The BRMCA and County Supervisor Pete Candland are embroiled in a debate focused on the BRM private roads. Starting in early 2014, this ongoing debate should reach an end by the spring of 2015. The information below, along 
with the new BRMCA FAQ’s tab, provides detailed information about the history of the BRMCA, our case against the Candland Road Committee Plan, along with a conversation with a resident whom is in favor of the Candland Plan. The outcome of this debate could have a major impact on how well our roads are maintained. If you support the BRMCA position, please take the time to sign our petition. We encourage you to also post an anonymous comment, supporting either position, to this page.
To comment on this topic click on the title above and enter your text in the box all the way at the bottom of this page, or click here
Some Background
The Bull Run Mountain Civic Association (BRMCA) has been responsible for making whole-of-community recommendations to the county office of public works on how our community’s special tax levy is spent on BRM road maintenance. It is important to note that the BRMCA only recommends road-related actions to the county. We do not set policy. County Supervisor Pete Candland is proposing a plan, to be voted on by the County Board of Supervisors (BOS), to strip the BRMCA of their rights and, in its place, institute a County-supervised and administered roads committee.
This current dispute arises from a letter that the BRMCA sent the county in 2008 notifying the county that the Roads Committee was being restructured. There are some county staff who are of the opinion that this restructuring instead canceled the roads committee and there are some who choose not recognize the one that exists. From the BRMCA’s standpoint, the Roads Committee is alive and well and fully functional. Public Works interacts with the BRMCA and the Roads Committee on a weekly basis and has since 2008. As a result, the BRMCA Roads Committee both does and does not exist in the county’s mind. But in practice, it does exist and continues to provide service to all mountain residents.
Click here to read the full article The BRMCA Road Committee and Candland’s Proposed Road Committee Overview
Community Conversations
On Sat, Oct 25, 2014 at 10:44 AM, thephosters@juno.com <thephosters@juno.com> wrote;
To the BRMCA Board,
Buddy and I attended Supervisor Candland’s Town Hall Meeting and after reading over his handout the only difference we can see between the setup for the new Roads Committee and the existing Roads Committee (which is the BRMCA Board of Directors) is that all property owners within the service district will be able to vote for the members of the proposed Roads Committee. Currently, all those who pay the levee must also pay a $50 membership fee to the BRMCA in order to vote for those who direct the spending of that levee. Although Mr. Candland said that the first (I will call it ‘interim Roads Committee’) will be composed of residents appointed by the county BOD, that committee is scheduled to be replaced in December of next year by an elected committee (elected by the residents of Bull Run Mountain). Mr. Candland’s office will pay out of their funds for the mailing, etc, for this election. No money would be required from the residents for this election.
We would like the opportunity to post these views on the BRMCA website so that the community can have an open discussion of the pros and cons of Candland’s proposed Roads Committee. …
Click here to read the full conversation A Conversation with a BRM Resident in Favor of the Candland Road Committee Plan
Click here for an additional document that has been circulated to some residents Resident Letter-2014
Transparency and Freedom of Information are Not Free
One of the transparency “benefits” that Supervisor Candland has been promoting in his proposed roads committee is that all the information coming out of this county-sponsored roads committee will be available through a Freedom of Information (FOIA) request. Residents would have access to all communications and actions of the committee through this law.
Supervisor Candland and some of his supporters have been claiming that they are getting road maintenance recommendations and complaints about the BRMCA directly from BRM residents. The BRMCA board of directors wanted to find out if that was true, and what those complaints were. Was the BRMCA roads committee being tone-deaf to these road issues? Was there a large group of individuals who were supporting Candland’s road committee proposal?
Click here to read the full article Transparency and Freedom of Information are Not Free
If, after considering both perspectives, you agree that our road maintenance decisions should stay under the purview of our community group in the BRMCA, please show your support by signing our petition at Candlands Roads Committee Plan: Vote against the Candland Roads Committee plan.
