If you go
What: Superior board retreat
When: 5 p.m. Monday
Where: 124 E. Coal Creek Drive
More info: View full agenda: bit.ly/2kYgBHf
Superior trustees will discuss the town's policy at Monday's retreat regarding how to best handle board members' private meetings with developers — an issue that has drawn debate and criticism among officials in past dealings.
The town's previous board had an informal policy to not meet with developers, according to officials on Friday, who added that there is no legal restriction currently to board members meeting with developers as long as the developer does not have an active development application.
"According to our policy," Mayor Clint Folsom wrote in an email Friday, "Board members are not permitted to meet with developers that have an active development proposal being considered for approval by the Board of Trustees."
Prior to applications being submitted to the town, Folsom added, developers want to meet with elected officials to obtain their feedback on their proposals.
"If Trustees determine that such a meeting would be beneficial," Folsom said, "I would generally prefer to have that meeting in a public work session format where all of the trustees are present and we can all give feedback to the developer letting them know what is important to our community."
As Superior's current trustees continue to reside over plans to transform the town and accommodate the influx of residents, concern regarding transparency and the disclosure of information to the public has risen, including among officials in the past.
Last spring, then-Trustee Chris Hanson took aim at former Mayor Pro Tem Debra Williams for criticism she had levied against him for meeting privately with developer Bill Jencks, of Ranch Capital.
"This puts myself and the rest of the board in a very awkward position," Hanson said in May. "Trustees should really know what they are saying, and understand the law before they make comments about other trustees. I would ask for a public apology and I would ask for a retraction of that comment."
Comments from Williams addressed whether or not Hanson had violated the public's trust and disclosure rules when he met with developers privately.
"It needed to be discussed at that time," Williams said in response. "I'm sorry you were offended but it was a necessary discussion. This is about transparency, and when you meet with the developer one-on-one you are not able to include the public and that is important and we are held to a higher standard. That's a choice we all have to make. That's it."
In Boulder, policy involving this issue is handled in a somewhat similar fashion, according to Boulder spokesperson Sarah Huntley.
"Boulder addresses the issue of potential conflict of interest related to development by encouraging clear communication between council members and the City Attorney's Office," Huntley said Friday. "Specifically, council members are encouraged to speak with the City Attorney's Office when meeting privately or one-on-one with an outside party."
Anthony Hahn: 303-473-1422, email@example.com or twitter.com/_anthonyhahn
Our editors found this article on this site using Google and regenerated it for our readers.