Taos is becoming accessible only to the wealthy

Idiscovered Taos in 1978. El Taoseño was flourishing, adobe houses rented for $50 a month, cars didn’t dominate, Joe’s Boardwalk Restaurant was open on John Dunn Street; people rode horses to town and it was good for locals, young, creative people or others looking for somewhere affordable to raise a family, live a rural life and be close to nature.

Now it is a place for those on a high income, and the local people struggle to pay rent and bills. It was a tough place; now it is even tougher. Many leave.

As a beautiful and seductive town that fosters the arts, Taos attracts second- and even thirdhome owners, property developers and investors, who derive income from the beauty that attracts wealthy people. Hotels have been built in the ski valley where large tracts of virgin land are being encroached upon by development. Nature, the original attraction, seems to be taking a backseat to this progress.

I have seen the difficulty for people to find anywhere to live, advertisements where the landlord controls how many people live in a property, forbids pets, even children, and demands over $3,500 upfront, just to move in. I had an entire deposit of $650 taken by a local rental company in 2005 when I lived in one of their units for a year. I was charged to clean an oven I had never used, in the exact same condition as when I moved in.

Tenants and owners need to be respectful of each other rather than the current distrust leading to penalties and costs when tenants don’t care about cleaning when they leave because they assume they will not get their deposits back. Service industry jobs do not support escalating rents. Currently people working from home from elsewhere have snapped up a lot of the reasonably priced rental accommodations. With high rents it then becomes almost impossible for people to get their heads above water, reduce credit card bills or even think of ever owning a place of their own or a secure rental.

Is there even any such thing as a secure rental for life?

I understand the risks business people take and the hard work involved. They should be rewarded. But we all need a decent place to live, regardless of income. Could there be a cap on rent levels? A surcharge on second- and third-home owners? Can owners charge as much as they like willy nilly? Has this ever been considered in council chambers? Has the concept of building affordable, decent accommodation ever been mooted? Would this not have a positive ripple effect?

Meanwhile many trees are sacrificed to this negative ecology. Removing trees in Taos Plaza? Veteran Cottonwoods wiped clean away on Kit Carson Road? Whose staggeringly bad idea was it to remove trees from the Plaza when they offered shade on a hot day? Now a shadow of its former self, when it should be a busy hub for people to gather, talk and exchange news. Many people seem to meet in Walmart now, most of the cafes and restaurants excluding people who are on restricted income and often as not locals born and bred in the county. It is as if the town is not theirs anymore.

I have paid property taxes since 2003 for an acre of land I bought with a small inheritance from my parents. I have no power or influence on what that money is spent on. It was another dream that has been left “lying fallow.” Trying to live there proved impossible, except for extended visits, although my taxes are taken and continue to be taken, with remarkable efficiency.

Many good people try to start a life in Taos and fail. Even visitors are restricted by rising costs. For people who love to hike for example, decent people on average incomes, paying for a holiday let is crippling.

Trees can be planted, homes can be built, but magic and soul cannot be bought and sold. Business people and landlords, property owners and investors can you not try to invest in people? Is it not possible to build decent homes not completely dominated by cruel market forces benefiting the few and penalizing those on average incomes?