Mesa County Ballot Issue 1A: The proposed 29 Road interchange at I-70

29 Road at I-70, where the proposed interchange would be built. Right now there is just a bridge over the interstate. (Photo: Google)

Mesa County Ballot Issue 1A asks voters to approve county taxpayers’ taking on an additional $174,438,202 in total debt, including interest over the next 30 years, to repay an $80 million bond to build a new interchange on I-70 at 29 Road. The repayment would cost County taxpayers an estimated $6 million per year for the next 30 years. The county says repayment would be from revenue from the county’s existing sales tax, so the project would not raise taxes.

Who supports it:

Quintin Shear, the registered agent for N70-Tech LLC, the group of undisclosed investors who own most of the land around the proposed

Red outline shows the holdings of N70 Tech LLC, the company made up of a group of undisclosed investors who would benefit financially from building a 29 Road interchange

interchange, supports the measure, which is not a surprise, since he and his fellow investors will profit directly from it. The only unanswered question is who besides Shear owns the land. N70-Tech LLC donated $10,000 to the “Finish the Loop” Committee in support of the measure and the Grand Junction Chamber of Commerce donated $30,000. Mesa County Commissioner Cody Davis,  a developer, also supports the measure, as does Grand Junction City Councilman Cody Kennedy.

Who opposes it:

Grand Junction City Council Members Dennis Simpson, a Certified Public Accountant, and Scott Bielfuss oppose Issue 1A. It’s also opposed by Kari Sholtes, Ph.D., P.E., a civil engineering instructor who is on the faculty at Colorado Mesa University, and by Mesa County resident John Traylor, who worked as a financial analyst for New York state. The registered issue committee that opposes 1A, “No on 29 Road Debt” has not taken any donations, according to Tracer.

Arguments for:

Grand Junction City Councilman, Dennis Simpson, CPA, has been warning people about the high cost of the 29 Road interchange project.

No written comments in favor of the measure were submitted to the County Clerk by the required deadline to be printed in the local General Election guide issued by the Clerk. The “Finish the Loop” committee, which supports the measure, has a website that says the measure will help alleviate traffic congestion on Patterson Rd., complete a transportation loop around town, improve emergency response times and “make our streets safer.” It is also expected that if it is built, the new interchange would open up thousands of acres of desert land north of I-70 to development.

Arguments against:

City Councilman Dennis Simpson has publicly issued extensive warnings about the project, saying it will cost taxpayers far more than the ballot issue states, and that it “is about economic development, not better traffic, and we can’t afford it.” He warns that for safety, the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) will require a “braided ramp” (video) be added to the interchange at a cost of millions of additional dollars. Braided ramps put vehicles getting on and off the interstate onto two separate roads, with one road elevated above the other, separating them for safety. (The CDOT engineer’s comments can be seen here (pdf).)

Kari Sholtes, Ph.D., a civil engineering instructor at Colorado Mesa University, wrote a detailed editorial published Oct. 17 in the Daily Sentinel explaining the multitude of engineering problems with the 29 Road Interchange as it is currently planned. Sholtes says the project will cause additional congestion and increase total injuries and fatalities over the ten years after it becomes operational, which is why the CDOT will not fund it. The cost of the project

City Finance Director Jennifer Tomaszewski told City Council members she has a fiduciary duty to warn them that the 29 Road Interchange Project project would “decimate City Capital” (Photo: City of Grand Junction)

would be split between Mesa County and the City of Grand Junction, but the Grand Junction City Finance Director, Jennifer Tomaszewski, who is also a CPA and a fiduciary  charged with acting in the best interests of the City, warned City Council members at a workshop July 15, 2024 that given the amount of revenue the City takes in from sales taxes and its current level of operational expenses and debt, the proposed $2.5 million/year in debt service over 30 years the City would take on to build the 29 Road interchange would “decimate our city capital, basically.” 

Opponents also argue the proposed new interchange would be only 1.2 miles from the Horizon Drive interchange, which is too close and contributes to it being an unnecessary expense.

Recommended vote on Mesa County Ballot Issue 1A: NO.

  3 comments for “Mesa County Ballot Issue 1A: The proposed 29 Road interchange at I-70

  1. Who supports it? Two Codys of equally questionable moral character. One who can’t help but bandy about insensitive terms like “mongaloid” in public meetings. The other…a washed-up cop turned CC member who gets all hot-and-bothered when the Finance Director honestly says this would “decimate City Capital” then himself has no trouble throwing around inflamatory terms like “crackhouse” when referring the homeless services. Let’s get down to Brass Tax though…does the Western Colorado Drug Task Force endorse this issue?

  2. I heard Ms Sholtes speak at an informational meeting. She pointed out that the intersection at 29 road and Patterson would have to be substantially improved…something that is not included in the extant proposal.
    I also found out that there has been no environmental impact study done, yet.
    It seems that the ducks on this project aren’t even close to being in a row. Many at the meeting wondered why it’s being pushed now.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *