Thursday, April 17, 2008

County finances: Are the numbers good?

By James Robinson

Staff Writer

Nearly one year ago, a dark financial juggernaut bore down and did its nasty work on Archuleta County. By summer, 38 employees had lost jobs, $1.7 million in road projects had been postponed and county administration made deep cuts to a variety of departments, programs and services.

In explaining the cause of the crisis, Archuleta County Commissioner Bob Moomaw said during Tuesday’s board meeting, “In hindsight, there was an equal problem between the finance and treasurer’s offices.”

Now, in April 2008, and based on statements Tuesday from Archuleta County Commissioner Ronnie Zaday and Citizens Financial Advisory Task Force member John Ranson, it remains unclear if the problem has been equally solved.

Following a regular briefing from the task force, Zaday expressed frustration with Treasurer Lois Baker’s reports and said she had difficulty making sense of Baker’s numbers.”

“There’s not enough detail and explanation and negative fund balances continue to grow. We’re supposed to be doing everything right, but the negative fund balances keep growing,” Zaday said.

Ranson said the task force also had difficulty with the treasurer’s numbers, but in a telephone interview Wednesday, said the issues deal largely with how the treasurer’s data is formatted — not that the numbers are necessarily erroneous.

Ranson said since the task force’s creation in June 2007, its members have worked diligently to understand the treasurer’s reports and now, after months dealing almost daily with the data, they have become more comfortable with the information. Nevertheless, and as a safeguard, the task force has created its own system to track the county’s cash flow.

Ranson and Archuleta County Finance Director Don Warn said two factors will contribute greatly to the treasurer’s ability to provide accurate, up-to-date, easily comprehensible reports — a new integrated software system that will link the treasurer’s, finance and assessor’s offices and adjusting journal entries that will deal with the negative fund balances.

In the meantime, Warn said he is confident in the numbers provided by the treasurer’s office, and the budget will remain balanced in 2008.

Warn acknowledged that reporting between his department and the treasurer’s office isn’t always ideal, but said the county is solvent and he has a handle on money coming and going.

“The system is not perfect, but we’re balancing. It’s largely a matter of technology,” Warn said.

In addition, Warn said he has worked closely with Baker to draft a cash handling policy, which Warn said is a critical and absolutely integral component of the county’s system of internal financial controls. Warn said he is also reconciling revenues as they enter the treasurer’s ledger.

Monthly reports, a number of policies in the draft stages and procurement of the integrated software package, Warn said, will help keep the county on track.

“We’re monitoring everything. We’re receiving everything on a monthly basis and we’re watching,” Warn said.

In the meantime, Moomaw said Tuesday, the district attorney’s office has audit reports necessary to investigate possible criminal activity as it relates to the development of the financial crisis.

“We do know state statute has been violated,” said Moomaw. “The documentation is with the DA’s office. That is the legal process and it needs to be given a chance to work.”

james@pagosasun.com


Scant proof yet in sheriff recall effort

By James Robinson

Staff Writer

Though an attempt to recall Archuleta County Sheriff Pete Gonzalez is underway, the effort appears heavy on accusations but lean on specifics.

Recall committee members Galen Erin, Mike Thomas and Homer (Mack) Trout have all declined to provide detailed comments to SUN staff — including documentation to support their claims — and have opted instead to issue a press release after The SUN’s press deadline Wednesday.

Specifically, SUN staff sought answers to the following questions (which were provided to Erin, the recall committee’s media contact in an e-mail and voice mail):

• How, in light of the county’s tenuous financial position, do you justify taking the taxpayer into a $30,000 to $40,000 recall election?

• There are a number of channels one might use to pursue a complaint(s) against the sheriff’s department. What channels have you used — aside from the recall route — to have your concerns addressed?

• Please provide specific examples and supporting evidence to substantiate the allegations made against the sheriff as cited on the recall petition.

According to Archuleta County Clerk June Madrid, the recall petition was filed and approved by her office April 9, and the document includes a lengthy tally of transgressions allegedly perpetrated by Gonzalez and his deputies.

