Ouray County is on a mission to repair its most badly damaged roads – the damage brought on by significant growth and tourism in recent years – and the Board of County Commissioners is considering a ballot measure in November to obtain money to restore the most critical areas, over a ten-year span.

At present, they report "inadequate" revenue to plan and implement capital improvements to rebuild substandard county roads. "The demands and needs are far exceeding what we can do to bring the roads up to minimum. It's still not keeping up with the demand," said Commissioner Heidi Albritton, who moderated a two-hour discussion before an audience of 50 citizens at the Ouray County 4-H Center on Monday evening.

Roughly ten percent of the county's 285 miles of roads now evaluated and prioritized by the Ouray County Road and Bridge Department have been found to be in critical need of repair.

A citizen's budget committee, dubbed the Citizens Strategic Initiative and Accountability Committee, tasked last year by the BOCC and the Durango-based Souder, Miller and Associates (the county's designated firm for engineering consulting), identified which road areas were most problematic, made the calculations about what was required to repair them, and then prioritized – using a scoring method to indicate which upgrades are most necessary.

The assessment, led by Souder Miller Senior Engineer Mark Wright and Donzil Worthington, senior project coordinator, recommended improvements that include chip-and- sealing gravel roads now eroded, due to heavy vehicle traffic; performing "sub-grade" repairs of road shoulders, followed by the installation of French drains; pothole repair; culvert replacement and intersection realignments.

Top priority roads include County Roads 361, C.R. 1, 5, 14, 17 and 24.

The priority areas were determined from a "selection matrix" that factored accident history, sight distance, signage, drainage, traffic volume, surface condition and maintenance cost – with an "efficiency bonus" applied when two or more projects – and the work crews assigned to them – were situated in the same neighborhood and could be combined into a single timeframe, thereby consolidating costs.

Once target areas were ranked, County Administrator Connie Hunt calculated that at the R and B mil levy is 1.500 mills and generates revenue of $210,013. If the proposed ballot question were approved using 3.00 mils, the total allocated R and B mil levy would be 4.500 mils, which would generate $513,169.64 in county revenue. Over the course of ten years, the 4.500 mil would meet the estimated $3,000,000 needed for all of the road work identified.

Hunt reminded the audience that while only about 13 percent of all R and B revenues are sourced to property taxes, and that other revenue sources – fees, grants, federal and state revenues and transfers of "In/Fund" balances – are not enough. "We're barely able to keep up with operations and maintenance," said Hunt.

Wright pointed out, however, that any sites that may have been overlooked are open to reassessment. "We created a draft of what Ouray County could use to rank road improvements," he said. "We have not surveyed or inventoried all of the roads. If your particular road is not there, and you think it needs to be," he urged participants to talk to County Road and Bridges staff.

Keith Meinert, the Democratic candidate for the Ouray County Commissioner seat up for election this year, asked that the county seriously consider other options which the CSI had not endorsed, as well. "I think the real question is how to get the funds," Meinert said. "Every ballot for school was turned down last year," he observed, and "a ballot issue for a tax increase is probably going to fail.

"The county should have another look at a use tax and impact fees. We need other alternatives that have a higher likelihood of being passed." County R and B committee-member Dick Allison also felt that the mil levy may not be the only answer. "The use tax is a very viable way," he suggested.

A use tax allows the collection of significant tax due to out of county sales, enabling the county to collect that tax on certain items purchased outside the county but delivered to and used in the county. For example, the county presently is able to impose a $3,100 impact fee on every lot in an approved subdivision at building permit application time.

But Albritton explained the reason why the use tax option was not adopted. "We can't budget for R and B," she said, "because the use tax is not a stable source of funding.

"The mil was the most stable of options. And the level of service will go down if we don't do something."

Ken Lipton, a member of the CSI committee, defended the use-tax option, but conceded that while the use tax can be difficult to predict and more challenging to administer, "it increases the burden for road maintenance on new development and purchasers of vehicles." Lipton went on to explain that the use tax is collected at the time of vehicle registration; that a building materials tax can be collected at the time of issuance of building permits; and that construction vehicles kept in the county can also be taxed on a pro-rata basis. According to Lipton, 25 counties in the state have a use tax, including neighboring Montrose and San Miguel counties, and all but four Colorado counties tax building materials and vehicles.

"It appears that the administrative burden would be worth it," Lipton said, "and that an owner mil levy could be imposed, reducing the burden on all taxpayers and businesses, if a mil levy increase was combined with a use tax.

"New development is constant," he emphasized, "and adds to the deterioration of county roads. New growth would help to pay for new demands on the roads."

Commissioner Kristi Westfall differed with Lipton's assessment about where the growth is coming from. "We're all using those roads," she said. "It's not just those people coming in."

Ridgway Mayor Pat Willits observed, however, that commercial businesses pay far higher tax revenues than do residential homeowners, and that "the feeling is that they feel they're at their limit." Willits said that the town would review the proposal, but added that a "strong education campaign" may be the most effective way to get the mil increase passed.

An August 29 deadline looms for the ballot question's content and language to be finalized, but there is still time to come to an agreement about whether the mil increase is going to be presented to the voters. Added Albritton, "The next few weeks are critical in terms of going forward. We will get on the agenda for the town and city meetings."