Letter to the editor for July 26
July 25, 2017
Muller debate circular
If you attended the July 18 Board of County Commissioner's special meeting regarding the proposed Muller Parkway, you were treated to one of the most confused and contentious examples of governance I have ever witnessed. With the exception of Commissioners McDermid and Thaler, who actually understand why the parkway is necessary, and who, apparently, were the only ones who listened to their staff and to the public, the Board argued in endless circles about whether trucks should or should not be allowed on the proposed alternate route.
Commissioners Penzel, Walsh and Nelson argued against allowing trucks on the parkway by referring to decisions made a decade ago. Apparently, they prefer to maintain the status quo rather than work toward a solution in today's environment. Further, they missed, by a wide margin, the central point of the debate – trucks are part of the congestion because they are part of the overall traffic stream. Restricting one class of traffic from using Muller Parkway reduces the effectiveness and purpose for the route. The best, long term, solution for Muller Parkway is to allow all classes of traffic to travel along it – driver's choice – otherwise any investment is not worth the cost.
More of a disappointment, Commissioner Nelson argued that developers don't want to see truck traffic on roads where they plan to build. This causes me to ask, "Who do you represent, Mr Nelson? Developers, or current residents?" Also, after disclosing that he owns property adjacent to the South end of the proposed parkway, Commissioner Nelson stated, "his vote would not be swayed" by that fact. Regardless of his assertion to the contrary, there is the appearance of a serious conflict of interest, and in my view he should have recused himself from voting to avoid any ethical concerns.
Recommended Stories For You