Below are Boulder Weekly‘s five questions for Longmont City Council and mayoral candidates, and their answers.
Question 1: What are the three most important problems
confronting the City of Longmont? Please list them in their order of priority
and briefly describe how you would attempt to solve your highest priority
issue.
MAYOR
Bryan Baum
Declined to
reply
Dennis Coombs
Clearly the most
pressing problem facing Longmont is getting the thousands of logs out of Ralph
Price Reservoir. This is our primary water supply, and we don’t want these logs
to get water logged and then sink to the bottom of the Button Rock dam. This would
plug up or damage our outlet piping and we would lose 75 percent of our water
supply. We are working with the county to get overland access on a fire road to
bring in heavy equipment so we can begin rebuilding the main access road from
the top down, while also working on rebuilding that road from the bottom up.
The need for
short- and intermediate-term housing for the displaced community members from
Lyons and our river corridor is also a big concern. With our current rental
availability of less than 1 percent, this does not have an easy immediate
solution. I think this next council needs to take a serious look at the
possible funding options laid out by the “Affordable Housing Task Force
Committee”
Our last major
immediate issue is what to do with the St. Vrain River. The river is now on a
completely new path well away from where the irrigation ditch heads are
located. Do we bring the river back to the ditches or the ditches over to where
the river is now located? Most of the time, Mother Nature knows best solution. We
will probably end up with a combination approach depending on the grade from
the ditch head to the river location and the particular stretch of the river.
This is a very complex problem that requires coordination of FEMA, Boulder
County, City of Longmont, City of Lyons and the Army Corps of Engineers.
AT-LARGE
Trisa Baxter
A. Economic opportunity
for all Longmont citizens; we need to invite companies that pay a living wage
to be part of our community. Longmont is an amazing city and there is no reason
to not relocate here.
B. Budget; it is
important that the city lives within its means, while providing services for
its citizens.
C. Downtown
development; have you noticed that a new business will arrive in the downtown
area — only to disappear a short time later? The city, in cooperation with the
land owners, needs to build a parking structure. This will help downtown
businesses stay in business.
Polly
Christensen
Jobs, education,
public infrastructure and services. We need to actively recruit quality,
sustainable, forward-thinking businesses with more jobs and living wage jobs.
We need a better strategy for connecting the unemployed with businesses that
need good employees. We must continue to support local education, from
preschool through adult education, in order to have a higher quality of life
for our residents and attract better employers. Without higher quality jobs and
quality education for all, we cannot
maintain our tax base to protect the fine city infrastructure and services that
make Longmont the place we choose to live. Individuals and businesses will not
come here; individuals and businesses will not stay.
Ron Gallegos
Economic development, quality of life, vision for the future.
Redevelopment of the Twin Peaks Mall, the plan as currently
configured is a no-starter. The citizens of Longmont should get some more than
another Walmart,
grocery store and enhanced movie theaters … these kind of opportunities only
come around so often. Mitigation of the St. Vrain in terms of flood but also a
master plan for economic development towards an eye to tourism … river walk
with shops, restaurants, galleries.
This ties in with the quality of life component and a grand plan
or vision of the future.
Alex Sammoury
1. Flood
recovery — once damage has been fully assessed, we will need to prioritize
repairs to the city’s infrastructure, such as water, sewer, streets, bridges,
parks, greenway etc.
2. Economic
development is always a priority since it enables job creation, improving
infrastructure, reducing red tape, evaluating incentive offerings are all
integral to the city’s ability to retain and attract new corporate and retail
businesses that create jobs.
3. Redevelopment
of the mall, attracting new retail to the community, reducing leakage and
increasing sales tax revenues that can be re-invested in maintaining and
upgrading existing infrastructure such as water lines, sewer lines, parks and
trails.
Gabe Santos
Did not provide
answers by press time
WARD
2
Rick Accountius
I don’t view the issues facing Longmont as problems. I view
them as challenges. The three most important challenges facing Longmont are:
flood recovery, jobs, mall redevelopment. First, I would like to commend
Longmont’s city staff, the current City Council and all first responders for
their efforts during the flood. They all did an outstanding job. Now, as we
begin to recover and rebuild, we need to consider both the human toll and the
damage to our infrastructure. Countless citizens were displaced, and many
people are in need of simple luxuries. City Council should work with the
non-profits they support to insure human needs are being addressed. This should
be done in parallel while working with city staff to identify and repair those
areas in our infrastructure that were most damaged. Finally, the city should
continue working with various government agencies to complete more flood
control projects like the one recently completed in Southmoor Park. This
project saved perhaps hundreds of homes from flood damage.
Jeff
Moore
Recovery from the flood is the highest
priority issue for Longmont. The current damage estimate of $148 million may
not include the cost of additional upgrades to improve protection and add
developable land. I would want additional measures to fortify flood control
structures to reduce the impact of future flood events. Additional funding for
infrastructure projects may be required and is a reality that we need to
consider once all of the costs are tallied.
Second, I would balance economic
development and growth to enhance the quality of life for Longmont’s citizens.
