Photo: Archuleta County Public Works Director Mike Torres (right) and County Engineer Ethan Kegley (left) present to the Board of County Commissioners, August 4, 2026.
I generally find that the better I come to know someone, the more I appreciate them.
And as a journalist covering political issues in Archuleta County, the same goes for government leaders.
In this editorial series, I will be quoting numbers presented to the Board of County Commissioners by Public Works Director Mike Torres on August 4, 2026. These numbers have not been independently verified by me. Based on my previous research, the numbers look reasonably accurate.
During recent discussions about a possible request for an Archuleta County Lodging Tax increase on the upcoming November ballot, County Commissioner John Ranson has often stated that he’s “looking for an additional $1 million” to add to the County road maintenance budget.
An increase in the Lodging Tax from the current 1.9% to a possible maximum of 6% could theoretically provide that $1 million, if it were all dedicated to roads.
We can, then, consider the fact that rebuilding just one mile of paved County road now costs more than $1 million.
According to Mr. Torres’ presentation, the County includes about 70 miles of paved roads, and 525 miles of gravel roads. Of that total of 595 miles, about 482 miles is in the County’s hands.
Back in 1998, the BOCC hired Bechtolt Engineering to analyze the Archuleta County road system. The analysis noted that Highway 160, Highway 84, and Highway 151 are maintained by the state and federal governments. I don’t yet have a copy of this analysis, but the cover page shows the County road system as little black lines.
The date of this analysis — 1998 — is important, as will be explained later.
There’s a simple fact that’s been well known, and often discussed, by various County commissioners and Road & Bridge Managers, for 30 years: sales taxes and property taxes in Archuleta County have never provided enough revenue to allow Road & Bridge to fully maintain 482 miles of roads.
The funding shortfall has been especially severe since 2020, when the Board of County Commissioners used Certificates of Participation to create a $20 million debt for a new County jail — after the voters rejected the proposed project, twice.
Much of the debt service funding for the jail has since been diverted from the Road & Bridge budget. As we see from the chart below, the BOCC, in 2019, had allocated $1.4 million in property tax revenues to Road & Bridge… but that amount fell to about $319,000 in 2020.
The 2026 County budget shows $444,000 from property taxes dedicated to Road & Bridge. Less than 1/3 of the amount allocated in 2019.
Meanwhile, the County’s ‘Core Values’ are posted on the commissioner’s meeting room and on the Archuleta County website’s Home Page.
Road maintenance, per se, does not appear in the Values. But ‘shared community goals’ are mentioned.
We’re going to be talking about ‘shared goals’. Especially, the ‘shared’ part of that concept.
When the County surveyed local taxpayers in 2025, several of the questions were about the County’s published “Core Values”…
…including this question:
How well do you believe the County is living up to its Value of Accountability?
79% of the respondents said the County “needs improvement”. Only 1% thought the County “exceeds expectations”.
If this were a 3rd grade student’s report card, we would hardly expect that student to be promoted to 4th grade.
One of the “least worse” grades, however, was for the County’s Value of Service, and one of the most-talked-about services is maintenance of the community’s road system.
A seriously underfunded service, apparently… to judge by a presentation by County Public Works Director Mike Torres at the BOCC’s Tuesday, August 4 work session. The presentation was illustrated in a professional manner with 30 PowerPoint slides.
As you might guess from this opening slide, the discussion focused largely on two particularly important definitions:
Primary Roads
Secondary Roads
So let’s look at those definitions.
Archuleta County’s Primary Roads are ‘arterials’, ‘collectors’ and ‘access’ roads so designated in 2004 by the BOCC. Mr. Torres did not explain, last week, why these particular roads are ‘Primary’ although we must assume that the BOCC, in 2004, had some criteria for designating these roads — and not other County roads — as ‘Primary’.
ARTERIALS
CR 500 (Trujillo Rd)
CR 600 (Piedra Rd) – Hwy 160 to FS boundary
COLLECTORS
Buttress Ave – S Pagosa Blvd to Cascade Ave
Cascade Ave
CR 119 (Light Plant Rd)
CR 335 (Lower Blanco Rd)
CR 359 (Coyote Park Rd)
CR 700 (Cat Creek Rd) – Hwy 160 to Orange Ct
Meadows Dr
Mission Dr
N Pagosa Blvd
Park Ave – N Pagosa Bivd to Carlee Pl
Pinon Causeway
S Pagosa Blvd
Trails Blvd – Hwy 160 to Ranger Park Dr
Vista Blvd
AGRICULTURAL ACCESS
CR 391 (Edith Rd)
CR 542 (Montezuma Rd)
CR 551 (Juanita Rd)
CR 700 (Cat Creek Rd) – Orange Ct to CR 500
RECREATIONAL ACCESS
CR 113 (Fawn Gulch Rd)
CR 146 (Turkey Springs Rd)
CR 166 (First Fork Rd)
CR 200 (Snowball Rd)
CR 302 (Mill Creek Rd)
CR 326 (Blanco Basin Rd)
CR 382 (Upper Navajo Rd) – to FS 731 Price Lakes Rd
CR 400 (Fourmile Rd)
CR 982 (entrance to Navajo State Park)
CR 988 (entrance to Navajo State Park) – South of Hwy 151
Eight Mile Mesa Rd
What’s essential to understand, at this point in time, is that County Road & Bridge is still designating these roads as ‘Primary’. That is to say, “Accepted for regular County-funded maintenance.”
All other public roads in the County (outside of the Pagosa Springs town limits) are thus designated ‘Secondary’. That is to say, “NOT accepted for regular County-funded maintenance.”
Some of the public roads are maintained by independently-governed metro districts and HOAs. More about that later, because it’s important to this discussion.
Private roads also exist, and are solely the responsibility of the owners, for maintenance.
To my knowledge, no new public roads have been built in the unincorporated county since 2004. No doubt a good thing, right?
Read Part Two… tomorrow…