According to petition sponsors Erin, Thomas and Trout, Gonzalez should be recalled because:

• he has mismanaged his office and failed to carry out the responsibilities and duties of Archuleta County sheriff;

• is not a resident of Archuleta County, a violation of Colorado Revised Statute 30-10-501.5;

• has repeatedly and egregiously abdicated his duty to protect and serve all the people of Archuleta County and failed to enforce the laws of the state of Colorado;

• has engaged in discriminatory and selective harassment and intimidation of innocent law-abiding citizens while simultaneously engaging in selective non-prosecution of individuals known to be committing crimes;

• through his deputies, has engaged in harassment and intimidation of citizens and tourists, targeting specific individuals, business owners, employees and patrons;

• through his deputies, has unlawfully taken the personal property of citizens during traffic stops and never returned the citizens’ property;

• through his deputies, has failed to write reports, investigate and assign case numbers to citizens’ reports of bona fide crimes, including violent crimes, and has destroyed evidence and personal property belonging to crime victims.

Although Erin said she had individuals willing to sign affidavits to support the petition’s claims, that documentation was not provided to SUN staff by Wednesday’s press deadline.

According to a variety of sources, from law enforcement to legal counsel, individuals with claims against the sheriff’s department have a number of avenues to seek redress — filing a civil suit, filing a complaint with the department itself or taking the claim to the district attorney.

According to Archuleta County Attorney Teresa Williams, there are currently no civil suits against the sheriff’s department linked to incidents that occurred under Gonzalez’s tenure. Former sheriff’s department employees Eugene Reilly and Wayne Alexander have threatened suit for wrongful termination, however, Williams said no suit has been filed.

District Attorney Craig Westberg said his office had not received any complaints against Gonzalez’s office.

“I have received no complaints. I am not aware of any illegal, untoward or inappropriate action on the part of any people in Sheriff Gonzalez’s department,” Westberg said.

In the event of a district attorney’s investigation into the sheriff’s department, Colorado Bureau of Investigation (CBI) spokesperson Lance Clem said the CBI would assist.

According to CBI Director Bob Cantwell and Division Director of Investigations Steve Johnson, they are unaware of any investigations into the Gonzalez administration.

Lance Clem, public information officer for the CBI said, “There are no ongoing formal investigations of Sheriff Pete Gonzalez.”

At the local level, Carmen Hubbs, executive director of the Archuleta County Victims Assistance Program, said, “Are we trying to mediate with the sheriff’s department (on behalf of a client)? No. None of our clients currently have requested these kinds of services.”

Despite the moniker, Hubbs said the victims assistance program is separate from Archuleta County government, and operates as a non-profit agency that advocates for victims rights in cases of violent crime, domestic violence and sexual assault.

John Wallace of the FBI’s Durango office declined to comment on whether his agency was involved in investigations in Gonzalez’s department.

The question of whether Gonzalez is a bona fide resident of Archuleta County is part of the recall push, and it is a question that has dogged Gonzalez throughout the 2006 election, and apparently persists today.

According to county assessor’s data, Gonzalez purchased his home in Pagosa Springs on Nov. 30, 2006, from John Weiss, the current Archuleta County Undersheriff.

Gonzalez’s neighbors testify that the sheriff maintains a presence at the home, and comes and goes according to his daily work schedule like any other neighbor.

Gonzalez said he also keeps a home in Durango because his wife, a nurse, splits her time between Mercy Medical Center in Durango and Pagosa Mountain Hospital.

In 2006, the courts ruled that Gonzalez met the statutory residency requirements after Steve Wadley, one of Gonzalez’s challengers in the 2006 sheriff’s race, filed suit, challenging Gonzalez’s residency status.

Madrid said the petition requires 903 signatures from registered Archuleta County electors. Signatures, Madrid said, are subject to verification. In addition, the recall committee has 60 days, from the April 9 filing date, to complete the task.

Madrid said if the petition effort is successful but goes the full 60-days, it could force the recall question to a special election. A special election could cost taxpayers as much as $40,000.

According to the 2008 county budget, Archuleta County is operating with a $36,000 surplus.

