Building Industry News 2006 Recap
Throughout 2006, we have provided reports on our work on behalf of the members on industry issues. Each Candid Contractor mailed to every member has provided an update on the latest industry news. As the year comes to an end a summary of this year’s industry issues seems appropriate.
New City of Las Cruces Community Development Director
In June, David Weir of Franklin, Indiana, was hired as the city’s community development director. EO Michele Marshall had the privilege of serving on the committee that interviewed the final candidates. Weir had previously lived in Las Cruces and worked with the city’s community development department. Weir has been receptive to working with us.
Park Impact Fees
We have known for quite a while that park impact fees would be a major item needing our attention. The issue began to gain momentum in late 2005. Park fees have been $249 a home for almost a decade and are collected at the time of permitting and put into “park district” accounts. Little has been done with the funds. The newest effort began with a study on parks in the city. The study indicated that in order to achieve the level of service recommended by the study, park fees would need to be adjusted to more than $4,000. The good news is that city staff is not seeking that kind of an increase.
To our benefit, LCHBA President Judd Singer and Greco Enterprises’ Kirk Clifton were appointed to the Capital Improvement Advisory Committee. They have been working to negotiate a reasonable increase in park fees. Members of the Building Industry Forum worked to put together a recommendation to its staff for fees should be applied.
A fee of $500 beginning in January 2007 and then moving up to $800 in January 2008 has been proposed. The recommendation will not go before council until after the first of the year.
"Other" Impact Fees
At the city council’s meeting on January 17, 2006 the city manager unveiled a plan for “other” impact fees. We had known for some time that Robert Garza, then Director of Public Works, was working on a plan that would impose impact fees for roads, drainage, and public facilities, i.e. fire and police stations.
The city engaged an outside firm to look at the potential for the additional impact fees. The study is still in progress. We have met with city officials to discuss the intent for new fees. We are also continuing to pursue issues related to ensuring that the city is following its rules and procedures as well as the state’s law for determining, planning, implementing and accounting for impact fees.
Increased Fees for Subdivision, Annexation, etc. by City of Las Cruces
LCHBA had several conversations with the city about its proposal to increase fees for subdivision and annexation applications. While no one wishes to see the cost of doing business go up, LCHBA understands the need for fees to increase from time to time. We have expressed to the city that the fees be justified and be used for what they are intended. As usual, we did bring up ways for streamlining processes to reduce the need for increased fees.
Proposal for changes to City Subdivision Regulations
Recently, LCHBA developers met with the city about changes they wish to make to subdivision regulations. The changes would not allow any permits to be pulled until subdivisions are “substantially” complete. The big question is what is meant by “substantially” complete? From listening to various city departments represented, public utilities, fire, etc., “safe” access is a major issue. What appears to be coming is a push for 80 to 90% complete. We will be meeting with the city again about the issue.
City Annexations
In 2006 the city annexed numerous parcels of land. A number of the annexations received heavy opposition from neighborhood groups, which are becoming more and more formidable. In addition, some of the councilors have gotten into the habit of extracting various items from applicants which were not agreed upon during the staff and/or P&Z approval process under the guise that since there is no specific rule of law addressing annexations, they can do whatever they want. A recent example is the extraction of ten acres of land from a developer for a park. Park impact fees will still be paid, hopefully minus the value of the land. There is certainly concern about this trend.
City’s Comprehensive Plan
The city is in the process of reviewing its current comprehensive plan. Recommendations will be made to Council for changes in the coming year. We’re looking forward to being involved in this dialogue.
Billboard Ordinance
The City approved changes to its sign ordinance and has limited all billboards to 12 streets within the City: IH-10; IH-25; Hwy. 70 west of Porter Rd.; Lohman west of IH-25; Telshor north of Lohman; Amador; Main Street; Solano; Valley; Picacho; Motel Blvd. south of Picacho; El Paseo. Billboards still have to meet other requirements—including zoning.
Building Inspection Issues
2006 saw a significant increase in inspection issues. Despite its efforts, the city’s inspection department has had difficulty keeping up with the increased demand for inspections. LCHBA has had meetings with the chief inspector and the city manager to suggest some ideas that might help streamline the process. We have also suggested that they look into the idea of contracting with private inspectors, which the city attorney thinks they cannot legally do. A couple of new inspectors have been hired and some inspectors are receiving cross-training so they may make multiple inspections at one time.
City/County Joint Meetings
In 2006, the city and county have had two meetings to discuss areas in which they may cooperate. There has been discussion about joint participation in regional planning. There is state funding available for such an initiative if a decision is reached to pursue it.
County Flooding Issues
The mega storms and resulting flooding experienced in recent times has put the spotlight way too much on the development community. One county commissioner took no time in making it a development issue rather than a community one. This commissioner sought a moratorium on development, which was not approved by his colleagues; however county staff has been asked by the commissioner to provide feedback from the community on problems and possible resolutions by December.
LCHBA was invited to participate in a flood task force and has already submitted its first report to county staff. More input from LCHBA members and reports to the county are to come.
County Master Planning and Impact Fees
The county is currently in the process of developing a master plan and they will be looking at imposing impact fees for infrastructure. This is a process that we will closely follow.
Changes to County Design Standards
County staff has been working on this initiative for over two years. On again and off again the process has picked up momentum this year. Judd Singer is part of the committee working on proposed revisions, which may now be slowed by the deliberations on flood control measures.
Cluster Subdivisions
As you may know, the Town of Mesilla has imposed a moratorium on approval of any subdivisions unless they are “cluster” ones that would save farm land around them. A number of landowners in Mesilla are making their opposition known to the cluster idea. The county is pursuing cluster rules as well. Discussion of the topic was tabled at the last county commission meeting and will come up at a later time.
Citizens Coalition for Open Space Preservation
LCHBA’s participation in this group has been ongoing since its inception several years ago. LCHBA Staff member Richard Hummell serves as liaison for LCHBA with this group. Our main goal in participation with OSP has been to stay abreast of what they’re up to. While we support a reasonable vision for open space preservation, we felt the OSP’s vision for what should be saved for open space in our community is too far reaching so we weren’t able to support it. In 2006, since creating their “open space vision,” they have outlined a number of open space projects they would like to pursue but haven’t yet agreed what to pursue. This year, the group entered into discussion with a national organization call Groundworks, which would help OSP create a local Groundwork nonprofit chapter that would receive funds to pursue open space projects. OSP submitted an application for formation of a local chapter early last spring.
In September OSP was notified that its application was accepted. The next step is for Groundwork USA to conduct a feasibility study and strategic plan with their money (minimum two year process), help get OSP organized as a non-profit (one year process), and hold the group’s hand while they work on a chosen project (one year process). It will be three years minimum before Groundwork Las Cruces can fly on its own as an active organization doing work, and raising and spending its own money.
Trust for Public Lands
A joint effort by the Open Space group and the City to obtain funding for open space projects failed to materialize. A lack of communication between city staff (who were spearheading the necessary work) and the OSP, plus a lack of interest for requesting community funding via referendum on the part of elected leaders brought this effort to a quick conclusion. The county commission also voted down a request to provide funding. However, during the year, the Governor announced that he will introduce legislation in 2007 to require that a portion of the oil and gas trust fund be used to provide funding for open space initiatives. This initiative was presented to the legislature and failed in large measure due to the hard work of our state association lobbyists. Our state association will be watching this very closely again this year. The real potential threat is that these funds could be used to leverage bonds that could buy up development rights and/or purchase sizeable areas of developable land.
Domenici Bill for Wilderness and Sale of BLM Land
LCHBA leadership along with everyone else in the community (except those for whom it was of most interest) were almost blindsided by this piece of legislation that was on the verge of being introduced to Congress when we and other community members intervened to give us enough time to study the legislation’s intent. Our main concern was amount, timing and process for selling BLM land, as well as who would have authority to make these decisions.
Seminar Domenici has asked the city to conduct meetings with community groups and come up with a recommendation for the legislation. LCHBA met with the city in September and will continue participation on a city workshop to frame a final recommendation for the legislation. When LCHBA members go to Washington, DC for their annual meeting with congressional members, we will personally convey our position on the issue to Senator Domenici.
Prehistoric Trackways National Monument
In 1988, local amateur paleontologist Jerry MacDonald discovered fossil trackways in a 280 million year old sequence of mudstones in the Robledo Mountains. Subsequent excavations by Jerry and invited scientists from museums and universities in the United States and around the world have revealed the geographic extent and scientific importance of the discovery. The main concentration of fossil trackways occur within a portion of and alongside a Toro Rock Products quarry on BLM land northwest of Las Cruces. The fossils consist of reptile and amphibian trackways, and impressions of insects and plants, many of which are new to science. The quality of preservation, diversity of the assemblage, and volume of material make the deposits one of only a hand full of such sites in the world. Its importance is magnified by the fact that it is the oldest known site of its kind in the world. The fossil trackways are indeed a world class discovery, and without question preservation is a reasonable topic.
A citizen’s group, the Paleozoic Trackways Foundation, formed to work on protecting the fossil trackways. BLM supports protecting the discovery. The Dona Ana County Commission has passed a resolution supporting preservation. Toro Rock Products has been displaying good corporate citizenship by not mining rock in that portion of the quarry where the trackways are known to occur and have ordered quarry employees to stop mining operations and notify management if trackways are uncovered elsewhere in the quarry.
The Paleozoic Trackways Foundation requested a letter of support from the LCHBA for Congressional Senate Bill S-3599 introduced by New Mexico Senators Bingaman and Domenici proposing to establish a Prehistoric Trackways National Monument in a portion of the Robledo Mountains, Dona Ana County, for the purpose of protecting scientifically important fossil trackways. The LCHBA submitted a letter dated October 2 to the Paleozoic Trackways Foundation. The LCHBA did not endorse S-3599 as it is currently written. The LCHBA supported setting aside only the necessary few acres of BLM land to protect the preserved and as yet unexcavated fossil trackways in the hillside and immediate vicinity at the original discovery site.
The LCHBA did not support setting aside 5,367 acres of BLM land without scientific proof that the entire parcel contains fossil trackways that are of comparable scientific value to that of the original discovery site. Copies of the letter were sent to Senators Bingaman’s and Domenici’s offices.
Annual Round House Trip by the New Mexico Home Builders Association
On February 2nd, 2006 Judd, David Gordon, Joe Escamilla, John Hadley, Marc White and Michele participated in the annual trek to Santa Fe to visit our legislators. We were able to meet with Mary Jane Garcia, Lee Rawson, Ed Boykin, and Andrew Nunez. We tried, but due to our short timeframe and their scheduling conflicts, we were unable to see Joseph Cervantes, Mary Kay Papen, and Joni Gutierrez.
Construction Industries Funding, Water, Energy, Infrastructure, Affordable Housing, and Eminent Domain were among key legislative issues we had an interest in.
Environmental Protection Phase II Stormwater Permitting
A huge issue for us the last few years, work on stormwater permitting continued in 2006. Two major areas were addressed: (1) primacy over regulation by the state’s environmental department, and (2) efforts to get the EPA to see the inequities in how the rules are being applied in a state where there is virtually no ground water pollution issues. We also object to the unrealistic and inequitable requirements for paperwork, which if do not have all the i’s dotted and t’s crossed can amount to very large fines.
As to number one, the state has backed off on gaining primacy for now and is now reported to be looking more favorably at the idea of having regulation on a local level. This idea is being discussed at EPA headquarters in Washington, DC as well.
As to number two, the EPA has indicated that it would entertain our ideas for changes to national regulations when they begin a rewrite in 2008. There is some desire on the part of our industry leadership to have local governments regulate storm water. They have the power to do so. In the meantime, several large fines were handed out to developers/builders in the Cruces area last year.
Domestic Wells/Water Issues
The two water bills we had supported, HB-183 (Cervantes) and HB-121 (Stewart) did not make it through the Session, but HB-792 (Cheney) and HB-683 (Stell) passed. HB-792 will fund interstate projects that benefit New Mexico, and HB-683 authorizes the NM Finance Authority to make loans or grants from the water project fund to certain communities for specific water projects. Governor Richardson signed these bills into law.
Just when we thought the domestic well issue had been settled, a lawsuit was filed by a ranching couple that owns vast amounts of water rights on the Rio Mimbres. They are claiming that the state’s domestic well law is unconstitutional because its allowance of the incursion of domestic wells has restricted the flow of their water from a common basin. These litigants, it is purported, have a very good chance of prevailing and if they do, it could stop the drilling of domestic wells throughout the state.
Legislation in 2007 that would require proof of 100 years of water before gaining development approval is being rumored. We’ll also be on the lookout for a bill that would allow the state engineer to deny well permits without any due process.
Energy Legislation
During the 2006 legislative session, NMHBA supported SB-269 (Feldman) to provide subsidies for solar energy equipment. This passed, and was signed by Governor Richardson.
Infrastructure Financing
Nationwide, states are passing Tax Increment Financing (TIF) bills. We supported New Mexico’s version, a Tax Increment for Development District (TIDD), HB-462 (Lujan) which helps develop infrastructure for very large developments. This adds to the “toolbox” of financial tools to gain enough money for developers to do a good job of providing the necessary infrastructure to build better communities for New Mexico. Governor Richardson has signed this bill into law.
Green Building
In 2007, we will see legislation introduced by the Governor that will call for stricter energy efficiency in new homes. Legislation may also include tax credits for green building. NMHBA is already working with Construction Industries Division, which has been asked by the Governor to explore how green building rules could be included in the state’s building codes. NMHBA has just approved a position on Green Building.
2006 NAHB Annual Legislative Conference and Spring Board Meeting
The following LCHBA members attended: Judd Singer, Gary Rogers, David Gordon, Marc White, Judy Cassles, Barney and Joan Rawson and Michele Marshall. We joined other members from around the state. In meetings with our NM delegation we discussed the following topics:
Tax Reform
Housing’s Impact on the Economy
Federal Storm Water Permit Program
Government Sponsored Enterprises Regulatory Reform
Property Rights – Access to Federal Courts
Endangered Species Act
Immigration Reform
|
