We Need to Limit Spending
October 5, 2008--Los Alamos Monitor, Candidate Interview Question 4
In my opinion Council has made a mistake by committing a sizable part of our projected public money over the next 20 years towards big capital projects such as expansive road work, an overly elaborate municipal building and a separate judicial complex, especially since these projects will do little to expand our economy and create new high paying jobs in Los Alamos County. The old municipal building served the County’s needs quite well including judicial functions for many years. I believe that a new municipal building could be built at the site of the old building for about $15 million. If Council had chosen this route instead of electing to build both a new municipal building ($25 million) and a new judicial complex ($20 million) we could have saved at least $30 million.
The financial projections of today can not account for the unforeseen events of the future. Many people have already lost their jobs and further downsizing of the laboratory by more than 25% over than next 20 years could become reality. In addition most of the County revenue today comes in the form of GRT tax from the laboratory and it is not clear to me how much of the current amount we are going to receive over the long term. The possibility exists for more job losses and diminishing GRT revenue therefore it would be prudent to adopt a more fiscally conservative approach in our long term financial plan, lest we find our financial projections falling short in the future. Given our excessive and wasteful spending today do we have the right to expect homeowners and small business owners to pay more taxes in the future to make up for any short fall in our budget projections?
Council Chose the Wrong Location for the Skate Park
September 28, 2008--Los Alamos Monitor, Candidate Interview Question 3
I appreciate Council’s desire to move forward with the skate park. I would like our youth to have a new skate park on the Hill, but I believe that Council chose the wrong location for it and in my opinion the process they used to make this decision was flawed as well.
A skate park requires sufficient space and putting one in front of the library sandwiched between the trees puts unnecessary constraints on the skate park. There are other more suitable locations in the downtown area, such as the corner of Trinity and 20th, where a parking lot currently exists. A much nicer skate park could have been built in this location without comprising green space or forcing skaters to maneuver around trees.
I signed the petition that was presented to Council on August 5th because I feel that all voters should have their voice heard on this divisive issue. Signing that petition does not make me anti-youth as some would have you believe. In my opinion, the petitioners presented Council with a democratic way to end the divisiveness by allowing the voters to approve or disapprove the library site location on the November 4th ballot. Council rejected this democratic approach.
I Support the Trinity Site Project
September 21, 2008--Los Alamos Monitor, Candidate Interview Question 2
I would like to see more retail choices for the citizens of Los Alamos County and the voters have already spoken in favor of proceeding with the development of the Trinity site, by approving Ordinance 529 for bonds to help finance the construction of the Airport Basin facilities and the clearing of the land at the Trinity site itself. As a County our goal should now be to ensure that we are not spending more money than absolutely necessary to accomplish these tasks. In my view the total amount of $75 million that Council has allocated for the Airport Basin work and clearing the Trinity site is excessive. We are spending far too much to build the warehouses at the Airport Basin. Furthermore it is not unreasonable to expect the Trinity site developer to assume some of the cost to clear the land at the Trinity site.
As we proceed with both the Airport Basin facilities and clearing the Trinity site, it is essential that we hold the line on the budget. In my opinion we should not be spending more than $50 million for these two tasks.
Having a new Smith’s Marketplace as the anchor store would be a good thing for our community. I think the business plan for a Smith’s Marketplace, which is similar to a Wal-Mart store, is sound because consumers would be able to purchase a full selection of groceries in addition to a selection of clothes, household goods, electronics and other goods which are currently not available in Los Alamos County. I think this is the best opportunity that has come along in years to expand retail options in Los Alamos County and having this kind of retail in our community would make it easier for families and working people to obtain the goods they need.
Why I'm Running for Council
September 14, 2008--Los Alamos Monitor, Candidate Interview Question 1
I am running for County Council because I believe that as a county we are spending more money than necessary on excessive capital projects. I have a different set of priorities than the current council which has allocated resources in a wasteful manner for expansive road work, building demolition projects, the West Jemez bypass, overly elaborate warehouses at the Airport basin, extravagant sidewalk projects and a new municipal building that will have twice as much space as needed at twice the cost. We are a small community and we are best served by frugal projects, yet many of the decisions of this Council have made it more likely that a greater tax burden will be placed on our citizens in the future.
I believe that the people of Los Alamos County would be better served by the kind of priorities that I would bring to the Council. We should fund the White Rock Downtown Master plan now, since the need for economic development is greatest in White Rock and the homeowners who live there deserve their fair share of County resources for development. We should fix our electrical grid now so that there are less interruptions and more reliable service. We need to help our schools by lowering the County’s share of properties taxes, so that school facilities can be repaired without homeowners paying more taxes. We should expand retail options to encompass goods and services that are not currently available in Los Alamos County so that in these difficult economic times our citizens do not have to travel great distances outside the County to purchase the goods they need. We should fund our public bus system so that our citizens can continue to ride for free, helping to mitigate the high cost of gas.
