| “Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter.” Martin Luther King Jr. (1929-1968) U.S. civil rights leader and clergyman |
ENVIRONMENT SECTION
Updated February 7, 2007
The property consists of 50.85 acres located
in the W ½ NE ¼ and the E ½ NW ¼ of Section 21,
Township 55 North, Range 84 West.
It is outside the city limits,
about five miles southwest of the Sheridan County Courthouse.
Opinions about this highly controversial subdivision are detailed below in Letters to the Editor. Because of copyright regulations, only my own letters are included word-for-word, exactly as they appeared in the newspaper. I have summarized the other letters.
Following the Letters to the Editor section are very brief summaries of the nine formal and two informal public meetings that have been held regarding the subdivision. I attended ten of the meetings and spoke at nine of them.
Near the end of the ENVIRONMENT section, contact information is listed for the Board of Sheridan County Commissioners, the Sheridan County Planning and Zoning Commission, the Sheridan Area Water Supply Joint Powers Board, and the newspapers in which the Letters to the Editor appeared.
At the very end of this ENVIRONMENT section, you can see a list of the newspaper articles that have appeared about the Indian Paintbrush Estates subdivision project.
Irene L. Hause
2005 October 13. “Property owner against Indian Paintbrush subdivision.” Max McLain.
2005 November 29. “Indian Paintbrush Subdivision site unsuited for development.” Ron Lytton.
2005 November 30. “Will work against proposed Indian Paintbrush Subdivision.” Irene L. Hause.
2005 December 24. “What’s wrong with open space between Sheridan, Big Horn?” Judi Panetta.
2006 January 10. “Hopes commission will assess proposed septic system use.” Lester Fox.
2006 January 21. “If Bliss wants to build on wet land, move to New Orleans.” Loraine Canfield.
2006 January 24. “Questions whether anyone would live in Paintbrush Estates.” Max McLain.
2006 January 25. “Longtime resident distressed over Paintbrush Subdivision.” Cheryl Pickering.
2006 January 26. “Halt project.” Max McLain.
2006 February 3. “Longtime residents stand up against Paintbrush subdivision.” Irene L. Hause.
2006 February 5. “Development of ‘swamp’ in Sheridan questionable.” Max McLain.
2006 February 22. “People need to know about water issues at Paintbrush.” Janet Maxwell.
2006 March 4. “On Paintbrush Estates, who to believe—locals or developer?” Irene L. Hause.
2006 March 6. “Will commissioners hear voices against Paintbrush Subdivision?” Sandy Sare.
2006 March 11. “Commissioner Durante shows courage with his ‘no’ vote.” Cheryl Pickering.
2006 March 16. “Subdivision vote shows county commission not working for public.” Ron Lytton and Linda Layton.
2006 March 17. “Praises Commissioner Durante for vote against subdivision.” Irene L. Hause.
2006 March 22. “Finds Sheridan a haven; dismayed by subdivision OK.” Claudia Azhari.
2006 April 28. “Would not dream of putting house at Paintbrush Estates.” Irene L. Hause.
2006 May 2. “Paintbrush developer answers critics over project, water use.” [David] Scott Bliss.
2006 May 9. “Bliss’ rhetoric does not change swamp site at Paintbrush.” Claudia Azhari.
2006 May 20. “Indian Paintbrush Estates not suitable for housing sites.” Kris Korfanta.
2006 May 25. “Not here please.” Irene L. Hause.
2006 July 12. “SAWS water use for Paintbrush to be discussed July 19.” Irene L. Hause.
2006 July 18. “SAWS should stop or downsize Paintbrush Subdivision.” Sandy Sare.
2006 August 7. “Can’t understand why Commissioner Dixon supports Indian Paintbrush project.” Judi Panetta.
2006 August 7. “Will Indian Paintbrush Estates be asset or liability for Sheridan?” Irene L. Hause.
2006 September 7. “Hopes SAWS does not change vote on Indian Paintbrush.” Sandy Sare.
2006 September 9. “Indian Paintbrush opponent wonders why Dixon supports it.” Irene L. Hause.
2006 September 12. “Will Dixon, Paintbrush developer ever give up?” Judi Panetta.
2006 September 13. “Dismayed Paintbrush developer going ahead with project.” Claudia Azhari.
2006 September 15. “Says mayor misled public with developer/SAWS water deal.” Ron Lytton.
2006 September 28. “Don’t stand by and let Kinskey steamroller go by unchallenged.” Irene [L.] Hause.
2006 October 30. “Durante represents the people and merits re-election.” Irene L. Hause.
2006 December 8. "Lingering questions over SAWS, Paintbrush water." Gene Sager.
2006 December 21. "SAWS meeting a parallel to Marx Brothers movie." Irene L. Hause.
2007 January 9. "Indian Paintbrush Estates development ongoing debacle." Judi Panetta.
2005 October 13. Consideration of Preliminary Plat. NOT APPROVED.
2005 November 15. Consideration of Adequacy of Paperwork. APPROVED.
2006 February 9. Reconsideration of Preliminary Plat. NOT APPROVED.
2006 March 7. Consideration of Final Plat and Right-of-way License #06-02. APPROVED.
2006 August 9. Consideration of Water Service Agreement. NOT APPROVED.
2006 August 15. Consideration of Right-of-way License # 06-30. NOT APPROVED.
2006 September 13. Reconsideration of Water Supply Agreement. APPROVED.
2006 September 28. Consideration of Right-of-way License # 06-31. APPROVED.
2006 December 13. Although Indian Paintbrush Estates subdivision was not on the formal agenda, considerable discussion about it took place.
2007 January 10. Amendment to Indian Paintbrush Estates Subdivision Memorandum of Understanding (MOU). APPROVED.
2007 June 13. Indian Paintbrush Estates subdivision was not on the formal agenda. However, during the "Public Comment" portion of the meeting, a member of the audience inquired about the status of the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) that had been approved at the January 10, 2007 meeting.
CONTACT INFORMATION FOR COMMISSIONS AND WATER BOARD
Sheridan Area Water Supply/Joint Powers Board (SAWS/JPB)CONTACT INFORMATION FOR THE NEWSPAPERS CITED
Billings Gazette"Property owner against Indian Paintbrush subdivision." This letter from Max McLain of Sheridan, Wyoming, appeared on Page 4 of The Sheridan Press [Sheridan, Wyoming] on Thursday, October 13, 2005.
McLain wrote that he has wetlands on his property, which is downstream from the proposed 22-lot Indian Paintbrush Estates. He noted that wetlands are nationally protected habitats. McLain said he fears that the nature of the soil at the site of the proposed subdivision lends itself to leaching of septic systems, which would contaminate the wetlands. McLain was also concerned about the runoff from lawn care products and how that would affect the wetlands. He noted that Story, Wyoming [20 miles south of Sheridan] is currently dealing with contaminated groundwater as the result of the leaching of septic systems and wondered if that would be the future of his own wetlands if the proposed Indian Paintbrush Estates subdivision is built.
“Indian Paintbrush Subdivision site unsuited for development.” This letter from Ron Lytton of Sheridan, Wyoming, appeared on Page 4 of The Sheridan Press (Sheridan, Wyoming] on Tuesday, November 29, 2005.
Lytton challenged the statements regarding the proposed Indian Paintbrush Estates subdivision that were made by the developer, David Scott Bliss, assertions that appeared on the front page of The Sheridan Press (Nov. 16, 2005). Bliss had claimed that the neighbors’ concerns about the proposed building site had no basis in fact. Lytton’s letter refuted the developer’s claims by quoting a report submitted to the Department of Environmental Quality by the developer’s own engineer, a report that included data from a state engineering groundwater review. The data showed that the static water levels of three registered wells on the proposed building site were “-6” on Permit No. P46357W, “0” on Permit No. P63642W, and “0” on Permit P63643W. “-6” translates to “artesian well” (no pump needed) and “0” translates to “surface water.”
“Will work against proposed Indian Paintbrush Subdivision.” This letter from Irene L. Hause of Sheridan, Wyoming, appeared on Page 4 of The Sheridan Press [Sheridan, Wyoming] on Wednesday, November 30, 2005.
Editor:
At two recent meetings at the Sheridan County Courthouse, I spoke in opposition to the proposed Indian Paintbrush Estates Subdivision on Swaim Road.
Anyone who has lived out here for any length of time knows that the site is too spongy to support a housing development.
