Telluride – As a momentous Valentine’s Day approaches, this entire town is talking love. And marriage vs. divorce.
It’s the buzz in every restaurant, the debate on the local public radio station, the crux of endless town hall meetings, and the center-stage discourse at the Sheridan Opera House.
All this chatter and regularly erupting arguments are centered on love for the valley floor – the 793 bucolic acres that are Telluride’s front yard and, many folks here say, its most distinctive resort-town feature.
For 25 years, residents have waged an escalating “war for the floor” to keep the private property at the entrance to town, with its spotted cows and wildlife-rich wetlands, from being developed and overtaken by trophy homes, faux ponds, golf courses and chi-chi hotels.
In colorful Telluride fashion, they have written odes and ballads to the beloved strip of land. They have made dairy cows a battle icon. They have raised millions from bake sales and deep-pocket donors. They have voted for open-space funding and condemnation measures.
Most recently, they have waited through eight nerve-racking months of court-ordered mediation between town officials and the valley-floor owner, a military-weapons manufacturer who runs his Telluride operations from a former funeral parlor.
On Tuesday, residents will vote to either give the town council the go-ahead to enter into a compromise development agreement – a marriage – or to divorce itself from any negotiations and try to protect the valley floor via condemnation.
“Vote with your heart,” opponents of a compromise ballot measure are saying, while proponents are urging, “Use your head.”
San Miguel County Commissioner Art Goodtimes framed the topic that once united this town in opposition to development as one that has now galvanized and split it.
“My head and my heart are on opposite sides,” he said.
That’s been the quandary for everyone, from Mayor John Pryor to a local character who calls himself Big Bird Gesus.
Gesus appears at public hearings in a tinsel wig and was hustled away from one last week shouting, “God save Telluride.”
“There’s a lot of passion around it, but we are not elected to be emotional. We have a fiduciary responsibility to this town,” said Pryor, who is urging voters to accept a mediated settlement with landowner Neal Blue and his San Miguel Valley Corp.
Pryor is in agreement with the rest of the town council, the San Miguel County commissioners and the Telluride R-1 School District.
“From my perspective, they’ve basically rolled over,” said Telluride real-estate broker Todd Creel. “If you vote ‘yes,’ you’re basically endorsing the deal they’ve already cut.”
A “yes” vote will give the council authorization to annex the valley floor – tripling the size of the town – and approval to negotiate terms of a final agreement with Blue.
The “essential elements” of that deal, as outlined for voters, will preserve 513 acres – 91 percent of the property south of Colorado 145 as it enters town – through a conservation easement that would guarantee public access.
The remaining property on that side of the highway and 121 acres to the north would be developed with housing, businesses, a park and a school.
Up to 22 multimillion-dollar homes would be built on a 47-acre parcel that cuts the valley floor in two. Those homes could be up to 10,000 square feet each (including caretaker’s quarters).
Employee housing would be located on a sliver of land on a steep, north-facing mountainside or next to a sewer plant.
Up to 5,000 square feet of commercial development would be allowed near Society Turn, 3 miles west of Telluride’s current boundary.
For its part, Telluride would pay at least $15 million to restore the San Miguel River and to clean up tailings dumped there during Telluride’s mining era.
If the development measure is defeated, the town will be back in court fighting to acquire the property through condemnation.
Many residents recognize that option would be risky.
The town has raised almost $20 million toward that effort, and a grassroots citizens’ organization has raised another $5.5 million, but that is far short of the company’s ??which company? $48 million appraisal.
Proponents of the ballot measure say a jury also may not look kindly on a town that walked away from a settlement that would protect all but 9 percent of the disputed land.
“A ‘no’ vote will put Neal Blue in the catbird seat,” said longtime activist Pamela Lifton-Zoline.
Blue, who has business bases in La Jolla, Calif., and Denver, owns General Atomics, a weapons manufacturing and “virtual data collection” company.
His Colorado influence became apparent to Telluride residents when an associate lobbied for legislation in 2004 that made condemnation more difficult for the town.
Carly Shaw, who works for Blue in the San Miguel Valley Corp., said no one from the company could comment on the Telluride issue because it is in litigation that will be revived if the ballot measure does not pass.
In an infamous 1993 memo faxed from one of Blue’s planners to a town official, Blue called for draining the valley-floor wetlands to make room for more development.
The corporation called the memo a hoax. But opponents of the valley floor settlement, who don’t buy that, are recirculating the memo now.
Both sides are also handing out bumper stickers, buttons, posters and – with less than a week until a history-shaping Valentine’s Day – impassioned advice to those pining for an unchanged valley floor.
“The love of this land,” county commissioner Goodtimes reiterated, “goes very deep.”
Staff writer Nancy Lofholm can be reached at 970-256-1957 or nlofholm@denverpost.com.
Valley floor chronology
1981: Neal Blue’s Cordillera Corp. buys 793-acre valley floor for $6.5 million. Town of Telluride opts not to buy property.
1996: Committee of county officials and citizens recommends that development include a golf course, hotel and 1,770 residents. Neither town nor county acts on the recommendation.
1998: Blue’s San Miguel Valley Corp. raises possibility of dealing with Mountain Village (an incorporated town on Telluride Mountain) and hints that it may link valley floor to village via gondola.
2000: SMVC announces annexation pacts with Mountain Village and a 1,770-resident development plan that includes a resort hotel and gondola.
Telluride works toward possible condemnation.
2001: SMVC closes public access to valley floor.
Telluride Town Council authorizes condemnation.
2002: With voter approval, town files notice of intent to condemn 570 acres on south side of Colorado 145.
Voters opt to permit new town debt to fund valley floor acquisition.
South side of valley floor is valued at $19.3 million by town appraiser and at $48 million by SMVC appraisers.
2003: SMVC refuses town offer to buy south side of land for $19.5 million.
2004: Town Council files condemnation action.
Legislature passes bill limiting municipalities’ ability to condemn property. After lobbying pressure from a Blue associate, amendment is added that prohibits condemning land outside municipal borders for open space. It is retroactive to January 2004, which predates Telluride’s condemnation filing.
Court orders town and SMVC to mediation.
2005: Town unveils pact to be voted on Tuesday.
– Compiled by Nancy Lofholm
