For those of you that are still following the court saga (which should be all of us, as every time The Lawyer puts pen to paper, we pay)…the next set of documents to fly back and forth:
First, Mr. Pace’s attorney submits a Bill of Costs to the district for $2948.75; note this is not the final bill for his civil suit (see this post for details); this is just the costs that his attorney feels the district should pay since they lost the case. In addition, his attorney filed a motion with the court notifying them of the amount claimed.
Seems reasonable. You go to court, you win…the losing side should pay for the court costs…no?
Here’s where it gets interesting. The Lawyer submitted a Response and Objection, basically saying that since the Colorado State Legislature did not say the district could be held responsible, they aren’t:
“…absent an express provision, there must also exist a “substantive legislative authorization” indicating a specific and clear legislative intent to assess costs against public entities…”
In other words, if I’m reading this correctly…the district can take you to court anytime they want, for any reason, causing you to spend thousands of dollars to defend yourself.
If you lose, you will be forced to pay their court costs…ask any of the residents that have been taken to court so far — I believe there are dozens.
If you win…they don’t have to pay your court costs. You’re out however much you spent defending yourself.
Nice how the lawyers and our legislature set that up, huh?
Dear residents of Woodmen Hills,
The cost of filing a response and objection from Pete Susemil’s office is 1500.00 est. Larry made the call on this one. The board never voted to move forward on this matter. The lawyers cannot move forward unless they get authorization first.
Now Mr. Pace’s lawyer is filing a response to his objection no cost to Mr. Pace.
What has not been explained to you: the person footing this bill is this; Woodmen Hills is not immune from costs. The State is but only in due course or process. Woodmen Hills is a Quasi Municipal Government Corporation (Enterprise) if you will.
You could potentially end up paying over 8000.00 if The judge rules in the Defendants favor.
Now how’s that for legal advice!
Larry does not have to get board approval for such endeavors. He has the authority to take on this matter till its conclusion. He “never” has to get further board approval. So in reality it could cost over 500.000.00. Larry “never” has to seek further board input on this “operational matter” as Jan put it. Essentially; Larry can run the legal bill up to 1,000,000.00 dollars without any fear. The board in essence gave Larry “Carte Blanche” on this matter.
This is in total contradiction to the Newsletter sent out in July 09 by the District. Which Janice Pizzi clearly states that “The board gives Larry his direction”. Newsletter July 2009
Clearly you are watching from the cheap seats.
Webster defines “Operational” as
Main Entry: op·er·a·tion·al
Pronunciation: \-shn?l, -sh?-n?l\
Function: adjective
Date: circa 1909
1 : of or relating to operation or to an operation
2 : of, relating to, or based on operations
3 a : of, engaged in, or connected with execution of military or naval operations in campaign or battle b : ready for or in condition to undertake a destined function
The quote of “Campaign or Battle” clearly shows Larry’s military background and how he see this situation.
I see it as a huge waste of your money 150,000.00 and rising.
“Deep Pockets” By frivolous spender.