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?  

Edgewood's 'Inadequate' Wastewater Connection Ordinance

"The old one was probably more inadequate than I could state."  

Edgewood Mayor Brad Hill talking about the town's wastewater ordinance and quoted in the March 25, 2015 edition of The Independent. 

The topic under discussion was the revision process for the town's Wastewater Connection Ordinance 2010-01 which was approved on by the Town Council on March 3, 2010.  It does not appear to have been modified during the five years since it was approved; some changes are probably needed. 

A draft ordinance with an accompanying proposed fee schedule was presented to the Town Council on February 17, 2010. During the public hearing, questions were raised by citizens about whether or not connection to the sewer system would be optional or mandatory. [The ordinance as proposed and adopted leaves the decision to the customer.]

During the deliberations, Councilor Brad Hill pointed out a typo and asked that a term "multi-family" be changed to "multi-unit."  Councilor Rita Loy Simmons asked that a map of the service area be included.  Mayor Bob Stearley asked how many businesses had expressed interest in connecting to the system.  The minutes indicate that the Council went through the ordinance line by line and suggested several changes, but the minutes do not reflect the substance.  At the conclusion of the discussion, the Council voted to continue the public hearing during the March 3, 2010 meeting. 

During the March 3 meeting, no members of the public asked to speak on the matter. The council discussed several changes but the minutes do not reflect the substance. At the conclusion of deliberations, Glenn Felton offered a motion to approve the ordinance with the changes agreed upon during the February 17 and March 3 public hearings. Brad Hill offered a second.  Glenn Felton, Brad Hill, John Abrams and Rita Loy Simmons all voted to approve the new ordinance. 

What changes might we expect in a new ordinance and fee schedule?  There is a possibility that connections would no longer be optional for property owners located in the plant's service area.  Also, there may be fee hikes proposed for initial connection and/or for service.  The town has been subsidizing the costs of running the plant since it first opened. With the recent downturn in Gross Receipts Tax revenues, the town may ask customers to pay more. 

Read the ordinance: Which version?

Former P&Z Chairman, John Bassett, wrote a letter published in the March 25, 2015 edition of The Independent in which he outlines a significant omission from the current Zoning Ordinance.  In May 2012, at the urging of newly elected Mayor Brad Hill, P&Z recommended and the Town Council adopted changes to certain definitions and increases in allowable densities for the Residential/Institutional (R-3) zone category.  However, those changes were not carried over into the latest version of the town's zoning ordinance.

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.

Read the Ordinance: July's R-2 zone district fumble

        When Councilor John Abrams expressed his opposition to the proposed elimination of the R-2 (Residential 2-acre) zone category in the new zoning ordinance during the July 2, 2014 council meeting, the situation devolved into the squabbling which has become a regular feature of town council meetings.  Instead of providing a substantive response to Abrams' questions, the mayor chastised him for not having spoken up earlier.  In fact, Abrams did raise objections at the April 12, 2014 town meeting.

Council meeting of September 3, 2014

"If you're not seated at the table you're liable to find yourself on the menu!"

Please note that there will be two principal agenda items for this meeting, and that it will begin at 6:00 pm instead of the usual 6:30 pm. This is being done in order to facilitate the start-up of building a town hall on Section 16.  The two items which will be dealt with are:

• Exploration of funding alternatives for a town hall and; 
• A second attempt an regularizing town boundaries through an infill annexation.  Town residents living in the areas targeted for annexation should be aware that this is not considered a voluntary annexation; rather it is a exercise of the town's police powers for ensuring the health, safety and welfare of citizens. 

What area residents might want to consider with regard to the first item of funding a town hall is that the town council has the power to impose a small amount of property tax which could be used to help pay for the proposed facility without seeking voter approval.  Also, any funding alternative will certainly include borrowing against future GRT revenues for the project.  That, in turn, would mean less money spent elsewhere if the town's GRT income continues to stagnate.

While the mayor has indicated in the past that he objects to citing health safety and welfare by the town when placing conditions on such things as road design standards, it appears that he and the council have no qualms about exercising that power to annex land without the consent of property owners. Any property owners who are annexed in this manner will be assessed property taxes pursuant to the recently approved General Obligation Bonds for building an animal shelter and for the paving of Rainbow, Horton, and Walker roads.  In addition, when the land is annexed, the property owners who are affected need to be aware that their land will have a zone category assigned at some point.  The town has a variety of different residential and commercial zone categories and the differences among them can be significant. 

The town's first attempt at an infill annexation was rejected by former Governor Bill Richardson's Boundary Commission, and that decision was upheld by a panel of New Mexico's Supreme Court.  I expect the proposed infill will be changed somewhat from the first attempt in order to address issues cited in the court's decision, and that it will also include more land. 

The last time the possibility of annexing South Mountain Elementary was raised before the council, the indication at that time was that there are no plans to do so.  However, if the land were to be annexed, Edgewood would then have an elementary school located inside town limits.  And, doing so makes sense in another way because the school is very close to the geographic center of the town.   

