ES-CA Board Meeting, March 3, 2014

The ES-CA Board of Directors met last night. Attending the meeting were Directors: Bob Gorrell (President); Orin Safier (Treasurer); Chris Daul (Secretary); Ed Majka; and, Tony Hull. Also attending were: Dick Ulmer, Scott Stevens, David Wilson and Ed Macy.

The major issues discussed included:

1. I 25/Rt. 550/Rt. 165 Interchange. ES-CA has received numerous complaints from residents about the difficulty of seeing oncoming traffic at the ramp entrance to Rt. 165, from northbound I 25. The original NM DOT plans called for an acceleration lane to be present, but that was later removed without notice.

ES-CA Board members had met with NM DOT officials and were advised to wait and see how the final configuration would work. Based on feedback from residents, and our own experiences, the Board believes that the intersection is not safe.

ES-CA is requesting a meeting with NM DOT officials, State elected representatives and local law enforcement officers to discuss how the ramp entrance can be made safer. Our position is that we want the acceleration lane to be built. If anyone has additional concerns or comments, please let Board members know.

2. Fisher – Proposed Annexation by Bernalillo. Once again the Board would like to thank everyone that attended the Bernalillo Council meeting on February 21st. The annexation ordinance was tabled due to concerns expressed by Placitas and other residents about the potential mining of the site. ES-CA Board members subsequently met with Mayor Torres of Bernalillo to further discuss our concerns. The Board will be discussing the matter again with the Mayor and we expect to arrive at a suitable compromise that will give the Town some tax revenues and a detention basin, while severely limiting sand and gravel processing and, prohibiting any type of asphalt plant. We will keep everyone apprised of what is happening next.

3. Zoning Issues. ES-CA has discovered that Sandoval County has very limited enforcement powers over zoning violations, as evidenced by the LaFarge situation. Board members have met with the County Administration and the County is determined to try to enforce the regulations, but they have very limited ability to fine landowners. While ES-CA is continuing to work with the County and the Anasazi HOA, we are also proposing State legislation that will give counties more enforcement power on zoning matters.

All ES-CA Board meetings are open to the public and everyone is encouraged to attend. The next meeting is on Monday, April 7, at 6:30 pm, at La Puerta Realty office.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Gravel Mines have Anemic Tax Benefit to Sandoval County

Gravel mines do not pay severance tax like oil and natural gas that contribute to about one third or our state’s income. Gravel mines pay little to no tax to the counties and municipalities where they reside. Fisher Sand and Gravel claimed at a recent Town of Bernalillo Council meeting, that as their office resides in Bernalillo, if they could re-open their illegal gravel mine by annexing it into Bernalillo, it would generate up to $60,000 per month in New Mexico Gross Receipts Tax (GRT) for the Town. The Fisher testimony was mistaken.

Fisher’s statement would only be true if all of their sales went to construction projects within the Town. Most of the gravel from our area is used in concrete, roads, etc. in Albuquerque and therefore only generates GRT for Albuquerque.

Materials used in construction are taxed at the point-of-sale. The NM Tax and Revenue Department (TRD) has always considered the construction point-of-sale, or business location, to be the location of the final product: [excerpt from TRD directions] “You provide construction services – Your business reporting location is the location of each construction site…. All phases of a construction project are considered a service, including materials that become components of the completed project”. [see link –NM FYI BUSINESS LOCATION]

Using the new Bernalillo High School as an example, if the cement used to make the concrete is manufactured in the Tijeras plant located in Bernalillo County, the gravel and sand comes from the Lafarge quarry east of Santa Ana in Sandoval County, and is mixed and trucked from Albuquerque in Bernalillo County, no GRT tax will be paid at any of those locations, but will be paid at the location where the school is built. The Town will get GRT on all labor and material and profits used to build the school. Only the general contractor, otherwise known as the prime, will pay the GRT and on the total cost of construction. All other vendors will be issued Non-taxable Transaction Certificates to prevent double taxation.

Posted in Zoning and Land Use | Leave a comment

Fisher Sand and Gravel

BERNALILLO TOWN COUNCIL MEETING

DISCUSSION OF ORDINANCE TO ANNEX FISHER

SAND AND GRAVEL PROPERTY

On Monday, February 25, 2014, the Mayor and Council of Bernalillo met to discuss an ordinance that would annex the Fisher site into Bernalillo. Under the ordinance, it would provide for the construction of a detention basin to assist in storm water control, zone the site for retail, commercial and light industrial development, and, permit Fisher to mine the site for 15 years, prior to any development. ES-CA board members, along with many other residents of Placitas, attended the meeting and voiced their opposition to the proposal of 15 years of mining. The Bernalillo Mayor and Council voted to table the ordinance, pending revisions that provide performance safeguards for the Town.