I have the leadership skills, ideas, energy and commitment necessary to enact my priorities, if given the opportunity to serve on the Council. As a public official I would work to ensure that our county government lives within its means while continually promoting the growth of our local economy and reducing the burdens on working people and small business owners. I will work to make sure that our projects are good deals for the County and not windfalls for developers.
Municipal Building Plan Is Not Good for the County
September 9, 2008--Los Alamos Monitor
I would like to see a cooperative market in Los Alamos and I believe that such a business would be successful, but a partnership with the County is not necessary in order to make it happen. As part of their proposal the cooperative market developers would like us to pay for an underground parking structure at the Trinity and 15th site in addition to the cost of the new municipal building itself. The developers propose an elaborate municipal building at more than 44,000 square feet which is much larger than what is needed to accommodate our staff, especially since the judicial area has been removed from it. The old municipal building was 21,000 square feet and this space served the needs of our community quite well for many years, including judicial functions.
I have not heard a valid reason why the developers couldn’t build the cooperative market on their own, and I would like to see them do so because a new commercial building with a restaurant and market would greatly improve the appearance of the Trinity and 15th area and generate more economic activity there. The County will receive GRT revenue from the commercial building regardless of whether it is next to the new municipal building or not.
A new municipal building at Trinity and 15th would deprive us of land that could be used in the future for commercial development, involving for instance a new small technology company, like IMTech which brought new high paying jobs into our community when it located here a few years ago. For this reason we should build our new municipal building on land currently owned by the County, and I believe that we could build a new municipal building with about 21,000 square feet of space at the site of the old building while staying within the current budget of $15 million for this project. Council should stay within this budget, and building an overly elaborate municipal building with more than 44,000 square feet and an underground parking structure would cause us to spend about $25 million on the project. In my opinion this is about $10 million too much and it is not a good deal for the County.
The County Should Help Our Schools
August 19, 2008--Los Alamos Monitor
Los Alamos Pubic Schools are highly regarded for academic excellence and make Los Alamos a desirable place to live. We must ensure that the schools have classrooms and facilities that live up to this reputation. I applaud the school district for formulating a plan to revitalize aging school facilities including the high school, middle school and Aspen elementary school. As a community we need to support this plan; however now is not a good time for an increased tax burden on our citizens. Many people have lost their jobs, several homes are in foreclosure, more than four hundred homes are on the market and people are paying considerably more for gas relative to just a few years ago. We should not be indifferent to these conditions by expecting citizens to now pay more property tax.
The school district can implement a facility repair plan without homeowners paying more property tax if the school district and the county work together, since both of these government bodies receive property tax revenue. The county receives much more revenue from gross receipts tax than from property tax. If the county were to lower its property tax to offset an increase in the tax from the school district, more tax revenue would go to the school district enabling the district to finance general obligation bonds for a facility repair plan. In such an approach homeowners would not see an increase in their overall property tax.
I favor this type of approach and I believe it is feasible without impacting the debt obligations and the essential services of the county. We must work to achieve our county goals while living within our means. The most important job for the council is to look carefully and critically at public spending. It is essential that we hold our capital improvement projects within budget and we prioritize our future spending. We are a small community and we are best served by frugal projects. In my view looking towards the future helping our schools is more important than things such as expansive road work, building demolition projects and elaborate warehouses.
White Rock Needs a Downtown Plaza
July 1, 2008--Los Alamos Monitor
I support the recent decision by County Council to accept the White Rock Downtown Master Plan. White Rock needs a downtown plaza area which would serve as a focal point for private investment encompassing retail stores, restaurants, and more affordable housing options for the citizens of White Rock and Los Alamos County in general. We need to act to diversify our local economy and promote our county as a gateway to nature. I commend the Steering Committee for the great deal of work that it has done developing this plan, which would create favorable conditions for renewed private investment in White Rock and help brand Los Alamos County as a premier destination for outdoor activities. Furthermore the work of the Steering Committee is an excellent example of concerned citizens doing their part to help improve our community.
Having a plan is a good first step, but this alone is not enough. As a county we have already committed resources towards economic development on the Hill. The need for economic development in White Rock is greater. The homeowners of White Rock deserve their fair share of county resources for economic development. We can implement the White Rock Downtown Master Plan if we hold the line with regards to the budgets of our other capital projects and prioritize county spending. We don’t need to do everything all at once and we can accomplish our goals as a county while living within our means. The highest priorities for county spending in the near future should be economic development both on the Hill and in White Rock, and helping our schools with their infrastructure revitalization by lowering the county’s share of property taxes.