Over the years, area residents have often referred to that piece of land as a “swamp” or “marsh.”
On Oct. 13, the preliminary plat for the proposed subdivision was an item on the agenda of the Planning and Zoning Commission.
The vote was 2 “for,” 2 “against,” plus one “abstention” regarding the preliminary plat.
With that vote, the developer had the choice of either dropping his request or appealing it to the Sheridan County commissioners.
On Nov. 15, the developer exercised his right of appeal, and the Sheridan County commissioners believed that he had, as of Nov. 15,
provided all the necessary documentation to proceed to the final plat stage of his proposed subdivision.
During that meeting, the developer stated that he has owned that acreage for about six months.
The commissioners’ vote to allow the developer to continue to the final plat stage was in no way a reflection on the merits of the
proposed Indian Paintbrush Estates Subdivision.
The vote was simply a vote confirming their belief that all the paperwork was in place to proceed to the final plat stage.
Public input is allowed during the final plat stage, and I will continue to be among those out this way against that proposed project.
Irene L. Hause also expressed her views in a videotaped interview conducted by Judy Hagerott, a reporter for KOTA-TV in Rapid City, South Dakota. This interview was broadcast during November 2005.
“What’s wrong with open space between Sheridan, Big Horn?” This letter from Judi Panetta of Sheridan, Wyoming, appeared on Page 4 of The Sheridan Press [Sheridan, Wyoming] on Saturday, December 24, 2005.
Regarding the controversy surrounding the proposed Indian Paintbrush Estates subdivision, Panetta wondered if there is a law requiring that every acre between Sheridan and Big Horn, Wyoming, needs to be developed. She would like to keep some open spaces.
“Hopes commission will assess proposed septic system use.” This letter from Lester Fox of Sheridan, Wyoming, appeared on Page 4 of The Sheridan Press [Sheridan, Wyoming] on Tuesday, January 10, 2006. [Lester Fox is 94 years old and is a retired dairy rancher who lives west of the site of the proposed Indian Paintbrush Estates subdivision.]
Fox said that in 1978 a former owner of the proposed building site had to put in two underground drainage systems before he could even graze his cattle there, and even with the drainage systems, some of the ground was too wet for grazing. Fox asked that the County Commissioners give some deep thought to the long-range consequences of allowing septic systems to be constructed in land with that history.
“If Bliss wants to build on wet land, move to New Orleans.” This letter from Loraine Canfield of Sheridan, Wyoming, appeared on Page 4 of The Sheridan Press [Sheridan, Wyoming] on Saturday, January 21, 2006.
Canfield wrote that since 1946 she has lived west of the proposed building site for Indian Paintbrush Estates. She emphasized how wet that land is during normal weather patterns, adding that all it would take would be “one hard winter to flood where he wants to build houses.”
“Questions whether anyone would live in Paintbrush Estates.” This letter from Max McLain of Sheridan, Wyoming, appeared on Page 4 of The Sheridan Press (Sheridan, Wyoming) on Tuesday, January 24, 2006.
McLain listed the various restrictions that will be placed on prospective builders at the proposed Indian Paintbrush Estates subdivision. The restrictions relate to the types of septic systems allowed, the types of lawn care products allowed, and the limitations on basements. McLain said he wonders what will happen when the current long-term drought ends if such a range of restrictions is required for building during the current drought. He questioned the viability of septic systems in land that wet and fears how potential septic system failure would affect the migrating ducks and geese that use the pond (Metz Reservoir No. 2) on his family’s property.
He continued by asking if fisherman would still be able to eat fish caught in the pond.
He concluded his letter by wondering whether any of the engineers and lawyers hired by the developer would seriously consider building and living at the proposed Indian Paintbrush Estates subdivision.
“Longtime resident distressed over Paintbrush Subdivision.” This letter from Cheryl Pickering of Sheridan, Wyoming, appeared on Page 4 of The Sheridan Press [Sheridan, Wyoming] on Wednesday, January 25, 2006.
Pickering invited readers to view an enlargement of an aerial photograph taken of the site of the proposed Indian Paintbrush Estates subdivision. The photographer, Ron Lytton, had placed an enlargement of the picture in the window of a shop located at 142 North Main Street in Sheridan. Pickering noted that the picture revealed extensive marshlands, even though the picture was taken during Sheridan’s current long-term drought and after the 2005 irrigation season had ended. [Irrigation ditches that serve downstream property first cross the proposed building site.]
“Halt project.” This letter from Max McLain of Sheridan, Wyoming, appeared on Page A4 of the Buffalo Bulletin [Buffalo, Wyoming] on Thursday, January 26, 2006.
McLain expressed general concern about water contamination from coal bed methane operations and from the actions of housing developers. In particular, he wrote of his concerns about the probability of septic system failure in land as wet as the site for the proposed Indian Paintbrush Estates subdivision on Swaim Road in Sheridan. He stated that several people living in the vicinity of the proposed subdivision are banding together in an appeal to the Sheridan County Planning and Zoning Commission and the Board of County Commissioners to halt the project before building begins.
“Longtime residents stand up against Paintbrush subdivision.” This letter from Irene L. Hause of Sheridan, Wyoming, appeared on Page 4 of The Sheridan Press [Sheridan, Wyoming] on Friday, February 3, 2006:
Editor:
According to a public notice in The Sheridan Press, another public hearing regarding the proposed Indian Paintbrush Estates subdivision on Swaim Road is scheduled for 5:30 p.m. Thursday, Feb. 9, in the second floor Public Meeting Room of the Sheridan County Courthouse (new addition).
Many of us who live on or around Swaim Road are alarmed, afraid of septic system failure that could occur in soil as wet as the proposed site for Indian Paintbrush.
Indeed, that particular acreage is known as a “swamp,” “marsh,” or “bog” to people who have lived out here for any length of time.
We do not think it is a place to put a 50-acre, 22-lot subdivision.
But the upcoming public meeting is not just about those of us who live on or around Swaim Road. It is about everyone who believes in the right of citizens to live without fear of having their neighborhoods adversely affected by irresponsible actions of developers.
It is about people who are willing to stand up for their right to clean water and the right to stand up to developers like David Scott Bliss, who arrogantly stated on the front page of The Sheridan Press (Nov. 16) that residents’ concerns about his proposed Paintbrush site are not based on facts.
However, a Natural Resource Conservation Service soil survey says “these [existing] soils may have some limitation for constructing buildings due to soil shrink-swell properties, depth to groundwater, and flooding potential.
“These soils may also be limited for septic system suitability due to restrictive permeability rates, depth to groundwater and flooding potential.”
Also, a state engineering groundwater review indicates that the static water levels of three registered wells on the property measures “0” on two of the wells and “-6” on a third.
Readings like that translate into land that is plenty wet!
Aerial photographs taken last fall show extensive marshlands. One of those photographs is on display at 142 N. Main St.
Letters to the editor from Lester Fox (Jan. 10) and Loraine Canfield (Jan 21) testify to their personal knowledge of how very wet that land has been over the years, before the current drought.
Mrs. Canfield has lived out here since 1946, and Mr. Fox since 1952.
If you are thinking that perhaps Mr. Bliss has never bothered to talk to folks around here, you’d be right.
Remember that date—Feb. 9 at the Sheridan County Courthouse.
“Development of ‘swamp’ in Sheridan questionable.” This letter from Max McLain of Sheridan, Wyoming, appeared on Page 9B of the Billings Gazette [Billings, Montana] on Sunday, February 5, 2006.
McLain expressed concern that septic systems would be prone to failure in ground as wet as the proposed site for the Indian Paintbrush Estates subdivision. He pointed out that two waterways flow across that proposed building site onto land that has been in his [McLain’s] family since 1964, adding that the water then flows through Sherri View subdivision on its way toward the Little Goose Creek drainage.
The full text of McLain’s letter may be seen at http://www.billingsgazette.net/articles/2006/02/05/opinion/letters/70-swamp.txt
“People need to know about water issues at Paintbrush.” This letter from Janet Maxwell of Sheridan, Wyoming, appeared on Page 4 of The Sheridan Press [Sheridan, Wyoming] on Wednesday, February 22, 2006.
Maxwell expressed respect for those residents of Swaim Road who have spoken out against the proposed Indian Paintbrush Estates subdivision. She hoped that the Sheridan County commissioners would listen to these residents because they know that particular piece of land. Maxwell continued by saying that she is not against all housing developments, but does not feel that the proposed building site is an appropriate place for an additional 22 houses.
