 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 |
Colonias Along the United States/Mexico Border: The Issue and Impact of Colonias In Southern New Mexico
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
Session:Student Presentations (March 14, 8:45 am) |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Abstract: Colonias are generally classified as areas along the United States/Mexico Border that lack safe housing and adequate infrastructure and have high unemployment rates and low levels of educational attainment. In part these areas have been allowed to develop because of weak land use regulations. The ramifications for the health of the communities, the counties, the states, and the region are great and the issue really is no longer why do these areas exist but what is the best way to combat the issue and improve the conditions in the colonias.
In the current social and political landscape border issues are hot topics. Border issues can be the stuff that elevates the careers of those at the top of the federal agency food chain or clinch a victory in a political campaign. Many officials at agencies such as The Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) have built their careers on issues such as colonias, and consultants have swarmed to the border region to "cash-in" on the situation. The colonias problem is one the hottest border issues. The development, perpetuation, health and welfare, and regulation of colonias have received increased attention over the last decade. So far the remedies have been reactive instead of proactive, and have not gotten to the root of the problems that perpetuate the festering of the social problems in the colonias. This paper will focus on colonias in Dona Ana County, New Mexico. I will provide general background on the issue locally and statewide, its impact on the overall health of the county and state, and observations of how the issue can be remedied. In addition I will discuss the federal government’s role in problem solving. Overall Background Before I jump into the colonias issue as it pertains to Dona Ana County and New Mexico I feel it is vital to first explain a few fine points. I will provide the federal definitions of a colonia, explain common characteristics, assumptions and misconceptions about colonias, and outline the types of funding available to colonias, which I see as solely reactive. What is a Colonia: Federal Definitions HUD: In short, HUD defines a colonia as a rural community or neighborhood located within 150 miles of the U.S.-Mexico border that lacks basic infrastructure and services; i.e. potable water and paved roads. United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Any identifiable community designated in writing by the state or county in which it is located, which is determined to be a colonia based on specific criteria to include lack of potable water, adequate sewage system, and decent, safe, and sanitary housing. The community must lack inadequate roads or drainage and the community must have come into existence or be generally recognized as a colonia before October 1, 1989. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Colonias are rural U.S. settlements with substandard and poor living conditions along the U.S.-Mexico border. These communities typically lack potable water, wastewater treatment, drainage, electricity, and paved roads. As one can see the first problem that arises with how to address the conditions in the colonias is what constitutes a colonia. Each involved agency has a separate definition. Although they are close in meaning there are variations that cause some level of disagreement over which communities should be designated and what measures the individual colonia and/or the county must take before they may qualify for funding. Therefore, the first item that should be addressed at the federal level is the forming of one unified definition of a colonia that will be used by every concerned agency so that assistance can be expedited and proactive measures can be taken to truly address the problem instead of simply advancing careers. To a certain degree the decentralized approach to the colonias issue at the federal level has done nothing to reduce the problem. I feel that if true progress is to be made it is vital for the federal government to develop a single definition, streamlined set of guidelines, and then these agencies must constantly monitor the designated areas to not only determine progress, but also determine which communities still qualify under the single definition. Common Characteristics of A Colonia
The difference between colonias in Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, and California is minimal. Most qualifying communities are characterized in all four Border States by a lack of safe housing, adequate infrastructure, and services. A fair number of the communities began as illegal subdivisions developed by unscrupulous ranchers and farmers and small time commercial developers who sought to prey on the poor and undereducated to make a fast and easy profit using contracts for deed. In fact the problem of contracts for deed may be the most debilitating issue in New Mexico’s colonias. In contrast to colonias in Arizona, New Mexico colonias are mostly unincorporated communities. In the New Mexico State University (NMSU) study only 12% of the 137 designated colonias were incorporated municipalities. The majority of New Mexico’s colonias are located in rural sections of the county’s beyond the urbanized areas, and in the case of Dona Ana County, they are outside of the extra-territorial zone (ETZ). The development of the colonias can usually be divided into two categories; Functional towns i.e. mining communities such as Santa Clara in Grant County, and Subdivisions such as Cattleland in Dona Ana County. The majority of colonias in Dona Ana County fall under the subdivision classification. Assumptions and Misconceptions There are many common misconceptions about colonias. The first, and most common is that they are full of illegal aliens. The fact is that United States Citizens or legal residents who have full, legal rights to work and vote in many cases settle many colonias. Due to the lack of data from the census bureau it is hard to determine an overall percentage of persons in the colonias that are not U.S. born versus U.S. born. I hypothesize that the further north of the border one travels the less likely it is to encounter first generation immigrants. Many of the southern most colonias do have a relatively high population of first and second-generation immigrants due to their proximity to the border. The counties of Dona Ana, Hidalgo, and Luna are located directly on the U.S./ Mexico Border; therefore these counties have become starting points for those who emigrate from Mexico. Second, it is perceived that all colonias are illegal subdivisions. Granted there are many subdivision size colonias that have been developed illegally, but many colonias in New Mexico are small towns with local merchants, services, and schools. One assumption that I believe to be true is that since many colonias are unincorporated they are politically unvaluable and thus they are ignored. I see incorporation as a major issue in the colonias. As previously mentioned, only 12% of New Mexico’s colonias are incorporated communities. Incorporation is a benefit because these communities have a better chance of obtaining funding for needed infrastructure they will gain the political clout of a recognized town, which would give them the ability to form true coalitions instead of being lumped into a meaningless mass of people who reside only in a census block or tract. However, in Dona