Attorneys for the city and county of 疯客直播 Fe faced off last year in the state鈥檚 First Judicial District Court in a genuine legal tussle after county commissioners approved an ordinance that would have effectively block a long-planned annexation.
Now, months after a judge ruled in the city鈥檚 favor, city and county elected officials are floating the prospect of joint meetings, aiming to foster greater communication. The hope is to chart a new course with increased collaboration.
鈥淚 put this forward two years ago, but the time wasn鈥檛 right due to the annexation troubles. But now we are past that, I think,鈥 Commissioner Justin Greene said last week.
He was referring to commissioners鈥 effort in 2023 to expand the village of Agua Fr铆a, designated by the state as a Traditional Historic Community, to include a 1,075-acre parcel known as Area 1B along the city鈥檚 northwestern edge, between West Alameda Street and N.M. 599. It was the last parcel set for annexation into the city under a yearslong process that had faced delays.
Residents along Coyote Ridge Road and other neighborhoods in the parcel, frustrated by a lack of city services and other concerns, had petitioned the county to extend the boundaries of Agua Fr铆a to their homes. Commissioners held hearings on the matter, including a contentious meeting in 2023.
疯客直播 Fe Mayor Alan Webber, arguing against the proposed ordinance to expand Agua Fr铆a, accused then-Commission Chairwoman Anna Hansen of 鈥渂reach of contract鈥 and 鈥渂argaining in bad faith鈥 because she had participated in the annexation negotiations and also encouraged residents to organize against the effort.
The city filed a lawsuit over the ordinance, and the judge ruled in the city鈥檚 favor in May, a decision the county chose not to appeal.
Late last year, the city was planning a fiscal impact study to assess the effects of needed services and public infrastructure, city spokesperson Regina Ruiz wrote in an email in November.
Greene said he plans to introduce a resolution soon before the County Commission that would call on members of the city and county governing boards to discuss possible areas of collaboration at a joint meeting.
鈥淭here would be follow-up meetings because a 鈥榦ne and done鈥 is certainly not the answer to this,鈥 he said. 鈥淭his is a one and, maybe, quarterly? Maybe it鈥檚 every six months? It depends on what kind of a work plan can be developed from the first meeting and the prep work.鈥
City Councilor Pilar Faulkner wants to help lead the effort by introducing a similar resolution on the city side. City and county constituents are the ones who suffer from any lapses in communication between the two boards, she noted.
鈥淚t makes way more sense for us to be working together than it does for us to be fighting. The people are the only ones that suffer when that happens,鈥 Faulkner said.
Elephants in the room
Elected officials could collaborate on issues such as economic development, land use, public safety and homelessness 鈥 with results benefiting residents of the region by streamlining policies, some said.
Sam Pick, who was the city鈥檚 mayor from 1976-78 and 1986-94, said he always believed collaboration between the two boards was important.
鈥淚 think it鈥檚 a good idea. They should meet often,鈥 Pick said. 鈥淵ou ought to meet once a month. And what could go wrong? If you鈥檙e not talking, you鈥檙e not trying.鈥
He also spoke about how decisions made by the city impacts the county 鈥 and vice versa.
鈥淲e have to have some concern about the urban sprawl that is based on the regulations that we have within the city. And I think we owe it to the county to be sensitive to their needs, too,鈥 Pick said.
Councilor Michael Garcia said he is encouraged by an appetite for increased collaboration in the local governments following a contentious period.
鈥淟et鈥檚 talk about the elephant in the room,鈥 Garcia said. 鈥淭o be frank, from my understanding, there has been some contention between the [mayoral] administration and the county. That does not mean that the councilors have not wanted to work with the county.鈥
鈥淚 do not have the same perspective as the administration鈥檚 stance on Area 1B,鈥 Garcia said. 鈥... I fully support what the residents want. And if the residents of the area want to continue to reside within the county, and given that the city has not provided the services that have been promised to them, then I fully support them wanting to stay in the county.鈥
Webber said there is daily collaboration between the city and the county at the staff level across a range of issues, including when it comes to plotting the region鈥檚 water future. But he, too, sees the benefits of more joint efforts, potentially through working groups made up of councilors and commissioners.
鈥淚 think the real elephant in the room is whether we鈥檇 ever consider city, county consolidation,鈥 Webber said. 鈥淚f you look at Los Alamos, it鈥檚 a city and a county. 疯客直播 Fe is a city and a county, but we are separate governments, which means we have two of everything.鈥
He added, 鈥淭here are parts of the county that extend all the way into Espa帽ola, and it would be kind of tricky to do city-county consolidation that extended that far. But there are places around the United States 鈥 starting with Indianapolis, Ind. 鈥 that have paved the way toward a really effective integration of city and county that leads to more efficiency and less redundancy.鈥
How would it work?
Greene laid out ideas for a city-county collaborative effort in an opinion piece recently published in The New Mexican.
鈥淗ow could this work: I propose that we set up teams made up of a Councilor and Commissioner to lead the discussion on topics they have knowledge of and have passion for. I believe this will give 鈥榦wnership鈥 and a team building structure between the individuals on our organizations that will become the foundations of our collaborative approach,鈥 Greene wrote.
County and city staff work together on many issues daily, he added, but more 鈥渦pper-level鈥 discussions are needed to foster more trust, transparency and understanding.
City Councilor Signe Lindell said she had a discussion last week with Greene about more collaboration.
鈥淎t this point in time, we don鈥檛 have anything exact planned,鈥 Lindell said. 鈥淚 think we need to meet and decide what the issues are we do need to address, so I鈥檓 just approaching it with an open mind.鈥
County Commissioner Adam Fulton Johnson said he agrees with Greene about the need for more coordination with the city, 鈥渁nd that starts with sort of, I think, breaking bread and getting to know each other a little bit better so that we can make those [meetings] really smooth, easy and regular.鈥
鈥淭he hope is to get together a joint group of us to take on issues that we should be doing together and not fighting about,鈥 Faulkner said.
It would not be the first time the commission and the council have sat down at a table together. In fact, there is a long history of joint meetings and organizations.
For example, a joint meeting was held in 2004 on a proposed agreement on the Buckman Direct Diversion project.
Buckman and the Metropolitan Planning Organization are examples of jointly run city-county organizations, with board members from both the commission and council.
Hansen, whose second and final term on the commission ended in December, said the only time the council and commission met during her tenure was around the time she was first elected and former Mayor Javier Gonzalez was in office.
鈥淚, too, completely agree with Commissioner Greene that the city and county need to be working together,鈥 Hansen said.
But some residents are skeptical the pitch from Greene and others will yield anything new or positive.
Sid Monroe, an Area 1B resident who has long opposed the city annexation, recalled the early 2000s, when joint boards met to discuss annexation.
鈥淪peaking from our perspective, we鈥檝e kind of gone through this, done that and we鈥檙e still at a stalemate,鈥 he said.
Monroe said he believes any collaboration between the city and the county should be transparent to members of the public.
鈥淯nfortunately, we don鈥檛 have a lot of faith based on our experience of that,鈥 he said.