Maxwell stated that over the years she has had several friends who have lived on Swaim Road, and she wrote in particular of the friend whose basement flooded several times over a two-year span. Maxwell said the land there has always been very boggy. She was concerned that people who might buy lots in the proposed subdivision might not know what they are getting into.
She expressed hope that Sheridan County’s elected officials would keep Sheridan County’s “Vision Quest” and “Vision 20/20” in mind as they determine the fate of the proposed subdivision.
“On Paintbrush Estates, who to believe—locals or developer?” This letter from Irene L. Hause appeared on Page 4 of The Sheridan Press [Sheridan, Wyoming] on Saturday, March 4, 2006:
Editor:
The fourth public hearing regarding the proposed Indian Paintbrush Estates subdivision on Swaim Road is scheduled for Tuesday, March 7, at 9 a.m. in the Sheridan County Courthouse.
At all three previous hearings, I voiced my objections to having a 22-lot housing development with septic systems built on unstable soil across from my west property line. Residents in this vicinity are deeply concerned about the possibility of septic system failure in land that wet.
All along, I have had my doubt about David Scott Bliss’ knowledge of that particular acreage when he purchased it in 2005 with plans to develop it.
According to the minutes of the Oct. 13, 2005, meeting of the Sheridan County Planning and Zoning Commission, Bliss said there is only one area in the subdivision that could be considered a wetland, and that would be Swaim Draw. Swaim Draw is on the north end of his acreage.
However, the final plat on display at the Nov. 15 hearing also indicated delineated wetlands of similar size on the south end of the property. Jones Draw runs through there.
Just because the remaining acres are not delineated wetlands does not make them dry enough for responsible building.
At the third public hearing, a member of the developer’s staff made a PowerPoint presentation. Essentially, it was a talk containing a lot of conditional language, what a person thinks of as “a lot of ifs, ands, buts and maybes.”
A neighbor at the hearing challenged that language, saying that it did nothing to assure her that the septic and groundwater issues had been adequately addressed.
So put yourself in the place of the people who live in this area. What would you believe?
I prefer to believe the experience of people who have lived here and have seen just how wet that land can be. I believe Loraine Canfield, who has lived here since 1946. I believe Lester Fox, here since 1952. I believe my brother, Max McLain, who sunk into that land halfway to his knees while walking across it to go fishing at the Fox Ponds. I believe Ron Lytton, who took aerial photos in 2005 that prove his contention that the land is marshy, even during the current drought.
Every one of those people has made a public statement in a letter to the editor.
All the developer’s planned engineering stunts won’t mean much when the drought ends.
“Will commissioners hear voices against Paintbrush Subdivision?” This letter from Sandy Sare of Sheridan, Wyoming, appeared on Page 4 of The Sheridan Press [Sheridan, Wyoming] on Monday, March 6, 2006.
Sare wrote that she is not against development and progress if it proceeds in a carefully planned, environmentally-friendly way. However, Sare does not feel that the proposed Indian Paintbrush Estates subdivision on Swaim Road falls into that category. She said she had attended the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting in February [Feb. 9, 2006] and saw that the developer’s PowerPoint presentation had addressed concerns that had been previously raised by the neighbors. However, she wondered if the developer’s plan to build up the banks of Swaim Draw and Jones Draw could indicate that the developer anticipates problems with drainage and flooding.
She also questioned the viability of mounded septic systems at the site since a research report she had read included a reference pointing to a 50% failure rate for such systems [http://www.purdue.edu/dp/envirosoft/decent/src/mound.htm]. Sare added that some of the leach fields at the Paintbrush site would require 5-foot berms.
Sare expressed that she had no confidence that the developer’s long list of covenants would be enforced, citing her own and others’ experiences while living in subdivisions. Sare wondered if the County Commissioners would heed the voices of the property owners and residents in the vicinity of Swaim Road who had signed a petition in opposition to the proposed Indian Paintbrush Estates subdivision.
“Commissioner Durante shows courage with his ‘no’ vote.” This letter from Cheryl Pickering of Sheridan, Wyoming, appeared on Page 4 of The Sheridan Press [Sheridan, Wyoming] on Saturday, March 11, 2006.
Pickering praised Sheridan County Commissioner Larry Durante for having the courage and foresight to vote against the proposed Indian Paintbrush Estates subdivision at the March 7 public hearing. [Although the subdivision was approved by a 2 to 1 vote,] Pickering felt that by voting against it, Durante had truly heard the voices of the neighbors who had been calling attention to the wetness of the soil at the prospective Paintbrush site. Pickering believed that Commissioner Durante agreed with the neighbors that putting houses on that site would create health, safety, and welfare issues because of structural problems that could occur with the houses and septic systems on soil of that nature. Pickering encouraged Sheridan County residents to call the Commissioners’ Office and thank Commissioner Durante for not rubber-stamping a questionable subdivision.
“Subdivision vote shows county commission not working for public.” This letter from Ron Lytton and Linda Layton of Sheridan, Wyoming, appeared on Page 4 of The Sheridan Press [Sheridan, Wyoming] on Thursday, March 16, 2006.
Lytton and Layton pointed out that the Sheridan County commissioners [by a 2 to 1 vote on March 7, 2006] had approved the proposed Indian Paintbrush Estates subdivision even though it had not met all the legal requirements of Wyoming State Statute 18-5-306, “Minimum requirements for subdivision permits.” Lytton and Layton said that two required documents were missing: (1) proof that water could and would be supplied by public or private water suppliers and (2) a statement regarding the potability of the proposed water supply.
Lytton and Layton further questioned why the commissioners placed more emphasis on inspecting septic systems than on monitoring the groundwater for pollution. They wondered who is going to enforce the several conditions and inspections imposed by the commissioners on the developer. Further, they questioned whether or not the developer would be around to take responsibility for cleanup of potential septic system failures and polluted groundwater, or if the burden would fall on “unsuspecting lot owners, or the taxpayers.”
Lytton and Layton concluded by voicing their opinion that, by approving the subdivision, the county commissioners had not carried out their responsibility for public health and welfare.
The full text of Wyoming State Statute 18-5-306 may be seen at http://legisweb.state.wy.us/statutes/statutes.aspx?file=titles/Title18/T18CH5.htm
“Praises Commissioner Durante for vote against subdivision.” This letter from Irene L. Hause appeared on Page 4 of The Sheridan Press [Sheridan, Wyoming] on Friday, March 17, 2006:
Editor:
For anyone who thinks that all public hearings are boring, you should have been at the Sheridan County Courthouse on March 7 for the fourth public hearing regarding the planned Indian Paintbrush Estates subdivision on Swaim Road (County Road 56).
Emotions ran high as neighbors took on the developer, his lawyer, his project manager, his team of engineers, and a real estate agent.
But March 7 was not like the movies where the underdog wins. On that day, greed and misguided visions of “progress for Sheridan County” won by a 2 to 1 vote of the County Commissioners.
It was Commissioner Larry Durante who championed the cause of the underdogs.
Mr. Durante had carefully studied all of the cautionary information about the planned building site that neighbors have been calling to the public’s attention since last October.
He had then made phone calls and talked to area residents face to face. He had reviewed the developer’s engineering report. He had examined aerial photographs of the site taken by Ron Lytton in the fall of 2005 that showed much of the site to be marshy even during the current long-standing drought.
He had studied photographs of flooding on adjacent property during the spring of 2005, flooding caused by runoff from the Paintbrush site.
He had paid attention to the statement read by my neighbor at the March 7 hearing, a notarized statement that had been prepared by a Sheridan physician which described in detail the several areas of excessive wetness that he’d observed when he’d recently pastured his cattle there.
After Mr. Durante’s extensive review of the evidence about the planned Paintbrush site, he agreed with the neighbors that, even with massive engineering efforts, developer David Scott Bliss’ acreage would remain wet enough to pose health and safety issues because houses and septic systems built in unstable soil cannot be expected to maintain their structural integrity.
As Mr. Durante pointed out, not every piece of land in Sheridan County is appropriate for development, adding that the planned Paintbrush site is an example of one of those unsuitable areas.
“Finds Sheridan a haven; dismayed by subdivision OK.” This letter from Claudia Azhari of Sheridan, Wyoming, appeared on Page 4 of The Sheridan Press [Sheridan, Wyoming] on Wednesday, March 22, 2006.
Azhari wrote that she had recently moved to Sheridan and finds it an ideal place to live, but is dismayed that County Commissioners Cram and Dixon approved David Scott Bliss’ application to build the Indian Paintbrush Estates subdivision on Swaim Road. As someone who lives in the vicinity of the Paintbrush site, Azhari said she could not believe that a developer would want to put 22 homes on 51 acres of land that is known to be swampy. Azhari is concerned with the potential for downstream surface and groundwater pollution from 22 mounded septic systems, believing that both people and wildlife are at risk.
She advocates that independent studies be done on any sites where developers want to build and that the independent reports be evaluated by both the County and the State.
Azhari further believes that indiscriminate subdivision development in the Sheridan area needs to be reined in because “mortgaging Sheridan-Big Horn’s future to developers is folly.”
“Would not dream of putting house at Paintbrush Estates.” This letter from Irene L. Hause appeared on Page 4 of The Sheridan Press [Sheridan, Wyoming] on Friday, April 28, 2006:
Editor:
On April 5, the day before the rainy days hit, Sheridan Media News Director Ace Young was taping on-site interviews with Phil Zerwas, Ron Lytton, and me.
The four of us were standing in the southwest corner of my property, which is just across the fence from the planned Indian Paintbrush Estates subdivision.
Mr. Lytton reached down, pulled up a handful of dirt, and squeezed water out of it.
I wouldn’t dream of putting a house on that part of my property, yet developer David Scott Bliss has begun infrastructure construction for a 22-lot subdivision with 22 septic systems right across the fence.
Indeed, heavy equipment has been out here, even on a Sunday (April 9), ripping up a section of the Swaim Draw wetlands, so that a road can be built to access the lots that a real estate agency began marketing weeks ago.
However, as of April 12, Mr. Bliss had not yet received a Sheridan Area Water Supply/Joint Powers Board permit for potable water supply to the subdivision.
I confirmed this with Mayor Dave Kinskey immediately after the April 12 SAWS/JPB meeting in City Hall, a meeting that I attended.
Before the times comes that Mr. Bliss finally decides to present his case at a SAWS/JPB meeting, both city and county residents need to contact the board members and ask them whether or not they thing that the historically swampy Paintbrush site is a suitable place to further stretch the Sheridan area’s precious (and sometimes rationed) water supply.
Another question to ask: Who will be responsible for the design, construction, operation and ultimately the maintenance of the water system in that unstable, water-laden soil?
Board members are County Commissioners Terry Cram, Ky Dixon, and Larry Durante. City members are Mayor Dave Kinskey and City Council members Kathy Kennedy and Marc Ketcham.
Call them to ask questions and voice your opinion about water supply for the Indian Paintbrush Estates subdivision. The number at the commissioners’ office is 674-2900. To reach City Hall, call 674-6483.
A few weeks ago a man remarked to me that it would be pretty hard for SAWS/JPB to turn down a permit to a guy who has already started construction.
However, it was Mr. Bliss’ decision to proceed even though he knew he did not have his potable water supply permit. It is nothing more than a maneuver for special consideration that deserves no sympathy whatsoever.
“Paintbrush developer answers critics over project, water use.” This letter from [David] Scott Bliss of Sheridan, Wyoming, appeared on Page 4 of The Sheridan Press [Sheridan, Wyoming] on Tuesday, May 2, 2006. An editor’s note appeared below the letter informing readers that the newspaper had shortened Bliss’ letter.
Bliss identified himself as the developer of the new Indian Paintbrush Estates subdivision in Sheridan. Regarding the critics of the Paintbrush project, Bliss claimed “they are wrong.” He said that the subdivision has “strong covenants,” and he elaborated on the government regulations that a developer must fulfill prior to receiving a “Permit to Construct.” Agencies he listed were Sheridan Area Water Supply [SAWS], the Department of Environmental Quality [DEQ], and the County Planning Department. Bliss asserted that he had complied with the requirements of SAWS and DEQ and that “after the [water] system is installed, tested and inspected, an agreement from SAWS can be awarded.” Bliss stated his belief that his Indian Paintbrush Estates subdivision “is a wonderful development for Sheridan County” and that people living there will have “the space and privacy they deserve.”
“Bliss’ rhetoric does not change swamp site at Paintbrush.” A letter from Claudia Azhari of Sheridan, Wyoming, appeared on Page 4 of The Sheridan Press [Sheridan, Wyoming] on Tuesday, May 9, 2006.
Azhari responded to [David] Scott Bliss’ Letter to the Editor dated May 2, 2006. She wrote that the developer’s “public relations/sales rhetoric” could not change the fact that long-term residents near the Indian Paintbrush Estates Subdivision have long referred to that land as a swamp and could not change the fact that Bliss has still has to go before the Sheridan Area Water Supply Joint Powers Board to present the reasons he should be granted water tap permits for that property.
“Indian Paintbrush Estates not suitable for housing sites.” A letter from Kris Korfanta of Ranchester, Wyoming, appeared on Page 4 of The Sheridan Press [Sheridan, Wyoming] on Saturday, May 20, 2006.
Korfanta identified herself as a middle school science teacher and the mother of two young children. She said that she is troubled by the fact that government officials have allowed the Indian Paintbrush Estates subdivision project to proceed despite repeated warnings from people living in the area that the land is very wet during normal weather patterns. She questioned why financial gain for developers should be allowed to override concerns that our children could inherit potential groundwater problems as the result of constructing 22 septic systems at the 51-acre Paintbrush site. Korfanta urged the public to contact board members of Sheridan Area Water Supply “and ask them to do the right thing by the people of this county and deny SAWS water use in that subdivision.” She did not think that Indian Paintbrush Estates subdivision should be allowed to have clean SAWS water while at the same time having such potential to pollute the groundwater from the septic systems.
“Not here please.” This letter from Irene L. Hause appeared on Page A4 of the Buffalo Bulletin [Buffalo, Wyoming] on Thursday, May 25, 2006:
Dear Editor,
Gordon Saathoff’s letter to the editor [April 20] really struck a chord with me. His words amplify my own belief that many of our public servants—elected and otherwise—are supporting the financial interests of developers instead of the expressed wishes of the public.
Mr. Saathoff stated his opinion that the people of Buffalo are subsidizing developers and builders by the water rate increase that is actually a tax in disguise. He wrote that the water rate increase was implemented after voters turned down a proposed tax to provide matching funds for a grant to subsidize developers and builders to provide water and more for new subdivisions.
That sort of thing, coupled with the Indian Paintbrush Estates subdivision farce here in Sheridan, only reinforces my view that a subdivision moratorium is long overdue. Our government needs to be held accountable for actions that set aside the wishes of the majority in order to favor the bank accounts of subdivision developers. A moratorium would provide time to develop, analyze, and implement appropriate regulations that would protect our land, our water, and our way of life.
Just because “it’s happening everywhere” doesn’t mean that rampant, virtually uncontrolled subdivision development needs to continue happening here. Wyoming people pride themselves on their independent nature, and it is that same independent nature that can change “it’s happening everywhere” into “but it’s not going to continue happening here.”
“SAWS water use for Paintbrush to be discussed July 19.” This letter from Irene L. Hause appeared on Page 4 of The Sheridan Press [Sheridan, Wyoming] on Wednesday, July 12, 2006:
Editor:
Because the southwest corner of my property is across the fence from developer David Scott Bliss’ controversial Indian Paintbrush Estates subdivision on Swaim Road, people frequently ask me what’s going on at the Indian Paintbrush site.
Paintbrush is the 22-lot, 51-acre subdivision that was approved by a contentious 2-to-1 decision of the Sheridan County Commissioners on March 7.
In mid-March construction began on the Paintbrush access road. Neighbors were subjected to seven-days-a-week construction racket during most of that phase, including Mother’s Day and Memorial Day.
Now, four months later, the moods of Paintbrush neighbors still range from anger to dismay to disgust to disbelief as we continue to see backhoes, trackhoes, pumps, graders, compactors, and multiple truckloads of washed rock forcing that acreage into something that Mother Nature clearly never intended.
Ron Lytton, a neighbor who is a professional aerial photographer, has been documenting the exploitation of that land.
Beginning last October, several neighbors have repeatedly drawn to the public’s attention the unsuitability of that site for a subdivision, because we know the history of those acres, land we’ve long known to be wet and unstable.
