October 2020
By October, the Pagosa Springs Town Council seemed to have put its controversial Urban Renewal Authority (URA) on the back burner.
The Town voters had indicated that they wanted the right to approve any large tax subsidies proposed by the Town’s newly-created URA taxing authority, when, on June 14, the voters approved Ballot Question 1A by a 3-to-1 margin.
Prior to that election, and for the two months following the vote, one of the members of the URA commission — Greg Schulte — had been trying to convince the other commission members that the Town voters had no right to demand participation of the URA decisions about multi-million-dollar tax subsidies for developers. Mr. Schulte had formerly served as the Archuleta County Administrator, and then later as the Pagosa Springs Town Manager, and then again as the County Administrator, and was currently the chair of the Pagosa Springs Medical Center board of directors. While serving as a bureaucrat in Archuleta County, Mr. Schulte had often encouraged government officials to ignore taxpayer input, and to make decisions based primarily on the needs of the bureaucracy.
Mr. Schulte’s continual push, as a member of the URA commission — to try and invalidate the 3-to-1 popular vote on June 14 — was in perfect alignment, I think, with his overall attitude about government control.
It wasn’t the only attempt, in 2020, to overturn a popular vote. The Republican Party would soon be engaged in a national effort to overturn the results of the 2020 Presidential election.
Pagosa Mayor Don Volger had been a consistent supporter of Mr. Schulte’s anti-voter campaign, right up until the URA meeting of August 20. We were all aware that the Pagosa Springs URA was specifically formed to address supposed “dangerous urban blight” on 27 vacant (and never-developed) acres owned by local developer Jack Searle. Mr. Searle had, in fact, circulated the petition that initiated the URA formation in November 2019.
A report submitted previously to the Town by Mr. Searle and his business partner, David Dronet, proposed tax subsidies in excess of $79 million to support a proposed expansion of the existing Springs Resort.
The central question posed at the August 20 public meeting, by URA Commissioner Schulte, was: which government board should initiate the lawsuit to invalidate the June 14 popular vote? Should the Town Council initiate the lawsuit? Or should it be the URA commission that files the lawsuit?
Some perspective was lent to the discussion by URA commissioner JR Ford.
“I don’t disagree with [Commissioner Schulte] on a lot of points. But I would be coming from a whole different direction. We’ve talked about a lot of things, so I’m a little confused about where I want to go with this, but I… I’d be spending my money on my attorney, having him figure out how to align myself with my taxpayers, way more than I’d be spending my money on my attorney, trying to figure out how I can get around my taxpayers…
“…Where you’re talking about major dollars being spent [on plans], the developers have to spend those dollars anyway. They have to put all that information together, to be able to sell the project to their investors, to offset their financing.
“So, does [the Charter amendment] make it a lot harder for them? Yes. But are they spending a lot of money they weren’t going to spend anyway? No. Because they wouldn’t make the decision to go for a $10 million, or $20 million, or $50 million TIF project if they didn’t need that to make their project go forward. They need all that information to be able to sell it to their investors….
“…If I were a Town Council member… you know, I don’t think the URA commission has a right to vote on this at all… but if I were a Town Council member, I’d be more worried about how to align myself legally, and fix the URA to align with the wishes of our taxpayers… I think some people are trying to make this into, ‘Woe is us. We’ll never get another developer to come to town.’ And I just don’t believe that.”
Then Mayor Don Volger asked Town Attorney Clay Buchner whether “it would be cleaner for the Town Council to seek a Declaratory Judgment, or would it be cleaner for the URA [to seek the judgment]?”
“And I know it makes it so confusing, because the majority vote on the URA commission is the Town Council.” Indeed, the Council had chosen to maintain control of the URA commission, by denying full representation to almost every other local tax-supported district in Archuleta County — even though all those districts could be legally compelled to contribute to Mr. Searle’s massive tax subsidies.
Town Attorney Clay Buchner offered his opinion as to which of the two government boards ought to file the lawsuit.
“Honestly, sir, I don’t think either are good options. I think that, in effect, the Town would be going against itself, and against its voters and constituents, and that wouldn’t be a good decision. And there might not even be a true ‘resolvable controversy’ for the court to even hear, if it were the Town or the URA commission. I can’t say that for certain, but that’s something that the court is going to address, and it doesn’t seem like there is a controversy. It’s the way the Charter now reads, and we don’t have a problem… yet.
“So the court might say, ‘This is not ripe for even a Declaratory Judgment.’
“I think it’s possible, but insofar as you’re asking my advice on what’s ‘cleaner’ — one option is not ‘cleaner’ than the other. Neither are great options.”
Mayor Volger:
“So then, the ‘third-party developer option’… going ahead and presenting this issue before the court… would be the best option?”
We will note, here, the use of the word “best” by Mayor Volger. It appeared our elected mayor was in favor of a lawsuit — any lawsuit — that might overturn a 3-to-1 vote by the taxpayers.
Attorney Buchner:
“Yes, but that’s not our option. There’s nothing we can do but wait, for someone to either care, or a developer who wants to proceed and has an issue with [the Charter amendment]… Those other [Declaratory Judgement] options still exist. I just would not advise going that route.”
In other words, if Mayor Volger and URA Commissioner Schulte really want to try and overturn a legally-approved Charter amendment by town voters, we need the help of a developer willing to spend money on attorneys. Of course, that developer would actually be suing the Town government — which includes, of course, the Town Council and the URA commission — as well as the Town taxpayers.
An awkward situation.
Mayor Volger thanked Attorney Buchner for his advice, and then suggested that the URA commission put aside its dreams of filing a lawsuit against its own voters, and focus on getting itself organized. Not in so many words, but that was essentially his recommendation.
“And then wait and see, if somebody does take this to the court,” said the Mayor hopefully. “For the reasons that Clay explained.”
That was the last URA commission meeting to be held during 2020. The meeting scheduled for September was canceled, and no further meetings were held. No future meetings are currently listed on the Town website.