 Hello, my name is Steve Pittman and this is an installment of Longmont Public Media's candidate interview series. I'm here with Terry Goone, a candidate for mayor of Longmont running against the incumbent Joan Peck. Hello and welcome, Terry. Well, thank you very much. You're going to have time for summation at the end, but since our time is limited, I'm going to start right off with our first question. Go for it. If you are elected, what is the biggest issue you want to address? And is that issue within the control of city council or is it something that requires a ballot measure or state-level action? Honestly, the biggest issue that I see with our current city council and our current city government is that there's too much of it. So I would look at reducing that. I know there's three ballot measures on the ballot coming up for more tax increases for amenities, for wants, not needs. So I would dig deep into the budget and come up with what are the, what can we get rid of? What can we strip down? My object here is to, you know, definitely allocate funds to what is required. And the requirements of government are of course individual rights. And so the police, the justice department and then as a municipality, we've got utilities, though honestly some of those could be also sold off to private enterprises. And look into that sort of thing and where we can go from there. Thank you. Thank you. There are several safety and crime reduction measures, which the public has asked for, such as vision zero, restorative justice and a larger police force. Which of these solutions do you think are effective? And what else should the city council do? I love restorative justice. I think that's an excellent, and it's proven itself to be so. The police like it. It has proven itself to be a very good program to divert people from being, you know, just institutionalized regularly over and over again. So that's a very good provision zero. I think is that the, is that the keeping people from getting killed on the streets? Yeah, no traffic. No traffic deaths. That's, that's a goal. I don't know how you do that with more traffic. I'm not really certain what their plans are to do that other than I've seen different things around where like that that woman's house in 17th now that keeps getting run into is now have some has some barriers. So perhaps that's what they're talking about. And maybe some more inputs into curbing that that kind of thing. I haven't I gotta be honest, I haven't looked too much into vision zero. And I did speak with the police department, the chief of public safety just found out about the budgetary constraints or anything that he needs. And he was saying they are they're fine right now. They they could use they do have openings for more police officers. So definitely should be fulfilled. Do we need more than that? He didn't seem to think so. But certainly, if if we need more than that, he is the expert. Thank you. Thank you. What is your vision for the future of Longmont's transportation network of vehicles, streets, sidewalks and multi use paths? My vision for that. Well, that's a beautiful thing, isn't it? He tried to read the future. And so it becomes very tricky. I was listening about this the other day. And there needs to be some sort of creative method to to have roads and transportation modalities, I guess is the term people are using now for these non cars, but not quite a pedestrian zone. So perhaps by weight, if we have extra lanes by weight, so these little zipper things, I don't even know what they're called, I've seen them going by not quite a motorcycle, almost a motorcycle, not, you know, more power than a skateboard. But I don't even know what these are called, because frankly, I'm old. But those kinds of things, they go fast, so they don't belong on sidewalks where pedestrians are, but they don't belong in the streets either. And I think that needs to be taken into consideration. And certainly, roads, transportation is a function of government. And as far as long line is concerned, so when we are designing new streets, and we obviously have a traffic problem that I think everybody recognizes that that needs to be addressed as well, perhaps a separate lane for vehicles of any type that weigh less than x amount. That would be my thoughts on that. Do we have room for extra lanes and the existing streets? At some point, you have to make room for extra lanes. Yeah, you just have to. I don't think that bus services, I don't think that that is the long term answer. Certainly a lot of people use buses. But when you think about what happened during COVID, and they shut down, they shut down everything, people didn't want to be next to each other, certainly not crammed into a bus or airplanes or things like that. I don't think that's a great solution. We are, you know, we're Americans in the West. And one of the things that we value highly is freedom to go where we want to go. And so bus and electric trains, things like that, they are limited to what can happen. And with potential for pandemics and future pandemics, I don't think people are as comfortable as they once were. Certainly they're needed. I wouldn't, I don't dissuade them from being, especially if a private enterprise can make some money doing that sort of thing. And I know that there's been more talk about the door to door types of services Uber and Lyft are very popular. So if if somebody can make money off of a bigger van, a bigger bus, bus, that's great. Thank you. The high cost of housing makes it difficult for service workers to afford to live in Longmont. Do you believe that they should be able to? And how do you believe it would impact the lives of current residents if they could? Well, the high cost of housing affects all of us service workers and non service workers. So that's, that's just a general thing. Do they deserve that? That's just that's an odd word