Indeed, the acreage even contains delineated wetlands that are being monitored by the Army Corps of Engineers.
Paintbrush neighbors are particularly concerned with the potential for septic system failure on that site, especially since some people are still on wells out here.
The anecdotal evidence we continue to hear supports our concern that mounded septic systems – the kind required at the Paintbrush site – are not as reliable as they are alleged to be.
According to the Sheridan Area Water Supply – Joint Powers Board office, the developer’s application for a SAWS water supply permit is a tentative agenda item at the upcoming SAWS-JPB public hearing. The Board will determine whether or not to grant that permit.
As elected representatives, part of their duty will be to determine if granting that permit would constitute appropriate use of SAWS water, and if granting SAWS water to Paintbrush would be in the long-term best interests of the residents of Sheridan County.
The hearing has been set for Wednesday, July 19, at 5:30 p.m., at Sheridan City Hall, Third Floor. If you are at all concerned about Sheridan County water issues, here is the perfect opportunity to observe and/or comment.
If you plan to attend the hearing, you may want to telephone SAWS at 672-5280 on the day of the hearing to make sure Paintbrush is on the final agenda.
“SAWS should stop or downsize Paintbrush Subdivision.” This letter from Sandy Sare appeared on Page 4 of The Sheridan Press [Sheridan, Wyoming] on Tuesday, July 18, 2006.
Sare wrote that she, as well as many others, have been confused and frustrated when discussing Indian Paintbrush Estates subdivision with various agencies and individuals. Sare explained that the reason for the confusion and frustration is that paperwork and issued permits continue to support the advancement of Indian Paintbrush, but at the same time, the people granting the approvals and permits do not believe that the property is appropriate for development.
Sare asked, “How can these agencies grant these permits and then sit back and say ‘mmmmm … not a good area to be developing’? Where is the breakdown in our system of checks and balances?” Sare emphasized that the neighbors’ serious concerns about the building site have been validated by aerial photos and the running of sump pumps.
She added that just because the developer chose to pour money into his project without having water supply approval from the Sheridan Area Water Supply Joint Powers Board should not sway the Board as they vote for or against public water supply to the subdivision. She concluded by saying that SAWS JPB should “consider putting a stop to or downsizing this subdivision.”
“Can’t understand why Commissioner Dixon supports Indian Paintbrush project.” This letter from Judi Panetta appeared on Page 4 of The Sheridan Press [Sheridan, Wyoming] on Monday, August 7, 2006.
Panetta wrote of her conversation with [Sheridan County] Commissioner Ky Dixon. Panetta could not understand why Dixon continues to support Indian Paintbrush Estates subdivision, which Panetta described as “a risky and potentially dangerous enterprise due to likely failure of septic tanks.”
Panetta reiterated that the developer’s engineering tests were done during a lengthy drought and fail to take into account the neighbors’ knowledge of the wetness of the land prior to the drought.
Panetta suggested that Dixon, as chairwoman of the Sheridan Area Water Supply Joint Powers Board had grown too close to the developer which apparently led to the manipulation of meeting times and agendas, a tactic Panetta felt has been used to wear down the opposition. Panetta added that Dixon knows she will not be held accountable or responsible after the [November] election [because about two weeks after the final plat for the subdivision was approved by the County Commissioners on March 7, Dixon announced that she would not be running for re-election].
Panetta concluded her letter by suggesting that all the SAWS JPB members visit the mobile home park where her mother lives here in Sheridan. Panetta said it was built on a bog and has repeatedly had problems with sewer and water mains that break as a result of freezing ground and surface water.
“Will Indian Paintbrush Estates be asset or liability for Sheridan?” This letter from Irene L. Hause appeared on Page 4 of The Sheridan Press [Sheridan, Wyoming] on Monday, August 7, 2006.
Apparently it isn’t just we neighbors of the star-crossed Indian Paintbrush Estates subdivision on Swaim Road who think what’s going on out here is newsworthy.
The Billings Gazette ran a story about the controversy in the Aug. 1 Wyoming edition.
The “done deal” portrayal by the developer’s team left out the fact that they have yet to appear before the Sheridan Area Water Supply Joint Powers Board for their water-supply permit.
They’ve had about five months to do so. Now it appears that Paintbrush might finally be coming before the Board on Wednesday, Aug. 9, at 5 p.m. in the Sheridan County Courthouse.
I say “might” because the developer, David Scott Bliss, has a history of playing games with the SAWS JPB agenda.
I’ve attended some recent SAWS JPB hearings. Mayor Kinskey emphatically stated that he believes the SAWS JPB board, made up of elected officials, is there to represent the best interests of their constituents, not to rubber-stamp engineering reports.
He also spoke with great determination of the need for wise and responsible use of the Sheridan area’s long-term water supply, particularly as it relates to the mushrooming numbers of subdivisions.
Does Indian Paintbrush Estates subdivision have the potential to become a socially responsible and environmentally viable subdivision – that is, will it be an asset or a liability for Sheridan now and in the future?
This is a serious question, because the answer will determine whether or not the subdivision is granted access to Sheridan’s water supply, even as the residents of Sheridan experience water restrictions.
We opponents of Paintbrush have long contended that these particular 51 acres are too wet and unstable to support a 22-unit housing development, each with its own septic system and potential for groundwater pollution.
In the Gazette article, Commissioner Larry Durante (who voted against the subdivision on March 7) summarized the problems with Paintbrush and concluded by saying, “There’s a lot of prime, developable land here in Sheridan County, and we shouldn’t be developing marginal pieces when there are other pieces that don’t have a problem with groundwater.”
One final point: To quote the Gazette article, “Bliss said Hause is part of a ‘relatively small but vocal’ group of opponents.”
I can assure Mr. Bliss that I will remain vocal, and I can assure him that his opponents are not nearly as few as he would like to think. They just aren’t as outspoken as I am.
The full text of the article appearing in the Billings Gazette may be seen at http://www.billingsgazette.net/articles/2006/08/01/news/wyoming/30-protest.txt
“Hopes SAWS does not change vote on Indian Paintbrush.” This letter from Sandy Sare appeared on Page 4 of The Sheridan Press [Sheridan, Wyoming] on Thursday, September 7, 2006.
Regarding Indian Paintbrush Estates subdivision, Sare expressed her hope that the Sheridan Area Water Supply Joint Powers Board would again deny SAWS water to that subdivision at the September 13 “reconsideration” hearing. She said that the denial of SAWS water to “that historically water-logged building site” would be in the best interest of the public.
Sare pointed out that the developer, David Scott Bliss, had been accompanied by legal counsel to every public hearing he’d attended. She added that Bliss might want to change advisors if he was led to believe that the Department of Environmental Quality’s approval had guaranteed him water supply. Sare stated that DEQ’s approval was for the adequacy of the water delivery system, not approval for the furnishing of SAWS water.
“Indian Paintbrush opponent wonders why Dixon supports it.” This letter from Irene L. Hause appeared on Page 4 of The Sheridan Press [Sheridan, Wyoming] on Saturday, September 9, 2006.
Editor:
As an opponent of the Indian Paintbrush Estates subdivision project, I’ve attended several public hearings since last October. Indian Paintbrush Estates subdivision was an agenda item at six of them.
At its Aug. 9 hearing, the Sheridan Area Water Supply Joint Powers Board denied a water supply permit to that subdivision.
The next—yet another—hearing about developer David Scott Bliss’ boondoggle has been scheduled for Wednesday, Sept. 13, at 5 p.m. in the Sheridan County Courthouse (second floor, new addition).
At the Sept. 13 hearing, the board will review the developer’s “Request for Reconsideration.”
Here is a quick and revealing review of the voting records at the last three public hearings about Indian Paintbrush:
March 7 county commissioners meeting: Ky Dixon and Chairman Terry Cram voted to approve the final plat of Indian Paintbrush. Larry Durante voted against it.
Aug. [9] SAWS JPB meeting: Dixon and Cram voted in favor of allocating SAWS water to Indian Paintbrush. Durante, Mayor Dave Kinskey and Councilwoman Kathy Kennedy voted against it. Councilman Marc Ketcham was unable to attend the meting.
August 15 county commissioners meeting: County Engineer Bruce Yates brought what he termed a “housecleaning” item before the commissioners—an old request by Indian Paintbrush for a right-of-way to install a water line under part of Swaim Road. Cram and Durante voted against it. However, Dixon voted to approve this right-of-way, even though SAWS water had been denied at the Aug. 9 SAWS JPB meeting.
