64 Days and Counting…

 …Because restoring the Fire/EMS JPA is of paramount importance, yet tonight’s agenda is loaded up with frivolous elements. It’s past time to start working on the budget. But instead, the Commission continues to waste time re-inventing the wheel on a myriad of issues, presuming to set themselves up as moral arbiters for the citizenry, and sending the staff on an endless series of futile inquiries. 

It’s one thing to send credulous underclassmen out to “hunt snipe” on a moonless night: However, experienced professionals can’t be expected to cater to the Commissioners’ big egos forever.  

• Do these Commissioners not understand the fundamental reasons why previous inquiries into a 24/7 medical facility have not come to fruition? Consider this: It’s not for lack of trying by other, highly qualified people. The fundamental realities of income, tax base, and population have not changed substantially since it was looked at in the past. 
• How many times to we have to revisit the real versus artificial turf question? Has it not occurred anyone to look back at the minutes of meetings when the first field was built?  
• Why is the Church Road paving project still not finished despite decades of appearing on the ICIP, and the fact that is the entry point from the east to one of the town’s best income generators?  Perhaps look at the town’s history of political instability.
• Why did previous town governments not jump right in to buy chip-seal equipment, and why has the town not met projections after this one did take on the project? Could it be that previous town governments were better grounded in reality and looked at the short window dictated by our weather, staff turnover rates in the road department, and had conducted more than one cost/benefit analysis on future maintenance? 
• Does the town need a separate Public Information Officer? The Commissioners need to stop wasting time and money on lawsuits, pursuit of vanity projects which the tax base cannot support, and let senior staff actually do the jobs for which they were hired. If that were to happen, release of official information would be more routine and less time consuming.  

Letter: Leadership, infrastructure and the future of Edgewood

Having been away from Edgewood for a large part of the past few years, I was disappointed to return and find that many of our roads have not been getting timely maintenance and are in poor condition. My neighbors are complaining about road improvements taking place in places where there are few houses, while they eat dust year after year. However, if you watch the town meetings you will hear a series of  glowing reports on road  projects. When mis-steps are acknowledged, they are accompanied by a series of lame excuses. 

At what point will Edgewood residents demand that its town government stop the hype and start dealing with reality? Former Town Councilor and Mayor Pro Tem, John Abrams, offers his thoughts in a recent letter to nm.news. Abrams is one of a very small group of town officials in Edgewood’s relatively short history as an incorporated municipality who has the ability to think long term, and who doesn’t try to exploit the town for personal gain. As such he is not popular with Edgewood’s cargo cult faction. Nevertheless, at several critical points, Abrams has been called on for help when Edgewood’s flashy promoters failed to complete important projects.

Edgewood P&Z conjures something from nothing?

Last night’s P&Z remand hearing managed to achieve two things during a meeting lasting more than six hours: (1) A bulk plat land division mechanism was conjured from a long outdated ordinance in which no such process exists. (2) The Commission's lack of understanding of land use issues was displayed in excruciating detail. 

This prodigy sprang fully formed like Athena from Brad Hill’s side during the hearing. The staff report appears to be nothing more than series of opinions dressed up as immutable legal facts, it was unveiled at the last minute, and it was swallowed whole by the Commissioners. The vote was unanimous; no conditions attached. In choosing the least defensible of the options available to it, the Commission has all but guaranteed that resolution will take years. 

Special Meeting Posted: Roads (Re-arranged with additional information included)

The Town Commission will meet on May 5, 2025 to consider one item: A request for an extension on LGRF grants for Horton Road from (1) Venus to Frost, (2) W. Venus from Horton running east for approximately 0.75 miles, and (3) Nugent Road from Horton to NMSR 344.  

History, Details and Precedent Matter: 

West Venus: In the town government’s early years there was talk of having the developer of Stone Mountain Estates pave W. Venus from NMSR 344 past Horton as far as the ingress to the proposed development. However, that project has been delayed for many years over zoning issues. [ETA a clarification suggested by one of the blog’s original readers: The first section of W. Venus (approx. 0.25 miles) was eventually paved as part of the improvements agreement which was required by Santa Fe County of the developer who built the Hermosa Montaña Subdivision across from Edgewood Middle School.]