to use for housing. I mean, it's can you afford to live there? Can you, can you purchase in that area? The high cost of housing is a function not only of our beautiful state and our beautiful city, but also of all of the onerous regulations that are put on to builders as well. And apartment complexes and things like that. There's a lot. There's a lot that are hidden costs that we don't necessarily recognize as a government when you, you have to fill out more paperwork for something the new recycling requirement of apartment complexes. That's, that's like not only paperwork on this side is but paperwork on the other side of the city as well that has to be followed up on and, and tracked and that sort of thing. So these are, these are the things that actually add costs to our daily the things that we're doing. I believe the government does not belong in the business of housing at all. And, you know, other than zoning planning and zoning, I don't believe it should be in, in housing and should let the free markets deal with it. And I believe at that point, you will find affordable housing because affordable housing is needed. And so the private sector will, will figure out what to build, whether it's boarding houses and, you know, you don't necessarily want to live in a boarding house your whole life, but it's a start and it's a way to get into things. The, we, we stop building condos with that new that law that passed the state level for the, the defects law. So that's, that's a problem. And it needs to be worked around at this point in time, if you can't repeal it, but you'd have to figure out maybe there's a with local government, I don't know if there's a ability to make a change specific to long line itself. But that might be something to thank you. Okay, I'm going to have to reset the time because we're going to get seven minutes now for this three part question. There will be three measures on November's ballot. Do you think that the public should support each of those measures and why? And you'll have two minutes and 20 seconds to comment on each measure. I'll try and keep track of time a little bit here. The first measure is three C a new branch library and library funding. I'm going to go with no, not this year, certainly. And I'm always good with maintaining what we have. So I know this this particular measure has maintenance and an annex. I don't necessarily agree that we need an annex. We have a good library. Someone just a lot what a lot of people have been saying in the Times call when I use it, I don't see it as very busy. So I'd have to look into the numbers as to whether we need an annex. I know there's been libraries are many of the libraries built for 68,000 people and not 100,000. And that could be true. But also fewer people are using libraries. So there is that aspect as well, you can Google so much. So that there is a difference in how libraries are put to use the I'm always a believer maintenance, but because they connected that with the annex, I don't think that it should be I do believe that this is a year when our property taxes are hitting the roof, and we don't even know what that's going to look like. And, you know, obviously, our evaluations went up and how that's going to translate into a tax increase is a lot of people are going to be hurting in a huge way, a huge way. And I've talked to our state representative. And she she told me that they can't do anything about it. It's like, Yes, yes, you can. And so it seems it's this is not the year to throw new taxes out. And of course, we're not going to see the results of that property tax increase until after the November election. So people will be voting, then they're going to get their property taxes. And so there's going to be I suspect there may be some regret if we end up with 9.05% sales tax because we pass all these things. So that is, yeah, that I would not have put that on the ballot. Definitely. I would have separated maintenance, which should be part of any function. You know, if we're going to start a library, you need to include maintenance that's long term. And that's just part of the budgetary process. So that's that's what I think about that one. Okay, thank you. The second measure is 3D an arts and entertainment center. Well, I know people have been crying for that. But I think I know people have long been wanting an arts and entertainment center. But I also think that when they vote to get that on the ballot, it's a it's like a bit of a mob rule, right? You're saying that I want this beautiful thing. And I want you people to pay for it. And I'll join in. But I want you guys to pay for it. So the city, of course, doesn't earn any money. It's all taking from one group of people to another through our taxes. And so passing this passing this ballot measure is just people saying, this is what I want. And you guys need to pay for that. And then I get to have it and enjoy it. And of course, we can all enjoy it if we wanted to. But it's a matter of priorities. I these are not my priorities. So why do I have to pay for that? And you know, the other said the other day in the city council meeting, Marsha Martin called a man greedy because he was interested in the zoning around his house. And it's like this performing arts center that you people are wanting us to vote for is saying, I want your money so I can have my performing son. And to me, that's that's it was immoral for one. It's and it's unconscionable. I can't believe it's happening. I can't believe it's happening this year in particular. And that's what I think about city government involving itself in such things as these amenities. Thank you. Thank you. So the third measure is three E new recreation facilities. I'm saying the same goals for that city government shouldn't be in the job recreation. It's you're competing directly with our local gyms and our local, you know, anybody wants to start