SA Creel
I am writing in regards to agenda item 8.1 North Mesa Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) and Housing Study Presented by Kurt Steinhaus to be included in your 10/22/20 School Board Meeting.
I have read the North Mesa Housing Study October 2020 Draft and respectfully ask that you please keep in mind those whose interests you are elected/appointed to represent as School Board Members and Los Alamos Public School officials. LAPS is under no obligation whatsoever to participate in or try to solve the described housing shortage issue within the county as determined by a recent Housing Market Needs Analysis (2019) referred to in the Housing Study on pg.4. It is of interest to note that in Table 8 on pg.44 of the Housing Study the development strategy receiving 5 stars was SELECT TRADITIONAL MASTER DEVELOPER with the Disadvantages listed as "-No recurring revenue -Less control over outcome." The strategy titled LAPS AS DEVELOPER:BUILD/OWN HOUSING DEVELOPMENT received a mere 2 stars yet it was the only option in the category of Potential to achieve County/LAPS Project Goals to state "-Can determine the number of units set aside for LAPS employees" while also in the category Advantages listed "-This option will allow the County/LAPS to retain full control - Will generate recurring income."
Please refer to the Los Alamos Public Schools District Mission and Vision Statements as described in the 5-Year Facilities Master Plan and consider your true objectives in regards to our community's school district and also to previously discussed plans as described in the LAPS 20 Year Facilities Plan (listed in the Los Alamos Public Schools • 5-Year Facilities Master Plan, which includes with regards specifically to LAMS: 2009-2029 Proposed Projects Funding Cycle 5 (2025): -LAMS: Existing Gym, New Gym, 6th Grade wing).
It is of utmost importance that LAPS Board Members and Officials, while considering developing this land, remain focused solely on potential benefits, if any, that would directly impact LAPS students and employees whom they are elected to represent. It seems apparent through the findings within the North Mesa Housing Study October 2020 Draft that the highest recommended course of action in no way reflects the objectives LAPS set out to achieve with this project. It also seems disingenuous to the community to conflate an overall county housing shortage issue with an LAPS employee shortage/housing issue to legitimize procurement of land owned by LAPS; land granted with the intent of benefiting LAPS students in the future. Continuing this process into a Memorandum of Agreement or Understanding between the County and LAPS based on the findings of this report would be disrespectful to taxpayers, students, LAPS employees and a clear waste of precious School Board time particularly during a time of pandemic-related school closures. Your fiduciary obligations are to the aforementioned parties, not to the County Council members or developers. Certainly LAPS could continue to search for opportunities to help fund housing for LAPS employees through other means. A statement such as "A good program that can be enacted in a year is better than an ideal program that will take five years" as quoted from pg.43 in the Housing Study, well serves developer’s financial interests by fabricating an imaginary time constraint LAPS is under no obligation to recognize. It suggests that this project has the potential to be rushed and forced through with less than ideal results and not with the intent of benefiting the parties you volunteered to represent. Please reconsider.
Respectfully,
