Letter to the Editor: Oh, those answers by Rio Blanco County

Dear Editor:
This is an open letter to our Rio Blanco County commissioners.
I told you to be prepared for a response to your answers to my questions of Feb 26. First off, let me say it was obvious the response was written by other than the three of you, but I guess that’s why they get paid the big bucks.
Truthfully, much of the response sounded just like Obama saying “Not my fault, Bush did it,” but, in this case, the blame was laid at the feet of Ken Parsons, Forrest Nelson, Joe Collins and Kai Turner, and, actually, you, Mr. Bolton were in there for some of the time. Oh yes, and let us not forget Archetype, the company that was hired by the BOCC and I’m certain was paid for the work they performed.
1. Your answer to me indicates that none of the prior proposals were viable nor fiscally responsible. Can you please explain your evaluation procedures and why and how the three of you reached this conclusion?
2. With regard to your answer to my question No. 2, I find your response flippant in nature. I never assumed that the cost for 2005 would remain static for 2014, nor should you have assumed I did. I spoke to various builders and was told it is possible some costs have doubled while others have gone down. Your “experts” should have this same knowledge. If the cost of a two-story justice center behind the courthouse on the courthouse square were doubled from 2005, you are still under the $15 million you have set aside. Please explain how that would be fiscally irresponsible.
3. Reference my question and your response to No. 3. Can you provide the amount of savings on overall project costs by using part of the old elementary school versus not using the school at all and building behind the courthouse?
I am pleased to know that county employees are required to be accountable for their time, however, the request that was posed was due to not having the exact title for drawings, costs, etc., and knowing that without this information a formal request for information is a moot point, thereby the request was made to Archetype. They did not hesitate to provide the information.
It is rumored to have been said that you all did not want the public to “be confused” by any of this information. If the rumor is true, the only confusing thing about it is why didn’t you want anyone to see the information? Is it because a more-informed public may disagree with what you have already decided is best for them?
With regard to the closure of Fifth Street, I appreciate Jon Hill’s candid response (see below), which I know came directly from him as opposed to being composed by committee. If Jon’s understanding is correct, it sort of sounds like a “backroom deal.”
I really do not believe you gave consideration to those individuals whose signatures in support of saving the school were submitted with a full set to each commissioner as well as the county attorney. Why do I believe as I do? At no time were options given to your newly hired Colorado experts, Reilly Johnson, that did not preclude the elementary school site.
I know this is true because Bob Johnson himself told me this outside the Fairfield Center on the day you all interviewed the four bid finalists. The site of the courthouse square was never part of you plan even though the many individual referenced above made an alternative request when they signed the petition to Save the School. My question to you is why?
Regarding the response section on DOLA grants: Am I understanding this correctly, that no DOLA money will be used to construct this justice center? The DOLA grants would be used to remodel the existing courthouse (which was included in the 2005 cost estimate of $6,742,400) or for future expansion if required. If you obtain a DOLA grant, how many years do you have before you are required to activate a project and spend the match portion? Are these grants a lifetime deal?
With reference to your commitment to economic development: I see here you talk about Curtis Creek and broadband and having the economic development person and the advisory committee on board. I also know that the OHV project is a part of this overall plan, but what of heritage and agri-tourism?
The State of Colorado, in various publications and at meetings I have attended has said that this a huge economic booster, especially in rural communities. I point out that one thing we have here is history and the old Meeker Elementary School is a major part of that history. It was the last WPA building built in the United States.
Again, I point out that my quest has been to Save the School, obtain an historic designation and to see it repurposed to the benefit of all the residents of the county as the anchor for a true active and viable community once more and to bring in some much-needed outside money – as well as a venue to be utilized by all. Oh, and one more thing, the school can be used in the winter when it is really cold outside, as opposed to this proposed gazebo for which we are supposed to be excited.
Connie Theos
Meeker