Letter to the editor: Fiester Preserve: Vexing argument or engaging opportunity?
First, some relevant information from the U.S. Court of Appeals 9th Circuit: Stare decisis is the policy of the court to stand by precedent. The term is but an abbreviation of stare decisis et non quieta movere, “to stand by and adhere to and not disturb what is settled.”
Using the aforementioned definition of legal precedent, it is a gross violation of the public trust to characterize the ongoing attempt to vacate a signed agreement that relates to a designation of land “protected in perpetuity” as a simple piece of county business that serves the public good. Colorado Open Lands understands the ramifications only too well or it would not be taking the stand they have chosen on this issue.
If the members of the Summit Board of County Commissioners are truly concerned with the public good, they should engage with all the stakeholders and find a compromise (something the board states as lacking in the current partisan divide) that works for all parties concerned and not be party to a precedent that could damage the public good for generations to come. Simply put, the board should not trade away an ideal that has stood the test of time. Your word is your bond. It used to be how things worked up here awhile back.
Start a dialogue, stay on topic and be civil.
If you don't follow the rules, your comment may be deleted.