IN THE NEWS

See Councilor Romero's reaction to the Santa Fe New Mexican's recent editorial in today's paper. Note how she omits the central facts, including the fact that the PRESTO CHANGO happened behind closed doors and without public homeowner input and allows 3 DU per and 5 with "affordable housing". Further, these areas are now under City authority, even before annexation, with out a voice in City elections.

See related article about the City's zeal for projects in a time of fiscal difficulty. And read the letter about Sun Mountain development.

Also see related article about the Northwest Quadrant plan. We have many friends in that area that have been engaged in opposing the City's plan. Note a new provision in the plan "Other options include creating a public-improvement district for residents of the project who would pay up to $98 per month in additional taxes on top of homeowner association fees". The City planner told us in a meeting "the City really never does that".

Stay involved and stay informed.

DOWN, BUT NOT OUT. UPDATE

Brief update on today's meetings.

Commissioner Vigil:
Was open to our concerns, but indicated this RR Ordinance may be the best we can get. City planner was there and helped clarify
1. Although the City accepts Neighborhood Agreements and Covenants, should an individual member wish to apply for lot splits ( up to 3 per acre) it would be up to the homeowners association to sue that member.
2. Indeed, when City water/sewer is available, homeowners are expected to pay to connect. How and when to be determined.
3. Although "rarely used", the City can levy a special revenue district upon a neighborhood for improvements, including roads.

ELUA
There was a good turn of people from diverse areas and backgrounds who spoke out against Annexation and the Rural Residential Ordinance. The City proposed the Ordinance be adopted immediately, to be reviewed and formally adopted in 4 months. The Commission voted with the City, 3 to 2. The ELUA determined that they did not have to consider the ELUC's recommendation for a 3 month delay for public input.

From now on, all development/additions/zoning/permits/etc will be handled by the City. There was some vague promise of "public outreach" to explain the changes during the next 4 months.

It is time to re-group and re-stratagize. Thanks for everyone who attended. BTW, a podcast of my interview today on KSFR is now available here. It is the lead interview in the broadcast and I answer questions articulating our concerns.

Stay tuned. Thanks everyone,

Sid

SANTA FE PUBLIC RADIO KSFR COVERING ELUA MEETING

Save Santa Fe has just learned that radio station KSFR 101.1 FM is covering today's ELUA meeting (6 PM, 102 Grant St.) and the annexation issue in general. Member Sid Monroe was interviewed about his concerns and experience regarding the Rural Residential Ordinance. Tune in to 101.1 for more.

MEETINGS TODAY/ MEANWHILE, BUDGET POSTPONED

The ELUA is meeting this Today, Thursday, 6 PM at 102 Grant Street, and the annexation issue is on the agenda.We have also been invited to meet with Commissioner Vigil and County Attorney Steve Rosson Thursday, May 28, @ 4pm in the County Legal Conference room, 102 Grant Ave, regarding the Rural Protection Ordinance.

Meanwhile, last night the City Council voted to postpone the City budget. Further budget cuts are necessary and the City will not meet the June 1 filing deadline.

" Councilors Rebecca Wurzburger, Ron Trujillo, Matthew Ortiz, Patti Bushee and Carmichael Dominguez voted in favor of the postponement and cuts, while Councilors Rosemary Romero and Miguel Chavez dissented. Councilor Chris Calvert, who said last week that he thought at least part of the proposed budget could be approved, did not attend Wednesday's meeting."
Said Mayor Coss: " This city has never done anything like this since the Great Depression. We are reducing $13 million". " ---Albuquerque Journal North

WILL CITY APPROVE BUDGET TONIGHT?