A recall election, coupled with a number of mid-year budget adjustments such as 2 percent cost of living raises for employees and the possible hiring of an appraiser in the assessor’s office could easily vaporize that figure.

james@pagosasun.com


PAWSD hears impact fee complaints

By Chuck McGuire

Staff Writer

The Pagosa Area Water and Sanitation District (PAWSD) Board of Directors met in regular session Tuesday, as a capacity crowd gathered to ask questions about the proposed Dry Gulch Reservoir and related impact fees.

By meeting’s end, few members of the public seemed satisfied with the answers they’d received.

Public discussion first ensued, as the board turned to evaluating a resolution that would allow the district to borrow $11,217,060 from the Colorado Water Conservation Board, at 3.5 percent interest over 30 years. The money would pay off an $8.6 million “bridge loan” previously obtained from Wells Fargo Brokerage Services, LLC, plus the anticipated costs of acquiring additional private land deemed necessary to complete the reservoir project.

The bridge loan and most of a million dollar grant extended to the San Juan Water Conservancy District (SJWCD) late last year was used to purchase 666.25 acres of property from Running Iron Ranch, LLC, Kathryn and Donald Weber and several relatives at a price of approximately $9.53 million. PAWSD and the SJWCD are partners in the project, and the purchased land comprises most of the area needed to develop Dry Gulch.

At first, audience members questioned the need and overall size of the project, with attention focused almost entirely on an impoundment that would encompass 35,000 acre-feet at full build-out. District officials have repeatedly reported, however, that a reservoir that size will not likely be necessary until the late 2000s, if ever.

According to recent engineering studies, the size of the actual facility will depend on growth projections and the district’s financial status by the middle 2010s, when planners finally determine legitimate district needs. At Tuesday’s meeting, district board member Bob Huff suggested the first phase of the reservoir would most likely be in the neighborhood of 12,500 acre-feet, with additional phases added much later, as required.

Two audience members asked the district board why it needed more land than already acquired, and how much more would be necessary for project completion. PAWSD Assistant Manager Gene Tautges referred to a large topographic map on the wall, pointed out the proposed dam site, then explained how land contours fail to fit lines of ownership. He then pointed to desired private parcels, as well as U.S Forest lands necessary to accommodate even a minimum-sized reservoir.

As talk of physical requirements waned, attention turned to financial needs, and it soon became apparent that relative impact fees were the primary concerns among audience members. Most, of course, questioned the Water Resources component of the PAWSD Capital Investment Fee, which now stands at approximately $7,000 per equivalent unit (or 1.5 customers).

As PAWSD board members described it, the Water Resource Fee is imposed on any new construction within the district, to help offset the costs associated with developing new raw water resources to meet future water demands.

Such resources include storage, diversion facilities, pumping and pipeline equipment, while some of the costs include land acquisition, feasibility and environmental studies, and a variety of state and federal permits. For years, the board has adhered to the philosophy that “growth should pay its own way.”

Most of those complaining about the Water Resource Fee Tuesday night expressed dismay over its size. Many, in fact, claimed impact fees as a whole were responsible for the dramatic slowdown in area construction and the loss of related jobs. A common consensus suggested that some people have chosen to build elsewhere, rather than pay high local impact fees that can equal $15,000 for the construction of a single-family residence.

Few meeting attendees seemed willing to attribute at least partial blame for local economic woes to the nation’s economic downturn, higher food and energy prices, or a local real estate market that currently includes more than 600 listings of single-family homes. No one confessed the production of housing inventory might have outpaced demand the last couple of years, or that similar communities across the state also impose significant impact fees.

No one mentioned sharp increases in the cost of building materials and labor in recent years, and all failed to consider out-of-town investors purchasing hundreds of vacant residential lots, only to quadruple list prices without appraisal, thereby artificially inflating real estate values.

And, in respect to PAWSD’s rising monthly service fees, few seemed interested in the district’s own 50-percent increase in operating costs from 2005 to 2008.

While many doggedly spoke their minds, then left the room before board members could adequately address their concerns, most expressed dissatisfaction with board responses.

chuck@pagosasun.com


NEWS

COUNTY

TOWN

Town to install sidewalks along section of Apache Street

By Jim McQuiggin

Staff Writer

Anyone who has taken a stroll on Apache Street can tell you the walk can be a harrowing balance between dodging traffic and becoming mired ankle-deep in mud.

