This is the second half of the forum, for the first part, go here: http://www.grantcountybeat.com/news/news-articles/54027-first-part-of-grant-soil-and-water-conservation-district-candidate-forum-on-oct-18-2019

The sixth question came from the audience about the lack of awareness about elections.

Athena Bailey-Wolf, challenger for position 2, responded first. “I didn’t hear about the elections before this one, there was a district-wide election of supervisors as required, but the positions were uncontested so there were not elections even though they did the necessary procedure.”

John Merino, incumbent for position 2, said the positions were elected. “The position I am serving now was elected, it wasn’t a public election like the one we are having now. That’s changed with the last year,”

Challenging candidate for position 1, Glenn Griffin, said he believes there is a lack of confidence in the Grant Soil and Water Conservation District, and the board itself might not agree with the new election laws.

Incumbent Ty Bays said they’ve been criticized for not advertising more, but that they have a limited budget. “For years we have begged people to be on this board,” he said. “This is a tough job, it’s unpaid.”

The seventh question also came from the audience. Nick Seibel read it aloud, “Where did this sudden interest come from to get a foothold in the Soil and Water Conservation District? The claim that it is secretive is a falsehood, it’s always been there and open to the public. Where were these candidates? Is there an ulterior motive to get these candidates in office?”

“These three folks want on there because we supported the AWSA [Arizona Water Settlements Act] and the NM CAP [New Mexico Central Arizona Project Entity]. We’re a bunch of farmers and ranchers who support farmers and ranchers and I think it would be insane to be opposed to the development of the only new water available to the entire state of New Mexico,” Bays said. "They want to get on our board and take our board over. They’re also a little upset with our opposition to the Wild & Scenic River Designation and it’s unfortunate our progressive Democratic commission voted along with that. They really sold the farmers, ranchers, and hunters in this area down the river,”

Griffin said he’s been working sixty to eighty hours a week doing tree thinning for the past 17 years. He disagrees with the lack of communication about the previous elections because they can be published free. “Some of us don’t fall in love with the diversion. My constituents are concerned about losing their homes, and you should be, too. Wild and Scenic [designation] will bring new jobs to Grant County. Not one acre of private land will be impacted, that was one of the lies disproven.”

“I’ve been in the position for a year now and the climate has changed,” Merino said. “I can’t answer as far as where the other candidates were when these positions came up.” He continued, “What I have seen in the short time I have been there is that we do an excellent job of tracking everything, so we are not unlawful. We’re out there, we’re open to the public, we’ve got nothing to hide.”

Seibel asked the eighth question. “I’m curious, for about a year now, and I’m making an assumption, when there is a vacancy on the council they put out there that they are looking for people and they make an appointment to the board based on the applications they received. Assuming the process here is the same, how did you hear about the vacancy and how did you come to apply for it.”

“Well, I was called by one of the board members and I sat down and discussed the position with them and they went over what the requirements were,” Merino said.

Seibel then turned to Bailey-Wolf and was immediately interrupted by Bays. “When we lost a board member the law allowed us to appoint a new member to fill the seat until there was a new election. Laugh all you want, but that’s how it was and that’s how it went, and we’ve had to beg people to be on this board. All of a sudden, we’ve got folks that want on here for ulterior motives.”
Seibel regained control and re-asked the question of Bailey-Wolf.

“I think I can speak for myself and I thank John for your honest response. I guess Ty Bays gave us his demonstration of what not listening and making assumptions is all about,” she said. “I do not want to be on the board to stop the Gila diversion project. I want to be on the board because I have a dedication to clean water. Water is life. I want to be on the board because I want to see our native species taken care of and preserved. I want to be on the board because I want to promote sustainable agriculture. If it helps certain board members to justify themselves by imagining some conspiracy theory, they will do that. This is an unpaid position. This is what I am considering to be my volunteer work for our land, our water, and our people.”

The ninth question was limited to a minute per candidate, “Do you support trapping on public lands?”

Bailey-Wolf was first. “No, I do not. I do not support any trapping on public lands.” She added that trapping not only kills native species, but sometimes pets, and even noted a child had been injured.

“From the standpoint that if there is something out there that is affecting the public, then yes I support trapping,” Merino said. “The audience needs to realize the fish and wildlife service, they have people that are paid to trap species that are creating problems for the public.” He added that it’s not always about killing the animals, but often moving them.

