The Crested Butte News Serving the Gunnison Valley since 1999
Three recent local political moves this week came as no surprise, but they all provided reasons to possibly tweak us all. They did me. One will go to the voters, another to the bureaucratic process and the third apparently to court. It was a tweakadelic week in the local public realm.
The Crested Butte town council on Monday not surprisingly voted 5-2 to put a second home tax on the November ballot. If approved by voters, the tax will hit second homeowners with houses in the town limits, and the amount will be based on the size of their house. I’ll go out on a limb and predict most, but not all, second homeowners will be able to easily pay the annual tax that will range from $1,400 to $3,400.
But I’ll disagree with the mayor who is leading this charge and argue there were a few good reasons to not put that idea on this year’s ballot. An initial outcry from voting citizens after the idea of the second home tax was floated suggested the better way would be to dig deep into the town budget, both short-term and long-range to find cost savings and other potential revenue sources. To a person, the seven town councilmembers heartily embraced the petitioner’s idea of a citizen’s budget advisory committee. Town will solicit applications for those interested in such a position immediately and be appointing some folks at the next council meeting on September 8.
Look, I think Crested Butte and probably every government entity is looking at a horizon with financial red flags given rising costs for things like asphalt for roads, maintenance for older infrastructure and construction for new projects — the things governments do. But Crested Butte isn’t going to go bankrupt next year. Over the years, it has creatively set itself up to avoid financial disaster. The town has millions of dollars in reserves. That’s not Mark Walter money, but it is still millions. There is more than $7 million in “unassigned fund reserves” in the Crested Butte General Fund. Almost $8 million in reserves is stacked up in other town funds but those are more limited. For example, $2.7 million is in the open space fund and $3.8 million in the capital fund. Those dollars are committed to specific areas of town but not allocated specifically to any particular project.
Given that deep eight-figure savings account, taking the time to let the citizens committee determine what they might find and recommend, along with exploring other out-of-the-box ideas like a sales tax premium that seemed brushed aside as being too out-of-the-box, makes sense. Honestly, I don’t think there’s a lot of fat in the town budget but while not a numbers guy, I could see places to trim and things to adjust. It’s not just about revenue. The initial vacant home tax conversation certainly got the community and a core of financial-oriented citizens engaged. So why not let them do the work that the council just enthusiastically encouraged before an election is finished, not after, as this one will be. Give voters all the new and interesting information before they cast a ballot.
One of my initial tweaks with this tax proposal that was reinforced this week is that many councilmembers chant the mantra that Crested Butte is different from other resort towns. It is. And part of the difference is a crusty attitude of acceptance and parity among the three legs of the economic stool (locals, tourists, second homeowners). Most local second homeowners chose CB because they love, appreciate and respect the community and our sometimes-weird mountain town culture. Most have fallen into the CB dream and see it as a real community that accepts them as people and not as a piggy bank. Putting this on the ballot challenges that part of the unwritten contract we all appreciate.
I’m sure I’ll write more about all this as we move closer to the election. But as one councilmember on Monday used the metaphor of the Townie Takeover as a reason this tax deepens community, to me it looks like the council is sending the message that second homeowners can maybe (and maybe not) watch the bikes circle the Third and Elk intersection but they can’t join in unless they pay extra. That doesn’t seem right.
Another no surprise political decision this week was another split vote, this time with the county commissioners. There are some really good and interesting elements in the Lacy-Dow subdivision proposal for the Lower Verzuh Ranch, but who will argue that if approved, it won’t have a major impact on the look, feel and population of the North Valley? By voting to send it through to the Preliminary Plan phase, county commissioners Liz Smith and Jonathan Houck did not guarantee any approved development. There are a lot of serious issues to work out and that is expected to take up to a year, which is months before the projected end of the corridor plan. To me, the bigger picture is what that decision does to the legitimacy of the Corridor Plan running from Gunnison to Mt. Crested Butte.
This is one of a few big parcels of developable land left in the North Valley and to push it on its way without taking the time to consider the big picture corridor first, is a questionable move. While there are certain legal timelines in place for the bureaucratic process once an application is accepted, the development team did say the county should take the time it needs to work out its thought process and consider ramifications. Okay then. Take them up on the generous offer and say we as a community will first look at how we want the North Valley to grow and thanks for giving us a glimpse at what could be coming down the train tracks. It can definitely shape how much of a big city or small town we want to be as a community. Isn’t that the crux points the community should determine before pushing new major developments forward on the momentum track?
Again, there are some good things in this Lower Verzuh proposal, and it could all still go through, or be rejected, but having the corridor plan in place first makes the most common sense. Commissioner Laura Pucket Daniels fought Tuesday against moving it along, not so much because of the corridor plan timing per se, but she indicated she didn’t find the application compatible with the area’s character, felt the density was too much, and impacts did not have mitigation measures identified. In other words, issues associated with a corridor plan.
And finally, to the courts we go…or at least the Crested Butte South Property Owner’s Association and the Gunnison County Library District go…again. I’ve told people it seems to me this is a scuffle of personalities over policies. Of course, both sides claim they have policy on their side. Both sides claim they want the library built. Both sides say the three-story apartment complex isn’t on the horizon in the near future. Both sides claim they are simply following the rules.
The on again, off again maneuvering would be almost silly chest measuring if it wasn’t getting so expensive. Both sides are using pricey Front Range lawyers. The amount of taxpayer dollars going to attorneys instead of books is now into the six figures. That tweaks me. And frankly, it should tweak you.
Looking at where this kerfuffle is, and it is scheduled for a long day in district court on August 26, could everyone perhaps put aside personality and the past animosity, find a neutral mediator and spend a few hours listening? Then compromising? And then saving a ton of money and providing a good community amenity in a main population center? Aside from the housing element hanging out there, does anyone expect major pitfalls with the library building? Doubt it.
But my guess is it’ll all be left up to the judge — and you never know which way that goes — except that it won’t be cheap.
Anyway, I really do appreciate all of our public officials and our public processes. I genuinely like every single person involved in the three situations I just mentioned — but man, it can all be so tweakadelic sometimes. And this was one of those weeks.
— Mark Reaman
