By SUZIE HAVEMANN
Los Alamos County Councilor

My friend Sharon Stover, who is a former and esteemed County Councilor, used to say, “There is always more to the story”. And I used to add “There are almost always two sides to every story”.

I thought about these sentiments during Tuesday night’s Council meeting as we heard presentations, questions, public comment, and staff’s answers on two important topics:  community wide broadband and the purchase of real property on Diamond Drive, across from the high school. The former ultimately passed on a 6-0 vote and while we must do better in giving reasonable time for public consideration and input, there was agreement that the option of much faster, less expensive, and less monopoly-driven internet connectivity will be of value to all our residents. 

Some background on the second topic:

The County was recently presented with an exclusive offer to purchase, in one bundle, three adjoining parcels on Diamond Drive: the old Metzger’s lot, the Anderson’s Pharmacy / Morning Glory lot, and the land and building that used to be Ed’s Market and now houses several revenue-producing tenants, including our Social Services and state Public Health Offices, an ATM, NMED, and Jui Jitsu’s space.

These three parcels are zoned General Commercial and were purchased by the current owner a few years ago; he resides in Colorado and for reasons not explicitly clear (sellers don’t typically share their motives or bargaining chips), he is only willing to sell at a certain price and if Closing occurs on or before Dec. 17.

Note, the old Metzger’s building had been vacant since 2015 and was finally demolished by the current owner this past year. That property had previously been listed for sale and was therefore available on the open market, but nothing ever happened with it.

Morning Glory has been vacant since August 2023 and that building was also recently demolished. The seller likely spent $500K to $1M for the demo work and another ~$200K in site improvements.

Some details:

These three parcels were assessed earlier this year at a total valuation of $5.6M; an appraisal was completed this week and came in at a similar value.

The negotiated purchase price between the seller and county staff is $9.85M.

Immediately, one can see the crux of the matter.

Putting aside the tight turnaround time and agreeably tiny amount of time for public engagement (which is a valid bone of contention that I am not dismissing), it is hard to rationalize such a price delta.

But therein lies the opportunity for some open-mindedness in thinking about how there is more to this story based on my experience as a local Realtor for 18 years, there is a difference between “price” and “worth”. A seller doesn’t want to leave money on the table and a buyer doesn’t want to overpay. But who really defines what is “overpaying”? The buyer. And when a buyer settles on a price, they are weighing multiple factors: price, location, other available options for purchase, costs to make the property suitable, overall “feel” of the property, anticipated duration of ownership, matching of features to unique needs, etc.

Appraisals offer a value at a snapshot in time based mostly on recent comparable sales or on actively listed similar properties (which in this case, there are none). List prices and purchase prices are based on so much more.

In fact, if a buyer decides a property is “worth more” than the list price or appraised value, the buyer will often get to the higher price by various means. The final “market price” is ultimately determined by what could be deemed irrational behavior, but still valid factors, in the eyes of the buyer.

What’s On the Table:

Given the late hour of the Nov. 19 Council Meeting and the desire for more time to consider this subject, the Diamond Drive Purchase Agreement decision was tabled to our next meeting on Dec. 3.

There are many factors to consider and more than two sides to this story.

I tend to be one who thinks the long term cost of doing nothing, or of losing this opportunity, is greater than the cost of paying over the assessed value.

Ideally, a private developer who understands and has a vested interest in the future of this community would have already purchased this property and developed it in a way that enhances opportunities for small business, housing, and other community needs.

But that hasn’t happened. Nor has it happened with the CB Fox Building. Nor the Mari Mac shopping center, at least so far. Nor with Longview in White Rock. Nor the old Hilltop House site. So, one could argue that private sector ownership hasn’t always made our town more vibrant or business-friendly.

I think it’s time to try something new. We have a great mix of new and veteran County staff who are eager to garner public input and put their skills to work to make something really positive happen for our community.

For years we have said over and over we need more housing, we need a hub to provide better and more accessible social and health services, we need more space and more opportunities for existing and startup businesses, and we want to partner with other community organizations. And, we have said over and over we are tired of vacant land, unsightly buildings, and lack of progress. Of note, the location of this parcel lends itself to so many possibilities with both UNM-LA and LAPS.

Please keep in mind the County already owns a lot of property in town and one could argue some of the best looking buildings were County-developed. But that’s in the eyes of the beholder, I realize. The County also owns other parcels that will hopefully be developed soon for housing, mixed use, retail, and business space. It’s not like this Diamond Drive parcel would be our first rodeo.

This is such a unique opportunity because of the timing, location, and shovel-readiness of this property. If we back away, sure, it will be in the hands of the private versus the public sector. But then we will have zero say in the outcome; we could end up with storage units, or a car wash, or professional office space. Who knows? And that’s the point. We don’t know and we won’t have any ability to shape that future.

What Do You Think?

I agree, this is a tough decision. I’m inclined to want to leverage this opportunity even if it seems irrational, but remember, market economics is often derived from what could be deemed irrational actions.

But, I’m not totally sure on this. We county councilors must also be judicious in our decisions about public money expenditures. We must consider all input coupled with our experience, goals, and values that were communicated during our respective election campaigns. We also have the responsibility to think long term and big picture.

So, what do you think? If you would like to have the chance to give input on what could be developed at such a prime location, then please speak up! If you would like to see the County pursue this investment opportunity, please say so.

But if you feel this is not the right time, price, or place for the County’s expenditure, please say so. We need to hear from as many of you as possible. The best way to predict the future is to shape it. Thank you for being engaged in what’s happening in your community.

You can give input any or all of these ways:

• Email the Council at: CountyCouncil@lacnm.us
• Submit letters to the editors of our local media
• Give e-comment via the prompts that will be included with the published agenda
• Express your thoughts at the Dec. 3 meeting, either in person at Council Chambers or online via Zoom (the link will also be published with the agenda).