Third, the fracking ban and drilling regulation lawsuits.
Question 2. Explain your position on the city’s hydraulic
fracturing ban and your level of commitment to defending Longmont from the
resulting lawsuits.
MAYOR
Bryan Baum
Declined to
answer
Dennis Coombs
My personal
opinion on the fracking ban is totally irrelevant. My job as your mayor is to
do what the majority of the people want done. The 60/40 vote in favor of a
fracking ban in our city is a crystal
clear message from our citizens as to what they want me to do. I answer
only to the majority of the citizens of Longmont, which is what all elected officials should do.
AT-LARGE
Trisa Baxter
Owners of
mineral rights should be able to harvest those materials but not at the risk to others, so
until there is a way to harvest those materials safely without the use of
chemicals and excess water than I am against fracking. The citizens of Longmont
have said that there will be no fracking — so if elected I will stand with the
citizens.
Polly
Christensen
The
city should stand firm in defending the decisive 60/40 citizen vote of a modest
ban on no fracking inside the city limits. Longmont’s city charter grants us
home-rule status, and these suits are a direct attack on our home-rule status.
The residents of Longmont have a right to protect the health of ourselves and
our children, conserve our water, and protect our property values within the
limits of our city.
Ron Gallegos
We saddled that horse [citizens’ inititive] and now we need to
ride it to the end. The citizens told us what they wanted; now we have to
defend to the end.
Alex Sammoury
The ban
on fracking is imbedded in the city’s charter, as a sworn city council person
it is my duty to uphold and defend the city charter, and that is exactly what
we as council are doing and intend to continue doing.
Gabe Santos
Did not provide
answers by press time
WARD
2
Rick Accountius
The fracking ban in Longmont is law and part of our city
charter. City council members, new and old, are obligated to defend it.
Jeff
Moore
Unfortunately
this issue is about money, without regard to local control and land use policy
within planning areas of affected cities. The health, safety and quality of
life impacts from drilling and fracking are risks the citizens of Longmont
should not have to live with. The city needs to continue to vigorously defend
against the lawsuits and look out for the best interest
of its citizens, not the oil and gas companies. The City Council needs to
defend our rights as a home rule municipality and exercise local control to
protect our citizens from the many hazards associated with fracking.
Question 3: Should
Longmont be limiting its growth in any fashion? Why or why not?
MAYOR
Bryan Baum
Declined to
answer
Dennis Coombs
Yes, we have a
plan for build out of our city, and we should basically follow that
comprehensive plan.
AT-LARGE
Trisa Baxter
Growth will
limit itself as the city reaches build out. What I would like to see is in-fill.
Encouraging small local builders to build custom homes on those lots in
existing neighborhoods. Also, I would like to see repurposing of existing
buildings to serve dual purposes. For example, the redevelopment currently
happening in Longmont mid-town, the new buildings there will have shops on the
bottom floor and apartments on the top floors.
Polly
Christensen
Our
city comprehensive plan is a good model for the future. We do need to
re-examine and rethink it periodically, but we cannot continue to grant
exemptions to every private developer who bought restricted land at a cheap
price and then seeks an exemption to the comprehensive plan so he can make more
money. We have to be able to firmly stand by our decisions for the overall good
of the community.
Ron Gallegos
Thoughtful growth with a mix of building types and price ranges.
Something that will allow for convention trade and general tourism. We’re
nowhere near the total carrying capacity of our city.
Alex Sammoury
Longmont will be reaching build-out in a few years, so
growth will be limited to redevelopment, similar to what has happened in
neighboring communities. Currently Longmont is experiencing a shortage in
single-family housing as well as rental units, creating a demand for additional
development. The market, in my experience always corrects itself based on the
basic rules of economics “supply and demand.” As we reach build-out, growth
will be self-limiting.
Gabe Santos
Did not provide
answers by press time
WARD
2
Rick Accountius
No. Over the past several years, growth has slowed naturally
due to the economic downturn. Consequently, there is no need to limit growth at
this time.
Jeff
Moore
Growth needs to be managed to maintain the character of
Longmont as a place companies and people want to move to. Schools, roads, city services and
housing need to keep pace with development to prevent deterioration of our
quality of life.
Growth within Longmont’s planning area is limiting sprawl
while preserving open space and agricultural land. The Longmont Area Comprehensive Plan predicts build out in
2022 at our current growth rate. That can adjust up or down with different rates of development, land use
changes, infill, and re-development. The plan is 10 years old so an update is
needed.
Question 4: Are
you in favor of Ballot Question 2A regarding the debt increase to finance
wastewater system improvements? Why or why not?
MAYOR
Bryan Baum
Declined to
answer
Dennis Coombs
I fully support
the sewer bond issue. We are mandated to meet the new federal wastewater
ammonia standards, and if we don’t we will be fined $10,000 per day. If the
bonds are not passed, we still have to fund the project in near real term, and
this would be done by doubling or tripling our current sewer rates. Passing the
bonds would be the best solution for people on a fixed income.
