New Mexico in Focus; 844; ABQ 2030 and Transportation 2040

PRODUCTION OF NEW MEXICO InFOCUS PROVIDED BY THE McCUNE CHARITABLE FOUNDATION. >> THIS WEEK ON NEW MEXICO InFOCUS ... WE LEARN ABOUT ALBUQUERQUE'S NEW STATUS AS A 2030 DISTRICT. >> ALBUQUERQUE DOESN'T GIVE ITSELF ENOUGH CREDIT FOR ALL OF THE INNOVATIONS THAT HAVE REALLY BEEN HAPPENING, AND I THINK THAT HAPPENS BECAUSE WE HAVEN'T REALLY EVER CREATED A SHARING INFORMATIONAL PLATFORM. >> AND, WHAT TRANSPORTATION SERVICES WILL PEOPLE NEED DECADES FROM NOW IN CENTRAL NEW MEXICO? NEW MEXICO InFOCUS STARTS NOW! >> THANKS FOR JOINING US THIS WEEK. LATER IN THE HOUR, WE GET TWO PERSPECTIVES ON PLANNING FOR THE FUTURE HERE IN ALBUQUERQUE. THE CITY IS NOW RECOGNIZED AS A 2030 DISTRICT. THAT'S A DESIGNATION SHARED BY OTHER CITIES AROUND THE COUNTRY. THE AIM IS TO ADDRESS CLIMATE CHANGE IN 2030 DISTRICTS LED BY BUSINESS LEADERS, NOT ELECTED OFFICIALS.

WE ALSO HEAR ABOUT A NEW PLAN THAT LOOKS AT DIFFERENT TYPES OF TRANSPORTATION THAT WILL BE NEEDED IN CENTRAL NEW MEXICO IN THE FUTURE. THE PUBLIC REGULATION COMMISSION REJECTED PNM'S REQUEST FOR A RATE HIKE THIS WEEK. THE LINE WILL TALK ABOUT THAT AND WHAT IT MEANS. A GOOD THING OR A BAD THING ON RIDE SHARING. ONE COMPANY HAS LEFT NEW MEXICO AND BLAMED THE REGULATORY CLIMATE. LET'S GO RIGHT TO THE LINE. >> EARLIER THIS WEEK, THE BERNALILLO COUNTY COMMISSION HELD A HEARING ON THE PROPOSED SANTOLINA DEVELOPMENT SOUTHWEST OF ALBUQUERQUE. THE COMMISSIONERS REJECTED AN APPEAL FROM OPPONENTS, BUT PUSHED BACK DISCUSSION ON THE PROPOSED MASTER PLAN TO THE END OF THIS MONTH. NOW, EACH WEEK WE WELCOME COMMUNITY MEMBERS TO THE TABLE TO TALK ABOUT TOP NEWS STORIES LIKE THIS ONE, AND I'M JOINED TODAY BY DANIEL FOLEY, FORMER NEW MEXICO HOUSE MINORITY WHIP. JULIE ANN GRIMM, EDITOR OF THE SANTA FE REPORTER IS BACK. LAURA SANCHEZ-RIV? TAKING NOTES FROM SANCHEZ LEGAL SOLUTIONS.

THAT'S WHAT LAWYERS DO. AND STEPHEN SPITZ, HOST OF NEW MEXICO PEOPLE, PLACES IDEAS ON KUNM. STEPHEN TAKES ALL OF HIS NOTES AHEAD OF TIME, IT'S OKAY. LAURA, THERE WAS AN INTERESTING QUOTE FROM SOUTHWEST ORGANIZING PROJECT, HE'S BEEN HERE AT THIS TABLE, ON A PART OF THE MEETING THAT HAPPENED MONDAY NIGHT SAYING THERE'S NOT GOING TO BE ANY MORE PUBLIC COMMENT ON THIS. THE COMMISSION HAS HEARD ENOUGH FROM THE PUBLIC. IN HIS VIEW, THE QUOTE IN THE JOURNAL WAS, HE SAYS THEY HAVE SHOWN THEIR CARDS AND IT'S A 3-2 VOTE IN FAVOR OF THIS THING. WOULD YOU AGREE WITH THAT? >> I THINK THAT THEY'RE LIMITING THE AMOUNT OF PUBLIC COMMENT. WHAT THEY'VE SAID IS FOR THE NEXT MEETING ON THE 28th, THEY'RE GOING TO ALLOW FOLKS WHO HAVE APPEALED, SO THOSE WHO HAVE AN ACTUAL STANDING IN THE APPEAL, TO MAKE A COMMENT, TO DO A PRESENTATION, BUT THEY'RE NOT GOING TO ALLOW THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC COMMENT. I THINK THAT IF YOU WERE WATCHING THE MEETING, IF YOU WERE FOLLOWING THIS ALONG, YOU CAN DEFINITELY SEE THAT THERE ARE THREE COMMISSIONERS THAT ARE IN FAVOR OF MOVING FORWARD WITH IT, AND TWO COMMISSIONERS,

MAGGIE HART-STEBBINS AND DEBBIE O'MALLEY, WHO ARE REALLY CONCERNED ABOUT THE PUBLIC'S CONCERN. WATER, INFRASTRUCTURE. A LOT OF OTHER ISSUES HAVE COME UP. AND IT DOES APPEAR THAT THERE IS A 3-2 VOTE AT THIS POINT. BUT, AGAIN, IT COULD BE PREMATURE. WE DON'T KNOW WHAT KIND OF DYNAMICS THERE WILL BE ON THAT DAY, WHAT KIND OF ISSUES WILL COME UP, AND I THINK THIS IS ONE OF THOSE THINGS THAT I EXPECT WILL CONTINUE WITH A LOT OF PROTESTS, A LOT OF DEMONSTRATIONS, AND A LOT MORE, I THINK, CONCERN FROM CITIZENS ON THE WEST SIDE IF THIS DOES GO FORWARD. >> STEPHEN SPITZ, GOOD TO THE IDEA OF NO MORE -- I DON'T WANT TO GET HUNG UP ON THIS PUBLIC COMMENT THING, BUT THIS IS A BIG DEAL. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT 90,000 SOME PEOPLE DOWN THE ROAD. WE'RE TALKING HUGE ISSUES WITH WATER THAT WE'RE GOING TO GET TO IN A SECOND. BUT SHOULD THE PUBLIC HAVE SOME MORE SAY IN THIS? THIS IS A LARGE DEAL WE'VE GOT GOING HERE. >> YEAH, I MEAN, OBVIOUSLY IT WOULD BE BETTER IF THE PUBLIC COULD HAVE MORE OF A

SAY, ALTHOUGH THE INTERESTED PARTIES ARE THE ONES THAT ACTUALLY BRING TO BEAR THE DETAILS. I MEAN, MY VIEW IS THAT IT'S SORT OF A DESERT MIRAGE. IT'S UNDEVELOPED DESERT. THERE'S NOTHING TO SUGGEST IT'S GOING TO HAPPEN ANY TIME SOON. IF YOU LOOK AT THE CLOSEST ANALOGY, MESA DEL SOL, THEY WERE SUPPOSED TO HAVE 37,000 HOMES. THEY'VE BUILT 200. THEY'VE ONLY SOLD 170. IT'S IN A MORE CENTRALLY LOCATED AREA WITH INFRASTRUCTURE, WITH BUSINESSES. >> CLOSER TO THE CITY. >> YEAH. SO I THINK THE LIKELIHOOD -- I MEAN, SO YOU SAY, WHY IS SANTOLINA DOING IT? WELL, I THINK AS LAURA SAYS, I MEAN, IT LOOKS LIKE A RECEPTIVE AUDIENCE, AND THE COUNTY COMMISSION WOULD LIKE TO GET SOME MORE GROSS RECEIPTS TAX REVENUE. SO THE DEVELOPERS SAY, LET'S GO FORWARD, LET'S MAYBE SELL OFF SOME OF THIS, LET'S GET THE PLAN APPROVED, LET'S GET SOME WATER RIGHTS, AND SEE WHAT MIGHT HAPPEN IN THE >> THERE YOU GO. JULIE ANN GRIMM, WATER RIGHTS, LET'S GET RIGHT TO IT. INTERESTING LITTLE WRINKLE THAT CAME OUT ON MONDAY.

THERE'S AN OPINION THAT THE COUNTY ACTUALLY DOES NOT HAVE THE FINAL SAY ON HOW WATER SHOULD BE USED, IT SHOULD BE THE WATER AUTHORITY, IN FACT, WHICH IS MADE UP OF MEMBERS OF THE COUNTY AND THE CITY AND SOME OTHERS. YOUR SENSE OF THAT? SOME FOLKS WERE SAYING THAT FEELS LIKE A LITTLE BIT OF A MOVE AROUND THE COUNTY'S AUTHORITY. WHAT'S YOUR SENSE OF THAT? >> WELL, YOU'VE GOT TO LET THE PEOPLE WHO ARE GOING TO BE PROVIDING THE WATER MAKE A DECISION ABOUT WHETHER THEY CAN PROVIDE THE WATER, ESPECIALLY WITH A PROJECT OF THIS MAGNITUDE. IT'S NOT LIKE ADDING ONE LITTLE BUILDING IN A SHOPPING MALL. I MEAN, THIS IS 22 SQUARE MILES WITH HOMES FOR UP TO 90,000 PEOPLE, AND SOME UNTOLD MYSTERY NUMBER OF BUSINESSES AND SERVICES, WHICH I THINK THERE'S SIGNIFICANT DOUBT ABOUT WHETHER THAT WILL MATERIALIZE. SO, YEAH, I THINK THE WATER FOLKS SHOULD BE WEIGHING IN, AND I THINK THERE SHOULD BE SOME SERIOUS DISCUSSIONS AS CONSERVATION IN THIS NEW COMMUNITY.

THE SANTA FE CITY AND COUNTY GOVERNMENTS BOTH SET USAGE REQUIREMENTS ON NEW DEVELOPMENTS AND SAID, YOUR NEW HOMES CAN ONLY USE I THINK IT'S TWO ACRE FEET A YEAR, SOMETHING. IT'S SIMILAR TO WHAT THE STATE ENGINEER SAID. I HAVEN'T HEARD MUCH ABOUT THIS, ALTHOUGH I HAVEN'T POURED THROUGH THE FILE. SO THAT MIGHT BE THERE ALREADY. >> THE IDEA OF CAPS IS OUT THERE, CERTAINLY, AND IT'S AN INTERESTING THING TO KIND OF CONSIDER. DAN, GOOD TO SEE, AS WELL. GIVEN WHAT STEPHEN SAID ABOUT OUR HISTORY WITH MESA DEL SOL AND OTHER LARGE PROJECTS OUT THERE, ISN'T THIS AT THE BOTTOM LINE JUST FOLLY TO TRY TO PUT SOMETHING OUT THERE? OR DOES THIS NEED MORE, IN YOUR OPINION? >> I THINK THERE NEEDS TO BE MORE DISCUSSION ABOUT IT. I THINK ANY TIME YOU START LIMITING THE PUBLIC, YOU'RE ASKING FOR A PROBLEM, WHEN YOU LIMIT THEIR INPUT. BUT YOU ALSO HAVE TO REALIZE AT SOME POINT YOU'VE GOT TO MOVE ON. I MEAN, SOMETIMES PUBLIC COMMENT CAN BE USED TO

PREVENT THE SITUATION FROM MOVING. AND IT SEEMS TO ME LIKE THE COUNTY COMMISSION IS SAYING, OKAY, LOOK, WE HAD THIS TIME FOR EVERYBODY TO MAKE COMMENTS, NOW WE'RE GOING TO START LIMITING IT TO PEOPLE THAT HAVE INPUT, BECAUSE SOMETIMES THOSE PEOPLE GET RUN OVER BY THE FOLKS WHO JUST WANT TO COME IN AND TELL YOU WHAT'S GOING ON. YOU KNOW, WE HAVE THE MESA DEL SOL EXAMPLE. WASN'T NEARLY AS SUCCESSFUL AS WE THOUGHT. DOES THAT MEAN WE TELL THE NEXT PEOPLE, NO? I'M NOT SURE THAT I BUY THAT. >> WHAT SHOULD WE TELL THEM? IT'S CERTAINLY ON THE RECORD THAT IT'S FAILED, IF YOU WANT TO USE A STRONG WORD. SHOULD SOMETHING BE SAID TO SOMEBODY AS OPPOSED TO, YOU CAN HAVE EVERYTHING YOU WANT? >> WELL, WHAT I WAS GOING TO GET TO IS, I DON'T THINK YOU JUST GIVE THEM CARTE BLANCHE. YOU START PUTTING SOME CLAWBACKS IN, YOU START PUTTING SOME THINGS THAT SAY, LOOK, WE'RE GOING TO DO SO MUCH BASED ON HOW MANY HOUSES YOU SELL, WHAT YOU'RE DOING BASED ON WHETHER WE WANT GREEN LEAD CERTIFIED HOMES IN THAT AREA, YOU KNOW, INSTEAD OF -- WE HAVE A HISTORY IN NEW MEXICO OF,

