For the truth about water infrastructure and West Steamboat Springs Area Plan compliance and more check out out these documents and this webisite: http://docs.google.com/fileview?id=0B...
Scott- where do you keep coming up with the 400 units of new demand? I have not made that statement. To be more clear there were 1077 sales in 2008 and 1064 sales in 2009. You actually have made my argument for me: "We are at about 50 months. If no new listing came on the market then it would still take 4 years to sell the current inventory." Even in a perfect world Sb700 is 3 years from having the first house built. I never said there was demand for new inventory but rather we do not have 20 years of built supply as the "let's vote" group contends.
Steamboatrich- I just spoke to Jack White and corrected the paragraph- and thank you for readily admitting CA members have been supporting the "Let's Vote" group.
I deleted all reference to the Community Alliances responsibility on the website but it could easily been re-written as follows:
(The Community Alliance did)-Delete. "former members and supporters of the CA are responsible for most of the organizing, supplying most of their money, wrote the petition, created their messaging and advertising, and their letters to the paper; they have just allowed a couple of new faces to be their figureheads. The supporters, investors, and contributors of Good For Steamboat are all public information."
The sentence prior to the above quote states "…the anti-growth faction of the Community Alliance..", it was never intended to say the Community Alliance was doing this or that but rather the anti growth faction of that organization. The entire paragraph was refuting the claim that the “Let’s vote" group is not "no-growthers" when in fact a significant number of them are and have demonstrated so while they were either members or supporters of the Community Alliance; even if they talk under the guise of "smart growth".
I acknowledge as an organization the Community Alliance has chosen neither to support nor challenge the annexation; as their membership is divided on the matter.
This wasn't dirty tactics but rather a poorly written section. I take responsibility for our errors and apologize.
scott- I don't see where I spoke of 400 units of new construction demand; I am merely pointing out that there is not 20 years of built inventory. That even in down markets there has been a thousand traded.
jk- I am perectly capable of writing what I need written and I don't have any need to hide who I am, who our supporters are, or who we have hired. I am not afraid of being accountable for my statements and i take responsibility for any and all statements made on the behalf of Steamboat 700.
If you believe in your position and that your intentions are honorable then why do you hide who you are?
And by the way the lets vote "no" committee has spent more on Pilot advertising then we have.
The Let's Vote Committee makes several misleading and unsubstantiated statements that require some clarification and counter point. Instead of littering the anonymous "blogosphere" with our responses, we decided to posts a full rebuttal here: http://www.good4steamboat.com/growth
We hope this helps you get more informed. As always we are available via email at info@good4steamboat.com as well as by phone at 870-0244 at any time.
George- Annexation Agreement. IV. Affordable Housing and Community Housing Plan. The affordable housing and Community Housing requirements of the City shall apply to and be deemed satisfied with respect to the Development as follows: A. Community Housing. The Developer, at the time of and as a condition of approval of each final plat (but not any LTS plat) for any portion of the Property, shall dedicate and convey to the City that amount of real property in the form of Buildable Lots for development for affordable housing purposes pursuant to the Community Housing Plan, attached as Exhibit G. EXHIBIT G ...(f) The CHP Lots shall be conveyed to the City, or its designee, by special warranty deed without charge, free of liens and encumbrances, except the Project Encumbrances.
Scott- the assessment is attached to the land, disclosed in their preliminary title report, and listed on the closing statement. It is never imposed by the City, it ceases to be voluntary after they purchase the land. It is an encumberance on title. Land owners have the right in Colorado to require future land owners of the property to follow certain rules and guidelines; a common rule is that the land can never be developed, or the foot print can never be increased, or prohibits two story development (especially when the seller owns the property behind or adjacent. PIF's are also common. Existing residents could voluntarily impose the same conditions- they don't becasue it makes the property harder to market.
We added that language as a fail safe- again to make sure the existing residents were protected. We have had multiple legal opinions and so has the City as to its legality and strength. Gerry Dahl is the States leading municipal attorney and represented the City throughout the annexation proceedings and he believes it will withstand any challenge.
I resist posting on this forum but pitpoodle is make false statements. But I wanted to clarify his/her false statement. PITPOODLE- A Real estate transfer is not illegal just as HOA fee's are not illegal. They are Privately imposed fees (PIF). They have withstood the test of time and challenge for over 30 years in Colorado. A City cannot impose a real estate transfer fee but a private land owner can voluntarily impose one. Call your attorney, the City attorney, or Jerry Dahl (The City's special Council).
Dennis Howard: Vote ‘no’ on 700
For the truth about water infrastructure and West Steamboat Springs Area Plan compliance and more check out out these documents and this webisite:
http://docs.google.com/fileview?id=0B...
https://docs.google.com/fileview?id=0...
http://www.good4steamboat.com/
March 5, 2010 at 11 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Let's Vote committee: Growth myths
Scott- where do you keep coming up with the 400 units of new demand? I have not made that statement. To be more clear there were 1077 sales in 2008 and 1064 sales in 2009.
