By Tom Boland, Florence
Being new to the valley and being generally interested in what’s going on around me, I decided to spend a morning reading “the Court File” to learn what all the hubbub is about with the Big Sky Development v. Ravalli Co. Commissioners case. Yes, sadly, that’s my idea of a good time. My curiosity got an additional pull when I received my property tax bill for the year and saw that I too am helping pay off the $675,000 judgment levy.
Using the document index prepared by the very competent Clerk of Court’s staff, I was able to find and read some interesting and rather disturbing documents. Most notably, the expert appraisers’ reports prepared at the request of the parties to the lawsuit. Neither the County’s hired appraiser, nor Big Sky’s own expert could justify the amount of damages sought. Big Sky’s appraiser acknowledged that the bottom fell out of the real estate market just as the Developer was denied his variance request on road standards. Amazingly, this expert stated that the county’s delay in approval of the variance may have actually saved his investor-clients considerable money since they were about to sink $2.8 million into a residential development that they, likely, would not have been able to sell. This same appraiser admitted in his report that his appraisal numbers should “probably be adjusted downward” in light of the 2008 economic meltdown, but he chose not to, apparently concluding that such an adjustment would be flushed out as the case proceeded. See Ct. Document No. 115.
Oddly, the County’s attorneys never questioned Big Sky’s expert, nor called his appraisal into question, even though they had the right and the opportunity to question his numbers while he’s under oath.
The County’s expert appraiser was even more skeptical of the developer’s damages but for some reason the County Commissioners and their team of lawyers chose to not accept their own expert’s assessment of Big Sky’s potential losses.
Our County Commissioners then agreed to pay $675K in an out-of-court settlement which occurred during a little-noticed meeting on May 12, 2014. According to the Commissioners’ own approved meeting minutes there was NO public participation in this meeting, even though the settlement agreement clearly says that the settlement approval is conditioned on public notice and opportunity for public participation. Instead, they chose to do a “quick and dirty” approval under the radar with a settlement sum that does not seem to be justified by the evidence in the case.
Why was Big Sky Development given $675,000 of taxpayers’ money when its own real estate appraiser questioned its justification? Why the secrecy? And why can’t affected Ravalli County taxpayers get straight answers about the settlement of this case when they ask county officials?