Draft version of the Commission Agenda Summary for 2002:

I've uploaded a summary for 2002 to Drive. There are other summaries available for 2000-2001 and 2008-2013. The format varies somewhat from one year to the next but there is a common thread of meetings listed by date along with non-routine agenda items and brief comments about the actions taken. The Agenda Summaries are part of the archive of Commission Minutes which contain more detailed information.  There is also a collection of Council Minutes available. Note: both collections of minutes are incomplete. I will add more if/when the town makes them available in the Agenda Center of its website. 

The 2002 summary is a rough draft which does not have the year's totals added, but there are quarterly numbers provided. 2002 was a year which saw a lot of changes in the town, and the Commission and its work reflects that. I found the complaints about the lack of proper vetting of applications before referring them to the Commission interesting. The planning office seems to have come full circle.

Note, too, the number of minor subdivision applications brought forward that year. I predict that if the Edgewood Council adopts the minor subdivision language in the draft ordinance published on May 29, 2014 there will be a return to the practices which prevailed in the town's early days when many of the subdivision applications were "minor." There are good reasons for the near-universal condemnations of serial platting because it relieves developers of their share of the responsibility for installing quality infrastructure. The taxpayers end up footing the bills, and money which could have been put to other use is diverted to the remediation of the results of shoddy development practices. Abuse of the minor subdivision concept is the mechanism by which serial platting comes into being. [There are legitimate uses for the minor subdivision procedure so long as protections are build in which discourage its use for piecemeal development of large tracts of land.]

Revisiting an old issue:

I wrote the following post for another blog a couple of years ago.  I believe it's possible that the Town of Edgewood will try to set up another ad hoc committee similar to the one described below with the intent of controlling the process of starting a new school district.  Since this model has already passed legal muster I would not be surprised to see it rolled out again.

 

In May 2012, the town's lawyers were tasked with finding a way to get around the Open Meetings Act and the Inspection of Public Records Act, and they delivered a loophole that if you squint hard enough and tilt your head just right, it is possible to pass the arrangement through the eye of the proverbial needle.  It probably meets the letter of the law, but I wish the mayor and council would hold themselves to a higher standard than just barely legal. 

 

Key points to note are that while a formally convened advisory committee is subject to  OMA/IPRA, the town's lawyers ultimately concluded (sometime after the date of the meeting at which the following discussion took place) that an ad hoc committee is not required to meet those standards. Notice also the absence of discussion by the council.

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.

Link added: First Choice Community Health Care

I've added the First Choice homepage to the links list in the sidebar.  You will find information at the website about general clinic services and policies as well as the Edgewood clinic.

Questions about Administrative Adjudicatory Deliberations (AAD):

Even with use of a loose interpretation of the concepts of transparency and responsive government, it remains difficult to reconcile Edgewood Mayor Brad Hill's call for use of the AAD with his past statements on open government and the use of closed sessions. Mayor Hill has described advice given to the Commission by a representative of the New Mexico Municipal League (NMML) in terms which appear to be inconsistent with advice given during previous training sessions sponsored by that organization. Furthermore, the Mayor's current position on the use of closed deliberations is not consistent with his own history on this matter. Therefore, I believe it is reasonable to ask if this represents new thinking on the part of the NMML and the Town of Edgewood.

Public Deliberations versus Administrative Adjudicatory Deliberations:

The introduction to the Seventh Edition of the Open Meetings Act Compliance Guide published by the Office of the New Mexico Attorney General, Gary K. King, opens with the following paragraph: 

Public access to the proceedings and decision-making processes of governmental boards, agencies and commissions is an essential element of a properly functioning democracy.  In a comment applicable to open government, Justice Louis Brandeis once observed that "sunshine is the best disinfectant." I agree wholeheartedly.  As former President Harry S. Truman later put it even more succinctly; "Secrecy and a free, democratic government don't mix...." ~ Gary K. King, Attorney General, 2010.

The current edition of the Open Meetings Act Compliance Guide includes a section on the Administrative Adjudicatory Deliberation (AAD).  It indicates that this mechanism is an exception to the OMA and one which was primarily intended for use in personnel matters.  The exception has been extended to include other matters involving confidential information.  However, the Compliance Guide also includes the following admonition: 

“Public bodies may not misuse the exemption as a means of avoiding the open meeting  requirements.”  (An excerpt of the Commentary following Example 46 on p. 24 taken from the Open Meetings Act Compliance Guide;  Seventh Edition, 2010.)

It may, indeed, be true that the New Mexico Municipal League (NMML) is seeking to establish a new "gold standard" for all quasi-judicial matters in which decision-making bodies retreat into closed sessions for deliberations and the making of decisions, but other than the Mayor's remarks at last week's Council meeting, I have found no indication that this is the case.  I have seen no evidence that any other jurisdictions in the area routinely use closed deliberations in land use matters or contemplate doing so.