Marcia Fernandez, South Valley farmer, said, “Our South Valley community has been fighting Santolina for over 8 years. We knew what the threats to us and the environment were because they were in the Master Plan. Now that WALH wants to amend the Master Plan with vague mentions of energy generation and landfills, we don't know what the threat will become." Patrick Jaramillo, American Friends Service Committee Co-director, said, “The concern from the beginning was water availability and appropriate use. This project may have started as a “master plan,” but now that it is clear that the water is simply not there, the developers have abandoned any plan and are wanting piecemeal development that provides no benefit to the community, only money for their shareholders. Julie Stephens, Community Planner, said, “WALH is asking the County through you, the CPC, to change fundamental aspects of the Santolina Plan without offering specifics or a new economic analysis to determine that no net costs would be met. Rather than giving WALH carte blanc to plan as they want at the expense of the public, WALH must reassess the validity of Level A, i.e. the Santolina Master Plan, overall and return with a new approach.” Elaine Hebard, Member, Contra Santolina Working Group, said, “The Level A was approved 6 years ago -- but it wasn't viable then, according to Dr. O'Donnell, in part because of the unrealistic population projections. It would be unconscionable to continue the fantasy that population growth is going to be the same as used by WALH. While growth was projected to add 115,608 people to the County between 2010 and 2020, the reality was 15,815, or 13.7% of the original projection. Current population projections for the period from 2020 to 2040 are less than 7% of what was projected in 2012. Less growth translates into diminished demand.” Kristine Suozzi, Ph.D, former NM Director of Public Health, said, “In 2014, a Health Impact Assessment demonstrated that the proposed Santolina development would harm public health with increases in obesity, diabetes, asthma, respiratory diseases, stroke, decreased immune responses, and cardiovascular disease. Now WALH's proposed amendments may even worsen public health outcomes. Issues such as "waste disposal" are ill-defined, and could mean anything from a landfill to a medical waste incinerator; both could have severe impacts on air and groundwater quality. The two factors that best predict a person's health outcomes are zip code and skin color. A Santolina zip code would be an unhealthy zip code.” Alejandría M. Lyons, MCRP, Environmental Justice Organizer (SWOP), said, “Western Albuquerque Land Holdings (WALH) and their proprietors are only thinking about a return on their investment, but as residents and stewards of these agricultural lands we should be outraged about the proposed tire dump to be placed on the historic Atrisco Land Grant. The original plan came to our working group in 2013 and it did not include any indication that it would be environmentally viable, but now in 2021 the stakes are even higher. We are witnessing the worst climate crisis of our lifetimes; can Bernalillo County really afford Santolina’s water extraction and degradation? We need the CPC to consider the long term effects that these revised uses will have on future drinking water standards for our County.” Dr. Virginia Necochea, Executive Director, NMELC, said, “For 8 long years the community has been standing up to protect limited water resources from this mega-sprawl development. It's important for the public to know that the developers have drastically changed their original master plan to a piecemeal development that includes various workarounds. It is our hope that after all of these years, the Bernalillo County Planning Commission and county staff will finally make the right decision and deny Santolina, especially given present-day climate conditions we are experiencing such as continued drought and increased temperatures. It's time to do right for the people and the environment.” Maslyn Locke, NMELC Staff Attorney, said, “The proposed amendments to the Level A Master Plan and the proposed Level B.II Master Plan would ultimately allow the Developers to circumvent the master planning process and result in a piecemeal development consisting of, what County staff has called, “a patchwork of incompatible land uses that would continue indefinitely.” The amendments have been proposed in order to accommodate the vague land use ideas in the B.II plan but ultimately undermine the intent behind planned community development. It’s encouraging to see the County staff recognizing the importance of some of these issues plaguing the Santolina plan-issues that the Community has been identifying for the last 8 years.” Santiago Maestas, President, South Valley Regional Association of Acequias, said, “We ended the 2021 irrigation season without any water since August, except for the pueblos, who have prime and paramount water rights and endangered species, which leased water from the Albuquerque Bernalillo County Water Utility Authority that kept the Rio Grande from going completely dry. Next year does not hold much promise of improvement for farmers and irrigators due to climate changes and a 96,000 acre-feet debt to the Interstate Compact. One expert believes that we will have to fallow thousands of acres of farmland for 3 years to repay this debt. Irrigators in the South Valley oppose the Santolina planned community on the Southwest Mesa, which would use 18 million gallons of water per day at full buildout. Farming in the Middle Rio Grande is now also an endangered species.” Norm Gaume, MSCE, P.E., (ret.), former Director, NM Interstate Stream Commission, said, “Bernalillo County has turned its back on water sustainability, climate change impacts and the interests of County residents. 1) We don’t have the water. 2) Climate change will cause increased temperatures, much lower river flows, and less groundwater recharge. Substantial cutbacks to existing Middle Rio Grande water uses will be required. Santolina would make the supply and demand gap even wider and endanger the water supply for other Water Authority customers. 3) WALH has not acted in good faith to contract with the Water Authority for water supply and wastewater disposal services. 4) WALH’s Level A Master Plan Proposed Amendments continues to show water and sewer infrastructure concepts that were disapproved by the Water Authority in 2018. 5) The Water Authority’s conceptual plan to provide water and wastewater services to Santolina would reduce South Valley irrigators’ water.” |
