BY KEVIN HOLSAPPLE
Los Alamos

County Council,

I am unsure if I will be able to attend tonight’s meeting, but I have a number of questions I would appreciate if you will address before taking any action. Generally, I like and support the idea of a high-density housing project in the downtown. However, I do not generally support the County subsidizing market-rate developments. In this case, it appears that the Council is being asked to approve a substantial subsidy without public participation in that decision. The project does not appear to have any bearing on our community’s most important housing need – affordable housing for local workers earning $15-17/hour. Here are my questions:

1. From reviewing the presentation, it appears that there has been no public information issued nor has there been any opportunity for public input since 2023.

Q.  Is this understanding correct?

Q. If so, was the public informed and public input solicited about the proposed $3.6M public subsidy as part of the 2023 discussions? Is so, what was the nature of the input received on the subject of the subsidy?

Q. If there has been no opportunity for public understanding/comment, wouldn’t a public briefing and input session be helpful at this juncture?  The Council is once again being asked to decide on a complex project involving a significant public expenditure that the public was only apprised of two working days prior.

2. What is the expected total investment by the developer in the project?  Has an analysis been performed to estimate GRT and property tax proceeds to the County?  How long would it take for the cumulative tax proceeds to equal the proposed subsidy amount of $3.6M
3. Will there be a development agreement requiring the developer to complete the project within a defined time period?  Will the property be offered as security for nonperformance of the development agreement? What happens if development does not occur as anticipated?  Is the property returned to County ownership in that case?
4. What agreement instrument would be used for the $3.6M public subsidy?  Would this be a contract with the developer for services rendered?  Would it be a public-private partnership under the County LEDA ordinance? Other?
5. Is it correct to assume that this project will not include any units affordable by local workers earning $15-17 per hour?
6. How much has the County already spent for infrastructure at this site?  I have heard the number $1.2M.  Is that correct?  Are the County’s prior infrastructure expenses of any use to the proposed development?  If not, why were they undertaken?
7. What are any anticipated negative impacts of the proposed project for local businesses? Has this question been considered? Have local businesses been consulted?
8. What are any potential opportunities for local businesses that would result from the proposed project? Has this question been considered? Have local businesses been consulted?
   1. The presentation lists “Small Business & Local Emerging Entrepreneur Support” as being addressed by the project.  Please explain the thinking behind this.
9. Will the project require any development code variances (including canyon rim set-backs)?  Is it clear that selling the property does not grant any expectation of favorable action(s) for any variance requests?
10. Does the County retain ownership of the Canyon Rim Trail right-of-way or is that sold as part of this and a public trail easement retained?
11. On what street(s) would there be “expanded on-street parallel parking”?
12. Why would a stoplight be needed/justified?  Is it wise to commit to fund a traffic light prior to a traffic study and public input?
13. What examples of relevant successful projects did the developer provide in their proposal? The staff report suggests that the developers were heavily vetted as part of the selection process, but little or no information was shared about this. What did the vetting process entail to reach the conclusions presented?

I would suggest the need for a cost-(public) benefit-risk assessment to clearly identify costs, public benefits, and risks involved. The County should use this kind of analysis to explain the rationale for whatever decision it makes.