From today's Albuquerque Journal North:

Time is running out for the Santa Fe City Council to approve its 2009-10 spending plan. But some councilors still don't think the budget's ready for prime time. “I think we should reject this budget and work on it some more,” Matthew Ortiz said Tuesday of the staff-developed budget that will come before City Council at today's meeting. Ortiz said the total dollar amount that needs to be cut is an ever-changing target. Recently, he said, the finance department identified an additional $680,000 in revenue. “My faith in the budget numbers are at an all-time low,” Ortiz said. The city has until June 1 to submit its budget to the state for the fiscal year that begins July 1. At tonight's council meeting, Ortiz said, he'll call for putting off a vote on the budget. If the vote isn't postponed, Ortiz said he'll recommend staff reductions. The cuts would include deputy department directors, at a savings of $780,000, a couple of office manager positions and up to three positions in the Office of Constituent Services.

And the Santa Fe New Mexican (full Editorial here):

So what surprises can Santa Feans expect from our eight councilors by way of finding the $5 million cut the city will need even if it relies on reserve funds instead of whacking the other $9 million?

How about a political purge? Is tonight when councilors decide that positions held by officials unwilling to kiss certain boots are, come to think of it, expendable? Like the recent decision to annex new territory first, and worry later about the cost of providing police, firefighting and other services to new city residents, it's possible that a council majority already has huddled in secret over who is offered up as human sacrifices to tough economic times. As for mayoral guidance, David Coss — busily preparing his candidacy for re-election — didn't show up, even as a spectator, for last week's Finance Committee meeting. That was the session at which Chairman Matthew Ortiz apologized for the confusion over this year's budget process; one in which the public has been kept largely in the dark.

Get informed. Get involved.

ELUA MEETING THIS THURSDAY

The ELUA is meeting this Thrsday, 6 PM at 102 Grant Street, and the annexation issue is on the agenda.

We have also been invited to meet with Commissioner Vigil and County Attorney Steve Ross
on Thursday, May 28, @ 4pm in the County Legal Conference room, 102 Grant Ave, regarding the Rural Protection Ordinance.

FIRE DEPRTMENT NEED $14 MILLION TO SERVE ANNEXED AREAS; CITY PLANNING BUDGET CUTS

The first study of the costs associated with the City's plan to annex 1o,000 acres and 14,000 people was issued to the City Council last week. Among the troubling findings that he Santa Fe New Mexican reported today are: that the Fire Department will need more fire inspectors and that the City is already short of inspectors; 2 new fire station are needed, along with equipment and personnel; new tanker trucks are needed for areas that do not have water; and many homes cannot be accessed because of bad roads. See the full article here.

Not to mention that the new personal would not be familiar with the new areas they would respond to!

Last week, the City announced cuts in City services would be required for the new budget.

In fact, at the time Councilor Ron Trujillo said he questioned "cuts to public safety programs in light of the city's plans to annex thousands of additional acres over the next five years."

Meanwhile, perhaps from an alternate universe: "Cutting spending while adding new city customers will be a challenge, but City Manager Galen Buller believes it can be done." THE FIRE DEPARTMENT ALONE NEEDS $14 MILLION but the City belives it can CUT SPENDING AND ADD NEW CUSTOMERS. How?

DO YOU REALLY BELIEVE YOU WILL BE SAFE AND PROTECTED BY THE CITY? THE FULL IMPLICATIONS OF CITY ANNEXATION ARE JUST BECOMING KNOWN. THE FACT IS THERE ARE NO CONCRETE PLANS BY THE CITY TO SERVE AND PROTECT THE ANNEXED AREAS. ZONING AND DENSITIES ARE CHANGING, TAXES WILL INCREASE, AND WHAT ELSE?

"Would it help us to have more money to address those annexation questions? Sure," he said. "The annexation is a policy issue that has been decided, and we will make it work within our budget. That's our job."

REALLY?

please, get informed. Get involved.

savesantafe@cybermesa.com

NOTES AND WEEKEND READING

In the news today: "Santa Fe Mayor David Coss said Thursday that he'll seek a second term." Also, 4 of 8 City Councilor positions will be open for election next March. Although we can not vote, it is imperative that County residents get involved. Even before formal annexation, the City will be dictating planning, zoning, density, and many other areas of County resident's lives.

