Contact
Subscribe
Powell wants to get past the ‘us-against-them’ mentality
Ray Powell
Ray Powell says his time working with Jane Goodall has been a needed sabbatical from politics – one that has empowered him and given him the desire to return to the New Mexico Land Office and work for change.
Powell said he had become cynical about politics because there are so many people involved in the political system who are self-serving. He has spent the last four years as the director for the Four Corners region of The Jane Goodall Institute for Wildlife Research, Education and Conservation.
In that role, he’s worked to educate and empower children to envision healthier communities, and he’s traveled the world and gotten to meet with top experts.
Working for Goodall has given him a renewed energy, Powell said.
“If you’re in politics for any amount of time, I recommend a sabbatical with someone who is so empowering,” Powell said.
Through his job, Powell has worked with children on service-learning projects aimed at integrating community, animals and the natural world – to teach children that they must take care of the environment but also think about the needs of the people around them.
Children understand that they are inheriting a mess, and Powell has been working to get them to think about what they must do to restore the planet, “not by assigning blame or by getting in a circular firing squad, but just to move forward.”
It’s that focus on moving forward that Powell said he wants to bring back to the land office. He served as land commissioner from 1993 to 2002, and he’s running for the seat once again on Nov. 2. He faces Republican opponent Matt Rush.
Powell said he’s “really worried” about the state of the land office after eight years of it being run by outgoing Land Commissioner Pat Lyons, a Republican.
“I want to get back and empower them,” Powell said. “… On day one, I an step into that office, clean it up and move forward.”
Economy and quality of life
Powell said the job of land commissioner is important to the state’s economy and quality of life – two issues he said are not mutually exclusive.
Goodall learned from working to combat deforestation in Tanzania that you can’t just “save the chimps,” Powell said – you have to help people too. That the area was so devastated that people were suffering, and Goodall found that saving the animals wasn’t the most important thing.
She began working on economic development that was done with an environmentally friendly mindset. She helped improve the lives of people in the area – and, in the process, protect the wildlife too.
“That’s what we need to do in New Mexico,” Powell said.
Powell said the land office needs to focus on taking care of the land, working on economic development, keeping food production in the state, developing new sources of energy, and continuing to work with non-renewable energy producers.
Powell said New Mexico has an opportunity to be the “worldwide experts” on renewable energy and what he calls a “restoration economy” because of its land, climate, universities and national laboratories.
Powell pointed to the Mesa Del Sol development in Albuquerque, which he helped bring to the state, as an example. Some 1,100 acres of land in that development are zoned industrial and focused on renewable energy development.
But Powell said the oil and gas industry can’t be ignored or shut out. Those sources of energy are necessary and will be around for a long time, he said, and the next land commissioner must continue to work with them. After all, 95 percent of revenues derived from state trust land come from oil and gas.
The difference
Powell said Rush’s answer for why he’s running is, “why not?”
“I’m not taking shots at him, but this isn’t something you do on a lark,” Powell said.
Powell said he’s interested in bringing all stakeholders to the table to find solutions to New Mexico’s problems.
“I think we’ve got to find common ground, and that’s another difference, because I’ve gone to forums with my opponent, and it’s always us against them,” Powell said.
Powell said he created various advisory groups during his previous tenure as land commissioner and he plans to do that again. During his previous tenure, he was able to propose legislation backed by people often portrayed as being on opposite sides of a fight because he brought them all to the table.
Powell said governance is “bringing people together so that you get this chemistry where things happen.” He said the land commissioner should be a “facilitator,” of that, not “the driver.”
“That’s why I just can’t go down that road of saying it’s us against them,” Powell said.
Smart development
Powell said there are smarter ways to develop than the land office has done in recent years. He cited examples from his previous tenure.
Powell worked to create the Sandia Science and Technology Park on state trust land because a company that produced photovoltaic cells at Sandia National Laboratories was planning to move to New Jersey, where land was cheaper.
Creation of the park convinced the company to stay here and lease land from the state. The project created economic development and permanent revenue off the land from tenants at the park.
