Photo: At a “community listening session” on December 16, local realtor and businessman JR Ford encourages the Archuleta Board of County Commissioners to collaborate with the Archuleta School District in facilities planning.
We’ll continue our discussion about the proposed sale of the Running Iron Ranch tomorrow, and the claimed lack of citizen participation in related decisions.
Today will be a look at how the Archuleta Board of County Commissioners have reacted to recent “citizen input”.
The BOCC have been considering, since early last summer, the purchase of a 5-acre parcel along South Pagosa Boulevard as the location for a proposed County Administration Building. Those discussions led to accusations that Commissioner Veronica Medina had violated Colorado law by failing to reveal an apparent conflict of interest, resulting in a recall petition being circulated, and a recent decision by the Colorado Independent Ethics Commission to investigate her behavior.
Since then, the BOCC had broadened their research into other available vacant properties, and on Monday night, that research was shared at a public “listening session” — a standing-room-only meeting at which a dozen community members stepped up to the podium to ask questions about the decision-making process, and to offer suggestions about alternative approaches. How about collaborating with the School District, for example?
Many thoughtful ideas were put forward. Apparently, they were not worth serious consideration.
At their regular Tuesday meeting yesterday afternoon, a couple of the same community members urged the commissioners to engage with the Archuleta School District, to determine if the County and School District could cooperate on facility planning.
More about that issue in a moment.
Also on the agenda:
Consideration Of Approval Of Conditional Use Permit For An Outdoor Shooting Range At Keyah Grande (PLN24-126)
Keyah Grande, has applied for Approval of (PLN24-126) an Outdoor Shooting Range, Board Conditional Use Permit (BCUP) to operate a publicly facing shooting range. Keyah Grande aims to offer a user-friendly environment for shooting sports and firearm training. Their facility will serve the Keyah Grande Guest House guests, local law enforcement, trainers, and the wider community. Their mission is to promote responsible firearm usage, enhance skills through certified training programs, and foster a sense of community through shooting enthusiasts. The parcel is zoned Agricultural Ranching (AR).
As it turns out, the shooting range will not actually be open to “the wider community” except under limited circumstances.
Several members of the audience testified on this proposal, the approval of which had been recommended by the County Planning Commission. A couple of audience members asserted that — based on faulty advice from the County Attorney — the Planning Commission may have accidentally neglected to follow a legal County approval process. Other audience members — who happened to live in close proximity to the range — questioned the planned use of the shooting range during nighttime hours, but Commissioner Warren Brown asserted that “night training” is a necessary aspect of proper law enforcement firearms training.
I believe the shooting range has been in use at Keyah Grande — without the required County Conditional Use Permit — for at least 15 years. (I seem to recall videotaping a wedding at the shooting range, about 15 years ago, when I still had a video business. A curious location for a wedding.) The County Planning Department somehow convinced the owners to apply for the proper permit, and the BOCC unanimously approved the Conditional Use Permit last night with several conditions applied.
It appeared, from the discussion, that neighborhood input had modestly influenced some of the permit conditions.
A while later in the meeting — a rather long meeting, as it turned out — we arrived at a curious mix of agenda items related to buying vacant property for a future County Administration Building. All of these items were scheduled to be presented by County Attorney Todd Weaver, who has been advising the BOCC on various real estate matters.
Three “old business” items…
C. Consideration Of A Letter Of Intent With ArenaLabs, LLC
D. Consideration Of A Purchase And Sales Agreement With ArenaLabs, LLC
E. Consideration Of A Letter Of Intent With Pagosa Partners I Inc.
At the beginning of the meeting, Commissioner Medina had announced that she would not be voting on Items C and D, concerning ArenaLabs LLC, due to a perceived conflict of interest. Those two items were subsequently denied by Commissioners Warren Brown and Ronnie Maez. The third item, concerning a possible purchase of 5 acres in the Aspen Village subdivision, was moved into “new business” because a “new” sales offer had been tendered by Pagosa Partners I.
So, then… two “new business” items…
A. Executive Session (to discuss matters concerning the purchase, acquisition, lease transfer, or sale of any real, personal or other property interest pursuant to section 24-6-402(4)(a) of the Colorado Revised Statutes… all regarding the possible purchase of additional land for a new County Facility…
B. Consideration Of Approval Of The Purchase Of Property For The Construction Of A New County Facility
County Commissioner Todd Weaver did not present any of these items, however. He appeared to be gone. Permanently? It wasn’t clear what exactly was going on. But something was going on, because at the end of the meeting, the BOCC approved the initiation of discussions with an outside attorney.
Several people addressed the commissioners on the subject of vacant land purchases — or, alternately, on the subject of collaborating with the Archuleta School District on a joint facility planning effort. Realtor Shelley Low, representing ArenaLabs LLC, made a half-hearted appeal for her client. The BOCC was urged to take their time and carefully consider the ideas that had come from the taxpayers.
But the commissioners came back from their executive session and Commissioner Brown explained why the community input offered during the meeting that afternoon — and at the “community listening event” the previous evening — had failed to influence his decision.
The BOCC then voted to enter into negotiations with Pagosa Partners I for a parcel on Cornerstone Drive in Aspen Village.
Here’s the approximate location of the parcel under negotiation, outlined in blue:
I might mention one more thing. During the BOCC work session Tuesday morning, Commissioner Medina had stated‚ rather forcefully, that she could not support the use of Certificates of Participation (“COPs”) to finance a future building. She argued that the commissioners have an obligation to obtain voter approval for the financing of any new building, and should not use COPs to do an end run around the taxpayers.
I agree with Commissioner Medina. But I can’t recall hearing a commissioner argue against the use of COPs since… I don’t know when?
Read Part Five, tomorrow…