For those that attended the meeting, we should all be proud of our service and our actions. Speakers were well informed, polite and forceful. It was our collective actions that brought about the halting of this ordinance. A special thanks goes to Ed Majka, who spent much time organizing presentations, preparing handouts for the Mayor and Council and informing residents of this matter. This is what ES-CA does. And it is only as strong as it’s membership. This issue is not over, and everyone needs to remain vigilant, and involved. In addition this threat to our health and property, there are many other issues facing Placitas. If we are to continue to protect our interests, everyone needs to be involved with your time, or money, or both. ES-CA needs you.

As noted, this issue is not over. Bernalillo believes that it will be beneficial to annex this property, but they are now aware of the mining issues. ES-CA will be working with the Town to revise the ordinance. We do not oppose annexation. We do not oppose the construction of a detention basin. We do oppose unbridled gravel mining on the property. We understand that Fisher needs to grade the site, and that there can be an economic advantage to screening out gravel, but fifteen years is literally a lifetime to some. We also wish to make sure that in the end, the property is properly reclaimed. In fact, Fisher is under a legal obligation currently to Sandoval County to grade and reclaim the site.

ES-CA has proposed that Fisher be limited to 18 months to complete grading, which would include the extraction of material, and, in effect, a limited, regulated mining operation. We ask that the Town require that Fisher post a bond to insure completion. We would also require that Fisher be subject to mandatory penalties for failure to complete the reclamation with 18 months. We have also asked that the Town require that the workday be kept to the hours of 9 am to 4pm, and that Fisher comply with all necessary regulations, including, but not limited to: air pollution, water pollution, noise, traffic, etc.

This site is currently in disarray. While ES-CA does not encourage any mining within the area, we would like to see this site restored. The County has been remiss in enforcing its regulations against Fisher. Our proposal of a bond and penalties would may be a far stronger position to insure that the site is properly reclaimed, than waiting for the County to act.

We welcome your thoughts and comments.

Posted in Zoning and Land Use | Leave a comment

ES-CA Alert – Fisher Gravel Mine at I-25

Fisher_Annex_OrdinanceOn Monday February 24th at 6:30PM the Town of Bernalillo will hear Item 7A on the agenda which is the annexation of the currently illegal gravel mine into the Town. Of concern to Placitans is that Fisher asks in the proposed ordinance to be able to mine sand and gravel for 15 years.

4D. As to the entire annexed property, the property owner shall have the right to extract sand, gravel and similar products as a part of the grading process for the property and commercially sell such minerals; provided that this use shall cease and terminate upon the earlier of: (i) completion of final grading for the property; or, (ii; fifteen (15) years after the Effective Date of this Ordinance.

Please come to this hearing and let your voice be heard that you do not want another gravel mine in these proximities. The Town of Bernalillo should also be concerned about the demand on water, spewing dust, noise and truck traffic. The Town Council Chambers are located in Bernalillo at 829 Camino del Pueblo. You can read the entire proposed ordinance by clicking here Fisher_Annex_Ordinance .

Posted in Zoning and Land Use | 2 Comments

FISHER SAND AND GRAVEL UPDATE

ES-CA Forum Article – February, 2014
Fisher Sand & Gravel Update
Ed Majka, Political/Legal Chair, ES-CA

On Thursday, February 13, 2014 representatives of ES-CA, Chris Daul, Ed Majka and Orin Safier met with Steve Gudelj, Placitas developer and business owner, and
Dave Olson, Vice President of Fisher Sand & Gravel. Mr. Olson is a resident of Placitas.

The purpose of the meeting was to discuss current and future use of the property owned by Fisher, which is adjacent to I-25 northbound; south of Rt. 165. This site has been utilized to produce gravel for sale and, as stated by Mr. Olson, has limited production value. An effort to site a temporary asphalt plant was defeated by efforts of our Community and ES-CA, working with the Sandoval County Commission.

The property was listed “For Sale”, but could not find a Buyer. Fisher Vice President, Dave Olson quoted the following (quoting here, with his permission) “Fisher will not locate an asphalt plant at this site now or in the future”. Efforts are underway to donate a portion of the property to ESCAFCA for the purpose of constructing a detention pond to
help in flood control along the west side of I-25 to minimize flood damage along South Hill Road in Bernalillo.

