 |
| Sierra Luna Road |
News New Mexico's photos tell a terrible story of an anti-business, double standard at city council that is causing serious economic damage to the Las Cruces area. The first photo depicts a well-engineered road that leads to a stranded golf course in the north east section of the city. This road was actually intended to be a secondary road that leads directly to the site of the proposed golf clubhouse. The development company that built this road also maintains the golf course. The development company was told by city staffers (under orders from meddling councilors) that NO occupational permit should be allowed for the golf clubhouse until the development company also built "another access road." The other access road was to be located just 1/3rd of mile east of this road. The "other" road, the main road, was actually to become a major arterial roadway, complete with street lights, multiple use paths, bike lanes etc. for the area. Even when the development company asked for the secondary road (above) to be used simply as access for golfers headed out to play the golf course earlier this summer, two of the seven city councilors (Olga Pedroza and Nathan Small) voted to continue to render this road (and the golf course) useless.
 |
| Stranded Golf Course |
Let's fast forward to the present and see what has happened to the lofty standards. Let's have a look at site where the base course is now being laid on the "temporary" road on North Sonoma Ranch Boulevard. Somehow, with approval of our same city councilors this "temporary" road has been substitued for the "major arterial" roadway demanded from the development company. Sadly, it is obvious even to an untrained naked eye that this "temporary" road will suffer constantly from poor drainage. In fact, unlike the well-designed secondary road above, this temporary road will be a maintenance nightmare Take particular note of the elevation of dirt mounds on the sides of this hastily built temporary road. What will be the immediate use of this road, that is now being laid on the same pathway that the city had told the development company MUST be constructed as a major arterial thoroughfare? It will used for access each day by school buses and parents taking children to the brand new multi-million dollar Monte Vista Elementary School. The road may also be used by emergency vehicles in the event the other narrow road (Jornada) is impassible.
 |
| Temporary Road on N. Sonoma Ranch Boulevard |
Many serious questions arise regarding the council's double dealing and double standards. Did the acceptability of this temporary road come before council for a vote? We doubt it. We suspect staffers quietly signed off. Were city and LCPS staff and planners pleased to make rapid plans for LCPS to pay for this temporary road when $10 million in New Mexico Finance Authority funds were available to build a first class four lane thoroughfare by the development company? Not hardly. Is this temporary road what parents of children attending Las Cruces Public Schools would find acceptable, given all the facts? Not at all. Does this ill-conceived temporary road reflect in any way, shape, or form the stringent demands made on and met by the development company? No way.
 |
| Monte Vista Elementary School |
Does LCPS pay any gross receipts tax to the city to construct roads. Nope. Will the development company have to rip this collosal waste of taxpayers money right back out of the ground and cover it up with 90 thousand cubic yards of dirt fill when the permanent roadway is built? You bet. Through the actions of meddling, anti-business councilors, are local taxpayers seeing more than $1 million of their money squandered on a sub par temporary road to a school? Absolutely. Will LCPS receive $1 million from the development company for their infrastrcuture contributions in the area? Not now. Was the proposed four-lane road to be built by the develoment company, with all the extra amenities, going to cost taxpayers a dime? Not one red cent. Does this dubious result constitute "getting it right the first time" as described by Councilors Dolores Conner and Sharon Thomas in their recent op-ed pieces in the local newspapers, after they were challenged on the wisdom of reneging on their original votes for NMFA funds (along with all other councilors EXCEPT Mayor Ken Miyagishima). Surely you jest. Is this any way for reliable councilors to act when their duty is to serve as stewards of the public trust? We suggest everyone drive out to this area of town and decide for yourself how badly city council has botched this deal.
Posts
0 comments:
Post a Comment