Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Economic Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Truth or Consequences weighs incentive package to attract Love's travel center
Summary
City staff outlined a potential incentive package for Love's travel center including utility rebates, impact‑fee waivers and infrastructure work; staff estimated roughly a two‑year payback under the plan and will refine the package for a future meeting. No formal incentive vote was taken.
Get email alerts on the Economic Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
City staff presented a preliminary incentive package intended to attract a Love's travel center to a site near I‑25, detailing infrastructure work the company would undertake and the city costs and rebates that could be offered if the project proceeds.
City Manager Andrew Whitehead and Assistant City Manager Alvarez described the basic components: Love's would extend a water line under Cemetery Road and the company would pay for much of on‑site water infrastructure; the city would need to run three‑phase power to the site (staff estimated about $230,000 for service upgrades and about $150,000 to extend the 3‑phase line). Staff also discussed a city ordinance that allows up to a 20% rebate on utility charges for large users over an 18‑month period tied to job creation and retention requirements.
On the financial case, Whitehead told commissioners the payback could be relatively quick under certain assumptions: "It looks like it could be about a 2 year payback if we were able to provide them something around 30 or $40,000 in incentives, plus they would get the rebate," he said, describing a scenario using comparable local utility customers. The city estimated potential gross‑receipts tax revenue in the neighborhood of $170,000 per year if the project materializes.
Support and concerns: several commissioners said they were inclined to support efforts to secure the business for long‑term jobs and tax revenue; one commissioner cautioned that some community members could oppose short‑term concessions. "This is an investment in our future," the chair said, urging staff to continue negotiating within existing ordinance authority.
What happens next: staff said they will refine the package and return with a formal proposal, likely for the commission’s September meeting. Staff emphasized they would act under existing local economic development rules (local code §14‑52) and would only offer rebates or waivers consistent with that ordinance.
No formal vote was taken on incentives at the meeting; briefing materials and staff estimates were presented for discussion and further refinement.

