In early February, a judge validated the Black Forest petition for incorporation and appointed an election committee.However, the opposing side ñ members of Keep Black Forest Free ñ have hired attorney Lisa Stevens to challenge the judgeís ruling.Pam Devereux, chairwoman of Keep Black Forest Free, said Stevens filed the ìchallengeî to the judgeís ruling Feb. 12. Joan Vairin, committee member, said, according to state statutes, Black Forest does not meet the requirements for incorporation. ìThe area must be urban in character, and there must be 50 electors per square mile,î she said. ìThereís nothing urban about Black Forest, and we question the number of voters per square mile.îAccording to www.savetheforest.com, the Black Forest area included in the incorporation includes 58.5 square miles (37,457 acres), about 3,112 households and 8,603 inhabitants and 6,300 registered voters.Jim Brown, executive committee member of the Black Forest Incorporation Committee, said they presented 440 signatures to the judge, who ruled that all state statutes had been met. ìThere is some vagueness in the law, and he was aware that there are 150 electors per square mile,î Brown said. ìWe donít see any validity in this filing.îCommittee member Ed Bracken echoed Brownís sentiments. ìWe have a deadline to respond to the motion to dismiss the petition, but it is not relevant,î Bracken said. ìWhat are they afraid of? What will we gain by dragging this out in court? Let the people who live here decide.îThe first election is scheduled April 24. Proponents have scheduled numerous public meetings. Opponents are distributing flyers and posting signs.Those for incorporation want to control their own destiny when it comes to development and resources, such as water. Those against incorporation worry about higher taxes and budget constraints.Vairin cited the lack of a business tax base in Black Forest. ìEverything (for the budget) would be taken from property taxes,î she said. But Brown said a fair amount of the proposed cityís budget would be garnered from the state and revenues currently earmarked for the county. For example, he said state gasoline taxes would fund road and bridge maintenance.But plans for the incorporation include a bond issue election, and Vairin and Devereux arenít in favor of relying on the voters for city revenues.They referenced the fiasco in Watkins, Colo., a city that incorporated and later reversed that decision. ìWatkins folded because the bond issue did not fly three years in a row,î Vairin said. ìThe first year Watkins was a city there were 64 new regulations in one year. And look at Centennial (Colorado), they are over $20 million in debt.îBracken said Centennial made some mistakes in the beginning, but now they are ìbooming.î Watkins incorporated for a ìdiametrically different reason,î he said. It was about a low-density development, and he said the city ìlived off the kitty the developers put in their pocketsî until the developers wanted to change the density. When they went to the voters for more money, they turned it down because they didnít want the development, he said. ìThey didnít do their homework in developing their budget.îDevereux said she doesnít believe the voters would approve the incorporation if faced with an election today. But, she said, ìNever count your chickens before they hatch.îMeanwhile, Bracken said the incorporation efforts move on with the same ìzest, earnest and vigor.î
