Should our community leaders be listening more closely to the community?
Or would that be a waste of everyone’s time?
A record that got considerable play at my family home, back in my teenage years, was Allan Sherman’s album, Allan in Wonderland. One of my personal favorite tunes from that record was the jazzy and energetic hymn, “Good Advice”… wherein Mr. Sherman gave profitable advice to Henry Ford, Alexander Graham Bell and Elisha Otis, among others. (In an interesting twist, he also gives imaginary bad advice to Christopher Columbus, causing him to sail off the Edge of the World.)
The chorus went like this:
…And that was Good Advice, Good Advice
Good Advice costs nothing and it’s worth the price…
Given my abiding interest in local politics, I’ve formed certain ideas about democratic government, community-driven prosperity, and citizen participation.
When is it appropriate for local leaders to seek advice from the voters and taxpayers?
And how often is that advice actually listened to… and how often is it actually profitable?
Was Allan Sherman correct in asserting that good advice costs nothing… and it’s worth the price?
Part One on Friday focused on a pending decision by the Archuleta Board of County Commissioners to purchase some vacant land as the site for a future Administration Building, possibly to be funded by Certificates of Participation… that is, without voter approval.
A seemingly last-minute “public input event” is scheduled for tonight, Monday, December 16 at 5:30pm at the current Admin Building, 398 Lewis Street. The public is invited to get information about certain suggested vacant parcels, and then share their community-oriented ideas with County Attorney Todd Weaver and County Manager Jack Harper.
Although a final decision will presumably be made at some point by our three County commissioners — Veronica Medina, Warren Brown and Ronnie Maez — the press release for the event stated that the BOCC will not be in attendance.
A decision to enter into a real estate purchase might be made the following day, Tuesday, December 17 at 1:30pm. So the value of Monday’s “public input event” appears, to me, rather dubious. (Public comment can also be made at the Tuesday meeting.).
I stated on Friday that this ‘public input’ event appears to be nothing more than political theatre.
Which is not to say that the BOCC wanted to produce political theatre. They may actually believe that tonight’s event will be meaningful, and useful, and will help the commissioners to make the best possible decision.
I have my doubts.
But it wasn’t the Arculeta County event that inspired this editorial series, about governments asking for — or seeming to ask for — advice from their constituents. The inspiration for this editorial came from some public comments made at a Pagosa Area Water and Sanitation District (PAWSD) board meeting on December 12.
Disclosure: I currently serve as a volunteer PAWSD board member, but this editorial reflects only my own personal opinions and not necessarily the opinions of the PAWSD board or staff.
As many Daily Post readers know, PAWSD has been involved lately in a dispute with another government entity — San Juan Water Conservancy District (SJWCD) — over the pending sale, or retention, of a 667-acre ranch purchased in 2008 as the site for a proposed Dry Gulch Reservoir.
PAWSD subsequently concluded, back in 2013, that its customers have access to plenty of water resources and do not need to spend $100 million — or more — building yet another reservoir. Nevertheless, PAWSD customers have been paying off the loan for the Running Iron Ranch purchase since 2008.
Recently, PAWSD has received attractive offers to purchase the Ranch, and at its meeting on Thursday, December 12, the PAWSD board voted unanimously to begin advertising the Ranch for sale.
In the meantime, the SJWCD board has posted public notices that they see the Dry Gulch Reservoir as a dire necessity, and that they intend to take every possible action to prevent the sale of the Ranch. From a recent public notice from SJWCD:
SJWCD believes planning decisions are best made in open and transparent processes informed by current water conditions and a forward-looking perspective…
SJWCD has been moving over the past year to build public awareness of our watersheds and environmental conditions affecting them, introduce community members to the Running Iron Ranch, and engage professional services for reservoir planning…
SJWCD encourages the public to reach out to board members of both SJWCD and PAWSD about the potential sale of public property identified years ago as the best available site for future water storage.
SJWCD has also urged increased community involvement in the decision about selling the Ranch.
Shouldn’t we be asking the community for their advice? Presuming it would be good advice?
The encouragement from SJWCD, urging the public to reach out to PAWSD and SJWCD about the sale of the Ranch, seems to have borne a modest return on investment, because one member of the public — Pagosa Springs High School teacher Josh (“JD”) Kurz — actually took it upon himself to address the PAWSD board on Thursday during the “public comment” portion of the meeting.
Thus, the inspiration for this editorial series.
Last year, SJWCD began a serious effort to provide the Pagosa community with more information about local and state water issues, including climate change, drought, and recreational uses of water. One of their first efforts involved hiring Josh Kurz, “teacher and watershed scientist”, to develop a public program that could help to educate the Pagosa community about our water resources.
The idea was to help create a “water-fluent community” that could then make better decisions about water-related things like taxes and reservoirs.
It became apparent, in 2017, that the community had a very different understanding from SJWCD, about the need for a reservoir on the Running Iron Ranch. That year, SJWCD had placed a ballot measure before Archuleta County voters, for a very modest property tax increase aimed at moving the Dry Gulch Reservoir project forward.
That measure was rejected by a 3-to-1 margin.
I took that result to mean that PAWSD customers agreed with the PAWSD board… that the proposed reservoir was not needed or wanted.
The SJWCD board had a different interpretation. They concluded that the community simply didn’t understand our dire water situation. That the community was, shall we say, ignorant.
Enter, stage left, teacher and SJWCD consultant Josh Kurz.