One of the persistent hot topics in local politics has been the "zones of influence" incorporated municipalities want to establish beyond their city or town limits. Intergovernmental agreements between towns and counties allow that to happen fairly easily, and there are good reasons to craft those agreements.

Our population is growing, and most of the growth hasn’t come as infill to already established communities. Rather, it’s happening in the unincorporated areas of the county. Some of it is remote, but quite a lot is clustering in subdivisions just outside of our towns. If and when the residents of those subdivisions want to annex themselves to their neighbor municipalities — and they will, because the economic and political benefits are substantial — everyone benefits if the infrastructure matches up. Streets need to connect, water and sewer systems need to be compatible.

Some county residents have objected to those zones of influence, believing they’re an attempt for municipal governments to dictate decisions in which they have no business being involved. The right to raise chickens is one privilege frequently mentioned, but the reservations go far beyond that: No one wants the "government," any government, to have more power over them.

So it was interesting to hear Cortez city council candidates being quizzed, at a forum last Thursday, about their opinions on the Anasazi ACEC west of Cortez, being considered for further federal protection or interference, depending on whom you ask. As Cortez citizens, they have the same right to an opinion as any other citizen of Montezuma County or the United States. If elected, they might have a little more collective clout, because the city council does have some lobbying power.

But the truth is that the proposed Canyon of the Ancients National Whatever isn’t inside or even adjacent to the city limits. While city residents have strong opinions, and ample justification for holding them, it’s somewhat paradoxical to expect the council to attempt to dictate to the federal government the uses of BLM land when there has been such a strong protest against those innocuous zones of influence.

Another irony is that what might be good for Cortez — an increase in visitation and the income associated with it — is not the same as what’s good for the residents of the western part of the county, and perhaps not even the same as what’s best for the federal lands in question.

City officials are charged with guarding the city’s interests. Any attempt to draw them into a fight not of their making is unfair to them and unfair to Cortez residents. They have to base their policies on political realities, not on pie-in-the-sky wish lists.