Fisher has been in conversations with ESCAFCA as well as Town of Bernalillo representatives. Those conversations include the possibility of the Town of Bernalillo annexing the property.

Ultimately, Fisher claims they will not operate as a mining operation, and their intent is to develop the site for light industrial, warehousing and other commercial activities.

ES-CA representatives voiced concern of Fisher not being open to public interest and community impact over the last several years. We also discussed the poor reputation of Fisher, and the number of violations at their operations in New Mexico and Arizona.

ES-CA’s position is to continue to monitor activities on the site, and attend Sandoval County and Town of Bernalillo meetings, as well as Planning and Zoning meetings to maintain a “watchful eye” on any development plans and the impact of those plans on Eastern Sandoval residents

In closing the meeting, contact information was exchanged, and ES-CA representatives requested that Fisher keep lines of communication open to build a more favorable and beneficial relationship.

Note: You can help by becoming an ES-CA watchdog, in which you would attend a public meeting and provide information to make ES-CA aware before something occurs that could/would negatively impact our Community. For further information on how you can help ES-CA in these and other efforts, please contact Ed Majka, at majkanm@msn.com or Scott Stevens, j.scott.stevens@gmail.com.

Posted in Zoning and Land Use | Leave a comment

RT. 550/165/I 25

I have communicated with NM DOT today concerning both the signal timing and the entrance ramp from I 25 NB to Rt. 165 EB.

As many of you have experienced, there has been a backup at the intersection the past two mornings during the rush hour. DOT advised me that they are working on the signal timing issues to prevent backups in any direction and are aware of our concerns. I will once again travel through the interchange on February 12 and will advise NM DOT of the situation and whether it is improved.

Concerning the ramp, I have forwarded comments to DOT and expressed ES-CA’s continuing concerns about the safety of the access onto Rt. 165. Please continue to submit your comments to the Forum and ask others to comment as well. ES-CA board members will be meeting on February 17 to discuss this issue again and decide upon a course of action.

ES-CA will continue to work on the issues at the interchange and welcome your thoughts and suggestions.

Posted in I-25/US 550 Interchange | Leave a comment

Lafarge Mining Operation a Loser for Sandoval County and Placitas

by Stephen Vaughan

Lafarge has recently been telling all who would listen that they no longer intend to honor the various written statements of intent by their predecessor operators to end mining operations in 2015. Indeed, they have explicitly said they are negotiating a new lease, and intend to mine to the perimeter of the leasehold.

As residents of Placitas, we know the traffic, the noise, the dust their operations create.

But isn’t there also economic benefit to Sandoval County from the mining?

In a word, no.

As we all see the trucks clogging the intersection of 25 and 165, can’t we take solace in the gross receipts taxes they are paying into the coffers of the County?

No. The trucks are taking the gravel to Albuquerque for the most part, where the gross receipts taxes are paid. Other than gravel that may be delivered here, the County sees not a dime of GRT.

What about property taxes paid by the owners? As best we can determine, the owner paid approximately $100,000 last year in property taxes on the entire mining site. The comparison to the taxes that would be paid instead as a result of a conforming use, for example homes, is striking. Assuming a hypothetical 500 homes on the 1000-acre site (after gross receipts taxes paid by the developer, the builders, and the contractors), each home would pay, let’s estimate, $5,000 a year in taxes, or $2.5 million.

And then there is the money that would be spent by those 500 families in Sandoval County, with the resulting benefit to local businesses and the County itself.

One must not forget, too, the reduction in property values resulting from the mining operation: Studies have shown gravel pits may reduce surrounding property values ranging from 30% contiguous to the mine, down to 10% two miles away. Property tax assessment appeals have already succeeded on Placitas homes near the mine, based solely on the presence of the mine. We estimate the loss in County property tax revenue will eventually range from $250,000 to $750,000.

And finally there is the water. Last reporting year Lafarge used 94 million gallons of water, during one of the worst droughts in memory. Five hundred homes would use about 35 million gallons of water.

This may be good business for a Paris-based international corporation—but it’s just not paying its way for those of us in Sandoval County.

————————————————————————————–

Documents relating to Lafarge

[following added by Orin Safier]

Here is a 2013 Satellite view of the Lafarge operation, showing the areas detailed in the 1988 Certificate of Nonconformance: Sep 2013 Satellite View of Nonconforming Areas

Here are some documents that are important regarding the Lafarge mining:

1) 1988-01-11 Certificate of Nonconformance.  This was passed in 1988 by the Extraterritorial Zoning Commission, and places zoning restrictions on the mining property.

