Tips from those who have done it
Many people make New Year’s resolutions to eat better, drink less or start an exercise program. In case your resolution is to get in shape for the Elk Mountains Grand Traverse—an insane 40-mile ski race that crosses one of Colorado’s most rugged mountain ranges and takes the average competitor about 14 hours to complete—we thought we’d try to give you a little taste of what to expect. Read More »
Another year is behind us and we’ve spent the last few days reminiscing about what we’ve accomplished in 2007. Now it’s time to look forward to what 2008 will likely bring the Gunnison Valley.
The area’s agenda is rather full with several big issues coming to light in 2008 in the towns of Crested Butte, Mt. Crested Butte and Gunnison County.
Specifically, townspeople will continue their dogged defiance of mining plans on Mt. Emmons, also known as Red Lady. U.S. Energy and Kobex Resources have stated they intend to submit their plan of operations to the U.S. Forest Service for the proposed molybdenum mine on Mt. Emmons in the first quarter of 2008. The plan will allow local entities fighting the proposal to get an official look at what these mining companies want to do and how they are proposing to accomplish it.
The year should also bring the maturation of the Red Lady Coalition, which logged its first victory in 2007 but has yet to fully define itself in the public eye. Hopefully, the organization, along with the veteran High Country Citizens’ Alliance, will be able to capitalize on intense civic vigor against the mine proposal that emerged in 2007.
In addition, the town of Crested Butte is expecting to see its first major annexation proposal in 2008 since the Verzuh Annexation almost ten years ago. A pre-annexation application was submitted on behalf of Fairways GH Paradise, LLC and Spann Ranches calling for a 70-acre annexation for mostly residential development located just north of town on Highway 135.
The town has also committed to start re-working some troublesome guidelines administered by the Board of Zoning and Architectural Review, although the new rules won’t likely be finished until 2009.
In Mt. Crested Butte, Crested Butte Mountain Resort (CBMR) has a bevy of plans for the 2008 year, as outlined by reporter Evan Dawson’s story on page 12 of this edition. Most notably, the resort is awaiting a Forest Service decision on its Main Mountain plan in 2008. The resort may also break ground on two new buildings, the Cimarron building in the base area and the Red Lady Lodge at the top of the Red Lady Express chairlift.
This year may also bring the debate over whether CBMR should be allowed to expand onto publicly owned Snodgrass Mountain further into the forefront. CBMR is anticipating a United States Geological Survey decision on a geology study it submitted in 2007, contradicting some of the government’s findings about the stability of Snodgrass Mountain. If the USGS and CBMR agree, the resort will submit expansion plans to the U.S. Forest Service and enter the National Environmental Policy Act process.
At the county level, Gunnison County commissioners have a full slate as well. The county has already launched a review of its regulations for major developments—rules that will govern any ski area expansion onto Snodgrass Mountain and U.S. Energy/ Kobex’s mining plans. With several work sessions planned, those revamped rules may be completed in 2008.
In addition, the county is looking at taking another step forward in providing affordable housing for its residents this year. Commissioners are looking at adopting inclusionary housing requirements, which will obligate developers to set aside portions of their projects for affordable housing.
2008 will bring its fair share of campaigning as well. In addition to the presidential and state races, locally three seats on the Mt. Crested Butte Town Council held by Chris Morgan, Danny D’Aquila and Tom Steuer are up for election in April 2008 and county commissioners Hap Channell and Paula Swenson’s seats are up for election in November.
It’s clear that our officials have their work cut out for them this year. But this workload must be shared across the community—therefore, I hope 2008 will be the year of even more citizen involvement in these important decisions.
Stay tuned and stay involved.
—Aleesha Towns
Red Lady Coalition says withdrawal next step
“This is not an email list you can join—it’s an organization that gets things done,” Red Lady Coalition member Denis Hall recently told a Crested Butte resident who asked to be added to the “alert” email list. Hall explained there was no email list and if he wanted to join, he’d be required to work. Read More »
Coalition presents petition to Forest Service
Although the Red Lady Coalition did not receive a definitive answer from the U.S. Forest Service regarding its petition, the coalition is optimistic the meeting will encourage a more in-depth analysis of any mining proposal submitted to the agency regarding a potential large-scale molybdenum mine on Mt. Emmons. Read More »
Two months ago, the Crested Butte News published a citizen’s letter calling on the Crested Butte/Mt. Crested Butte Chamber of Commerce to respect the will of its membership and take a political stand on the mining proposal on Mt. Emmons.
In a nutshell, some business owners want the Chamber of Commerce to start to represent their interests politically. In response, the Chamber of Commerce is considering doing just that.
This has been a long time coming.
For at least four years, the Chamber of Commerce has been reshaping its mission. It switched to a voluntary membership organization with members paying dues (as opposed to a mandatory group funded through the Business Occupation and Licensing Tax [BOLT]). Around the same time, the Chamber of Commerce shut down its call center business and announced it would start providing traditional member services like business training seminars.
Now, Chamber executive director Christi Matthews says the Chamber of Commerce board is considering dipping its toes deeper into the political waters by taking firm stands on issues like the mine proposal and advocating for local businesses.
On Monday, December 11, Matthews appeared before the Town Council to discuss formalizing the relationship between the Town and the Chamber of Commerce, which has existed for several years, with a service contract.
On its surface, the Chamber’s service contract was intended to establish an agreement between it and the Town for the operation of the Visitor’s Center, which the Chamber of Commerce currently runs. Matthews explained the contract is needed to ensure the Chamber is properly maintaining the Visitor’s Center.