A town paving project for paving more of W. Venus to Horton was suggested by former Mayor Bob Stearley in 2011, in order to mitigate dust generated from heavy traffic coming from Horton Road on the way to Edgewood Middle School. There had been numerous complaints from parents about the poor condition of the road and the fact that large amounts of dust was settling on students during early morning and afternoon practice sessions on the athletic fields. 

The Town Council chose West Hill Ranch Road instead even though three of the four Council Members at that time stood to benefit from the project (Brad Hill, Rita Loy Simmons, John Abrams). The argument in favor of choosing Hill Ranch over W. Venus was that this would benefit more residents while the worst effects on W. Venus were only of limited duration on week days. 

[ETA: I checked with former Councilor and Mayor Pro Tem, John Abrams, who was able to offer more information. He gave permission to use his name and added the following additional considerations which influenced his choice of W Hill Ranch: (1) A petition bearing >300 signatures gathered from people who used the road by volunteers who stood at a stop sign at the intersection of Horton and Hill Ranch. (2) A traffic counting machine survey showing an average of just under 500 TPD on the road. (3) Complaints by the road crews that they could not keep up with maintenance due to heavy traffic. Abrams also added that the paving on W Hill Ranch is beginning to fall apart and that if not repaired soon the remediation costs will only increase.] 

My note: Councilors Abrams, Simmons and Hill all disclosed at the time that they stood to benefit. However, it was clear that many more residents also benefitted. Former Mayor Stearley believed that the three had conflicts of interest, and therefore insisted that W Hill Ranch should not have been chosen for that reason. One person who collected signatures asked Stearley a good question: why she should be penalized simply because two of the three (Abrams and Hill) lived in the area and a third (Simmons) owned land there? 

East or West Venus? In 2013, Mayor Brad Hill waved off the option given to the town by former Governor Martinez and the late State Rep. Stephen Easley to spend its 2013 Capital Outlay funds to complete the remaining 0.75 mile paving of W. Venus to Horton instead of Hill’s preference to pave just under a mile on E. Venus.

The E. Venus project ran through the Hillcrest Master Plan. At that time, members of the Hill family were still responsible for property taxes, and the OSE showed that the family-owned corporation (Highland Stock Farm) retained 50% of the original water rights.) 

The remedy for a questionable decision in this case was political as reflected by results of the 2016 town elections. People who were eating dust in their neighborhoods were not amused by the finished project  nor were they impressed with the quality of work which failed to address the poor drainage where E. Venus meets NMSR 344. (See also Town Council minutes from February 6, 2013.)

Horton and Nugent? The paving of Horton from the I-40 Frontage Road to Frost has been listed in a succession of Comprehensive Land Use Plans as a priority in order to establish an alternate evacuation route, and also a means for relieving congestion along NMSR 344.  Nugent Road has long been identified as a generator of “fugitive dust” and residents in the area will benefit from improvements as will the owners of vehicles who use the road.           

Today, the current projects listed on the agenda lie in the town’s “Shoestring/Bridge” annexation. Does the fact that a few current and former town officials stand to benefit from these projects make them in any way illegal? The answer is no unless it can be objectively demonstrated that there was a failure to properly disclose potential or actual conflicts of interest, or that the projects solely (or primarily) benefited one or more town officials at the expense of the wider community.  

Something the current town government might want to keep in mind is that for over 25 years, the town has established a body of legal precedent in such matters which may serve to undermine its arguments for the propriety of Edgewood’s intervention in current litigation.  

2025 Capital Outlay Overview

See this post for the version signed by the Governor. 

Update: It appears that a lack of discipline by the governing body is nothing new as shown in this Edgewood News story from January 11, 2024.  

Edgewood’s governing body has long faced difficulties in crafting its yearly ICIP (Infrastructure Capital Improvement Plan) submission to the state legislature. There are three underlying problems it faces: lack of awareness about town how government functions among the general public, seemingly unresolvable differences over what programs should be funded, and Edgewood’s perennially toxic elections. The governing body can’t please everyone, and the ICIP is where Edgewood’s many sub-groups which give the town its unique character become a liability.  What the town gained by changing the timing of elections in the area of budget preparation, it lost with the timing of the ICIP so don’t expect improvements this fall.* The terms of Commissioners Brennan and Anaya expire this year, and as appointees, Commissioners Murillo and Raridan will stand for election should they wish to continue to the end of the term for those seats. 

The Commission Manager government seems to have thrown in the towel last fall and sent a very long wish list for consideration. The search parameters at the state legislature’s website can be adjusted to show Edgewood’s requests as well as those from towns of similar size elsewhere in the state. When compared to neighboring towns, Edgewood comes off as greedy.  What the wish list suggests is that the Commission gave heed to several pet projects and failed to make any effort at prioritizing requests. State legislators are busy during sessions. It is possible for towns to slip questionable projects through without disclosing all the relevant facts, but any victories thus gained usually end up being a one-off deal. Burn a legislator once and you’re done with that person until someone new takes the seat.   

Planning for the town’s requests for Capital Outlay funds usually begins in late summer after the budget has been approved and accepted by the State. The usual process is to hold a series of public hearings and then have an on the record discussion among the governing body about which projects should be at the top of the list and why they should be chosen. The final product, usually consisting of the top two or three items, is placed into the ICIP report. Submissions are expected to be received no later than October for consideration in the following year’s legislative session. 

Ideally, a town’s lists remain relatively stable over time, and as the top choices are funded others move to the top. Edgewood’s political instability has made this difficult, but until recently it was able to make a credible showing during most (but certainly not all) legislative sessions.

2025 Requests for projects which have received previous Capital Outlay funding:

1. 1.8 million  Church Street
2. 900 k trails
3. 12 million Drinking Water
4. 850 k Wastewater
5. 1.890 million trails 
6. 200 k upgrade road equipment 

2025 Requests for projects which had not received previous Capital Outlay funding:

1. 465 k BMX Park
2. 617 k Rt. 66 sewer line design 
3. 1.2 million wellness center PD 
4. 4.1 million Horton Road 
5. 1.2 million Steeplechase 
6. 450 k various roads 
7. 1.64 million Section 16 development projects
8. 975 k  Community Center
9. 310 k motor grader 
10. 800 k WiFi expansion 

Funding to Edgewood sent for the Governor’s signature as part of the complete Capital Outlay legislation:

1. 617 k Rt. 66 sewer line design (full funding included in final bill; Senator Thornton)
2. 138 k Wellness center PD (partial funding included in final bill; Senator Thornton)

The Town Commission’s failure to prioritize means that none of the requests which have received previous funding received additional help this year.  Community Wellness Centers appear to have been popular requests this year, and partial funding for Edgewood’s Police Department center will likely be put to good use. 

The Rt. 66 Sewer line design item is interesting and deserves a closer look. The Rt. 66 corridor is already well served with wastewater lines. The problems encountered by the wastewater plant led to a change in priorities for extending the service area beginning in 2014-15 after it became obvious that the system needs more residential customers to balance Walmart and the commercial customers along Rt. 66.   

* One of the most important benefits of the town’s decision to move elections away from local control and onto the general elections calendar run by County Clerks is that newly sworn-in members of the governing body have a breathing space before what is far and away its most important function: budget preparation. The old March election calendar meant that newly elected town officials were thrown into the deep end with regard to budget preparation. Even the best prepared candidates from past years have found the experience difficult. The ICIP is important, and the timing in election years is difficult, but the budget process is the more important consideration. [One additional benefit to the change is that town-run elections are expensive, they create distractions to day to day operations, and they place an undue burden on employees. That is especially true when races are hotly contested or the subject of legal challenges.] 

Special MAP Meeting Decoded

UPDATE: I have been contacted by readers who reminded me of two things: (1) Plans for improving North Horton have been around for a long time, but there remain questions about whether or not the project described is eligible for MAP. (2) After considering the furor over ill-advised paving projects in the past, a former Town Council directed P&Z to prioritize roads which required frequent maintenance, and for which it could be established had > 250 TPD (Trips Per Day).  As I began my second time at P&Z in 2019, the Commission had just finished work on delivering a set of recommendations. No followup was possible in subsequent years because of the legal furor over acquisition of EPCOR. Following the reconstitution of government, the concept seems to have been lost or intentionally discontinued. I have summarized this and more feedback to the original post here. 

Last night’s hurriedly called special meeting was explained as being required to generate a resolution to pave more of North Horton Road. It caught a lot of people by surprise. 

1. Someone in the town office missed the deadline for a recurring event. 2025 begins year four following the reconstitution of government, so the deadline to apply for Municipal Arterial Program (MAP) funds could not have been a surprise. Town staff took the blame. The latest iteration of town government must be remarkably passive because in prior years elected officials have hovered over the process in such a way that the deadline could not have been missed. (Perhaps they and town staff are too busy managing current and threatened litigation?)

2. Former Councilor Linda Holle spoke in public comment where she asked some pertinent questions about how Horton was chosen. The replies from Murillo, Brennan, and Mulligan were delivered almost in unison.  IT IS ALL ABOUT SAFETY. To be sure, Horton Road has long been a priority to fill two needs: A hard surface alternate route in case of emergency and to relieve congestion on NM 344. However, MAP funding was on an earlier agenda; why was Horton not specified then if it was an obvious choice? (Behind the scenes deal-making?)

3. Commissioner Rariden asked what measures are being taken in the meantime to make the road more passable pending completion of this project? He was assured that doing so is a waste of money. (If the situation is so dire, his question deserves a substantive reply.)

4. Commissioner Brennan expanded on the town’s plans: It seems there is a never before heard of component to meeting the MAP requirement of the town furnishing partial matching funding: The town will be allowed to furnish in-kind road work instead of handing over cash. He went on to discuss the possibility of starting with chip seal and maybe real paving down the road. This assumes that the town will be able to hire an oil truck as needed, have enough trained staff to run the town owned chip seal equipment, and that the town equipment will be ready to go after sitting idle over winter months. The window of acceptable temperatures for paving is narrow due to Edgewood’s climate. (Paving Horton was a campaign promise made by Brennan.) 

5. Town staff assured the Commissioners that District 5 DOT staff has assured the town that the application papers will be accepted. However, MAP funds are limited, and priority will likely be given to those communities who submitted timely applications.  

6. MAP funding is spread out in a sequence to (1) design, (2) engineer, and (3) build designated roads which are also required to join a state road. How will “in-kind” work be done for the design or engineering phases? 

7. Approval of any sort is not guaranteed. If the town gets anything this year it is likely to be only partial. (Church Road has used MAP funds in the past, and has been a priority for paving for well over a decade, but it’s still not done. One reason, among others, is political deal-making among the governing body which diverted funding requests to pet projects.)

8. The people who will benefit are sure to be pleased at least until they find out how long it is going to take. Those in other parts of town will be angry that they didn’t get priority. The first, and for many years only road paving project, other than Frost Road and Dinkle Road, was Skyline Drive. It was a political albatross around the neck of the town council member who lived on that road when the chip seal was laid down.  

9. In 2011, former Mayor Stearley’s fight with the council over which roads to pave resulted in some of the most tumultuous council meetings in the town’s history. The rancor generated by that fight likely contributed to his defeat by Brad Hill in 2012. 

10. In the same vein, Hill’s successful diversion of State Legislature capital outlay money from Church Road toward paving a mile of East Venus Road which contained no houses may have contributed to his defeat by John Bassett in 2016. The town matching money put up for Hill’s East Venus project meant that when the wastewater treatment plant started showing problems, his ability to deal with the situation was made more difficult. The people who signed petitions in favor of the project and were assured that the paving of mile two would be coming soon are still waiting.  

One of the deciding factors in the original vote to incorporate was improving roads. Progress has not been easy. Politicians come and go at regular intervals, and I have seen successive waves of rash promises about roads. Road improvements happen, but they always cost more (money and political capital), and take more time than anticipated. 

