The charge, meanwhile, is “unfair and we firmly believe it definitely hurts the business community,” Schwenke said.īottger found that the county and chamber failed to demonstrate a reasonable probability of success with their contention that the charge was a tax. “We still fully believe it is a tax and not a fee.” The chamber is “fully committed to moving forward,” said Diane Schwenke, president and CEO. There have been “more positive conversations” recently with the drainage district, McInnis said. There has been some improvement on the district with a contested seat having been decided by an election earlier this spring and greater interest in discussing issues around the valley, McInnis said. “We’ve taken that (the charge) was ill-timed and that the governance has to change,” McInnis said. No one disputes that the Grand Valley needs to deal with stormwater, said Mesa County Commissioner Scott McInnis. The need for the projects that the district is planning hasn’t lessened either, Ryan said.Ĭounty and chamber officials said they were disappointed, but not deterred. The district has an obligation to those who already have paid the fee to collect from those who haven’t, Ryan said. The drainage district board had approved printing and mailing bills to delinquent property owners earlier Tuesday morning, said district General Manager Tim Ryan. For the same reasons, the equities weigh in favor of denying the injunction.”
“Thus, an injunction will more likely disserve than serve the public interest. “Collection of the fee will allow (the drainage district) to better fulfill its statutory obligations to the businesses and residences it serves in the Grand Valley,” Bottger wrote in a 14-page opinion in a case in which the question of whether the charge is a tax or fee is central. Mesa County District Court Judge David Bottger rejected a request by Mesa County and the Grand Junction Area Chamber of Commerce for a preliminary injunction that would have halted the district from collecting the charge, which for most residents is $36 a year.
#Grand valley drainage diatrict gj sentinel full version
The Chamber supports an extended process of securing more information in a collaborative manner with all entities responsible for drainage and thoroughly exploring all funding models, the implementation of a sunset provision on the funding source, more transparency and accountability in the form of reports issued to taxpayers regarding how project priorities are identified, how funds are being spent, and how funds are leveraged with money from other sources-including grants.Ĭlick here to download full version of the Grand Junction Area Chamber of Commerce June 2017 Newsletter.Bicycling the Colorado National Monument, Grand Valley in the distance via įrom The Grand Junction Daily Sentinel (Gary Harmon):Ī second round of invoices will go out in early August from the Grand Valley Drainage District to residents and businesses that have yet to pay their bills for the handling of stormwater - a charge that got a boost Tuesday from a court ruling. The growth of businesses improves the economy, increases job opportunities and adds to the tax base. The Chamber opposes the imposition of an impact fee for business expansions. The Chamber supports the development of thoughtful alternatives regarding new fees, taxes, and grants to meet the need. The Chamber supports a valley-wide solution to addressing the area’s drainage problems, which of necessity involves governmental entities in addition to the Grand Valley Drainage District. Shown below are the principals that have always guided us on this matter: Last year the Chamber voted to take the unusual action of suing Grand Valley Drainage District along with Mesa County only after eight months of fruitless negotiations to find common ground and a solution that would not unduly harm businesses and our economy. The case is currently calendared for four days. Beginning at 11:00 AM on June 5th both sides will argue in court as to whether this is a fee as the District contends or actually an unauthorized tax as the Chamber and Mesa County argue. Judge Timbreza on May 17th, executed a court order denying the GVDD request and the Chamber/Mesa County response and request for summary judgement. As this newsletter is being printed, parties on both sides of the dispute regarding the Grand Valley Drainage District levying of a fee on all residents and businesses within its boundaries are preparing for trial.
0 kommentar(er)
