When I visited 187 Bill’s Place, late Thursday afternoon, I found Andy Davis sitting at the gate near his motorcycle, rolling a cigarette. The weather had transformed into a lovely Indian Summer afternoon. Behind Mr. Davis, I could see the large dumpster trailer he’d ordered from one of the local garbage collection companies — still mostly empty, but ready to accept the various piles of trash that he’s assembled on the property.
A lot of trash. Maybe 20 years worth?
The Archuleta County government’s looming threat to bring a private contractor onto the property, and spend $23,000 cleaning up the property — and to then place a $23,000 lien against the property’s title — had not yet materialized. The County had scheduled the threatened cleanup to begin early on Monday, October 29. It was now the afternoon of November 1, and Mr. Davis was still working by himself, making (slow?) progress with trash removal on the Aspen Springs parcel owned by his mother.
Mr. Davis told me he’d filed a ‘cease and desist’ motion with the courts, asking that the County be prohibited from commencing with the threatened property takeover.
This was a continuation of the pattern demonstrated by the County government over the past several years, regarding enforcement of the 2009 ‘Nuisance Ordinance.’
Multiple complaints filed by neighbors; promises that the ordinance would be enforced; courtroom maneuvers and threats made to the property owners. And years later, the property owners are making slow progress with removing the junk and trash that had been stored on the parcel for a couple of decades, or more.
In the case of 187 Bill’s Place, the County government was successful in driving out Warren Goodman and his family, who’d been living on the property since about 1995. Mr. Goodman, who claims a Native American ancestry, had found himself at wits end in dealing with the County’s threats and with the vandalism of the Medicine Circle he’d constructed at the site, and had deeded the property over to Andy Davis’ mother, Verna Davis.
Warren Goodman’s 13 dogs had been confiscated and relocated to the Pagosa Springs Humane Society. Then Warren, his wife Joanne, and his son Berlin, moved away.
A County employee emailed me yesterday morning, suggesting that I’d made an incorrect assertion in yesterday’s Part Two.
Bill — I seldom comment on your daily posts, but I noted the statement today: “In 2008, it was perfectly legal to live in a travel trailer in Archuleta County.”
That is not correct. Archuleta County adopted the unified Archuleta County Land Use Regulations in 2000, and county-wide zoning in 2006. Residential occupancy is limited to legal Dwelling Units for public safety. A “travel trailer” is not built to building code and is not considered safe for permanent occupancy…
A government employee will sometimes have his own unique view of the world, based on bureaucratic regulations that don’t align with the real world. Yes, it’s true that a “travel trailer” is not built to building code — because it’s a vehicle, not a building — but millions of Americans, all across the country, consider an RV to be perfectly suitable for permanent occupancy. An RV may move from place to place, according to the seasons, but there is nothing inherently “unsafe” about living in an RV.
There is, however, something terribly unsafe about having no home at all.
Prior to 2010, many Pagosa Springs residents lived in RVs and travel trailers, on various properties within the unincorporated county. Then, in December 2010, the Board of County Commissioners — Clifford Lucero, Bob Moomaw, and John Ranson — essentially made those residents homeless, by making changes to the County Land Use Regulations.
From the minutes of the December 7, 2010 BOCC meeting:
[Senior County Planner] Cindy Schultz requested the Board approve a resolution regarding recreational vehicle camping on private property. Section 3.2.4.4 would be inserted into the Regulations to allow recreational vehicles to be occupied while on private property as long as there was an active building permit until such a time that an Occupancy report is required and the San Juan Health Department requires a septic system. Section 3.2.4.5 [would be inserted] allowing RVs to be occupied for camping up to 120 days in a 12 month period without any permit…
Commissioner Moomaw moved to approve the resolution as Resolution 2010-57… Commissioner Ranson seconded the motion.
Chairman Lucero opened the floor for public comment.
Three County taxpayers offered comments on the proposed law, with one speaking in favor of the new regulations, and two raising questions about how the law might negatively impact current residents. The BOCC — three men with big, comfortable homes — then unanimously approved the new regulations.
With the stroke of a pen, the BOCC declared that residents who might have lived in Archuleta County for decades — but who, for whatever reason, could not qualify for a 30-year mortgage, or perhaps had purposely made a different lifestyle choice — could no longer live in their very modest, but presumably debt-free, homes.
When I sent a copy of the above December 7, 2010 minutes to the concerned County employee, I received the following thoughtful response.
Not to debate the point, but you may be familiar with the historical roots of land use planning & building codes in public health and safety, in particular the social reforms at the turn of the last century. You should read up on the Tenement Housing laws of the 1880s, or Jacob Riis’ ‘How the Other Half Lives’ (1890) about the deplorable conditions of tenement housing across the country well before the “Hooverville” shantytowns of the 1930s.
I don’t think you would take us back to 1890s living conditions, let alone the Great Depression.
Well, it sounded to me like my friend did, in fact, want to debate the point.
I don’t mind a debate. I will happily engage in a friendly argument with most anyone, at the drop of a hat.
But we have to ask the question. Who, really, is making people homeless, here in Archuleta County? Isn’t it our own County government, acting at the request of wealthier residents who find poverty to be unsightly, and damaging to their ‘property values’?
It doesn’t have to be this way. We could be Christians, and help those most in need of our help. We could even assert that people living in One Nation, under God, would do exactly that.