We in the audience at the Aug. 15 meeting could only speculate why Commissioner Dixon voted the way she did.
Since March, SAWS JPB meetings that include Indian Paintbrush on the agenda have been bounced around like ping-pong balls. It will be interest to see if the Sept. 13 hearing actually takes place; that particular meeting was already postponed once due to inadequate public notice.
In the meantime, work on Indian Paintbrush Estates’ infrastructure continues unabated, seven days a week, including on Labor Day.
“Will Dixon, Paintbrush developer ever give up?” This letter from Judi Panetta appeared on Page 4 of The Sheridan Press [Sheridan, Wyoming] on Tuesday, September 12, 2006.
Panetta expressed her amazement that Indian Paintbrush Estates subdivision is still moving forward despite being twice rejected by the Planning and Zoning Commission and once by the Sheridan Area Water Supply Joint Powers Board. Panetta said that she cannot understand why the developer and County Commissioner Ky Dixon are so intent on going forward with a project that will put septic tanks in “a boggy area that contains a federally designated wetlands.”
Panetta described the proponents of the project as tenacious and arrogant and called it stupid to put septic tanks on those acres. She questioned what is going on in the background of this project, specifically asking if a “good old boy” network is at work.
“Dismayed Paintbrush developer going ahead with project.” This letter from Claudia Azhari appeared on Page 4 of The Sheridan Press [Sheridan, Wyoming] on Wednesday, September 13, 2006.
Azhari expressed her dismay that Indian Paintbrush Estates subdivision project would be the subject of a “reconsideration” hearing by the Sheridan Area Water Supply Joint Powers Board on September 13. Azhari said that County Commissioner Larry Durante, Sheridan Mayor Dave Kinskey, and Councilwoman Kathy Kennedy were very clear when they expressed their reasons for denying water taps to the subdivision at the August 9 hearing. Azhari hoped they would display the same resolve against Indian Paintbrush at the “reconsideration” hearing.
“Says mayor misled public with developer/SAWS water deal.” This letter from Ron Lytton appeared on Page 4 of The Sheridan Press [Sheridan, Wyoming] on Friday, September 15, 2006.
Lytton [who is the agent for the Big Horn Reservoir Company] claimed that Mayor Kinskey lied to and misled the public on the radio regarding the [September 13] water rights deal made by the Sheridan Area Water Supply Joint Powers Board and [David] Scott Bliss, the developer of Indian Paintbrush Estates subdivision.
Lytton stated that Bliss could not give 21 shares of Big Horn Reservoir Water to SAWS because doing so is in violation of state law and the bylaws of the reservoir company.
“Don’t stand by and let Kinskey steamroller go by unchallenged.” This letter from Irene [L.] Hause appeared on Page 4 of The Sheridan Press [Sheridan, Wyoming] on Thursday, September 28, 2006.
Editor:
I was stunned by what I witnessed at the Sept. 13 Sheridan Area Water Supply Joint Powers Board hearing.
It was the hallmark of the abuse of public process that has occurred as Indian Paintbrush Estates subdivision snaked its way along a nearly yearlong path to approval.
A police officer was posted at the door, and Chairwoman Ky Dixon limited public comment to two minutes per person.
Step back to the SAWS JPB meeting of Aug. 9 where Mayor Dave Kinskey—a board member—persuasively spoke of the reasons to deny a SAWS water permit to Indian Paintbrush. The permit failed to receive the four votes necessary for approval.
At the Sept. 13 “reconsideration” hearing, Kinskey again spoke powerfully, this time in favor of the permit. Kinskey, Dixon, County Commissioner Terry Cram, and City Councilman Marc Ketcham cast the four crucial votes, and Paintbrush got its SAWS water.
What had changed in that month’s time? What had become of the mayor’s own axiom, that subdivisions are being approved on the backs of the residents of the city of Sheridan? “Voluntary Water Restrictions Requested” still appears on the City’s Web site.
Here’s what changed: The developer had agreed to various conditions that advance Kinskey’s crusade for more power outside the city limits.
Kinskey said that he was aware of the Indian Paintbrush neighbors’ objections to the subdivision, but that the developer’s decision to turn over his Big Horn Reservoir Co. irrigation water shares to SAWS outweighed any other considerations.
Ron Lytton, agent for the reservoir company, repeatedly called to the board’s attention that both state law and the bylaws of the company forbid the kind of transaction described by Kinskey.
Lytton, who had gotten wind of this deal, had even brought the company’s regulations to the hearing and read them to the board, to no avail.
What did the public get in return for Kinskey’s changed position? It saw more water taps approved in the county in exchange for 21 acre-feet of water that residents will not see in the foreseeable future, if ever. The privately owned reservoir is not even in a drainage served by a current water- treatment facility.
Don’t stand by and let Kinskey’s steamroller roll on unchallenged.
Contact your representatives and demand a full independent investigation of the deal made at the Sept. 13 SAWS JPB hearing. Tell them that you support Ron Lytton’s continuing efforts to make the government in Sheridan County open and accountable.
“Durante represents the people and merits re-election.” This letter from Irene L. Hause appeared on Page 4 of The Sheridan Press [Sheridan, Wyoming] on Monday, October 30, 2006.
Editor:
Sheridan County Commissioner Larry Durante represents the people and merits re-election.
I did not know Commissioner Durante until the Indian Paintbrush Estates subdivision mess erupted in my neighborhood last year, out here southwest of town on Swaim Road.
Durante voted against the final plat and against SAWS water supply to Indian Paintbrush, and he did not base his vote on my and others’ very vocal opposition to the subdivision.
Durante researched the situation for himself.
He studied the soils information prepared by the U.S. Department of Agriculture Natural Resources Conservation Service. He made a site visit to Indian Paintbrush.
In one instance of his research, he went as far as to track down and speak with a former owner of the property who resides in a care facility.
Based on his own investigation, Durante came to the conclusion that indeed the neighbors of Indian Paintbrush had valid concerns about the site as the future location of a subdivision.
In other words, Durante was not bedazzled by the developer’s dog and pony show. Durante is perceptive and recognizes that all change is not progress and that all change is not good.
Larry Durante deserves your vote because he has demonstrated the analytical thinking so desperately needed as Sheridan County faces rampant development.
"Lingering questions over SAWS, Paintbrush water." This letter from Gene Sager appeared on Page 4 of The Sheridan Press [Sheridan, Wyoming] on Friday, December 8, 2006.
Sager summarized his understanding of Mayor Dave Kinskey's actions regarding Indian Paintbrush Estates subdivision, decisions Kinskey had made in his role as a Sheridan Area Water Supply board member: In August the mayor had made a strong statement against authorizing SAWS water for the subdivision. However, the mayor had changed his mind by the September meeting, saying that the developer had agreed to give SAWS some of his shares in Big Horn Reservoir Company and that the receipt of these water shares overrode all concerns that citizens had been bringing forward about the subdivision over the past several months.
Sager went on to say that at the September meeting the mayor and the other board members had ignored repeated admonitions from the reservoir company's agent when the agent told board members that such a trade-off between the developer and SAWS was contrary to both the reservoir company's by-laws and state law. Sager further noted that the deal was subsequently invalided, commenting that the mayor's "rash decisions" continue to create legal expenses that are paid for by tax dollars.
Sager challenged the SAWS board to make a statement at its next meeting that clearly explains the current status of the developer's application for SAWS water at Indian Paintbrush Estates subdivision and to justify the board's handling of that application.
[NOTE: Board members present at the September meeting were Ky Dixon (Chairwoman), Terry Cram, Dave Kinskey, and Marc Ketcham. Larry Durante and Kathy Kennedy were absent.]
"SAWS meeting a parallel to Marx Brothers movie." This letter from Irene L. Hause appeared on Page 4 of The Sheridan Press [Sheridan, Wyoming] on Thursday, December 21, 2006.
Editor:
A few weeks ago I borrowed an old movie from the Sheridan County Fulmer Public Library, the 1932 Marx Brothers classic, "Horse Feathers".
"Horse Feathers" must have been the inspiration for the Dec. 13 meeting of the Sheridan Area Water Supply-Joint Powers Board.
