On The Road Again- Heavy Truck Corridor Comments

The County Commissioners sure are patting themselves on the back about the Mt. Comfort road project. Unfortunately, they've neglected to answer the tough questions and go public with the details of the $23 million project. Bottom line- how much of this overall cost (land aquisition, design plans, etc) will be paid for by the taxpayers??

Right now, they are only addressing a small portion of this massive corridor project. Will the TIF pay off the bonds for the project or will the cost land in the lap of the taxpayers?

In a recent Letter to the Editor, our CCR Legislative Chairperson John Priore wrote about planning and funding issues related to the Mt. Comfort Road transformation. This letter was not published by the Daily Reporter. Consequently, we include the letter here to inform the public on the increased financial obligations that we will be under as a result of this project.

Here is that letter:

Letter to Editor
August 12, 2009

I really can't criticize our Commissioners' decision to transform Mt. Comfort Road in to a commercial heavy truck transportation corridor, connecting 169 and 174. How can I! I've been proposing something similar for years. Though my preference was for a north-south road corridor located somewhere between Mt. Comfort Road and State Road 9 because of the economic benefits and opportunities associated with having another 170 interchange, I have always held that Mt. Comfort would be a good Plan B. I also proposed and still support a similar corridor and connector on the east side of the County between State Road 9 and State Road 109, connecting 169 and 174 with an 170 interchange.

Another difference between my proposal and the current course of action being taken by our Commissioners deals with funding. Since the new primary purpose and use of Mt. Comfort Road is being changed from that of a county road to that of State road and Federal connector or by-pass, my proposal relied solely and fully on State and Federal funding. Not a single cent of local road or other tax revenues would have been used to fund these projects under my proposal. Our Commissioners on the other hand seem to be relying on considerable local revenues to fund the project.

Though I cannot now fault our Commissioners for adopting a proposal I have previously and still support, I can and surely do take exception to their decision to obligate local taxpayers to unnecessary tax obligations related to the Mt. Comfort Road expansion without any public discussion or disclosure of what they are exactly doing and what deals they have made with the MPO, Hamilton and Shelby Counties, State and Federal officials, and God knows who else concerning the Mt. Comfort Road project. Further, just how much exactly is the Mt. Comfort Road project going to cost local taxpayers? Where do they plan to get the monies needed to design, purchase right of way, make drainage improvements, cover their share of actual constructions, and pay for future increased recurring operating and maintenance costs?

By their own admission, the Commissioners have clearly indicated that the Mt. Comfort Road expansion is an integral part of a regional plan to connect 169 and 174 and develop a transportation corridor for heavy commercial truck and other intrastate and interstate traffic. Accordingly, since it is intended to function as a State road and Federal connector, it only makes sense that funding should come from State and Federal sources and not from local taxpayers.

First, our County Council obligated us to subsidize the Colts and the Convention Center. Now, our Commissioners have decided to obligate us to pay for State and Federal road projects. How they can justify this when they are turning local roads back in to gravel roads because they can't afford to pave them is inexcusable and beyond comprehension.

John Priore
Blue River Township