May 16, 2012

SandBoxBlogs: Glenwood Springs Post Independent "Open space group is trying to get county sales tax on fall ballot"

With no ability amongst the folks to fully trust the accuracy of a PI report,  it is hoped that the Aspen Daily continues to cover the movements of the Garfield Legacy Project.  Doing so will give Mary Noone's project a fighting chance to at least have the GarCo folks pay attention.

A caution to avatars in commentary as you respond to what sounds like some progress for GarCo along with two steps back for GarCo if Noone does not change her group approach before putting this on the ballot.

SandBox's prediction?

The other groups that the Garfield Legacy Project sounds like they have associated themselves with early on, appear to be entrenched and lashed to Mary's kite tail.

If that is the case, then this proposed tax hike and the attempt to create an open space program off the role models of those groups, Pitkin county and Aspen will be not only voted down by Garco folks but likely voted down in flames.

See related story and public comments here.  

John Stroud:
"GLENWOOD SPRINGS, Colorado — When a group of open space program managers and supporters from around the state gathered in Glenwood Springs last fall for the yearly Colorado Open Space Alliance conference, there was a bit of irony involved.

Neither Garfield County nor the city of Glenwood Springs have formal open lands programs, although past attempts have been made to convince voters to enact tax measures to support such an effort.

But a new group of Garfield County residents is now working to add the county to the list of 20 other Colorado counties that have open space programs.

The Garfield Legacy Project organized in 2009 as a coalition of citizens and partner organizations, such as the Aspen Valley Land Trust (AVLT), to begin exploring ways to preserve open lands in Garfield County.

Last fall, the group conducted surveys and hosted public meetings, from which it developed a “Greenprint for Conservation and Economic Opportunity.” That effort was funded primarily by a $75,000 Great Outdoors Colorado (GOCO) grant.

Now, the Garfield Legacy Project is busy putting together a program proposal and sales tax question to present to voters in the November election.

A one-quarter-cent (0.25 percent) countywide sales tax is estimated to generate $2.5 million annually that would fund the program, according to Mary Noone of Glenwood Springs, one of the founding board members for the Legacy Project....."  (Read more?  Click title)

"Unapologetic pursuit and tracking of patterns within the news others make since 2010."


vet68 said...

Garfield county voters have a strong history of looking at the future and whether or not a plan will really fly. They aren't as big into politics as Aspen and Pitkin. They don't suffer fools lightly either. The saying that you can't fix stupid probably originated in Garfield county. Only hope it sounds like for this is in what's Charlie's saying that the old has to be dissolved if there is something new on the horizon. Never thought I'd see Mary Noone pushing an agenda for someone else and don't think it's anything but a media grab that the pic we're seeing in this article and the strongest quotes are coming from one of the problem's with it. AVL and Cochran. If it was the right deal for Garfield county it should have a board that governs how the money is spent. Trouble with this deal as stands is that the board would be filled with beliefs and visions that have led us wrong in the past and are more upvalley mindsets. Think you're dead on, Nanny. This put up like it is will go down in a blaze of glory.

glenwoodsprings22 said...

The last thing garfield county needs is a lot of open space land bought up with taxpayers dollars just so that it can sit in the hands of board that has groups like AVLT and Thompson Divide Coalition. We've got so many groups and government open space grabs as it is there isn't anything but land buying that's been done with any of them. We are a demographic that is working class. We are farmers, ranchers, miners, construction and roughnecks. We hunt, fish and annual burn our lands because that's the way to keep nature in balance. We need to access our lands and we need those lands to produce revenue not just sit there idle. Guaranteed that if you don't put a broader control on any tax proposal to garco voters that has the people in charge and not a board that few who are really honest trust, this will lose and fail to pass. The Mary I know is a free thinker and doesn't fit into the crowd she's running with on this one. Too bad because there's a lot of support out there for the right moves for garfield county. But not this. Just say NO.

hotmama said...

This sounds disappointing, not surprising and typical. Without major positive changes I'll be working to defeat the ballot. This is not Garfield County.

hammerandnails said...

ya know your right mama. but that doesn't make it right that some of this stuff can't be busted wide open so that we stop spinning our wheels. pretty obvious if this is the response they give after so many have spoken up from what I heard that this is what we're going to get. burn the barn down so that this tax request goes down in flames. maybe someone as smart as Mary will get it right the next time around. it's not about the few, it's about everybody. just say no.

MR said...

Have to go partially along if this is what the idea is. Nanny's right though. Who can believe anything they read in the PI? Be a good thing if Danforth would continue covering it. We aren't Aspen and Pitkin. AVL isn't as well touted as they would like to believe either. There's a lot of restrictions on a landowner who sells out to groups like that. I know of at least one in the county that has strong regrets.

The goal seems to be controlling the land through purchase. Having a say in the values and principles that govern the purchase afterward. That's a private acquisition and needs to only be done with private funds. Trying to put a token and vague statement of tourism development just to aim well for public tax increases isn't going to make litmus with Garco voters.

If Mary really is sincere in all of her vision to see a compatible end that works for a county she says she loves then Mary needs to seriously revisit associations with groups that have no proven track record let alone any effort on record to do same. This will never fly in our county because we are a working county with a legacy that fits the lands we own. I'll lend my support to any legacy project that molds into that legacy. Otherwise need to run with hammer. Burn the barn down with activisim against this and just say NO. Sorry to see this it's a real shame the concept in its pure form is running down this path.

Anonymous said...

Saddened to see this, I believe the comments here are accurate. This will never pass under the umbrella of groups and individuals that are focused on control of land in similar ways to upvalley. I'm not surprised at all that Martha is pushing front and center or that she's shifting the focus of coverage to the post independent that has served her agendas so well for so many years. I will now be voting no unless there are serious revisions.