Herschlag: Thoughts On Tuesday’s Election, Before You Vote

Let me start out by saying that like you I strongly support a grocery store coming to Penacook. The icing on the cake is it will be a Market Basket. But we should give credit where credit is due. I believe no one has worked harder to bring a grocery store to Exit 17 than the Rauseo's.

It is my opinion that the city has not always been all in on this project. Here is just one example of the city council not willing to fully commit to the development of Exit 17 and Whitney Road:

This is from the minutes of last years finance committee meeting.

June 14, 2018 -

The Mayor’s proposed changes which would affect CIP and Special Revenue budgets were as follows:

CIP #502 – Whitney Road Extension: Move up to FY 2019 the land use planning and real estate analysis at a cost of $35,000; and move the surveying of Whitney Road (General Impact Fees Traf Dist 1, $14,790; and General Impact Fees Traf Dist 2, $26,378) out to FY 2020.

There was discussion about the changes to CIP #502 (Whitney Road Extension). Councilor Herschlag said he supports moving up the Whitney Road land use planning and real estate analysis to FY 2019, but questioned why the surveying had to be moved out to FY 2020. The Mayor responded that much planning will need to occur for this project, including working with the State, all of which will take time; therefore, moving the surveying out to FY 2020 shouldn’t be a problem with the progress of the project. Councilor Todd said that the concept is to start with the land use planning and have City Administration provide a report back to City Council before moving forward.

A motion was made and seconded to tentatively approve the Mayor’s proposal to move $35,000 in CIP #502 up to FY 2019 for land use planning and real estate analysis of Whitney Road, and to move the surveying of Whitney Road out to FY 2020. Councilor Kretovic recused herself from the vote. The motion passed with a unanimous voice vote.

Prior to this meeting the council voted in the majority to move all three projects into the 2019 budget. It was at the June 14th, meeting that the mayor (who had previously voted against this funding) brought forward his proposed changes.

Is it possible that if the administration and city council had been more proactive in supporting development efforts at Exit 17 that there now wouldn’t be at least a two year delay until a grocery store opens?

Recently there have been a number of articles and opinion pieces in the Concord Monitor on the importance of increasing the number of residential units in the city. We have read everything from without more people businesses won’t locate here, to communities that have seen increases in their school populations, have seen their taxes reduced or grow at a slower rate than communities that have seen a reduction of students in their schools.

Under current zoning regulations Concord could potentially add 20,000 new residents. Increased costs aren’t only to the schools. Ask yourself how this would impact traffic. Rte 3 can’t be expanded without huge costs of taking many properties that abut the road. If we want to keep I-93 to no more than 3 traffic lanes in each direction and minimize its footprint, how will increasing our population impact the need to widen 93. Will we need to build an entirely new road between downtown Concord and Penacook to keep Rte 3 from being one giant parking lot - making Loudon Road look like a rural byway compared to Rte 3 - if we develop to the extent our current zoning allows?

It is my opinion when you add all the costs - without significant commercial development - the costs to the community for new housing outpaces the new taxes these properties will generate. We need to do a cost analysis on future growth. Not just how much revenue is generated and not just how much of that revenue can pay for improvements, but what additional costs will the community be responsible for. Road improvements, police and fire protection, schools, community centers, recreation. And while water and sewer improvements are paid for by user fees, those rates will increase to meet the demands of an increasing population. Our rates are already double those Manchester pays.

The Tannery apartment project that has been supported by every city councilor but myself, does not reflect what the community has stated it wanted on this site. Time and time again you said that you wanted a mixed development project. Even without a grocery store it was always the desire of the Village to have a commercial component. Instead construction has started on the first phase of a 54 unit apartment complex (with only six units not income restricted).

Will new taxes be collected on this project? Yes they will. But they will go to pay for costs associated with site cleanup and not for city, school, or county services. When the city goes forward with a River front park, that only adds to the length of time new funding will not be available for the services you and I are required to pay for.

Over 100 people attended a meeting to voice concerns about possible zoning changes at the Rivco site that would have allowed for construction of large apartment buildings. Again any requirement for commercial development would have been removed. The Ward 1 city councilor responded to those attending, that if the zoning changes weren’t allowed they could wind up with a chicken processing plant. Really. Are these the only options for the Rivco site. Six story apartments or a processing plant.

I recently read on the Ward 1 councilor's candidate profile that

“the city has performed $15,000,000 worth of special projects in Penacook, including: Village Street repaving, sidewalks, lighting, burying power lines, replacement and maintenance of water and sewer lines, a new Rolfe Park pool (the first pool in the city to be replaced, by the way), and repaving of many streets. These are all special projects that are provided above and beyond the annual services we pay for in taxes, such as Police, Fire, and the like.”

In my opinion this is a huge exaggeration to make it appear the city has spent just as much money on special projects in Penacook as they have in downtown Concord. Let me give credit where credit is due, burying power lines was a special expenditure for the Village.

But replacing the pool at Rolfe Park along with four other city pools was undertaken because the material lining the pool walls failed. While the original pool walls built around the 1940’s are still structurally sound, the pools that were replaced approximately 25 ago years used materials that were defective. Is this a special project for Penacook?

When the skate house at White Park was replaced, was that a special project for Ward 4?

Village Street was part of a city wide street renovation and repaving project for the Route 3 corridor. Was this a special project when work was done along other parts of the road? Or is it only a special project when it is in the Village?

Are intersection improvements on city streets special projects for Penacook? What about roundabouts on Franklin, Liberty Streets and East Concord, are they special projects for those neighborhoods or are they city wide traffic improvements?

Is it a special project when streets in Penacook are repaved as part of a city wide street maintenance program, but not a special project when Shawmut Street in Ward 10 is repaved?

Are water and sewer improvements special projects or are they part of the maintenance and upgrading of our city’s utilities systems? They are not paid for by your property taxes, but by your water and sewer fees.

The city has been more responsive to Penacook over the past few years than they have in the past, but equating city wide projects as special projects for Penacook is just plan wrong.

Here is my hope. I hope that all of you - regardless of who you vote for - will vote. I hope that you will take the time to determine which candidates best represent your interests and the issues important to you.

While we all have the right to voice our opinions and concerns, your voice isn’t being heard if you don’t vote. If fewer than 200 people show up to vote at their Ward for a municipal election, who is being represented?

Be sure to take the time to vote on November 5th.

And a post script

So where do we go from here. Like many in our community I understand the demand for not only more housing, but housing that is affordable. I continue to strongly advocate for housing that is not segregated by income, but for mixed income developments, whether they are single family, multi-family or apartments.

Affordable housing has two components. Housing that tenants and homeowners can afford is the first part. Ensuring that the community can afford to pay for the safety services, schools, recreation and a well maintained infrastructure is the other component for affordable housing.

To do this we need to have a yard stick, a method to measure costs. Both short term and recurring. We need to ensure that housing that is affordable today, doesn’t become so expensive due to costs for services and increases in property taxes, that it isn't affordable tomorrow. Considerations not only for those new to the housing market, but those who are on fixed incomes.

If we are going to build more housing we must know the costs to the community before projects are approved. Do we know if there will be subsequent commercial development? Will new commercial development contribute to city, school and county services or will their taxes be sequestered to pay for improvements that make their projects affordable only for the developers?

We’re all in this together and we all have an obligation to contribute to the common good. Let’s work together to make sure that Concord continues to be Concord. Let’s make sure that we remember that what makes Concord a great community is all the people that live here.