2) 2013-06-23 Lafarge Notice of Violation.  After the 1988 Nonconformance conditions were “grandfathered” in 2010, this Notice of Violation was issued by the County to Lafarge in 2013.

3) Lafarge Appeal Pages from 2013-09-06 Suit of County.  After receipt of the Notice of Violation, Lafarge attempted to appeal that notice. These pages contain their reasons why they consider themselves not to be in zoning violation.

 

Posted in Zoning and Land Use | 7 Comments

I 25/Rt. 550/Rt. 165 Construction

I 25/RT. 550/165 INTERCHANGE

UPDATE

Eastern Sandoval Citizens Association (ES-CA) Directors, Bob Gorrell, Jerry Saxton and Chris Daul met with NM Department of Transportation officials on January 30, 2014, to discuss the I 25/Rt. 550/165 interchange project, and specifically, the ramp design from I 25 northbound to Rt. 165 eastbound.

DOT officials acknowledged that the original plans had been changed, which eliminated an acceleration lane for traffic entering Rt. 165 eastbound. The new design has raised complaints from numerous Placitas residents, concerning the visibility of oncoming traffic heading eastbound from the Bernalillo area on Rt. 165. DOT officials said that once the final lane pattern is completed, the visibility would improve, since the existing poles, holding up the light signals, would be removed, temporary signage would be removed, and the location of vehicles that are stacking on the off ramp in order to turn left onto Rt. 165 will be shifted farther to the west.

As we know, the new configuration became operational on February 2. DOT District Three Engineer, Timothy Parker, stated that if there are any problems with the ramp, after completion of the new traffic configuration, DOT will meet with us again to determine how to address the issue. We would like to hear from residents as to whether the new configuration is still a problem or if it is now better.

Also, DOT officials said that the construction company, heading the project, is being fined in excess of $8,500.00 per day for non-compliance of their contract with the State. DOT understands the frustration Placitas residents, and others, are having with the construction project and indicated that they will work with us to alleviate any problems that remain after completion.

ES-CA will continue to work to insure that this project is completed as soon as possible and will insure that Placitans’ concerns are addressed.

Posted in I-25/US 550 Interchange | 11 Comments

2014 Placitas Communities Zoning Update

Currently, there are three open zoning violations that all relate to gravel quarries. The beauty of this area has attracted many people who have built moderate and high end rural homes, and the gravel, used mostly in the urban areas for landscape, roads and concrete, has attracted the gravel mines. There is an expected tension between the beauty of the area and its abundant stone and gravel. The regulation of that tension for the protection of property rights, investments, and peaceful ownership for our unincorporated communities falls under the Sandoval County Zoning regulations. Prior to enactment of the County regulations, the Town of Bernalillo / Sandoval County Extra-Territorial Zoning (ETZ) Commission regulated most areas of Placitas excluding the Village. The last Chairman of the ETZ which disbanded in 1995 was Tom Swisstack, presently Mayor of Rio Rancho. On a per household basis, Placitans pay some of the highest per capita property taxes in the county. There are no severance taxes for gravel extraction. If you would like to see gravel mining and the associated truck traffic double or triple, do not read any further.

The first of the three open violations relates to the old McIlhaney Gravel Mine. It was partially reclaimed, or restored wherein grades are re-shaped to emulate the surrounding area and then seeded. This reclamation occurred about 1999. As this occurred four years after the ETZ, page 19 item 5 of the “Extra-Territorial Zoning Ordinance”, was never enforced. “In the event that a use authorized as an S-U Zone is permanently discontinued, the S-U Zone may be cancelled and removed from the Zoning Map under the provisions for an amendment to this Ordinance. That area delineated by such discontinued S-U zone shall be rezoned to the prevailing surrounding zone as determined by the Authority following recommendation by the Commission.”

On October 21, 2010, Sandoval County repealed the ETZ Ordinance. Then on November 18, 2010 Sandoval County violated several of its own ordinances when it brought the long discontinued S-U Sand/Gravel special use, originally granted by the ETZ, into the Sandoval County Zoning Map with Ordinance 10-11-18.7B3. The purpose of the Zoning Ordinance is to protect property rights by providing clear expectations. Special Use is spot zoning and is not a right conferred upon a governing body or property owner, but is allowed through due process if enabling zoning ordinance will allow:

Section 16, Non-conformities, Abandonment. “Whenever a nonconforming use has been discontinued or abandoned for a period of one year or more, such use shall not thereafter be reestablished, and any future use must be in conformance with the provisions of this Ordinance.”

