As mentioned previously in this editorial series, America’s Founding Fathers did not believe in equality, even as they wrote the phrase “all men are created equal” into the Declaration of Independence. It seems our nation’s founders believed their experiment in ‘republican’ government would fail if the working poor, and women, and people of color were given the right to vote and directly participate in government.
It took more than 100 years before “all men” were given the right to vote — at least, on paper. And another 50 years before women could vote.
Even today, in 2025, key members of the federal government and of certain state governments are working to make it more difficult for certain people to vote — in the name of supposed ‘election integrity’.
Meanwhile, we have been building up bureaucracies, armed with fat books of rules and regulations, with the aim of ensuring ‘fairness’ in decision-making processes. While a certain level of efficiency and fairness has been achieved, bureaucratic governments have also become, in some cases, barriers to true citizen participation.
As I cover various decision-making processes in Pagosa Springs for the Daily Post, I often hear our elected and appointed leaders express the desire for ‘more citizen participation’ in the face of apparent widespread apathy. The apathy towards participation in government decisions seems especially strong among younger adults, who prefer to spend their time and energy engaging in conspicuous consumption and posting on social media.
Even though we are all highly dependent on one another for our daily needs, Americans tend to think of themselves as ‘individuals’ rather than as members of a cooperative community. And our system of government — unintentionally perhaps, but nevertheless effectively — encourages division and separation. We’re not often expected, as members of the public with shared concerns, to sit down at the same table and work out consensus solutions to our challenges. Nor are we typically so inclined. We’ve learned that, most often, our opinions don’t matter to the bureaucracy.
So, how about the Town’s struggling sewer system? What do we do, about that?
The Pagosa Springs Sanitation General Improvement District (PSSGID) maintains about 17 miles of sewer pipes, and pumps about 325,000 gallons of sewage per day, on behalf of about 1,500 households and businesses. About 1/3 of the system — around 6 miles of pipe — is faiing or in need of critical repairs, at a projected cost of about $15 million. The PSSGID recently issued $4.5 million in bonds to fund some of the most critical repairs.
But the vast majority of the Pagosa area population — about 85% — does not live within the PSSGID district, and most of those folks pay their sewer bill to Pagosa Area Water and Sanitation District (PAWSD). To make matters even more interesting, the PSSGID pumps its wastewater 7 miles uphill to the PAWSD treatment plant… but town customers pay their bill to PSSGID, not PAWSD.
The pumping system has been problematic from the very beginning, resulting in downtown sewer customers paying a higher monthly bill than PAWSD customers. Next year, the PSSGID bill is scheduled to increase to $76 a month.
PSSGID has estimated future system costs, for repairs and upgrades, at “$80 to $100 million”.
How to get the apathetic public involved? One way is to propose a tax increase. And to prepare everyone for the tax increase, one standard procedure involves a survey. The Town’s PSSGID survey is available here. The main purpose of the survey might seem to be “gathering input from the public”, but it’s also a tool for getting information out to the public and getting people thinking, prior to a possible election.
The PSSGID repairs and upgrades could potentially be funded in at least three ways.
Option One: Increase PSSGID customer fees from $76 a month to maybe $200 a month. This can be done without a vote of the people.
Option Two: Get voter approval for a new Town-only sales tax, possibly adding one penny to each one-dollar purchase.
Option Three: Increase the property taxes within the Town by an average of about $1,000 a year. This change would also require voter approval. (Good luck getting that approved!)
The online survey’s final question:
4. Of the three funding options presented in this survey, which one is the most appealing?
Fee increase
1% sales tax increase
Property tax increase
The survey notes that the 1% sales tax would be paid, within the town limits, by locals and visitors alike. The only people who could vote on establishing the Town sales tax, however, would be the residents living within the town limits. To sweeten the deal, the Town is suggesting lower monthly sewer fees for town residents and businesses. This reduction in fees would not apply to PAWSD sewer customers.
From the survey:
Residents would get to vote on a sale tax increase this November.
A 1% sales tax would generate approximately $3.6 million in revenue the first year.
A sales tax is paid by both visitors and residents.
If approved, monthly sewer fees would decrease by at least $15.00 per month or more, beginning in January 2026.
Monthly grocery costs for a family of 4 would go up by approx. $15.00/mo.
The cost of other taxable purchases would increase by 1%.
We’re all in this mess together. But we don’t all get to vote.
The Town staff held three community meetings last week to present these three possible options to the broader community, and to collect ideas from the public. Most of the attendees at the Monday meeting — the only one I attended — were not Town residents or voters, but nevertheless expressed tentative support for the “1% sales tax” option.
The sales tax option allows the entire Archuleta County population, and our visiting tourist families, the clearest path to participate in a community-wide solution to a challenging situation that directly affects only a particular segment of the population.
It also seems the solution least likely to bankrupt our downtown families and businesses.