So NM’s Board of Finance doesn’t need any experts?

An out-of-state company is one step closer to securing $51 million in state incentives for a new development on Albuquerque’s West Side, despite Department of Finance and Administration and legislative staffers warning the tax giveaway doesn’t make much sense.

Western Albuquerque Land Holdings, the company behind a separate massive development on the West Side, would pay for improvements to Interstate 40 and frontage roads to service the development it’s planning. That development would include a proposed Presbyterian medical center, hotel and other amenities north of Interstate 40, near the new Albuquerque Public Schools stadium. The company is asking for up to $51 million in reimbursements that would come from a share of the extra gross receipts tax revenue generated by the development.

Albuquerque city councilors have already approved $63 million in similar incentives for the project.

But DFA and economists working for the Legislative Finance Committee say the developers failed to show the project would create “new jobs” in the state or that state help is necessary. They said that even without state incentives, the new medical center, grocery store and other amenities are likely to be built when there’s demand for them in the course of normal growth. And economists warned the project won’t bring new money into the economy, suggesting the medical center and grocery store would merely draw business away from existing hospitals and grocery stores.

“These activities do not grow the state’s economic pie,” said Clinton Turner, the chief economist for the state Board of Finance and the Department of Finance and Administration. Legislative economists agreed, saying it’s “quite likely” the jobs would be created without the state incentive. And, they pointed out, the project is already in line for incentives from the city of Albuquerque.

But the state Board of Finance voted 5-2 in favor of the state incentives anyway, scheduling a final vote on the measure for September. Legislative approval also will be required.

Economists protect public in sun and rain

And the board didn’t just reject the recommendation not to move forward with the incentives; one board member, Albuquerque attorney Robert Aragon, treated the staff report with outright disdain, arguing the economic analysis was simply a “best guess.” He compared economists to “a weatherman who forecasts rain tomorrow that never happens.” DFA Secretary Duffy Rodriguez, a nonvoting member of the Board of Finance, defended her staff, saying the economic analysis was the work of a team of employees at DFA and not based on conjecture.

Lt. Gov. John Sanchez, meanwhile, told the staff he thought their assumptions were wrong.

To be sure, the state Board of Finance has every right to accept or reject recommendations of its staffers, and it’s true this area of the city is desperate for new jobs. But the attack Aragon engaged in during last month’s board meeting crossed the line when he openly belittled Turner’s work and said he could cross-examine Turner and demonstrate that his analysis is “based on conjecture rather than empirical fact.”

“If he challenges me,” Aragon said, “I will go down that alley.”

DFA and legislative staffers were doing their jobs — looking out for the best interests of taxpayers and the state by analyzing whether these proposed tax incentives are likely to grow the economy. Their analysis of these types of deals is crucial to ensure taxpayers don’t get taken for a ride.

Legislative economists Jon Clark and Dawn Iglesias are absolutely right when they say, “There should always be a high standard of evidence when taxpayer funds are to be used for a private development project.”