Yesterday, in the Letters section of the weekly Pagosa Springs SUN, local activist Lee Stopher responded to my four-part editorial about Pagosa’s future water demand. I had mentioned, in my editorial, a previous SUN letter submitted by Ms. Stopher.
This week, she wrote, in part:
A couple of weeks ago I wrote a letter to the SUN expressing my concern about the proposed sale of Running Iron Ranch by PAWSD [Pagosa Area Water and Sanitation District]. This letter prompted an editorial in four parts by Bill Hudson in the Pagosa Daily Post. Bill raised issues with my letter and, in so doing, he has raised more questions for me. Hopefully, this is the beginning of a public conversation on this issue.
First, let me say that my only implied criticism of the PAWSD board is the lack of public engagement on this issue.
I would likewise welcome more public engagement — and more public conversation — on this issue, but it would appear that the only engagement we’re going to get at the moment an occasional letter to the SUN and occasional editorials in the Daily Post.
The San Juan Water Conservancy District (SJWCD) convened a “public meeting” yesterday, November 7, to discuss the possible sale of the Running Iron Ranch, and immediately went into an executive session to exclude all members of the public from their discussion.
Disclosure: I currently serve as a volunteer board member on the PAWSD board of directors, but this editorial reflects only my own personal opinions, and not necessarily the opinions of the PAWSD board or staff.
I’ve seen Ms. Stopher in attendance at numerous Archuleta Board of County Commissioners meetings, but I cannot recall ever seeing her at a PAWSD or SJWCD meeting. Meanwhile, I serve on the PAWSD Board, and we regularly see a half dozen members of the general public at our meetings, informing the Board about issues they’re experiencing, or policies they’re concerned about. The Board has consistently been willing to actively engage with the public on those issues and concerns, in lengthy public discussions.
During my many years reporting on PAWSD Board meetings and serving on the Board, I’ve not heard members of the general public, attending our meetings, express concerns about the sale or non-sale of the Running Iron Ranch.
I’ve also attended numerous SJWCD Board meetings, both as a reporter and during my four years as a SJWCD board member. Not counting news reporters, I seem to recall seeing a total of maybe two members of the public, over the past decade, in attendance at a SJWCD Board meeting.
Government officials often profess a desire for “public engagement”. One great way to “listen to the community” is to put a request for higher taxes on the ballot. That way, you can get a clear sense of the community’s priorities, without holding a lot of public meetings.
SJWCD did, in fact, put the Running Iron Ranch reservoir project — the Dry Gulch Reservoir — on the ballot in 2017, asking for a very modest tax increase to move the project forward. The public responded, in a fairly engaged manner, by rejecting the tax increase by a 3-to-1 margin.
That’s a certain type of public engagement.
Did SJWCD listen to the public?
Following that dramatic loss at the polls, SJWCD’s then-president Rod Proffitt told the Pagosa Springs SUN:
“The facts have not changed. In fact, the need for this water storage project is becoming more apparent. CWCB and PAWSD agree this community may face a serious demand supply gap as early as 2024…”
That was, of course, nonsense. PAWSD had removed the Dry Gulch Reservoir from its long-term planning documents in 2012 and has never, since then, considered investing a penny of their customers’ money into reservoir construction on the Running Iron Ranch. Additionally, Mr. Proffitt’s “serious demand supply gap” didn’t exist in 2017, nor does it exist in 2024.
But some people will say anything — will even spout obvious lies — to try and influence the public.
Ms. Stopher, meanwhile, admits that she she now has more questions than she did before. In her letter, she was dismissive of a 2011 study performed by a community work group — a certain type of very active community engagement — that recommended against building the Dry Gulch Reservoir.
The conclusions from that 2011 study group have actually held up remarkably well.
In 2008 — the year the Running Iron Ranch was purchased to address “serious demand supply gaps” — PAWSD sold 1,221 acre feet of treated drinking water.
In 2021, PAWSD sold 1,298 acre feet of treated drinking water.
PAWSD maintains over 4,000 acre feet of water storage in various reservoirs, but much of its raw water comes directly from mountain streams. Most of the reservoir storage has never been tapped, since PAWSD was formed in the 1970s. Never.
No sign of a “serious demand supply gap” at this point, folks.
Which brings us back to yesterday’s SJWCD Board meeting, which consisted of an hour and ten minutes behind closed doors in an executive session, after which the seven board members voted unanimously to reject a potentially attractive offer to help SJWCD build a reservoir on the Running Iron Ranch.
Since 2012, SJWCD has been telling the community that they were looking for a partner to help them build a reservoir — for the benefit of our entire county. Since 2012, they have utterly failed to find any partners.
Then, on November 7, 2024 — presented with an attractive offer from a potential partner — they voted unanimously to reject the offer.
I’m sure Ms. Stopher will be saddened by this turn of events. Not only did SJWCD reject this offer to help build a reservoir which Ms. Stopher seems to feels is necessary for our community… but SJWCD made their decision without the slightest bit of public engagement or public input.
Instead of cooperating with the PAWSD Board — which had expressed support for this generous offer at their last public meeting — the SJWCD seems to be inviting an extended legal battle over the right to sell the Ranch property.
An extended legal battle… that will be funded by the taxpayers?
Read Part Three, on Monday…