Bringing the two sides of the Snodgrass debate together…later

“Let’s see what happens at the meeting of September 27…”

At least one county commissioner is making a push to bring the proponents and opponents of ski lifts on Snodgrass Mountain together to settle differences and find some common ground. The Forest Service recently rejected a request by the ski area to add lifts to the mountain, and that has caused some division within the community.

“It’s been a difficult issue to grapple with, especially with a lot of people thinking the commissioners should have weighed in on the issue,” commissioner Jim Starr said at the September 14 county commissioner meeting. “It’s caused a lot of frustration. It’s caused me a lot of frustration.”
So Starr contacted Gail Digate and Mark Ewing of Leadership Learning Systems to possibly facilitate a community process that would bring together representatives of both sides of the issue. The ultimate goal would be to find a consensus on how to move forward in the future over the issue.
“It’s not a move to go into pre-NEPA or to change our position of neutrality over the issue,” explained Starr. NEPA refers to the process through which environmental impacts of projects must be considered, according to the National Environmental Policy Act.
“We have a potential role in the permitting process so we can’t weigh in,” continued Starr. “It could be considered prejudging the issue on our part so we have had to stay neutral. But there is still some angst over the issue within the community and I thought it would be good to have six or eight stakeholders have a small facilitated process to at least talk about the issue.”
Starr pointed out that Crested Butte Mountain Resort and Forest Service supervisor Charlie Richmond would be meeting to discuss the Snodgrass issue and direction on Monday, September 27. “The commissioners wouldn’t even make a decision to continue pursuing this facilitated process until after that meeting,” he said. “But I’ve talked to representatives of CBMR, [Crested Butte Mountain Resort], Charlie Richmond, FOSM [Friends of Snodgrass Mountain] and CLS [Coalition for Lifts on Snodgrass] and they have all said that depending on the outcome of the meeting on the 27th, this could be a good way to move forward.”
Digate outlined the so-called “conciliation process” that might be used. She said it helps people on both sides examine their assumptions. It brings together both sides to see what their shared interests are and it identifies the potential for the next steps.
“It sets out a framework for conversation,” Digate explained. “It helps clarify the situation. It generates alternatives and it creates a decision making process. With high stakes decisions, coming to consensus is the most important part.”
Digate emphasized the need for neutral facilitators to mediate the process. She emphasized the commitment needed for any stakeholders who participate, and commitment needed to come in terms of time and money. She noted that an ideal group size would be between 12 and 15 people, and each stakeholder group would be contributing a couple of thousand dollars to the process “so that they would have skin in the game.”
“The process can be messy,” Digate admitted. “It can be very stressful and very challenging. Every voice needs to be heard and all of the relevant information needs to be on the table. A successful outcome depends on authenticity, honesty, transparency and accountability.”
Ewing added, “The process itself asks and answers what the ultimate success is for the process.”
“If there is not a shift within the group members from advocacy, it is more difficult to go through the process,” Digate said. “That’s where it can get messy.”
When asked why both sides of the issue would agree to the process when one side might feel it has an advantage, Digate said the big picture had to be considered.
“It is a chance to reduce the sense of divisiveness,” she said. “There is a sense of rebuilding the community. It is at least a genuine effort to decrease the divisiveness.”
“The desire from my point of view is the desire to rekindle the sense of community,” said Starr. “It isn’t totally gone but the issue has been taxing. I start to see hints of this issue becoming an influence in other areas where we have all worked together in the past. It’s not quite a wedge but that sense of community is more difficult these days.”
Digate said the outcomes and process could be applied to other issues as well. “There is a long term strategic benefit.”
CBMR chief operating officer Ken Stone said he felt it was “premature to go too far down this road. We’re still in the Forest Service process,” he said. “Charlie was given direction to help give us direction. Right now, Snodgrass is still in our ski area permit. If that changes, the conciliation would change. We want to wait and see how the meeting on September 27 goes before we commit to something like this. If the Forest Service takes Snodgrass out of the permit it could come down to legal action. We may need to protect our interests. We just don’t know where we are yet.
“But while there are a lot of unknowns at this point, we want to encourage this dialogue with the community,” Stone continued. “We are interested in bringing the community together to make mutual beneficial decisions.”
Starr concluded the meeting topic by saying the commissioners should revisit the topic next month after the ski resort meets with the Forest Service. “Let’s put this on hold a few weeks and revisit it in October,” he said.
Commissioners Hap Channell and Paula Swenson agreed with that conclusion.