News and Events
Albuquerque Journal
Wednesday, April 23, 2008
Council's Smart 'No' Vote
Supports Smart Growth
Albuquerque leaders have been chanting a smart-growth mantra for years. On Monday night, just enough of them walked that talk.
Because smart growth - growth that combines where people live, work and shop, growth that minimizes impacts on roads and fuel and air - requires some outside-the-big-box thinking. And that requires leaving options open.
A new player in smart growth is the TIDD - tax increment development district. The mechanism allows a developer to divert new sales and property taxes from its district that would have gone into government coffers to help finance infrastructure.
The big TIDD in town, Mesa del Sol, was a rush job that some feel handed an overly generous 67 percent of tax revenue (estimated at $130 million over the next 25 years) to developer Forest City Covington, although it looks like a good bet given the quality economic development taking place there.
Safeguarding against a repeat may have been the driving force behind the attempt to limit incentives.
But tying officials' hands by restricting TIDDs in the newer parts of town, eliminating gross-receipts taxes from the mix, capping property taxes at 33 percent and excluding residential developments isn't going to deliver smart-growth projects.
Councilor Ken Sanchez, part of the 5-4 majority that killed the plan, says it "slams the door shut to prospective companies." Well, at least the door to Albuquerque. When one closes, another opens - chances are in Rio Rancho, Belen or Los Lunas.
The council already has the authority to approve or reject a TIDD application and to limit the revenue diverted. Councilor Michael Cadigan, who co-sponsored the bill, says it was a reminder to not "succumb to temptations," such as the promise of new jobs, that might not pan out. Chances are applications and their possible temptations would be mighty scarce with minimal incentives available.
Meanwhile, how, exactly, does turning quality developments away safeguard against a stagnant tax base, increased traffic and stress on the environment?
It doesn't. It's smarter to leave the city's doors - and options - open.