By late summer, however, that stroll will be less an adventure and more of a pleasure.

Acting on a resolution presented to Town Council by the Pedestrian Improvement and Safety Task Force (presented last August), the Town of Pagosa Springs will add 1,100 linear feet of sidewalk on the north side of Apache Street from the bridge at the intersection of Hot Springs Boulevard and Apache Street to the Apache Street and 7th Street intersection.

According to Mike Davis, of Davis Engineering, construction should start within the next two weeks, pending approval of the contractor’s bond. Although Davis could not provide an exact date when the contractor (Mike Snook Concrete) would begin construction, he was confident the project would be completed by late summer.

Both Davis and Town Planner Tamra Allen said the project was bid well under budget. However, with $200,000 earmarked for concrete and sidewalks in this year’s town budget, the sidewalks for Apache Street were bid at just under $160,000 — four-fifths of the total money set aside for concrete and sidewalk improvements in 2008.

The Apache Street sidewalk project was not the only recommendation made by the Pedestrian Improvement and Safety Task Force in its resolution presented to Town Council. The resolution (approved by the council last September) included embedding reflective materials at various intersections throughout the downtown area, placing “pedestrian flags” at several intersections on U.S. 160 through downtown, and the exploration of the feasibility of making South 6th Street one way from Pagosa Street to Apache Street, as well as dedicating a pedestrian easement from Great West Avenue to the elementary school.

Since none of those recommendations were considered for the 2008 capital improvements projects (nor money put aside for those projects), it remains to be seen if the town will push for the completion of the remaining recommendations made by the task force.

With work started on Apache Street and Phase II of the Sports Complex project, Apache Street will see a great deal of activity as the weather warms. Drivers who pass through the area should take construction activity into consideration when making their daily commute.

Editor’s Note: This is the second in a series of articles reporting on the various capital improvement projects planned for Pagosa Springs this summer.

Each week, a new project will be featured, letting readers know where to look for improvements to the town — or perhaps avoid potential traffic snarls due to construction.


INSIDE

Pagosa Springs: Friendly, and eco-friendly

By Jim McQuiggin

Staff Writer

There’s a lot of green to be seen at Town Hall these days and it has nothing to do with leftover St. Patrick’s Day decorations.

In preparation for Earth Day on April 22, employees at Town Hall have jumped at the opportunity to plan and coordinate various programs and activities promoting Pagosa Springs as a place that is not just friendly, but is also eco-friendly.

In the days prior to Earth Day, Town Hall employees will be providing residents of Pagosa Springs with information and opportunities to raise environmental consciousness. Anyone who walks into the lobby of Town Hall can help themselves to brochures covering everything from water conservation tips to recycling (see sidebar) to composting waste.

For anyone interested in composting, Town Hall is sponsoring an essay contest for a chance to win a composting bin. The contest is open to everyone

If creative writing is not your thing, you can purchase a composting bin at Town Hall for $40, available while supplies last.

Towards the goal of saving energy and reducing greenhouse gasses, the Town of Pagosa Springs will, in conjunction with La Plata Electric Association, distribute free compact fluorescent light bulbs (CFLs) to anyone who comes in (one per person) on Earth Day. Energy-efficient CFLs are part of a comprehensive strategy for cutting energy usage (see sidebar) and one CFL can save at least $30 in electric bills over the lifespan of the bulb. More than that, reduction of greenhouse gases due to decreased power plant output is such that, if every U.S. household replaced five bulbs with CFLs, it would prevent the release of as much greenhouse gas as removing 8 million cars from the road for a year. Better yet, those five CFLs would save 50 percent of a household’s annual lighting bill. Free CFLs will also be available at the local LPEA office on South 8th Street.

Parks Superintendent Jim Miller would like Town Hall’s Earth Day awareness to bring attention to the town’s tree grant program. Although the grant program is ongoing for 2008, Miller said “What we’re doing here (at Town Hall) for Earth Day is a perfect opportunity to let people know about the tree grant program.” Basically, Pagosa Springs residents interested in planting a tree will have half the cost of the tree (up to $100) covered by the tree grant program as well as having someone from the Pagosa Springs Parks Department come out to plant the tree. The grant covers one tree on in-town residential property, planted between the house and the street. The property owner is responsible for transporting the tree, utility line locates and must purchase a tree from approved Archuleta County nurseries. For more information and a list of approved nurseries, contact Miller at 264-4151, Ext. 233.