Another example: The land office retained ownership of much of the land in the Mesa Del Sol development so the state will continue making revenue off it. Lyons has sold much of the land he’s set aside for economic development.
And in Mesa Del Sol, Powell said he required the creation of an employment district before any homes were built – to prevent sprawl, establish a tax base, and ensure that people could work near where they live.
Transparency
Community involvement is critical to development, and Powell said he will work as land commissioner to give communities a say in the development process for trust land. Rather than taking an entire, massive project to a community for approval at once – as Lyons did in Las Cruces with a 90,000-acre development on the East Mesa – Powell said he will require developers to come forward with a piece at a time when they’re ready to develop it.
And he will require industrial parks or other economic development before homes are built to ensure there’s no sprawl and that there’s a tax base in place.
Powell said his biggest mistake during his first tenure as land commissioner was “hubris” – taking a master plan development for Edgewood to the community for the first time after it was nearly complete.
He said it took 27 community meetings for him to earn back the community’s trust, and he learned that community involvement must come first.
‘All of these pieces fit together’
Farming and ranching are difficult, and Powell said his other focus will be on keeping those who want to work the land connected to it. That will include education on how to protect the environment so the land remains viable for future generations.
Powell said his overall goal is to “get food produced, get the land cared for, get our tax base increased and protect our watershed, which is so critical.”
“All of these pieces fit together,” Powell said, adding that his lifetime of experience – as a former land commissioner, as a veterinarian, and working for Goodall – has prepared him to step into the job again and approach the management of state trust land by “looking at how everything fits together.”
|
Share
Tweet
|
Advertisements
|
33 comments so far. Scroll down to submit your own comment.
Leave a response
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Thanks Icarus, I think you supported yourself quite well. I just always find it odd that people can be so wrapped up in politicians as to defend them to others as they would defend themselves. I have often said I woud not walk across the street to see one, no matter who they are or from what party. I guess it just shows our fundamentally different view of these kind of people. I have no respect for them, and since they are my servants who should be doing my bidding, but rarely do, I doubt that will change. But if I had a horse in the race, and I supported myself by that interest, I would feel as you do. I am just very fortunate to not be in that situation.
Dr. J:
Sorry about the delay; I missed your reply until now.
Obviously, I am not Ray Powell – he has better things to do at present, and to the best of my knowledge doesn’t post user comments here (incidentally, his predecessor as Land Commissioner, Jim Baca, does). I am, however, a friend of his. I am not, however, living vicariously; I have my own accomplishments, thank you very much, and your armchair psychology is based upon the false premise that I do not have a stake in this race (or any other). I’m a political strategist; there is nothing vicarious about my interest. It’s how I put food on the table (or under it, if we’re talking about my dog). Even if that weren’t the case, I’m still a citizen, and thus have a pretty clear stake in the matter. I see passion in politics as a virtue, so long as it is tempered by rationality.
Interestingly, as long as we’re talking psychology, there are also clear and well-documented neurological differences in how liberals and conservatives think about and debate politics. You’ll find conservatives complaining frequently about personal attacks, and liberals looking confused until we realize that a lot of conservatives really can’t differentiate between disagreement and dislike (I have along response to proudrepublican recently on this very topic). Re-read through various threads on this site and tell me, who resorts to unrelated personal attacks faster – certain frequent conservatives (ksparks, proudrepublican, jivaro99 are good examples), or the liberals (Hemingway as an example perhaps)? More often, it’s the first tactic of a conservative, and the second of the liberal. This is, of course, from the liberal point-of-view. The majority of times I am accused of personal attacks, I have done no such thing from my perspective (the difference between saying someone sounds paranoid rather than actually saying they are paranoid, for example). Meanwhile, a large number of people who accuse me and other of personal attacks frequently start with them, and seem unable to see that anything they said might be offensive.
