Archuleta County Development Director Pamela Flowers and Building Code Official Tony Medved both submitted resignation letters from their respective positions on July 14.
Flowers’ resignation letter was “effective immediately,” while Medved indicated his final working day for the county would be July 25.
Flowers held her position as development director for more than five years, according to her letter, “ensuring that development in Archuleta County moves in the direction set forth by the [Board of County Commissioners, BoCC] through the various standards, regulations, codes and ordinances you have adopted.”
Her letter of resignation was addressed to the BoCC.
In her letter, Flowers praises her development department staff and other professionals working in the county.
“I have been blessed to find intelligent, thorough, and measured professionals who have enthusiastically joined me in that effort,” she writes, adding that she and her co-workers have “worked every day to create a level playing field for everyone in Archuleta County, regardless of who they are or who they know.”
She goes on to explain that her team avoided accepting any legal liability for the county “by focusing on the words in the governing documents you have given us and mandated that we enforce,” noting her department’s daily mantra is, “What does the regulation say?”
She goes on to write, “That is how every single decision is made by our staff. If it is in the regulation, we must do it and if it is not in the regulation, we cannot do it. No emotions, no favoritism, no looking the other way.”
Flowers notes in her resignation letter that each individual who comes to the Archuleta County Planning Department has “an important and relevant perspective and an experience that matters, and they must be treated with the utmost patience, care, and respect.”
She adds that the “core tenet” of the Planning Department’s job is to explain rules and standards adopted by the BoCC and apply them to applicants.
“We hear them out, we empathize with their feelings, and we educate them about the meaning of the various rules. Then we strive to find a way to help each person get to ‘yes’, if possible.
“But common sense should tell you that in some situations, a ‘yes’ for one person may amount to a ‘no’ for another. For instance, if someone comes to us for a setback variance in a floodplain area, the staff makes sure they have complied with every standard adopted by the Board and then comes to you with a staff report showing how they meet the criteria for that ‘yes’. But perhaps the neighbors come to you in private and in the public with an emotional and irrational argument that 15 feet would essentially destroy their lives, so you vote ‘no’. It should be clear to you that in many cases, we can’t just get ‘them’ to a ‘yes’... because there are usually two sides to the matter. No matter the decision, someone will be disappointed,” Flowers writes.
In May, the BoCC unanimously denied a variance request for a property located in the Rio Blanco subdivision that would have allowed a front and side setback encroachment of a proposed detached garage of 15 feet.
Planning Manager Owen O’Dell presented the request to the BoCC, which included a staff recommendation for motion to approve the variance.
For more information, see the related article in the June 6 edition of The SUN titled “County denies setback variance, counter to staff recommendation.”
In her letter, Flowers goes on to explain that by focusing on the rules explicitly, the Planning Department avoids being arbitrary.
“When the Board ignores the carefully detailed facts showing what the rules say, the conditions of approval to ensure full alignment with those rules, even detailed summaries of the neighbors’ comments compared to the facts provided to inform your decision, you demean and disregard the careful efforts of my staff by giving in to the pressure and reacting emotionally anyway,” Flowers writes, adding, “Unfortunately, this sort of decision-making fits perfectly with the self-serving, shady, and weak-minded actions I have unfortunately come to expect of this Board.”
She then claims that the commissioners do not have a full understanding of their roles, suggesting that some residents are being protected.
“It has, therefore, become painfully obvious that each of you lack the capacity to understand your role and your responsibility as a county commissioner. You are not kings and queen of the County. You do not have unlimited power. You were not elected to protect your ‘friends’ from the very rules you have adopted,” Flowers writes.
She then explains that the “thankless” work undertaken by the Development Services Department daily ensures that every county resident is treated fairly and consistently.
She adds that the BoCC has been reminded multiple times that it has the power to change the regulations, but that no effort has been made.
“The fact that you have made no effort to make rule changes and instead choose to actively work against and pressure my staff to behave unethically in favor of your pals, shows the depth of your ignorance, laziness, and corruption,” Flowers writes.
She then claims that, instead of acting with courage to protect the county, “you have chosen to belittle, attack, and demonize your employees for doing the difficult work.”
Flowers also claims she was scolded in a public meeting for not enforcing the rules, while also being insulted and name-called along with her fellow employees behind closed doors, “because we won’t ignore the rules for one of your friends.”
She goes on to state that her future with the county is “bleak,” while noting that she is not perfect, but a person of “great personal and professional integrity.”