Betsy Love from Sheridan Media and Josh Mitchell from The Sheridan Press deserve big bonuses for being able to sort things out well enough to get some information on the radio and into the newspaper.
I had gone to the meeting with the intention of getting a clear explanation of the current status of the Sep. 13 Indian Paintbrush Estates subdivision/SAWS water deal involving Big Horn Mountain Reservoir Co. water shares, a deal that had very understandably turned sour.
Four of the six board members were present when the meeting began. Because one of the board members had to leave early, a hurried reorganization of the agenda took place so that a quorum would be present long enough to take action on items requiring a quorum.
Then the race was on as they roared through or cut short some important issues.
Everything involving Indian Paintbrush came across like the old Abbott and Costello routine, "Who's On First?"
Larry Durante, who had voted against the final plat of Indian Paintbrush (March 7) and against furnishing SAWS water to the subdivision (Aug. 9), unsuccessfully kept trying to break through long enough to find out why some very recent decisions regarding Indian Paintbrush had been made, reportedly in a SAWS executive session, without his knowledge of the session and without subsequently being brought forward at a public hearing.
It is a violation of both the Wyoming open meetings law and SAWS-JPB rules and regulations to make decisions in an executive session that are not ratified in an open, public meeting.
Can we expect a comprehensive and understandable explanation from the new SAWS board that will take office in January? Can we expect the board to follow state law and their own rules?
The citizens and taxpayers of Sheridan County deserve honesty, openness, and clarity from their elected officials - not buffoonery.
"Horse Feathers" and "Who's On First" are not appropriate models for public meetings.
[NOTE: Board members present for the entire December meeting were Ky Dixon (Chairwoman), Terry Cram, and Larry Durante. Kathy Kennedy had to leave about half way through the meeting. Dave Kinskey arrived shortly after Kathy Kennedy left. Marc Ketcham was absent.]
"Indian Paintbrush Estates development ongoing debacle." This letter from Judi Panetta appeared on Page 4 of The Sheridan Press [Sheridan, Wyoming] on Tuesday, January 9, 2007.
Paneta expressed thankfulness that the Sheridan Area Water Supply-Joint Powers Board is now developing formal guidelines for developers who come to SAWS for water taps and believes that these guidelines are a direct result of the problems encountered with Indian Paintbrush Estates subdivision.
She expressed hope that the new lawyer hired by SAWS would be able to "sort out the possible illegalities and irregularities" regarding Indian Paintbrush.
Panetta reviewed the history of Indian Paintbrush applications to SAWS for water taps, noting that the August 9 application had been denied and that the developer [David Scott Bliss] had requested reconsideration at the September 13 meeting.
Panetta stated her opinion that Bliss' offer of 21 shares of Big Horn Reservoir Company water at the September 13 meeting was nothing more than "wind pudding"-a "sleight of hand" on the developer's part-because Panetta believed that both Bliss and his lawyers were aware that "those shares were not a viable exchange" for SAWS water taps at the time the offer was made. Panetta continued by stating that both the developer and the SAWS board had chosen to ignore the frequent admonitions of Ron Lytton, the agent for the reservoir company, who repeatedly stood up at the September 13 meeting to inform them that such a transfer of water shares was not allowed by the bylaws of the reservoir company.
Panetta further stated that during the December 13 board member Larry Durante had repeatedly asked other board members-and received no satisfactory explanation-as to why he had not been notified when some of the other Board members were making the decision to return the water shares to Bliss.
Panetta stated her opinion that other members of the board, in effect, had said at the December 13 meeting, "Trust us, something good is coming out of this down the pike, and we may even get some money out of this."
Panetta went on to say that because the developer's offer of "blue sky and hot air" was invalidated, the board should also invalidate their approval of SAWS water taps for the subdivision.
Panetta concluded by saying that she hopes the incoming SAWS board members will have Larry Durante's courage to stand up and say "no" to developers under similar circumstances.
[NOTE: Board members present for the entire December meeting were Ky Dixon (Chairwoman), Terry Cram, and Larry Durante. Kathy Kennedy had to leave about half way through the meeting. Dave Kinskey arrived shortly after Kathy Kennedy left. Marc Ketcham was absent.]
COMMISSION and BOARD MEETINGS
regarding Indian Paintbrush Estates subdivision
October 13, 2005 through June 13, 2007
Thursday, October 13, 2005
Consideration of Preliminary Plat
Sheridan County Planning and Zoning Commission
(five-member panel)
Mike Connell, Chairman – voted YES
Billie Little – voted NO
Laurie Scheeler – voted YES
John Stamato – voted NO
Phil Zerwas – ABSTAINED
With the above vote, the developer (David Scott Bliss) had the choice of either dropping his request or appealing it to the Sheridan County Commissioners. He chose to appeal the decision.
Tuesday, November 15, 2005
Consideration Whether Subdivision Paperwork Adequate
Sheridan County Board of Commissioners
(three-member panel)
Lawrence A. “Larry” Durante, Chairman – voted YES
Terry Cram – voted YES
Ky Dixon – voted YES
The Commissioners’ vote to allow the developer to continue to the final plat stage was in no way a reflection on the merits of the proposed Indian Paintbrush Estates subdivision. It simply reflected their belief that the developer’s paperwork was in order so he could proceed to the next step. The matter then went back to the Planning and Zoning Commission for reconsideration at their February 9, 2006, meeting. The minutes of the November 15, 2005, meeting are available on-line at http://www.sheridancounty.com/info/assets/ccom/2005/11-15-05.pdf
Thursday, February 9, 2006
Reconsideration of Preliminary Plat
Sheridan County Planning and Zoning Commission
(five-member panel)
Mike Connell, Chairman – voted YES
Laurie Scheeler – voted YES
Phil Zerwas – voted NO
Billie Little – could not attend meeting due to family emergency
John Stamato – recently resigned from Commission
Because the proposed plat did not receive three affirmative votes, the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission was “denial.” The developer has chosen not to be reheard by the Planning and Zoning Commission, but rather has decided to proceed to the Board of Commissioners on March 7, 2006, despite the recommendation of “denial” from the Planning and Zoning Commission.
Tuesday, March 7, 2006
Consideration of Final Plat
Sheridan County Board of Commissioners
(three-member panel)
Terry Cram – voted YES, with reservations
Ky Dixon – voted YES
Lawrence A. “Larry” Durante, Chairman – voted NO
The minutes of the March 7, 2006, meeting are available on-line at http://www.sheridancounty.com/info/assets/ccom/2006/03-07-06.pdf This vote approved the final plat for Indian Paintbrush Estates subdivision. At this same hearing, the Board approved Right-of-way License 06-02 for the developer to cross Swaim Road to install an open cut pipeline crossing for a water line. Some time after the hearing, it was learned that the developer did not yet have a water-service agreement with the Sheridan Area Water Supply Joint Powers Board.
