picture of Pete

Capital Improvement Projects

  • Even with Lab budget cuts in recent years, we have been able to build up the Capital Improvement Projects Fund to over $14M, and we still have about $3M left in the Economic Development Fund (from an original $8M “buyout” grant made to the County by DOE, when its yearly assistance grants to the County were discontinued). However, we don’t know whether or not the new Lab contract to be awarded in 2018 will continue with a for-profit contractor; if not, county GRT revenues could drop by as much as 34% (~$17M).
  • The present County Council has worked hard to get maximum value from dollars invested in capital improvement projects. For example, we sent back the original Teen Center and White Rock Library, Senior and Youth Center proposals because they were too expensive. After re-scoping, we were able to build excellent facilities that serve these needs for about half of the originally estimated cost. There has been good citizen participation in the planning and advocacy of individual projects, but some people question the overall prioritization--which projects go first and why. Priority for funding projects should be based on a transparent rating system, which includes capital costs, operating costs, economic benefits, and impact on other County strategic goals. New or improved recreational facilities attract some tourists to stay and spend more money here, helping local retail, and these projects will make people more enthusiastic about living here. But I place a higher priority on using the money and land we have to revitalize downtown Los Alamos and White Rock, and grow the local economy. In the long run, successful investments in economic development will create new jobs and private investment, leading to increased tax revenues that can support additional recreational development. In general, I agree with the idea that existing County assets, such as the Duane Smith Auditorium or the Golf Course, should be maintained before additional new large projects are constructed.
  • I support the concept of submitting a major recreational projects bond issue to the voters, with the following two conditions: 1) We should obtain authorization from the state legislature to increase the Los Alamos property tax rebate for people of low income, so that a property tax increase will not fall on the people in our community who cannot afford it; 2) We should time the recreational bond election so that the for-profit/non-profit status of the new LANL contract is known, because of the large impact this will have on County revenues and potential taxes.
  • Regardless of the future details of the Lab contract or the vote on a bond issue, we will continue to be a prosperous community. If we manage our funds wisely and prioritize, we will be able to afford the most important things to keep Los Alamos a nice place to live.