You actually have made my argument for me:
"We are at about 50 months. If no new listing came on the market then it would still take 4 years to sell the current inventory." Even in a perfect world Sb700 is 3 years from having the first house built.
I never said there was demand for new inventory but rather we do not have 20 years of built supply as the "let's vote" group contends.
March 1, 2010 at 11:59 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Let's Vote committee: Growth myths
Steamboatrich- I just spoke to Jack White and corrected the paragraph- and thank you for readily admitting CA members have been supporting the "Let's Vote" group.
I deleted all reference to the Community Alliances responsibility on the website but it could easily been re-written as follows:
(The Community Alliance did)-Delete.
"former members and supporters of the CA are responsible for most of the organizing, supplying most of their money, wrote the petition, created their messaging and advertising, and their letters to the paper; they have just allowed a couple of new faces to be their figureheads. The supporters, investors, and contributors of Good For Steamboat are all public information."
The sentence prior to the above quote states "…the anti-growth faction of the Community Alliance..", it was never intended to say the Community Alliance was doing this or that but rather the anti growth faction of that organization.
The entire paragraph was refuting the claim that the “Let’s vote" group is not "no-growthers" when in fact a significant number of them are and have demonstrated so while they were either members or supporters of the Community Alliance; even if they talk under the guise of "smart growth".
I acknowledge as an organization the Community Alliance has chosen neither to support nor challenge the annexation; as their membership is divided on the matter.
This wasn't dirty tactics but rather a poorly written section. I take responsibility for our errors and apologize.
March 1, 2010 at 11:09 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Let's Vote committee: Growth myths
scott- I don't see where I spoke of 400 units of new construction demand; I am merely pointing out that there is not 20 years of built inventory. That even in down markets there has been a thousand traded.
February 28, 2010 at 10:07 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Let's Vote committee: Growth myths
jk- I am perectly capable of writing what I need written and I don't have any need to hide who I am, who our supporters are, or who we have hired. I am not afraid of being accountable for my statements and i take responsibility for any and all statements made on the behalf of Steamboat 700.
If you believe in your position and that your intentions are honorable then why do you hide who you are?
And by the way the lets vote "no" committee has spent more on Pilot advertising then we have.
February 28, 2010 at 3:42 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Let's Vote committee: Growth myths
The Let's Vote Committee makes several misleading and unsubstantiated statements that require some clarification and counter point. Instead of littering the anonymous "blogosphere" with our responses, we decided to posts a full rebuttal here: http://www.good4steamboat.com/growth
We hope this helps you get more informed. As always we are available via email at info@good4steamboat.com as well as by phone at 870-0244 at any time.
February 28, 2010 at 12:10 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Let's Vote committee: Housing for locals is wishful thinking
George-
Annexation Agreement.
IV. Affordable Housing and Community Housing Plan.
The affordable housing and Community Housing requirements of the City shall apply to and be deemed satisfied with respect to the Development as follows:
A. Community Housing. The Developer, at the time of and as a condition of approval of each final plat (but not any LTS plat) for any portion of the Property, shall dedicate and convey to the City that amount of real property in the form of Buildable Lots for development for affordable housing purposes pursuant to the Community Housing Plan, attached as Exhibit G.
EXHIBIT G
...(f) The CHP Lots shall be conveyed to the City, or its designee, by special warranty
deed without charge, free of liens and encumbrances, except the Project
Encumbrances.
February 23, 2010 at 3:04 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Fact check: Steamboat 700 traffic op-eds contained errors
Scott- the assessment is attached to the land, disclosed in their preliminary title report, and listed on the closing statement. It is never imposed by the City, it ceases to be voluntary after they purchase the land. It is an encumberance on title. Land owners have the right in Colorado to require future land owners of the property to follow certain rules and guidelines; a common rule is that the land can never be developed, or the foot print can never be increased, or prohibits two story development (especially when the seller owns the property behind or adjacent. PIF's are also common. Existing residents could voluntarily impose the same conditions- they don't becasue it makes the property harder to market.
February 10, 2010 at 5:57 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Fact check: Steamboat 700 traffic op-eds contained errors
We added that language as a fail safe- again to make sure the existing residents were protected. We have had multiple legal opinions and so has the City as to its legality and strength. Gerry Dahl is the States leading municipal attorney and represented the City throughout the annexation proceedings and he believes it will withstand any challenge.
February 10, 2010 at 3:40 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Fact check: Steamboat 700 traffic op-eds contained errors
I resist posting on this forum but pitpoodle is make false statements. But I wanted to clarify his/her false statement.
PITPOODLE- A Real estate transfer is not illegal just as HOA fee's are not illegal. They are Privately imposed fees (PIF). They have withstood the test of time and challenge for over 30 years in Colorado. A City cannot impose a real estate transfer fee but a private land owner can voluntarily impose one. Call your attorney, the City attorney, or Jerry Dahl (The City's special Council).
February 10, 2010 at 1:11 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )