The ballot Measure H was enacted with a majority vote of 68% (1118 votes of 1642 total). The measure text was:
Section 2.08.180 be added to the Indian Wells Municipal Code to prohibit the City Council from taking any action to approve the establishment, development or installation of all or any part of the Coachella Valley Association of Governments’ “CV Link” Project within the City, unless approved by a majority of City voters?
The editorial board of the Desert Sun asked this question of all candidates for City Council:
"The city is asking voters if they would approve of Indian Wells being part of the proposed CV Link. What is your opinion of the CV Link? Explain."
Here are the candidate responses:
- Doug Hanson, not a winner 2016 with 21%: "The reason we put CV Link on the ballot was to find out how our
residents feel about CV Link. The issue for Indian Wells is not what you
think about CV Link but how does the link traverse the city. We clearly
could not put it in the middle of the golf course. That would present a
humongous hazard to the people on the link and create havoc with our
golfers. In addition, the use of Highway 111 is not a viable route
because of a previous ballot measure and the inability to widen the
Hanson is clear that his objections are focused on the exact routing of CV Link. We can work with that, as long as it is not merely a bait-and-switch tactic to obstruct the corridor, as was practiced by Hobart and Rancho Mirage.
- Ted Mertens, winner 2016 with 28%: "The CV Link project is a major and costly undertaking. I proposed the
ballot measure (Measure H) to give residents a voice. I have not seen
adequate evidence to support the claims relating to the benefits of this
project. Initial construction costs estimated at $100M, will probably
exceed that amount when completed. On-going maintenance costs are
unknown. Cities will be expected to pay for these costs. The proposed
routing through the IWGR or along Highway 111 is simply unacceptable.
When approved, Measure H will prevent any future council from taking
action without first obtaining the approval of a majority of voters."
At least Mertens states clearly that he has his reasons for rejecting CV Link, even if the objections sound suspiciously like the obstructions from Hobart and Rancho Mirage.
- Kimberly Muzik, winner 2016 with 24%: "This has been such a controversial item! I am glad it is going before
our residents for their vote November 8th. Personally, do we really want
the CV link to go through our beautiful IW Golf Resort? What about
costs of future maintenance and safety?"
I see Muzik's gambit: don't answer the question by posing other questions. However, the very phrasing of her questions reveals her belief that CV Link is not for her.
- Ty Peabody, winner 2016 with 27%: "I am adamantly opposed to CV Link as it is being presented:
- Our residents voted to not allow widening of Highway 111 without a majority vote.
- Building the Link as an elevated road adjacent to our golf course would be detrimental to golfers and spoil our views.
- Our city would be required to build access roads or bridges connecting the Link to the clubhouse area.
- Our city does not have capital to cover O&M costs.
- There are serious potential liability issues related to the Link.
- There is attempt by CVAG to use dedicated funds from Measure A for repair of existing roads and bridges for CV Link."
Peabody has bought the Hobart Boondoggle, hook, line, and stinker. He clearly has not read the "Conceptual Master Plan" for the project, and he misunderstands the many alternatives floated for funding O&M costs.