IT'S ALL OR NOTHING. HEY, YEAH, WE'RE GOING TO GIVE IT TO YOU, YOU GET EVERYTHING UP FRONT, AND THEN WE WIND UP WITH THESE BIG PLOTS OF LAND WITH ROADS AND CURBS AND NO HOMES. SO AT SOME POINT I THINK MAYBE THIS COULD BE A GOOD TEST. OKAY, WE LIKE YOUR PLAN, BUT LET'S APPROVE THE OVERALL PLAN, SAY WE GIVE YOU INITIAL APPROVAL, BUT LET'S GO PHASES AND LET'S KIND OF WORK ON PHASE 1 AND ONLY DO PHASE 1, AND MAKE SURE WE GET EVERYTHING RIGHT IN PHASE 1, VERSUS THE KIND OF STUFF WE'VE HAD OUT IN RIO RANCHO WHERE ALL OF A SUDDEN YOU'VE GOT EIGHT MILES OF ROADS AND YOU'VE GOT A HOME, AND IT TAKES NINE YEARS WITH DIRT BLOWING EVERYWHERE FOR A NEIGHBOR'S HOME TO BE BUILT. SO THIS COULD BE A GOOD TEST AREA FOR US TO SAY, LOOK, WE NEED TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO DO THIS CORRECTLY. >> HOW DOES WATER FIT INTO THAT, LAURA SANCHEZ-RIV?? IF WHAT DAN'S SAYING MAKES SENSE, HOW DOES WATER PLANNING FIT INTO THAT? >> I THINK IT'S A HUGE PART OF THIS. I MEAN, THAT'S ONE OF THE MAIN CONCERNS THAT THE OPPONENTS HAVE ABOUT THIS AND A LOT OF THE WEST SIDE COALITION OF NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS HAVE ALSO EXPRESSED CONCERN ABOUT THIS. I MEAN, WATER OBVIOUSLY IS A

PRECIOUS COMMODITY HERE, AND WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A DEVELOPMENT THAT IS PROBABLY GOING TO BE TARGETED AT -- I MEAN, IT'S NOT NECESSARILY INNER CITY TYPE OF HOUSING. OBVIOUSLY WE'RE TALKING ABOUT NICER HOUSING. POSSIBLY PEOPLE MOVING OUT THERE FROM PARTS OF ALBUQUERQUE, BUT ALSO ATTRACTING FOLKS FROM OUT OF STATE. SO IT'S AN ADDITIONAL USAGE FACTOR. AND THE OPPONENTS ALSO ARE CONCERNED ABOUT THE INFRASTRUCTURE SIDE OF IT. YOU KNOW, ALONG WITH WATER USE, THERE'S INFRASTRUCTURE FOR WATER AND UTILITIES WHICH, YOU KNOW, BEGS THE QUESTION ABOUT, WHO IS GOING TO PAY FOR THAT STUFF? AND USUALLY WITH A DEVELOPMENT LIKE THIS, THERE'S A MECHANISM CALLED A TIDD, A TAX INCREMENT DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT, THAT'S BEEN USED FOR SEVERAL OF THESE KINDS OF DEVELOPMENTS. MOST RECENTLY, I CAN REMEMBER SUNCAL BACK IN 2008-2009 TRIED TO GET A TIDD APPROVED AND FAILED, BECAUSE THERE WAS SO MUCH CONCERN ABOUT THE INFRASTRUCTURE COSTS, AND THE FACT THAT WITH A TIDD, WHAT HAPPENS IS YOU CREATE A DISTRICT AND BASICALLY, EVERYBODY THAT'S WITHIN THAT DISTRICT, ALL THE BUSINESSES THAT ARE IN THERE, THEIR GROSS RECEIPTS GOES BACK TO THAT DISTRICT. SO ALL THE INFRASTRUCTURE GETS PAID OUT OF THOSE GROSS RECEIPTS. THAT MEANS, BASICALLY, ADDITIONAL INFRASTRUCTURE OR ADDITIONAL BUSINESSES THAT

COME IN AREN'T PART OF THE LARGER POOL OF BERNALILLO COUNTY, AND SO YOU'RE ESSENTIALLY SAYING, YEAH, WE'RE FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, BUT WE'RE NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THAT ADDITIONAL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT TO HELP THE CURRENT SERVICES THAT BERNALILLO COUNTY HAS. >> STEPHEN, LAURA BROUGHT UP SOMETHING THAT I WANT TO GET AT, AS WELL, THE ZERO SUM GAIN HERE, IT SEEMS TO ME. LAURA MENTIONED THERE'S A POSSIBILITY OF PEOPLE MOVING OUT FROM THE OLD CITY OF ALBUQUERQUE IN YEARS DOWN THE ROAD. WE'RE PROJECTED FLAT ON OUR POPULATION GROWTH, THE WAY WE'VE BEEN TRENDING. WHERE ARE THESE 90,000 GOING TO COME FROM? MY FUNDAMENTAL QUESTION IS, IS SOMETHING GOING TO DIE IN ALBUQUERQUE PROPER FOR THIS THING TO THRIVE? DO YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN? WE'RE THINKING 20-30 YEARS DOWN THE ROAD. >> I THINK IT WON'T DEVELOP. I MEAN, BASICALLY, IF THE DEMAND ISN'T THERE, THEY'RE NOT GOING TO BUILD THE HOUSES. JUST LIKE MESA DEL SOL HASN'T DEVELOPED. AND MESA DEL SOL, BY THE WAY, MAY DEVELOP. THE INFRASTRUCTURE IS THERE. IT MAY GO. BUT THESE DEVELOPERS HAVE THEIR HEADS SCREWED ON RIGHT. THEY'RE NOT GOING TO START BUILDING HOMES WHEN THERE'S

NO DEMAND. >> SURE. >> ONE THING I DO QUESTION, LAURA, IS THIS WHOLE WATER ISSUE. I MEAN, PER CAPITA WATER USE DOESN'T CHANGE DEPENDING ON WHERE YOU LIVE. SO UNLESS YOU'RE SAYING THIS DEVELOPMENT IS GOING TO BRING IN PEOPLE FROM OUT OF STATE, WHICH I DON'T SEE, I DON'T SEE HOW THE PER CAPITA WATER USAGE IS REALLY GOING TO CHANGE, EVEN THOUGH YOU'RE QUITE RIGHT, THAT'S WHAT THE OBJECTORS ARE SAYING. I DON'T QUITE GET THAT. >> WELL, I THINK IT'S THE INFRASTRUCTURE. THEY NEED TO GET THE INFRASTRUCTURE OUT THERE FOR WATER DELIVERY. >> EXISTING PEOPLE, EXISTING HOMEOWNERS, ROADS, SEWER, WATER, WE'RE ALL BETTER OFF IF THIS THING DOESN'T HAPPEN. >> THAT'S THE BOTTOM LINE. >> THE REALLY INTERESTING THING ABOUT THIS IS THE DISCUSSION ON JOBS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT. AND I THINK DAN'S RIGHT, YOU HAVE TO HAVE CLAWBACKS, YOU NEED TO HAVE A VERY DETAILED AGREEMENT, WHICH I THINK IS THE REASON THAT THE COUNTY COMMISSION DELAYED THIS, BECAUSE THE COUNTY ATTORNEY SAID, WE'RE STILL TALKING ABOUT THIS DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT. THAT HOPEFULLY INCLUDES SOME OF THOSE DETAILS. BUT ONE OF THE IMPORTANT RATIOS THAT I READ ABOUT WAS, SANTOLINA DEVELOPERS ARE TALKING ABOUT A 2-1 RATIO OF JOBS TO ROOFTOPS.

BASICALLY, TWO JOBS FOR EVERY HOME. THAT'S REALLY AMBITIOUS FOR ALBUQUERQUE. AND IT'S REALLY DIFFERENT FROM WHAT YOU SEE ON THE WEST SIDE OF ALBUQUERQUE, WHICH IS RIGHT NOW ABOUT .56 JOBS FOR EVERY ROOFTOP. SO WE'RE REALLY SEEING A SHORTAGE OF JOBS ON THE WEST SIDE IN PARTICULAR. >> THAT BEGS THE QUESTION, ARE THESE FOLKS SEEING EVERYTHING WITH ROSE-COLORED GLASSES OUT THERE, DAN? I HEAR LAURA'S POINT. WE HAD SOME OF THE FOLKS FROM SANTOLINA HERE FOR A DISCUSSION ABOUT 60 DAYS AGO, AND SOMEBODY MENTIONED THAT SAME THING, THAT'S AN AGGRESSIVE NUMBER. ARE WE SEEING THIS THING CORRECTLY? >> BUT HERE'S THE THING, GENE. I DON'T THINK IT'S UP TO US TO SEE IT CORRECTLY. I THINK WHAT WE SHOULD DO IS STOP SAYING TO THESE FOLKS, WE WANT YOU TO RECALCULATE THE NUMBERS. IF THEY'RE AGGRESSIVE AT 2-1, YOU PUT CLAWBACKS IN THAT SAY THAT. LAST TIME THAT I CHECKED, SANTOLINA IS NOT A NONPROFIT, SO IT'S LIKE WHAT YOU SAID, THEY'RE NOT GOING TO RUN OUT THERE AND BUILD 8000 HOMES AND HOPE THEY SELL. THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE TO HAVE A VERY STRATEGIC PLAN TO DO THIS. ONE OF THE THINGS WE HAVE TO REMEMBER, THOUGH, IS FOR THESE ENTITIES, THERE'S A TON OF WORK THAT GOES INTO GETTING APPROVALS AND GETTING LAND AND GETTING WATER AND GETTING INFRASTRUCTURE, LIKE LAURA SAID. THE QUESTION REALLY IS, IS THAT THE DIRECTION WE WANT

TO GROW? IS THAT WHERE WE WANT TO GO? DO WE WANT TO DO IT RIGHT NOW, WHEN I BELIEVE THERE ARE LOTS OF THINGS THAT NEED TO BE DONE INSIDE. >> INSIDE ALBUQUERQUE PROPER? >> YES, ALBUQUERQUE AND RIO RANCHO. THE OTHER THING THAT'S NOT BEING TAKEN INTO EFFECT IS, THE MORE BUILDING ON THE WEST SIDE, THE FACT THAT IT'S NOW TAPPING INTO RIO RANCHO'S RESOURCES, AND THEY'RE NOT GETTING ANYTHING OUT OF THESE THINGS. THEY'RE TAPPING INTO RIO RANCHO WATER, RIO RANCHO ROADS, THEY'RE COMING INTO RIO RANCHO SCHOOLS, AND YET THOSE ENTITIES THAT ARE IN BERNALILLO COUNTY THAT ARE NOT CONSIDERED A PART OF RIO RANCHO AND SANDOVAL COUNTY, THERE'S NO MONEY COMING BACK THAT'S REALLY EFFECTING THE SCHOOLS. YOU TALK TO THE PEOPLE IN RIO RANCHO, WHERE I LIVE, ONE OF THE THINGS -- YOU KNOW, THE RUST HOSPITAL, YOU LOOK AT ALL THESE THINGS THAT ARE BEING BUILT RIGHT THERE ON THE EDGE THAT ARE BRINGING ALL OF THESE PEOPLE IN FROM ALBUQUERQUE, THEY LIKE HAVING THE GROSS RECEIPTS MONEY, BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY A LOT OF THAT MONEY IS NOT COMING IN TO HELP WITH THE INFRASTRUCTURE. THE MORE TRAFFIC, THE MORE ROADS THAT ARE NEEDED, WIDER ROADS, THINGS THAT NEED TO BE DONE. SO I THINK THERE'S A REAL BALANCE HERE. I WOULD HOPE BEFORE THIS IS DONE, THE BERNALILLO COUNTY COMMISSION AND THE SANDOVAL COUNTY COMMISSION ARE TALKING, BUT WE'RE NOT GOING TO GET ANY OF THIS STUFF FIXED IF THESE TWO NEIGHBORS DON'T FIGURE OUT HOW TO WORK TOGETHER. >> THAT'S A GOOD POINT THERE. UP NEXT, WHY SOME BUSINESS LEADERS HERE IN ALBUQUERQUE HAVE AGREED TO WORK TOGETHER TO REDUCE WATER USE AND CARBON EMISSIONS.

>> PNM IS A COMPANY EVERYBODY LOVES TO HATE. IT MAY BE THE ONLY ORGANIZATION THAT BOTH REPUBLICANS, DEMOCRATS, CONSERVATIVES, LIBERALS CAN RALLY AROUND, AND THEY DON'T LIKE THEM. I MEAN, THE WHOLE TIME I WAS IN THE LEGISLATURE, ANYTHING FROM PNM, YOU WOULD BE AMAZED AT HOW YOU COULD RALLY REPUBLICANS AND DEMOCRATS. >> THE CITY OF ALBUQUERQUE WAS RECENTLY NAMED A 2030 DISTRICT. CHANGE OR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT, YOU'LL WANT TO HEAR MORE ABOUT THIS NEW DESIGNATION. NOW, NEW MEXICO'S LARGEST CITY JOINS OTHERS AROUND THE CITY LIKE DENVER, SEATTLE AND PITTSBURGH THAT ARE ALREADY SIGNED ON AS 2030 DISTRICTS. OUR PRODUCER SARAH GUSTAVUS >> HOLLY CAREY, PROGRAM MANAGER FOR THE ALBUQUERQUE 2030 DISTRICT. THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE. >> THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO BE HERE TODAY. >> MOST OF OUR VIEWERS PROBABLY HAVE NOT HEARD OF THESE 2030 DISTRICTS. WHY SHOULD THEY CARE? >> WELL, I'M GOING TO GO BACK A LITTLE BIT AND GIVE YOU A LITTLE HISTORY ABOUT ARCHITECTURE 2030. BACK IN 2002, THERE WAS A VISIONARY ARCHITECT BY THE NAME OF ED MAZRIA WHO STARTED REALLY DOING A LOT OF RESEARCH ON CLIMATE CHANGE, AND WHAT HE DISCOVERED WAS THAT IT'S IN THE ARCHITECTURE, THAT THE BUILDING SECTOR USES 75% OF ALL THE ELECTRICITY THAT'S PRODUCED IN THE UNITED STATES, AND ALSO IN THE UNITED STATES, FOR CO2 EMISSIONS, BUILDING STOCK IS RESPONSIBLE FOR 45% OF THAT, AS WELL.

SO HE SAW THE BUILDING SECTOR AS A PROBLEM, BUT HE ALSO SAW THE BUILDING SECTOR AS THE OPPORTUNITY AND THE SOLUTION, BECAUSE BY THE YEAR 2035, 75% OF ALL THE BUILDING STOCK IN THE UNITED STATES WILL EITHER BE NEW OR BE COMPLETELY RENOVATED. SO IN THIS NEXT 20-YEAR TIME SPAN, WE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO REALLY WORK WITH ARCHITECTS AND WORK WITH THE BUILDING SECTOR TO REALLY OFFSET DANGEROUS CLIMATE CHANGE. SO, BASICALLY, WHAT HE DID WAS, HE SET UP DISTRICTS. HE GOES TO THE URBAN CORE OF CITIES AND HE SETS UP BASICALLY LIKE A GEOGRAPHICAL BOUNDARY IN THE URBAN CORE TO HAVE COLLABORATION BETWEEN DIFFERENT PARTNERSHIPS. >> NOW, THIS IS COMING FROM THE PRIVATE SECTOR. A LOT OF TIMES WHEN WE TALK ABOUT ADDRESSING CLIMATE CHANGE, WE TALK ABOUT ENVIRONMENTAL DECISIONS, WE THINK ABOUT ELECTED OFFICIALS. THIS IS REALLY UNIQUE, THAT PRIVATE BUSINESSES ARE GOING TO BE LEADING IN THIS LOCAL DISTRICT TO ADDRESS THESE ISSUES IN THEIR BUILDINGS AND PLAN FOR THE FUTURE. >> SO ALBUQUERQUE HAS BEEN DOING A LOT OF INNOVATIVE AND RESOURCE REDUCTION PROJECTS, BUT IT'S BEEN DONE ON AN INDIVIDUAL BASIS, BUILDING BY BUILDING. SO CREATING A DISTRICT IN ALBUQUERQUE ALLOWS THEM TO VOLUNTARILY -- IT'S NOT MANDATED OR LEGISLATED, SO DEFINITELY IT'S NOT LED BY

THE PUBLIC, IT'S LED BY THE PRIVATE SECTOR. THEY VOLUNTARILY COME TOGETHER TO SHARE COMMON GOAL, COMMON METRICS, TO CREATE A COLLABORATIVE NETWORK OF SHARING BEST PRACTICES. SO THESE INDIVIDUALS GET TO SAY WHAT WORKED AND WHAT DIDN'T WORK IN THEIR FACILITIES, THEY GET TO COME TOGETHER COLLABORATIVELY IN A DISTRICT TO TALK ABOUT FUTURE IMPROVEMENTS AND CHALLENGES TO THAT. AND SO WHAT YOU START TO SEE IS, YOU START TO SEE EFFICIENCIES OF SCALE. SO THAT'S WHY IT'S REALLY AWESOME THAT IT IS PRIVATELY LED. >> BY EFFICIENCIES OF SCALE, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT REDUCING CARBON EMISSIONS, REDUCING WATER USAGE. WHO'S HELPING BUSINESSES GET THE INFORMATION THEY NEED TO MOVE FORWARD ON THAT? >> WELL, THAT'S BASICALLY WHAT THAT IS. SO OUR PERFORMANCE TARGETS ARE THE SAME AS EVERY OTHER DISTRICT AROUND THE WORLD. WE HAVE TO DO CARBON REDUCTION, WATER REDUCTION, AND ALSO ENERGY USE REDUCTION. SO THEY COME TOGETHER, AND WE HAVE PROFESSIONAL SERVICE PROVIDERS THAT WILL HELP SUPPORT THAT, WE HAVE PUBLIC

STAKEHOLDERS THAT COME TOGETHER AND SUPPORT THE PRIVATE SECTOR, AS WELL, AND THEN WE ALSO HAVE COMMUNITY STAKEHOLDERS. SO ALL OF THEM TOGETHER, WE CREATE AN INFORMATION SHARING PLATFORM THAT HAS EDUCATIONAL SEMINARS, WE HAVE NETWORKING EVENTS, WE'RE GOING TO BE DOING CASE STUDIES. CNM AND UNM HAVE COME ON BOARD TO CREATE EVERYTHING BACK INTO AN EDUCATIONAL PLATFORM TO SUPPORT THAT PRIVATE SECTOR AND LEARNING HOW TO MOVE FORWARD. >> WHO ARE SOME OF THE PARTNERS RIGHT NOW IN THE PUBLIC SECTOR? >> IN THE PUBLIC SECTOR, WE HAVE DOWNTOWN ALBUQUERQUE MAIN STREET. WE HAVE MID REGION COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS. WE HAVE NEW MEXICO ASSOCIATION OF ENERGY COMPANY OF NEW MEXICO. AND WE HAVE URBAN LAND INSTITUTE OF NEW MEXICO. SO WE HAVE FIVE REALLY STRONG FOUNDING PUBLIC PARTNERS AT THIS POINT. >> ANYTHING THAT ALBUQUERQUE CAN LEARN FROM THE DISTRICTS THAT HAVE ALREADY BEEN IDENTIFIED BEFORE? SEATTLE, DENVER, DALLAS. ARE LESSONS GOING TO BE SHARED BETWEEN THE CITIES? >> ABSOLUTELY.

THAT'S THE BEAUTIFUL THING. IT'S A GLOBAL CONVERSATION, BUT IT'S LED AT A GRASS ROOTS LEVEL. SO WHAT HAPPENS IS, WHEN PARTNERSHIPS OR PROPERTIES COME TOGETHER IN THE DISTRICT, THEY GET TO HAVE SHARED RESOURCES, THEY GET TO HAVE SHARED FUNDING STREAMS, SO WE'RE GOING TO BE ABLE TO ALLOW A LOT OF FUNDING THAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN WITHIN THE DISTRICT. THERE'S GOING TO BE NATIONAL BUYING POWER, AND ANYTHING THAT'S HAPPENING IN THE OTHER DISTRICTS, THEY HAVE ACCESS TO. SO WE HAVE AN ENTIRE MEMBERSHIP PORTFOLIO THAT COMES TOGETHER WHEN YOU JOIN. SO DEFINITELY, YOU KNOW. AND WE'RE ALSO ALLOWED ON A LOCAL LEVEL TO ADD GOALS OR TARGETS THAT WE IDENTIFY SPECIFICALLY IN ALBUQUERQUE, MEANING ALBUQUERQUE IS THE FIRST DESERT DISTRICT, WE'RE THE FIRST BLIGHTED DISTRICT, WE HAVE A LOT OF -- YOU KNOW, WE HAVE A VERY HIGH VACANCY RATE DOWNTOWN, IN THOSE AREAS, AND SO ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE'VE DONE LOCALLY IS WE'VE ADDED ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT INCREASE AS ONE OF OUR GOALS, WHICH MEANS THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE PUTTING EVERYTHING BACK INTO REDEVELOPMENT OF OUR URBAN CORE SO THAT THESE

PROPERTIES CAN LAY A SUSTAINABLE FOUNDATION FOR ALBUQUERQUE'S FUTURE GENERATIONS. >> EVEN THOUGH IT'S BEING LED BY THE PRIVATE SECTOR, IS THERE A WAY THAT ELECTED OFFICIALS, DIFFERENT ADMINISTRATIONS CAN SUPPORT IT, CAN HELP MOVE IT FORWARD MORE QUICKLY, MAYBE? >> OH, ABSOLUTELY THEY CAN, YES. A LOT OF THINGS CAN HAPPEN. THEY CAN WORK TOGETHER AS A TEAM TO LOOK AT POLICY CHANGES WITHIN THE DISTRICT. I KNOW THE CITY IS DEFINITELY ON BOARD AND SUPPORTING THIS DISTRICT. THERE'S A LOT OF INNOVATION THAT'S HAPPENING THROUGHOUT THE ALBUQUERQUE AREA. WE HAVE THE BIKE SHARE PROGRAM, WE HAVE INNOVATE ABQ, WE HAVE ALL THESE DIFFERENT ENTITIES, DOWNTOWN ALBUQUERQUE MAIN STREET. WE'RE ALL COMING TOGETHER COLLABORATIVELY TO BE ABLE TO LIFT UP AND REDEVELOP OUR URBAN CORE. SO, ABSOLUTELY, ANYBODY THAT'S -- AND LEGISLATION, WHETHER IT'S LOCAL GOVERNMENT OR, YOU KNOW, ANYBODY CAN DEFINITELY PARTICIPATE IN HELPING BRING THIS TOGETHER. >> I THINK A LOT OF PEOPLE SOMETIMES THINK OF ALBUQUERQUE AS BEING VERY FAR BEHIND ON THINGS. VERY FAR BEHIND ON DEVELOPMENT, VERY FAR BEHIND ON NEW IDEAS.

HOW DO YOU THINK THAT WE CAN MAYBE LEAD THE WAY IN THE FUTURE ON THIS CLIMATE CHANGE ISSUE? HOW ARE WE UNIQUELY SITUATED TO BE AN EXAMPLE AND A LEADER IN THIS AREA? >> WELL, AS OF MONDAY, APRIL 27th, WE SIGNED AS THE 10th DISTRICT IN THE WORLD TO CREATE THAT CONVERSATION, AND I THINK BEING THE FIRST DESERT DISTRICT, I THINK WE HAVE A LOT TO SHARE IN REGARDS TO WATER SAVINGS, I THINK WE HAVE A LOT OF OPPORTUNITIES TO BE THE LEADING FORCE AND THE LEADING DISTRICT TO BRING OTHER DESERT DISTRICTS INTO THE CONVERSATION. AND I THINK SOMETIMES ALBUQUERQUE DOESN'T GIVE ITSELF ENOUGH CREDIT FOR ALL OF THE INNOVATIONS THAT HAVE REALLY BEEN HAPPENING, AND I THINK THAT HAPPENS BECAUSE WE HAVEN'T REALLY EVER CREATED A SHARING INFORMATIONAL PLATFORM. SO THAT'S REALLY WHAT THIS DISTRICT IS GOING TO BE ABOUT. IT'S GOING TO BE ABOUT BRINGING ALL OF THE INNOVATIONS, ALL OF THE Ph.Ds AND ALL OF THE TECHNICAL EXPERTISE, BRINGING IT INTO THIS DISTRICT AND THEN SHARING IT.

