By Natalie Barszcz
Town of Monument (TOM) officials held a town hall meeting with residents of adjacent Gleneagle on Aug. 29 to gauge their interest in being annexed into the town.
The public was invited to participate in a question-and-answer session and was encouraged to attend online because of limited space at the Family of Christ Lutheran Church.
The Gleneagle residents in attendance were largely opposed to an annexation.
The church was at about half capacity with 100 residents attending in person after some heard about the meeting via social media sites and some via a local news media station just an hour before. The meeting was also announced on the TOM website a few days prior. This reporter received notification via Monument Fire District (MFD).
Town Manager Mike Foreman addressed the audience, saying the meeting was purely to garner the thoughts from the Gleneagle residents regarding a potential annexation into the TOM. Moving forward the decision would be entirely upon the will of the residents, at their request with voter approval, he said. Gleneagle had a population of 6,649 in 2020.
Mayor Mitch LaKind said he appreciated the turnout and would love to hear the residents’ thoughts. During the July Fourth Street Fair, several residents approached him saying, “We can’t wait to annex into the town,” he said. He wished he had taken the names of the residents, but the subject of annexation had not been discussed with the Monument Town Council, only with Foreman. The town does have a state-mandated 3-mile potential annexation plan but cannot implement any plan until the residents agree, he said.
Fire Chief Andy Kovacs explained the merger process between MFD and Donald Wescott Fire Protection District (DWFPD) and said a consolidation discussion between the fire districts had been coming together over the last two years. He also said that before the merger began, DWFPD had a contract with American Medical Rescue ambulance, but 80% of the time it was responding to calls in Colorado Springs and not in Gleneagle. The combined district now has Advance Life Support ambulances at Station 4 and 5 and another at Station 1 on Highway 105, reducing response times to service Gleneagle.
DWFPD will have a ballot measure in November seeking to equalize the two-mill levy the Gleneagle residents are being assessed, and at the completion of the merger next year the residents will receive a reduction from 21.9 mills to 18.4 mills. Residents can read what has been going on over the past two years by examining the MFD Feasibility Study, the 2021-22 annual reports, and the Joint Factual Summary at www.monumentfire.org. MFD is a special district and not affiliated with the TOM, he said.
Note: Most of the DWFPD and MFD boards of directors attended the meeting. See https://www.ocn.me/v23n8.htm#dwfpd and www.ocn.me/v23n9.htm#mfd.
Monument Police Chief Patrick Regan said when the idea was brought to his attention, he was asked about the benefits to providing service to Gleneagle. Monument Police Department (MPD) has a budget for 27 officers and is one of only a few fully staffed departments, with a retired military corporal providing training. A dedicated tax revenue supports the Police Department, and in the future the headquarters may move away from the Town Hall to a central location, closer to Gleneagle.
The biggest benefit to Gleneagle residents would be an increased patrol presence, including drive throughs, responding to requests for investigation, and code enforcement issues. MPD has already been assisting in Gleneagle, providing backup for the El Paso County Sheriff’s Office. The department would assist either way, but annexation would require hiring about 15 officers, costing about $2 million (including equipment) in the first year and would not be lucrative, he said.
Foreman said policing is provided from the general fund, about $2.6 million from property taxes and sales taxes, and a dedicated 0.5 cent sales tax is collected throughout Monument, generating about $1.7 million for MPD.
Assistant Public Works Director Jeremiah Reichert said the Public Works Department had no interest in promoting annexation and it was a trickle-down decision. Public works departments across the nation are operating underneath what they receive, and adding more infrastructure would not be lucrative. He talked about the lifespan of roads, typically 25-30 years, for sewer, sanitary and storm structures, about 40-50 years, and water main infrastructure lasts about 75-100 years. For maintenance and replacement costs, there is always a greater need than funds provide.
Annexation would not be a “cash cow for the Public Works Department with every dollar coming in trickling down to just a dime.” The TOM has about 29 miles of roadway responsibility, and Gleneagle has 18 miles, and about $25 million likely would be needed for the additional infrastructure and some additional maintenance staff, he said.
Here are some of the questions and comments:
- “We don’t need annexation, it’s more bureaucracy in the safest part of the county.”
- “Is the fire department dependent on annexation?”
- “The boundaries of the annexation need to be clarified?”
- “The new Property Tax Assessment numbers are not beneficial in swaying a decision.”
- “What the TOM has done with their downtown area, allowing developers to infest the town like locusts is not inspiring, and the annexation appears to be greed driven by the new assessments, it looks like a disingenuous money grab, and more honesty is needed.”
- “We do not want any other water, sewer district, or electric company, and with only one school, Gleneagle has a great thing going, we don’t need annexation.”
- “How would it affect Antelope Trails Elementary School, school districting and D20?”
- “It was disappointing to find out about the meeting from Nextdoor.com on Aug. 25, prompting a canvass of the neighborhood to get the word out.”
- “I found out about the meeting about 90 minutes beforehand, and the presentations look time consuming, just how long had the town been planning the meeting?”
- “The communication is abysmal, I heard about it on the 5 p.m. news on Channel 5.
- “Pleasant View Estates residents were not notified; we are not part of Gleneagle.”
- “Are the Monument residents satisfied with the performance of the Public Works Department?”
- “Growth looks out of control and over expanded, and why did Donala Water and Sanitation District (DWSD) help Monument out with water about five years ago?”