Section 10, A., Intent., SU Special-Use District – “… The County Board may not grant a Zone Map Amendment for establishment of a Special Use District unless satisfactory provisions have been made:
1. To assure the compatibility of property uses shall be maintained in the general area.
2. To preserve the integrity and character of the area …
[same as the Placitas Area Plan language].

Section 10, C., Removal of Zones., SU Special-Use District, – “In the event that a use authorized as a Special Use District is permanently discontinued … shall be restored to the prevailing zone district …”. In fact “discontinued” means for an extraction site, no extraction by the operator has occurred for more than 6 months.”

Per the Sandoval Zoning Ordinance, this property should have reverted to the zoning of adjoining properties and the overlay zoning of the Placitas Area Plan. Continuing this spot zoning violates both the intent and the letter of the zoning ordinance and threatens properties nearby. If you want to see this property, it is south of 165 and the next properties, just south of the illegal Fisher gravel mine, and just north of the Bernalillo water tank reservoir. This property is owned by the Sandia Tribe, but it’s not a part of the sovereign tribal lands. Sandia has proven itself over time to be an exceptionally good steward of the land, but it also allowed decades of gravel mining to occur between Bernalillo and the Pueblo before requiring that the land be reclaimed.

The next violator is Fisher. It is not happenstance that these properties are neighbors. There is plenty of gravel up and down the Rio Grande corridor, and the Placitas Area just happens to be closer to Albuquerque than a lot of other mines. The short story on Fisher is that they feigned a “Terrain Management” re-grading of their property for future commercial lots instead of going through the process for an S-U (special use) Sand and Gravel permit. ES-CA and the community took the Sandoval County Commission to task on this violation when the asphalt equipment moved on site. The county sent a compliance letter to Fisher on January 27, 2012 and in accordance with Section 15(F) of the Zoning Ordinance, they were to remove all equipment and stock piles of materials. The equipment and material remain on the site and the original faux use agreement expired in December of last year.

The last site is not unlike Fisher in thumbing their nose at the Sandoval County Government and its citizens. Lafarge came in on the coat tails of another mining operation approved by the late ETZ. As this mine has been in continuous use and not abandoned or use discontinued, the County was obligated to bring the ETZ use in under Section 10 (1), J., SU Sand and Gravel Mining, Existing Current Uses / Grandfather Clause. Lafarge does not interpret things the same as the County and has expanded its mine past the ETZ approval and do not think they should have to follow the parts of the ordinance that require application and process described earlier for S-U Sand and Gravel. There is a lot more to be said about this property and the neighbors near this property will tell the rest of this story.

Posted in Zoning and Land Use | Tagged , , | 9 Comments

I-25/US 550 Interchange and Placitas Traffic Safety

The I-25/US 550 Bridge Reconstruction just keeps going and going, but wait there’s more… or less. The old intersection had two eastbound lanes to Placitas. When you exited from northbound I-25 to head east at 165, you had to crane your neck around to see if you could merge. Some of you might remember the DOT public presentation in November of 2011 where the plan we were to agree upon included a new merge acceleration lane? I sure do and the reasoning. It would be safer. All of us had seen both rear-end and side-swipe collisions at that intersection. The merge lane was needed and we agreed.

You have probably noticed there is no merge lane. In fact, the angle of the reconstructed intersection due to aligning 165 further south is even more acute. Now you really have to crane your neck to merge and I have observed that the large trucks have to stick their heads out of the window to see oncoming traffic. The new intersection is worse than before. What happened? As it turns out the merge lane was removed to better accommodate gravel trucks jockeying over to the northbound frontage road. The logic of this decision is perplexing.

On January 30th,2014 ES-CA representatives met with DOT District 3 Engineer Tim Parker at the I-25 / 550 intersection. ES-CA had the week earlier sent a letter on the safety concern to Mr. Parker, our county Fire Chief and Sheriff, and to our state and federal representatives (link to letter below). At the meeting Mr. Parker recognized our concern, but wished to complete the project without the merge lane and see how it worked. Construction is expected to be complete in 60 days and lets hope no one is hurt in the meantime. ES-CA asked in the meantime that DOT investigate restricting heavy trucks over 2 tons from the frontage roads between 7- 9 AM and 4 – 6 PM to lessen the congestion. Mr. Parker said he would investigate. ES-CA believe that reducing the number of trucks during peak commute times would benefit both the trucks and the passenger cars. Similarly, adding back the merge lane would increase the traffic safety for both our community and the large trucks.

January 21 letter to DOT: DOT Letter 21Jan2014

Posted in I-25/US 550 Interchange | Tagged , , , | 6 Comments