EVEN MAYBE OUTSIDE OF THE DISTRICT, SHARING ALL THE WONDERFUL THINGS THAT ALBUQUERQUE'S BEEN DOING AND LIFT US UP. I KNOW WE'VE HAD SOME STRUGGLES AND SOME THINGS THAT STARTED AND NOT NECESSARILY MADE IT, YOU KNOW, ALL THE WAY THROUGH IN THEIR COMMITMENTS, BUT WE'RE CREATING A NEW VISION. >> HOW CAN BUSINESSES GET INVOLVED? AN INDIVIDUAL BASIS, OR AS A PROPERTY OWNER? >> AS A PROPERTY OWNER. >> AS A PROPERTY OWNER, WE HAVE A VERY SIMPLE COMMITMENT LETTER. BASICALLY, WHAT WE ASK PROPERTY OWNERS TO DO IS TO SHARE THEIR BUILDING USE, THEIR ENERGY USE, THEIR WATER USE, AND THEIR TRANSPORTATION DATA. BUT THE AWESOME THING IS THAT IT'S SHARED ANONYMOUSLY, MEANING THAT WE DON'T LOOK AT INDIVIDUAL BUILDINGS AND SAY, OKAY, HERE'S THE TARGET FOR 2030, AND IF YOU DON'T MAKE IT, THERE'S GOING TO BE REPERCUSSIONS FOR THAT. IT'S BASED ON A DISTRICT LEVEL, SO ALL OF THAT INFORMATION IS SHARED ANONYMOUSLY AND IT'S BROUGHT INTO THE DISTRICT AND AGGREGATED AS A DISTRICT TOTAL, AND THEN AS A DISTRICT WE MOVE FORWARD. SO IF THEY'RE WILLING TO SHARE THEIR ENERGY USE, WATER USE AND TRANSPORTATION DATA ANONYMOUSLY, SHARE

THEIR BEST PRACTICES, SHARE WHAT THEY'VE BEEN DOING, SHARE THE LESSONS LEARNED, WHAT WORKED, WHAT DIDN'T, LOOK AT FUTURE OPPORTUNITIES AND FUTURE STRUGGLES WITHIN THE DISTRICT, THEN THAT'S REALLY WHAT WE ASK. WE ASK THEM JUST TO HAVE A COLLABORATIVE CONVERSATION WITHIN THE OTHER BUILDING OWNERS. AND, YOU KNOW, AS THEY UPGRADE THEIR BUILDINGS, IT ALSO INCREASES THE VALUE IN EVERYTHING ELSE THAT'S IN DOWNTOWN. SO, YES, IT WILL CREATE A COMPETITIVE EDGE FOR THEM, BUT IT ALSO LIFTS ALL OF THE URBAN CORE UP WITH IT. >> ALBUQUERQUE IS A LARGE CITY. DO YOU HOPE THAT SOME OF THESE PRACTICES WILL EXPAND BEYOND WHAT'S BEEN DESIGNATED AS A 2030 DISTRICT? >> ABSOLUTELY. REALLY, THIS CONVERSATION COULD BE -- I MEAN, I HAVE HAD MANY PEOPLE THAT SAID, WE'RE NOT GOING TO MAKE IT INSIDE OF YOUR DISTRICT BOUNDARY, BECAUSE YOU DO HAVE TO SET A GEOGRAPHICAL BOUNDARY, AND IT CAN'T BE SO LARGE THAT YOU CAN'T MANAGE IT, BUT IT HAS TO BE LARGE ENOUGH THAT IT'S GOING TO MAKE AN IMPACT. SO THERE ARE INDIVIDUALS, AND WE EVEN HAVE SOME PROPERTIES THAT ARE OUTSIDE OF THE DISTRICT, AND I SAID, YOU KNOW, YOU CAN HAVE THE SAME CONVERSATION.

SET THE SAME GOALS. LOOK AT THE 2030 GOALS AND SET THAT AS A GOAL THAT YOU WANT FOR YOUR PROPERTY. AND I THINK THE CONVERSATION CAN GO THROUGHOUT ALL OF ALBUQUERQUE. I MEAN, I WISH THAT WE COULD HAVE ALL OF ALBUQUERQUE BE THE 2030 DISTRICT, BUT THAT'S A LITTLE LARGE. >> THANK YOU FOR JOINING US AT THIS POINT AS YOU'RE GETTING STARTED AS AN OFFICIAL 2030 DISTRICT, AND WE'LL CHECK IN WITH YOU AGAIN IN THE FUTURE. >> THANK SO MUCH FOR THE OPPORTUNITY. >> STAY WITH US THIS HOUR TO HEAR HOW THE MID REGION COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS IS PLANNING FOR TRANSPORTATION I'M GENE GRANT AT THE TABLE WITH THIS WEEK'S LINE OPINION PANELISTS. NOW, LATE THIS WEEK WE LEARNED THAT THE PUBLIC REGULATION COMMISSION REJECTED PNM'S REQUEST FOR A RATE HIKE. PRC OFFICERS SAID PNM DIDN'T PROVIDE ENOUGH INFORMATION TO JUSTIFY THAT HIKE, AND CRITICS OF THE RATE HIKE REQUEST, ITSELF, SAID PNM SHOULDN'T RAISE RATES TO SUPPORT THE CONTINUED USE OF COAL AT THE SAN JUAN GENERATING STATION. AND, THERE'S OPPOSITION TO PNM'S REQUEST TO RAISE FEES FOR CUSTOMERS WHO INSTALL SOLAR PANELS ON THEIR HOME. JULIE ANN, I'VE GOT TO START WITH YOU ON THIS ONE. DO YOU THINK THIS IS A BIG WIN FOR INDIVIDUALS? I'M READING SOME OF THE QUOTES. OR IS THIS JUST A DELAY TO

THE INEVITABLE THAT MIGHT >> I THINK ONE OF THE INTERESTING THINGS ABOUT THIS IS THAT IT MIGHT SHOW THAT ALL OF THIS ACTIVISM AROUND ENERGY, AROUND RENEWABLE RESOURCES VERSUS COAL, AND JUST AROUND HOW MUCH PEOPLE SPEND OF THEIR OWN PERSONAL INCOME ON THESE ENERGY BILLS, THAT'S STARTING TO HAVE AN EFFECT. I CAN'T REMEMBER ANY OTHER TIME AS A JOURNALIST IN NEW MEXICO FOR 13 YEARS OR MORE THAT PEOPLE HAVE BEEN TALKING ABOUT THE PUBLIC REGULATION COMMISSION AS THOUGH THAT'S A THING THAT WE SHOULD KNOW AND CARE ABOUT. THEY'RE OUT THERE STANDING IN FRONT OF THE PNM OFFICES AND THE PRC HEARINGS WITH SIGNS, THERE WERE HUNDREDS OF PEOPLE MARCHING IN THE CAPITAL IN THE COLD THIS WINTER AROUND THIS ISSUE. SO I THINK FOR THOSE PEOPLE TO CLAIM A VICTORY IS VALID. IT DIDN'T GET ONE VOTE IN APPROVAL. IT WAS A 5-0 VOTE. >> INTERESTING POINT THERE, I'M GLAD YOU GOT THAT IN. IT SEEMED PRETTY CLEAR THE MESSAGE FROM THE PRC, AS JULIE ANN IS MENTIONING. BUT UNDERNEATH THE MESSAGE, WHAT DO WE REALLY THINK IS GOING ON HERE? IS IT ABOUT RENEWABLES? IS IT ABOUT CONTINUING WITH

COAL? WE HAVE A COAL THING COMING UP IN 2017. NON-SUBSTANTIVE. IF YOU LOOK AT THE HEARING EXAMINER'S REPORT AND YOU LOOK AT SOME OF THE REPORTING ON IT, IT WAS ALL BASED ON -- NORMALLY IF YOU'RE A REGULATED MONOPOLY, WHICH PNM IS, YOU CAN LOOK AT YOUR PRIOR COSTS AND IF THEY'RE GOING TO GO UP, YOU FILE A RATE CASE WITH THE HISTORICAL COSTS, AND THAT'S WHAT YOU BASE YOUR FUTURE RATES ON. HERE BECAUSE OF ALL THE CHANGES, YOU KNOW, THERE'S GOING TO BE THE GAS PLANT, THEY'RE GOING TO GET NUCLEAR FUEL, THEY WANT SOLAR, THEY COULDN'T DO IT THAT WAY. THEY HAD TO DO WHAT'S CALLED A FUTURE TEST YEAR, AND THEY HAD TO DO IT IN A GRAPH AND THEY HAD TO ATTACH ALL KINDS OF DETAIL TO EXPLAIN WHAT WENT INTO THIS. I MEAN, THEY DIDN'T DO THAT. THEY WERE SUPPOSED TO DO IT ELECTRONICALLY SO THAT THE STAFF AND PEOPLE WHO OBJECTED TO IT COULD SUBSTITUTE ASSUMPTIONS AND SEE HOW THAT AFFECTED FUTURE RATES.

THEY SIMPLY DIDN'T DO IT. AND THAT WAS THE HEARING EXAMINER'S DECISION, THAT WAS WHAT THE PRC DECIDED. SO, YES, I AGREE. YOU'RE QUITE RIGHT, ALL OF A SUDDEN THE PRC IS FRONT AND CENTER. BUT TECHNICALLY, ALL THIS IS AN ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION. THE PRC SAYS YOU DIDN'T DO IT RIGHT, YOU DIDN'T FILE WHAT YOU HAD TO FILE. THE RULES ARE CLEAR, BY THE WAY, THEY DIDN'T FILE WHAT THEY HAD TO FILE. SO THAT'S HOW I SEE IT. >> AND LAURA SANCHEZ-RIV?, A COUPLE OF CHANCES TO FILE, AS WELL. WHY DO YOU THINK THAT HAPPENED, THE NONELECTRONIC FILING? NOT TO THINK FOR PNM, BUT IT SEEMS LIKE THERE WAS A I'M NOT QUITE SURE WHAT WAS GOING ON. >> I READ SOME OF THE PLEADINGS AND I READ THE HEARING EXAMINER'S DECISION, AND I DON'T NECESSARILY THINK THERE WAS A STRATEGY THERE. I THINK THE REAL STRATEGY IS THAT THEY'RE ARGUING THAT THEY NEED THIS RATE HIKE BECAUSE OF SOME OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATIONS AND THE RENEWABLE ENERGY INVESTMENT. THAT'S THE STRATEGIC PART OF IT. AND I THINK STEVE'S RIGHT, THERE WAS NO SUBSTANCE ALONG

THOSE LINES THAT WAS EXPLORED IN THIS CASE AT THIS POINT. REALLY THE HEARING EXAMINER HAD THE ISSUE IN FRONT OF HIM. SEVERAL OF THE PARTIES THAT INTERVENED OBJECTED TO THE FACT THAT THERE WAS NO TRANSPARENCY IN THE FILING, MEANING THAT THEY WEREN'T ABLE TO BACKTRACK AND FOLLOW EXACTLY THE WAY PNM HAD ARRIVED AT THOSE NUMBERS TO JUSTIFY THE RATE HIKE. THEREFORE, NOT BEING ABLE TO DO THAT, THEIR ATTORNEYS OBJECTED. THEY FILED MOTIONS TO ASK THE HEARING EXAMINER TO DISMISS THE CASE BECAUSE IT WAS INADEQUATE, AND HE AGREED WITH THOSE MOTIONS. ESSENTIALLY, THAT WAS THE RECOMMENDED DECISION BEFORE THE PRC. SO ULTIMATELY, THE PRC DID NOT SUBSTANTIALLY LOOK AT ANY OF THIS. ALL THEY SAID IS, WE AGREE WITH THE HEARING EXAMINER, THIS IS NOT SOMETHING THAT'S RIPE YET, WE DON'T HAVE ENOUGH INFORMATION, SO YOU NEED TO RE-FILE IF YOU'RE INTERESTED IN THIS RATE HIKE. AND WHAT THEY'VE SAID IS THAT THEY'RE LIKELY TO REFILE, AND I'VE HEARD SEPTEMBER 1st AS A POTENTIAL DATE. BUT THEIR SPOKESPERSON ALSO SAID THEY MIGHT APPEAL THIS TO THE SUPREME COURT, WHICH

THEY COULD. THAT INEVITABLY, EITHER ONE OF THOSE TWO, WHETHER THEY FILE ON SEPTEMBER 1st, AND THERE ARE SOME CRITICS THAT THINK IT'S NOT GOING TO BE READY BY THEN, OR IF THEY APPEAL IT TO THE SUPREME COURT, EITHER WAY IT DELAYS THE POTENTIAL INCREASE IN RATES CONSIDERABLY FOR THEM. SO THEY'RE LOOKING NOW INTO NEXT YEAR FOR THE POTENTIAL FINALIZATION OF THIS RATE, AND PROBABLY LATER FOR ANY KIND OF INCREASE THAT WOULD HIT RESIDENTS. >> THAT'S INTERESTING. DAN, DID PNM TRY TO TAKE TOO BIG OF A BITE OF THE APPLE HERE, IN YOUR OPINION? WAS THE ASK TOO BIG AND DIDN'T HAVE ENOUGH DOCUMENTATION FOR THE ASK? MAYBE IF THE ASK WAS SMALLER. >> NO, I THINK PNM IS A COMPANY THAT EVERYBODY LOVES THEY MAY BE THE ONLY ORGANIZATION THAT BOTH REPUBLICANS, DEMOCRATS, CONSERVATIVES, LIBERALS CAN REALLY AROUND, AND THEY DON'T LIKE THEM. THE WHOLE TIME I WAS IN THE LEGISLATURE, ANYTHING FOR PNM, YOU WOULD BE AMAZED AT HOW YOU COULD RALLY REPUBLICANS AND DEMOCRATS. I THINK PNM HAS SPENT A LONG TIME IN THE PAST KIND OF BEING HEAVY-HANDED SAYING, LOOK, IF YOU DON'T LIKE THIS, THEN WE'RE GOING TO DO THIS. I THINK WHAT YOU'RE SEEING IS THE PRC -- YOU KNOW, I SAID WHEN WE CREATED THE PRC, PEOPLE WOULD ASK MY OPINION, AND I SAID, GOD

