The Steamboat Springs City Council signaled support Monday for moving forward with the Yampa Valley Regional Transportation Authority, giving a majority thumbs-up to a three-year, $1-million-a-year funding pledge from Steamboat Ski & Resort Corp. — even as several councilors voiced frustration over negotiating terms, lingering distrust and unanswered questions about future funding. 

Council’s decision paves the way for the RTA intergovernmental agreement and associated ballot language to return on Tuesday, Sept. 2 for a formal vote, with the fate of another potential ballot question — a lift-ticket tax — to be discussed at the same meeting.

Earlier this month, Ski Corp. unexpectedly pulled back on a long-touted 20-year, $1-million-per-year pledge to support the RTA, instead pledging $1 million for one year, just weeks before the Sept. 5 deadline to submit ballot language. While most of the RTA member jurisdictions vocalized reluctant agreement to the revised pledge, Routt County officials remained firm that it was “unacceptable” and proposed a three-year, $1-million-per-year pledge.

---

---

At the Aug. 19 council meeting, members wrestled with whether the RTA formation question remained viable given Ski Corp.’s sudden retreat and approved the first reading of lift tax ballot language, integrating provisions to reflect $1 million in annual funding for the RTA. 

A day later, Ski Corp. President and COO Dave Hunter sent an email to members of the RTA formation committee with a revised pledge of $1 million per year over three years, pursuant to the county’s request, with the caveat that the revised pledge would “automatically terminate” should the city decide to put a lift-tax question on the ballot. 

---

---

According to City Attorney Dan Foote, after a formation committee meeting on Aug. 21, the pledge agreement was revised so that the contribution would only terminate if a lift tax was both referred to voters and successfully passed – and if it passed, that the city would be on the hook for $1 million annually for the RTA through 2046.

City Council then convened a special meeting on Monday, Aug. 25 to discuss whether to move forward with the proposed RTA given the new iteration of the pledge agreement. 

Calls for accountability

The new pledge agreement states that formal negotiations to extend the pledge beyond the initial three years are targeted to conclude by April 1, 2027, while the three-year funding commitment — and termination clause regarding a lift tax — runs through Dec. 31, 2028.

Councilor Dakotah McGinlay suggested some sort of consequence for Ski Corp. should the longer-term agreement not be finalized by the April 2027 deadline, to which Foote responded that Ski Corp. was “unwilling to offer that.”

Councilor Bryan Swintek, who was absent at the Aug. 19 council meeting, expressed his distrust. 

“From my perspective, the resort’s good faith has been used up, and so I am not comfortable with this without some repercussion for not completing the negotiation,” said Swintek. “This simply puts us in the same position and kicks the can down the road.”

“There is very little incentive for them to do anything other than what they’ve been doing and what they have done: pay lip service, say they will do it in good faith, and then when the rubber meets the road, say they didn’t have enough time,” he added. “So I no longer trust the resort’s good faith.”

Council President Gail Garey asked if there was any time left to amend the pledge agreement language given that Routt County and the city of Craig would be making decisions on whether to move forward with the RTA on Tuesday, Aug. 26. 

“Getting new language drafted and reviewed by everybody is not going to happen before tomorrow,” Foote replied.

Councilor Steve Muntean, also absent from the Aug. 19 council meeting, raised the possibility of a scenario in which the RTA formation question passes, an RTA tax question passes in 2026 and Ski Corp. opts out of the longer-term pledge after three years.

“That million-dollar (annual) shortfall, from Year 4 to Year 20, how is that made up?” Muntean asked, “and how do we financially plan the RTA without some security that we know it’s going to happen?”

“I don’t think you can,” Foote admitted. “That will be a big question mark … if things aren’t resolved by April 1, 2027.”

Routt County Commissioner Sonja Macys, speaking during both the council discussion and public comment periods on behalf of the commissioners, made clear the county’s stance. 

“We do not love the idea that we have to go back to the drawing board and negotiate. Obviously, we tried to advocate strongly for the 20 years to be a solid commitment,” said Macys. “But when we asked for the three-year commitment, we asked for it thinking we would be in a strong position to negotiate the rest.”

