Photo: Lady Justice
I’ve seen numerous photographs, over the years, of Lady Justice depicted as a statue. She is typically holding a scale to indicate that justice is always a balancing act; and she usually wears a blindfold, reminding us that she makes her decisions objectively and impartially, without regard to any party’s wealth, status, race, sex, or political position.
Then we have the sword, which will presumably be used — if the accused is found guilty — to remove their head.
Decapitation has fallen out of favor, to some degree, here in the U.S. But judges and courts are still in high demand. The U.S. is one of the world’s most litigious nations. Depending on how you define “lawsuit”, we appear to rank Number 5 after Germany, Sweden, Israel and Austria.
But we do indeed hold the top spot, if you count the number of lawyers per capita, with one lawyer per 300 people.
Yesterday in Part Two, I suggested that Americans enjoy a good fight, although we might enjoy it most when we are merely spectators rather than participants.
In this editorial series, we’re discussing the ongoing fight between Pagosa Area Water and Sanitation District (PAWSD) and San Juan Water Conservancy District (SJWCD) — two special districts with watery concerns.
PAWSD delivers about 400 million gallons of treated drinking water annually, serving about 80% of Archuleta County residents and nearly 100% of Archuleta County businesses.
SJWCD delivers… well, actually, SJWCD doesn’t deliver anything tangible. Mostly, SJWCD holds meetings, makes plans, and protects its water rights. But they hope to, someday, oversee the construction of a massive reservoir on the Running Iron Ranch.
At the moment, the two districts are involved in litigation over PAWSD’s right to sell that Ranch.
Disclosure: I currently serve as a volunteer member of the PAWSD Board of Directors, but this editorial reflects only my own opinions, and not necessarily the opinions of the PAWSD Board and staff.
In my humble opinion, SJWCD had three obvious paths forward that would have made lawsuits totally unnecessary.
As were mentioned yesterday in Part Two.
One:
SJWCD could have agreed with PAWSD that their joint Running Iron Ranch agreement from 2016 actually says:
4.2.2. The PAWSD may decide to abandon the Project and sell the Running Iron Ranch pursuant to the terms of Paragraph 5 below…
…which is what it actually says.
Two:
SJWCD could have entered into negotiations with a potential buyer of the Ranch who has offered to help them built the Dry Gulch Reservoir. That offer could also provide PAWSD customers relief from over $10 million in future debt payments.
Three:
SJWCD could have offered to purchase the Ranch themselves… or could have offered to take over payment of the annual debt — about $500,000 a year that PAWSD customers are now paying or accumulating in future interest payments.
Some might argue that Option Number Three is totally unrealistic, given that the total tax revenue collected by SJWCD amounts to only about $160,000 a year. But as we all know, tax revenues can be increased. The Archuleta School District has increased its property tax revenue — through voter approval of a Mill Levy Override — by about $1.7 million a year. The Pagosa Fire Protection District property tax collections have increased — again, with voter approval — from less than $1 million a year to now more than $4 million a year.
All the SJWCD board needs to do, to take over ownership of the Running Iron Ranch, is negotiate a deal with PAWSD and Colorado Water Conservation Board (the holder of the Dry Gulch loan) and then get the voters to agree to increase the SJWCD mill levy.
Okay, sure… that’s easier said than done.
SJWCD asked the voters for a property tax increase in 2004 to help fund construction of the Dry Gulch Reservoir, and voters said, “No”.
SJWCD tried again in 2017, asking the voters for a property tax increase, to help fund the Dry Gulch Reservoir, and voters again rejected the request — by a 3-to-1 margin.
In the meantime, since 2010, the voters have declined to elect anyone to the PAWSD Board of Directors who favored the construction of the Dry Gulch Reservoir. (The SJWCD board, however, is not elected by the voters; it’s appointed by a Durango judge.)
We could surmise, from these facts, that — historically — the community has not been supportive of the Dry Gulch Reservoir project.
But why not?
Many people in Archuleta County are concerned about the changing environment, and that concern might be especially obvious during a winter like the current one, with below-average snowfall. The community generally understands that less winter snow can mean less water in our rivers and streams in the spring, summer and fall. It can also mean increased wildfire danger in our various local watersheds, with further detrimental effects to water resources.
Could SJWCD convince the voters — now, in 2025 — that the Dry Gulch Reservoir is a good idea? Could they make a compelling case to the taxpayers? And stop wasting our “good public money” on lawsuits?
I believe what the voters need and want is a good, persuasive story.
Unfortunately, the eight members of the SJWCD board have consistently rejected every option presented to them that could put an end to the current litigation. To all appearances, they want nothing more than to spend tens of thousands of tax dollars fighting in court, in a case that might last two years, or longer, and might cost PAWSD customers $1 million in additional loan payments and interest accrual…
…while SJWCD chases a phantom reservoir that the PAWSD board doesn’t support… that the community doesn’t support… and that is no closer to being built than it was in 2004.
But we do love a good fight, don’t we?