  

Groundhog Day: Edgewood Style

What if Rita Loy Simmons, Chuck Ring, Sherry Abraham, John Abrams, and John Bassett supported the acquisition of EPCOR and Thunder Mountain Water Company assets for a very good reason? Most of us pay substantial amounts of state and federal taxes in various forms. State and federal governments re-invest some of that tax money into community owned water and wastewater systems; other towns in NM have taken steps recapture some of that money to benefit their citizens. Why should Edgewood not do the same, particularly since EPCOR management has made it clear that it sees no advantage to making improvements to water quality? 

What if Edgewood could offer EPCOR and Thunder Mountain customers a better deal? EPCOR's infrastructure is an aging patchwork which will eventually require extensive replacements/improvements; how will EPCOR (or a succeeding for-profit entity) pay for the improvements and preserve their profit margin other than by increasing rates?

The image of a locomotive on fire speeding into the abyss is a curious choice on the part of the CORE postcard author. Why the hurry? EPCOR certainly knows the value of it's assets. Does it fear that the assessor's report will cause some wavering in it's two solid “no” votes? What if the 2A supporting councilors who succumbed to to EPCOR's “shock and awe” campaign were to wake up and understand that eminent domain and firearms have a lot in common; neither are inherently evil and both are tools which can be used for good or ill.

CORE is holding out the promise of a new form of government which will wave a magic wand and make any laws the public doesn't like disappear. It's not a promise they can deliver, but who cares? If they get their hands on the levers of power, they can always plausibly plead legal exigencies for their failure to perform. The group backing CORE has let its mask slip enough to lead me to conclude that this isn't just about John Bassett. It's the same group that did whatever it could to prevent former Councilor and Mayor Bob Stearley from crafting a water policy for the town. Bassett and EPCOR weren't part of the picture then so there is obviously something else in play. I suspect it's nothing particularly earthshaking only some sad, tired Boomers who are afraid if Edgewood grows too much they won't be the big fish in the little pond anymore. This isn't the first time the town has inexplicably shot itself in the foot when it had a breakthrough opportunity.  

I've been looking back to the first announcements about the town's decision to look into acquiring EPCOR and its Thunder Mountain assets. Setting aside all the conspiracy theories and character assassination which is churned out in regular installments by the newly minted [EP]CORE group I'd like to put out a series of questions to consider-especially for those who plan to attend their rally on Thursday:

1. What has this supposed watchdog group done in the past 20 years; why did they suddenly rise up and begin to strain gnats whilst having quietly swallowed many camels for two decades?
2. When do they plan to offer actual facts to support their numerous allegations? 
3. If John Bassett and his family intended to make a quick buck off the wastewater plant why haven't they taken advantage of the access along Church Road which has been available to them for the past 10 years?
4. Why has the group dropped EPCOR's slick corporate PR and reverted to crude agitprop which employs a narrative voice which will be familiar to anyone who remembers Edgewood's tumultuous early years?
5. Why have they revived the questionable practice of grooming unsuspecting, well-intentioned church members to spread their message?
6. Has the group been infected with a virulent strain of Bassett Derangement Syndrome, or is this just a mutated version of an older sickness that pre-dates John Bassett's tenure as mayor and EPCOR's purchase of Edgewood Water Company?
7. EPCOR's infrastructure is an aging patchwork which will eventually require replacement/improvement; how will EPCOR or another for-profit entity pay for the improvements and preserve their profit margin?
8. Why has EPCOR kept its assets separate from those acquired from Thunder Mountain?
9. The public/private partnership between Clovis, NM and EPCOR has been touted as a better solution than a takeover; would the proponents of such a partnership be willing to tax residents to pay for water improvements as Clovis is doing?
10. Edgewood is largely dependent on Hold Harmless funds for revenue and that source will eventually end; how will the town replace that income?
11. While many have said over the past 20 years that they are in favor of using economic development to make up the shortfall, when it comes to actually doing what's required the consensus always falls apart; can the town prosper on a property tax base augmented by retail GRT?
12. The first town government promised citizens to pursue economic development before property taxes; has that consensus run its course?  