She writes, “Standing by and watching you disrespect and threaten the people in this County who are trying to do the right thing because we won’t get in line is no longer tolerable to me. I cannot continue to be associated with the profound incompetence and dishonesty shown by this Board on a on a regular basis.”
Flowers also writes that the BoCC believes she is the “problem,” and she will step aside to let the county find its “yes man,” adding that she can only “hope and pray” that the county will realize the value of her and others working alongside her.
Flowers ends her letter by stating, “Archuleta County has been on a good path of late, but this corruption will most definitely derail the efforts of the many outstanding people who live and work here and just want to do their part to make the County better.”
In an interview, Commissioner Veronica Medina, when asked about Flowers’ resignation, stated, “Those are personnel matters and we don’t give comment in regards to those.”
In separate interviews, Commissioner Warren Brown and County Manager Jack Harper both indicated they had no comment, noting it is a personnel matter.
In a separate interview, Commissioner John Ranson mentioned that he was “disappointed” with parts of Flowers’ resignation letter.
“I think it’s a real opportunity for us to take a hard look at where we are and how we want to move forward as far as building and planning goes,” Ranson added.
In his resignation letter, Medved writes, “I understand that my departure may cause some disruption, and I sincerely apologize for any inconvenience this may bring to you and the team. However, due to circumstances, I have made the difficult decision to step down in the best interest of myself and my family.”
Additionally, Medved requests an in-person exit interview with the county’s Human Resource Department “to provide feedback regarding my decision to resign and to share some concerns I have for the County.”
Medina confirmed that Medved would be employed with the county until July 25.
Flowers’ response
In an email to The SUN, Flowers explains that the BoCC never went against staff recommendations “until this past year,” noting there have been a “few” of those instances.
She adds, “But honestly, if they determine that we misinterpreted the regulations, then they should vote differently than we recommend.
“However, when it’s obvious that they are giving into emotional and baseless arguments from [Not In My Backyard, NIMBY] neighbors, even as the attorney is advising them not to, that is embarrassing to say the least.”
Flowers also explains that she understands and expects that the commissioners will receive calls from the public with questions, concerns and complaints about the Archuleta County Land Use Regulations (LUR).
She notes that under previous commissioners — Ronnie Maez and Alvin Schaaf — calls from the public in regard to the county’s LUR were handled as expected, with the commissioners asking about the specific case.
Flowers notes she was able to provide details and “share the language found in the various applicable rules, and show how those rules were applied to his case.”
She adds that the commissioners would then advise the individual to comply with the requirements.
“What is happening now is a citizen calls and provides either a half truth or an outright lie about decisions made by the staff, the commissioner tells that person our staff doesn’t use ‘common sense’ or ‘over enforces’ the rules and that he will fix it for the citizen. Then he demands we change our decision or ignore requirements because the person has ‘no options’ — never making any attempt to understand the reasons the staff has taken a particular position, the true facts about [the individual’s] situation, or what the rules actually say,” Flowers writes in her email.
She goes on to explain that the “pressure to disregard requirements” made her job difficult because it teaches people they just need to call the commissioners and they “will get their way.”
She adds, “This is not only profoundly unfair to the hundreds of people who followed the rules and met the requirements for similar projects, but it is, as I said in my letter corrupt.”
Flowers did not provide names of specific individuals in her letter, other than Maez and Schaaf, but states that this behavior is the new norm “for at least one commissioner.”
She then provides two anecdotal situations of the commissioner advising someone to move in before a certificate of occupancy was issued and another case of a commercial property owner not wanting to pave their lot that is connected to a paved county road.
“By telling them to move in, the commissioner accepted unnecessary liability for Archuleta County,” Flowers adds.
She also explains that property owners have the option to apply for a variance from the paving requirement.
“Rather than ask the person to use this process to let the BoCC formally waive the paving requirement, we are pressured to ignore this requirement instead. Again, I could name dozens of people in the time I have worked for the County who either paved or received a proper variance to avoid it. Why should this commissioner’s friend be treated any different?” Flowers writes.
Development director position
During a work session held by the BoCC on July 22, Harper indicated that O’Dell has been named the “acting director” of development services, and that the development director position has been posted.
Harper also indicated that the county will “probably hold off for a bit” on filling the building official position.
He explained that O’Dell has reached out to third-party firms for potential assistance with planning review and inspections.
In a later interview, Ranson commented that O’Dell being named as the acting development director is the “best thing to happen since I took office.”
clayton@pagosasun.com
>