Photo: The new County offices at the corner of Talisman and Village Drive.
Those of us following the national news are aware of turmoil taking place in certain American cities, as protesters react to ongoing enforcement actions by the federal government. Whether the policies the federal government is enforcing are lawful, or unlawful, is open to debate.
Up here in the mountains, things are still relatively peaceful. Perhaps things will stay that way?
One local issue that has the potential to generate controversy: a proposed $20 million Archuleta County administration building currently in the planning stages.
Our three County Commissioners — Veronica Medina, Warren Brown and John Ranson — are scheduled to discuss this planned project at their Tuesday work session, this morning at 8:30am.
Many other (less controversial) issues are also on the work session agenda, for discussion.
- IT Report – Gabe Cersonsky
- Discussion of Network Expansion at the Archuleta County Fairgrounds – Gabe Ceronsky
- Discussion Regarding Tourism Budget – Jennifer Green
- Discussion Regarding Cloman Park Frisbee Golf Course & Current Projects – Dave Belina
- Community Foundation – Archuleta Fund – Marcy Mitchell
- Discussion to Move Forward with a Micro-Transit Application – Andrew Mylroie
- Discussion of Proposed Design Plans for the Future County Administration Building
- Agenda Review
- Admin Report
- Other Items of Mutual Interest
The work session will be followed, in the afternoon, by the BOCC’s regular business meeting, at 1:30pm. Often, the topics discussed during the morning work session are subject to final decisions at the afternoon meeting. In such cases, the more casual work session serves as an opportunity for the commissioners to question staff at length, and to share their (sometimes differing) opinions with each another.
Unlike the work session agenda, the regular meeting agenda packet often includes specific documentation about the matter at hand.
In the case of the proposed “Future County Administration Building” discussion, we are left somewhat in the dark. Neither the work session agenda nor the regular meeting agenda give even a hint about what particular issues will be discussed, regarding the proposed $20 million building.
It’s common for the BOCC regular agenda to include helpful links to additional information, so the public can more fully understand the details of these sometimes-complicated decisions. For example, the BOCC will be discussing, at their regular 1:30 meeting, the following item:
NEW BUSINESS
…B. Consideration of Resolution 2025-____ Appropriating Additional Sums of Money to Defray Expenses in Excess of Amounts Budgeted in the Combined Dispatch Fund
This resolution increases the 2025 appropriation for the Combined Dispatch Fund for the purchase of AXS Upgrade Equipment in an amount not to exceed $460,000.
Presenter: Cathleen Giovannini, County Attorney
LINK: Resolution 2025-__ appropriating additional sums of money cdc fund
As we note, the equipment used by the Dispatch Center, to answer your 911 call, is not simply an ordinary phone. Just the “Upgrade Equipment” costs $460,000. Part of the reason that this equipment is so costly is, of course, that it’s being sold to a government with a $52 million budget, collected from a community of 14,000 people. So companies can charge a higher price than normal.
The same situation goes for new government buildings. They can easily cost twice as much as what a private business would pay for the same building.
I can’t say, this morning, what type of conversation will take place at the work session or the regular meeting, concerning the Administration Building. The agendas don’t provide any detailed information for the public to review in advance.
The potential issues are significant.
For one, the BOCC has indicated their intention of gathering public testimony and discussion before moving ahead with the project.
But we might wonder why that public participation has not already happened? Considering that the BOCC has already purchased a $2 million parcel in Aspen Village, and has already approved (by a 2-to-1 vote) a $314,000 expenditure for design and engineering for the future building?
Does the community even want this building? Maybe, maybe not. There’s one good way to find out. (More about that in a moment.)
Another potential issue: How big should this building be? The BOCC recently leased a 8,000-square-foot office building at the corner of Talisman and Village Drive — the former “Wyndham Building” — to accommodate the County Clerk & Recorder, County Treasurer, County Assessor, DMV, County Elections Office, and the County HR department. The move was precipitated by an arson attack at the old County Courthouse downtown, where these offices were previously located.
This building was not specifically designed to fit government offices, so the departments have had to be a bit creative in their use of the existing layout. One complaint I heard about the new location is that it lacks storage space. In the old Courthouse location, the department offices were smaller, but the building provided plenty of storage.
A quick stroll through the building makes it clear that, as of October 6, not all the space is being used efficiently… yet.
Another potential issue: The County does not have $20 million. Maybe a wealthy donor will contribute the money? Just kidding.
I discussed, in a recent editorial, two possible ways of financing a $20 million building.
A voter approved bond, or a Certificate of Participation (COP). Does the public want to spend $20 million on a new Administration Building? We can easily find out, by putting the project in front of the voters. Commissioner Warren Brown has been clear, that he believes the voters will not approve such a project, but that it should be built anyway. Commissioner Medina has said she will not move ahead with the project without voter approval. Commissioner Ranson has said he wants the project moved to the back burner, and maybe discussed at some point in the future, after other important community needs have been addressed. Roads, for example?
Back on September 16, several members of the public testified at a regular BOCC meeting, encouraging the commissioners to put the brakes on — the financial brakes — and stop spending money on plans for a new Administration Building. Nevertheless, two commissioners — Veronica Medina and Warren Brown — voted to spend $314,000 on design and engineering for a new Administration Building that the BOCC does not have the money to build.
What will be discussed today? I have no idea.
Other interesting things on the regular meeting agenda include a preliminary presentation of the draft 2026 County budget, a proposal to pave the parking lot at the County-owned park at the end of Cloman Park Drive, a discussion about a proposal to have the County government sponsor a July 4th parade, and the possible selection of a new County Manager.
Peaceful changes. Publicly financed.