up a business and have a yeah, some sort of recreation is in direct competition to the city. And the city's got the monopoly because they're forcing others to pay for this tax. That's that's that is what a tax is. It's a force they're taking your money and making you pay for a recreation center. When we live in Longmont, Colorado, which is one of the most beautiful areas, there's so much outdoor free recreation that people can do. And it's again, it is unconscionable to think that just because you wanted and you wanted in your neighborhood that everybody else should pay for this. It's I don't like it. And I would say no, it shouldn't. It doesn't belong on the ballot this year in particular because of the property tax increase. And it shouldn't be part of city government. Any of the recreation center that we have even now. Thank you. So you have about six minutes, six and a half minutes left if you'd like to make any closing remarks. You don't have to use the full. Well, you know, it's it's one of those things where our city government is, you know, they have a vision. They've got and this is outside of the ballot measures, but they've got a vision for Longmont to be carbon free by 2030 in spite of extra costs, in spite of inefficiencies, in spite of the fact that having Longmont carbon free in 2030 is not actually going to make a change to climate. It's not going to change the climate at all, just to have long, but does turn Longmont into an example for others to follow. That is I mean, I have a similar vision, which is a vision where the government is reduced to the point where they're not interfering with individual rights, private property rights and that sort of thing. And the private market then designs the town based on the town's needs because you can tell what's needed by what sells. So that's kind of my I would like for Longmont to be an example of what reduce government to absolutely as little as possible where all the government is only there that supplies the needs and all the wants are supplied by the private sector. The government stays out of housing, it stays out of banking, stays out of recreation and performing arts, that sort of thing. And of course, it maintains. Sorry, I should have stopped that. It maintains, you know, what we've got going. I recognize this is a dream similar to how, you know, the carbon free by 2030 is a dream. It's a, it's a, you know, bit of a fantasy. But that is, that's my dream to see Longmont be that way. I love the people long are so innovative. You see something every day in the newspaper was the other day was coffee grounds and and using that to do 3D printing. It's amazing. People are amazing. And if you let them, if you let them express themselves to their fullest extent and they don't need to have everything that's public, private, like the, the, the sugar beet thing that's going on that is what is called crony capitalism in normal terms, right? You can call it public, private, but that is crony capitalism by definition. And so if you can get, if you can get the the government out of those kinds of negotiations, I believe the world is a better place. And I would like Longmont to be that example of what that looks like. So those are, those are my thoughts on that. OK, I'm going to ask one follow up question. Sometimes they have a couple more minutes and that is I hear people commenting that some people in service jobs are being priced out of the housing market here in Longmont. So it appears to be a real problem that actually it doesn't seem like capitalism is going to solve. Do you have any solutions to suggest beyond just no, I mean, because the market operate. We don't have a free market here in Longmont. We don't have a free market where, where capitalism is allowed to make a like a boarding house. Where would you put a boarding house if you're going to build one? That's it's not allowed. You can't make one. And you've got requirements for, for affordable housing that changes the whole dynamic by requiring affordable housing. The developer now has to raise the prices of everything else so that raises the prices in the entire town and then these affordable houses. They're just like these little one-offs that then have specific deed restrictions, I assume, that go with the life of the house. So now these homeowners cannot sell at their actual value in the future, because there's probably deed restrictions to keep them affordable all the time. You've got required sizes of bedrooms these days. Why is there a required size of bedroom that that makes no sense to me? And so there's all these little things that are requirements that make building more onerous, more expensive that as you add laws, because there ought to be a law, if this is what happens, it's it's just a steamroll and it goes on and on and on. And right now, I mean, our government is so intertwined with everything in our lives. It's outrageous. It's just it's too much. That's why I was saying it in my fantasy life. It's the long one is a, you know, it's a as government free world as it can possibly be. And and I would be I would love to see what that looks like. I would love to see what the free markets can build with. Tiny Homes was a were a big it was a hot button issue for a while. Now, do people really like to live in them? I don't know. But certainly it could be a thing that is affordable for period for period of time. It might be a little harder to sell because it's a tiny home. But we used to have that mobile homework that was down by the San Fray and River, obviously too close to the river. Can you build a mobile home park? I don't think so. Certainly, I don't think it would be approved in Longmont, that kind of thing. And yet there is an opportunity for for homes that are affordable if we allow it. Well, thank you very much, Terry, for being here. It's been a pleasure. Well, thank you very much. I appreciate the time.