Ana County the populations of all but three colonias (Anthony, Chaparral, and Sunland Park) are too small to incorporate under the statutes of a "Class A County" in New Mexico. Funding Available To Colonias Assistance to colonias comes in two forms, grants and loans. The majority of the funding in New Mexico is doled out from federal agencies in the form of grants. The USDA, HUD, and the EPA are the three primary contributors. Of these agencies, USDA has infused the largest dollar amount into the collective coffers of New Mexico colonias. USDA: The Rural Utilities Service (RUS) grant is the grant most awarded to New Mexico colonias by USDA. The 7th U.S. Congress first established this program with the enactment of the Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act in 1926. The key element of this act is Section 306C WWD Loans and Grants. USDA established the Water and Waste Water Loans and Grants program to provide financial assistance to impoverished rural communities that face substantial health risks to establish safe water and sanitary disposal systems. The program is designed to allow not only counties and municipalities to apply for RUS monies, but also special or single use districts, non-governmental agencies (NGO’s) i.e. cooperatives, private corporations, and Indian tribes. However, only communities that meet the rural designation may apply. The act defines a rural community as any municipality or unincorporated community with populations less than 10,000, according to the most recent census. Under the Clinton Administration this act was amended to specifically service colonias. Of all the federal programs I believe this is the most common sense program because it does allow, for example, the Organ Water Association to apply for funding, thus allowing local organizations who actually now what the community needs versus what a third party study dictates. Under other programs application is limited to county or municipal authorities. The eligibility requirements are slightly different for colonias than they are for other types of rural communities. Colonias only have to prove that a significant level of health risks exist due to the lack of service or the lack of access to adequate, affordable, water and/or waste water systems. Other types of communities must prove that their communities earn no more than 70% of the national per capita income and the unemployment rate in the community has reached at least 12.5%. Thus colonias appear to have priority because most of them do lack the basic infrastructure and easily qualify. However, the awards are based on a point system, which is based on population, income, and joint financing. Additional points are awarded to colonias and the state office can award discretionary points. This point system tends to penalize communities with no formal system of government with ability to employ professional planners or grant writers. The majority of colonias in New Mexico are unincorporated and the counties are understaffed. Unless a regional planning agency or a non-profit group is assisting a colonia, they may not be able to compile the necessary data to complete the application. Thus, they may not be awarded the amount of points that would push them to the front of the line. However, this has not prevented New Mexico Colonias from benefiting from the RUS program and other USDA programs that are dedicated to water and wastewater. Since 1993 USDA has invested over $100 million in the colonias region. Colonias in New Mexico have received some of the largest grant amounts. In 1998 USDA awarded over $6 million. In Dona Ana County the Organ Water Association received $990,000, the Brazito Mutual Domestic Water Consumers Association received $924,000 and the Vado Mutual Domestic Water Consumers and Mutual Sewer Works received $700,000. HUD: With the possible exception of the RUS grants, the most common form of funding used to improve conditions in colonias is the Community Development Block Grants (CDBG). CDBG grants are provided to the communities by HUD to begin or complete projects as they see fit. In New Mexico, HUD sets aside an additional 10% of CDBG money specifically for colonias, which is referred to as non-entitlement funds. To date HUD has invested $10.3 million dollars in CDBG funding in New Mexico colonias. In fiscal year 1999, HUD infused an additional $1, 531,200 of non-entitlement funds. Non-entitlement funds have been used to do comprehensive and infrastructure plans, complete water and sewer projects, pave roads, and improve streets. HUD also granted $640,000 in 1998 in the way of colonias initiative grants and $165,445 in 1999 for Rural Housing and Economic Development grants. EPA: At this time no major programs have established by the EPA to directly benefit colonias. "Most existing federal loan and grant programs for colonias require recipients to use money to bring their homes up to typical housing standards — insisting that houses have a separate bathroom, among other requirements (Elder)." Although a bathroom is may not be the best example to use as a point of contention as it pertains to how money is doled out, it is important to understand that although requirements should exist, it is important to remember that a roof that does not leak may be more important than whether or not a family has indoor plumbing. One creative remedy in the way of funding has occurred in the Texas colonia, El Cenizo, outside of Laredo. El Cenizo was able to win a settlement that was the result of a long running dispute between El Cenizo residents and the state Department of Housing and Community Affairs; residents will get control of a $350,000 fund to pay for improvements in the subdivision’s substandard homes. But unlike previous colonia-improvement programs, the money won’t come with any strings attached. Along with this, El Cenizo will also receive $1 million in federal housing assistance. This grant will be deposited into a community account and Webb County will receive a $685,000 CDBG for improvements in the colonia. The El Cinizo example has two important lessons. One, communities must pull together and form coalitions so that they have a collective voice to fight with, and two, the communities have a good idea of what they really need to improve the conditions in their area. It is the community that knows what they need and how to spend the money if funds become available to them. The El Cinizo example could be duplicated all along the border with great results and should be implemented in a few colonias in each state on a trial basis with a defined method to test the programs success. The question I feel that has not been answered is whether the proper balance for funding exists. It has been stated that federal agencies and agencies that receive large amounts of federal funding have a tendency to not balance funding. A prime example is that of the Appalachian Redevelopment Commission who their early years allocated a disproportionate amount of funding to the building of highways at the expense of education and training. Therefore, it is entirely possible that by looking at this issue in retrospect that federal and state agencies may be dedicating too much funding to projects such as water and wastewater improvements. Although these items are vital to creating healthy communities that can sustain themselves, something is getting left out and I feel that education and training in the colonias is lagging as these two elements were in Appalachia. These issues must be addressed equally in order for these communities to improve their economic stock and raise the quality of life. True development will only come from the escalation of education levels and job