Despite town employees taking initiative on the various Earth Day activities, administrative assistant to the Police Department and Earth Day organizer April Hessman said, “The town is sponsoring this event and is very proud to participate.”

Hessman said the town is committed to having town buildings and facilities make the most of geothermal, passive solar and solar energy sources. She also made it clear that while she, Miller, James Dickhoff, and Allen have taken it upon themselves to make Earth Day an event at Town Hall, town government is equally committed to environmental awareness.

Mayor Ross Aragon said, “I will get some kind of resolution regarding Earth Day before the council.” Aragon said that could happen during the council’s April 17 meeting.

The mayor said he has directed Town Manager Mark Garcia to draft the resolution which will be presented at the noon meeting. Aragon said he is interested in having Pagosa Springs “deeply involved” in Earth Day and gives credit to the intrepid employees at Town Hall who have done what they can to raise awareness to the environmental plight of our region — and our planet.


Free wildflower trip to Canyon de Chelly

By Beverly Danielson

Special to The SUN

The Southwest Chapter of the Colorado Native Plant Society provides free wildflower trips that are open to all who are interested in exploring, preserving and enjoying the flora of the Four Corners area.

The next event will be a hike at Canyon de Chelly on April 23 to learn simple techniques of sketching flowers or the landscape. The trip will begin at noon and last the afternoon — participants may want to spend time before or after to hike or sketch. The trip leader is Margaret Mayer (928) 724-3467 who should be contacted for details about the trip and to make reservations. She has also information about where to hike, camp, or stay in a motel.

The chapter welcomes new members and urges anyone interested to visit the website at www.conps.org/southwest.html which has current information about events.

Despite bankruptcy filing, Frontier to begin Durango service

By Chuck McGuire

Staff Writer

Despite filing for Chapter 11 protection last Thursday, Frontier Airlines Holdings, Inc. will initiate commercial passenger service between Durango and Denver, as planned.

Last Thursday, Frontier and its subsidiaries, including Lynx Aviation and Republic Airlines, voluntarily filed for reorganization under Chapter 11 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code.

The following day (April 11), Judge Robert D. Drain of the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York approved the airlines’ “first day motions,” ensuring Frontier’s ability to conduct normal business operations during its restructuring.

In a phone interview late Tuesday, Frontier spokesman Joe Hodas said plans to begin service between Durango and Denver are still on and will not be affected by reorganization.

Flights are scheduled to commence Tuesday, with the first of three daily non-stop trips arriving in Durango (from Denver) at 9:57 a.m. The second should arrive at 3:27 p.m., with a third Durango arrival planned for 7:09 p.m. Following a 30-minute layover, each leg will return to Denver, with total travel times either way averaging little more than an hour.

“We’re ready to start flying April 22,” Hodas said. “We’re looking forward to serving Durango and the southwest Colorado communities.”

When asked about the feasibility of new services in the wake of increasing fuel costs, Hodas said relatively short flight distances make them feasible. He explained that Lynx Aviation will fly the routes with Q400, 74-seat turboprop aircraft, which are 35 percent more fuel-efficient than conventional jet aircraft.

“We hope to fill every seat,” Hodas continued. “Part of it will be attracting new business, but we’re confident that it’ll be worthwhile.”

According to Frontier Airlines’ Web site, the carrier filed for Chapter 11 protection because of skyrocketing fuel prices and an unexpected announcement from its principal credit card processor, indicating intent to withhold significant proceeds from the sale of Frontier tickets. Chapter 11 will allow the carrier to continue the following operations:

• Provide employee wages, healthcare coverage, vacation, sick leave and similar benefits without interruption.

• Honor pre-petition obligations to customers and continue customer programs, including its EarlyReturns frequent-flyer program.

• Pay fuel costs under current supply contracts and honor existing fuel supply distribution and storage agreements.

• Honor