Edgewood Incorporation Map: some history and context [corrected & updated]

 

Why do various neighborhood groups in the North 14 area remain so vehemently anti-Edgewood after more than 20 years? Perhaps this photo which shows the original incorporation map will help explain. It could serve as an example of what gerrymandering looks like in practice. The areas which participated in that incorporation vote are outlined in bold black ink. Compare that to the Edgewood boundary map which achieved most of its present outline with the annexation of Campbell Ranch a bit less than three years later in December of 2001. The majority of annexations which took place after 2001, with the exception of Section 32, have been infill which did not substantially alter the boundary map's general outline. The idea that such a small number of people so many miles away should be allowed to dictate land use along North 14 was, and still is abhorrent to many residents in those neighborhoods. 

The vote to annex Campbell Ranch in December of 2001 was preceded by a series of annexations which legal counsel would later instruct the town's officials to refer to as a "bridge" annexation. When asked for the reason, the reply given was because state law does not permit "shoestring" annexations. This admonition was greeted by snickers and catcalls from the audience. The town officials in attendance reserved their amusement for the parking lot. 

The Campbell Ranch annexation was soon followed by a hotly contested town election in March of 2002 which resulted in the defeat of a pro-Campbell slate consisting of two incumbent Town Council members Frank Lasky, Gary Chemistruck, and political newcomer Brad Hill. The alternate slate of candidates opposed to the annexation was composed of council member Robert (Bob) Stearley, P&Z Commissioner Donzil Worthington, and Paul Hoffman.  They won easily in an election which saw a turnout of just over 38% of eligible voters. Stearley and Hoffman joined another Edgewood resident, Linda Sparling, in a lawsuit which sought to nullify the annexation, but their challenge was ultimately denied in State District Court in 2004.  [Correction: the challenge which was denied in state district court was a different, and by that time, the only remaining challenge which had been filed by Santa Fe County. The fate of the Stearley/Hoffman/Sparling challenge is unclear: it may have been dismissed at an earlier date or withdrawn to clear the way for Santa Fe County’s more substantial challenge and also to clear obstacles to Stearley’s and Hoffman’s participation in Campbell Ranch’s business with the town government.]

The 1999 vote to incorporate was taken within precisely curated geographic boundaries which excluded neighborhoods where residents were reluctant to add another layer of government. Later, residents outside the original boundary map watched in dismay as the town annexed more and more territory without considering how to pay for services or accommodate new residents who were ambivalent about the prospect. In both instances, state law is partially to blame: both for allowing such blatant gerrymandering and for favoring number of acres owned rather than number of residents when considering annexation requests. After more than twenty years, most Edgewood residents still view the town government with polite skepticism when they notice it at all.  

The town's first effort at consolidating a confusing checkerboard into a coherent whole was rejected by the Boundary Commission which described Edgewood as reckless and territory-hungry.  The second attempt at an infill annexation was successful. The fact that it was John Bassett whose name appeared on documents finalizing a process begun by his predecessor, Brad Hill, is likely a better explanation for the results of the two most recent town elections than the collective ego of the new town government is willing to admit. 

The principal actors in the incorporation were a group of real estate agents and small-scale developers who were frustrated by Santa Fe County's “performance based” land use criteria which they found difficult to navigate. Like many other largely rural/small town governments, Santa Fe County has since moved to a more traditional land use code.