Thank you Icarus, exceptions duly noted and respected. But there is a differnce between my generalization and yours. I never generalized about you personally, just Dr. Powell. You generalized me as sounding “borderline paranoid”, while I generalized Dr. Powell as being a member of “La Politica”. If you are Dr. Powell, I understand, but I suspect you are not, so you are thus living vicariously through his identity not unlike many sports fans live through their favorite teams. This third party identification is common but not something I ever do nor fully understand. You can attack most any of my favorite candidates, spots teams, etc. and I have no personal feelings about that, they are not me. I can understand where people would so closely associate with and idolize a third party that attacks on the third party become the same as attacks on themselves, but realize they are not at all in fact.
Actually, while “La Politica” was your generalization, “borderline paranoid” was my generalization about people who use the phrase; in this case, it was you, but I have the same thought every time someone uses it, so it wasn’t meant personally. My reaction is much the same when I hear conservatives make their still-unsubstantiated voter-fraud claims.
And you need not call me “progressive”, though the term is accurate. Unlike many on the left, I still proudly wear the label of “liberal”.
Much better Icarus, you may well be one of the progressives that can handle disagreement wthout personal attacks. Now, about that “borderline paranoid” accusation against me personally….
Where in there did I call you stupid and/or unintelligent? I’d appreciate it if you wouldn’t project incorrect sentiments into my words. Also, I’m sorry, but I can’t forgive you for generalizing if the generalization in question unfairly utilizes what is typically used as a derogatory term. As for “numerous offices for decades”, Dr. Powell has held exactly one elected office for exactly one decade, so I stand by my statement that you don’t seem to know what you’re talking about in this situation, and as evidence I site your previous erroneous statements regarding Dr. Powell’s political career and your demonstrably false attack on him claiming that certain donors only gave money to his campaign because he would “carry a grudge”. None of what I said was a personal attack, and there was no need to become unnecessarily defensive.
Icarus, there you go with a personal attack about how I don’t know what I am talking about and am thus stupid and unintelligent. You could just say that your alleged superior knowledge of Powell renders my opinions and perceptions of him as differing from yours. Wouldn’t that be better than a personal attack because of a disagreement of opinion? You see, I think most progressives are just not capable of handling disagreement without personal attacks. I would not characterize you the same way (i.e., not knowing what you are talking about) just because we disagree, we just disagree. Reasonable, rational, and intelligent peple can have very different views and opinions and still be reasonable, rational, and intelligent. Would you agree? Also, forgive me for making generalizations, but most all Democratic Party elected officials who have held numerous offices for decades must have the La Politica machine behind them or they would never have had such a record in New Mexico. In case you haven’t noticed, there is “significant corruption” in NM, as King says.
Carry a grudge? Alright, that statement pretty much guarantees that you have absolutely no idea what you’re talking about this time. Dr. Powell has been accused of many things in his life, but holding a grudge is something that no one who has ever dealt with him would say (with the possible exception of Commissioner Lyons, who seems to be incredibly worried about what will be found in the filing cabinets when he leaves office). Calling Dr. Powell a “La Politica operative” is not only wildly inaccurate, but (like most statements invoking the phrase “La Politica”) comes across as borderline paranoid. About the only thing in the entire sentence that was even mildly accurate was the phrase “recycled”, which, while derogatory in connotation, is at least a viable perception.
I understand your point Icarus, I was just jabbing you about being so dismissive and negative about the Journal when they endorsed all the Repubs for Congress. I can certainly see Jeff being endorsed, I also agree with his positions about 60% of the time. And you certainly are not as bad about treating persons you disagree with with personal attacks as some other posters here. Although your “myopia” comment comes pretty close. PNM is certainly not the kind of business who tries to anger or neglect anyone, as a regulated utility they have to go along to get along and contribute to anyone who looks electable, they have no values or principles. They know they would pay a heavy price if Powell were elected (as he most certainly will be) and they contributed to his opponent. I’m sure he would carry a grudge, most recycled, long-term professional La Politica operatives do.
Ick Phoenix…if you’re responding you’re obviously paying attention.
New Direction, how many times are you going to repeat yourself before you realize that no one (on either side) is paying any attention to you? Your whole premise that an old face doesn’t bring new ideas is so laughable as to be completely unworthy of inclusion in the debate.
The rank and file Democratic delegates to the state and county conventions need to start breaking ranks with the Dem party machine chiefs and start supporting candidates that bring fresh new perspectives and motivations to their candidacies and not just run on their resumes of having held the same office over and over again.
