The Crested Butte News Serving the Gunnison Valley since 1999
Focus on environment, economy
The two candidates vying for the District Three Board of County Commissioner’s seat squared off on Sunday, October 17 at the Crested Butte News Candidates’ Forum, held at the Crested Butte Center for the Arts.
Incumbent Democrat Jim Starr, who took office in 1999, and his Republican challenger, Phil Chamberland, answered questions on disparate topics for over an hour. But nearly all of the questions—whether they were about ranching, Snodgrass or county policy—had roots in the environment or economy.
While some people in the valley might view the molybdenum deposits in Mt. Emmons as a potential source of revenue and a way out of economic hardship locally, Chamberland was the first to be pinned down on his views of the mine being proposed outside Crested Butte.
Crested Butte resident Harvey Castro asked Chamberland why he thought he was being targeted as a pro-mine candidate.
Chamberland said, “I think that anybody here would agree that looking up at the table here if they [Thompson Creek] were going to pick somebody that they want as county commissioner that would be me. I understand that. The reason for that is because I am willing to suggest that we should at least have due process. Anybody in here will think that somebody is not afforded due process, I would not want to see you in front of the county commissioners with a project of your own. We need to have due process. It doesn’t mean we sit there and let them have it. I’m petrified of what can happen if that [mine] occurs. We need to find some way to get Mt. Emmons and the moly threat out of our community.
Starr asked for a chance to respond to the concerns about the Mt. Emmons Project. He said, “Mt. Emmons project is a project that has concerned folks in this valley for almost 30 years. These kinds of tough issues are about the people who live here. They’re also about the economy; mining is a boom/bust economy—we can’t get around that…It’s also about protection for the environment. My question is, does Crested Butte want to be known as the next Leadville, where there’s another moly mine? The answer is no, it would be very detrimental.
Sue Navy asked: In 1997, Gunnison County voters approved the creation of the Gunnison Valley Land Preservation Fund to protect open space, habitat and ranchlands and to create trails. The Fund’s term will sunset in 2013 unless voters reauthorize it in 2012. Will you support the reauthorization of this fund in 2012?
Starr: Yes I will, and I will because even though times are very difficult, this is a tax in place. This is a tax that needs to be continued. The fact is that our open spaces are not only incredibly important to our economy, because we’re a tourist-based economy in large part, but also because we need to keep the ranching heritage here in the Gunnison Valley.
Chamberland: Pretty much the same thing—any time you’re willing to and able to let the public decide is a good thing. So I don’t see why I wouldn’t support at least allowing it to go to the voters. Every time we have done research and studies on why people come to our state and our communities, trails show way up there. So I believe that as amenities to bring people in to help us all live a better life the trails are in the forefront of that.
Crested Butte Mountain Resort Chief operating officer Ken Stone asked about future funding of the Rural Transportation Authority, saying “I think most people, if they follow it at all, know that the RTA is functioning at a low level of funds due to taxes. This has a split tax base where the southern half of Gunnison County pays less than the north end of the valley and I’m wondering, would you support bringing those taxes up to match or how would you approach that deficit that we have right now? How would you approach the deficit?”
Starr: This year the RTA discussed at length whether we should bring forth a question to the voters about whether or not we should equalize that tax. One was bringing it to parity and the other was to raise the tax so it would be a higher tax for each end of the valley. We very much need those incomes.
Chamberland: Certainly I would support taking it to the voters and let them decide. The issue would be if you could convince the voters at the southern end of the valley that it would be worth their investment to benefit what they perceive as this end of the valley. That’s a tough issue. It’s tough time. A lot of people are fed up with taxes and that’s why you have things like 60, 61 and 101 being thrown at us.
Scott Wimmer asked: “What would be different if you were elected?”