During the discussions, Crested Butte Town Council member Leah Williams very astutely observed that the contract marks a departure from the Town and Chamber’s informal relationship and questioned the Chamber’s new drive to become more of a voice for local businesses.
Matthews explained the Chamber is planning on dividing its budget to reflect its three primary (but somewhat divergent) tasks—maintaining the Visitors Center, hosting special events and acting as an advocate and resource for businesses. The new contract would allow the Chamber to separate Town monies going to pay for the Visitors Center from its newly adopted advocacy mission.
This is where things get weird.
On Monday night it was suggested that the council shouldn’t sign the Chamber’s contract to operate the Visitor’s Center unless the contract included provisions forbidding the Chamber to advocate against Town Council decisions. If signed, the provisions could mean the Chamber couldn’t actively dissent against things like the Town’s sidewalk maintenance ordinance, horizontal zoning and more.
Essentially, the Town Council is now faced with two questions:
• One, is it ethical for BOLT funds to go to a politicized Chamber of Commerce, even if the funds are specifically marked for the Visitor’s Center?
• Two, is it appropriate for the Chamber of Commerce to operate the Visitor’s Center if the organization becomes politically active?
Crested Butte mayor Alan Bernholtz answered no to at least the first question. He said he does not believe the Town should give any funds to an organization that could actively campaign against Town policies—even if it’s in exchange for services rendered.
Williams took a significantly softer stance but basically said the same thing. Williams said she respects the Chamber’s role in representing local business. However, she said she’s concerned about the effects it could have on the Town Council’s ability to protect the welfare and safety of the community. When organizations protest the Town Council’s decisions, Williams said, "then it can be difficult for the Town to stand by its decision."
However, if the Chamber of Commerce board does decide to take a political stand on an issue that’s contrary to the Town, it should give the Town Council reason to pause and reflect—whether it’s on parking issues, zoning or something else.
This conversation is surprising because the Chamber of Commerce has essentially been a political entity for at least two years. Matthews consistently attends Town Council meetings and attempts to point out elements in proposed ordinances that might detract from the health of local businesses.
The Chamber of Commerce is now saying that they may want to take that one step further—by becoming a business advocacy group. This is not foreign territory for Chambers of Commerce—many Colorado Chambers take active stances to support businesses. It is new ground for the local Chamber of Commerce, after many years of being fully under the town’s auspices.
While Williams and Bernholtz may have concerns about the Chamber having lobbying power and operating the community Visitor’s Center, I don’t. Like every business owner in town, the Chamber of Commerce staff is perfectly capable of turning down the rhetoric when guests are around. My greater concern is whether the Chamber of Commerce is politically mature enough to take on this responsibility, when it’s clearly still in its gawky teenage years. To be effective, it will have to grow up rather quickly.
Finally, town manager Susan Parker has suggested it may be illegal for the town to give money to an organization that pushes its political views, according to a new state law. While Matthews has said the Chamber will address this point, the Town should find some way to ensure that the Chamber of Commerce can be an active political force in this community, if its members so choose. Our business owners deserve that.
-Aleesha Towns
Since I became editor of the Crested Butte News 18 months ago, I’ve received much feedback on the work of two of our columnists, Denis Hall and John Norton. Both men have long histories in Crested Butte—Hall as a forthright environmentalist and former president of High Country Citizens’ Alliance and Norton as a former president and CEO of Crested Butte Mountain Resort and now a consultant for the ski company.
Recently, members of the non-profit organization Friends of Snodgrass Mountain and others have expressed concern that Norton is given a large pulpit in the paper from which to preach about ski area expansion. For those who may not know, CBMR is proposing to expand lift-served skiing onto Snodgrass Mountain, which is located adjacent to Mt. Crested Butte. The company is preparing to submit its plans to the U.S. Forest Service, which caretakes the land.
Specifically, I’ve been told by at least one citizen that Norton should not be allowed to write about CBMR issues.
I answer this in two ways—one, Norton does not limit his column to Snodgrass or CBMR but hits on a gamut of issues. In the past 12 months, he’s written about Mt. Emmons, wildfires, and tourism and economics, amongst other topics.
Two, good columns are provocative and may represent beliefs that are different from those held by readers. There’s a reason talk radio is so popular. Columns have the power to challenge views and allow readers to clarify and hone their beliefs. (Good editorials can have the same effect.)
It’s true that Norton uses his column to forward CBMR’s argument for the development of Snodgrass Mountain. To be honest, I’m happy that we have CBMR’s view in the newspaper. I’d much rather have those thoughts out in public as fodder for discussion than confined to the company’s conference room and hidden from view. For those who disagree, there’s plenty of space in our pages for letters to the editor.
Similarly, I’m happy every week to provide the community with the views of a vivid environmentalist—someone who’s concerned about the health of our planet and more particularly, the potential effects of mining on Crested Butte. In the past 18 months, I’ve already received and published several letters that disagree with Hall.
In any given week, this newspaper can be (and often is) accused of being too leftist and in the pocket of environmentalists and a right-wing propaganda machine that only serves as the mouthpiece of business. That lands our editorial stance somewhere in the middle. It’s exactly where I think we should be and I think it’s reflective of our community as a whole.
In closing, I might not always agree with what these two gentlemen have to say but I always find it interesting. I hope readers do as well.
Former commissioner named community liaison
The Crested Butte News Serving the Gunnison Valley since 1999
