As mentioned in Part One, the Archuleta Board of County Commissioners heard a rather unusual proposal on Tuesday from San Antonio residents Ronnie and Terry Urbanczyk.
The BOCC has been soliciting purchase offers on the historical County Courthouse for the past several years, even while the building has been tied up in an ongoing ‘lease-purchase’ obligation connected with a $5 million loan dating back to 2010…
…and even while openly publicizing the building’s environmental and structural weaknesses.
Previous purchase offers have suggested that the building would be razed, once the three County departments still occupying the mostly-vacant building have been relocated. One such offer, from Springs Resort representative David Dronet, was discussed on Tuesday.
But the unusual offer from the Urbanczyks took a very different view of the property. Here’s Ronnie Urbanczyk, explaining the offer to the BOCC on Tuesday.
“I’ve been spending a lot of time in the county over the past few months. My wife and I have bought several pieces of property, and when we heard about the Courthouse, we got kind of excited about the opportunity to do something with it…
“So, we bought the property right lot next to it — the parking lot next to it. I had a friend of ours come out; he’s a structural engineer; we had him look at [the Courthouse]. Wanted to get his opinion before we got excited… and we felt comfortable that we could secure the structure, and make it a viable structure. And Terry and I decided it would be kind of neat to make it into a hotel… and the area next to it, a nice place to meet for corporate events. And stuff like that…”
“So we started doing some numbers. I sent you guys a kind of a proposal; what we’d like to do.”
That proposal, as was shared yesterday in Part One:
Owner/Developer proposes to acquire the Archuleta County Courthouse building based on the terms and conditions outlined below. Under the terms of this proposal, Owner/Developer will:
- Enter into a purchase contract for the Building and pay the County $250,000 up front in cash for the right to acquire the Building.
- The County will be allowed to continue to occupy their space in the building at no cost (County to pay operating expenses).
- Owner/Developer shall have an exclusive right to lease the space that is not occupied by the County.
- Owner/Developer shall have the exclusive right to complete a build-to-suit building for the County at a location and upon terms mutually acceptable to the parties.
- Owner/Developer shall pay the County a move-in bonus of $50,000 upon the commencement of occupancy in the new location.
The lease agreement with the County shall be for a term not to exceed 5 years. The County will agree to waive all fees and charges associated with the current building and the new building (permit fees, etc).
A few unusual things are suggested by this proposal, besides the idea that the historical building might be saved and renovated to a new and profitable use. For one, the County would not pay any rent to the new owners for up to five years; a period of time with might allow the County to find or construct a new office building to house three County departments — the Clerk, Treasurer and Assessor.
Another thing suggested by the proposal is an unfamiliarity with our political boundaries. The County government has no control over the fees and charges (permit fees, etc.) connected with a commercial building in downtown Pagosa. Those fees are assigned by the Town of Pagosa Springs. (Making an exception, of course, for County property taxes, which the BOCC could theoretically choose to reimburse.)
A third interesting idea suggested by the proposal is the Owner/Developer’s “exclusive right to complete a build-to-suit building for the County” upon mutually acceptable terms. That part of the proposal did not receive any discussion.
Mr. Urbanczyk noted that he and his wife purchased the Dutton Creek Ranch, and have been working closely with Pagosa Area Water and Sanitation to improve the functionality of the Dutton Creek pipeline — the main water source for the PLPOA subdivisions.
He continued:
“We’d like to think we can work with the County on the Courthouse, renovating it and restoring it, and make it into something the downtown would enjoy, and to be able to help the downtown.
“Demo-ing the existing building would be a nightmare… And I think the building can be fixed; it could be used. It’s going to take a lot of money to do it, but I think it would be a tremendous value to the county…”
Mr. Urbanczyk then directed the BOCC’s attention to a map he’d brought along, showing property he and his wife had purchased adjacent to the County airport, and offering to enter into a public-private partnership to add additional parking and larger airplane hangers, and thus make the airport, and the community, more attractive to wealthy visitors and residents. He had not included his airport plans in the written Courthouse proposal, but he clearly wanted the BOCC to consider both development projects as part of a single offer.
“So my deal is pretty simple, and I could write the check and start the construction tomorrow.
“Fixing structures is my business. I do about $200 million a year in just concrete work, and we do a lot of those where we go into the basement; figure out what’s happening; we restructure it; we brace it back up. We save the building, and then we go to work on the rest of it…
“So, if you have any questions, I’d be happy to answer them. My family has invested about $20 million, in the last year, in Pagosa Springs. It’s not like we’re here to mess around… I have three children, and they all each have three children. So I have nine grand kids and six adults in the line.
“So I need a lot of room,” he laughed.
Bill Hudson began sharing his opinions in the Pagosa Daily Post in 2004 and can’t seem to break the habit. He claims that, in Pagosa Springs, opinions are like pickup trucks: everybody has one.