Chamberland: I would start by trying to set up a new tone from the top down—an attitude of we’re here to help, we’re here to take input. My perspective is that the people of Gunnison County are the employers and they employ the BOCC to do a job for them. I will strive to make it simpler for businesses and people to thrive in this community. We have all the accents and we should be thriving… We have been pretty stagnant around here, rowing around in circles. We all need to get our oars together.
Starr: I’ve heard a lot about this new tone but I haven’t heard a lot of specifics about it. I don’t understand why folks think we need a new tone. Gunnison County is working better—with the municipalities, with the business leaders in the community, with everyone involved in pulling these communities together—now than it has in the last 20 to 30 years. I think one difference would be that there would be a lot more motorized recreation in this county if Phil got elected. That’s not all bad, it’s just a reality. Another difference would be that there would be a lot of on-the-job training required.
Jim Ruthven was a panelist during an earlier debate between the two candidates and attended the Crested Butte News forum to ask Starr about a statement that he supported Snodgrass. “I wonder how you reconcile that with the position of neutrality the county commissioners took?”
Starr: Integrity of the process. We were asked as commissioners to weigh in on that issue when it was already a site-specific plan before the Forest Service… It wouldn’t have been appropriate—as we’ve said all along and the Forest Service has known all along—to weigh in on that issue. It was a plan already in front of them. That’s the difference. While I personally thought that Snodgrass could go forward under the compromise plan reached a few years ago, we would not have been correct to weigh in as a board of county commissioners on that issue.
Chamberland: I think that the Board of County Commissioners did weigh in on it when they approved the comprehensive plan that shows Snodgrass Light as part of future of Gunnison County. I don’t see why they would have compromised themselves by at least stating that in a letter.
Chamber of Commerce director Richard Bond said, “Both of you have talked about the need to diversify jobs. If elected would you work for the establishment of a financially strong, professionally managed economic development function to create new industry and jobs?
Chamberland: Yes.
Starr: I would but I think it would have to be different than our previous attempts… We need to support existing businesses. Talk about what people value in the community and what could bring more people here. We’ve got to build our existing businesses. Then we need to sit down and talk about what we value in this community and what would bring more employees here.
But Bond wanted to know, “Why hasn’t that happened yet?”
Starr: Because we’ve been trying to focus on building the things we have. We needed to create jobs here in the short term. Just starting two new projects here, with the jail and public works facility—those will employ 40 local people here year-round. We need to start working on longer-term goals.
Chamberland: I think that we haven’t focused enough on private-sector jobs, plain and simple. I understand that we will have private companies working on public projects. Eventually if we don’t boost up private-sector jobs there won’t be enough taxes and money to go after the public-sector stuff that we’re going after. That’s the bottom line. I think that we need to sit down and focus on how we create that and use the resources we have.
State Representative Kathleen Curry has her roots in ranching and wanted to know what the candidates would do to support the industry. And while some innovative ideas were given by both candidates, both said they would do whatever is necessary to keep agriculture alive in Gunnison County.
A Candidates’ Forum wouldn’t be complete without a question regarding the county’s controversial linkage fee, asked this year by Harvey Castro. “One of the more contentious fees that comes up biannually when the commissioner races come up is the Linkage Fee for affordable housing. Suppose we were to just do away with that?
Starr: Linkage fee was created out of a couple of different studies—housing needs assessment and impact fee study. The reason the fee is tied to the construction of new housing because it’s been clearly shown that constructing new housing raises the need for workforce housing to be developed. So you try to create a linkage between the need that is created and addressing that need. Our linkage fee does that.
Chamberland: I think we need to work in a fashion that helps create housing that is affordable for housing for everyone. I don’t know if the linkage fee does that. I don’t know if our trying to manipulate the market in the ways we have been is effective. The bottom line in Crested Butte is that the average medium home price has gone up 222 percent while, in Gunnison it went up 78 percent. But I think we need to look at different ways to affect workforce housing.
The last day to vote is Tuesday, November 2. You can listen to a full recording of the debate at www.crestedbuttenews.com before you cast a ballot. See story on the House District 61 race on page 14.
