After reading the April 4 editorial concerning the Mesa County Elections’ warehouse, I thought it would be appropriate to respond. I am unclear about the “spin” that my office recommended the purchase of a $4 million dollar building for an elections warehouse, but I am quite clear that the recommendation did not come from the County Clerk’s office.

Two years ago, when my office approached county administration concerning the subject property (now for sale for $4 million), that specific property was not for sale. Rather it was for lease.

In 2006, I had been advised that the main Division of Motor Vehiclesoffice (presently located in the Mesa Mall) might not be able to retain its location. This became a month-to-month unknown for us.

At that time, my staff began looking for a location that would continue to be equally visible and easily accessible to the public. We began to explore (in 2006) the possibility of leasing a portion of that subject property, not only for the elections warehouse, but also for the main DMV office, as well as its inventory (which is presently warehoused in a separate location).

Since I became the county clerk (January 2003), I have been advocating that the county build rather than lease. While the above solution was not ideal, it was at least a solution that would not cost the county any more monies than it was presently paying for both the main DMV location and the elections warehouse (in 2006). However the county, at that time, had other priorities it needed to address.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment.

JANICE RICH
Mesa County Clerk & Recorder
Grand Junction

This entry was posted on Saturday, April 5th, 2008 at 10:51 am and is filed under General. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.