Annexation foes file motion with Granby | SkyHiNews.com
YOUR AD HERE »

Annexation foes file motion with Granby

The property in the middle of a dispute between a potential retail marijuana shop and the town of Granby.
Byron Hetzler/bhetzler@skyhidailynews.com | Sky-Hi News

Was the land recently annexed by the Granby Board of Trustees to prevent a pot shop from opening an enclave?

Does it matter?

According to a Motion to Reconsider Annexation submitted by the law firm of Hoban & Feola, it does not. Though the Town of Granby sees things differently.

The motion cites a section of the Colorado Revised Statutes pertaining to exceptions for annexation. That exception reads, “No enclave may be annexed… if … Any part of the municipal boundary or territory surrounding such enclave consists at the time of the annexation of the enclave of public rights-of-way, including streets and alleys, that are not immediately adjacent to the municipality on the side of the right-of-way opposite to the enclave.”

“If this goes to court it is going to be thousands of dollars for both sides. If our interpretation is correct that is going to be wasted money.”
Ronald Stern
Attorney for plaintiffs

Ronald Stern of the Stern & Newton law firm represents the owner of the property, LTTK LLC, and is co-counsel with the Hoban & Feola law firm and helped prepare the motion. He explained he worked specifically with the section addressing annexation exceptions. According to his interpretation of the statute the debate over whether the land is an enclave is immaterial and the property in question was not allowed to be annexed because it falls under the exception.

“From my perspective I don’t know and I don’t care if it is an enclave,” said Stern. “If this goes to court it is going to be thousands of dollars for both sides. If our interpretation is correct that is going to be wasted money.”

Granby Town Manager Wally Baird disagreed.

“The town attorney and I talked about that a little at the board meeting. He was aware of what their argument was. The exception really does not apply here because the town has annexed property on both sides of the highway and we are not using that as a border.”

Baird explained that is his interpretation of the statue and is not the official legal position of the Town of Granby.

Baird said the board would not deny the motion to reconsider outright but did not know when or how the Trustees wanted to address the motion.

Granby trustees approved the emergency annexation of land on Highway 40 during their Dec. 9 meeting. Prior to annexation the land was a part of unincorporated Grand County, which allows retail marijuana. The Town of Granby does not allow retail or medical marijuana businesses within the borders of the community.

The Hoban & Feola Law firm has already filed a lawsuit against the Town of Granby in District Court. That lawsuit is currently pending while awaiting a response from Granby on the Motion to Reconsider.


Support Local Journalism

Support Local Journalism

Readers around Grand County make the Sky-Hi News' work possible. Your financial contribution supports our efforts to deliver quality, locally relevant journalism.

Now more than ever, your support is critical to help us keep our community informed about the evolving coronavirus pandemic and the impact it is having locally. Every contribution, however large or small, will make a difference.

Each donation will be used exclusively for the development and creation of increased news coverage.

For tax deductible donations, click here.
 

Start a dialogue, stay on topic and be civil.
If you don't follow the rules, your comment may be deleted.

User Legend: iconModerator iconTrusted User