HELP US THE DAY THEY FIGURE OUT HOW POWERFUL THEY REALLY ARE, AND I THINK THEY'RE STARTING TO FIGURE IT OUT. I THINK PNM IS IN A BAD SPOT. I THINK THEY'VE GOT TO MAKE SOME SERIOUS BUSINESS DECISIONS. I DO THINK THAT THERE ARE SOME THINGS THAT HAVE TO BE LOOKED AT THAT I THINK PNM DESERVES SOME LEEWAY WITH WHEN IT COMES TO WHAT ARE THEY GOING TO DO WITH THAT COAL PLANT UP IN FARMINGTON. I MEAN, WE'RE TELLING THEM TO SHUT IT DOWN, WE'RE TELLING THEM TO CLEAN IT, WE'RE TELLING THEM TO GO DO OTHER THINGS. THEY BROUGHT INTO THIS RENEWABLE ENERGY PORTFOLIO WHEN GOVERNOR RICHARDSON WAS THERE, AND THEY POLITICKED ON THE SIDE OF IT, AND NOW THEY'RE SAYING IT'S COSTING MORE MONEY THAN WE THOUGHT IT WAS GOING TO COST, WHICH IS EXACTLY THE THINGS WE SAID TO THEM WHEN WE WENT DOWN THIS ROAD. WE SAID, DO YOU GUYS KNOW WHAT THIS IS GOING TO DO TO YOU? BACK THEN THEY SAID, YES. NOW THEY'RE SAYING THEY DIDN'T KNOW. SO I THINK AT THE END OF THE DAY, MY PREDICTION IS EXACTLY WHAT LAURA SAID. THE PRC DIDN'T EVEN LOOK AT THE CASE, THEY JUST LOOKED AT THE FINDINGS FROM THE OFFICER AND SAID, WE SUPPORT THAT AND THAT'S RIGHT. I THINK THEY'LL GET IT FILED, AND THEY'LL GET IT FILED IN ENOUGH TIME. I THINK THEY'LL WIND UP

DOING WHAT THEY ALWAYS DO, WHICH IS THEY ASK FOR 12, THEY GET 7, THEY THINK THEY'VE DONE A GREAT JOB, AND 6 IS THE NUMBER THEY WANTED. >> TALKING ABOUT THAT NUMBER FOR A MINUTE, 12 IS THE NUMBER THAT PEOPLE KEEP THROWING OUT, BUT REALLY THE NUMBER THAT WOULD AFFECT PEOPLE WHO I THINK ARE THE MOST VULNERABLE IN THIS SITUATION, THE RESIDENCES AND THE SMALL BUSINESSES, THEIR INCREASE IS ON THE ORDER OF 16%. LARGE BUSINESSES WEREN'T GOING TO SEE AN INCREASE. AND I THINK THAT TOO MUCH AVERAGING MAKES PNM LOOK TOO GOOD IN THIS SITUATION. >> YOUR THOUGHT ON THAT, STEVE. I'VE HEARD THAT, AS WELL. >> THAT'S EXACTLY RIGHT. I MEAN, THERE WAS NO INCREASE -- TO TELL YOU THE TRUTH, I DON'T QUITE UNDERSTAND IT. WHY ONLY RESIDENTIAL CUSTOMERS? >> THEY GAVE A PASS ON ALL SCHOOLS. SCHOOLS DIDN'T SEE ANYTHING. >> IT JUST DOESN'T MAKE SENSE TO ME. BUT I THINK YOU'RE EXACTLY RIGHT, ULTIMATELY WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN IS THERE'S GOING TO BE A REFILING, THEY'RE GOING TO BE CUT BACK, THERE ARE GOING TO BE SOME OF THESE SALARY INCREASES THAT THE PNM OFFICERS GOT, THAT'S GOING TO BE OBJECTED TO. AND BY THE WAY, THIS IS A VERY COMPLICATED THING THEY'RE TRYING TO DO, BECAUSE THEY'RE TRYING TO PREDICT ALL OF THESE

VARIABLES, AND THEY DON'T EVEN HAVE SIGNED AGREEMENTS ON SOME OF THESE THINGS. SO SOME OF IT IS SORT OF UNDERSTANDABLE, WHY THEY DIDN'T GET EVERYTHING, THEIR DUCKS IN A ROW SO TO SPEAK. >> LAURA, IS THERE A BUSINESS BREAK HERE DAN ALLUDED TO DUE PNM? THEY'VE GOT A LOT OF STUFF ON THEIR TABLE THEY NEED TO SOMEHOW FOLD INTO THEIR THING HERE. SHOULD THEY GET A RATE INCREASE, FIRST OF ALL? RENEWABLES, SOMEBODY HAS GOT TO PAY FOR ALL OF THIS STUFF, RIGHT? >> RIGHT, YES, SOMEBODY HAS TO PAY, BUT I THINK THAT -- I HATE TO SAY THIS, BECAUSE THIS IS SUCH A CLICHE, BUT THE DEVIL IS IN THE DETAILS. NOT TO GET TOO MUCH INTO THE UTILITY RATE-MAKING ISSUE, BUT THE REASON THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT ONLY RESIDENTIAL OR ONLY CERTAIN ONES, THERE'S DIFFERENT CLASSES IN UTILITY RATE-MAKING. THERE'S UTILITY BIG INDUSTRIAL CONSUMERS, THERE'S RESIDENTIAL CONSUMERS, THERE'S DIFFERENT CLASSES, AND IT'S NOT EXACTLY LIKE YOU CAN JUST TAKE FROM ONE CLASS AND SUBSIDIZE ANOTHER. IN FACT, THAT'S ILLEGAL. YOU CAN'T REALLY DO THAT. >> WAIT A MINUTE, HANG ON. IN SANTA FE, YOU CAN TAKE

WATER MONEY FROM OVERBILLING FOR WATER AND PAY SALARIES. >> I HEARD YOU. >> NO RULES APPLY WHEN THE GOVERNMENT OWNS IT. >> I HEARD YOU, AND THAT'S NOT LEGAL, EITHER, AND WE'LL GET TO THAT. >> YES, WE WILL. >> BUT IN THIS CASE, THE RESIDENTIAL BASE IS REALLY THE BIGGEST, THE MOST STABLE BASE FOR PNM. IT'S THE LARGEST ONE. THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT A $7.80 A MONTH INCREASE, PLUS 16.34% INCREASE, AS WELL. RATES AND ACTUAL DOLLAR AMOUNTS ARE A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT IN TERMS OF HOW THAT BALANCES OUT. BUT I THINK TALKING ABOUT THE RENEWABLE ENERGY PART, THEY'RE ALSO TALKING ABOUT A $21 TO $26 CONNECTION FEE FOR ANYBODY WHO HAS ROOFTOP PV; PHOTOVOLTAIC. AND THAT'S A HUGE AMOUNT. >> THAT WOULD BE SOLAR FOR THOSE OF US THAT DON'T KNOW THE LINGO. >> YES; SORRY. THAT WOULD BE SOLAR ROOFTOP. >> AND THAT WOULD BE PUNISHING PEOPLE WHO ARE TRYING TO DO WHAT SOME DESCRIBE AS THE RIGHT THING. >> IS IT PUNISHING, OR JUST MAKING THEM PAY? >> THAT'S RIGHT. >> THERE'S A COST TO THAT. THIS IS THE DEAL THAT WE TALKED ABOUT WHEN THEY CAME OUT WITH THE RENEWABLE ENERGY PORTFOLIO.

LOOK, AS A CONCERNED REPUBLICAN, I'M NOT OPPOSED TO RENEWABLE ENERGY. I THINK IT'S A GREAT THING. BUT IF I CHOOSE NOT TO GET IT, I SHOULDN'T PAY FOR IT. AND SO TELLING PEOPLE, WE'RE GOING TO PUSH MORE OF THAT COST TO THEM IF THEY CHOOSE TO GET IT, I CAN SEE THAT. BUT I THINK WE'VE GOT TO BE ABLE TO JUSTIFY THAT COST. I MEAN, JUST SAYING BLANKETLY IT'S $26 WHETHER I PUT ONE PANEL ON MY ROOF, OR IT'S $26 IF I'VE GOT A 30,000 SQUARE FOOT MANSION AND I PUT 8000 PANELS ON MY ROOF, I JUST THINK PNM -- IT'S THE GIANT THAT EVERYBODY LOVES TO HATE. PEOPLE CAN RALLY AROUND IT. >> IT'S AN ALLOCATED COST OF PERFORMING ALL THE SERVICES TO GET THAT ELECTRICITY TO AND FROM YOU, AND THAT'S WHY IT'S A SET FEE. >> BUT I THINK AT THE END OF THE DAY, THEY'RE GOING TO GET SOMETHING. >> IT'S INTERESTING, YOUR COMMENT ABOUT YOU DON'T WANT TO HAVE TO PAY FOR OTHER PEOPLE TO HAVE RENEWABLE, BUT PEOPLE WHO DON'T WANT TO BE ON COAL, WHO ONLY WANT TO BE ON RENEWABLE, HAVE TO SUBSIDIZE THOSE WHO ARE USING COAL. AND RIGHT NOW, COAL MAY BE MORE COST EFFECTIVE, BUT EVENTUALLY COAL WILL BE MORE

EXPENSIVE BECAUSE THERE WILL BE SO MANY REGULATIONS, AND A LOT OF PEOPLE THINK THERE WILL BE A CARBON TAX, EVEN ON COAL. HOWEVER, PEOPLE ARE STILL GOING TO HAVE TO BASICALLY SUBSIDIZE COAL USE. >> THAT'S ALL GOOD, BUT THAT'S THE SAME ARGUMENT THEY MADE ABOUT GETTING THE RENEWABLE PORTFOLIO YEARS AGO; OH, THE COST IS GOING TO GO DOWN AND ALL THIS OTHER STUFF. >> THE COST HAS GONE DOWN. >> THE COST IS GOING DOWN, BUT IT STILL DOESN'T COST ENOUGH THAT PEOPLE WHO DON'T WANT IT SHOULD HAVE TO PAY FOR IT. AND THAT'S A TOTALLY DIFFERENT ARGUMENT, BUT I THINK AT THE END OF THE DAY, WHAT YOU'RE GOING TO FIND OUT IS PNM IS GOING TO GET WHAT THEY NEED. >> PNM IS THE ONLY UTILITY WHO CAN'T SEEM TO MAKE THE PORTFOLIO WORK FOR THEM. EVERY OTHER UTILITY IN NEW MEXICO HAS BEEN ABLE TO MEET THE PORTFOLIO STANDARDS. >> THERE YOU GO. COMING UP NEXT, WE TAKE A BIG PICTURE VIEW OF TRANSPORTATION AND LOOK AT HOW PEOPLE MIGHT GET AROUND CENTRAL NEW MEXICO DECADES FROM NOW. >> WHAT'S REALLY FOR ME DISTRESSING IS THAT NOW LYFT HAS DECIDED, WE DON'T WANT TO DEAL WITH IT, WE'RE JUST GOING TO LEAVE. AND THAT'S NOT THE KIND OF MESSAGE I DON'T THINK THAT WE WANT TO SEND HERE IN NEW MEXICO, THAT WE'RE JUST GOING TO OVERREGULATE AND WE'RE NOT GOING TO ALLOW NEW BUSINESSES, ENTREPRENEURS TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THIS KIND OF OPPORTUNITY.

>> EARLIER IN THE HOUR, OUR LINE OPINION PANELISTS DISCUSSED THE PROPOSED SANTOLINA DEVELOPMENT. SUPPORTERS SAY THE PLAN WILL PROVIDE HOUSING AND BUSINESS SPACE TO MEET FUTURE NEEDS AS ALBUQUERQUE GROWS. BUT OPPONENTS HAVE EXPRESSED CONCERNS ABOUT WATER USE AND WHETHER THE POPULATION PROJECTIONS FOR THE PROPOSED PROJECT ARE ACCURATE. THERE ARE MANY ISSUES TO CONSIDER WHEN PLANNING FOR THE FUTURE OF ANY CITY, AND A BIG ONE IS TRANSPORTATION. THE MID REGION COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS RECENTLY RELEASED A PLAN FOR TRANSPORTATION NEEDS IN 2040, AND OUR PRODUCER SARAH GUSTAVUS SAT DOWN WITH A TRANSPORTATION PLANNER TO LEARN HOW WE MIGHT GET AROUND DECADES FROM NOW. >> AARON SUSSMAN, THANKS FOR BEING WITH US TODAY. >> THANK YOU FOR HAVING ME. >> YOU'RE A SENIOR PLANNER AT THE MID REGION COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS. YOU WORKED ON THIS TRANSPORTATION PLAN FOR I HAVE A QUESTION: ARE WE GOING TO BE DRIVING A LOT OF CARS IN 2040? >> YEAH, I THINK THAT'S PRETTY FAIR TO SAY, PRETTY SAFE TO SAY. THE REALITY OF IT IS, MOST PEOPLE GET AROUND TODAY IN PRIVATE VEHICLES. THE VAST MAJORITY OF TRIPS ARE MADE IN CARS. THAT'S NOT LIKELY TO CHANGE. MAYBE THE TYPES OF CARS THAT PROBABLY SEE MORE ELECTRIC CARS OVER TIME, THINGS LIKE THAT.

