Thursday, April 26, 2007



A perfect financial storm

By James Robinson
Staff Writer

As a beleaguered Archuleta County struggles with ongoing cash flow troubles, county staff and elected officials are being asked to cut costs and trim expenses, although many are wondering “How did we get here?” and questions of legality linger on the periphery.

Archuleta County Treasurer Lois Baker brought the legal question to the fore during an April 10 strategic planning session when she briefed the Board of County Commissioners, other elected officials and key staff on the county’s financial predicament.

“The way it’s been set up all these years is illegal,” Baker told the group.

Archuleta County Finance Director Bob Burchett later countered that Baker’s comment and her assertions of illegality were “a matter of interpretation regarding statute.”

And Baker explained: “What I thought was illegal about it was that I didn’t have any control over the funds. When payroll would come in they wrote checks without me knowing how much they were writing them for. The same went for accounts receivable. Since then, (the April 10 meeting) that’s all been changed.”

Baker said her assertion is supported clearly by Colorado statute (30-10-711), which reads, “Payment of county warrants and orders by electronic transfer shall be made only after the treasurer approves the release of funds for such electronic transfer.”

As treasurer, Baker serves as one of the county’s financial gatekeepers, making sure there are funds available to cover expenses.

Although Baker was reluctant to speculate on the reasons behind the county’s financial downturn, she said the practice of paying bills without her knowledge had likely gone unchecked because, in years past, the county had more funds available and substantial reserves.

“Before it wasn’t such a big issue because the county had more money,” Baker said.

Although Burchett was also unwilling to speculate on how the county arrived in dire financial straits, perhaps there are a number of factors, such as: unaccounted-for spending coupled with first quarter payment of annual big ticket items — medical service contracts, insurance premiums and charitable contributions — and decreases in collections of property taxes and gross receipts income coalesced to create the perfect financial storm.

Burchett said he would have a better idea of cash flow next week, and a full department head briefing on how the situation came to pass with a clearer financial assessment is scheduled for May 8.

“We’ll know then if we need to take drastic measures or if our current level of intervention will get us through the year,” Burchett said.

In the meantime, the financial picture appears grimmer than presented April 10.

Burchett said, “Fourth quarter projections look really bad.”

And Archuleta County Administrator Bob Campbell said, “Things aren’t real optimistic, money isn’t coming in as expected. We knew it was a tight year, but it hit us harder than we’d expected.”

To help weather the storm, the county has enacted a hiring freeze, limited travel and training, cancelled the use of take home vehicles and has banned overtime. In addition, Burchett said there are 18 additional cost saving measures that could be employed if necessary.

On the up side of the county’s financial woes, Burchett said he had submitted the county’s errant audit to the state April 20, and had received a letter Monday releasing the state’s freeze on the county’s use of property tax revenues.

Justin Smith of the state auditor’s office was unable to be reached to confirm the information.

Despite Baker’s concern, Burchett said he is confident in the county’s compliance with statute and the its adherence to sound accounting principles.

“Our budget, as far as I know, every year is in full compliance with what the state requires,” Burchett said.

james@pagosasun.com



Brass tacks, business for county

By James Robinson
Staff Writer

It was brass tacks and all business at the Archuleta County Courthouse Tuesday, with Archuleta County Commissioners Bob Moomaw and Ronnie Zaday setting a grueling pace beginning at 9 a.m., and during the marathon day the two hammered out policy and procedural matters, established the May 1 agenda, and moved forward with key legislation.

The morning session began with the commissioners meeting with area landowners and representatives of the San Juan Citizens Alliance regarding the recently released Record of Decision (ROD) for the Northern San Juan Basin Coal Bed Methane Project. As written, the document would open up sensitive areas in Archuleta County, particularly the Fruitland Outcrop and portions of the HD Mountains Roadless Area, to drilling.

Drilling near the Fruitland Outcrop in La Plata County has been linked to numerous negative impacts such as drawing down of the water table, methane contamination in domestic water wells, exacerbation of methane seeps, and methane related fires. To prevent further outcrop-related impacts, the ROD establishes a 1.5-mile no drilling safety buffer in La Plata County, however the ROD does not provide the same protection in Archuleta County.

In September 2004, and again in September 2006, the Board of County Commissioners passed resolutions formally opposing drilling within 1.5 miles of the Fruitland Outcrop, yet after learning that Archuleta County remained vulnerable to the potential negative impacts of outcrop drilling, the board undertook a fact finding mission. To that end, Commissioner Robin Schiro invited ROD author and Forest Supervisor Mark Stiles to the commissioners’ meeting April 17 to present the rationale for leaving the outcrop area open to drilling in Archuleta County.

Following Stiles presentation, and later in the week, Moomaw invited county residents living near the outcrop and members of the San Juan Citizens Alliance to present their concerns Tuesday.

Moomaw said in order to make an informed decision on whether the county should appeal Stiles’ ROD, it was important to hear both sides of the issue.

