The latest powerplay by the council is to move $500k the county commissioners had budgeted for road repairs into a separate line item. The council could then suggest what use this $500k would have as they didn't seem too thrilled about using it for road repairs:
To strike a compromise with the commissioners, the council proposed pulling $500,000 from line items dedicated to chip-and-seal projects to create a new line dedicated for the council’s use. The line item in the CEDIT budget did not specifically go to the zoo.
First, this can hardly be described as a compromise because the commissioners had no input. Next, what exactly is the point other than to try and show the commissioners that the council has a say too? The council has effectively taken their ball and gone home. Their move will now require the commissioners to go back to the council and request $500k for road work. At the end of the day the council doesn't have the authority to spend the $500k anyway - the commissioners wear the pants so to speak.
The county council needs to stop their political posturing and just get to work...
11 comments:
Aren't these the same County Commissioners that want to pass the responsibility of bridge maintenance and repair to the local jurisdictions and didn't the Allen County Highway Department recently announce personnel cuts because of the aboite annexation?
I didn't think that they had half a million dollars to just give away. I'm sure that money will end up being used for pet projects, or probably fund a bunch of consultants who get paid to study things that don't need to be studied. Meanwhile roads will continue to deteriorate and later the Commissioners will blame it on someone else.
"I'm sure that money will end up being used for pet projects..."
Nice pun, Kaiser - but your point is well taken.
Kaiser,
To be fair, the Commissioners want to use the money for road repair and the council seems to want to use it on...well I have no idea; the only thing I've heard from them is to use it for a zoo exhibit...
Chip-and-seal is NOT road repair any more than makeup is "face repair."
My favorite line from the article was:
But Councilman Darren Vogt, R-3rd, questioned how sealing dead-end roads and roads with few houses along them could be considered economic development.
I guess agriculture doesn't fit into the county councilman's list of "Economic Development".
Frankly, I can see how people in unicorporated areas are fearful of a merger between Fort Wayne and Allen County governments.
Kaiser,
In all fairness, it should probably be noted that agriculture (or at least heavy agricultural equipment) is the exact reason many of those roads are in such a state of decay.
I was recently told by one of the commissioners that they are going to establish guidelines for how CEDIT money can be spent. The emphasis will be on projects/plans that can help this county get back to 105% of the national wage.
A daunting task to be sure...
Andrew,
Yes, heavy agricultural equipment damages roads, just as heavy automobile and truck traffic damages roads in urban areas.
My point was this: Our county council members think that they are "city" council members, often overlooking the needs of the unicorporated areas of the county. As you pointed out, chip and sealing roads isn't much in the way of road repair, and now some agricultural areas are at risk of losing even that minimum service.
At the end of the day, heavy commercial truck traffic pay for the roads they destroy (18-wheelers pay sometimes in excess of $14,000 each in highway taxes per annum).
Alas, farm machinery with no license plates do NOT pay highway taxes, because they are NOT SUPPOSED TO BE ON THE HIGHWAYS! Yet every day you can find someone driving a combine, a tractor, a sprayer....right down the asphalt and gravel roads without any recourse whatsoever. Just another nameless, faceless and USELESS farm subsidy.
Kaiser, I think any reasonable governing body will focus its efforts on areas where the population density is higher than 0.5 humans per acre.
I think that any "reasonable" governing body with a responsibility to serve the entire county would at least be willing to maintain minimum infrastructure for a sector of the overall economy that provides us with food, among other things.
A ratty dirt or gravel road is a minimum infrastructure, and they already have those. If the farmers would stop driving their massive equipment directly on the poor roads, we wouldn't be having this strange conversation. Plus, if the taxpayers at-large weren't so completely subsidizing the "traditional farm" lifestyle for some of these clowns, there might be some extra road money sitting around to maintain more of these barely-traveled, severely abused (or is it "misused?") roads.
Post a Comment