“Whether that million dollars a year comes from (Ski Corp.) directly as a pledge, or whether it comes through the city of Steamboat Springs as a lift-ticket tax, we don’t particularly care,” Macys continued. “One way or the other, (the money) is going to come to the RTA, and that’s what we’re looking for over 20 years’ time.”

City Manager Tom Leeson cautioned councilors that the feasibility of a lift tax successfully passing was “fraught with risk” and that there’s “no guarantee the city would be backfunded.”

“There’s a scenario where (the RTA) doesn’t get funded at all,” said Leeson. 

Macys then said that the county has identified other funding sources for the RTA, such as funds from the upcoming Xcel settlement decision, as well as verbal commitments from the state for ongoing funding.

“None of that has been asked of the county, so there’s another piece of good faith that we will follow through with,” said Macys.

Public weighs in

The public comment period revealed deep divisions. 

Ski Corp. Vice President of Brand and Resort Strategy Katie Brown, speaking on behalf of the resort in the absence of President and COO Dave Hunter, opened public comment by reiterating the resort’s “commitment to the long-term success of the RTA” and said that the revised pledge of $1 million annually for three years “represents (their) investment in the RTA formation.”

Longtime resident Diane Brower lambasted the ski corporation, calling Ski Corp.’s pledge “offensive and inadequate.” 

“Having lived in the valley since 1980, Ski Corp. has never paid its way … this amount is really nothing considering its enormous profits and its enormous impacts on the city,” said Brower. “In the interest of fairness and fiscal responsibility, please calculate a substantial and truly equitable taxing amount.”

“These are hard decisions to make, but we voted for you to make hard decisions,” urged Brower, “not to listen to monied interests.”

David Box, planning commissioner and candidate for the District 3 seat on City Council, implored city leaders to put the RTA on the ballot, and said putting the lift tax on the ballot “puts us at a huge risk.” 

Luke Philips, who identified himself as an “engaged observer,” echoed Box’s comments.

“Ski Corp. is giving us $3 million as earnest money. If they fail the rest of the negotiations, this future RTA board still got $3 million for free,” said Philips. “Please graciously move on from the lift tax today. It’s divisive and will lead to the failure of all ballot efforts this fall.”

Community member John Spezia expressed his frustration that the city has been “bullied and blackmailed.” 

Where council stands

As the meeting drew to a close, council members took stock of their positions.

“We don’t have to love it, but we do love the formation of the RTA, and this is how we get there,” said West. “So I think that’s a verbal thumbs-up.”

“I can live with it,” said McGinlay. “I don’t love it, but I can live with it.”

“It feels somewhat that we’re between a rock and a hard place on this,” said Muntean. “I don’t like it, but I can support this to move it forward.”

“Ski Corp. put us in a terrible position, and so with what we have today, I’m going to give a verbal thumbs-up,” said Dickson. “Looking forward to our meeting next Tuesday to talk more about the IGA (intergovernmental agreement) and our lift tax.”

Garey said she was looking at it from Macys’ point of view for the sake of the collective good. 

“From the perspective of our community members and our partners in the other municipalities … I think the time is now to move forward with the RTA,” she said.

Swintek, however, dissented forcefully.

“Billion-dollar companies become billion-dollar companies by manipulating the system in their favor. They plead poor while driving in their branded Rivians. They fluff us, they screw us, and then they give us their pittance, and we thank them for it,” said Swintek. 

“We are offering the resort a discount of $1 million a year so they can ship their employees here and bring their customers here, because if they had to pay their people a living wage to live in town, or provide housing, it would cost them more than $1 million,” he continued. “Yet they still balk at this because they know they can win the game.”

“We are all kidding ourselves if we believe that they will come back to the table in a different fashion a third time,” Swintek added. “When someone shows you who they are, believe them.”

The council’s tentative thumbs-up means the RTA intergovernmental agreement and associated ballot language will return for a vote at their Sept. 2 regular meeting, after the county and other jurisdictions consider it this week. 

The fate of the lift tax will also be considered at the same meeting, with council remaining divided about guarantees for future RTA funding, trust in the resort’s “good faith” and the overall fairness of the agreement.