Water & Wastewater discussions

With the economy improving, land use applications coming into Edgewood's planning office are, at long last, beginning to increase. Last night's meeting of the Governing Body saw a lot of public comment on water and wastewater issues after Edgewood Mayor, John Bassett, read a statement outlining the Town's intent to explore the feasibility of acquiring portions of EPCOR's water service located in Edgewood.

In a sense, Edgewood is looping back to its early days as a formally incorporated municipality. The Council Meeting minutes for November 3, 1999 reflect what many Edgewood residents remember as similarly lively discussions about the proposed sale of Edgewood Water Company to New Mexico American Water Company. Part of that discussion included proposals that the town should buy the company in order to keep the business local and add a revenue source into the equation. While wastewater provisions are a necessary part of the water equation, the plants usually require subsidies. [NMAW did buy EWC which it eventually sold to EPCOR. EPCOR currently serves both the original service area of EWC/NMAW plus the customers inherited when it acquired Thunder Mountain Water Company in 2013.

I've had several requests for information about the history of Edgewood's wastewater plant, and since this blog was started for the purpose of facilitating the sharing of information, I'm hoping to resume regular posting along with updating broken links and evaluating content for relevance. I'm also planning to add a page dedicated to water/wastewater issues, so bear with me while the page is under construction. I will rely primarily on my collection of old Council Meeting Minutes for the years 1999-2013 which I've stored on Google Drive.  From 2008-2012 the Town posted agendas and meeting minutes separately at its website. Due to the constraints of the website purchased in 2013, the agendas and minutes have been published as part of the meeting packets which makes extraction of individual documents tedious and time consuming. There are plans to launch a new, updated version of the website which I hope will contain agendas and meeting minutes posted separately from the larger information packets.

Capital Outlay: A Primer

While looking for information about Senate Bill 175*, which is sponsored by New Mexico Senator Sue Wilson Beffort, I found this Information Bulletin from the New Mexico Legislative Council Service. In order for municipalities to apply for capital outlay funding, priorities in the form of an Infrastructure Capital Improvements Plan (ICIP) must first be adopted by resolution during a public hearing and then reported to the New Mexico Department of Finance and Administration.

*The title of the bill is: SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT GROSS RECEIPTS 

Land Use in the News 09/12/2013

From this week's  The Independent:

• A proposed retail development project in Moriarty (page 1);
• Coverage of last week's Q&A forum on the proposed EMW Water System (page 1);
• Pipeline construction and the local economy (page 4);
• Edgewood's legislative wish list discussion for the ICIP (page 5);
• Tijeras' legislative wish list discussion for the ICIP (page 5);
• Plans for expanding First Choice Community Healthcare (page 5); 
• Drought, trees, and bark beetles (page 18);
• Legal notices:  There are no legal notices listed for the Town of Edgewood.  The Santa Fe County Commission has three notices; one for a regular meeting, another concerning a meeting of the ethics board, and notice that the Commissioners and the City of Santa Fe Council will attend an Extraterritorial Land Use Authority meeting (p. 22).

Edgewood's legislative wish-list will be voted on during Wenesday's council meeting:

The Mayor has published a proposed set of priorities for the Council's approval on Wednesday.  You might want to attend the meeting and contact the governing body in advance of the meeting if you have questions about these requests.  The Infrastructure Capital Improvement Plan or ICIP is a long name for the wish lists presented by local governments to the legislature for funding.  The council will vote on Resolution 2013-20 and the accompanying list of prioritized requests during the September 4, 2013 Council meeting. That night's agenda shows that a representative from Santa Fe County will be present to discuss its priorities for the ICIP. 

Earlier post has been edited:

I've edited one of yesterday's posts to add information.  In 2002, Mr. Paul Cassidy's report to the Edgewood governing body included discussions of a variety of funding alternatives including General Obligation Bonds, Gross Receipts Tax Bonds, Utility Revenue Bonds, Public Improvement Districts, and Special Assessment Districts.  I have a PDF version of the 2002 report but decided against posting a link to it on the Portal because the information on town revenues is outdated. I do have permission to share the information and will email the file on request, but expect that Mr. Cassidy will have a new report with current financial information at the August 7 council meeting.