Meanwhile, the wheels on the Planning & Zoning bus have fallen off.

It’s not just Fire/EMS services that were targeted by the “Hey Edgewood, forget about SFCo, we can DIY this!” crowd. It became obvious even to casual observers that the wheels were loose beginning in November of 2024 when P&Z approved a Campbell Ranch subdivision application twice and were twice overturned by the Town Commission. 

What the Town Manager needs to do next is to secure support of the governing body to reboot Edgewood’s Planning & Zoning Department and return to sound development review practices. If he does not succeed, then Reboot Edgewood will be able to list another reason why Edgewood’s town government lacks the institutional depth needed to manage its own affairs.  

• I watched only parts of last Thursday’s PZC meeting which mercifully ended after more than three hours of confusion on the part of the PZC and town staff, and with dismay of applicants, their representatives, and the public.  
• Yesterday afternoon former P&Z colleagues recommended that I watch the following YouTube video from one of the applicants (beginning at 35 minutes; 57 seconds), and suggested that it should become mandatory viewing for all the town’s elected/appointed officials.
•  The video shows two things: (1) What is currently wrong with the town’s development review process, and (2) How development review looks to applicants and the public who see the process from “the other side of the table.” 
• One of the main reasons for incorporating a town government was to gain the ability to take control of development review away from Santa Fe County and make decisions locally.  
• However, beginning with the changeover to Commissioner/Manager government in 2022, the town abandoned earlier policies of hiring planning staff who either already had or committed to earning credentials from the American Institute of Certified Planners (AICP). 
• Edgewood’s advertising and promotion faction loves to brag about the large town map and how Edgewood is unique among New Mexico’s municipalities, but they never have understood that with all that complexity comes more responsibility. 
• Going forward, hiring qualified professionals in planning and zoning should once again be viewed as essential in managing those responsibilities. 
• What kind of town do we want to build? How the town looks and functions on a day to day basis is decided over time and in small increments. 
• One of the foundational exercises in “definition and division” with regard to the development review process involves understanding the differences between a town’s actual land use plan (sometimes called its master plan) which is based on the objective criteria of cumulative land use decisions, as opposed to the “hopes and dreams” contained in the more familiar document bearing the title “Comprehensive Plan.”
• It is important to note that while both types of comprehensive plans may be cited in making land use decisions, the former should take precedence over the latter. [ETA: The actual land use (master) plan is preferred because it is more legally defensible; it rests on precedent instead of subjective goals and objectives.]

12 Days and Counting…

…Because while approval of the new Fire/EMS JPA is a welcome development, it is not clear whether Edgewood’s town government will be capable of functioning long enough for the Reboot Edgewood group to pursue disincorporation. Last night’s unexpected PZC meeting is the latest indication that things have gone wrong. The video is just over three hours long, and it is painful to watch. 

Economic Advisory Board meets this evening.

It should be noted that the numerous disclaimers about maintaining Edgewood’s rural character seem to be less prominent in the current version of the ToE website. In 1999, many of the  people promoting the creation of a new layer of government appeared to genuinely believe that we could “have our cake and eat it too,” but 25 years on it is not possible to pretend any longer that adding more government has not had a profound effect on Edgewood’s essential character. Whether this is a good thing or not is a subjective assessment. 

• This meeting has some interesting items in the agenda/packet available at the town website. If the meeting is live-streamed, there is usually a link to watch on the ToE home page for those who cannot attend in person. 
• One welcome procedural innovation is that the Town Commission has firmly shut the door on earlier attempts to reconstitute and then allow the group to operate out of public view.
• The SWOT analysis discussion will give a snapshot of where this latest in a long line of the town’s “economic development” efforts is headed. One new trend seems to be convincing people to accept high-density housing projects. 
• What to watch for on higher residential densities: Do the proposed locations make sense within the town’s past and present Comprehensive Land Use Plans, or are the locations chosen on the basis of who owns the land? 
• Another possibility to consider: Locations where the town has exercised its recently created administrative resolution of code violations which, in turn, appears to have opened the way for public/private re-development projects. 
• While many people initially thought this mechanism would be a good way to resolve some bad situations, the first discussion of the solid waste ordinance served to reveal that it has morphed into a “cottage industry” which could, if not properly managed, drag the town into federal lawsuits.
• Using this mechanism to skirt due process and equal treatment considerations and side-stepping the lawful authority of the elected Municipal Judge was not good idea. The Town Commission needs to take a second look at how the policy has been used, and either put some restrictions in place or do away with it altogether. 
• The Santa Fe County Tax Assessor’s website would be a good place to begin researching the above-mentioned topics. 