“I think I like what Trump said about the people who want to emigrate to the United States. Stand on your own two feet, ranchers,” Griffin said. “If I have a mouse problem at home, I take care of it myself and before ranchers used to take care of their own problems. Now they need subsidies. Ranchers, stand on your own.”

Bays said the question was inappropriate for the board anyway. “We have no say over trapping on public lands, on private lands, or anything.” Bays then addressed Griffin, “Would you shut up, I am talking, I’ve got the floor now,” and then told the crowd to shut up when they began booing.

Seibel interrupted to ask everyone to be respectful to one another.

With the clock reset, Bays continued. “When I first met Athena Bailey-Wolf, she came to our board and wanted to know what we do with trapping. I told her we have nothing to do with trapping. We’re the Soil and Water District, we have no say on trapping. Do I support trapping on public lands? You’re darn right. There are a lot of people that this is a sport. If you don’t like trapping, you shouldn’t like fishing, etc. It all deals with pain and killing. I mean, it does. Trapping is a long time recognized way of capturing wildlife. It’s a longtime recognized way of controlling predators. Predators need to be managed and controlled to keep our big game populations healthy, our livestock herds safe.”

Geoffrey Plant asked the tenth question, “The Grant Soil and Water Conservation District oversees the Upper Gila Arroyos Watershed District, can you explain the relationship between the two districts?”

Bays said the Soil and Water Conservation Districts had the authority to set up watershed districts. “Back in the 1950s the Cliff Gila valley recognized that there was a problem with all the arroyos leading into the Gila. It was flooding out the roads and irrigation districts and wreaking havoc on their fields.” The residents voluntarily joined together and approached the Soil and Water District for sponsorship. Those living in the watershed district are taxed and that money was used to build, and now maintain, the dams in the area.

Griffin said his concern was that not everyone in the Cliff/Gila area is assessed the same taxes. He also revisited his concern for the current board fighting against the new election laws.

Merino reiterated Bays’ sentiment on the relationship between the two entities.

Bailey-Wolf said her concern was the board not posting requests for proposals (RFPs). “McCauley said they’re employees, but I don’t think that’s actually true, I think they are contractors. Putting out RFPs would allow for new ideas.”

The eleventh question came from the audience. “We talked a lot about how these things were handled in the past, and how they’ve been handled up to this point. There’s a new local election act, that genie is not going back into the bottle. We’ve had three members of the Soil and Water Conservation District up for reelection next month and two more, two years from now. Given that all of the county is going to be involved in this process whether we like it or not, how will you ensure more transparency in the activities of the district?”

Griffin answered first. “Consider the dam broke open, and democracy broke the dam open. We hope to change the makeup of the board in the future. I’ve said it several times, press releases are free. You’re going to see articles from the board meetings. This community needs to know what this board is doing.”

“Again we have less than $20,000  in our budget and those election laws are very stringent on how you adhere to those,” Bays said. “I’d like to address Glenn, every time you look at the rancher or farmer or trapper, why do you think there’s some conspiracy theory?” Bays said he’s not going to waste precious money on advertising. “If we can do it for free then maybe that’s a consideration but I’m not going to be wasting the taxpayers’ money.”

“The question is about increasing visibility so that’s something I have talked about,” Bailey-Wolf said. “You can get websites for free now. Press releases are free. Writing articles about what you’re doing and educating people about what you’re doing, that’s free.”

She also said participating in events like Earth Day increases exposure. “Adhering to the Open Meetings Act is a law in New Mexico and we had an incident with this board.” Bailey-Wolf said she wants inclusive meetings rather than just falling back on what it has been doing the last 20 years.

Bays then asked to respond, and Bailey-Wolf said no.

“He tells people to shut up when they interrupt him, why should he be able to interrupt me? This is my turn to speak and I’m not telling him to shut up, I’m telling him not to speak.”

“I’d like to state that we’re not operating in this little cave, the public is more than welcome to attend our meetings,” Merino said. “There’s an awareness that wasn’t there before. That’s changed some perceptions of who we are. It’s healthy that we’re having elections and it’s healthy to have debates.” He said there’s been a lot of changes over the years but the change in the election process has created an awareness that wasn’t there previously.

Seibel asked the twelfth question. “I promised there would be a diversion question and here it is. Are you in favor of the Gila River diversion or do you support spending the $50 million on other water projects. If you are in favor of the Gila diversion, why, if you are opposed, why are you against?”