You know, Dr. J, I frequently try to give you the benefit of the doubt, because unlike some of the more knee-jerk individuals here (proudrepublican, jivaro99, or ksparks), you do you best to come across as thoughtful and polite in most of your responses, though like most of us, your civility tends to wane as a given discussion progresses. However, I find my legitimate respect for your intellect challenged when – for the second time in as many weeks – you have such a complete failure at the most basic reading comprehension. What I said in the comment you pulled from the other topic – and conveniently only partially quoted – was that the Journal mostly endorses Republicans, with a few exceptions. While I specifically mentioned Senator Bingaman, Dr. Powell is one of their habitual exceptions. I’m not certain why you seem unable to grasp the premise of my statement, but I do have a theory. For one reason or another, you seem to have decided that I view people I disagree with as unintelligent, and decided that by referencing the Journal endorsement, I was being hypocritical, even though doing so was, in fact, perfectly in line with what I’d actually written. This is, of course, untrue. Kent Walz (editor-in-chief of the Journal, and the man ultimately responsible for their endorsements) is a very bright man, and, for that matter, I consider him a friend. Disagreement doesn’t change either of those things. Indeed, that a demonstrably conservative paper like the Journal, run by a very intelligent man like Kent, endorsed Dr. Powell rather than Mr. Rush is probably an indicator that they see a good reason for Dr. Powell to hold the office.
How can the Republicans hold their nose and vote for the incompetent and inept Matt Rush? Probably the most outlandish candidate running for a public office has to be Matthew D. Rush, and this is no joke. This politician wants to be State Land Commissioner. After months of campaigning he finally put something on his website about the issues a few weeks before the election. In fact in his campaign video, State Land Commissioner is misspelled throughout it. Then you have Mr. Rush fibbing about having an associate degree from Lubbock Christian University. It is unbelievable, but he is getting big money from the oil and gas industry. I guess Dr. J likes that! How can anyone vote for this guy for a $90,000 salaried job? To vote for this candidate is a new direction? Gimme a break!
Ugh…why is the electorate always forced to hold its nose and recycle all these old, insider dem politicians like Powell, Gary King, James Lewis et al in the name of experience?
At least all the R candidates for these lower ballot races are always fresh, new candidates with new ideas, qualifications and motivations (not that I’m crazy about Powell’s opponent). How much more validation from the voters do these old guard politicos need in order to get up out of bed every morning?
LOL–touchy! No, I learned it as a Biology/Biochem undergrad. But of course, college professors are just “extreme liberal activists” too, so those courses need to be put into proper perspective. For me, they had “A”s an “B”s following their names, but for others, they had a “D” after them.
Yes, 99% of species that have arisen have become extinct. So much for nature being able to bounce them back from destruction. What if what bounces back after we get through with the earth isn’t us? Life as a cockroach would be pretty awesome at that point.
So Icarus, now you think the Journal is correct on an endorsement? What has happened since you said this wrt the endorsements the paper made for US reps: “It’s a conservative paper, so that endorsement is hardly a surprise, and it certainly has little or nothing to do with “change”. Does this make Powell a conservative, or is the Journal actually capable of objectivity, unlike the SFNM?
Thinker says: “Put them ahead of people– or realize a world with out them would not only boring, it would indicate that the balance of nature had so been destroyed as to make human life threatened with extinction? Have you really no understanding of the fact of ecological webs of life–that we exist in mutuality with other living things..”
Indeed? As a scientist, I know that as long as species have been evolving, species have been going extinct. It is estimated that over 99% of all species that ever lived have gone extinct. So what has happened to doom our civilization due to this mass extinction trend over the millenia? Is the balance of nature destroyed by this very natural and constant phenomena? Of course not, how ridiculous is your assertion, where did you get that one, at the Sierra Club website?