• The other issue to watch is the new Water Ordinance (text included in packet) which seems to portray a new innovation in town official documents: A shiny foil seal is affixed to the signature sheet. One thing to keep in mind on this issue, like all town ordinances, it is a tool. 
• The use to which this one will be put is dependent upon who administers it and to whom any presumed costs and benefits will accrue. It could be used as first step to secure local control of the town’s water supply, or it could be used to tax Edgewood residents in order to subsidize a for-profit corporation which sends money out of Edgewood. 
• The CORE group which served as a tool to facilitate the change from Mayor/Council to a Commission/Manager form of government, seems to have fragmented. However, its voluminous social media posts have preserved a number of interesting insights. Many of their assertions have since been shown to be projections of their own intentions onto their political opponents. 
• One of the more curious assertions was that former Mayor John Bassett was scheming to “…send your water to Campbell Ranch!” No evidence was forthcoming in support of the assertion, and the original post was later deleted.  
• However, this begs the question of how such a project might be brought into being. How indeed? Take a close look at this water ordinance: Who wrote it, who promoted it, and who voted for it? John Bassett certainly cannot be either blamed or credited with this latest innovation. 
• Four of Edgewood’s five Town Commission Seats will be on the November ballot. Water should be a major topic, but I expect lots of emotional appeals and very little in the way of specific policies.

Edgewood P&Z falls short on procedure and substance.

Perhaps it is time for the Town Commission to make American Institute of Certified Planners (AICP) certification a condition of hiring or continuing employment with the town’s planning office. Edgewood long ago annexed itself into a position of needing to set high professional standards for its development review process. 

Edgewood’s latest development review vagary can best be understood as another instance of the cargo cult inspired thinking which has been a feature of Edgewood town government from the very beginning. While the influence of the cargo cult has waxed and waned during the last 25 years, at present Edgewood’s development review process has a distinct flavor of cronyism and deference to anyone perceived as offering big prospects for development. The April 17, 2025 P&Z Commission meeting was a clear example of this tendency. [I would post a link to those meeting minutes, but at this time only information on current and future meetings is available on the website.]

For those interested in finding THE issue of the May 15, 2025 public hearing with regard to substance, I suggest reading through the email exchange between former town counsel, Nann Winter, and Edgewood Planning Director Brad Hill. Since the institution of the Commission/Manager form of government, it has become obvious that the Town of Edgewood prefers to hear only from those willing to tell both Commissions’ “itching ears” what they want to hear as opposed to those who can tell them what they need to know in order to govern wisely. Is it a coincidence that after issuing her opinion Ms. Winter was replaced? 

It is former P&Z Chair Doyce Wilhite who deserves credit for attending Open Meetings Act workshops in 2010, and then encouraging both P&Z and the Town Council to adopt the New Mexico Attorney General’s checklists for conducting public hearings. Unfortunately, while the current P&Z Commission uses some kind of checklist, it missed at least two important due process items on May 15. How could the Commission perform its obligation to exercise due diligence with regard to a voluminous staff report which does not appear to have been made available to the public or commissioners prior to the meeting?  

Former Planning Director and Town Administrator, Karen Mahalick, always summarized the need for high standards and the use of best practices at every stage of development review as being primarily questions of fairness, openness, and what we as a community want Edgewood to be. One thing which made Ms. Mahalick stand out was her willingness to expand her skill set by pursuing AICP credentials. She started as a P&Z Commissioner, and volunteered in the Planning Office before being hired by the Town. Need I add that she was not popular with Edgewood’s cargo cultists?  

Cronyism never has and never will promote excellence. When the town’s elected officials embraced high standards, the town has been able to see positive results. When they have not, the results have proven unsatisfactory.  

Study session announced by the Santa Fe Board of County Commissioners

On Friday, October 9, 2015 the Santa Fe Board of County Commissioners notified county residents that it has scheduled a special study session at 10:00 a.m. on Tuesday October 13, 2015.  The announcement of the meeting specifies that no action will be taken.  The following items are on the agenda for presentation/discussion:     

1. Presentation on proposed new Development Review Fee Ordinance
2. Presentation on proposed amendments to the Sustainable Growth Management Plan (SGMP)
3. Presentation on proposed amendments to the Sustainable Growth Management Plan (SLDC)
4. Presentation on draft of 2015 Zoning Map 

The agenda and packet materials are available for viewing/downloading at the county website: www.santafecountynm.gov

Changes to the Campbell Ranch MP Timeline:

I have added a description and link to Commission Minutes for December 6, 2004 and January 13, 2005. Those minutes outline a discussion of proposed changes to Village 2.  The entry for January 19 has been changed to reflect the fact that the discussion by the Council was, in fact, in response to an application.  The Council Minutes are not clear on this point, but the nature of the Council's discussion is more understandable when it is read as a continuation of the January 13 P&Z meeting. 

