In his guest commentary in the Wednesday Daily Camera regarding the issue of the subdivision roads Local Improvement District, Boulder County Transportation Director George Gerstle says “In retrospect, it may have been better to have created these improvement districts when the subdivisions were first approved…so that funds could have been collected over time and property owners would not now be surprised by the need to pay for these services.” I wholeheartedly agree.
Had this been done, the requirement to pay for road “maintenance” would have been disclosed when I bought my property, and I would have had the option of adjusting my offer accordingly. I would have no objection to paying the assessment if this were the case; however, it is not.
I believe that there is a basic legal principle in this country, that the government cannot pass a law and enforce it retroactively. I would hope the same principle would apply to contractual agreements between the county and the subdivision developers, and by extension, the subdivision property owners.
I find it curious that Mr. Gerstle then goes on to say, “We cannot change history…,” which of course is precisely what the county commissioners have been trying to do since they unilaterally amended their so-called Comprehensive Plan in 1995 to redefine “road maintenance.” They remind me of Humpty Dumpty in Lewis Carroll’s “Through the Looking Glass,” to wit:
“When I use a word,” Humpty Dumpty said, in a rather scornful tone, “it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.”
“The question is,” said Alice, “whether you can make words mean so many different things.”
“The question is,” said Humpty Dumpty, “which is to be master — that’s all.”
(Just to be clear, Merriam-Webster defines “maintain” as “to keep in an existing state (as of repair, efficiency or validity): preserve from failure or decline…” It does not say “…to the extent that one feels like it, or is willing to pay for it.”)
Robert E. Reed
