Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Economic Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council keeps MRA funding decisions at the dais after public calls for greater transparency
Summary
After public testimony from residents and prospective applicants, Los Alamos County Council voted 5–2 to retain final decision‑making authority for Metropolitan Redevelopment Area (MRA) funding requests rather than create a separate MRA commission; council directed staff to improve public notice and encourage applicants to present proposals at open meetings.
Los Alamos County Council voted on Jan. 27 to retain council as the governing decision‑making body for MRA funding requests, rejecting a motion to establish a separate MRA commission. The vote was 5–2, with Councilors Hand and Regor opposed.
The item drew extended debate and public comment. Lisa Shin, a White Rock resident, said residents felt inadequately informed and asked that review processes and staff‑applicant meetings be more accessible and open. "We feel like we've been left in the dark," she said, urging public access to review committee meetings and to make application materials available online.
Representatives of prospective applicants, including Jeffrey Branch of Columbus Capital, urged against adding an additional review body. Branch said his firm has invested in the community and was preparing an application and requested predictable, timely review: "Miss Xin's comment with regards to what we're doing about that is false," he told council, disputing claims of secrecy.
Council debate revealed differing priorities: some members argued a new commission or steering committee of business people would add expertise and public confidence; others said it would delay projects and that council — as the elected body — should remain the final arbiter. Several councilors recommended improving transparency without adding a new commission: posting MRA applications to the county portal, holding an additional public meeting before ordinance introduction and encouraging applicants to present proposals at open council meetings.
Councilor Herman moved that council take no further action and maintain council as the governing decision‑making body for MRA funding requests; the motion passed 5–2. The county manager and staff said they would update the MRA handbook to require a public meeting prior to ordinance introduction and to post applications, as requested by public commenters.
