By David Webb, MD
Lanesboro, MN
In response to the June 4 commentary by Peggy Hanson, while I am in basic agreement with her thesis, I believe she picked the wrong example to make her case. There were important factual omissions and errors in her brief description of a particular Lanesboro infrastructure project. I should like to present a more complete accounting of it here. The project she referenced was the paving of Zenith Street East from Maple Drive to the city limits. Auburn-Zenith is the principal entrance into Lanesboro from the South and Southeast, one of only six arteries entering the city from all directions, and the only one which heretofore was not paved in its entirety. In addition to automobiles, traffic on Zenith Street regularly comprises school buses, construction vehicles, semi-trucks and trailers, livestock trailers, grain trucks, and heavy farm tractors and implements, much of which, much of the time exceed the posted 30 mph speed limit, and very little of which is generated by local residents. Nonetheless, it is we residents who have borne the brunt of the egregious dust problem created by this traffic, with significant adverse effects on health and home economics. Paving the remaining section of Zenith Street concurrently with the completion of the already begun repaving of Auburn-Zenith offered a unique opportunity to mitigate this problem. With equipment and construction crews already on site, the project could be undertaken this spring at never likely to be duplicated bargain price. The City Council’s decision to proceed with the project was hardly a hasty one. An initial proposal for consideration was presented to Council last fall. Subsequently, the matter has been an agenda item at eight consecutive Council meetings. There were two announced and published public hearings on the proposed project. Data presented to the Council included Net Present Value analyses, the State of Minnesota Local Road Research Board document “To Pave or Not to Pave? Making Informed Decisions on When to Upgrade a Gravel Road,” initially a paving contractor’s estimate and subsequently two formal bids, as well as input from the city engineer and citizen residents. Any and all concerns raised, including those raised by Ms. Hanson, were addressed and duly considered. Importantly, Council did not, as was misstated by Ms. Hanson, vote to spend $95K on the project. Rather, Council voted their approval of a $95K project, for which we property owners on this section of Zenith Street will pay half. Moreover, in an unprecedented action for Lanesboro, 100% of us residents signed waivers indemnifying the City against any future claims for reducing that 50% assessment. Based upon the data presented to and reviewed by Council, it is anticipated that in the long term the project would be cost neutral for the City; that is the City’s share of the cost of paving would be approximately offset by the reduced cost of gravel road maintenance and dust abatement. In the final analysis, we residents were indeed grateful to those Council members who recognized that fiduciary responsibility to their constituents is not simply a matter of limiting expenditures, but rather of balancing costs vs. benefits, a decidedly more difficult task. I entirely agree with Ms. Hanson on the importance of the next election cycle for the future of Lanesboro. Will it be progress or stagnation? To the excellent questions she suggested posing to prospective candidates, I would add a couple more: 1. Do you believe governance should be “bottom-up” (small d) democratic or “top-down” autocratic? Would you welcome or seek to constrain citizen input, particularly on matters most immediately affecting them? 2. In deciding a complex issue, would you take the opinions of planners, advisors, consultants, and other “experts” as mandates rather than advice? Or would you do your homework, solicit citizen input, attempt to reconcile conflicting advice, carefully assess all available data, and finally render a decision based on your own well considered best judgment?
Leave a Reply