AND I THINK THE BIG THING, THOUGH, THAT WE'RE GOING TO SEE IS A GREATER RANGE OF OPTIONS. THE REALITY I THINK IS THAT OVER TIME PEOPLE ARE STILL GOING TO CONTINUE TO DRIVE MOST PLACES, BUT THERE'S GOING TO BE AN INCREASED DEMAND FOR AT LEAST THE ABILITY TO WALK, TO BIKE, TO TAKE THE BUS AT LEAST SOME OF THE TIME IN THE ALBUQUERQUE METRO AREA. >> YOU'VE SURVEYED FOLKS IN THE AREA AND YOU FOUND THAT. AND SO HOW DOES DEMAND BECOME REALITY WHERE THOSE TYPES OF TRANSPORTATION ARE EASILY ACCESSIBLE? >> ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WAS REALLY INTERESTING AND REALLY SURPRISING TO US ABOUT PUTTING THIS METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN TOGETHER WAS THAT THERE'S A LOT OF RESEARCH THAT'S BEEN DONE NATIONALLY ABOUT CHANGING PREFERENCES AND CHANGING TRAVEL BEHAVIOR, BUT THIS IS THE FIRST PLAN WHERE WE WERE ABLE TO REALLY GET SOME MEANINGFUL LOCAL DATA ON STATED PREFERENCES AND ACTUAL BEHAVIOR. SO IT'S REALLY INTERESTING TO SEE OVER THE LAST TEN YEARS, PEOPLE ARE DRIVING ABOUT 10% FEWER MILES PER DAY THAN THEY DID YEARS AGO. TRANSIT RIDERSHIP HAS DOUBLED. SO THAT'S OBSERVED BEHAVIOR. BUT WHEN YOU LOOK AT PEOPLE'S PREFERENCES, HOW THEY STATE THAT THEY WOULD LIKE TO TRAVEL AROUND THE METRO AREA, THAT'S WHERE

WE'RE SEEING SOME REALLY INTERESTING RESULTS THAT WE HADN'T ANTICIPATED SO MUCH. ESPECIALLY AMONG YOUNG PROFESSIONALS, AMONG YOUNG ADULTS, THERE'S A HUGE DEMAND FOR MORE OPPORTUNITIES TO WALK, TO BIKE, TO TAKE PUBLIC TRANSIT AROUND THE METRO AREA. AND THEN ONE THING THAT WAS REALLY SURPRISING, TOO, WHEN WE SURVEYED PEOPLE LOCALLY WAS WE ASKED THEM ABOUT HOUSING PREFERENCES, AND THERE HAVE BEEN A LOT OF STUDIES NATIONALLY THAT INDICATE THAT MILLENNIALS, IN PARTICULAR, YOUNG PROFESSIONALS, WANT TO LIVE IN MORE URBAN CONTEXTS, AND WE FOUND THAT THAT WAS ACTUALLY CONSISTENT HERE IN THE ALBUQUERQUE METRO AREA, AS WELL. SOMETHING LIKE 70% OF YOUNG ADULTS EXPRESSED AN INTEREST TO LIVE IN MORE URBAN CONTEXTS. THAT'S A HUGE DEPARTURE, I THINK, FROM NOT JUST OTHER GENERATIONS, BUT MAYBE PERCEPTIONS LOCALLY ABOUT HOW PEOPLE WANT TO LIVE. THERE ARE SOME OF THOSE DEMANDS FOR MORE URBAN LIFESTYLES HERE THAN PEOPLE ANTICIPATED. >> WHAT'S THE ROLE OF THE MID REGION COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS IN TAKING THIS INFORMATION AND CREATING POLICY OR HELPING PLAN FOR THE FUTURE? >> SO, THROUGH OUR METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION

PLAN, OUR JOB IS TO TAKE THE GROWTH FORECAST THAT COMES FROM THE STATE DEMOGRAPHIC OFFICE AND LOOK AT HOW THAT GROWTH IS GOING TO BE DISTRIBUTED AROUND THE METRO AREA. SO WE LOOK AT WHAT SORT OF DEMANDS THAT'S GOING TO PLACE ON INFRASTRUCTURE. DO WE HAVE THE INFRASTRUCTURE TO HANDLE IT. AND IF DEMANDS ARE CHANGING, THEN HOW CAN WE MEET THOSE DEMANDS OVER TIME. BASICALLY, OUR ROLE IS TO WORK WITH THE MEMBER AGENCIES, THE LOCAL GOVERNMENTS AROUND THE ALBUQUERQUE AREA, AND TAKE THIS INFORMATION AND TRY TO TAKE THE FORECAST DATA AND LOOK AT WHAT TYPES OF INVESTMENTS SHOULD WE MAKE, HOW DO WE MEET THAT FUTURE DEMAND OVER THE COMING DECADES. >> SO THAT WOULD GO TO THE ALBUQUERQUE CITY COUNCIL, THE BERNALILLO COUNTY COMMISSION? >> SURE. THERE'S A POLICY BOARD THAT APPROVES THAT'S MADE UP OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, CITY COUNCILORS, MAYORS FROM LOCAL GOVERNMENT AGENCIES. THEY APPROVE THE PLAN. WE THEN WORK WITH THOSE LOCAL GOVERNMENT AGENCIES TO IMPLEMENT THE STRATEGIES AND RECOMMENDATIONS IN THE PLAN. THERE'S ALSO A POOL OF FEDERAL FUNDS THAT COME THROUGH MRCOG THAT WE HELP DISTRIBUTE. AND SO THAT'S REALLY WHERE

WE HELP IMPLEMENT THE PLAN, IS TO IDENTIFY THE LONG-TERM INFRASTRUCTURE NEEDS, AND THEN WORK WITH THE MEMBER AGENCIES TO IDENTIFY WHICH PROJECTS SHOULD RECEIVE FEDERAL FUNDING AND WHICH STRATEGIES SHOULD BE PURSUED. >> IT'S NOT SO MUCH IN THE HEADLINES RIGHT NOW, THOSE LOW, LOW, LOW GAS PRICES, BUT IT HAS BEEN IN RECENT MONTHS. HOW MUCH DOES GAS PRICE PLAY A PART IN WHAT PEOPLE MIGHT SAY THAT THEY WANT TO DO, OR HOW THEY MAY ACT IN CHOOSING TO DRIVE OR NOT DRIVE? >> THAT'S A FAIR QUESTION. THE REALITY OF IT IS, PEOPLE MAKE DECISIONS BASED ON ECONOMICS TO A LARGE DEGREE. WHAT DOES IT COST TO DRIVE. HOW MUCH ARE YOU SAVING BY TAKING PUBLIC TRANSIT, THINGS LIKE THAT. BUT WHAT WE DO SEE OVER THE REALLY LONG-TERM, IF YOU LOOK BACK 30 YEARS INTO THE PAST, WHAT ARE THE IMPACTS OF FLUCTUATING GAS PRICES ON DRIVING BEHAVIORS AND THE AMOUNT OF DRIVING THAT INDIVIDUALS MAKE, OR HOW MUCH DRIVING TAKES PLACE IN AN INDIVIDUAL DAY AND AN INDIVIDUAL YEAR, THOSE THINGS KIND OF WASH OUT OVER TIME. SO THIS SORT OF MORE RECENT SHIFT OVER THE LAST DECADE TOWARDS FEWER MILES TRAVELED PER PERSON, THAT MAY SORT OF FLATTEN OUT VERY SHORT-TERM, BUT THAT'S LIKELY TO CONTINUE LONGER TERM BECAUSE

WE DO SEE SOME CHANGES IN LIFESTYLE. >> YOU DID MENTION INFRASTRUCTURE A MOMENT AGO, AND I'VE HEARD THERE WAS A GROWING CONCERN ABOUT OUR INFRASTRUCTURE NEEDS AND WHETHER OR NOT WE'RE MAINTAINING IT. HOW DOES THAT FIT INTO THIS TRANSPORTATION PLAN? >> ONE OF THE KEY TAKE-AWAYS OF THIS PLAN AND ONE OF THE THINGS THAT REALLY DIFFERENT ABOUT TODAY VERSUS PREVIOUS PLANNING EFFORTS IS THIS EMPHASIS ON PRESERVING THE INFRASTRUCTURE THAT WE BUILDING NEW ROADS AND NEW LANES, AND THE REALITY OF IT IS, THERE'S AN AGING INFRASTRUCTURE ACROSS THE ENTIRE STATE, AND THE AMOUNT OF MONEY THAT'S BEING GENERATED TO MAINTAIN THAT INFRASTRUCTURE IS EITHER FLAT OR IT'S GROWING BY VERY SMALL AMOUNTS. SO THERE'S A GROWING GAP BETWEEN THE NEED JUST TO MAINTAIN THE EXISTING INFRASTRUCTURE VERSUS THE REVENUE THAT'S AVAILABLE, THE FUNDS THAT ARE AVAILABLE TO ACTUALLY INVEST IN OUR INFRASTRUCTURE. SO ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE'RE SEEING IS THAT AGENCIES ARE, IN FACT, FOCUSING MORE ON MAINTAINING THE INFRASTRUCTURE THAT WE ALREADY HAVE. THERE'S MUCH MORE OF AN

EMPHASIS ON KIND OF CONCENTRATING ENERGIES ON PRESERVING THE EXISTING ROADWAY NETWORK RATHER THAN EXPANDING ENDLESSLY, AND I THINK THAT'S CONSISTENT, TOO, WITH THIS NOTION THAT MAYBE PEOPLE ARE DRIVING A LITTLE BIT LESS, THAT THERE'S DEMAND FOR MORE URBAN LIFESTYLES, THAT YOU REINVEST IN THE EXISTING URBAN FOOTPRINT, INVEST IN THE EXISTING INFRASTRUCTURE. >> HOW IS CLIMATE CHANGE PART OF THE DISCUSSION ABOUT ISSUES LIKE PLANNING FOR TRANSPORTATION NEEDS IN THE FUTURE? >> WELL, WHAT'S REALLY NEAT ABOUT THE LONG-RANGE PLAN IS THAT IT'S DRIVEN BY THESE FORECASTS. SO, WE TAKE THE LEVEL OF GROWTH THAT'S ANTICIPATED FOR THE METRO AREA, AND OVER THE LONG TERM WE ARE EXPECTED TO GROW BY A FAIR AMOUNT, AGAIN, AND WE LOOK AT HOW THAT GROWTH IS DISTRIBUTED ACROSS THE METRO AREA. THAT'S REALLY OUR ROLE AT MRCOG. AND WHAT'S INTERESTING ABOUT THOSE GROWTH PROJECTIONS IS THAT IT'S NOT JUST USEFUL FOR PROJECTING FUTURE TRAVEL DEMAND, WE CAN USE THAT SAME SET OF PROJECTIONS AND LOOK AT THINGS LIKE, BASED ON THE DISTRIBUTION OF GROWTH, ARE WE SEEING MORE GROWTH IN PLACES THAT MAY BE AT RISK TO FOREST FIRES, AND WE KNOW THROUGH CLIMATE CHANGE

IMPACTS THAT THE INCIDENTS OF FOREST FIRES IS LIKELY TO INCREASE. SO THERE ARE LOCATIONS THAT MAY BE AT GREATER RISK, AND MAYBE WE SHOULD THINK ABOUT HOW DO WE MAKE OUR REGION MORE RESILIENT BY MINIMIZING THE LEVEL OF NEW GROWTH THAT TAKES PLACE IN THOSE LOCATIONS. WE CAN ALSO LOOK AT THINGS LIKE RESIDENTIAL WATER POSITIVE IMPACTS THERE. >> I WANT US TO LEAVE ON INNOVATION. I HAVE A POSTER IN MY HOUSE, IT'S A LITTLE BIT OF A JOKE, ABOUT WHAT A SUBWAY SYSTEM MIGHT LOOK LIKE IN ALBUQUERQUE, BUT IT HAS A LINE THAT SAYS, 'THIS WILL ACTUALLY NEVER EXIST.' BUT THERE IS SOME OPPORTUNITY FOR INNOVATION. HOW CAN WE BE INNOVATIVE THE ALBUQUERQUE METRO AREA? >> WELL, WHAT'S ALSO I THINK RELEVANT ABOUT THE GROWTH

