LETTER: Your vote has consequences
Tuesday, October 23, 2012 3:15 AM
If you are one of the people that are against this (Main Street) project altogether, you might as well stop reading. I am not going to change your mind and that is fine.
I am writing this to those of you that are concerned about money. To those of you that worry that the city is spending more than they need to. I want you to get the truth.
If you are thinking about electing people that will attempt to stop this project, I want you to be aware that there would be serious consequences to halting progress this far in the game.
Times are tough. The economy is on a slow and painful recovery. This may seem like the worst time to be doing a road project.
Interest rates are at unprecedented lows, and we are going to be able to get the bonding for our project with extremely low interest. In addition, we are getting $1.5 million from the state to help with this project.
If we wait 10 or 15 years, we not only may pay much higher interest rates, but the cost of the materials and contractors may go up considerably, not to mention, we won't have the money from the state.
For those of you who missed the council meeting where costs were discussed, you should know that the estimated cost of the street for a $100,000 home will be $20-$30 dollars a month.
I understand that this will be a burden for some and that times are tough, but we cannot put this off to future generations to deal with.
This may not seem like the best time, but it is long over due.
There have been claims that this $1.5 million is the amount for the resurfacing portion of the project. In reality, the cost for only doing that portion would be around $100,000.
If we don't do the utility work, we don't get state funding. The current system is old and very inadequate. There is not enough drainage on Main Street and storm water backs up and floods businesses. As the manager of the cinema, I can attest to this personally.
I am worried about the project and what may happen if we elect the candidates who are threatening to stop it.
Not only will we waste the considerable amount of engineering costs that we will still have to pay for, we will severely limit any chance of state funding in the future.
Worst of all, we will have old pipes, broken sidewalks, lights that need to be replaced and no new street.
To those of you that say that we should replace the pipes and streets but not update the look, I think you should know that the aesthetics portion of this project is estimated to cost about $2.00 per month per household during the life of the bond.
These things would all cost more in the long run if we did not include them in the bonding.
Sarah J. Schroeder