Inside Information
In your endorsement did you mention that PNM, a New Mexico company regulated by the PRC, was his client? Did you consider that your readers might want to decide for themselves whether or not his relationship with PNM could potentially affect his decision-making as a commissioner? After all, he would be expected to regulate the very business for which he was once a subsidiary general manger and on whose behalf he testified in favor of deregulation before the Nevada legislature in 1999.
As much as he may believe he's immune to pressures from 20 year-old relationships with utility business associates and as easily as he has convinced you of it, there's just no place in this world for that kind of subverted idealism. His 20-year loyalty to the energy industry does not translate into loyalty to the public. Sadly, even the Alibi doesn't see the situation for what it is, and you should know better.
Funny how politics are … if the primary had turned out differently and at this time you had been endorsing Hess Yntema instead of Camp, at least we could sleep at night knowing that you were standing behind a true public servant instead of an industry insider that cannot possibly represent the interests of New Mexicans at the PRC.
Letters
Thanks, Brother
Quality Roads For Developers
It was Domenici who, in 1996, sponsored the last-minute rider to the Congressional Appropriations bill to slice out the right-of-way from Petroglyph National Monument needed for the Paseo Extension and give that land to the City of Albuquerque. Instead of allowing a clean vote on the Paseo extension, Domenici snuck it into the Federal Appropriations Bill containing, among myriad other items, disaster relief for Bosnia. Mayor Chavez has accomplished a similar political sleight of hand this year by forcing voters to vote on a Street Bonds package that includes Paseo, rather than separating Paseo out as a stand-alone vote, as four of our city councilors recommended.
Domenici is now saying that the Street Bonds—which would fund a commuter highway right through the Petroglyphs—would actually “protect” the Petroglyphs. How’s that? His logic defies me—it’s like saying that constructing a highway through the Vatican will actually protect the Vatican. From what? Catholics?
Domenici goes on to say in a recent mail piece from the Quality Neighborhoods Committee that “not one petroglyph will be lost or destroyed.” Domenici and his counterpart, Mayor Chavez, show a profound lack of understanding and respect for what New Mexico’s Pueblo tribes have consistently said on this issue over the past decade.
The Pueblos have asserted that the volcanic escarpment on which the petroglyphs sit create the sacred area that is still in use today for religious ceremony. That’s why the All Indian Pueblo Council, representing New Mexico’s 19 tribes; the Navajo Nation, which has thousands of members in New Mexico; and the National Congress of American Indians, representing over 250 tribes nationally, are all staunchly opposed to the Paseo extension.
So it’s not a matter of moving one petroglyph from the right-of-way into a museum, it’s the reality of the irreparable damage a six-lane commuter highway and 20,000 cars per day will do to this religious area.
As reported in the media, Quality Neighborhood Committee’s first financial report in mid-October showed that 90 percent of its contributions came from developer interests. Its report released this Friday, Oct. 29, shows more of the same. We have homebuilders Scott Patrick, Inc. and High Desert Investment Corp. We have the National Association of Industrial and Office Properties and the Westland Development Corp. And we have Mesa Verde Development, Sandia Properties and Platinum Builders Corp.
Despite the mayor, the senator and Quality Neighborhood’s mantra that this Paseo Extension is for the people, not for the developers, it’s pretty transparent that this road is for the developers. St. Pete, perhaps you’re not so saintly anymore.
Letters should be sent with the writer's name, address and daytime phone number via e-mail to letters@alibi.com. They can also be faxed to (505) 256-9651. Letters may be edited for length and clarity, and may be published in any medium; we regret that owing to the volume of correspondence we cannot reply to every letter.