I will not engage in ad hom attacks on you personally, as you do me (shown here in your rant: “it’s bone-headed, automatic, angry opposition to balancing our wants as humans with our commandment to act as stewards of the earth. I don’t see it as a sign of intelligence, but rather a sign of laziness, of anger, fear and hunkering down to protect oneself from the very hard work of keeping up with the complexities that make up our lives“), but suffice to say the earth’s history and science does not back-up your assertion that “when we wipe out one species we set up a downward spiraling chain reaction which has negative outcomes for humans far worse than trying to accommodate their needs with ours“. And before you try the lame excuse that extinctions caused by evil man are somehow much worse and more devestating than “natural” ones, spare me. Loss of habitat and species failing to adjust to changes in their environment are no different no matter what causes them. Man is no different a natural force than anything else in the natural world, we are part of it.
Hemingway, there are numerous Democrats I have voted for in the past, and many I would vote for today, that are not of the “progressive” subspecies. For instance, Balderas is moderate and focused on his job, not promoting “progressive” causes, I feel Di is also like this though she hides it pretty well in public. And Joe Manchin in W.Va. is great, love the ad on his feelings of ObamaCare and the Obama carbon tax bill. You cannot categorize all Democrats as like these examples however. We have the Pelosi’s and Powell’s of the party too.
Dr. J:
What “private business groups” are you talking about? Aside from the Chamber of Commerce (which is so far to the right that PNM left them), I’m having trouble thinking of any, and as for just businesses on their own, they don’t typically endorse candidates. They do, however, give money, so let’s look at the money, shall we?
According to their own campaign finance reports (which are sitting here on my desk), Dr. Powell has received just over 7% of his money from teachers (who have a vested interest in the state land office making as much money as possible) and teachers’ groups, while Mr. Rush has received just under .1%. Dr. Powell has received 11% from real estate interests (who have a vested interest in a well-run Land Office), and Mr. Rush has received just over 1%. Businessmen (who arguably have an interest in their own bottom line, which invariably leads to the land office making less money for education) have still given Dr. Powell around 6% of his money, and Mr. Rush 11%. Dr. Powell has money from potash miners, ranchers, farmers, PNM, alternative energy, doctors, lawyers, and charitable foundations. 44% of Dr. Powell money comes from individual donors from all walks of life. Only 8% of Mr. Rush’s do. 47% of Mr. Rush’s money comes from ranchers (who have also given to Dr. Powell at a much lower rate) and the oil industry (who of course haven’t – Dr. Powell’s policies aren’t bad for them, per se, they’re just not as profitable as the “blind eye” methodology of the Lyons Office).
Here’s the really fun number: 29% of Mr. Rush’s money is from outside New Mexico. For Dr. Powell, that number is under 5%.
Honestly, Dr. J, you need to work on your truly myopic perceptions. As long as we’re talking about endorsements, have you noticed pretty much every paper in the state going to Dr. Powell? While the demonstrably false meme of “liberal media” might kick up in most people’s heads, I happen to know that (unlike some people) you’re actually smart enough to wade through all that and realize how few of them actually deserve that moniker. The Journal, for example, couldn’t be called “liberal” by anyone with even a modicum of rationality, and yet they enthusiastically endorsed Ray Powell.
Put them ahead of people– or realize a world with out them would not only boring, it would indicate that the balance of nature had so been destroyed as to make human life threatened with extinction? Have you really no understanding of the fact of ecological webs of life–that we exist in mutuality with other living things, not just to exploit them?
You DO realize that when we wipe out one species we set up a downward spiraling chain reaction which has negative outcomes for humans far worse than trying to accommodate their needs with ours? Do you not like to camp, hike, fish, take walks in the beauty of our unspoiled areas in New Mexico? Will we all be just fine in a future with a depleted, dirty and species-eradicated world just as long as you can still drive your Hummer and shop for plastic junk at the Mall?
I’m sorry if I just don’t get this latter day Know-nothing-ism on the right, it’s bone-headed, automatic, angry opposition to balancing our wants as humans with our commandment to act as stewards of the earth. I don’t see it as a sign of intelligence, but rather a sign of laziness, of anger, fear and hunkering down to protect oneself from the very hard work of keeping up with the complexities that make up our lives. I prefer to keep challenging myself to look beyond black and white simple answers to things.