skills. A person can become faster or more efficient at picking chile or loading trucks, but these types of jobs do not yield the type of wages or produce the type of raises that will significantly bolster tax bases and facilitate sustained economic growth. Just like their brother and sister communities in Appalachia and inner city ghettos, colonias are in a catch 22. They need better services, which cost money. However, until the tax base increases so that these services can be paid for, advancement cannot happen. Furthermore, the tax base will not increase until the people are educated, trained, and put to work in jobs that will do so. Therefore, more attention is needed in the areas of education and training. The Work Force Investment Act (which was adopted in July, 2000) partially addresses this issue. However, a major oversight was made. The program does not make available any language components. In New Mexico the issue of language skills plays an important role in explaining why so many of the colonias are unable to move ahead. Many of the colonias residents in Dona Ana County do not speak English and many more have a very limited grasp and understanding of the language. The ability to speak, understand, and write English is paramount for advancement because English is the language of business along the border like it is anywhere else in the United States. General Problems With Colonias
As we see in the example displayed in the Cecil McDonald recipe (Appendix 2), it is relatively easy for unscrupulous developers to fly under the radar of the law and avoid penalty or mitigate the case without significant financial strain upon them. Often these types of land use cases are never called into question or adjudicated because of ineffectual and vague legal language. This holds true in New Mexico and Texas. The Subdivision Act, 47-6-1 et seq. NMSA (1978) is full of loopholes. The New Mexico’s subdivision regulations provide no real meaningful or enforceable penalty to be enacted on the landowner who acts in an unscrupulous or illegal manner. Governments are rendered useless to prevent this type of development because the only penalty the courts can readily enforce is an injunction against future sales. However, when the sub divider encounters this type of mitigation from state, county, or municipality he can simply move on to dividing another piece of low-cost land at the minor expense of taking in a little less profit on the subdivision where he is caught by the prosecutor. The Issue and How It Impacts New Mexico Population & Community Recognition: New Mexico has an estimated 42,000 citizens residing in designated colonias. The affected population is spread over 10 counties in 137 designated colonias. I am of the opinion, and I believe soundly, that the estimated colonias population is low because of policies and statutes. Politics have once turned a blind eye towards issues of poverty. The state and Washington have largely ignored much of the rural population, of which the colonias fit into wholesale. The census has historically ignored rural communities by lumping them into tract areas, which make these communities unidentifiable. However, let us not solely blame the Department of Commerce and their Census Bureau. Much of the blame can be put upon the state of New Mexico. New Mexico under-funds, thus dis-empowers planning agencies at the county and Council of Government (COG) level. The future looks somewhat better. Since the 1990 census a greater emphasis has been placed on gathering hard numerical data. This data is needed by planners and grant writers at all levels to assist them in problem diagnosis and solving. Steve Meadows, of the Dona Ana County Planning Department, informed me that the county has given Census Designated Place (CDP) designations to a hand full of colonias (including Mesquite and Vado) in the county so that the 2000 census would recognize them. This is a small victory for colonias in Dona Ana County because the U.S. Census Bureau only recognizes incorporated communities. The majority of colonias in New Mexico are unincorporated. Based on the study conducted by the New Mexico State University (NMSU) team, only 12% of the colonias in the state are incorporated. Many communities that would qualify under the various federal definitions have yet to be designated. This is due largely to understaffing at the county level, and a lack of political fortitude in Santa Fe to recognize the issue. So the issue is that not everyone has been counted, and accurate and adequate data does not always exist. What this means is that research and demographic study at the local and state levels of government often cannot be completely carried. The lack of data plays a significant role in the equation, and answers many of the questions of why conditions have not improved. The policy of ignorance greatly impacts colonias in New Mexico. I feel it important to clarify at this point that I do not believe some sort of vast conspiracy exists in Washington or Santa Fe to keep the poor in their place so to speak. However, current policies are sub par and many of the colonias can easily be identified by signs at their gateways and should not be ignored because they are unincorporated. Greater emphasis needs to be placed upon getting out into the communities and finding out who the residents really are, so they can be helped. This is a problem not only with the census, but also with many studies that have been commissioned (to include the one I helped to carry out). Economics: New Mexico has long been recognized as a poor state with bad economic health. This traditional role has played an important part in the perpetuation and addition of colonias. The lack of sustainable (year-long) industry, quality education, and job training are factors in making a poor state and these are all common factors in all the colonias the NMSU team visited or researched. I believe that the weak land use regulations that allow colonias to develop aid in keeping good industry out of New Mexico. Companies, although it may be cheaper, do not want to locate in areas that do not plan and have weak land use regulations. Certainly cheap land and labor will lure them in, but if a large number of communities that meet the definition of a colonia are in the surrounding area of the targeted location, this may scare them off. They may get the feeling that their executives will not want to live in an area with a large number of un-healthy communities near by. This is not a steed fast hypothesis because I understand much of the land that houses colonias could be bought up cheaply and re-developed as master planned subdivisions and/or Planned Unit Developments (PUD). However, because they often lack adequate sewage and water systems the soil and water supply could be polluted to a point where the cost of cleaning them up would make the land more costly than land in another area that contains both cheap land and labor. The cycle continues because industry and business is not attracted to the community, and therefore community invest is lost because no jobs are created which keeps the citizens in low skill (which equals low pay) jobs. Thus the extra capital through personal finance and government assistance is not available to better the lives of the population. The key issue that needs to be addressed is economic. The majority of funding for colonias goes towards wastewater and water infrastructure. This is important. However, if the citizens cannot afford to connect to the system or the funding does not cover the expense of running lines out to remote lots then the problem has not been corrected. I believe a greater focus needs to be shifted to education (i.e. job training and increased dedication to primary and secondary education). If colonias residents do not have the access to training and education they will not be able to improve themselves and the overall health of the state’s economy will remain poor. New Mexico Subdivision Regulations: The Weakest Link In State Land Use Regulations Among the major contributors to the perpetuations of substandard conditions in New Mexico’s colonias are the laws that govern subdivision development. The State Statutes for New Mexico provide two separate subdivision laws. Statute 47-6-2 in the New Mexico Subdivision Act covers development in counties and 3-20-1 covers city and ETZ subdivision development. The regulations for subdivisions developed within the counties indicate that a subdivision is an area of land in which the surface has been divided by a sub divider into five or more parcels within a three year time period for the purpose of sale or lease. The regulations for city and ETZ development are vastly more detailed than those that regulate county subdivisions. First of all these regulations state that in order for a subdivision to be legal it first must be approved by a municipal planning authority. To go further into the regulation it states that;
What this tells us is that it is very easy for a developer to create a legal colonia by simply developing in the county outside of the ETZ (if one exists). A developer could follow a strategy like this for creating a subdivision:
This process can continue on and on and the developer could simply buy up several similar sized lots and have many small subdivisions developing at once, thus increasing his profits. I have no problem with landowners making a profit from their land. They have the right to do so under the law and it is a traditional path to riches in our country. However, colonia’s developers do not care that they are not providing the type of services that they promise and that the people deserve. The lack of one all encompassing subdivision regulation makes it extremely easy for unscrupulous developers to fly under the radar of county code enforcement officials. Thus, the perpetuation of colonia development is allowed to continue. The lack of political fortitude or the mere disinterest in Santa Fe to change the law and allow only the existing city and ETZ regulation to be used will keep the potential for colonia development alive for some time. Impact on Dona Ana County Since the 1980 Census, Dona Ana County has experienced a 40.66% growth in population, which is almost 3 times that of the State of New Mexico’s in that same period of time. Of the 135,510 (estimated 170,361in 1999) residents in Dona Ana County, 22% of them live in a designated colonia. This does not take into account those who reside in subdivisions that would qualify under the federal guidelines, those who live in communities not identified by the census and those who are undocumented/illegal aliens. Although illegal aliens probably make up a very small segment of the population in the colonias it must be understood they exist. It is unknown what the population growth rate in the colonias is at this time because the 2000 Census is not yet available and population figures from 1980 do not exist for many of the designated colonias in Dona Ana County. ?However, the colonias population is aiding the population increase in Dona Ana County and they cannot be left behind if the county hopes to move ahead. Unfortunately this segment of the population is not assisting in quality growth. What I mean by quality growth is that part of the population that is educated or trained to bolster the economy and increase the tax base. Therefore, Dona Ana County contains a very large population of people who are in need of many types of services and support but live in an area that cannot provide them due to the lack of dollars in the county coffers to pay for it. So once again we come back to the understanding that in order to elevate the community, and help it prosper you need money to produce the infrastructure, which does not happen unless there is good industry and sustainable jobs. Another hurdle is the lack of aggressive elected officials. It is my estimate that the political leaders in Dona Ana County do not want the county to grow in a manner that is strong and sustainable because it seems that they are not actively seeking anything other than retail stores and call centers. These are good jobs for teenagers and college students but they do not benefit families as much as other types of employment. Unlike some of the other rapidly growing counties in the United States, Dona Ana County is saddled with a high unemployment and poverty rate. In addition, the county has a large percentage of persons over the age of 25 without a high school diploma. According to the 1990 census, the unemployment rate in Dona Ana County was 9.4%, 26% of the residents in Dona Ana County were below the poverty line, 39.5% of the residents earned less than 80% of the county median income, and 18% of the residents over the age of 25 did not have a high school diploma. An interesting statistic is that only 2.8% of the residents of Dona Ana County were receiving public assistance. I would have speculated that this would have been higher in such an economically poor county with low levels of educational attainment. However, what this suggests is that there is a strong will of the people to make their own way and self-support themselves and their families. However, the politicians are not doing their part to improve conditions in the county for their constituents. The colonias in Dona Ana County all have a unique economic state that can be broken down and analyzed according to their specific geographical region in the county. I have divided the county into four separate areas. These regions are southern Dona Ana County, central Dona Ana County, the East Mesa area adjacent to Las Cruces, and northern Dona Ana County. In southern Dona Ana County the median household incomes tend to be very low. The average in this area is approximately $18,000 annually. Most of the communities in the southern part of the county rely heavily on seasonal farm labor as their chief source of income. The two exceptions to this are Anthony and Sunland Park. Although these two communities have the same annual income level, the type of work that produces it is more varied. These communities have higher proportions of persons working in permanent year-round service type jobs in El Paso and Las Cruces, but the difference in occupations do nothing to alter or spike the average income for them. In central Dona Ana County a relatively drastic spike in median household income occurs comparatively to the southern area. The income in this area rises approximately 69% to $26,000 annually. It is my belief that closer proximity to employment at the NASA complex just outside of Las Cruces and White Sands Missile Range helps to explain this dramatic spike. This spike in income proves out my contention that these communities can be upgraded as access to good, sustainable jobs increase. A definite upgrade in housing structures has also been noted to occur in this region over the last ten years, thus giving credence to my suggestion that better jobs have definite impact on how colonias live and how conditions improve. The exceptions of this are Brazito and San Pablo. The conditions and incomes in both of these communities mirror that of their southern neighbors. The East Mesa area adjacent to Las Cruces has some of the same characteristics as the central portion of the county. These communities are even closer to NASA and White Sands Missile Range. The average median