If you ask residents what their biggest local concern is, they would likely reply with the issue of growth management. More people are moving here as word of our great weather, wonderful food, friendly people, and low cost of living spread across the country. But as growth happens, how can we ensure that it affects our community positively?

A moratorium on growth is not a compelling option from either an economic standpoint or a philosophical one. A moratorium would hurt many working people who rely on construction, real-estate, or other related businesses for their livelihood. This would in turn hurt the economy as a whole. Second, it makes no logical sense for people to move in and then advocate that the highway be rolled up for future immigrants. If that were the case, people whose families have lived here for a long time could logically advocate that everyone who moved in after, say, 1970 should be forced to leave so that the County could go back to the way it was then.

So if we have to grow, how do we go about doing it right? The first part of the answer must be to define where we should and should not grow. There are many important pieces of land that almost everyone can agree should be protected. Mountain areas and environmentally critical regions by the river need to remain undeveloped to retain their beauty. Once these districts are defined, we need to figure out how to grow on the areas we think are appropriate for it. The process for figuring this out must have several characteristics. It must be open and fair; it must be civil; and all parties must come in willing to make some compromises.

The words “smart growth” have been used by everyone from developers to advocates for a moratorium. What should it mean? First, smarter growth means denser growth. Smaller tracts of land allow for more people to live more affordably in a smaller space, reducing sprawl. It also means developing up. Right now, Las Cruces has a limit on how high a building can go (the bank tower was built before this limit was imposed). This needs to change. Yes, it will impede some people’s view of the mountains. But the view will also be spoiled if the mountains are crawling with houses. If the choice is between spreading up and spreading out, the effects of the former are not nearly as large as the effects of the latter.

These two policies, growing denser and higher, increase the need for public infrastructure like wider roads, sewer systems, flood control levees, and bigger schools because more people would be operating in a smaller environment. At least part of the costs to build these necessities should be passed on to developers in the form of “impact fees,” which can help to build them in the areas surrounding new subdivisions. Additionally, some costs can be alleviated if infill development is encouraged in areas that already have infrastructure. Look at downtown Las Cruces and you will see many lots that stand empty. The same can be said for Doña Ana, San Miguel, Las Mesa, and other valley communities. Building in or near these areas, rather than on farmland or remote desert, keeps costs down and decreases sprawl.

Growing denser also helps maintain the historic nature of our community. When the Spanish first settled here, they built plazas where churches and shops were found. Located around the plazas were dense clusters of houses. Outside of this residential ring was open farm space. Mesilla remains an excellent example of these policies.

Furthermore, smart growth means cooperation amongst all entities involved in the future of our community. The City, County, and University are all currently working on a comprehensive growth plan because growth in the County directly affects city residents and vice-versa. School districts, farmers, developers, and neighborhood associations will also be directly involved in the process of developing it, for multiple points of view and buy-in from involved citizens are necessary for such a plan’s success. Our goal is to have a plan in place by the spring of 2008 at the latest, with community discussions to tart later this year.

Finally, once a plan is put into place, policymakers must have the courage to follow it consistently. Frequently allowing variances will not only lead to continued disorganized development, it will mean that the time and effort spent developing the plan was wasted.

Time should be taken to produce a quality plan. However, we policymakers should push to get it done as soon as possible, because pressure to develop is not going to stop. Getting this done will have the benefit of assisting the community to advance both in the near future and far down the road.