I pulled into Nazareth, was feelin’ about half past dead.
I just need some place where I can lay my head.
“Hey, mister, can you tell me where a man might find a bed?”
He just grinned and shook my hand, and “No” was all he said.
Take a load off Fanny, take a load for free
Take a load off Fanny, and… and… and…
You put the load right on me.
— ‘The Weight’, by The Band, 1968.
Some members of the Pagosa Springs Area Tourism Board expressed dismay, at their July 21, 2021, meeting, that the Town Planning Commission would make recommendations about re-directing a portion of the annual Lodgers Tax revenues to address the worsening housing crisis in Archuleta County.
How was it within the purview of a Planning Commission, certain Tourism Board members asked, to make recommendations for addressing a serious community problem… with money that is supposedly controlled by the Tourism Board, and is intended to be used only for increasing tourism?
Not all of the Tourism Board felt insulted, however. A few other members suggested that, considering the crisis, the Tourism Board might actually endorse the Town Planning Commission’s recommendation… that the Tourism Board and staff have done a great job of attracting tourists, and maybe it’s a good time to switch things up a little, and help the workers who actually keep the tourism economy functioning.
Considering the worsening situation, on the housing side of the equation.
And maybe, an ‘over-capacity’ situation on the tourism side of the equation.
As of 2022, working families are pretty much entirely outside the equation, in terms of having any influence or power. This lack of influence and power has never been so well illustrated as by the recent decision by the Springs Resort management to evict 16 families from an apartment complex on Eaton Drive, in the dead of winter.
One can easily feel that the proper motto of Pagosa Springs is not “Refreshingly Authentic” but rather “Tourism Über Alles”.
The members of the Pagosa Springs Area Tourism Board are appointed volunteers and, typically, they’re folks with a vested interest in the tourism industry… or in the Pagosa real estate industry, which is driven largely by tourists, vacation rental investors, and retirees.
Which is to say, the Tourism Board, taken as a whole, has a somewhat biased view of what ‘economic health’ means.
The Town Planning Commission, meanwhile, is also composed of appointed volunteers, but perhaps takes a wider view of the community’s best interests than the Tourism Board does.
Three years ago, the Town Council adopted a plan calling for the development of a significant, dedicated funding stream to address the workforce housing crisis. Three years later, the Town still has no meaningful, dedicated funding stream. When the elected leaders can’t find the political will to address this type of crisis, then a group of citizens are likely to step up and petition a solution onto the ballot, for the voters to consider.
On Friday, in Part Three of this editorial series, I suggested that “company housing” — such as the projects recently undertaken by the Springs Resort management, buying up properties and converting them into housing for Springs Resort employees, while requesting and obtaining taxpayer subsidies from the Town and County — is an double edged sword. Yes, in a sense, it can seem to address the housing crisis, but it threatens to make Pagosa Springs into a “company town”… where you cannot find or retain suitable housing unless you maintain a job with whatever employer owns your apartment building.
The eviction of 16 families from the Eaton Drive apartment complex, in the middle of winter, illustrates that danger. Even if it were not the middle of winter, we have been told that Springs Resort employees will have first claim on the renovated apartments, once the (needed?) repairs are completed.
How many of those 16 evicted families will be able to find other housing accommodations, that they can afford? How many of those 16 families, who are not employed by the Springs Resort, will be forced to leave behind their current jobs and move to a more family-friendly community?
How many Pagosa business owners and public service entities — who are not the Springs Resort — will find themselves even more desperate for employees than they already are?
Some of my friends — people whom I respect — feel that our local governments have no mandate to address this crisis. Some argue that we should not ask the tourism industry to step up and help pay for solutions to a serious problem the tourism industry has largely brought upon us.
Some of my friends believe that businesses like the Springs Resort will step up and solve the housing crisis. But we have to wonder what such a “solution” would look like.
Here, for example, is a statement published in last week’s editorial written by Terri House, publisher of the weekly Pagosa Springs SUN. Ms. House was quoting responses to an exclusive survey of business owners, conducted by the Pagosa Springs Community Development Corporation (CDC), asking their impressions of Ballot Question A… a citizens initiative that will appear on the Town’s April 5 ballot:
A sharp decline in tourism. Loss of jobs. Businesses closing. My two downtown STRs will not get as much occupancy, causing me to consider selling. I feel very at risk as a property and business owner in town not being able to vote. I want to vote in town issues. It is only fair. It is the reason many significant projects don’t come to fruition and town is stifled.
I cannot explain why SUN editor Terri House would publish two editorials, on consecutive weeks, quoting from an exclusive survey that apparently involved no working families or retirees.
One might think Ms. House would want to also obtain quotes from the 16 working families being evicted by the Springs Resort management in the middle of winter.