If you have not already, please read the new City Rural Residential Zoning Ordinance (thanks to all of you who worked so hard to get the City to belatedly post it!).

It is a dense read, and difficult to fully understand as it refers to and incorporates many other City Ordinances. A few observances from one of our astute members:

Although the density table gives a maximum density in the RR of 3 per acre (plus more, to meet the Inclusionary Zoning Ordinance, but the table doesn't say how much more) elsewhere are figures for lot sizes that conflict with this density. Page 11 B refers to lot sizes 2,000 to 4,000 square feet (these are equal to roughly 10 to 20 DUs per acre); Exhibit B page 7 gives a minimum lot size of 4,000 square feet, which can be reduced to 3,000 square feet if common open space is provided; Exhibit A page 1 states that "in the RR district multiple family dwellings are limited to four per lot." I don't understand what is meant by a "lot" in this context, since the density table (Table 14-7.1-1) gives the figures we've heard before, of one DU per 2.5 acres down to 3 per acre plus whatever the affordable housing bonus is.

Page 11 looks like it has a loophole--it says densities are limited, "unless approved by the Governing Body as a rezoning action or other action authorized by this chapter."
Another red flag: projects under 6 units, in the RR and in R1 through R6, get administrative (staff) approvals. We could see serial subdivisions, which have happened in the County, without the (theoretically) more thorough oversight required for larger developments.
A number of uses are not permitted which are puzzling, including photographer's studios, dance studios, healing arts offices, and arts and crafts studios, but home occupations are allowed--so these may be in conflict. No transit transfer facilities are allowed, either, which seems contrary to their ideological posture of reducing the impacts of "sprawl." I hate that word, since they use it as a derogatory smear against any kind of rural residential lifestyle.

Meanwhile, page 2 retains protective language: (H) Rural Residential District (RR) Purpose and Intent: The Rural Residential District is intended to respect the existing rural residential character of the area and prevent urban densities.

Also, if you are new here, please read through this blog, as it contains many useful contacts, past articles, and information.

CITY BUDGET SET FOR CUTS IN SERVICE

'Confusing' city budget now in council's court

As the City rushes headlong into annexation of 10,000 acres and countless numbers of households, while assuring everyone that City services will be available, in fact the City is looking to cut its budget. See today's Santa Fe New Mexican article.

"Councilors who are not on the Finance Committee, but who attended the meeting, also seemed divided. Councilor Rosemary Romero said the effort was the city's "best foot forward," while Councilor Ron Trujillo said he questioned cuts to public safety programs in light of the city's plans to annex thousands of additional acres over the next five years."

In reality, there are NO PLANS for fire, police, transportation, etc. in the Annexation plan.

And, the Albuqerque Journal has a grimmer take: "The city's Finance Committee couldn't settle on a budget recommendation Wednesday night for the upcoming July 1-June 30 fiscal year, raising questions about whether the city will be able to meet a June 1 deadline for submitting its plans to the state. Committee members did send a proposed budget forward to the May 27 City Council meeting, but without suggesting whether they thought it deserved to be approved or not. Councilors complained that they weren't offered a wide enough range of budget-cutting scenarios, that they were given few ideas that would shake up the status quo, and that it took too long to get some information they requested. "

Get informed. Get involved.

savesantafe@cybermesa.com

RR ZONING ORDINANCE 2009-18 POSTED

Finally! The revised Rural Residential Zoning ordinance is now available on line. I wonder if the numerous phone call and emails ti City and County officials had any influence?

(Note, all other Annexation material on the city's website still has the previous Rural Residential Zoning designations - 1 du per 2.5 acres, 1per acre if City Water Sewer available; 2 per acre in both available. THIS INFORMATION IS NOW VOID)

Stay tuned for more updates.