Andy Lyman
News
The contentious issue of whether residents could halt the planned city annexation of a chunk of county land ended within minutes on Tuesday with a compromise.
The Santa Fe Board of County Commissioners voted unanimously to approve a reworked map that would allow a couple hundred county residents to stay in that jurisdiction while also giving the option for a handful of large landowners to fall within the city limits in the future.
Commission Chair Anna Hansen said during the meeting that she wasn’t thrilled about only part of the land staying within the county, partly because she still believes the entire region referred to as Area 1B, just north of the Village of Agua Fría, fits the bill for a Traditional Historic Community.
“It’s clear to me that this is part of the traditional historic village,” she said. “Residents proved that 100%, and maybe more than 100%.”
But, Hansen added, the new map, which cuts out swaths of privately and state-owned land for the city to annex, represents a solution that most can work with.
“As responsible elected officials, it is our job to represent our community and our constituents. It is also our job to compromise,” Hansen said.
The move to allow Agua Fría to absorb county land and avoid annexation began with a citizen-led petition drive among hundreds of 1B residents. The area was identified in a settlement agreement as territory the city would annex, but it sat in limbo after the city failed to complete the process by 2018 as the agreement stipulated. Mayor Alan Webber, city councilors and county commissioners picked up the baton and restarted the process in 2021 with a joint resolution aimed at negotiating a deal.
By January of this year, Hansen sent a letter to her constituents who live within the area informing them they could join a petition to effectively stop the negotiations and stay within the county. The county accepted about 200 signatures weeks later and began drafting an ordinance to move the borders of Agua Fria.
Commissioners punted the issue after a nearly six-hour meeting on May 1, which included about four hours of public testimony from both residents of 1B who want to remain under the county’s jurisdiction and those in favor of city annexation—which were largely representatives of local land developer Homewise and city officials.
The board again delayed a vote on the proposed ordinance on May 30 when commissioners decided to consider an idea presented by Homewise CEO Mike Loftin to carve out sections of 1B where owners wanted to be part of the city.
During Tuesday’s meeting, County Attorney Jeff Young told the panel the county overnight-mailed letters to residents of 1B asking for a quick response to the question of whether they want to join Agua Fría or the city. He said a majority of those residents replied with their preferences, and the new map reflects those desires. A small number who did not respond will be part of the city annexation by default.
andylyman@sfreporter.com
Area 1B
The county created a map based on responses from residents and property owners.Commissioner Justin Greene praised the residents who pushed back against the annexation, saying they “preserved a bit of democracy” and said he was happy with the new map, but also happy to put the issue to rest.
“I’m excited for this to be over,” he said. “I’m excited for us to move on and plan this properly.”
Commissioner Hank Hughes stressed his deference to 1B residents who don’t want to live within city limits and noted expanding the boundary of Agua Fria is “totally appropriate.”
But Hughes said he was also pleased to work out a way Homewise could develop affordable housing on its lots by connecting to city sewer and water.
“Speaking for myself, and I think for all of us up here a little bit, we are committed to making that work,” Hughes said.
Still pending, though, are two legal challenges in First Judicial District Court.
The city filed an injunction request asking a judge to intervene and Homewise filed a notice of administrative appeal, arguing the commission improperly accepted the petition. Both cases have been in a holding pattern until the county makes a decision.
While city officials testified against the petition in two prior hearings, none attended Tuesday’s county meeting. Webber tells SFR that the uncertainty will continue for the city and that the entire council will need to evaluate the county’s new ordinance before making any moves in or out of court.
“We’ll check our legal options and we’ll see what we make of it,” Webber says. “And ultimately, the governing body will have to come to some resolution about how we want to proceed.”