“In this particular area, there’s a pretty big risk to the people living there. There are some potential downsides and I want to know those downsides.”

While the full board heard Stiles’ April 17 presentation, Schiro was absent for the discussion Tuesday. The commissioner is at the nation’s capitol on a Club 20, Washington D.C. trip, scheduled for April 23 to 26.

According to the organization’s Web site, “Club 20 is an organization of counties, communities, tribes, businesses, individuals and associations in Western Colorado.  The group is organized for the purpose of speaking with a single unified voice on issues of mutual concern.  Its activities include marketing and advertising, public education, promotion, meetings and events, and political action.”

County Administrator Bob Campbell said Schiro had also indicated she would miss the county retreat, scheduled for April 25 through 27, which Campbell described as a strategic planning session for the board, other elected officials and department heads. Campbell said the event would help the county identify goals and set a course for operations over the next three to five years.

Archuleta County Assessor Keren Prior said she would not attend the event, and according to Campbell, Treasurer Lois Baker will send a staffer in her place.

Following the San Juan Citizens Alliance presentation, Moomaw and Zaday agreed to put the question of appealing the ROD to a vote during the regular, May 1, Board of County Commissioners meeting.

Later in the day, and during the agenda review session, Moomaw and Zaday grappled with the county’s ongoing cash flow troubles, and heard requests from department heads and elected officials to fill budgeted staff positions.

As part of the county’s effort to resolve its cash flow troubles, Campbell has called for a hiring slowdown, including the hiring of positions budgeted for 2007.

After hearing elected officials’ and department heads’ requests, the commissioners approved staffing requests from the sheriff’s department and senior services, while denying staffing requests from weed and pest and the assessor.

In addition, the commissioners reaffirmed their commitment to their meeting minutes policy adopted unanimously in January 2007.

According to the policy, meeting minutes were to provide a succinct account of board meetings with a listing of the agenda item, brief background information, the motion and the vote. In addition, all changes to the minutes were to be made by the agenda review session held one week before the regularly scheduled board meeting.

Moomaw called for recommitting to the established policy after observing County Clerk June Madrid being dogged for requests for multiple and last-minute changes. Moomaw said if two versions of meeting minutes appear, one according to the established policy, and one contrary to the policy, the board will vote each version up or down.

Moomaw and Zaday have both described the time spent discussing and changing minutes as “ridiculous,” and the minutes issue forced Madrid in 2006 to give the board an impassioned and vehement ultimatum.

In a second policy matter, the board turned the commissioners’ agenda over to Campbell, who will be the final arbiter of changes. In addition, Moomaw and Zaday mandated that no changes will be made to the agenda after the agenda review session, unless the issue is time sensitive.

Typically, the board chair, in this case Schiro, and the county administrator set the agenda, however, recent tumult over last-minute additions and deletions, and multiple, sometimes varied or conflicting agendas, have sent county staff scrambling. Moomaw and Zaday said they hope putting the agenda in Campbell’s hands will solve the problem.

Lastly, the adoption of impact fees has played a central role in discussions on how the county can balance the pressures of growth and development while meeting the continuing demand for services, and Tuesday, Moomaw and Zaday took an unprecedented step, and approved putting the question of adopting impact fees to a vote during their regular May 1 board meeting.

As proposed, and if approved, the county would levy two impact fees: an $818 impact fee for roads; and the second, a $1,305 fee for county facilities.

During the discussion, the commissioners struggled with when to levy the fee: at recording of final plat, or when a building permit is pulled for new home construction.

Campbell indicated Wednesday that the legislation may require more wordsmithing, and may be pulled from Tuesday’s agenda.

When questioned about levying impact fees for special districts such as the water storage impact fee advocated by the Pagosa Area Water and Sanitation District and the San Juan Water Conservancy District, Moomaw and Zaday responded that an incremental approach would be best, and adoption of subsequent impact fees would require further research.

The commissioners will meet Tuesday, May 1, at 1:30 p.m. in the Board of County Commissioners’ meeting room in the Archuleta County Courthouse.

james@pagosasun.com


Values soar, protests certain

By James Robinson
Staff Writer

Midwinter property value predictions indicated astronomic leaps in value, and according to figures provides by Archuleta County Assessor Keren Prior, many property owners’ worst fears may soon come to pass.

“We saw about a 90-percent increase in vacant land, about a 45-percent increase in residential, and about an 18- to 20-percent increase in commercial,” Prior said. “Forty percent is not a bad percentage, particularly with the way it was looking.”

Property owners will know the full scope of their property value when Notices of Valuation are mailed out May 1.

Prior’s initial estimate, put forth in February, indicated a 50-percent increase in home values over last year — 20 percent more than county staff suggested during their campaign to sell Ballot Issue 1A to Archuleta County voters.

But Prior also noted the above figures are averages.

“Some areas saw valuations increase 150 to 200 percent,” said Prior.

And Alpha subdivision may be one such area.