household income is $26,232 annually, and many have there own water systems or districts. The northern part of the county is the poorest of the four. The average annual median household income is only $13,750. This area relies almost exclusively on seasonal agricultural work as their source of income. Thus, most of the residents are unemployed for most of the year. This area also represents some of the poorest living conditions in the county. Communities such as El Milagro, Placitas, and Rincon display what is usually viewed as "Third World Conditions" to outsiders. I should note that to the residents of all colonias in the border region their homes are cherished places where they raise their families. They take pride in owning property. In 1993 the Dona Ana County Planning Department completed a study in which they claimed fewer than 20% of the colonias in the county were connected to a public water and/or wastewater systems. In that report they claimed that mobile home permits outnumbered building permits for single-family homes 3 to 1. Although there is certainly nothing wrong with mobile homes as a housing type they do present certain safety hazards. Among those hazards are fires. The estimated life span of a mobile home is only 5 minutes in a fire. The locations of some of these mobile homes are not easily accessible and in some cases access is impossible. Therefore, fire and rescue vehicles may or may not be able to get to the endangered areas. Fires are not the only hazards that could prove extremely dangerous to these areas. Many colonias lack the proper rights of way and the road conditions are such that large emergency vehicles may be denied access in the case of medical emergencies and floods. Even though many of the colonias are near volunteer fire departments their response time and the narrow roads still make it almost impossible to save these structures in the case of a fire or save lives in cases of floods and medical emergencies. Of the ten effected counties, Dona Ana is the only one that has an existing ETZ. Fortunately for Dona Ana County 35% of the designated colonias lie within the ETZ. The burden is somewhat lessened because a higher-level of regulations can be placed upon the land and mistakes can often be avoided. With the exception of San Pablo the conditions are basically good in the ETZ colonias compared to those outside of the five-mile radius. The subdivisions on the East Mesa are made up of mostly mobile homes and the roads are unimproved but the likelihood of an illegal subdivision popping up out of nowhere has been decreased. However, the remaining 65% of the communities pose a formidable threat to the quality of community development in the county because they lie outside of the ETZ and are not (with the exception of Sunland Park) incorporated municipalities. The possibility of additional poorly subdivided areas exists in many communities. Throughout Dona Ana County and New Mexico a precedent has already been set that illegal subdivisions and other types of poor planning and code violations will be accepted without very many questions being asked. The tolerance for this has been established because Santa Fe has made it known through lax land use regulations that this is okay so the counties should not be concerned either. This level of apathy and tolerance cannot be accepted if this state as whole expects to prosper in the twenty-first century. Additionally, these politically ignored areas fester even further because the residents do not fight what is going on so the developers take advantage of their silence. The three largest colonias (Anthony, Chaparral, and Sunland Park) in New Mexico are located in the southern part of Dona Ana County. Although steps have been taken to correct the problems in these areas more has to be done. Due to the size of their respective populations they pose the greatest threats to the overall health of the county. The longer the problems remain, the greater the impact will be and it will become increasingly harder to deal with the problematic issues in these communities. Below are brief profiles of each one of these communities - Community Profile: Anthony Anthony is designated, as a CDP by Dona Ana County, which basically means they are unincorporated but the population has grown so large that the census bureau cannot ignore their existence. The population of Anthony in 1990 was 5,160. Of those 5,160 39.1% are foreign born and 77% reported speaking Spanish at home. The unemployment rate was 15.1%. 14.9% earned less than 80% of the county median income. 47% of the population earned a wage below the poverty line. 18% of the adults over the age of 25 did not have a high school diploma. The median age in Anthony was 21.9. Anthony has its own water and sanitation service and almost 100% of the homes in the community are connected. The Anthony Water and Sewer District no longer permits the use of septic tanks within its boundaries. Housing conditions in Anthony are among the poorest in Dona Ana County. Interviews conducted during the NMSU study indicated that housing conditions have not changed since the 1990 census was taken. Site built homes and mobile homes are evenly used in the community. Many conclusions can be made about Anthony by simply looking at the data. The percentage of adults without a high school education can be directly correlated to the unemployment rate. However, another contributing factor to the level of poverty and unemployment is the amount of people who speak Spanish at home and who are foreign born. In this community it is very possible that people cannot work because they cannot communicate in English. This community possesses many problems and should draw concern from the county because it is poor, poorly educated, the housing is deteriorating, and the population is increasing. However, Anthony is a young community and I feel that it’s feasible for the community to turn around quickly because of the relatively young median age. The recent construction of the Gadsden branch of the Dona Ana Community College is a vital element to the improvement of Anthony because the residents no longer have to travel to El Paso or Las Cruces. Anthony’s assets lie in youth, and its liability lies in poorly trained and educated people. Education and training can improve the community, but the beneficiaries must understand the lack of education, skills, and language abilities are liabilities that must be done away with for their community to prosper. Anthony is a good example of what the next step should be. Anthony is a community that has improved infrastructure and now they must begin to direct funding to job training, education, and English language programs. Anthony is in a good location to take advantage of jobs in both the El Paso and Las Cruces areas but they must focus on ways to prepare their residents to obtain positions that will help them bolster their local economy and begin rehabilitation on their homes. Community Profile: Chaparral Chaparral is an unusual case study for many reasons. The first factor that makes this community very different from the others is that it is split between Dona Ana and Otero County. Approximately 60-70% of the area lies in Dona Ana County, as does most of the population. Like most of the colonias in New Mexico, Chaparral is unincorporated. There have been some movements in the community to incorporate but there is no universal agreement as to which county they would prefer to be annexed into completely. Under New Mexico law all affected landowners must agree to annexation therefore the residents on the Otero side most likely do not want to be annexed into Dona Ana County. Since it is unclear what the population split between Dona Ana and Otero counties is, incorporation may not be a legal possibility at this time. In order to incorporate the community must possess at least 10,000 residents. However, based on the 2000 estimate, if 60% of the residents of Chaparral reside in Dona Ana County then there would be enough people to allow them to divide and incorporate the Dona Ana County section. The estimated population for the year 2000 in Chaparral was 17,000 giving Chaparral a 78% growth rate between 1990 and 2000. This estimate also gives Chaparral the largest single colonia population in the state. The median age in 1990 was 26 years old. Based on numbers taken from the 1990 census 30.2% of the families in Chaparral earned less than 80% of the county median income. 22% of the population earned a wage that was below the poverty line. 3.8% of the population was unemployed. However, over 18% of the adults over the age of 25 do not have a high school diploma. Chaparral is a relatively young community, they are poor, and the level educational attainment is low. However, there close proximity to El Paso and Las Cruces gives the community access to Ft. Bliss, White Sands Missile Range, NASA and several other major employers in the areas that provide a good living wage and keep the majority of the population employed. The infrastructure in Chaparral is similar to that of many other communities. 4.8% of the housing units lack electricity; however, electricity is available to 100% of the units. It is possible that many units receive electricity by running extension cords to adjacent units. So the percentage that is not yet connected because they cannot afford to do so is unknown. The roads within the residential sections are mostly unimproved or in a severe state of disrepair. Most of the residential and commercial units in Chaparral employ septic tanks to handle wastewater disposal. Chaparral has two private water companies and one mutual domestic water association but wells are still heavily employed. Chaparral has a small but growing local economic base. Several small restaurants have opened in Chaparral. According to residents of Chaparral, local real estate professionals and county officials from Dona Ana and Otero County, the housing stock has improved slightly since the 1990 census was taken. Community Profile: Sunland Park Sunland Park is the sole incorporated colonia in Dona Ana County. The population in 1990 was 8,179 persons. While not as striking as the growth in Chaparral, Sunland Park is experiencing a rapid growth rate. According to Larry Shannon, Director of Community Development in Sunland Park, the 2000 projection is 12,000 to 14,000 people based on a housing survey conducted prior to the census. If the population does increase to 12,000 people the population of Sunland Park will have increased by 46% over the past 10 years. If the population increases to 14,000 that percentage rises to 71%. Sunland Park also experienced a population boom between 1980 and 1990 at a rate of 52.7%. Like Chaparral, Sunland Park is a young community. Sunland Park is in a position to possibly grow much faster than Chaparral because the median age is 22 years old. What this indicates is that more residents of Sunland Park are moving into the age were people commonly choose to start families. In addition to that the close proximity to Santa Teresa and El Paso should serve to increase the opportunity for higher wage yielding jobs as those communities continue to grow. Primarily, the job growth will most likely come from Santa Teresa. However, that potential influx of good jobs is not yet evident based on the extremely high unemployment rate in the community. According to the 1990 census 13.9% of the working age population of Sunland Park were unemployed. This can be attributed more to the low level of educational attainment than it can be to the lack of job opportunities in that area. The 1990 census shows that 39% of the adults over the age of 25 lacked a high school diploma. Another key statistic in understanding the difficulties in Sunland Park is the number of persons who earn a wage below the poverty line. Of the 8,179 residents of the city, 52% of Sunland Park’s population fit into this category in 1990. Even though Sunland Park has many problems they have taken some steps to improving their situation. The first thing they did was to incorporate. This gave the community the chance to control their own fate to some degree versus relying on the county to help guide them. So unlike most colonias, Sunland Park has a mayor and a city council. Sunland Park also has a water system and they do not allow the use of septic tanks. In addition Sunland Park has its own planning agency and they have a comprehensive plan. Sunland Park still has much work to do in the way of bringing housing structures up to code, implementing job training programs, and attracting business and industry to their city to increase their tax base. However, I feel that Sunland Park is in a better position to improve and grow in a way that will produce positive results than any other community. Looking Toward a Future Problem As I have already stated, Dona Ana County is one of the fastest growing counties in the United States and the fastest growing county in New Mexico. With an abundance of designated (and soon to be designated) colonias in Dona Ana County adding to this growth it is obviously important to address the root of the problem. The root of the colonias problem is comprised of the same issues that plague rural poverty everywhere; poor education, job training, high unemployment due to a lack of sustainable industry, and poor healthcare. Dona Ana County’s rapid rate of growth could positively impact the colonias that are in close proximity to Las Cruces and Santa Teresa (the looming boom town to the south). With a potential influx of industry that would create sustainable employment it is possible that many colonias residents would be afforded the opportunity to vacate low paying seasonal agricultural jobs for better paying factory jobs or other forms of work brought to the area. At this point it is important to provide some background on Santa Teresa. Santa Teresa is a master planned industrial community in southern Dona Ana County that is adjacent to El Paso, Texas and borders Chihuahua, Mexico. Santa Teresa is a booming community with a population of approximately 1,500 people. Some liberal estimates have been made that the population could swell to as many as 150,000 residents by the year 2030. Currently Santa Teresa is an unincorporated they cannot annex land. Once Santa Teresa reaches a population of 10,000 persons or a population density of one person per acre it can incorporate. As mentioned earlier, the continued growth and industrial concentration in Santa Teresa could prove to be a powerful boost to the colonias in its vicinity. At this time there are eight communities in the path (both directly and indirectly) of potential growth in Santa Teresa. These communities include Sunland Park, Anthony, and La Mesa. Anthony and Sunland Park are special cases because they have populations larger than that of Santa Teresa, which are growing at a faster rate. Anthony had a population of 5,160 in 1990. Sunland Park was estimated to have a population of 10,800 persons in 1999. Sunland Park is an incorporated community therefore the effect of Santa Teresa will be that of outside economic impact because they are in no danger of being incorporated by Santa Teresa. In reality Sunland Park poses a minor threat to push for the annexation of land Santa Teresa may feel desirable. Anthony is not incorporated however; their population may have grown enough