Wednesday, August 9, 2006
Consideration of Water Service Agreement
Sheridan Area Water Supply/Joint Powers Board
(six-member panel)
Ky Dixon (Chairwoman) – voted YES
Terry Cram – voted YES
Lawrence A. “Larry” Durante – voted NO
Kathy Kennedy – voted NO
Dave Kinskey – voted NO
Marc Ketcham – could not attend
The water service agreement to Indian Paintbrush Estates subdivision was denied because it did not receive the four affirmative votes needed. According to The Sheridan Press (August 10, 2006 edition), “. . . developer Scott Bliss . . . said he would file an administrative appeal of the decision. . . . Bliss said if the appeal does not go in his favor, he will take his case to district court and sue SAWS for damages.” The minutes of the August 9, 2006, meeting are available on-line at http://www.city-sheridan-wy.com/info/assets/pwd-saws/20060809minutes.pdf
Tuesday, August 15, 2006
Consideration of Right-of-way License # 06-30
Sheridan County Board of Commissioners
(three-member panel)
Terry Cram, Chairman – voted NO
Ky Dixon – voted YES
Lawrence A. “Larry” Durante – voted NO
By this vote, the Sheridan County Commissioners denied approval for Right-of-way License 06-30 to install a water main parallel to the centerline of Swaim Road. The developer of Indian Paintbrush Estates subdivision had applied for this right of way before SAWS JPB had denied water to the subdivision on August 9, 2006. The minutes of the August 15, 2006, meeting are available on-line at http://www.sheridancounty.com/info/assets/ccom/2006/08-15-06.pdf
Wednesday, September 13, 2006
Reconsideration of Water Supply Agreement
Sheridan Area Water Supply/Joint Powers Board
(six-member panel)
Ky Dixon (Chairwoman) – voted YES
Terry Cram – voted YES
Dave Kinskey – voted YES
Marc Ketcham – voted YES
Lawrence A. “Larry” Durante – absent (was in Minnesota)
Kathy Kennedy – absent
The minutes of the September 13, 2006, meeting are available on-line at http://www.city-sheridan-wy.com/info/assets/pwd-saws/20060913minutes.pdf
Thursday, September 28, 2006
Consideration of Right-of-way License #06-31
Sheridan County Board of Commissioners
(three-member panel)
Terry Cram, Chairman – voted YES
Ky Dixon – voted YES
Lawrence A. “Larry” Durante – ABSTAINED
By this vote, the Sheridan County Commissioners approved Right-of-way License 06-31 authorizing installation of a water main parallel to the centerline of Swaim Road, in an open-cut of the barrow pit. Commissioner Durante abstained from voting because the call for a vote was made before he could finish asking questions about potential damage that Swaim Road might sustain. The minutes of the September 28, 2006, meeting are available on-line at http://www.sheridancounty.com/info/assets/ccom/2006/09-28-06.pdf
Wednesday, December 13, 2006
Sheridan Area Water Supply/Joint Powers Board
(six-member panel)
Ky Dixon, Chairwoman
Terry Cram
Lawrence A. “Larry” Durante)
Kathy Kennedy (had to leave when meeting was about half over)
Although Indian Paintbrush Estates subdivision was not on the formal agenda and no formal decisions were made about it at the meeting, considerable discussion about it took place. This was summarized in The Sheridan Press, December 14, 2006, edition by staff reporter Josh Mitchell's article, "Indian Paintbrush: SAWS board members stand by water deal." Irene L. Hause (December 21, 2006) and Judi Panetta (January 9, 2007) expressed their opinions of this meeting in Letters to the Editor. The minutes of the December 13, 2006, meeting are available on-line at http://www.city-sheridan-wy.com/info/assets/pwd-saws/20061213minutes.pdf
Wednesday, January 10, 2007
Amendment to Indian Paintbrush Estates Subdivision
Memorandum of Understanding (MOU)
Sheridan Area Water Supply/Joint Powers Board
(six-member panel)
Dave Kinskey (Chairman) - voted YES
Terry Cram - voted YES
Marc Ketcham (Secretary/Treasurer) - voted YES
Steve Maier (Vice-Chairman) - voted YES
Bob Rolston - voted YES
Mona Hansen - absent*
At the September 13, 2006, SAWS-JPB meeting, the developer had turned over 21.47 acre-feet of Big Horn Reservoir Co. water to SAWS to hold in escrow. Reservoir stockholders called that deal illegal, and that deal is now dead. With the amended water deal approved on January 10, 2007, the developer instead agreed to turn over to SAWS, by June 1, 2007, two shares of Park Reservoir Company water OR $6,000.
* Mona Hansen, a member of the Sheridan City Council, was present at the meeting table until just before the meeting began. As the meeting was about to begin, Hansen received a message and excused herself. At subsequent SAWS meetings, City Council member Robert "Bob" Webster has held that seat. The minutes of the January 10, 2007, meeting are available on-line at http://www.city-sheridan-wy.com/info/assets/pwd-saws/20070110minutes.pdf
Wednesday, June 13, 2007
Sheridan Area Water Supply/Joint Powers Board
(six-member panel)
Dave Kinskey (Chairman)
Terry Cram
Marc Ketcham (Secretary/Treasurer)
Steve Maier (Vice-Chairman)
Bob Rolston
Robert “Bob” Webster – (arrived about half an hour after meeting started)
Indian Paintbrush Estates subdivision was not on the agenda. However, during the Public Comments portion of the meeting, Irene L. Hause asked a question about Indian Paintbrush. She referenced the January 10, 2007, SAWS meeting in which the developer, David Scott Bliss, had agreed to turn over to SAWS, by June 1, 2007, two shares of Park Reservoir Company water OR $6,000. Hause asked the SAWS board the status of that agreement. Jay Stender, the SAWS administrator, stated that Bliss had paid $6,000 to SAWS on June 1, 2007.
The minutes of the June 13, 2007, meeting are available on-line at http://www.city-sheridan-wy.com/info/assets/pwd-saws/20070613minutes.pdf
Contact Information for Commissions and Water Board
Sheridan Area Water Supply/Joint Powers Board (SAWS/JPB)
as of February 14, 2007
Members of the Board (six members)
Sheridan City Government
City Hall
55 Grinnell Plaza
Sheridan, WY 82801-3930
Sheridan County Board of Commissioners
Sheridan County Courthouse
224 South Main Street, Suite B-1
Sheridan, WY 82801-4833
Sheridan County Planning and Zoning Commission
Sheridan County Courthouse
224 South Main Street, Suite B-8
Sheridan, WY 82801-4833
Contact Information for the Newspapers Cited
Billings Gazette
401 North Broadway
Billings, MT 59101
Mailing Address:
Billings Gazette
P.O. Box 36300
Billings, MT 59107-6300
Buffalo Bulletin
58 North Lobban Avenue
P.O. Box 730
Buffalo, WY 82834
The Sheridan Press
144 Grinnell Street
P.O. Box 2006
Sheridan, WY 82801
LIST OF NEWSPAPER ARTICLES REGARDING
INDIAN PAINTBRUSH ESTATES SUBDIVISION
2005 November 16. "Commission OKs preliminary plat for subdivision." Josh Mitchell, Staff Reporter. The Sheridan Press. Pages 1-2.
2006 February 10. "Controversial decisions: P & Z OKs Indian Paintbrush subdivision; race arena near Ranchester given thumbs down." Mark Heinz, Staff Reporter. The Sheridan Press. Pages 1, 6.
2006 February 17. "A step back to move forward: Indian Paintbrush developer says he's not discouraged by rejection vote from county planning commission." Mark Heinz, Staff Reporter. The Sheridan Press. Pages 1-2. [The February 9, 2006, approval of Indian Paintbrush was reversed. "Although three of the five planning commissioners were present at the Feb. 9 meeting-a quorum-there must be a majority vote of the entire planning commission to pass an item. . . . The two positive votes cast during the meeting were not enough to form a majority of the entire planning commission."]
2006 March 8. "Commission approves Indian Paintbrush subdivision: Chairman Terry Cram grudgingly casts swing vote on 51-acre, 22-lot development." Mark Heinz, Staff Reporter. The Sheridan Press. Pages 1-2.
2006 August 1. "Neighbors protest new subdivision." Ruffin Prevost, Gazette Wyoming Bureau. Billings Gazette. Pages 1B, 5B. The full text of this article may be seen at http://www.billingsgazette.net/articles/2006/08/01/news/wyoming/30-protest.txt
2006 August 10. "SAWS denies service to Indian Paintbrush subdivision." Bill E. Wambeke, Staff Reporter. The Sheridan Press. Pages 1-2.
2006 September 13. "Square-off at SAWS tonight." Bill E. Wambeke, Staff Reporter. The Sheridan Press. Pages 1, 6.
2006 September 14. "Overflow Crowd: Indian Paintbrush gets water: SAWS approves taps for controversial subdivision." Josh Mitchell, Staff Reporter. The Sheridan Press, Pages 1-2.
2006 September 16-17. "SAWS deal with developer called illegal." Josh Mitchell, Staff Reporter. The Sheridan Press. Page 1.
2006 September 30-October 1. "Indian Paintbrush water line right of way approved." Bill E. Wambeke, Staff Reporter. The Sheridan Press. Page 1.
2006 November 4. "Surveyor wins state award: Indian Paintbrush Estates wins subdivision plat of year." Pat Blair, Senior staff reporter. The Sheridan Press. Page B8.
2006 November 14. "No Deal: SAWS will not hold water shares." Josh Mitchell, Staff Reporter. The Sheridan Press. Pages 1-2.
2006 December 14. "Indian Paintbrush: SAWS board members stand by water deal." Josh Mitchell, Staff Reporter. The Sheridan Press. Pages 1, 7.
2007 January 11. "SAWS amends deal with Bliss: Board settles for 2 acre-feet; developer still getting water taps." Josh Mitchell, Staff Reporter. The Sheridan Press. Pages 1-2.
