Results of last night’s appeal hearing:

The 4-0 vote to uphold the appeals and deny the subdivision application appears to have concluded this particular application. [Commissioner Milligan recused himself and did not participate.] However, the vote still needs to be ratified by approval of meeting minutes and findings of fact/conclusions of law before the appeal window officially opens. For some reason, the town continues to state that the appeal window opens upon taking the vote. However, an aggrieved party might very well argue that since the record is not complete until those documents are approved and signed, a court may find that the window within which an appeal may be filed should be extended accordingly.

While there were statements offered during the hearing to the effect that this matter would go to court “no matter what” that outcome is not certain. If the applicants’ legal advisors believe that the town’s decision is legally defensible, they may advise foregoing that option. In this or any instance, denial of an application need not be the end of the matter. The applicant is always free to return with a new or revised application which addresses the reasons for the previous denial.  

What I do expect to happen is that there will soon be a call for substantial revisions to the town’s Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances. This could be a good thing (or not) depending on how the process works out. No ordinance is ever perfect; they can and should be reviewed as needed. However, the best use of ordinances is to consider them a road map designed to achieve certain goals. In the past, Edgewood has made reactive ordinance changes in response to a particular situation which ultimately served to turn the ordinance from a road map into a straitjacket. The prime example of this is the history of how so-called minor subdivisions are treated in the various iterations of the Subdivision Ordinance we have seen since 1999.  

Today’s special meeting on the Campbell Ranch subdivision appeal hearing.

I don’t see any updates or changes to the packet or schedule at this time. The meeting still appears to be scheduled for 3:00 pm, but I see that the YouTube placeholder thumbnail says 4:00 pm.  I’ve looked at the options for overflow viewing, and the town has made some attempt to accommodate the public. 

Whether or not it is adequate is another matter. The town has had at least since July 2, 2025 when notice of the hearing was posted to adjust the schedule. Did no one in the Planning Office think to consult the town calendar to see if the overflow room was available either then or since? Why was notice that the room would be unavailable posted only this week? 

The town’s planning director, Brad Hill, frequently cites his past work experience at the NMAG’s office when instructing the public, the Town Manager and the Town and P&Z Commissions on matters pertaining to to Open Meeting Act compliance. It appears that the town is relying on his expertise for managing this hearing as well. 

Campbell Ranch Appeal Hearing Packet Updated

Update: A regular reader of the blog forwarded a link to a town social media account post which reads as follows:

Due to summer youth programming, overflow room is not available for 7/24 Quasi-Judicial Hearing. Hearing to be livestreamed, free Wi-Fi (ECL) is obtainable from Town Hall parking area, if needed. Livestream: https://www.youtube.com/@thetownofedgewoodnm/streams

The town has also limited comments on its post. First Amendment as filtered through the Town of Edgewood’s recently adopted social media policy?

The town has posted a packet for the upcoming July 25 appeal hearing before the Town Commission. Its contents are minimal and more distinguished by what is absent than present.

Factors to consider when attending or watching the hearing:

• There is no staff report in the packet as it exists at the time of this post; therefore, if one is not provided before the meeting it will be important to attend carefully to Mr. Hill’s presentation. Look for the proportion of rhetorical elements v. logical elements in his presentation. Will his presentation be balanced, or does its structure imply intention for guiding the Commission’s decision making process into a particular outcome? 
• Generally speaking, politicians (when considered as a group) often respond best to rhetorical appeals while courts tend to rely more logical elements. However, there are legislators who do respond to logical appeals. Judges may be swayed by rhetoric, especially in cases where the relevant facts offer no clear path to resolution. The challenge in the present situation will be to balance the short term goal of convincing the Town Commission with the longer term goal of introducing evidence which will convince a State District Court Judge.  
• The abysmal failure of the ghost “Save South Mountain” PR campaign served only to highlight the fact that there is little, if any, interest in Campbell Ranch on the part of Edgewood residents. The so-called hoax emails did serve to put the spotlight on town employees and the latest version of Edgewood’s economic development committee.   
• The focus of the recent joint meeting of the Town and P&Z Commissions highlighting how, when, and under what circumstances approved master plans may be modified hints at behind the scenes maneuvering.  
• The letter written on behalf of Campbell Corporation, which is included in the packet, recalls the tone of the Edgewood Town Council meeting of July 21, 2004. 

Link to Joint Meeting & Recap of the Branding Seminar

UPDATE: Link added for branding seminar in second paragraph. Both meetings were live-streamed and are now and the joint meeting is still available on replay. I have not had time to do more than a cursory run-through for either.  The town can’t say that the second half of the joint meeting was a rehearsal for the scheduled Campbell Subdivision hearing, but it sure looks like that is what it was. We shall see how Campbell Ranch Appeal Hearing 2.0 goes. As to the first half: I can sum it up by saying that the prospects are beyond exciting and Brad Hill volunteered to be the town’s sole conduit for transmitting information on the proposed changes in the pipeline routing.

The branding seminar was just the latest in a series of similar events extending over the past two decades. Nothing really new; another public relations exercise ft. Brad Hill and Linda Burke. My cursory examination showed that the attendees were almost exclusively town officials. In the past, similar endeavors elicited more participation but served primarily to illustrate that there exist several competing models amongst town residents of what face the town should show to the outside world. The video for that meeting seems to have dropped off the YouTube channel’s listings. It may or may not reappear. Plenty of thumbnails from the Audrey, Sherry & Jerry Show are still available.  

One of Edgewood’s perennial difficulties is that the town government was created by and for people who excel at advertising and promotion but who, with obvious reluctance, are forced to rely on others for seeing projects through to completion. The town has always been, well promoted. What is missing today are fundamentals such as a stable political structure, technical expertise in key areas, financial accountability, and control of the water supply in the core part of the town. However, the Cow Awards are back, the July 4th Celebration was superb, and the carnival is bigger and better than ever. 

Subdivision Appeal Hearing July 24, 2025 at 3:00 pm

A letter dated July 2, 2025 has been posted at the Town of Edgewood website. It lays out the procedure for the Campbell Ranch subdivision appeal hearing which is advertised as a quasi-judicial public hearing. At the time of this post, the meeting is scheduled for Thursday July 24, 2025 at 3:00 pm in the meeting chambers at Edgewood Town Hall.  

For more information on public hearings, see the Public Hearing FAQ page listed in the header under the blog title.