FORECAST AND THE LONG-RANGE PLAN AND HOW THEY COME TOGETHER, THE MIDDLE GROUND BETWEEN LAND USE AND TRANSPORTATION PLANNING, IS THAT IT'S REALLY HARD TO INTRODUCE INNOVATIVE TRANSPORTATION INFRASTRUCTURE, INNOVATIVE INVESTMENTS, WITHOUT SUPPORTING LAND USE. SO WE EMPHASIS IN OUR PLAN THAT THERE'S A REAL CONNECTION BETWEEN HOW WE GROW AND WHAT SORT OF TRANSPORTATION OPTIONS ARE AVAILABLE. SO IF YOU HAVE CERTAIN LOCATIONS, ACTIVITY CENTERS, KEY CORRIDORS, KEY LOCATIONS WHERE YOU WANT TO SERVE WITH TRANSIT, AND THEN YOU INTRODUCE A LITTLE BIT MORE COMPACT DEVELOPMENT, THAT'S REALLY WHERE YOU CAN INTRODUCE MORE INNOVATIVE TRANSPORTATION OPTIONS. I DON'T KNOW THAT WE'RE LIKELY TO BE GETTING A SUBWAY SYSTEM ANY TIME SOON, BUT BUS RAPID TRANSIT IS A BIG DISCUSSION IN THE ALBUQUERQUE METRO AREA. THAT IS A VIABLE OPTION. IT'S MUCH LESS EXPENSIVE THAN A SUBWAY OR LIGHT RAIL. BUT YOU REALLY NEED A SERIES OF KEY ACTIVITY CENTERS AND SOME LEVEL OF DENSITY TO SUPPORT THAT. AND ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE SEE THROUGH THESE LONG-RANGE FORECASTS IS THAT IF WE DO HAVE THESE SORT OF POCKETS OF HIGHER DENSITY,

OR HIGHER MORE CONCENTRATED ACTIVITY, IT INTRODUCES THE POSSIBILITY FOR SHORTER TRIPS, FOR TRIPS BY OTHER MODES, WHERE YOU DON'T HAVE TO DRIVE ALL THE TIME, AND THAT'S WHERE YOU CAN BE MORE INNOVATIVE, IS WHERE YOU'VE GOT THAT CONCENTRATION OF ACTIVITY. SO IF WE INTRODUCE THAT, IF WE ENCOURAGE THAT IN THE ALBUQUERQUE METRO AREA, THEN, YEAH, WE CAN BE A LITTLE BIT MORE INNOVATIVE. >> MEANING THAT TRANSPORTATION NEEDS TO BE A PART OF -- LET'S SAY THEY'RE GOING TO IMPROVE A NEW BUILDING, A NEW SHOPPING CENTER, A NEW APARTMENT COMPLEX, TRANSPORTATION NEEDS TO BE FRONT AND CENTER? >> IT NEEDS TO BE FRONT AND CENTER, AND THAT GOES DOWN TO HOW THE BUILDING IS ORIENTED, WHAT THE SURROUNDING USES ARE, WHETHER THEY'VE GOT A HUGE PARKING LOT IN FRONT OF THE BUILDING. NOBODY IS TAKING PUBLIC TRANSIT TO A SHOPPING CENTER WHERE THEY'VE GOT TO WALK ACROSS A HUGE SEA OF PARKING. THAT'S NOT A VERY PLEASANT EXPERIENCE. AND IF YOU'VE GOT AN ENORMOUS AMOUNT OF FREE PARKING, WHY WOULD YOU DO ANYTHING OTHER THAN DRIVE. AND SO, AGAIN, I THINK PART OF WHAT WE'RE EMPHASIZING THROUGH THIS PLAN IS CERTAINLY NOT THAT DRIVING IS BAD, OR THAT DRIVING IS GOING TO GO AWAY, OR THAT IT SHOULD, BUT THAT YOU WANT TO CREATE MORE OPTIONS. WE SEE A DEMAND FOR THAT.

WE SEE SOME BENEFITS FOR CREATING MORE OPTIONS. AND IF YOU CREATE AN ENVIRONMENT WHERE YOU CAN INTRODUCE PUBLIC TRANSIT, OR ENABLE MORE WALKING AND BIKING TRIPS, THERE ARE REGIONAL BENEFITS IN TERMS OF REDUCED CONGESTION AND IMPROVED AIR QUALITY. >> GREAT. AARON, THANKS FOR JOINING US TODAY. >> THANK YOU FOR HAVING ME. >> WE'RE BACK AT THE TABLE WITH THE LINE OPINION PANELISTS. THIS WEEK, THE RIDE SHARING COMPANY LYFT STOPPED OF DRUG AND ALCOHOL TESTING. THIS A LITTLE BIT. IT WOULD SEEM REASONABLE TO ME AND MOST REASONABLE PEOPLE THAT EXPECTING SOMEONE WHO IS PICKING YOU UP TO GIVE YOU A RIDE SOMEWHERE IS FREE OF DRUGS AND ALCOHOL. MAYBE TESTING IS THE WAY TO DO THAT. WE EXPECT THAT FROM CAB DRIVERS.

IT SEEMS LYFT FELT THAT WAS UNREASONABLE. WHAT'S YOUR PERSONAL OPINION IF YOU'RE A CUSTOMER, WOULD YOU FEEL MORE ASSURED? >> MY OPINION ON DRUG AND ALCOHOL TESTING? >> WOULD THAT MAKE YOU MORE INCLINED TO TAKE A LYFT RIDE, OR NOT? >> HOW DO WE KNOW? ARE THEY TESTING EVERYBODY EVERY TUESDAY? ARE THEY RANDOMLY TESTING PEOPLE? I MEAN, I THINK SOMETIMES THESE TESTING THINGS THAT ARE REQUIRED BY THE GOVERNMENT, THEY JUST GIVE FALSE HOPE. YOU'VE GOT TO BE TESTED ONCE A YEAR. YOU'LL FIND OUT LOTS OF TIMES YOU'VE GOT TO BE TESTED ONCE A YEAR. >> BUT ON ITS FACE, IS THAT REASONABLE? >> YOU KNOW, YEAH, I WOULD -- HERE IS WHAT I WOULD ASSUME, GENE. WHEN YOU SHOW UP TO PICK ME UP, AND I THINK THAT YOU'VE BEEN DRINKING, OR I THINK THAT YOU'RE INTOXICATED, OR UNDER THE USE OF SUBSTANCE, THEN DON'T GET IN THE CAR WITH YOU. DON'T GET IN THE CAR, AND CALL SOMEBODY. I MEAN, WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO HAVE, A STICKER ON THE CAR THAT SAYS, I JUST PASSED MY DRUG TEST, COME ON IN. I MEAN, I DON'T KNOW WHEN YOU'VE TAKEN IT.

WE DON'T KNOW WHEN YOU'VE TAKEN IT. SO AT THE END OF THE DAY, I THINK THESE SORT OF GOVERNMENT MANDATES THAT MAKE EVERYBODY FEEL SAFE REALLY AREN'T HELPING AT ALL. >> THEY ALSO HAVE TO GET VEHICLE INSPECTIONS, LAURA SANCHEZ-RIV?, AND THAT'S INTERESTING TO ME BECAUSE I'VE USED LYFT A LOT. SOMETIMES I USE IT TO COME HERE TO THE STUDIO. WE HAVE A ONE CAR FAMILY. IT JUST WORKS OUT BETTER. AND I CAN'T REMEMBER A LYFT RIDE IN A CAR OF MORE THAN TWO YEARS OLD. BRAND NEW OFF THE DEALER LOT, IT WAS INCREDIBLE. >> THEY HAVE REQUIREMENTS. I DUG MORE SPECIFICALLY INTO UBER AND THEIR REQUIREMENTS, AND YOU HAVE TO HAVE A VEHICLE THAT'S 2010 OR NEWER, FIRST OF ALL. YOU HAVE TO HAVE A LICENSE FOR MORE THAN A YEAR. YOU HAVE TO HAVE PROOF OF INSURANCE FOR MORE THAN A YEAR. YOU HAVE TO DO A CRIMINAL BACKGROUND INVESTIGATION. THEY DON'T APPROVE DRIVERS UNTIL ALL OF THAT IS DONE. AND THEN THEY HAVE TO TAKE THEIR CAR DOWN TO A MECHANIC, AND THERE'S ONLY CERTAIN MECHANICS OR CERTAIN SHOPS HERE IN ALBUQUERQUE THAT THEY'RE CONTRACTED WITH TO DO THIS, AND THE DRIVER ACTUALLY HAS TO PAY FOR THE INSPECTION. THEY GO THROUGH AND DO A WHOLE INSPECTION ON EVERYTHING, CONDITION, IF

THERE'S ANY MAJOR DAMAGE TO THE CAR. THERE'S A LOT OF REQUIREMENTS THAT THEY HAVE TO GO THROUGH. THEY DON'T REQUIRE THE ALCOHOL AND DRUG TESTING RIGHT NOW, BUT MY QUESTION WOULD BE, WHO IS GOING TO PAY FOR THAT? BECAUSE THIS ISN'T LIKE A TAXI COMPANY WHERE THE TAXI COMPANY IS HIRING THESE DRIVERS, THESE ARE ALL INDEPENDENT CONTRACTORS. ALL THAT UBER IS PROVIDING A SYSTEM BY WHICH YOU CONNECT PEOPLE WHO NEED THE RIDE AND PEOPLE WHO PROVIDE THE SERVICE. SO WHO IS ACTUALLY PAYING FOR IT? AND I WOULD EXPECT THAT PROBABLY IT'S GOING TO END UP RELYING ON THE PERSON THEMSELVES WHO WANTS TO DRIVE. NOW YOU'RE ASKING PEOPLE WHO ARE ALREADY IN A POSITION TO MAYBE NOT HAVE STABLE JOBS WHERE THEY CAN DO THIS KIND OF WORK, AND THEY OBVIOUSLY NEED THE INCOME, NOW THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE TO GO DOWN AND PAY FOR TESTING ON THEIR OWN. I THINK THEY'RE TRYING TO IMPOSE REGULATIONS THAT THEY DEVELOPED FOR A TAXI SYSTEM ONTO THIS NEW ENTITY, AND THEY REALLY HAVEN'T TAKEN THE TIME TO UNDERSTAND HOW THIS NEW BUSINESS WORKS. AND WHAT'S REALLY FOR ME DISTRESSING IS THAT NOW LYFT HAS DECIDED, WE DON'T WANT TO DEAL WITH IT, WE'RE JUST GOING TO LEAVE, AND THAT'S NOT THE KIND OF MESSAGE I DON'T THINK THAT WE WANT TO SEND HERE IN NEW MEXICO, THAT WE'RE JUST GOING TO OVERREGULATE AND WE'RE NOT GOING TO ALLOW NEW BUSINESSES, ENTREPRENEURS, TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THIS

KIND OF OPPORTUNITY. AND I THINK THERE'S A LOT OF PEOPLE IN THE STATE, CERTAINLY WITH OUR DRUNK DRIVING RECORD, WE NEED MORE RIDE AVAILABILITY, A LOT MORE OPTIONS. >> JULIE ANN, YOU WOULDN'T BE SURPRISED, I'M SURE, I WOULD CHAT UP THESE DRIVERS HEAVILY AS I WOULD GO ALONG. >> AS DO I. >> IT REALLY STRUCK ME HOW, AND THINGS CAN BE DECEIVING, BUT HOW HAPPY THESE FOLKS SEEM TO BE WITH THE SITUATION. MOST OF THE DRIVERS I SPOKE WITH WERE MAKING MONEY, IT WAS NOT ONEROUS, THEY WERE PLEASED TO HAVE IT, THEY WERE MEETING GREAT PEOPLE, THEY WERE MAKING OTHER CORRECTIONS. I'M READING A LOT OF CRUSHING DEFEAT OUT THERE FROM FOLKS WHO WERE FORMER DRIVERS THAT, THEY'RE DYING. THAT WAS A GREAT WAY TO MAKE >> PEOPLE IN SANTA FE TALK ABOUT HOW IT'S RARE TO HAVE ONE JOB THAT REALLY ALLOWS YOU TO MAKE ENDS MEET, AND SO MANY FOLKS ARE PATCHING TOGETHER. YOU KNOW, YOU WANT TO BE AN ARTIST, YOU'RE ALSO GOING TO WAIT TABLES, AND YOU MIGHT THEN DRIVE AN UBER AS WELL. SO I THINK WHAT WE'RE HEARING FROM A LOT OF PEOPLE IN OUR NECK OF THE WOODS IS THIS QUESTION OF, SHOULD THESE SERVICES REALLY HAVE TO COMPLY WITH SOME BIG

