Bisbee council discusses $100,000 contingency for Lavender Pit shared-use path amid objections over fund transfer

Mayor Ken Budge presented a proposal to authorize up to $100,000 from Capital Improvement funds (originally derived from bed tax revenues) as contingency for the Lavender Pit East shared-use path project, saying the money would only be used “if necessary” and would be returned to visitor-center funds if unspent.

Project presenter Megan Connelley reported the project team had secured substantially more funding since April, stating they had raised roughly $900,000 earlier and, through recent efforts, “nearly $1.4 million in new resources” that reduced the city’s anticipated share. Connelley said negotiations with the Arizona Department of Transportation allowed less expensive design alternatives and ADOT agreed to repave its section next year, which together reduced the original bid by nearly $400,000 and shortened the project schedule so construction could begin August 3 with completion targeted in January.

Supporters from the community—Seth Degner, Stephanie Peavey and Cynde Beitner—spoke in favor of the path, emphasizing its potential to improve connectivity, recreation and tourism. Connelley also cited a project survey of 25 local businesses that, according to her presentation, estimated 205 new jobs and $12.7 million in private investment over nine years tied to the path.

Councilmember Karen Schumacher read a prepared statement opposing the proposed contingency transfer. Schumacher argued the funds had been moved inappropriately from visitor-center accounts through executive-session negotiations rather than open process and urged the council to restore the money to visitor-center uses if the contingency was not needed. Schumacher asked that proper public protocols be followed for future transfers.

Mayor Budge characterized the $100,000 as less than 2% of the overall $4.5 million project and said he would run a resolution to return the funds to the visitor-center account if they were not required. The transcript records a substantive exchange of views but does not show a recorded council vote on Resolution R-26-17 during this meeting; the council discussed the contingency authorization and the project timeline but no formal motion or tally on R-26-17 is recorded in the available transcript.

Next steps: project proponents signaled readiness to begin construction August 3 if funding and bids align; the council did not record a final vote on the $100,000 authorization in the June 2 transcript.