As I wrote last week, I’m fascinated with the concept of ‘infrastructure’ and with the idea that it must be maintained… and with how maintenance issues play out in a small town like Pagosa Springs. In particular, I want to understand whether government investments in infrastructure play a significant role in the ‘economic development’ of a small mountain town — and if so, whether that role is largely positive, or negative.
An assumption common to some government leaders and much of the taxpaying public is that infrastructure investments and ‘economic development’ are generally beneficial. This belief is promoted by certain special-interest groups who benefit directly from both types of investment, such as:
1. The construction industry that builds the infrastructure;
2. The banks and investors who loan the money to build the infrastructure;
3. Certain businesses that depend upon economic growth to enhance their bottom lines and increase their wealth; and
4. Government bureaucracies that accrue tax revenue increases as a result of growth.
One of Pagosa’s leading proponents of ‘economic growth’ is Pagosa Springs’ current Mayor, Don Volger. Mr. Volger served as the Town’s Chief of Police for 30 years before retiring in 2008. Reporter Anna Lauer Roy interviewed the Chief in the weekly Pagosa Springs SUN, and noted that a conversation with Chief Volger quickly reveals that “his 30 years in the business have made him a philosopher as well as an officer.”
“Our system will always be flawed,” Volger said, “because all we can do is judge a person’s actions; we can’t ever truly establish the intent and motive behind an action, and in order to have true justice, we would have to be able to analyze that. Sometimes there may be a reason someone did something that would mitigate the circumstances, or there may even have been a more sinister motive and the criminal was caught for a lesser crime before carrying out the whole plan, for example. But since we can never really judge the motive, the system will never be perfect,” said Volger.
Just as Chief Volger’s experiences with the Police Department led him to understand that our law enforcement system will never be perfect, we can assume that a subsequent decade of service on the Town Council — first as a Council member and then as Mayor — has taught him that the system guiding our entire Town government will never be perfect. But that hasn’t kept the Mayor from encouraging the Town government and the taxpayers it serves to maintain open lines of communication — in a continuing effort to “get along” and work together for the common good.
That’s not the easiest thing to promote, when we all have our own ideas about what’s meant by the “common good”.
Normally, the busy people of Pagosa Springs — like busy people everywhere — pay little attention to the way local governments are spending their tax dollars. We hope to elect the best possible candidates to public office, and then we pray that they make good decisions for us, without bothering us too much with the details. Sometimes, our prayers are answered. Sometimes, not.
Generally speaking, Archuleta County taxpayers begin to have questions and concerns when infrastructure proposals get up into the $5 million range… or higher. We witnessed that kind of citizen concern back in 2013, after the Pagosa Springs Town Council voted to spend $4.5 million on a smallish amusement park atop Reservoir Hill. The Council and other supporters of the amusement park had been marketing the proposed development as a valuable investment in ‘economic development’ — specifically, as a way to increase tourism spending in the community. A grassroots movement circulated petitions to challenge the Council vote, and were successful in placing a ballot measure before the Town voters. When the votes were tallied, the Town Council found out that the taxpayers wanted to have the final vote on the matter.
384 voters in the Town of Pagosa Springs — out of the 1,163 registered electors within the town limits — cast ballots by mail or in person on the sole ballot question:
Do you want to amend the Town Home Rule Charter to require voter approval before any amusement rides are installed in Reservoir Hill Park?
291 of those electors — about 76 percent — said “YES.”
93 voters — about 24 percent — had checked the “NO” box.
The vote might have been seen, by some, as a simple, and perhaps relatively minor, change to a municipal charter. Others viewed it as symbolizing the impending end of then-Mayor Ross Aragon’s 34-year dynasty.
Following the vote, Mayor Aragon made the following comment to the weekly Pagosa Springs SUN:
Clearly the people have spoken. I accept the vote on the referendum with civility and dignity. The bottom line is people do not want development on the hill. Case closed.
Here in the Daily Post, we quoted Council member Don Volger, who had not yet been elected our next Mayor. Our readers might find Mr. Volger’s quote interesting:
On this issue, I believe that pursuing the proposed Reservoir Hill development plan that includes mechanized amenities — a chairlift, alpine coaster and zip line — is in the best interest of the community as a whole because it should, if any of the current projections are even close, create jobs, increase tourism, and strengthen our economy…
It would appear that, in 2013, Council member Volger was either out of touch with the sentiments of the taxpayers he represented, or he didn’t value those sentiments. 76 percent of the voters had rejected the Town Council’s decision on the Reservoir Hill amusement park.
Three years later Ross Aragon had stepped aside, and Don Volger had been elected Mayor — and was in the midst of promoting another ‘economic development’ scheme on behalf of the Springs Partners LLC. The scheme, in 2016, was focused on a plan to have the Town taxpayers fund a South 5th Street bridge and new, paved streets that would directly serve the Springs Partners. The Springs Partners were suggesting they might build a new hotel on their vacant 27 acres (someday?) if only the Town Council would commit to building a new bridge on their behalf. Estimated cost to the taxpayers? Around $7 million. (Not including ongoing maintenance costs.)
I sat down with Mayor Volger to try and understand his feelings about the project…