Rank the Economic Vitality Strategic Plan's Priorities
How would you rank the priorities outlined in the draft Economic Vitality Strategic Plan? What areas do you think should be addressed first inside of the four various goals?
Goal 1. Increase the availability of housing in the County, both affordable and market rate.
No response.
Do you have additional comments you would like to offer about Goal 1 and your rankings - or other activities that the County should consider?
I oppose using the property maintenance ordinance to harass homeowners when a realtor doesn't like the way their property looks. It is realtors, not residents, who want to use the ordinance to force people to conform to the realtors' values. Also, there are at least 3 vacant lots for sale now in Los Alamos, so the problem isn't merely a lack of available land. Most of the vacant lots in town are not suited for multifamily housing, which is the type of housing we need most, if we want to provide living space for more people. I hear some apartments are already being built: one on Oppenheimer, and another to be built where the Black Hole was. It is wrong to force property owners to put up a vacant lot for sale: private property is not up to the County to develop, that is the choice of the owner. Some owners may be waiting for children or grandchildren to decide if they are going to build a home here. Thirdly, we do not need to pay for more studies. We need to take appropriate action. What happened to the residential units that were going to be built above the store units in the new strip mall where Smith's Marketplace is?
Goal 2. Define and address quality of life priorities.
Support development of outreach programs that support the needs of existing, new and prospective residents, including expanded housing, retail, recreation, education & work options, and improved cellular, broadband & transportation services. (1)
Do you have additional comments you would like to offer about Goal 2 and your rankings - or other activities that the County should consider?
We definitely need more than 2 choices for cellular, internet, broadband services. Why do we only have Comcast and CenturyLink? They are both expensive and not good at customer service. They need competition. What happened to the residential units that were going to be built above the store units in the new strip mall where Smith's Marketplace is? Why don't we tax landlords who charge such high rents that small business has no chance of making it here, because of their high overhead (due to rent)?
Goal 3. Grow a separate, complementary economy to LANL.
Target/grow high-tech industry through partnerships to leverage grant funding opportunities, improve cellular and broadband infastructure and expand entrepreneurial services. (1)
Do you have additional comments you would like to offer about Goal 3 and your rankings - or other activities that the County should consider?
Los Alamos has an airport. Why don't we support that? Is the county planning to get rid of the airport and use the land for something else? Where would we put any high-tech industry? We already have trouble finding space for new housing. We do have lots of office space, though. Does high-tech industry need more than office space? The county needs to think about how these different goals may interfere with each other. We may have to make choices.
Goal 4. Support and retain LANL as the area's best wealth-producing employer.
Continue supporting LANL’s regional advocacy programs, including the Regional Coalition, the Regional Economic Development Initiative, the Feynman Center for Innovation and talent recruitment. (1)
Do you have additional comments you would like to offer about Goal 4 and your rankings - or other activities that the County should consider?
We don't promote local vendors: we allow landlords to push them out with high rents. We make building houses or business locations difficult by trying to enforce codes to the letter, and even forcing the county's interpretation of the code on property owners, rather than being content with a reasonable approach. I would not want to build another house here. I certainly would not take the risk of building a business here. Why was the Hilltop House not grandfathered in to the codes for hospitality buildings? The new buyer is now unable to operate Hilltop House because of costly renovations required to meet new code. The County effectively killed that property. The County needs to think further than one step ahead. Is the County happy to contemplate the empty hotel sitting there? Is it hoping that someone will make it all go away by buying the property (at a steep loss for the current owner, of course) and demolishing the building? Does this satisfy your third goal in any way?
Open Forum is not a certified voting system or ballot box. As with any public comment process, participation in Open Forum is voluntary. The responses in this record are not necessarily representative of the whole population, nor do they reflect the opinions of any government agency or elected officials.
Translate
Goal 1. Increase the availability of housing in the County, both affordable and market rate.
No response.Do you have additional comments you would like to offer about Goal 1 and your rankings - or other activities that the County should consider?
I oppose using the property maintenance ordinance to harass homeowners when a realtor doesn't like the way their property looks. It is realtors, not residents, who want to use the ordinance to force people to conform to the realtors' values. Also, there are at least 3 vacant lots for sale now in Los Alamos, so the problem isn't merely a lack of available land. Most of the vacant lots in town are not suited for multifamily housing, which is the type of housing we need most, if we want to provide living space for more people. I hear some apartments are already being built: one on Oppenheimer, and another to be built where the Black Hole was. It is wrong to force property owners to put up a vacant lot for sale: private property is not up to the County to develop, that is the choice of the owner. Some owners may be waiting for children or grandchildren to decide if they are going to build a home here. Thirdly, we do not need to pay for more studies. We need to take appropriate action. What happened to the residential units that were going to be built above the store units in the new strip mall where Smith's Marketplace is?
Goal 2. Define and address quality of life priorities.
Do you have additional comments you would like to offer about Goal 2 and your rankings - or other activities that the County should consider?
We definitely need more than 2 choices for cellular, internet, broadband services. Why do we only have Comcast and CenturyLink? They are both expensive and not good at customer service. They need competition. What happened to the residential units that were going to be built above the store units in the new strip mall where Smith's Marketplace is? Why don't we tax landlords who charge such high rents that small business has no chance of making it here, because of their high overhead (due to rent)?
Goal 3. Grow a separate, complementary economy to LANL.
Do you have additional comments you would like to offer about Goal 3 and your rankings - or other activities that the County should consider?
Los Alamos has an airport. Why don't we support that? Is the county planning to get rid of the airport and use the land for something else? Where would we put any high-tech industry? We already have trouble finding space for new housing. We do have lots of office space, though. Does high-tech industry need more than office space? The county needs to think about how these different goals may interfere with each other. We may have to make choices.
Goal 4. Support and retain LANL as the area's best wealth-producing employer.
Do you have additional comments you would like to offer about Goal 4 and your rankings - or other activities that the County should consider?
We don't promote local vendors: we allow landlords to push them out with high rents. We make building houses or business locations difficult by trying to enforce codes to the letter, and even forcing the county's interpretation of the code on property owners, rather than being content with a reasonable approach. I would not want to build another house here. I certainly would not take the risk of building a business here. Why was the Hilltop House not grandfathered in to the codes for hospitality buildings? The new buyer is now unable to operate Hilltop House because of costly renovations required to meet new code. The County effectively killed that property. The County needs to think further than one step ahead. Is the County happy to contemplate the empty hotel sitting there? Is it hoping that someone will make it all go away by buying the property (at a steep loss for the current owner, of course) and demolishing the building? Does this satisfy your third goal in any way?