Our Statement to CBS Denver for the Interview with Natural Areas Director, Katie Donahue
Regarding the interview that aired on May 13, 2025 with Natural Areas Director, Katie Donahue, we did provide a written statement to CBS Denver’s Dillon Thomas at his request. Our statement has not been posted on the CBS Denver website, and no part of our statement was quoted in the video interview with Natural Areas Director, Katie Donahue. So we are posting our statement here for the public.
Please see the funding and solvency reports of the Natural Areas Department for yourself, where we are purchasing and conserving most of our Natural Areas lands, and how Hughes is already funded. Letting the space rewild over a long period of time with minimal intervention (weed control) will not significantly impact the Natural Areas budget.
Notably, when we asked Mr. Thomas if he had asked for supporting documentation for the statements presented in this video interview, he said he did not.
Note: The statements in the interview conflict with what former Natural Areas Director, John Stokes, stated in 2019 at a public meeting in which he said that the Natural Areas budget was sufficiently solvent to purchase Hughes for a Natural Area. At least one citizen provided public comment on Stokes’ statement to that effect at a subsequent public City Council meeting that year.
Statement from PATHS to CBS Denver News
May 13, 2025
The Natural Areas Department (NAD) statement (which we were provided by CBS Denver) does not align with the NAD’s own policy documents, like the Foothills Management Plan, or the department’s revenue and expenditure statements provided in their annual reports which can be found on their website.
The City’s own “Foothills Management Plan - Update 2019” (updated again in January 2025) describes the importance of reducing wildlife habitat fragmentation to create vital interconnectivity between patches of habitat, for the conservation of our local foothills fauna and flora, which preserving Hughes would do.
Furthermore, the NADs statement on revenue is in direct contradiction with the NADs own annual report statements. For instance, in 2022, over $16.5 million in revenue was generated for the NAD from dedicated City and County sales taxes and earnings on investments. In 2023, that figure was nearly $19.6 million.
Further evidence of the solvency of the NAD is found in the City's 12/31/23 audited financial statements (pages 125 and 136).
Recall that Hughes Open Space is already funded, and in fact, it is already 1/3 paid off thanks to a $4 million down payment shared 50:50 by the City’s General Fund and the Natural Areas department. The remaining $8.5 million is in a favorable, low-interest loan that spans 10 years, just like a low-interest mortgage, per City staff's own description of the loan.
Just $550K will be paid from Natural Areas and the General Fund each, for 10 years. In 10 years, Hughes will have been gradually, and entirely, paid off.
NAD has the most revenue of any City Department, and it will not be negatively impacted by spending $500K per year over 10 years, especially where there is an existing dedicated sales tax for land conservation that we all gladly pay into.
The City absolutely has flexibility in how the money is split across departments and the General Fund, as well as the timing of such fungible budgetary commitments.
Assuming the City really does ask the NAD to ultimately pay for the entire purchase price of Hughes when the debt service is paid off, there is absolutely no reason the NAD would be forced to pay it all at once.
As an example, if the City so choses, it could ask the NAD to contribute another $550K over another 10 years to gradually pay off remaining purchase price of Hughes from the General Fund.
Residents and voters bear the brunt of sales taxes, and we want a reasonable say in how our tax dollars are spent. We are not silent partners.
The City will likely ask voters via a referred citizen-driven initiative to extend the sales tax, this time in perpetuity without expiration, that for decades has funded the Natural Areas Program.
This popular tax is highly likely to pass with flying colors as it has in the past, which suggests there will be more than sufficient funding in years to come for land acquisitions, restoration and maintenance, including those of high conservation value like Hughes, that actually exists within the city limits of Fort Collins.
For years, residents have been insisting that more land be conserved by Natural Areas within the city limits of Fort Collins for ecological preservation and low-impact recreation, and the City has indicated that Natural Areas are a priority investment for outdoor recreation (slides 8 and 9).
As it stands, 71% of conserved City Natural Areas acres exist outside of the Fort Collins city limits and generally require a car to visit.
Only 29% of Natural Areas conserved acreage exists within city limits near where Fort Collins residents and taxpayers live, work, and play.
Fort Collins residents and taxpayers without a reliable vehicle are effectively prohibited from enjoying Fort Collins Natural Areas properties beyond city limits, most of which exist near Wyoming and Estes Park.
There is a significant opportunity cost to not conserving land within the city limits of Fort Collins NOW before it is gone, or before it is prohibitively expensive.
The opportunity to acquire and conserve land within Fort Collins is fast diminishing in the face of increasing development pressures within our city.
We should make wise decisions now about protecting land within city limits while we can, before it’s too late.
The Fort Collins taxpayers have willingly decided to place a tax upon themselves to conserve lands as Natural Areas within our wonderful city for all to enjoy and experience freely.
