County talks roads and tax issue with CB South reps

“We can’t promise you anything”

By Katherine Nettles

Gunnison County commissioner Laura Puckett Daniels and public works director Martin Schmidt presented information to the CB South Property Owner’s Association (POA) last week at the POA office about the county’s proposed road and bridge fund ballot issue for the fall. The proposed .5% sales tax would help fund road and bridges across all county-owned roads and infrastructure, the budget for which is otherwise constrained by state statutes and determined by 1990s-era funding structures. But the message was clear that CB South roads would not necessarily be impacted by more county road funds.

Schmidt presented the county’s current challenge of underfunded road and bridge funds and its deteriorating road conditions. The county hired consulting firm KLJ to take a pavement condition index for all county roads and bridges last year and create a deferred maintenance cost plan to address priority areas; KLJ determined the county has more than $38M in deferred maintenance.

POA board members asked if any roads in CB South were on the shortlist of projects the county would tackle if they did get a ballot measure passed. Schmidt said likely not, because CB South roads are not county-owned, except for Upper and Lower Allen Road. This kicked off a discussion about the issue of who is responsible for roads in CB South.

“They are owned by the public,” explained Schmidt, meaning they can be accessed freely by the public but have no actual entity responsible for them. He said there are three types of roads: private, public roads not in the jurisdiction of government and public roads “deeded to the public and accepted for maintenance by a special district, a municipality or a government agency.”

Schmidt said CB South roads are in the middle category. “They were all deeded to the public but never given to the county,” he continued. Historically, the county had maintained the roads, but in recent years allocated some funding to the CB South Metro District and the Metro District handles maintenance.

POA board members asked if the county might be interested in accepting CB South roads, and Puckett Daniels said the county is already underfunded for the roads they have and costs have gone up on materials. With limited funding streams, she said, “Not only is it not advantageous to the county to accept more roads, but it would be a detriment to everyone that’s involved.”

Schmidt added that regarding Highway Users Tax Funds (HUTF), “Pretty much everything north of Almont, we spend 100% of our HUTF revenue removing snow.”

POA board president Kevin Dietz asked if the county planned to use any potential funds from a .5% sales tax on CB South roads.

“We can’t promise you anything,” Pucket Daniels said.
“But there is nothing you do in Gunnison County that doesn’t impact a county road,” said Schmidt. “You can’t leave [CB South] without driving on Cement Creek Road; you can’t go skiing without driving on Gothic Road. You can’t go over Kebler or Cottonwood without being on a county road.”

Board member Liz Jordan said she felt the county should offer incentives of more road maintenance and/or improvements to CB South residents if the ballot measure goes forward.

Puckett Daniels said she appreciated the input from CB South representatives and said the board of commissioners ultimately decides how to spend their road and bridge funds. She acknowledged the conundrum involved in CB South roadway maintenance and agreed it would be helpful to hold more meetings with the POA board and membership going forward.