My occupation is assistant storyteller.
— Actor Harrison Ford
Acting — which is, after all, a form of storytelling — typically occurs in a collaborative atmosphere. A group of people get together and agree to work collaboratively to tell a story. In the case of movie making, the group can be extremely large; hundreds of people.
The stories thus created are not “true stories”. That’s why we need actors who can pretend to be someone they are not — as actor Harrison has done so adequately throughout his long career, working collaboratively with his fellow actors.
Journalism is a different form of storytelling, which is presumed — by some people — to be an attempt to tell stories that are “true”. But lately, questions have arisen in the minds of many, about whether journalists are consistently “spinning” the truth to serve this or that agenda. I would have to agree, that this sometimes happens. But I believe that journalists generally make an effort to “tell the truth” as they see it and hear it.
In Part One and Part Two pf this editorial series, I quoted some comments made by actor Harrison Ford in a Variety magazine interview with Angelique Jackson, published on July 30. In the interview, he spoke mostly about his long acting career, but near the end of the interview, Ms. Jackson asked his thoughts about current U.S. politics. He responded…
…But currently the issue is not who we are, but that we’re not who we used to be, because we’ve been purposefully disaggregated into serviceable political units. And that has caused the middle to become frayed and tenuous, and the middle is where we belong. Not because it’s banal and safe, but because it’s fair. Compromise is fair and honest.
Now, because we’ve been disaggregated in this way, we’re having a hard time finding commonality. But if you look at the economy, you’ll figure out where the commonality is — it’s where it always was.
Rich get richer, and poor get poorer. And that ain’t exactly right.
I assume the quotes were accurate, in the sense that Mr. Ford actually said those words. Whether his comments are an accurate description of U.S. politics in 2025, is less obvious.
Has “the middle” — the fair and honest middle, where we belong — become frayed and tenuous? Because we’ve been “purposefully disaggregated into serviceable political units”?
The Pagosa Area Water and Sanitation District (PAWSD) has been in the news lately, related to an ongoing lawsuit initiated by the PAWSD board of directors late last year. In 2015, PAWSD signed a three-way agreement with the Colorado Water Conservation Board and San Juan Water Conservancy District (SJWCD), that appears to give PAWSD the right to sell the 660-acre Running Iron Ranch “at its sole discretion”. When PAWSD received two unsolicited offers to purchase the Ranch last fall, and expressed an interest in selling the Ranch, SJWCD — which holds an 11% interest in the Ranch — announced its intention to make “every effort” to prevent any sale.
The sale would potentially relieve PAWSD customers of well over $10 million in debt payments. The case is currently in District court.
Disclosure: I serve as a volunteer on the PAWSD board, but this editorial reflects only my own opinions and not necessarily the opinions of the PAWSD board or staff.
That’s not the only controversy facing the PAWSD board this year. The board recently increased the monthly ‘Affordable Housing’ surcharges collected from water and wastewater customers. The surcharges are meant to cover a growing number of workforce housing projects that receive “fee waivers” from PAWSD, when their projects are restricted to lower-income households. Colorado law allows local governments to waive fees for “affordable housing” — one of the only types of waivers allowed by law. PAWSD has been waiving such fees since 2020, when the surcharges were originally put in place.
Certain customers have protested the surcharge as misguided, unfair, or perhaps even illegal, and a few customers have gone so far as deducting the amounts —$1.87 for water customers, and $3.57 for sewer customers — when they pay their bills. This has caused PAWSD to add “late charges” to those bills, according to District policy, and could potentially result in these customers having their water shut off.
This issue will likely be on the PAWSD board meeting agenda on August 14.
It’s reasonably obvious to some of us, that the rich will be getting richer and the poor will be getting poorer, in light of the ‘One Big Beautiful Bill’ signed into law last month. What’s less obvious is how the changes, happening in Washington DC, will affect people’s lives in rural resort towns like Pagosa Springs.
Will state and local governments step up to try and fill the gaps left by reduced federal subsidies? Will lower taxes on the wealthy at the federal level, ultimately result in higher fees and taxes, locally?
Here again is a sample of the complaints that customers have expressed concerning the surcharges:
I want to express my disappointment in the Affordable Housing water surcharges. Prices rise, inflation rises and your board arbitrarily imposes extra charges that go to who knows what, controlled by who knows whom. I think these charges are wrong, and even if I agreed, I would want to know there is legitimate oversight to their use…
We can understand people feeling disappointed about increased costs on their water bills and sewer bills, and electric bills, and gas bills, and property tax bills. But none of these increases are “arbitrary”. They are established by elected and appointed officials who — in most cases — take their fiduciary duties very seriously. The price increases reflect the inflation in labor costs, housing costs, raw materials costs, unfunded government mandates, and increased corporate profits.
In the case of the Affordable Housing surcharges, the PAWSD board decided many years ago that we are struggling with a housing crisis in Archuleta County, and that waiving fees for certain types of housing will, in the end, benefit everyone in the community.
Now, because we’ve been disaggregated in this way, we’re having a hard time finding commonality. But if you look at the economy, you’ll figure out where the commonality is — it’s where it always was.
It’s quite feasible for the PAWSD board to eliminate the Affordable Housing surcharges, while still helping to subsidize workforce housing. This would divert revenues from other District services.
Or the PAWSD board could cease waiving building fees, and make it more difficult for workforce housing to “pencil” in Pagosa Springs. I suspect everyone knows this would have a basically negative effect on the local economy.
Or we can figure out “where the commonality is” and ask customers to support a healthier local economy, with a few dollars per month.
It seems to me, the main question is: “Are we a community that depends upon one another, and that helps one another… or are we self-centered individuals, just looking out for ourselves?”