over the last ten years to give them the ability to do so, and thus Santa Teresa will only create an economic impact through the access of employment. There is also the potential that both communities will be undesignated as colonias by Dona Ana County this year. Once Santa Teresa incorporates and gains the ability to annex land they very well could move straight north towards Las Cruces and consume (with the approval of the land owners) entire communities such as La Mesa. Or they could follow the example of Laredo, Texas who in its efforts to increase its property tax and business base through annexation, annexed around the colonias in its vicinity. The remaining six communities in Santa Teresa path are unincorporated areas of the county and could, for lack of a better phrase, become "gobbled up" by the looming industrial boomtown, which would have a direct and positive impact on all facets of life for the residents of these communities. If done right these communities could retain there names and history while improving their quality of life as long as Santa Teresa planned properly and investigated whether or not these areas should gain classification and protection as historical landmarks. An important factor to note is that much of the land at the crest of Santa Teresa’s annexation path is agricultural land. This land could become very valuable and provide enormous profits for the farmers that own it. In the short term some may not be willing to let go of their land because they desire to see it used for agricultural purposes. If the land were annexed it would certainly be turned into subdivisions and commercial strips. Of course by the time growth would arrive at the doorsteps of the chile and onion farmers the value of their land for residential and commercial use could be so high they would not be able to refuse such an offer. Communities designated and not designated as colonias would greatly benefit not only from increased access to higher paying jobs but also assured improvements to creation of wastewater and water systems. However, under my theory this would only happen in the event that Santa Teresa would make the logical decision to annex the colonias lands versus annexing around them. However, what I believe will happen is one of two scenarios. First of all the newly incorporated municipality, in their effort to race against Las Cruces, who they may feel has thoughts of annexing almost all the way to El Paso, may try to block Las Cruces off. Santa Teresa may attempt to rapidly annex all the agricultural land (and colonias) south of Las Cruces and north of Santa Teresa. After taking in this land they begin a wholesale condemnation program in the colonias or through Eminent Domain and displace hundreds of people. In order for the city to obtain prime land for development they could cheaply evict these residents to allow for new and expensive developments to be built upon those sites. A second possibility is Santa Teresa may attempt to avoid the expense and legal red tape of condemnation the new town may push westward, lengthen its concentration of land, and maintain continuity along the border. This would create the effect similar to that of Laredo in that they annex (not around) but away from existing colonias. There is no question that the growth of Santa Teresa will impact the colonias in southern Dona Ana County. The impact could be so great that it could reach as far as the Hatch Valley north of Las Cruces. The real question is how will it impact upon communities such as Las Palmeras, La Union, and Chamberino. Will the growth serve to better the lives of the residents, displace them, or simply avoid them and cut the majority out of the benefits such far reaching growth would certainly bring about. For the sake of the overall economic health of the colonias, the county, and the state I hope Santa Teresa and Las Cruces take the hard road and annex these communities in and allow them to pull themselves up and prosper in unison versus excluding them from the process. The HUD/NMSU Project Although New Mexico has the second largest population of colonias residents, no attempt prior to the year 2000, had been made to conduct a comprehensive colonias study in the state. In the spring of 2000 I was hired along with 3 other students from New Mexico State University by the North American Development Bank (NADBANK) to work on a comprehensive, qualitative New Mexico colonias profile. The project was co-sponsored by the New Mexico Mortgage and Finance Authority (NMMFA) and administered by HUD. Our team was to work in parallel with students from the University of Arizona. The estimated time for completion was 6 weeks. The intent of the project was that it would be a pilot study to be used as a building block towards further studies in the state with a possible annual updating component. One of the primary functions of our study was that it would be used as a tool to measure the feasibility for comprehensive studies in California and Texas. In a sense, we were used as guinea pigs to determine if it could be done, how long it would take, and how much it would cost. Many good studies have been done by county and regional agencies and NGO’s prior to our study. However, this study was the first of its kind in New Mexico. The prior, regionally focused, studies proved to be extremely beneficial to our efforts by reducing the amount of research time we concentrated on various colonias and gave us more time to locate data that was previously unreported. Although the project was done to the satisfaction of our employers there were many roadblocks and difficulties experienced along the way, which, under different levels of expectation, may have derailed the effort and rendered the project unsatisfactory. The first mistake made was the projected time of completion. We were initially only given 6 weeks to collect and enter data for 137 communities in 10 southern New Mexico counties, which if driven in a straight line would cover over 350 miles. However, the colonias are located in a variety of geographical areas to include the easily accessible community of Dona Ana (Dona Ana County), which is just off I-25 to the small community of Mogollon (Catron County), which is located in the rugged Gila Region in southwestern New Mexico. The second mistake was the lack of quantitative data collection demands. Although our study was intended to be a qualitative study, a level of quantitative research is needed to accurately describe these communities. Portions of the profile demanded an evaluation of things such as housing stock. We were asked to delineate whether the housing was good, fair, or poor. However, we were not given any guidance on how to make these judgments. Our team was not given some type of methodology or even a checklist to determine the conditions. Outside of the profile template the methods of research were left completely up to our team. As a researcher this level of freedom was nice to have, however, it left the data open to be biased. However, our team was not the generator of the study. Being that we were commissioned to do the survey more research design limits should have been placed upon the project to ensure that the commissioners received the exact product envisioned. I feel we made fair assessments and did not allow our own feelings and biases to come into play (that statement is biased in nature). The possibility was there for us to produce grossly biased data that would not paint the most accurate picture. For example, I may have deemed a home in Garfield (Dona Ana County) as good because the exterior had been recently painted however, if the roof is caving in or has holes in it the house is in much worse condition than can be seen from the road. The only way to fully access a structure is to examine that structure from the outside and inside which would of course require permission from the owner or dweller. In order to correct this problem in future studies, a clear set of standards for evaluation needs to be established either by the project manager or the team with approval of sponsors of the project to insure that the communities are portrayed not just fairly and honestly, but also accurately so that the proper amount of funding goes to the communities. The lack of existing data in my opinion is the most pressing problem. We were tasked to compile a complete profile for each community. However, many of these communities are unincorporated and are too small to appear by themselves on the census bureau radar. Therefore, the only way to acquire the needed information is to conduct a door-to-door survey. In order to do that the time, money, and backing of the sponsoring agency must be given. I feel an additional study dedicated to a demographics and housing is vital. This will require advanced planning to ensure cooperation and build support. The communities must also be notified in advance so that the researcher does not infringe upon them anymore than necessary, and a realistic time frame must be established. Lastly, the issue of assistance and compliance between the researchers and the beneficiaries of the study must be addressed. All to often our group was met with either opposition or blank stares when we were collecting data. Many county managers were somewhat unwilling to help. This is not unfounded on their part. I can easily place myself in their position. If I were a county manger who had seen no results from researcher after researcher calling my office or sitting across the desk from me in an interview, I may not be willing to give my time effort to further studies that may or may not yield results for me. The most common scenario was that many counties were understaffed and did not have the resources to assist us. The information may have been available but no one was available to point our team in the right direction. This being said, in the future there must be a clear understanding established that in order for a community to be studied full cooperation must be given. If the county or municipality is unwilling to help then they should not receive the effort, which could be directed to another community who is willing to assist the research team. Conclusion Like any other issue that deals with poverty and living conditions the colonias issue is very attractive politically in Washington and the border states of Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, and California. The colonias problem is a good topic for Border States politicians to stump on and convince their constituencies that they are concerned about the hardships that the colonias residents face. It helps them soften their images and gives them the ability to look compassionate. Dennis Foltz, The Executive director of the Middle Rio Grande Council of Governments in Albuquerque, told me that many people at HUD have built careers on this problem. From his statement I draw the opinion that many people in government do not really want this problem to go away because they would be out of a job. There are many hardworking and good intentioned advocates in agencies such as HUD, USDA, EPA, and the slew of others at the federal, state, county, and municipal level who work with these types of issues. At the root of this issue is politics. Herein lies the real problem with colonias. The real problem is not just rural poverty, or poverty in general, because every region of the United States has a significant poor population living in rural areas. In certain writings one may be lead to believe that this is an issue specific to New Mexico and the other Border States. The majority of the colonias population resides in unincorporated areas in New Mexico and Texas. Both of these states do not realistically address land use regulations. Therefore, what is really to blame is the lack of, or the inadequacies of county land use regulations, which the state legislatures are all too willing to allow, remain. Basically what is evident is that too much talk and not enough action is taking place. Many studies have been done and some programs exist to provide grants and other funding to the colonias. However, many of these studies are under funded and lack basic research methods such, as sampling. In my opinion the biggest strides towards alleviating the problem and progressing towards true problem identification has been conducted at the university level. However, they are still inadequate and do not fully address the problem. Academics and their students have done relevant work and have suggested many good strategies. However, the university cannot make policy. Through the work of the university policies can be influenced. But the role of the university is to educate and research problems. Policymaking is the duty of the politician and on the subject of colonias the politicians have failed to carry out their duties. More has to be done at the state level in the way of legislation and the counties need to implement zoning and other forms of land use controls and code enforcement. If necessary the state legislatures in Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, and California must step in and use their powers to ensure that county governments are addressing these issues Basically, planning needs to happen to curb growth. In the short run New Mexico is left to only one way to deal with the colonias which is to employ the crisis response model. However, if real reform is to come to existing areas and further problems are to truly be mitigated the crisis model must be used in unison with planning, zoning, and code enforcement. Crisis response only remedies problems, it can never solve them. Problem solving will only come from planning. Good communities do not just happen and bad communities already exist. A combination of increased funding for infrastructure, more accountability demanded of the colonia developer, and an active role by the counties and the state both autonomously and collectively will do wonders to correct these problems. However, it does not stop there. A dedication to education and job training must also be a top priority. In closing the Border States have already taken the steps to identify most of the problems, now they must change policies and regulations (completely revising them if needed) to prevent further development and incorporate the colonias residents themselves into the decision making and problem solving processes. I believe if these steps are taken then real progress will be made. If not, if politicians and key leaders within federal agencies follow the present course of merely talking about it, getting a photo op, and throwing money at certain problematic issues and highly visible areas, then no improvements will be made.
Author and Copyright InformationCopyright 2001 by Authors Chad Wakefield is a senior in the City and Regional Planning program at New Mexico State University in Las Cruces. He is from Charleston, SC. Chad is the Student Representative to the New Mexico Chapter of the American Planning Association and the Vice President of the Geography and Planning Club at NMSU. Chad’s interest in colonias began while working on a pilot study of colonias in New Mexico for HUD, North American Development Bank, and the New Mexico Mortgage and Finance Authority in the summer of 2000 with three other students. Chad is currently working for the Mesilla Valley Economic Development Alliance in Las Cruces. |
