Noticias

• Mountain Village Selects Law Firm to Conduct Investigation
• Colorado Lawmakers Talk Rural Issues

---

Mountain Village Selects Law Firm to Conduct Investigation

Mountain Village has selected Wheeler Trigg O’Donnell — or WTO — to conduct an investigation into former Mayor Marti Prohaska’s involvement in an offer to purchase a majority portion of the Telluride Ski Resort.

Mountain Village Mayor Scott Pearson said the town sought a firm with broad legal expertise.

“What was important to us is that we hire a firm that has broad knowledge, and broad experience in a number of different types of law that might be implicated here. We also wanted a firm that had the legal breadth to consider that context both in Colorado and in California, since we know the meetings took place in California,” Pearson said.

“Finally, we wanted a firm that had the capacity to do a really thorough investigation of what could be a complex situation,” he said.

During the labor dispute between Telski and the Telluride Ski Patrol Union, former Mayor Marti Prohaska and former Telluride Town Council member Meehan Fee traveled to California to hold conversations with Telski owner Chuck Horning. Prohaska and Fee say they went as private citizens. Following that visit, the ski company filed a Freedom of Information Act request to obtain correspondence in connection to “a purchase offer of the ski company.”

The request included a contract indicating an agreement for Horning to sell 51% of the Telluride Ski Resort to the Telluride Ski Resort Fund — an entity controlled by Prohaska and Fee. The contract was signed by Prohaska and Fee. It was not signed by Horning.

Mountain Village initially decided against conducting an investigation into the meetings, noting the town’s only action would be having Prohaska step down — and she had already done so. Following additional information, however, the town changed its position and decided to conduct a third-party investigation.

“We later learned that our town manager was involved in drafting some of the documents – specifically a non-disclosure agreement – and that raised the prospect that possibly a town employee was involved and that changed our perspective,” Pearson said. “We felt that we needed to understand what was happening, we needed to understand whether there were other employees involved – I don’t think there were – but we needed to understand that, and we needed to understand if there was any impropriety that took place.”

Pearson said the primary purpose of the investigation is to determine what took place and establish the sequence of events.

“It’s important that we understand what the source of the trip was, what the source of the document that they signed was, what the source of Exhibit B was – that committed the towns to taking specific action. We want to know what happened, and what the course of events was,” he said.

Pearson said he hopes the investigation will help settle local rumors and clarify what occurred.

“It can answer the question of who did what. I think, importantly it can hopefully answer the question of who did not do anything. So those are some of the things the investigation is able to do to bring some closure, some resolution, and hopefully some peace to the town,” Pearson said.

The Mountain Village Town Council will officially vote on the selection at its meeting Thursday, Feb. 19. Members of the community may provide input on the scope of the investigation at that time or by email to [email protected].

WTO’s investigation will likely take about six weeks.

---

Colorado Lawmakers Talk Rural Issues

Bills that impact agricultural and resort parts of the state are passing and failing at the General Assembly. This week on Capitol Conversation, Colorado Capitol New Alliance reporter Rae Solomon steps in to share the latest.

Story beings at 4:25.

Julia Caulfield (JC): Our listeners will know that we often speak with Lucas for these Capital Conversations, but you’re stepping in today to talk about some bills that you have been covering. There’s one bill that I wanted to chat with you about today that would kind of create a tax break for some local smaller farmers in Colorado. Can you share what this bill is and what it would do?

Rae Solomon (RS): Yeah, the Agriculture Property Tax Definition bill, it sounds kind of in the weeds from the title, but it’s really about just making a little modification in our tax code, the state tax code that will benefit small, and maybe alternative farmers a little bit.

Right now there’s a tax break in our tax code for agricultural properties for grazing, but it’s specifically for land that’s used to graze cattle. This bill would expand that tax break to include land that pastures other animals, notably pigs and chickens. I spoke to some of the lawmakers who sponsored the bill, asking ‘you know, this seems like a pretty minor tweak. Why even bother doing this?’

They told me it’s really about trying to support smaller farmers and support smaller farmers through a change in the face of Colorado agriculture where, small farms are facing a lot of pressures from everything from tariffs to climate change, and people are starting to need to diversify more and experiment more and try new things.

There’s not a ton of farmers right now that this will likely impact. They’re not anticipating that it’s going to be a big financial impact to local governments or entities that are collecting property taxes, but it could be a significant break for the small farmers.

JC: You mentioned that it’s maybe not a very big price tag for governments and it could have big benefit for these smaller farmers. Are you hearing a lot of pushback or does this feel like something that is pretty uncontroversial and is likely to make it through and make it to Governor Jared Polis’ desk?

RS: So far, it seems completely uncontroversial. It passed in committee unanimously and then it passed in the Senate unanimously. So it’s already moving into the second chamber into the House. There’s been zero opposition to it. I think supporting small farmers is something that everybody can get behind.

