Wal~Mart Legal Department – Tipped Off

by local Watch Dogs…

Does this seem RIGHT to you?  Well Town of Avon insiders are insisting it’s happening.

So Avon’s local Wal~Mart (and their Corporate Legal Department) got tipped off this past week.

What’s going on?

Wal~Mart-Legal-Department

FACT:  The multi-year lawsuit between the Town of Avon (TOA) and Avon Developer (Traer Creek) is currently crafting a combined Settlement Agreement.

The legal provision that is allegedly being included, with the endorsement of both litigants – is an item to increase the existing Sales Tax (they’re calling it a “Fee” in the Settlement Agreement) of 0.75% – which if implemented will bring the “total Sales Tax” you pay for any items purchased in the “Traer Creek Metro District” (that’s Wal~Mart, Home Depot, Castle Peak Grill, the liquor store, Game Stop…etc) up to 9.486% almost 10% of your purchase price.

So what’s “the Rub”?

More than one person in our Community believes that the legal term “Fee” is being used as opposed to increased “Sales Tax” because if it were being proposed as an increase in Sales Tax – TABOR would require a Vote of registered Avon voters – to approve that.

Enter Wal~Mart Legal….

There are some BIG questions that need to be answered.

1 – Why should folks who choose to shop at Avon’s Wal~Mart/Home Depot be compelled to pay ANY additional “Fee” – ECT calls it an increased “Sales Tax” because two litigants have spent Millions between them – fighting each other in Court for several years?

A bigger question?

2 –  If this so called “additional Fee” is implemented (and left unchallenged) – what’s to STOP ANY Colorado Home Rule Municipality (Avon in this case) from imposing (via a simple Ordinance) any new “Fee” against any Big Box store located in their Municipality?

Indeed, would a Big Box Store just become a kind of (Municipal ATM machine?) for any Town- that decides it needs more money?

The ECT will keep you posted…lots of good legal questions need to be answer here…

Advertisements

2 responses

  1. Why is the town doing this? Did they lose ground on their position of raking back the idea that they gave the developer an exclusion on sharing sales tax revenues? The developer wanted forces to pay a lot of fees and infrastructure costs up front or there would have been no Walmart home depot etc.in the first place . The town negotiated a bad deal. Now the town wants to get back some of this revenue because of the impact it really found out what this development would do to added costa on the town budget. Interesting? I think more reporting on the bigger picture Is in order. Why do you think Lindholm is fighting so hard and it has not been resolved in the town’s favor. Properly because the town can only recover some costs moving forward with this fee structure in place. And now the consumer pays to bailout the town’s poor negotiations years ago. I feel this should go to a vote from the community. Instead of using a manipulative technique to shrit the issue and abuse community’s trust with our local government. We have way too much of that going on now in our federal governem now. We needs to build back our trust in government . Not allow it to sale us out to the highest bidder. This is America. Not China.
    It is not due process if we as the people keep getting thrown under the bus. Just my opinion

    • The ECT agrees with SEVERAL of your point.
      ECT does not believe that folks who choose to shop at the Avon Wal~Mart should be forced to pay a “fee” because two litigants could not agree for years…

      Wal~Mart (and all Big Box stores in Colorado) need to watch and be very careful with this (legal precedent?)…

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: