Why this Atrisco heir doesn’t favor the SunCal TIDD

Recently, one of Joe Monahan’s “senior alligators” struck out against Atrisco heirs lobbying against the SunCal TIDD, labeling them “no-growthers.”  On top of that, some elected officials have also felt the need to join this Internet reptile’s chorus by making similar “with us or against us” arguments with regards to the debate over the SunCal TIDD.

Like other debates that have been simplified with such black and white rhetoric, this case is much more complicated than some advocates of the SunCal TIDD would like to portray it.  As an Atrisco heir I feel that this side of the story must be told.

I spent my spring break from law school with my father, arguing in Santa Fe on behalf of those land grant heirs who were never asked their opinion about TIDDs, contrary to SunCal’s TV ads. 

We are pro-development as long as the development is smart and sustainable, and not at the expense of sending tax funds from communities that are already in decay, to a company that has filed multiple bankruptcies on many of its California holdings.

The following reasons explain our case.

For many land grant heirs, and other concerned citizens, maximization of profits, via a massive tax giveaway, does not necessarily translate into smart development for the entire community. Few are arguing that SunCal shouldn’t seek a profit.  However, the real issue is whether or not we want SunCal to develop at the expense of the greater Albuquerque and New Mexico community (as some contend has happened to many communities en el norte).

In essence, this argument is similar to the spirit behind anti-trust statutes, which check monopolistic anti-competitive regimes from harming the entire system via profit maximization. The spirit of our opposition is the same, only its genesis, in Nuevo Mexico’s community land grants, is different.

At the heart of our argument is the premise that the SunCal TIDDs will likely cause hardship and inefficiencies for the greater community because of the high likelihood that local business will relocate to the new development, thus depriving older communities of much needed tax revenues.

The result would be a state supported market failure, where existing communities would absorb SunCal’s costs (and increase SunCal’s profits) via depreciation of those existing communities. Concerns over these and other externalities are a primary driving force behind our opposition to the SunCal TIDD, and why many opponents of SunCal also favored the less risky Winrock’s TIDD.

SunCal’s contention that taxpayers will not fall victim to cannibalization appears to be specious. 

The contention in the Albuquerque Journal that there are nearly 30 international companies with whom SunCal is in talks with should send off alarm bells among concerned citizens, especially since many foreign countries are suffering as much or more than the United States in the current economy.   

Four of the favorite questions of a Navy captain whom I served under as a lieutenant were: “who, where, when, and how.” Whenever anyone gave a brief to the captain these questions had to be answered.  If we did not know who was doing what, where we were to operate, when we would be there, and how we would conduct the operation, the brief would be abruptly stopped until those questions were answered. 

It is clear that the 33 New Mexico representatives and nine senators who voted against the bill also wanted those questions answered — and found SunCal’s answers unsatisfactory. 

Anyone who is in business or law knows that it is a long way between talks and a meeting of minds in a contract. And even if an agreement is made, there is still some distance between signing the contract and starting the operation as the recent experience with Tesla proved.

So far, to my knowledge, SunCal has not answered the question of who (which businesses will be brought to Albuquerque), nor the when (when they will be brought here), and have only begun to answer the question of how, claiming that the TIDDs are the only way to bring new business.

The only question they have answered satisfactory is the where, and we already knew the answer to that question was Atrisco. Furthermore, I personally do not want to see Atrisco looking like one of SunCal’s multiple abandoned California projects because we did not answer these questions. All of these unanswered questions pointed to a bad business arrangement and bad policy for the entire state. 

Most disconcerting, however, is the fact that a major economic injustice is being perpetrated against people in the South Valley of Albuquerque, and in New Mexico’s rural communities. As I testified in the House Business and Industry Committee, the original purpose of TIDDs was for infill development. TIDDs were a tool to give incentives to developers to develop blighted and urban areas that lack basic infrastructure and basic services.

Therein lies the basic injustice in this legislation. 

For over 300 years many people in the South Valley have waited for basic services such as water and sewer. I grew up drinking water from a well, and using a septic tank in the South Valley. TIDDs could and should be used to develop this community in order to finish building its schools, repair old crumbling areas, and bring economic prosperity to the heirs of Atrisco who still live in the South Valley.

Our people should be our first priority despite the fact that they may not be able to give thousands of dollars to candidates, and hire eleven lobbyists to do their work. Not only is the South Valley hurting but so are our rural and smaller communities. 

I have driven north and south and seen the boarded homes, the “for sale” signs which have replaced the “open” signs, and the crumbling infrastructure. We should not take from them to give to SunCal while the rural communities and the South Valley are distressed.

Contrary to SunCal spokesman David Soyka’s claims in the Albuquerque Journal, there is business to be done in New Mexico, and the first business priority should be to restore our decaying communities.

Those in the South Valley and rural communities are having their rights trampled upon when they go without basic services and SunCal get unprecedented favoritism, and as a result our whole state is weaker.

Matthew Padilla is a native New Mexican and a law student at American University Washington College of Law where he serves as an editor of the school’s Sustainable Development Law and Policy Brief.