William McCawley: Thanks for asking


Kudos to Cari Hermacinski for her City Council re-election advertisement asking for my opinion regarding Steamboat 700 and 360 Village annexation. Her question should scream at the voting population of Steamboat. The annexation question is too big a decision for City Council and a handful of interested parties to make on their own.

The decision to expand the city by such magnitude should be made by everyone. I believe in the 51/49 rule. If the issue is put to a vote of the people of Steamboat, we should all respect the outcome. However, I will always be a little suspicious of the decision if it is made by a small group of people, many of whom have a horse in this race.

I recommend postponing the Oct. 13 council vote and putting the measure on the November ballot to see where the majority of Steamboat residents vote on the issue, then move accordingly. By the way, I am not in favor of annexation. My reasons are neither important, nor original. But Cari, thanks for asking.

William McCawley

Steamboat Springs


Jax Larsen 7 years, 7 months ago

I am so often frustrated - I live at the Riverbend Cabins and am not part of the city. I can't vote for city council members, I have to pay more $$ when I take a course at CMC (people w/in city limits pay a lot less), etc. I am just as affected by the 700 & 360 projects as people living in the city limits and I cannot vote on it. I don't like this one bit. These projects affect me profoundly and may even alter/change my quality of life and I essentially have no say since I don't have a vote. Just thinking out loud.


freerider 7 years, 7 months ago

I gotta agree with you on this one Bill , suspicious is too nice a word to use here . More like smelly , or corrupt , or underhanded , these annexations will only serve the developers . Anybody been to Vegas lately ?? free tours of massive foreclosures because of unscrupulous developers. 2000 more homes in Steamboat with no way to solve the traffic issue . CDOT IS NOT GOING TO HELP , hello , lets just move the Yampa River , 2000 more homes = how many kids , according to the city council 400 . WOW !! do the math next time . That could easily end up being a 1000 or more . And the water issue has yet to be solved as well . Too many unresolved issues and it is way too big for a handful of people to decide....put this to a vote


aichempty 7 years, 7 months ago

One way to eliminate the possibility of corruption and influence is to put it to a popular vote. Then, nobody can complain if it passes.

Jax, with all due respect, do you expect to live the rest of your life in the River Bend Cabins? I assume you are a renter. If not, my apologies, and I have learned something new. If you are a renter, you face the constant hazard of displacement, and the 700 project is just one more proof of how things go when you don't own the land. You can't control what you don't own.

I consider it a blessing that I don't live in Steamboat. Near enough to enjoy, but far enough away to avoid. My reaction to the 700 proposal is easy. Unless it brings better shopping for food along with it, I'll be taking the bypass roads on my way to shop in Hayden and won't have to see the place.

I personally don't believe that there are enough people willing to live in a place like the 700 project is proposed to be, and suspect that if it is approved, the major marketing thrust will be "Land in Steamboat Springs!" advertised all over the place for people to buy vacant lots.

We don't have the jobs to support that number of new families in this town. Ain't gonna happen unless somebody develops a local cash-cow industry other than skiing and tourism.

This project will only benefit the developers in the long run, and leave Steamboat citizens holding the bag and living with the traffic and later problems that will arise.

So, the vote is a good idea. It needs to be settled once and for all.


Karen_Dixon 7 years, 7 months ago

Mr. McCawley, To which horse-in-the-race are you referring? Perhaps you were being flippant, but this is a serious accusation to which I take exception, as one of & on behalf of the "small group."

Might I remind you that the horse we support is the one that the large group - the community - entered into the race 10 years ago. Various "small groups" - during the last 10 years have been working diligently to ensure the success of that horse on behalf of its owner. That horse's name is WSSAP, and it belongs to the Large Group.

There are, however, lots of personal horses in this race which belong to individuals within both the small and the large group. One of them may belong to you, Mr. McCawley. It's name is Property Value. Rest assured that That horse is very powerful and very strong. There are ways to ensure that this horse remains strong, but crippling new horses to limit the threat to yours is wrong. To the Large Group with this horse: The Small Group welcomes and strongly encourages your participation in the process, as evidenced by Councilwoman Hermacinski's ad. But please examine your motives and do not let your personal horse's success impair your judgment. We charge you with the same level of impartiality and fairness with which you charge us.


Requires free registration

Posting comments requires a free account and verification.