By CAROLYNN ROBERTS
Los Alamos

I agree that Los Alamos, and especially White Rock, need recreational updating/upgrading and, as a property owner, I am willing to foot some of that bill but this $20,000,000 Recreation General Obligation Bond fills me with apprehension and I just can’t vote for it. This is my opinion, and you know what they say about opinions…

RISK

Los Alamos county property owners are taking on all of the risk; a risk that is not in our realm of control. If something adverse happens at LANL or another fire devastates our community, WE, the property owners, are still responsible for paying this debt back. Additionally, if the “projected recovery percentages” fall short, Los Alamos County can, again, raise our property taxes to repay this bond.

NO CHOICE

I agree with Gerald M. Antos, (link). This bond package mixes real needs with too many wants. I would have preferred voting on each project individually. Then, as a property owner, I would have invested in the logical needs and weighed the wants, prudently (e.g., Why do we need two ice rinks in two separate places with two separate operating costs?).

POOR INVESTMENT

I cannot support a $20,000,000 project:

a) that is only generating 16 new jobs in our community;

b) that cannot produce enough revenue to pay half of its own bond;

c) that rationalizes that it will attract more people to an area that already has inadequate housing;

d) that seriously under-serves the needs of White Rock residents (no, I don’t live in White Rock); and

e) that presents risk that outweighs the benefit.

LOGIC

I understand that this is a wealthy community, but not everyone in it is wealthy. If this was my money, AND IT IS, I would not spend it like this. I would fix what needs upgrading and budget for future projects. There is a better, more economical way, to achieve these goals without assuming this level of debt.