AT-LARGE
Trisa Baxter
Yes, I am in
favor of the improvements to be made to the wastewater system. It is important
for the city to have a strong/reliable waste water system, and improvements
need to be made from time to time. I am most excited about the recapture of methane
gas and its use to operate the plant.
Polly
Christensen
Passing
this measure will allow us to begin upgrading our wastewater plant more quickly
and less expensively. Longmont needs to upgrade the wastewater plant in order
to be compliant with ammonia regulations and also to prepare for the increased
burden in the future. Our plant did well in this flood, while other cities
plants failed. We need to keep our infrastructure sound.
Ron Gallegos
Yes, I favor Ballot Question 2A. We must maintain the viability of
our asset and keep up with the technical advances being made in water
and wastewater systems. We should always have an eye toward improving the
system and its processes.
Alex Sammoury
The city must make the improvements to meet federal
standards and regulations. If the bond issue does not pass the city will have
to find other ways to pay for the improvements.
Gabe Santos
Did not provide
answers by press time
WARD
2
Rick Accountius
Yes. This ballot initiative will allow Longmont to meet the
federal and state unfunded mandate to reduce discharged ammonia levels. It will
also allow us to upgrade our waste water treatment facility to meet our future
needs. These goals will be achieved without raising taxes, and there will be no
additional rate increases associated with this bond. Failure to meet permit
levels for ammonia could result in penalties and fines. And finally, having a
quality infrastructure is a necessity when attracting businesses.
Jeff
Moore
I am in favor of Ballot Question 2A. New regulations
controlling wastewater will be in effect in 2016. The alternative is to pay
fines and raise rates. To me this is not an issue of an unfunded mandate, but
our responsibility to discharge clean water into the environment. This is funded by user fees, so no tax
increase is attached to this bond issue.
Question 5: Are
you in favor of Ballot Question 2B regarding the debt increase to finance
fiber-optic improvements that will allow the city to offer high-speed broadband
service? Why or why not?
MAYOR
Bryan Baum
Declined to
answer
Dennis Coombs
I fully support
the broadband fiber bond issue. No city that owns its own electric company, and
that is using this technology, and this implementation plan, has ever
failed. This will be a big benefit
to our citizens, and our local businesses. It will also be a major economic
development driver for our community. We have to do this because Kansas City is
doing this, Chattanooga is doing this, Champaign is doing this, Lafayette, La.,
is doing this. … Only the people who choose to use the service will be paying
back the bond debt. The private sector providers are still free to provide our
citizens with less quality for more money.
AT-LARGE
Trisa Baxter
Yes I am in
favor of the fiber-optic improvements. This is a win/win for the citizens of
Longmont. This is forward-thinking on the part of Longmont citizens. One
hundred years ago the citizens of Longmont approved its own electric company.
Now Longmont has one of the most reliable and least expensive electric services
around.
Polly
Christensen
I
am completely supporting of this debt increase, as it will allow us to finish
building out our fiber-optic network years earlier. This network was wisely
installed years ago. It is crucial to not only the future of our citizens but
will also enable us to attract the sort of innovative, far-thinking businesses
that will provide the quantity, quality and diversity of jobs needed to give
opportunity to all Longmont residents and support and expand our fine city
infrastructure and services.
Ron Gallegos
Yes, I was on the council that purchased the loop in 1997. I’ve
always thought it could provide a competitive advantage in attracting high-tech
and start-up businesses. It’s an asset to the community and an amenity for our
citizens. We can provide more bang for the buck than corporate providers.
Alex Sammoury
I am absolutely in favor of 2B, the fiber-optic
improvements, 60 percent of the voters approved the first step of allowing the city-wide
use of the fiber. It is a great asset that has been underutilized since it was
built in the late ’80s. Many large and small businesses locate in Longmont to
take advantage of the city’s competitive utilities pricing, highly educated
work force, good school system and wonderful quality of life, fiber will be one
other arrow in the city’s quiver when it comes to attracting new businesses, as
well as providing enhanced Internet access service to Longmont residents.
Gabe Santos
Did not provide
answers by press time
WARD
2
Rick Accountius
Yes. Our fiber-optic loop has been in place since 1997. In
2011, Longmont citizens voted to allow the city to utilize this asset. With
passage of 2B, the city will build out the fiber-optic network to bring
high-speed Internet and voice services to our citizens and businesses. With
this bond, subscribers will pay off the debt service, and not the taxpayers.
Subscribers will receive roughly twice the speed at half the cost, and the
revenue will stay in the city. Having the broadband fiber network built out
prepares Longmont for future technology changes, and will benefit both citizens
and businesses alike.
Jeff
Moore
I am in favor of Ballot Question 2B. This bond is financed
with user fees and will not raise taxes. Having world-class gigabit broadband
service will be a differentiator in attracting companies and jobs to Longmont. Managed
by Longmont Power and Communications, the infrastructure to maintain the system
has been in since 1997. Within
three years of voter approval, every household and business in Longmont
will have access to Internet service 10 times faster than speeds currently
offered, at about half the cost.
