In this editorial series, we’re discussing a conflict concerning an “agritourism” operation a few miles south of downtown Pagosa Springs on Highway 84, in an area of the unincorporated county generally zoned “Agricultural Ranching.”
But we’re also discussing government land use policy, and the problems it can cause.
One of the problems being, litigation.
Two of the people who testified at the Archuleta Board of County Commissioners meeting on October 20 were Dawn and William Vrastil, who own a 70-acre ranch directly across the highway from the “agritourism” operation and pig farm known as “84 Ranch”. Both the Vrastil’s property and the 84 Ranch are zoned “Agricultural Ranching” — a zoning designation that, in general, allows only residential and farming/ranching uses on a property. But the County Land Use Regulations (LURs) allow for “Wilderness Lodging” with an approved permit.
84 Ranch obtained just such a permit last year and installed five ‘tiny home’ lodging units.
The Vrastils are clearly not happy with the operations of 84 Ranch, nor are they happy with the way the approved permit has been enforced by the County Planning Department.
We’ve noted previously that the County does not currently have a dedicated Planning Department, as the result of firings and resignations in early October. William Vrastil — and moments later, 84 Ranch co-owner Brian Wattier — referred to the uncomfortable transitions that have taken place among County staff.
Mr. Vrastil mentioned participation by a Planning Commission member during an 84 Ranch approval in August 2025 that, in his option, should not have been allowed.
“Also… in the meeting minutes, it stated that, that Dawn and Bill Brasco were overwhelmingly in support of the project.
And nothing could be further from the truth, and yet that’s in the official meeting minutes.
“On, March 31, 2026, the Director of Development went ahead and did a surprise inspection on 84 Ranch. She found several violations, and she documented those. When she came back, she made a phone call to both myself and my wife separately. And yet, when she reported that up her chain of command, she was told by [County Manager Longinos Gonzalez] that he was not going to allow the [Board Conditional Use Permit] to be pulled, as she had indicated was the right thing to do.
“And that he was not going to allow any of those violations to be reported in the CORA (Colorado Open Records Act) requests. And, also that the project would be permitted to continue.
“Fast forward now to September 14, 2026, we had two planning staff members go ahead and submit their resignations.
“I know that two of the county commissioners were contacted separately about this, and were asked to go ahead and go directly to the Planning Department and find out what issues were there, rather than going through the… County Manager, who was, in fact, the problem. That did not occur. In fact, one of the commissioners went so far as to talk to the County Manager, who in turn went to the Planning staff, and with all three of them, used a finger-in-the-face type of comment, and went ahead and told them that that would not be allowed.
“All of this exists in the CORA files.
“I think that the Director of Development was fired because she challenged the County Manager. I would ask that you all go ahead and… do some deep research on that, to find out what is in the HR files, and the complaints that have been filed against the County Manager, and so far have not been investigated at all by this body.
“I thank you for your time…”
Next to speak was Joette Lee, Brian Wattier’s mother and 50/50 business partner in the 84 Ranch. She noted that the ‘consent’ item on the meeting agenda — a resolution memorializing, in written form, a BOCC variance approval in August — contained certain conditions. Improving the ranch entrance to meet CDOT specs, as required, had apparently been delayed by rain.
“On August 18, this board heard a variance, waived it, and granted it. We accepted those conditions. We worked diligently to get them completed. As far as CDOT goes, 8 inches of rain, working through that.
“I listen to our neighbors; I respect that they came. If there are concerns about how the Ranch operates, we will answer every one of them fully and in good faith, through the proper channels.
“But my concerns aren’t the questions before you today. They aren’t a reason to reopen a decision this board has already made.
“As Brian’s mother, I’ll just say this. I’ve watched him follow every step in this County, everything they’ve asked him to do. We’ve started over several times — numerous times — with staff change, and all the things that we’re all aware of.
“We aren’t asking for special treatment, and never have. We’re asking for the same process anyone else would get.
“Brian and I are simply trying to find a place to raise his family. We chose Pagosa. And I think we all know there’s a good reason why we chose Pagosa. We want to do business here. We want to work with locals. We want to raise the children here.
“I ask that you adopt the resolution as written…”
We then heard from Alicia Young, a supporter of 84 Ranch and its regenerative agriculture program.
And then, from Brian Wattier…
Read Part Four, tomorrow…
Bill Hudson began sharing his opinions in the Pagosa Daily Post in 2004 and can't seem to break the habit. He claims that, in Pagosa Springs, opinions are like pickup trucks: everybody has one.