For example, one Alpha property owner said after consulting with assessor’s staff, he learned the property taxes on his 10-acre vacant parcel are set to jump from $1,680 for 2006, to $3,420 for 2007 — an increase of 103 percent.

“Most of the higher percentage changes were in the Pagosa Lakes area,” Prior said.

Although it appears Pagosa Lakes may get hit the hardest, according to Prior, some parts of the county saw little change at all.

“There were some areas that did not see a value change, or had a slight value change — some around Aspen Springs,” Prior said.

Although the bulk of the assessor’s valuation work is done, Prior has about 1,000 properties with new construction that are yet to be completed.

“The only part of the reappraisal we didn’t get done was the 1000 new construction. If I had the right software and right personnel, we could have had this done,” Prior said.

According to county documents, the Archuleta County Assessor’s Office has more full time employees — 13 — than other counties with similar or greater populations. For example, Alamosa County fields eight full time employees, Gunnison, 10, Pitkin, nine, Grand, 11, and Routt, 11.

She said the affected property owners will receive a special Notice of Valuation later in May and in time for them to engage in the appeals process if they so choose.

Prior said, countywide actual values for single family residential topped $1 billion.

According to assessor data, actual values for single family residential in 2006 were $79,490,523, while in 2007, they jumped to $118,090,939. Actual values for vacant land showed slightly higher increases between the two years, with 2006 vacant land values at $61,841,557, while 2007 shows $107,127,258.

Prior said technical difficulties arose when values went beyond nine digits and her staff had to manually enter data into spreadsheets.

Prior said although the reports give a strong indication of property value increases and tax dollars coming into the county, the numbers won’t be finalized until after the appeals process.

According to Prior, notices of valuation will be mailed May 1. Taxpayers then have until June 1 to file a property value protest: Instructions on how to file a protest are included with the taxpayer’s Notice of Valuation.

“May is going to be a tremendous month with protests and appeals,” Prior said.

james@pagosasun.com


CEO pick backs out

By Chuck McGuire
Staff Writer

Once again, as the Upper San Juan Health Service District seemed on the brink of hiring a hospital Chief Executive Officer, its preferred candidate suddenly backed out. And, once again, the search continues.

For the second time since January, the district board of directors selected a finalist among applicants for CEO of a new critical access hospital in Pagosa Springs. And, for the second time, its top choice declined an offer of employment in the final hour.

This, after lengthy reviews, background checks and phone interviews trimmed a list of some 50 applicants down to just four finalists. As one of them eventually dropped out, the remaining three came to Pagosa Springs for personal interviews with the district, each agreeing that, if offered the position, he or she would be able and willing to accept.

“We didn’t invite anyone to come that didn’t agree beforehand that they could take the position, if offered,” said district board chair Neal Townsend. “I guess we need to make sure, when we offer a job to an individual, it’s an individual we can get. We may have to do additional screening, or offer certain added benefits.”

Regardless, soon after the board made its choice and offered Jim Tavary of Prosser, Wash., the job, he declined, citing conflicts with his wife’s profession as an emergency room nurse.

Because of a district employment policy preventing spouses, or those in similar relationships, from working together, Tavary’s wife could not have worked for the district and would have either been forced to retire, change careers or work in some other community, like Durango.

Back in January, Ronald A. Ommen of Jackson, Wyo., also declined an offer to become the hospital’s first CEO, and instead, suddenly accepted a position in the Wyoming governor’s office. Apparently, his wife also expressed some reservations about moving to Pagosa Springs.

In the latest round, district board member Bob Scott said all four finalists had years of hospital administration experience, including building, equipping, staffing and opening a critical access hospital like the one now under construction on South Pagosa Boulevard. The four finalists included Tavary, Michele Malone of Aatchison, Kan., James Parrish from Winnemucca, Nev., and Susan McGough of Medford, Ore.

This time, at least, Townsend said the district won’t begin another search from square one.

“There’s lots of pre-screening (of the remaining applicants) going on now, and Bill May (interim CEO) is calling several to see what their thoughts are,” he said. “We’re looking at people in the first and second tier to see if we may have overlooked someone eminently qualified.”

Bill May, meanwhile, said phone interviews are now ongoing, and he hopes to have a short list (three to five) of hopeful applicants to present to the district board at its regular monthly meeting next week.

“We hope to fast track this thing,” he said. “We candidly asked each of the three previous choices if they could take the job, and if their families would be willing to move here, and they all said yes. We were very clear about life in Pagosa Springs, but now we’re reviewing the other candidates in this process.

“We had hoped to get someone with critical access hospital experience, but we’re opening that up a little, now. If you’re a good CEO, you can run a critical access hospital. It’s largely the same.”

May said he hopes to complete the current round of interviews in time to make another offer in the next two weeks. Even as the clock is ticking, he said there’s still time.

“Though the district would like to bring a CEO on board now,” he suggested, “it would become a necessity within six months of when the hospital actually opens.”

As it appears today, that won’t be until next February.

chuck@pagosasun.com

INSIDE