Back in Part Two, we heard local activist and former Town Council member Mark Weiler use the word “disingenuous”, in reference to a rather massive sales tax increase now being discussed my our two local governments.
“The next thing I would like you to consider. When you say that we are only talking about a 1.5% increase in sales tax, my lawyer colleagues use a polite term: ‘disingenuous’. A polite term, for telling a lie. The actual increase you are contemplating is 37.5%.
“37.5% in increased cost, to the low and moderate income citizens of Pagosa Springs. I find this unconscionable. I think you should, too…”
I have a slightly different definition for “disingenuous”. It is indeed a polite term, but it doesn’t exactly meant “telling a lie”. It usually means, more like, “not telling the whole truth, intentionally.” Which is not quite the same as “lying”.
Merriam-Webster suggests two definitions for the word.
1. Not straightforward or candid; insincere or calculating.
2. Pretending to be unaware or unsophisticated; faux-naïf.
In my experience, a person trying to get their hands on someone else’s money is tempted to be “disingenuous.” Calculating. Not straightforward.
For example, we might hear a proposed sales tax increase described as “1.5%”. Just 15 cents, for every $10 purchase… on top of the 40 cents we’re already paying to the Town and County.
This is a portion of the truth. But it’s certainly not the whole truth.
Town Council member Jeff Posey was the opposite of “disingenuous” during last Thursday’s Council meeting, when he discussed the growth of government in Archuleta County. The opposite of “disingenuous” being, in this case, “straightforward.”
Mr. Posey:
“I agree with Mr. Weiler. This would be about a 35% increase to the Town’s revenues. That’s huge. That’s enormous. I would never imagine that we would get, or need, such a thing. That’s enormous…
“…This is a permanent expansion of government, and that just twists my gut, to have a permanent expansion of government. We think of our 2% sales tax, that we get now, as almost an ‘entitlement’. This is what the Town gets to spend… we expect it every year, and we budget on it. And two or three Councils from now, this higher amount will be that same set expectation. It will be an entitlement to them.
“And it will not be enough! They will want more.
“There’s always that creeping government expansion, which should be agreed to only when we truly, desperately need the money. And I have to question: do we? It seems, with our current budget, we are doing most of what we need to do… Could we do more? Absolutely! Do we have to do more? No.”
In spite of Mr. Posey’s straightforward arguments, when it came time for the Council to vote on supporting the proposed $6.5 million ballot measure, the Council voted “Yes” by a 4-2 margin.
The Archuleta Board of County Commissioners — Alvin Schaaf, Ronnie Maez, and Warren Brown — will be meeting today at 1:30pm to discuss, and possibly approve, a resolution that would place a $6.5 million sales tax increase before the local electorate, to be split 50/50 with the Town government. You can download that resolution here.
We can easily understand why the Archuleta BOCC might want their 50% share of this proposed sales tax increase. After the voters twice rejected a proposed sales tax increase (in 2017 and 2018) to fund a new 54-bed County jail, plus a new County courthouse, and miscellaneous other (unidentified) law enforcement expenditures, the BOCC went ahead and built the jail and courthouse anyway, and remodeled a new County Sheriff’s office to boot — without any dedicated revenue stream to pay for these expensive capital projects.
To help pay for something they didn’t have enough money to pay for, the BOCC eliminated all property tax money allocated to Road & Bridge in 2021.
Formerly, they had allocated 25% of the property tax revenue to Road and Bridge. Here’s a chart from the County’s 2021 budget presentation. Note the “0%”.
In 2022, the BOCC allocated 5% of property taxes to roads. The remaining funding will come mainly from sales taxes and HUTF (federal highway user taxes.)
Back in 2011, Archuleta County spent $6.8 million on roads. In 2012, they again spent $6.8 million on road. Even these amounts were not enough to keep our road system in good condition.
In their 2022 budget, the BOCC estimated the tax revenues applied to Road & Bridge at $6.3 million. Adjusted for inflation since 2011, that’s equivalent to about $4.8 million.
The BOCC also decided to drain $2.7 million out the Road & Bridge reserves this year. That’s not exactly a sustainable practice.
Would the BOCC like to see the taxpayers dig a bit deeper in their pockets, to restore some of the money they’ve eliminated from Road & Bridge to help pay for a jail the voters rejected twice? Maybe so. How about $6.5 million deeper?
What is much less clear is why the Town Council — which has seen its sales tax revenue increase by 75% since 2018 — would ask the voters for another 37.5% increase to their sales tax collections.
As mentioned before, $6.5 million averages out to about $1000 per Archuleta County household. About $10,000 over the next decade.
The BOCC decision, about whether to actually place this “enormous” tax increase in front of the voters, has not yet been made. It will be discussed today, at the 1:30pm BOCC meeting.
I presume the commissioners will entertain public comment on the question?
Bill Hudson began sharing his opinions in the Pagosa Daily Post in 2004 and can’t seem to break the habit. He claims that, in Pagosa Springs, opinions are like pickup trucks: everybody has one.