Hi, neighbors.
Below is an email from Commissioner Holian regarding various Capital Improvement Projects that the county is currently considering. Note there are a few road projects included. If, in the future, the residents want the county to help fund an upgrade of Apache Ridge Road, petitioning the county to become a County Improvement Project is the mechanism we would most likely have to follow.
Several residents have been meeting periodically with Commissioner Holian and County Attorney Steve Ross to determine the feasibility of such a project and what kind of costs the residents would be expected to bear (in the form of a mandatory assessment attached to property taxes payable over a set period of time).
We are still trying to nail down specifics on what would be involved if the residents chose to apply for a CID. We hope to determine things like:
--what would be most advantageous to residents to have with a one-time improvement: the first mile? the lower part of the road up to Lone Pine Spur? including Lone Pine Spur? up through the State Land parcel?
--what would the county require us to agree to in terms of improvement: county dirt road specs? drainage improvements? surface materials improvements?
--what costs would residents be expected to bear? Usually the funds come from General Obligation bonds (see below) but are then paid back by the affected residents in the form of an annual assessment attached to (but separate from) property taxes. Would all residents in the entire neighborhood be included in the assessment, even if only a portion of the road is addressed? Would all residents be EQUALLY assessed? What kind of numbers are we talking about, and how does that pro-rate over time?
--what would be the option for future maintenance? Is this a one-time improvement or is there a possibility for future ongoing maintenance? should the residents expect to continue contributing to a road fund for grading and snow-plowing in addition to the county assessment for the one-time improvement?
These are the kinds of questions we are trying to get answers to so that we can present a detailed questionnaire and specific information to the residents with an opprotunity for feedback.
One thing that is apparent is that without making a concerted effort to improve the surface of the road with a lot of new basecoarse, it's only going to continue to degrade. Grading at this point means scraping the powdered old basecoarse out of the bar ditches and putting it back on the surface, where it immediatly blows away or washboards. Additionally, monitoring the condition of the road and making determinations about maintenance is a job that everyone in the neighborhood needs to take responsibility for. New volunteers are going to have to step up and take over the database/dues collection process in the future. It's easy to say "we like the road the way it is" but that also means "and we want someone else to keep managing it." Please think about how you can contribute to this process in a meaningful way.
Thank you--
Candelora
Candelora Versace, Apache Ridge Property Owners Association
2012 Board: Candelora Versace, Kristin Ryan, Gustav Kocsis, Michael Jerry, Jennifer Como & Chris Mosconi
ARPOA, 44 Apache Ridge Rd, SF NM 87505
Begin forwarded message:
Subject: Capital Improvement Projects
Date: June 28, 2012 4:01:23 PM MDT
To: Undisclosed-recipients: <>;
Dear Santa Fe County residents:
Capital improvement projects are the backbone of our infrastructure -- and our quality of life -- in Santa Fe County. I will devote this entire e-mail to this topic because it was discussed at our last two meetings of the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) and is so important. In addition, we will most likely be approving some General Obligation (GO) Bond issues that will appear on the ballot in November for funding a variety of these kinds of projects. I think it is important to explain where the funds come from for capital improvement and also to give you an idea of how much we are proposing to spend.
For the first time since I have been Commissioner, a transparent and easy-to-understand process has been put in place for determining what projects are proposed for funding. We have also prioritized the projects and determined where the funds might originate from.
The types of projects that are typically considered come from plans (like the Open Space Plan, the Fire 5-Year Plan, and the County Capital Improvement Plan), as well as from input by Commissioners about what they think is important to fund in their individual districts. These projects are now all put into an overall list, evaluated according to multiple factors, and categorized according to project type (roads, water, parks, buildings, etc.).
Funding for capital improvement can come from a variety of sources: GO Bonds, the County Capital Outlay Gross Receipts Tax (GRT), state grants, Community Development Block Grants (CDBGs), assessment districts, and so on. Our staff makes an effort when considering capital improvement projects to determine how to best match the project with a funding source. For example, if it is possible to get a CDBG for a project, then it might not be necessary to fund it through a County GO Bond.
This year the consensus of the BCC was, in general, to put a higher priority on road improvements than we have in the past. However, in my district (Four), water projects -- both water and wastewater -- are still the top priority because there are still so many pressing needs.
