I would really like to have some sort of meaning from working towards a goal or cause that betters humanity as a whole. I see the world falling apart and no direction for humanity, and I’d like to do something about it…
— Young adult survey respondent, Making Caring Common Project, December 2022.
It’s a big world out there. 8.2 billion people with hopes and dreams for themselves, their families, their communities, their nations, their world.
It’s easier to focus on yourself, and your family. But some people are willing to focus on a somewhat wider picture. Perhaps, they focus their energy on a local nonprofit effort, or a for-profit business. Picking up trash along the highway. Delivering Meals on Wheels.
Maybe they’re willing to act as a watchdog, keeping tabs on a local government.
Looking out at the big world, it might appear to be falling apart, with little chance of avoiding a disastrous outcome. But locally? Maybe we can really make a difference, in our own little hometown.
Last week, when I was writing Part Six about the October 28 decision by the Town Planning Commission approving a grossly inadequate Sketch Plan for the proposed Pagosa West subdivision, I quoted some comments I’d made to the Commission at the conclusion of the public hearing:
“So I think you’ve made a terrible mistake by approving this. And unfortunately, it’s going to get delayed. It’s going to have to be appealed to the Town Council. And it will be further delayed if it goes to District Court. In which case, you have delayed the process for the developer…”
I had two goals in mind when I wrote my previous six-part editorial. Naturally, I wanted to inform my Daily Post readers about something important happening in their community. I was also trying to learn as much as I could about the Town Land Use and Development Code (LUDC) regarding Major Subdivisions, and Sketch Plan approvals. There’s nothing quite like writing an editorial to help you get your thoughts together.
After the inadequate Sketch Plan was first been shared publicly back in August, I’d been meeting occasionally with a couple of friends, talking about whether the public had the slightest chance of influencing the manner in which this major subdivision gets treated by the Town Planning Department, the Planning Commission, and ultimately by the Town Council.
As I wrote yesterday in Part One, the Town Planning Commission does a fine job 95% of the time. In this case, they screwed up. They acted incompetently, and probably illegally.
My friends and I could hardly believe that the Planning Department and Planning Commission were taking this supposed “plan” seriously, considering the numerous requirements in the LUDC the plan failed to meet.
We determined that the LUDC allowed interested members of the public to challenge a Planning Commission decision, if the citizens believed the decision violated the LUDC. An appeal can be made to the Town Council… and a Town Council decision can be further appealed to a District Court.
The appeals process is laid out in Section 2.4.14 of the LUDC.
2.4.14. APPEALS
A. Purpose. This Section sets forth the process for appealing final decisions made under this Land Use Code.
B. Definitions.
1. Appellant shall mean a party-in-interest who has taken an appeal from the original decision-maker to the appellate decision-maker, or from the appellate decision-maker to the Town Council by the timely filing of a notice of appeal…
You can read Section 2.4.14 here.
As with most legal processes, there’s a cost, and a requirement to file in a timely manner. The Town appeal requires a payment of $100 and must be filed within 10 days of the faulty decision.
My friends and I spent a few hours over the weekend, working up our Notice of Appeal… checking and double-checking to make sure we’d crossed every “t” and dotted every “i”.
The basis of the appeal:
The permissible grounds for appeal shall be limited to allegations that the original or appellate decision-maker committed one (1) or more of the following errors:
1. Failed to properly interpret and apply relevant provisions of the Town Code or Charter.
Our Notice of Appeal was 16 pages long. As part of the appeal, we were allowed to file additional briefs in the future.
I walked into Town Hall on Tuesday morning, with the Notice and checks totaling $100.
It became immediately clear that the Town was expecting an appeal to be filed, because I was informed by Town staff that the developers of the proposed Pagosa West had decided to withdraw their Sketch Plan, and to submit a new Sketch Plan at some point in the future. So an appeal based on the October 28 decision might be moot?
Presumably, the developer likewise had expected an appeal to be filed.
I indicated to the Town staff that I would appreciate seeing the developers’ intention to withdraw, in writing, since we had a deadline for submitting the appeal — which, if filed, would delay the project from moving to the next stage: the Preliminary Plat.
The wheels of justice turn slowly, as we know.
Yesterday afternoon, I received an email from the Town Planning Department:
Bill,
Yes, they have withdrawn their application that was heard at the October 28, 2025, Planning Commission meeting. If you would like a copy of their withdrawal, please fill out the attached CORA form.
Thanks,
As Daily Post columnist Louis Cannon reminded us a few days ago, you can win the battle and still lose the war.
But if you’re not into fighting wars, there are still dishes to wash.
And by God, there are enough dirty government dishes to keep everyone busy, if we’re so inclined.