Trustees Barely Approve GMF Head Manager Agreement; Sparks Fly Over Deal
Rick Langenberg
Why should the Woodland Park City Council and the RE-2 School Board have all the fun regarding wild and volatile meetings that ignite community angst on certain issues.
Green Mountain Falls’ leaders have apparently jumped on the political bandwagon when it comes to heated local showdowns; but regardless of any public square offs, voters will now get the final say.
Following a series of marathon, closed-door sessions and heated exchanges among GMF trustees and top officials, a final deal was reached recently in regard to the funding of a town manager—but only for a year. And even this pact only occurred with a 3-2 vote and with the reality that the town has a vastly split group of elected leaders who don’t agree on much when it comes to budget matters. Despite four executive sessions and even a considerable amount of public comments, the board remains divided on its town manager venture, which started about 10 years ago.
The end result is that GMF voters will ultimately become the head referees in determining the future course of the town’s financial future; and ultimately, if it wants to continue with the current town manager form of government, highly recommended by the state’s Department of Local Affairs.
That is option A and one that probably will call for some type of property or sales tax increase, or a combination of both. Option B would probably involve getting rid of a town manager or making some type of stringent budget reductions. And then there is the option of retreating back to the town’s former trustee/liaison system that requires using volunteers to run the town.
Within the next few months, town elected officials, with the help of their attorneys, will craft ballot language for an issue, slated to appear on the election ballot in Nov. 2025.
The idea of having voters decide the financial future of the town was approved on Nov. 21, following the fourth executive session in the last month and a half. According to Mayor Todd Dixon, the board strongly agreed on putting this issue up for a vote.
But the issue that continues to tear away at the skin of the trustees deals with the town manager contract.
By a 3-2 vote, the trustees agreed to renew their contract with Becky Frank, who has probably held the reins of the city’s managerial ropes longer than any of her predecessors, for the next 12 months. Under this deal, the contract was approved just for a one-year period with conditions. These including offering an annual compensation of $94,605 and being allowed to terminate her employment if the manager fails to carry out a board directive. The yes votes came from Dixon, and Trustee John Bell and Mayor Pro Tem Sunde King, while trustees Don Walker and Sean Ives voted no. In reality, King became the swing tally, as the debate that ensured for several meetings often pitted the political camps of Dixon/Bell against Walker/Ives regarding this fiscal issue.
The main point of contention didn’t have much to do with Frank’s performance as town manager, but whether the town could afford this position. During their regular meeting, a score of planning commission members came to Frank’s defense and described her services as outstanding. Brandy Moralez, the commission chairman, who ran for a trustee position last spring, even accused the main board opponents of the contract (Ives and Walker) as threatening the town’s fiscal future and performing a “dereliction of your duties to the town.”
Dixon and Bell maintained the town could support the contract. Bell even conducted a detailed analysis of towns in the state and nearby areas to support his contention. “I am not seeing how we can’t afford a town manager,” said Bell at the town’s regular Nov. 19 meeting. “I am not seeing an affordability issue,” added the mayor.
But Walker sternly disagreed. “This is not an emotional thing for me. The numbers don’t lie,” he replied. Walker argued that the town was pursuing a course of deficit spending that needed to end. “We need to make a change. We can’t control our spending.”
Ives went further and accused the current staff members of making decisions regarding adding employees without letting the trustees knowing about these actions.
And instead of funding a town manager, he hinted that the town could purchase an additional grader or due infrastructure projects that had been placed on hold for years.
King, meanwhile, took a more low-profile stance, and just agreed with an earlier decision to delay approving the contract at their regular meeting and holding an executive session two days later.
Executive Session Meeting Gets Testy
But this extra time didn’t appear to ease any tensions, as the two opposing camps dug in their individual political trenches a little more and definitely didn’t appear ready to exchange holiday greeting cards. Prior to going into close-door discussions, Bell referred to what he described as a hostile employee-treatment attitude, exhibited by certain leaders, as outrageous. He noted that other employees in GMF “are watching us.” “We have an employee here who doesn’t know if she is going to have a job in January,” blasted Bell, in staring straight at Walker. “This is not acceptable. I can’t believe we are treating our employees this way.”
But Walker noted that he didn’t set the timeline for this debate. He continued to emphasize that the issue centered around dollars and cents and the town was allocating 40 percent-plus towards running its administrative office.
Bell countered that the town has other options, such as generating more money from slight fee hikes, such as for renting out the gazebo and pool for functions and adding planning fees hikes. Those ideas, though, didn’t get a warm response from the trustees opposing the manager renewal contract.
“We are a statutory town. We are not an administrative state,” said Walker, in not refraining from making another counterpunch. “That is contrary to the philosophy of public service.”
Finally, the board agreed it wasn’t going to settle the matter through discussion in public any longer and then went into another closed-door session for about an hour and a half.
Immediately following the session, Dixon said the crux of the town manager contract issue deals with the fact that GMF no longer has a set revenue stream to finance this position. When this position was established, at the advice of former DOLA Regional Manager Clay Brown, the town received grant funds for several years. Brown’s thinking at the time was that additional revenue would become available to further fund the position, which in the state’s view, marked a much better way to operate the town government. DOLA actually played a key role in funding the construction of a new town hall for GMF, following the destruction of its former facility due to an arson-related fire.
But the town manager job has generated a revolving chair syndrome.
In the last 10 years, the town has sported at least five different head managers and temporary bosses. Frank, in fact, has had a more stable and positive relationship with local businesses and citizens than previous town bosses, according to most reports.