Timeline changes on the Campbell Ranch Master Plan page:

• December 6, 2004:  Campbell Ranch presents a number of proposed changes to its Master Plan.  The changes are outlined in the Commission Minutes for that date. 
• January 13, 2005: The Commission discussed a modified proposal for reconfiguring certain aspects of Village 2 and sent their opinion forward to the Council that the proposed changes should be considered minor. The changes proposed were to move the entrance, move and delay the proposed golf course, and changes regarding the nature of the roads (permeable vs. non-permeable).
• January 19, 2005: Approval of a Memo of Understanding with Campbell Ranch regarding pre-application fees for the PID negotiations.  The council also discussed whether to view certain proposed changes to Village 2 of the Campbell Ranch MP as major or minor.  Under the Zoning Ordinance in effect as of January 2005, major changes proposed to an existing master plan required a public hearing in order to amend it.

Performance Based Zoning makes its debut in Edgewood:

During the Council meeting of September 5, 2012, Edgewood Mayor Brad Hill announced that he intended to begin a sweeping overhaul of the town's land use ordinances.  However, the changes approved by the council in August 2014 were far less extensive than expected.  The town's consultants and land use attorneys, Robert White and Jack Hiatt, later said they found very little to change with regard to the substance of the land use ordinances. Most of the changes which were ultimately approved are relatively innocuous and mostly confined to updating and standardizing terminology. The Planning Commission Ordinance was changed to allow for the appointment of non-resident Commissioners.

Latest P&Z audio:

P&Z audio for April 15, 2014 is now available at the ToE website. This was a routine meeting, but I am posting the link because of the public comment section which begins at about 9 minutes and 38 seconds into the meeting.  Former commission chairman, John Bassett, provided the staff and commission photographs of the Sandia Airpark North subdivision in support of his contention that subdivision improvements agreements should be in place prior to the granting of a final subdivision plat.The photographs shown to the commission were taken in Edgewood at the Sandia Airpark North subdivision about 20 months ago. The appearance of the open trenches is essentially unchanged since that time. 

When the preliminary plat was approved in 2005, the town's policies on development review were still being formed. The commission had discussed optimal timing of subdivision improvement agreements with the town's attorney, David Henderson, prior to hearings on this matter. (See P& Z minutes for May 2, 2005.)  The preliminary plat was approved on October 17, 2005, and a conditional final plat was approved on February 20, 2006. A subdivision improvements agreement was approved on November 20, 2006 pending review of the town's attorney.  Sometime after the November 2006 decision, the applicant encountered problems securing funding. It appears that the conditions placed upon the final plat approval were never met, because the commission voted to extend the preliminary plat on September 10, 2007.  This was done after the Commission was informed that the applicant had secured funding for installation of infrastructure. The subdivision was granted a second final plat by the Town of Edgewood on April 7, 2008 after the commission was told that an agreement had been reached for installation of the required improvements. 

However, the work never progressed further than the digging of trenches for utilities before work stopped on the project. The open trenches remain to this day and are a potential liability to the town. The proposed changes to the subdivision ordinance would drop the requirement that execution of such agreements be undertaken prior to approval of the final plat.

I believe the history of this subdivision provides a useful illustration of problems which may arise from approval of a final plat prior to completion of the development agreement. The history of this subdivision also serves as an illustration of why it is unwise to place substantive conditions on final plat approvals.  (Photos provided by John Bassett)

These open trenches in Sandia Airpark North resulted after the town approved a final plat before securing an adequate subdivision improvements agreement.

A different view of the Sandia Airpark North subdivision in Edgewood which has been sitting idle for a number of years.

A Rationale for Road Design Standards and Enforcement of Grading & Drainage Regulations

One of the ordinances most criticized by the local development community is ToE Ordinance 2001-1 which is usually referred to as the Grading & Drainage Ordinance.  As such ordinances go, the requirements placed upon property development in Edgewood are relatively modest, but that hasn't prevented complaints.  Requests for waivers from those requirements are frequently presented to the town's planning office.

Santa Fe County Commission Approves Sustainable Land Development Code (SLDC)

The SLDC was approved on Dec. 10, 2013 with some interesting conditions.  I would encourage readers to go to the news release which has been posted at the Santa Fe County website.

Edgewood P&Z debuts the Administrative Adjudicatory Deliberation:

That is the title of a new procedure which the Edgewood Planning & Zoning Commission is now using in public hearings.  For those of you who have asked for more information, the best I can do at this time is direct you to the Open Meetings Act (OMA) Compliance Guide published by the office of the New Mexico Attorney General.  A description of the process followed by the comments of the Attorney General can be found on page 24 of the guide. 

Like many facets of public policy there are at least two sides to every question.  It appears that this process is legal for use in limited circumstances. The second criterion listed in the AG's opinion does not seem to have been met for the use to which the AAD was put on Tuesday. However, keep in mind that the AG's opinion is just that; an opinion. The "present administration" appears to prefer the legal opinions of the New Mexico Municipal League which often has its own interpretations of state law.