More about Tuesday’s joint Town-County meeting in a moment… but first, I’d like to report a couple of more personal concerns. Actually, some good news, and some bad news.
I had a chance to sit down over coffee with a couple of our Town Council members this week to talk about the Servitas ‘workforce housing’ debacle, and about the Town’s potential purchase of 3.4 acres of vacant riverfront property which will be on the Council agenda on April 4.
(I’ve reached out to the rest of the Council to discuss the same issues, but thus far, have not been able to meet with the other four members. The Council is seeking to fill one vacant seat.)
The two Council members I’ve talked to so far, appear dead-set on buying the property for $1.25 million, even though half the parcel lies in the FEMA floodway… and even though it is valued, by the County Assessor, at $160,000. This very expensive parcel would apparently be used for ‘recreation’ of some type.
That’s the bad news.
The good news is, that a $1.25 million purchase of vacant riverfront property will likely not cause my own property taxes to increase, according to my conversation this week with County Assessor Johanna Tully-Elliott. I live a few blocks from the vacant property in question, but not on the river, so the greatly increased valuation caused by the Town’s purchase would not apply to my own property values, in a different downtown neighborhood. (Values of other riverfront properties, downtown, might be affected by the sale, Ms. Tully-Elliot suggested.)
By the way, the County Assessor is currently updating our property values based on 2020-2022 sales data, so we can probably all look forward to increased property taxes next year. Sales prices for homes and property increased significantly during that time period.
That, too, might strike some as be bad news. But at least our governments will be getting more money.
I also chatted with my two friends on the Council about the Servitas housing debacle (as discussed in Part Four of this editorial series) and I have hopes that the Town will ultimately walk away from this unfortunate arrangement.
Yesterday in Part Five, we heard from Region 9 Economic Development Project Manager Heather Otter, speaking to a joint meeting of the Town Council and the Archuleta Board of County Commissioners on March 28. Ms. Otter noted that Colorado is projected to become ‘older’ between now and 2030. Fewer children. More people over 65.
This graphic refers specifically to Colorado as a whole, but Archuleta County is already considerably ‘older’ than most of Colorado. The median age in Archuleta is now 50 years old, while in Colorado, the median age is closer to 38.
Many people over 65 consider themselves retired, and are not interested in working in a tourism economy — or in any type of economy, for that matter. And we know that people over 65 typically need services that are not needed by younger people.
Ms. Otter noted this transition taking place, and suggested that our community leaders ought to be considering this demographic shift as they make decisions about priorities and community needs.
Ms. Otter:
“What you want to focus on here is, between 2020 and 2030, what the breakdown of age groups will be. And why I find this interesting is because, the 0-to-17 age group and the 18-to-24 ages group — those are your future workers. So we’re looking at a decrease in our 0-to-17 age group. People are not having babies at the rate that they were, so we’re looking at a decrease in our 0-to-17 population. That will impact our school enrollment, and all kinds of things…
“Now, is this something that we can think about, in terms of community and economic development? Are there ‘career-connected’ pathways for our young people? So they have the opportunity to stay, and become contributing workers?”
Good questions. I’m not sure what a ‘career-connected pathway’ might mean, if your community is built on a tourism economy. The ‘pathways’ might lead from one waitress job to the next, but then what?
Ms. Otter:
“One of the biggest thing that will impact that aging demographic are services and amenities that will allow them to ‘age in place’. I mentioned transit. That’s a concern. Health care…
“So just thinking about community, and economic development. A few things to consider. Our job growth, as well as our future — anything that is expected for retirement, for Baby Boomers — it’s going to support a demand for additional workers, and a continued need for housing.
“So if I can leave you with anything tonight, think about houses as ‘where jobs go to sleep at night’. If we don’t have housing, and we don’t have a varied stock of housing — meaning, different types, different price ranges — it’s difficult to even talk about jobs.
“Jobs and housing are intricately tied together, and I haven’t spoken about this — since I began working in economic development — in as adamantly a way as we’re talking about it now.
“We cannot talk about jobs, and attracting businesses, or even keeping our current workers, until we simultaneously address our housing.
“That’s just something that you’ll hear, again and again.”
With those comments in mind, let’s take another look at the list of agenda topics that the Town Council and the BOCC selected for their March 28 meeting.
I. REGION 9 UPDATE
II. TOURISM BOARD INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS RECOMMENDATIONS
III. PROPOSITION 123 – DISCUSSION RELATED TO A JOINT BASELINE OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS WITHIN THE TOWN AND COUNTY
IV. DISCUSSION OF FORMATION OF POSSIBLE RECREATION DISTRICT
V. RIVER ACCESS
VI. DISCUSSION OF USES AT SOUTH PAGOSA PARK
VII. TRANSPORTATION, ROADS AND TRANSIT
VIII. BIG SPRING CLEAN UP: MAY 6TH
IX. OTHER ITEMS OF MUTUAL INTEREST
Of the nine topics that our elected leaders felt were worthy of a three-hour meeting, five of them — more than half — concerned recreation and tourism.
One topic concerned housing.
Our elected leaders appear to be disconnected from reality, and living in a fantasy world filled with tourists and recreation.