I am not very active on social media and have been blocked from responding to some posts; so, I will make a statement here

​

There is a widely-viewed post made by paid Buc-ee's consultant Mark Waller circulating that accuses trustees Harris, Jurka, and Moseley of creatin “millions” of dollars of expenses to Palmer Lake by special elections, lawsuits, bad policy decisions (including the with drawl of Buc-ee’s), and tax increases. Let me address these accusations briefly, from
my point of view:

1. Special elections: the election last September was required by the recall petitions for Stern, Ball, and Dreher, and included the ballot initiative about residents voting for annexations. It is important to note that Stern avoided recall by appointing himself mayor. The quo warranto lawsuit is actually not against Stern, but against Attorney Krob, who was present and did not ensure that the appointment of Stern was done legally. The costs of this special election are due solely to the petitions for recalls and not by any action of the candidates.

2. There are currently 4 lawsuits. None of them ask for money or damages, so they are not in tort. Most of the legal cost increases can be tracked to the many land use issues the town faces (at one point we had five attorneys working in this area, mostly temporarily) and the long effort to hire a new Town Attorney and new Town Administrator. The costs of the lawsuits are being handled by CIRSA, for the most part, but there is an issue about the costs of the lawsuits, as reported by Beltran. That issue is less than $40K, so it has no relation to the “millions” that is being claimed. As to the 4 lawsuits, all of them are in mandamus, so the plaintiffs do not claim any money or damages for themselves, but are only asking the Court to force public officials to do their duty:

• The False Claims suit: this alleges that the Administrator ignored the requirements on the Federal ARPA grant and the FAST Act grant. The original appropriations law required these grants to be expended on specific capital projects, but the Town spent approximately $1.7M on operations and maintenance and concealed a water project as a highway safety project. The Court has been asked two questions (1) can the Town be held accountable for misspending the grants and (2) does the Colorado False Claims Act apply to municipalities? This is currently at the appellate court and no matter which way they decide, it is likely to go to the Colorado Supreme Court.

• The quo warranto suit: The question is, is it required that Stern quit his trustee position before being appointed mayor? It does not ask the Court to invalidate any decisions of the Palmer Lake Board, but in putting the case on abeyance, the Court cited its reluctance to interfere with any legislative decisions. That is not what the case asked, but as a practical matter, the Court is avoiding the actual question.

• CORA suit by Moseley: A CORA was filed with the Town asking for the evidence supporting a hearing (and dismissal) for Moseley’s “gender harassment” of the staff. When Attorney Krob resigned on 11 December, he waved a sheaf of papers and claimed they were “complaints.” The first CORA for these complaints was submitted in January, and then resubmitted in May. They have not been answered. An alternate set of interviews (all dating after 11 December) and emails (the majority after 11 December), purport to support Attorney Krob’s original statements on 11 December. No records have been produced that support the “sheaf of complaints” that Krob brandished on 11 December.

• CORA suit by Brodzik: Ms Brodzik has filed a number of CORA requests for financial data that the Town has used dubious excuses to avoid answering. This lawsuit was served by an independent resident of Palmer Lake and has no legal connection to Trustee Moseley.

​    3.  Policy decisions: Trustees Harris, Beeson, Marble, and Moseley have been asking for agenda items (code chapter 2, commissions and chairmanships, water enterprise                         contracts and invoices, contracts web repository, ADUs, etc.) since January, but by some political magic, they never get on the meeting agendas. No real policy changes have           been enacted, so attributing policy decisions to cost increases is not supportable.
    4. Tax increases: The only budget proposal that has been seriously discussed is moving the fire department into the Monument Fire District. This would be a tax increase of 8.4             mills but would simultaneously free up ~$600K to support the General Fund. No other proposal has considered a tax increase, but we recognize that a tax increase is probably         unavoidable. In any event, any proposal for a tax increase would be thoroughly discussed in public Board meetings. Any such decision would require a vote of residents, so all           Palmer Lake voters would have a say in how the budget issue is resolved. The idea that any tax increase could be forced by trustees or the mayor can’t happen and would be a         violation of the Colorado statutes. The idea of “million$” is the bloviation of a resident who is a shill of the Beaver, if you know what I mean.