By Kathleen Sloan
It’s that time of year—the city’s updated five-year list of infrastructure projects is due to the state, which is the go-to document legislators and state agencies use to determine how to divvy grant money.
Historically, in Truth or Consequences, capital projects are prioritized by staff behind closed doors and the list is then rubber-stamped by the city commission.
The same blind support and lack of oversight was evident this year, the city commission approving the ICIP list at the July 13 meeting.
The top five projects is the lobbying focus for city staff and city commissioners if and when they speak to legislators and state agency officials. It’s what city staff will spend their time chasing. It’s the city’s elevator-speech of needs that legislators assume the public wants and supports.
The five top projects determined by Assistant City Manager Traci Alvarez and city department heads are:
- Marie Street improvements, $282,000
- Animal shelter kennel building, $450,000
- Street Department 4,000-gallon water truck, $186,000
- Soccer field improvements, $430,000
- Clancy Street force main (pipelines that convey wastewater under pressure) improvements, $1.5 million
During recent budget talks there was no discussion of capital projects, engineering reports or infrastructure priorities, yet over half of the $45-million budget are capital projects.
During the year there have been no regular reports from department heads, let alone departments’ capital projects.
Over the past year only two engineering reports were presented to the city commission. Wilson & Company spokesman Alfredo Holguin gave a brief overview of a water system engineering report, which Swingle said would determine how we spend money on water infrastructure “for years to come.” No in-depth discussion by city commissioners followed.
The second engineering report, the economic feasibility study for development along both sides of the river, was presented by Wilson & Company last fall. It included extending water and wastewater infrastructure to the other side of the river, the pipes carried under a vehicular bridge. The public attending the meetings were vociferously against the project. Riverwalk study.
A vehicular bridge is on the new ICIP list for fiscal year 2028 at $5.5 million. Despite what the document states, Alvarez said, “I haven’t assigned a year” for the vehicular bridge project.
Alvarez, the city’s projects and grants coordinator, works with the engineering firms and city department heads and oversees the ICIP process every year. As usual, she held two public hearings (one during the June 22 city commission meeting, the other off-site) that asked the public to suggest any project they’d like, with no information or guidance.
The public input is ignored, because state legislators, state and federal agencies, only support and fund projects backed by engineering studies.
Since the city commission is also largely uniformed about engineering studies, including why and by whom they are ordered and where the projects fit within the city’s overall priorities, its input is also superficial.
The long neglect of the city’s water, wastewater, drainage, electrical and road infrastructure gives concrete testimony to how successful this method of running and prioritizing and coordinating projects has been.
Given the dearth of information and preparation, City Commissioner Merry Jo Fahl made a suggestion based on what she knows. For three years she has headed a committee to promote a foot bridge and paths along the river. She asked that the foot bridge be added to the ICIP list.
Mayor Amanda Forrister took exception to the suggestion. “The city is interested in a vehicular bridge,” she said.
Fahl agreed the city needs a vehicular bridge “to get emergency services over there,” but the foot bridge, to be built with grant money, not city money, would be owned by the city. The foot bridge would go where the city vehicular bridge does not. If the city builds the vehicular bridge at T or C Rotary Park, then the foot bridge would go in at Ralph Edwards Park, she said.
City Manager Bruce Swingle said the city needs a cost estimate to put a foot bridge on the list.
Mayor Pro Tem Rolf Hechler asked if the vehicular bridge design included a pedestrian walkway. It does, Swingle said.
Nevertheless, Fahl insisted the foot bridge be added as a separate project, claiming she would get figures to the city.
Hechler asked if the soccer field improvements (located within Louis Armijo Park), “mean replacement” of the soccer field. Yes, Alvarez said.
Hechler also asked how the top five projects were set as priorities and why, to which Alvarez responded with dead silence.
Nevertheless, Hechler made a motion to pass the five top projects Alvarez listed earlier and amended the overall ICIP list to include a foot bridge. The motion passed unanimously.
The water system needs a complete overhaul as does the sewer system! A soccer field! Seriously?