Yesterday, November 5, a group of local “stakeholders” (as they are often called) met at the Ross Aragon Community Center to discuss the future of tourism in Pagosa Springs. The group included government officials, board members, business owners, marketing professionals, non-profit organizers — a collection of about 30 people who have some connection to local tourism.
The Pagosa Springs Area Tourism Board and its staff had applied for — and had been awarded — a grant from the Colorado Tourism Office to help understand, and grow, the tourism industry in Archuleta County. The statewide strategic planning program is called The Destination Blueprint Program, and Pagosa is one of eight Colorado communities participating in the program.
In addition to the stakeholder meeting yesterday, the program collected responses in two different local surveys — one from business owners, and one from ordinary residents. Some of our Daily Post readers may have participated in the surveys?
I had been invited to participate in the event, which was led by Dave Santucci, founder and principal consultant for ‘Mission2Market’, a boutique destination consulting firm based in Denver. Mr. Santucci shared some conclusions drawn from the two local surveys, and then invited the room to brainstorm around the idea of growing tourism over the next ten years.
He told us that a small minority of Pagosa respondents would prefer that tourism not get any worse than it already is… but said that the majority of respondents seem comfortable with continued growth of the tourism industry. (He did not share actual numbers, however. Just his general impressions.)
As the roomful of tourism stakeholders brainstormed in smaller groups, discussing the best way to increase visitation, the ideas seemed to center around new recreational facilities, better cooperation between businesses in creating “package” experiences, better storytelling, more events…
…and, as one of the groups reported out: “All of this, while supporting affordable housing, because we can’t do any of this without having employees to fill those shoes.”
Later in the day, the Pagosa Springs Town Council held a regular meeting at Town Hall and discussed, very briefly, the budget for 2025. As part of that discussion, Mayor Pierce invited the public to weigh in on the budget priorities.
The only two members of the public in the room were SUN reporter Derek Kutzer and myself. Since Derek typically doesn’t testify at public meetings, it was left up to me to represent the public.
I mentioned that a number of the wonderful ideas had been kicked around that morning, at the Destination Blueprint work session, aimed at growing the tourism industry.
I asserted that none of the ideas could actually happen, however, because we don’t have sufficient housing in Pagosa that working individuals and families can afford.
The Town budget has a number of “funds” that help staff allocate and track their spending. In the General Fund, the 2025 budget allocates about $800,000 for parks and recreation, and about $750,000 for Building and Planning.
Then the Town has more than $3 million for parks expansion and maintenance in its Capital budget. And the budget for tourism marketing and events is $1.5 million.
The budget also has an allocation for “Housing” in the General Fund.
$106,000.
We’ve become accustomed, in Archuleta County, to seeing many millions of dollars spent each year on tourism and recreation.
Are these items necessary? I mean, is public spending on recreation and tourism essential to a diverse, functional economy? Our leaders seem to feel that’s the case.
But they don’t seem to believe that having safe, warm homes for our workers is essential.
By adopting that perspective — that tourism and recreation are essential, and housing is not essential — our leaders are on a path to creating a dysfunctional retirement community, without children and without young workers to keep our economy running. We are slowly creating a town that drives young families away. That’s why, in the latest Census numbers, the average age in Archuleta County is over 50 years old, while in Colorado, it’s about 38 years.
Oddly enough, the Town Council agreed on its top four priorities at a recent long-range planning meeting, and Priority Number Three was “Housing”.
But when Town staff presented the 2025 budget, Housing was not a priority at all. Not even slightly.
You can’t call something a priority unless you are willing to invest real money, and real effort, in it.
As I mentioned, there were 30 people at the Destination Blueprint gathering.
And there were two members of the public at the Town’s budget hearing. Two news reporters.
What are our priorities?
Maybe having a functional economy is not one of them. But, if it’s not a priority, I don’t see much of a future for our town.