Tri-Lakes resident tells commissioners Buc‑ee BLA approval erodes community trust; asks for land‑use hearing reforms

At the El Paso County Board of County Commissioners meeting on March 17, Laurel Scow of the Tri‑Lakes community criticized the county’s land‑use hearing process after an administratively approved boundary‑line adjustment (BLA) for a Buc‑ee site, saying heavy equipment was moving dirt within hours of the decision.

“People believe that this is already decided, that letters don’t matter, and that money wins,” Scow said, arguing that the process is “fundamentally unbalanced.” She said the Integrity Matters Coalition, the Town of Monument and hundreds of residents filed formal objections and that Monument’s March 6 referral raised four specific legal concerns that the county approved despite the referral. Scow identified developer Vertex and named Craig Dossi and former commissioner Mark Waller as actors she said had been involved in prior contests over applications.

Scow urged procedural reforms: allow recognized community organizations to designate a representative who would have the applicant’s presentation time, permit a community closing statement after the applicant’s rebuttal, and require prior quasi‑judicial records from other jurisdictions (for example, Palmer Lake) to be entered into subsequent county proceedings involving the same project or developer.

The presiding officer responded that comments related to a specific land‑use application must be stated during that application’s hearing and invited residents to the county’s website for information the county says corrects misstatements in public comments. Commissioner Williams asked the speaker to resubmit comments when an application is formally filed so the statements become part of the official record.

Why it matters: Scow framed her request as a trust issue — she said the public record and technical analyses from prior proceedings are lost when jurisdictions change, and that the current structure limits citizens’ ability to present consolidated evidence and closing arguments. Commissioners did not adopt reforms during this meeting; they directed members of the public to filing procedures and the county’s public materials.

What’s next: Commissioners and county staff did not announce immediate procedural changes. The speaker was advised to resubmit her comments when a formal application is filed so that those comments will be part of the record for any future hearing on the project.