“First of all, I’d like to say that I’m for it. It’s a federal mandate whether we like it or not,” Merino said. “The thing is, wildlife, recreation, agriculture, and the public will benefit from the diversion. I know there are two sides to look at but the question was asked and I’m sharing my point of view.”

“I’d like to address that right after I mention that meeting where a resolution was introduced that was not on the agenda. The board asked the consultant from the Department of Agriculture if she thought it was against the Open Meetings Act and she said yes, don’t do it. They did it anyway and then they tried to undo it by voting again the next meeting and putting it on the agenda,” Bailey-Wolf said. As far as the diversion goes, Bailey-Wolf reminded the audience that any additional costs would come down to the taxpayer. “The diversion will be subordinate to all AZ water users prior to 1968, that’s a lot of users. It’s also considered the most biologically diverse part of New Mexico.” Beyond the impact on the species, “Developing the water from the Gila system will place considerable fiscal and environmental responsibility on New Mexico and give the federal government more control over the Gila.”

Bays said he is in favor of the diversion. “I’ve said before that it’s the only new water available to the state of New Mexico. The amount of water that we are getting is just a drop of water.” Bays continued, “In light of what happened in Hurley, that was not a well thought out project, I can tell you we don’t want any more projects like that.”

Griffin’s concern is that House Bill 373, sponsored by Rebecca Dow and Gabriel Ramos, is not allowing a vote on the diversion. “Three hundred of my neighbors say no to the diversion because they cannot afford it. That will be the legacy of this diversion.”

The thirteenth question was the last from Plant and the Silver City Daily Press and Independent. “Would you support, as a supervisor, raising the mill levy to fund the Grant Soil and Water Conservation District?”

Griffin said the first time he heard that option was when Jesse Franklin-Owens brought it up in a previous forum. “I think what Jesse brought up was a half of a percent, it would cost a person $7.50 on a hundred thousand dollar home. I’d have to explore it.”

“No, I would not support a mill levy,” Bays said. “That’s a tax on you and yeah, it’d be beneficial to the district and we’d get some money to be able to do some projects, but no. Unless a group of landowners came forth and voluntarily wanted to do that, I would not vote in support of it.” Bays then addressed an earlier topic. “I’d like to go back and comment on some of your lies on the diversion. There’s never been  talk about a billion dollar project. There’s never been talk about taxing Grant County residents, or New Mexico residents. The AWSA does not have any taxing authority, they have to be designated by a government entity.” Bays said there are no plans to tax residents. “That’s a good project, it’s the only new water in New Mexico and if you throw it away you are throwing away your future generations’ ability to live, work, and enjoy this area.”

Bailey-Wolf said she is not interested in posing a mill levy either. “I know it has been proposed before and defeated, maybe 40 years ago. Things have changed. Maybe people would support it. But there are other ways to bring money into the district. We don’t need to tax people to get that money. We need to listen to people instead of bullying and disrespect. We need to listen to people. We need to write grants. We need the manager to be working full-time instead of part-time. There are other ways to bring money in than a mill levy.”

“My position would be to let the public decide that, I don’t feel that is my decision. If the majority of the public want that then of course I would support that,” Merino said. “I’m not opposed if that is what the public wants.”

Seibel said he had tons of great questions left, but chose the fourteenth as the last question from the audience. “How is the global climate change affecting the work of the Soil and Water Conservation District?”

“The federal government and the State of New Mexico have to take action before we do because that’s where we get our funding. Not a lot is happening but who’s to say that won’t change. It has to start from the top down and we’re the lower echelon as far as our funding goes,” Merino said.

Bailey-Wolf said this hasn’t been an issue with the current board. “Climate change affects the way I feed my livestock and how I plan to feed my livestock. As climate change accelerates, the wet seasons are more wet and the dry season are more dry. These things have to be taken into consideration by farmers as well as ranchers. I’d like to talk about this incredible opportunity that we have as New Mexicans, right now, that can help with climate change. This is called the Healthy Soils Act, and this hasn’t been talked about by the board that I know of. The deadline is November 6 and you have to submit your application through the Soil and Water District. It was signed into law April 2 and the legislation’s primary purpose was to support farming, ranching, and other forms of land management that increase soil and water retention. It’s a pilot program and I think it’s something a lot of you might consider by going on the State Agricultural Department website.”