JC: On the flip side, I also wanted to chat with you about a bill that has already died. It’s already been unable to make it through. And this would be allowing local governments to create a vacancy tax for dark homes in mountain communities. Can you just share a little bit more about what this bill would have done if it had made it to the finish line?

RS: It would have let local governments create a tax on vacant homes.

This is really targeting the mountain resort towns where like some of these towns have, and I’m sure you know, you’re in Telluride, some of these towns have up to 70% vacancy rates most of the year. These are areas with a lot of vacation homes. At the same time, there’s this housing crisis going on where people who work in these communities have to take crazy long commutes to get there because they just can’t afford to live anywhere nearby.

This bill was supposed to try to help address that situation by allowing local communities to create their own taxes. That would have been something that a local government could craft, really customize to whatever the local conditions are, and they would have had to go to voters to get approval for this. So it was not by any stretch creating a vacant home tax. It was just opening the door to that.

But new taxes are controversial, and then especially there was plenty of opposition to this from the community of people who who own second homes in those mountain communities. That surprised me by failing in its first committee hearing. I thought it might make it a little bit further.

It did generate some interesting conversation, though. Asking who are these communities for and opening up the question about private property rights can the government tell you that you need to rent out your property or you’ll be faced with taxes? These are some big questions that I think that bill inadvertently opened the door about.

JC: This bill itself has now failed, but you speak to kind of these conversations that are maybe starting to percolate. Have you heard anything or do you envision that this is a conversation that maybe will continue through the rest of this session when it comes to legislation, or maybe looking into sessions down the line in years to come?

RS: I think this year the conversation is decisively over. It didn’t even make it out of its first committee hearing, but I know that it’s going to continue. I spoke with the lawmaker, one of the main sponsors, Elizabeth Velasco from Glenwood Springs. She told me she definitely plans to reintroduce this next year. She wants to work on community building. She thinks maybe she didn’t focus enough on education and really explaining what this bill would do and how customizable it is for each community to make their own vacancy taxes that make sense for their own communities. So I know that she’s going to try it again. So this conversation might be over for now, but it’s definitely not over in the long run.

---

Community Encouraged to be a Friend of the Library

Everyone in Telluride may consider themselves a friend of the Wilkinson Public Library, but are they officially a card-carrying member?

The Friends of the Library will host a meet and greet this week to share information about becoming a member and the benefits of joining.

Friends of the Library is a nonprofit organization that supports the library by promoting awareness of its services, funding improvements, and sponsoring cultural and educational programs and activities.

The meet and greet is scheduled for 3:30 to 5 p.m. Wednesday, Feb. 18, at the Wilkinson Public Library.

---

Trump Administration Repeals Climate Endangerment Finding

The Trump administration has repealed its authority to regulate climate change-causing pollution from greenhouse gas emissions.

The 2009 endangerment finding determined that pollution from motor vehicles contributes to climate change and threatens public health and safety, giving the Environmental Protection Agency the power to regulate that pollution.

In announcing the decision, the administration said it is also repealing vehicle emissions standards and “restoring consumer choice.”

Chris Winter, director of the environment and natural resources program at the University of Colorado Boulder School of Law, said the move aligns with the administration’s broader goals.

“This administration is… allowing the fossil fuel industry to return to this very old-school way of doing things where the fossil fuel industry can just externalize the costs in terms of pollution, climate change, and all those things that affect all of us, and make our lives difficult and much more expensive,” Winter said.

Winter said the repeal will face a variety of legal challenges from environmental groups, states including Colorado and tribal nations.

Those lawsuits, he said, will test whether the conservative Supreme Court majority bends to the administration’s wishes or defends policies based in science.

---

Olympics Partnership Draws Climate Criticism

The Winter Olympics has been criticized for making an Italian oil company a “premier partner” of the games.

Aspen Public Radio’s Michael Fanelli reports athletes and climate activists argue that’s irresponsible, given the oil industry’s role in threatening the future of winter sports.

A cohort of athletes and advocates delivered a petition to the International Olympic Committee last week, urging it to stop taking sponsorships from fossil fuel companies.

Twelve of those Olympic competitors are partnered with Protect Our Winters, or POW, a Colorado nonprofit that amplifies athlete voices for climate action.

The Olympics have drawn criticism for the environmental impact of building new infrastructure and making tons of fake snow.

But Erin Sprague, POW’s CEO, says that’s missing the point.

“A lot of people ask me about whether the Olympic Games are sustainable or not, and that’s the wrong question, because fossil fuel companies produce hundreds of times more carbon pollution than any single Olympic Games.”

As Colorado deals with a historically low snowpack year, research has shown the West faces a little-to-no snow future based on current emissions trends.

Sprague says to avoid that future, we need to stop burning fossil fuels.

And taking away the positive associations people have with the companies that sell those fossil fuels is a good place to start.