At the last two BCC meetings, Adam Leigland (our Public Works Director) presented a list of the Capital Improvement Projects to be funded with either County Capital Outlay GRT or with upcoming GO Bonds. Staff from our Finance Department had previously determined how much money we could expect from the GRT in the next two years, as well as what kind of bonding capacity we now have due to certain bonds having been retired. The expected capacity was also predicated on the principle that property taxes NOT be raised.
The total proposed to be spent from the two above sources is roughly $70 million. It is broken down as follows:
Water Projects $10.80 million 16%
Road Projects $22.20 million 33%
Parks & Open Space $ 7.08 million 11%
County Facilities $10.85 million 17%
Community Facilities $ 7.70 million 11%
Public Safety $ 7.80 million 12%
Commission Contingency $ 2.00 million
The Commission Contingency item was suggested by Commissioners Stefanics and Anaya for emergency projects that might come up over the course of the next two years.
The overall percentage of each type of project in the County is also noted above. The percentage in each of the districts varies somewhat from that number. For example, in District 4 the percentage of proposed funding for water projects is 33% and road projects is 25%.
Also presented were detailed descriptions and summaries of all the proposed projects district by district. Projects that are in District 4 or that affect District 4 are as follows (with the amount of the cost from either a GO Bond or from the Capital Outlay GRT):
Roads Projects:
Puye Road chip seal ($140,000)
Cerros Cantando chip seal ($178,000)
Camino Pacifico chip seal ($192,000)
Glorieta Estates chip seal ($200,000)
County Road 33 (Old Lamy Trail) 2" asphalt overlay ($300,000)
County Road 67F (La Barbaria Road) paving/drainage ($500,000)
Old Santa Fe Trail bicycle lane construction ($1.5 million)
Water Projects:
Greater Glorieta wastewater and water reclamation projects ($900,000)
Greater Glorieta water supply ($1 million)
Old Santa Fe Trail water pipeline ($850,000)
(This would bring water from City limits to Old Las Vegas Highway, allowing for installation of fire hydrants.)
Water pipeline from Rancho Viejo to Eldorado ($2.5 million)
Community Facilities:
Ken & Patty Adam Senior Center expansion ($1 million)
Eldorado Vista Grande Library addition ($1.5 million)
Public Safety Facilities:
Hondo II Fire Station addition ($275,000)
Glorieta Pass Fire District substation ($500,000)
Trail Projects:
Santa Fe Rail Trail construction (segments 2 and 3) ($821,000)
There are also a number of projects that have County-wide benefit for which each of the districts is assigned an equal share. These are as follows:
Road Projects:
Local Government Road Fund matches ($200,000)
Road project engineering ($500,000)
Water Projects:
Quill Water-Reclamation Plant Upgrades ($3.29 million)
Connection of County water line between Rancho Viejo and Community College ($215,000)
Acquisition of failing Mutual Domestic water systems ($800,000)
Water rights acquisition ($1 million)
Aquifer Recharge and Storage Pilot Project ($1.245 million)
County Facilities:
Administrative building computer and communications room ($350,000)
District Attorney building energy and accessibility improvements ($850,000)
La Bajada Ranch programming and design ($200,000)
Old Judicial Courthouse redevelopment analysis ($250,000)
La Bajada Ranch immediate needs and remediation ($325,000)
Public Safety Facilities:
Fire Department Training Center development ($1.25 million)
Corrections facilities upgrades ($2 million)
Public Safety Complex upgrade ($2.7 million)
(To address additional space needs for the Sheriff's Department and the Regional Emergency Communications Center)
There are a couple of important points to make in summary. The funding noted above may not be the entire cost of the project, but rather is what would be slated to come from GO bonding or from the County Capital Outlay GRT only. There may be possibilities for grants or legislative appropriations in some cases for part of the cost.
Another project that was listed for all districts is redevelopment of the old Judicial Courthouse. This may cost a considerable sum (upwards of $6 million). However it would have a number of advantages for the County. I will address this in more detail in a future e-mail.
If you have any questions about the details of any of the above-listed projects, please feel free to ask. Also, those of you living in other districts can ask your Commissioner about an itemization of projects specific to your district. The presentation about this topic at the June 12th BCC meeting can be found at the following location:
This has not been cast in stone yet. We have not even voted on placing GO bond issues on the ballot for the next election. Please feel free to give me feedback.
Sincerely,
-Kathy