“Addressing Athena’s comment, we are dealing with that, in fact, myself and a guy that we kind of go to on occasion for expertise went and reviewed an application. This isn’t the cure for all our problems. I think there is $125,000 available so you know you’re not going to get a whole lot done,” Bays said. As for climate change, Bays had a lot to say. “I’ve seen our climate change. I remember as a kid they were talking about another ice age coming and I remember being very grateful that it didn’t. Then [Al] Gore came along with global warming. Then the globe isn’t warming so they’re calling it climate change. I don’t really buy all that stuff. Our climate is changing, at one time this area was covered by oceans. At one time there were volcanoes smoking all over this landscape, pumping CO2 into the air. It’s forever changing. What can we do to deal with the climate that we have? There are changes that may come but we need to have our watersheds and our farmlands in as good of condition as we possibly can. We need to use the resources that we have and, like it or not, there is some sort of agriculture going on. Who better to go through that than someone in the ranching and farming industry.”

Griffin said he was asked a similar question at the League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC) meeting. He said a prime example is the change in the lands around highway 180 toward Deming. “Ranchland stress from more heat and harder rains is causing more erosion. Soil and Water needs to be proactive. I have been proactive for 17 years to reduce the amount of trees. Less trees means more grass, which increases the soil moisture. That’s how you address climate change.”

Seibel then asked the fifteenth question, the SCDP “time machine question” wherein candidates envision themselves back here for re-election. “What is the single accomplishment on this board that you are most proud of?”

Bailey-Wolf said her proudest accomplishment would be generating respectful communication between board members and within the community, along with disseminating useful information to the community.

“It’s apparent that we need to be more transparent. I guess we have been but four years from now I’d like to look back and say the public’s more informed,” Merino said.

“To bring new voices and ideas to the board, to mandate bidding on contracts, open public input, stop fighting the new election laws, and to create a website with minutes, agenda, and accomplishments,” Griffin said. “It’s going to be a transparent organization where you’re going to want to come to a board meeting and not be told to shut up.”

“Well in four years I’d like to be sitting here across the table from John and Dusty Hunt and doing the same great work that we’ve been doing all these years. We’ve caught a lot of criticism and it’s pretty easy to criticize this board from the outside, but half of the things that both of these candidates have said tonight are really not true. Yeah, I’ve asked Glenn Griffin to shut up in our board meetings. Our board meetings have a period of three minutes where you can come and speak, but he can’t shut up. He just keeps interrupting,” Bays said.

Seibel explained that the candidates had two minutes apiece for their closing statements.

“I’ve served on this board for twenty years and many of the members on this board have done so voluntarily. We’ve worked very hard, I don’t care what these two say,” Bays said. “We’ve taken care of the public’s money, we’ve done everything above the law, and we’ve followed the election laws to the 'T”.' We’re just a bunch of hardworking folks that have done this job. I guarantee some members have travelled hundreds of thousands of miles over the years going to NM CAP meetings and commission meetings on behalf of this board. It’s a thankless job, it really is, and we’d certainly appreciate your vote to continue doing the good work that we’ve been doing.”

“I want the board to embrace democracy not to keep us from voting for another twenty-one years. The current board has been fighting the new election laws for four years. They didn’t want us to vote, and they still don’t want us to vote. New board candidates embrace the will of the people. With the new board we will right climate change and together with your vote we will bring Soil and Water into the 21st century,” Griffin said.

Merino said the public can reach him any time by phone at 575-201-8876. “I enjoy what I do. I’m here to serve the public. I’m open to communication, I’m open to new ideas, and I really enjoy being on the board. I’d like to continue.”

“In closing I ask that you support with me not just water conservation but the quality of water, to support improving our soil, learning new ways to create sustainable agriculture, regenerative ranching, and urban improvement of soil and water,” Bailey-Wolf said. “People in the city, small farmers, should no longer be ignored. You’ll have a place and you deserve to be listened to and get support. Thanks for being at this rather marathon of a forum, I really appreciate your kind intention.”

Early voting is happening now at the Grant County Clerk's office Monday through Friday - 8 a.m. - 5 p.m. and at the Bayard Community Center Tuesday through Saturday 9 a.m. - 6 p.m. and November 5, 2019 is Election Day.