SYSTEM OF REGULATION, OR IS THIS A SITUATION WHERE ADULTS CAN CHOOSE TO HAVE A RELATIONSHIP, TO PROCURE SERVICE, TO GET A RIDE FROM OTHER ADULTS KNOWING THE RISKS, KNOWING THAT, AS DAN SAID, YOU MIGHT OPEN THE DOOR AND SAY, OH, I DON'T LIKE THE LOOK OF THAT GUY, AND IT SMELLS LIKE ALCOHOL IN HERE, I'M NOT GOING TO GET IN HERE. I THINK THAT WE'RE ALL CAPABLE OF DOING THAT, AND THAT PERHAPS THIS REGULATORY PUSH IS JUST A REFLEX THAT'S MAYBE NOT REALLY CALLED FOR IN THIS SITUATION. >> SURE, ABSOLUTELY. STEPHEN, DAN MENTIONED, AND I'VE HEARD THIS FROM LOTS OF FOLKS, TOO, YOUNGER FOLKS, ABOUT THE IDEA OF IF YOU'VE HAD TOO MUCH TO DRINK, IT WAS WAY EASIER TO GET A LYFT OR UBER RIDE THAN IT WAS A CLASSIC CAB, WHICH YOU COULD WAIT UPWARDS OF AN HOUR ON A BUSY FRIDAY OR SATURDAY NIGHT. THAT SEEMS PRETTY IMPACTFUL TO ME. WHAT'S YOUR SENSE OF THAT? IF WE HAVE LESS CHOICES, IF YOU NEED TO GET BEHIND THE WHEEL OR NOT BEHIND THE DRINKING. >> WHEN I VISITED MY DAUGHTER AND SON-IN-LAW IN NEW YORK, THEY WERE MAKING A

MOVIE, I USED UBER ALL THE TIME, AND I MEAN, IT WORKS WONDERFULLY, AND IT WORKS WONDERFULLY HERE IN ALBUQUERQUE. YES, WE NEED THAT CHOICE. NOW, I'M NOT SURE THAT LYFT LEFT BECAUSE OF REGULATIONS. THAT'S WHAT THEY SAID. BUT THEY'RE IN THIS HUGE BATTLE WITH UBER. UBER IS A $50 BILLION COMPANY. THEY'RE TRYING TO DRIVE LYFT OUT OF EVERY MARKET. THEY'RE TRYING TO DRIVE LYFT OUT OF BUSINESS. SO I'M NOT SURE THAT THAT'S -- THE EXPLANATION THEY GAVE IS THE DRUG TESTING, THE DRUG AND ALCOHOL I THINK BY THE PRC IS ONLY IF YOU'RE IN AN ACCIDENT, THAT THE DRIVERS HAVE TO BE TESTED. THAT SOUNDS FAIRLY REASONABLE TO ME. THE INSURANCE REQUIREMENT, YEAH, WE WANT DRIVERS TO BE -- THOSE ARE THE TWO THINGS THAT LYFT POINTED TO. >> WE'D THE REST OF THE DRIVERS IN NEW MEXICO TO BE INSURED, TOO. >> THAT'S A GOOD POINT. >> GENE, WHEN YOU LOOK AT THIS, WHAT'S INTERESTING IS, UBER THIS WEEK IS GOING OUT TO RAISE SOME CAPITAL, AND RIGHT NOW UBER HAS BEEN VALUED EQUAL TO FED EX. THEIR VALUE ON THE MARKET IS EQUAL TO FED EX.

AND THE OTHER THING WE HAVE TO TALK ABOUT, TOO, THAT WE KIND OF KEEP SKIPPING OVER, AS AN INSURANCE GUY, PEOPLE HAVE GOT TO REMEMBER THAT ONE OF THE QUESTIONS THAT I'VE ALWAYS HAD IS THAT IF YOU HAVE PERSONAL INSURANCE, IT PREVENTS YOU FROM UTILIZING YOUR VEHICLE FOR COMMERCIAL PURPOSES. SO ARE THEY MAKING THESE FOLKS ACTUALLY CARRY COMMERCIAL INSURANCE, OR ARE THEY JUST CARRYING THEIR ALLSTATE PERSONAL INSURANCE? >> UBER IS PRIMARY UNDER THEIR REQUIREMENTS. SO UBER'S INSURANCE IS PRIMARY. IT'S A MILLION DOLLARS PER ACCIDENT, AND IT COVERS YOU REGARDLESS OF THE DRIVER'S INSURANCE. >> THAT'S WHY THEY WANT SO MUCH MONEY, AND THAT'S WHY LYFT IS GONE. I THINK UBER IS CRUSHING THEIR COMPOSITION. >> THAT'S INTERESTING. LET'S SQUEEZE IN ONE MORE NEWS STORY. WE LEARNED THIS WEEK THAT THE SANTA FE CITY WATER COMPANY IS SITTING ON $95 MILLION. LET'S SAY THAT AGAIN. THEY'RE SITTING ON $95 MILLION. THIS IS AFTER RATES INCREASED IN RECENT YEARS. AND JULIE ANN, SOME SAY IT'S TIME TO RETURN SOME OF THAT MONEY TO RATEPAYERS. YOU'VE BEEN DOING SOME REPORTING ON THIS, OF COURSE, AT THE REPORTER. WHAT'S THE SITUATION THERE? THE MONEY IS MOVING AROUND RIGHT NOW IN VERY ODD WAYS.

EXPLAIN WHAT'S GOING ON. >> SO WHAT'S INTERESTING TO NOTE IS THAT FOR FIVE YEARS, BETWEEN 2009 AND ONWARD, SANTA FE RATEPAYERS WERE HIT WITH 8.2% INCREASES EVERY YEAR FOR FIVE YEARS IN A ROW, AND THEN THE CITY, YOU KNOW, A COUPLE OF YEARS INTO THAT STARTED TO REALIZE THAT THEY WERE AMASSING MORE MONEY THAN THEY HAD ESTIMATED. YOU KNOW, THERE'S CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT MONEY THAT FACTORS IN THERE, BUT REALLY THE BOTTOM LINE IS, IT COSTS ABOUT 44 -- THEY MAKE ABOUT $44 MILLION IN REVENUE, THEY HAVE PLANS TO SPEND ABOUT $51, DIP INTO SOME OF THAT CAPITAL, BUT THAT STILL LEAVES QUITE A SUBSTANTIAL POT OF MONEY. MORE THAN $60 MILLION, IF YOU ROUGH OUT THAT MATH. SO YOU'RE STARTING TO SEE A LITTLE TENSION IN SANTA FE AROUND THAT. ANOTHER INTERESTING PART OF IT IS THAT THE CITY IS TAKING A COUPLE OF MILLION DOLLARS OUT OF THE WATER COMPANY FUNDS EVERY YEAR TO PAY FOR ABOUT 20 WORKERS WHO DON'T WORK FOR THE WATER COMPANY. >> OUCH. >> BUT I THINK ONE NARRATIVE THAT'S OUT THERE THAT I WANT TO SHOOT DOWN IS THAT THIS

IS NOT NEWS TO THE SANTA FE CITY COUNCILORS. THERE WAS A CITY COUNCILOR NAMED MATTHEW ORTIZ WHO WAS HEAD OF THE FINANCE COMMITTEE, HE'S NO LONGER ON THE COUNCIL, BUT I WAS REVIEWING SOME MINUTES THIS WEEK FROM CONVERSATIONS THAT HE HAD WITH THE SAME COUNCIL, WITH PATTI BUSHEE, WHO IS ON THE COUNCIL NOW WHO IS THE ONE WHO'S MAKING ALL THIS NOISE, WHERE THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT HOW MANY POSITIONS ARE COMING OUT OF THE WATER COMPANY, AND SHOULD WE TAKE SOME STEPS TO FIX THIS, AND WHAT WOULD BE THE RIPPLE EFFECT IN THE WHOLE BUDGET. >> WHAT DO YOU THINK HAPPENED IN THE INTERIM? WHY WAS THERE NO ACTION IN THE INTERIM BETWEEN THAT TIME AND NOW DO YOU THINK? >> BECAUSE THE CITY BUDGET IS A SHELL GAME. MOVE THE MONEY FROM HERE, PUT THE MONEY THERE, KICK THIS CAN DOWN THE ROAD. AND REALLY, THE CONSTITUENTS DON'T FOLLOW THAT VERY CLOSELY, AND IT'S EASY. >> THAT'S TRUE. I SAW YOU SHAKING YOUR HEAD, BECAUSE WE TALKED ABOUT THIS A COUPLE OF SECONDS AGO, ABOUT ITS LEGALITY. I'VE GOT TO THINK SOME SMART CITIZENS ARE GOING TO GET A LAWYER AND WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A CLASS ACTION SUIT AND THERE'S GOING TO BE SOME REBATES DEMANDED. WHAT DO YOU THINK OF THE LEGALITY HERE? >> I THINK THEY ABSOLUTELY HAVE TO REVERSE THIS SHELL

GAME, IF YOU WANT TO CALL IT THAT, WHERE THEY'RE ESSENTIALLY RAIDING FUNDS THAT ARE SUPPOSED TO BE RESTRICTED TO A PARTICULAR USE AND OFFSETTING THEIR BUDGET SHORTFALLS FOR THIS. THIS IS ILLEGAL. THE GROSS RECEIPTS TAX, WHEN THAT GETS PASSED AND IT GETS APPROVED BY VOTERS, IT'S VERY SPECIFIC ABOUT WHAT THE USES ARE. WHATEVER THE REVENUE QUESTION IS, THAT'S WHAT THE USE IS SUPPOSED TO BE. FOR THIS PARTICULAR GROSS RECEIPTS INCREASE WATER RATE ISSUE, IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE FOR WATER, FOR THE WATER INFRASTRUCTURE AND RELATED BLAH, BLAH, BLAH. IT'S USUALLY A GENERAL ENOUGH QUESTION THAT YOU CAN FIT IN INFRASTRUCTURE, SALARIES, DIFFERENT TYPES OF THINGS LIKE THAT. BUT NOT SOMETHING THAT'S OUTSIDE OF THAT PARTICULAR DIVISION. >> GRAPHIC DESIGNER, FOR EXAMPLE. >> RIGHT. BUT YOU CAN'T FIT IN JUST GENERAL FUND TO SUPPLEMENT TO DO THAT. SO THEY NEED TO REVERSE THAT, AND THEY NEED TO, IN MY OPINION, REVERSE THE TAX. THEY HAVE TOO MUCH MONEY AND NOT ENOUGH USE FOR IT. THAT'S SOMETHING THAT THEY NEED TO JUST ABSOLUTELY DO AWAY WITH. >> I DON'T THINK THE PART ABOUT THE GUY USING IT IS 100% CORRECT.

THEY CAN PASS IT, WE VOTE FOR IT, GET THE MONEY, AND THEN IN A MEETING THEY CAN CHANGE WHAT THEY WANT TO USE THE MONEY FOR. BUT THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO DO IT IN AN OPEN MEETING, BECAUSE THEY'VE DONE THAT WITH SCHOOLS BEFORE. >> THERE ARE SOME RULES, BUT THEY HAVEN'T DONE THAT. >> NO, TRUST ME, I'M NOT DEFENDING THEM. BUT THIS IS -- YOU KNOW, THE LEGISLATURE DID THIS WITH THE GAS TAX. WE PUT ALL THIS MONEY IN. GOVERNOR RICHARDSON DID IT. WE TOOK HIGHWAY MONEY AND USED IT TO BUILD THE RAILRUNNER. IT SEEMS TO BE THE MODUS OPERANDI FOR THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO, WHETHER IT'S LOCAL GOVERNMENT OR STATE GOVERNMENT. WE'RE GOING TO TAX YOU FOR A REASON. WE'RE GOING TO GO AFTER SETTLEMENT MONEY. TOBACCO SETTLEMENT MONEY, GONE. HOW MUCH OF IT DID WE USE? WE BOUGHT BILLBOARDS AROUND THE STATE, AND THEN WE FUNDED EVERYTHING ELSE. SO AT THE END OF THE DAY, I THINK THAT THE CITIZENS SHOULD BE ASKING FOR THEIR MONEY BACK, BECAUSE I CAN TELL YOU RIGHT NOW THE SAME THING IS HAPPENING IN RIO RANCHO, AND I'M ASKING FOR MY MONEY BACK. >> THERE YOU GO. THAT'S ALL THE TIME WE HAVE FOR THIS WEEK. JOIN US ONLINE TO SEE WHAT OUR LINE PANELISTS HAD TO SAY ABOUT OTHER HEADLINES IN THE NEWS THIS WEEK.

>> I'M GENE GRANT. AS ALWAYS, WE APPRECIATE YOUR TIME AND EFFORT TO STAY INFORMED AND ENGAGED, AND WE'LL SEE YOU NEXT WEEK InFOCUS.