- “This looks like a water grab, and Gleneagle has the best water in the area, with a separate aquifer from Denver and its own wells.”
Several residents said they were confused about why the meeting was organized, and the majority expressed their appreciation for the fire and police departments.
In response, LaKind said he had not been involved with organizing the meeting and there had been zero discussion at the Monument Town Council meetings. He said it was no skin off his back whether annexation is pursued or not, the town would have less work, no additional requirements, and no legal fees. Monument is not making money out of annexation, and there are other Town Council members to ask and meeting minutes to confirm. He wished the residents that approached him at the Street Fair had attended the meeting. Monument has no control over Colorado Springs annexing Gleneagle and the residents can choose to do nothing or go with Colorado Springs, he said.
Kovacs said MFD is already serving the Gleneagle district and east to Highway 83 (Station 5), and annexation would not change the level of service. However, if Gleneagle residents were to decide to annex into Colorado Springs, MFD would have to negotiate the sale of Stations 4 and 5, retain the apparatus and have 24 firefighters to either absorb some into the remaining stations or lay them off. The greatest loss would be losing the firefighters, he said.
Foreman said he had organized the meeting, in an effort to hear from the residents, and based on the feedback received, it is to do nothing, and he said in response:
- The meeting was announced on the town website and via multiple social media sites last week.
- Gleneagle residents would be eligible to run for office in Monument, vote for ballot measures, and make decisions.
- If annexation were to go ahead, residents would pay 7.63% sales tax and the extra 1 cent that Gleneagle and some Monument residents pay to support the voter-approved Pikes Peak Rural Transportion Authority for road maintenance, capital projects and transportation needs.
- Monument property taxes are assessed 5.75 mills.
- The annexation boundaries to the east had not been worked out before the meeting but would likely extend to Roller Coaster Road.
- Gleneagle’s neighbors to the north reside in Triview Metropolitan District (TMD), a separate special district with different taxation, managing its own wells, roads, and infrastructure, to include the construction of the Northern Delivery System pipeline project.
LaKind said the overlay of the school districts would not change, and that the TOM only has one school within the town; the rest are located in unincorporated El Paso County. DWSD would still provide the water and sanitation to the residents. The property tax bills from the El Paso County treasurer break down how much is paid into the districts by each resident. The school districts are self-governing and there would be no change there, he said.
Note: None of the water districts in northern El Paso County has its own exclusive aquifer. They do operate their own wells within their districts, typically extracting groundwater from the Denver and Arapahoe aquifers. Districts have existing interconnects should emergencies occur, and any water exchanged between districts would be purchased or replenished. See www.ocn.me/v16n9.htm#tmd. DWSD supplied TMD in late June/early July 2016 after a 5-foot break occurred. DWSD was reimbursed $151,943 for providing the water. See www.triviewmetrodistrict.com. Residents of Monument receive electricity service from Mountain View Electric Association.
Resident Jones said the Gleneagle community was not fully represented at the meeting, and it is not fair to shut it down or go forward because most of the residents did not receive any information or notification. As strong as the meeting is against annexation, there has to be more representation from the neighborhood and more communication, she said.
Foreman said the meeting was preliminary and the boundaries for annexation were not defined before the meeting and that would require working with the county. If the residents want to reach out to the TOM staff, that would be the next step. Any annexation would require 51% voter approval and requires resident initiation. He apologized for the missteps in communication and thanked the residents for attending the meeting.
In conclusion, the last resident to speak requested a show of hands for or against annexation. The majority of residents stood in opposition to any annexation and the meeting adjourned at 8:15 p.m.
Note: On Aug. 30, a letter of apology from the town manager to the residents of Gleneagle was posted at www.townofmonument.org.
Natalie Barszcz can be reached at nataliebarszcz@ocn.me.
Photo caption: From left, Monument Police Chief Patrick Regan, Town Manager Mike Foreman, Mayor Mitch LaKind, Fire Chief Andy Kovacs and Assistant Public Works Director Jeremiah Reichert present information and answer questions to a crowd of Gleneagle residents on Aug. 29 at the Family of Christ Lutheran Church on Baptist Road, Monument. Photo by Natalie Barszcz.
Other Town of Monument articles
- Nov. 5 Election Results for Monument and Palmer Lake (12/5/2024)
- Monument Town Council, Nov. 4 and 18 – Monument Council addresses budget, watershed, community initiatives (12/5/2024)
- Monument Planning Commission, Nov. 13 – Board discusses Jackson Creek North plat; Panda Express public hearing moved to December (12/5/2024)
- Monument Planning Commission, Oct. 9 – Commission raises concerns about ultimate use for Jackson Creek North (11/2/2024)
- Monument Town Council, Oct. 7 and 21 – Council discusses finance, nonprofit work, employee survey (11/2/2024)
- Monument Town Council, Sept. 3 and 16 – Council discusses budget deficits, strategic spending, future priorities (10/5/2024)
- Monument Planning Commission – September meeting canceled (10/5/2024)
- Monument Town Council, Aug. 5 and 19 – Council charts future with key budget, development, and management decisions (9/7/2024)
- Monument Planning Commission, Aug. 14 – Proposed Ziggi’s project examined (9/7/2024)
- Monument Town Council, July 31 – Special Town Council Meeting Results in Town Manager’s Dismissal (8/3/2024)