Hemingway: that difference in neurobiology gets me-and my kids- in trouble all the time because none of us can just shut up and accept a simple yes or no answer.
I think Dr. J should study the neurobiology of politics! Read the following article:
http://www.latimes.com/news/obituaries/la-sci-politics10sep10,1,4352129.story
This might explain his single-minded persistence in labeling all Democrats either left wing or progressive or socialist!
As a registered, but moderate, Democrat I am thinking for myself, my state, my country, and my children’s future. Those who want to put birds, bunnies, and minnows ahead of people are not my choices. If you all like them, that is fine, but we just disagree with societal and economic priorites. I would never accuse you of “not thinking for yourself” or “non-thinking” just because we disagree, why attack me? Us vs. Them? If I disagree with you I am stupid and non-thinking, that is the best you have?
Mr. Molitor,
There was a televised, side-by-side interview of Ray Powell and Matt Rush that aired on Report from Santa Fe with Lorene Mills.
Not technically a debate, but Lorene Mills is a top-class journalist and the interview is well worth watching if you are looking to hear directly from the candidates in this race.
Here is the link: http://reportfromsantafe.com/092510.html
Christ on a Crutch: So now firefighters are “extreme, left-wing, liberals”? Shut off Fox News for a few days and get out in your community. You’ll find out that there are real, live human beings out there with complex lives and points of view, not the neatly pre-defined labels you’re convinced are lurking around every corner.
As to why no business’s endorsing Powell? Maybe because they are doing the same non-thinking you’re doing regarding “party”. Maybe because they are less interested in protecting the environment and more interested in the easiest and cheapest way to make profits–regardless of the rest of us, and the Republicans promise to help them in return for their “endorsement”? Maybe because it has never occurred to them that people can step outside proscribed relationships and self interest, and work together on environmental issues?
New Mexico would be incredibly blessed to have someone with the breadth of understanding of the relationship between the people and nature as Powell as Land Commissioner.
Dr. J, even though it’s become an obsessive habit, at some point you MUST stop placing a “D” or “R” next to everyone’s name and think for yourself.
Oh I know, he is just a “moderate”, business-loving guy. Right. Follow the money, and the endorsements he has. Here is a partial list of the “progressive” (so as not to offend) groups:
American Federation of Teachers NM (AFT NM)
National Education Association (NEA)
Rio Grande Chapter of the Sierra Club
Conservation Voters New Mexico (CVNM)
Albuquerque Area Firefighters (IAFF)
Association of Federal, State and County Employees (AFSCME)
Teamsters
IATSE Local 423 – International Alliance of Theatrical Stage Employees
Animal Protection Voters
See any private business group endorsing him? And you wonder why there is an “us vs. them” attitude?
OMG – everyone who is a Democrat is an extreme left wing candidate according Dr. J. This is utter nonsense and rubbish!
Dr. J:
We’ve been over this; Dr. Powell is hardly “extreme left”, and despite repeated requests, you have yet to give examples of his “troubling” attitudes towards business. I seriously doubt many of the businesses who had the opportunity to work with the Land Office during his tenure would agree.
I certainly enjoyed my time working with Jane in The Congo, Angola, Zaire, and Kenya, as well as London HQ. However, I don’t see how that qualifies a person to be NM land commish. I worry about Dr. Powell’s extreme left wing views of industry vs. the environment and the damage that could do to our economy and fragile jobs. Jane is a pragmatic and practical person who knows the limits of environmentalism and when it encroaches on and impairs people’s lifestyles and livelihoods, I’m not sure Dr. Powell does as his attitudes toward business are troubling.
Mr. Molitor:
No; there have been a couple of radio forums, but for the most part, station managers aren’t really interested in down-ticket races, regardless of how powerful the office is. It’s just not a sexy enough job. Hell, does this race even get mentioned on broadcast news?
Has there been a televised debate between Powell and Rush?
It is clear that the best candidate for State Land Commissioner is Dr. Ray Powell. He heralds a “very bright future for oil and gas” on state trust lands despite the false claims of opponents. He enthusiastically supports new technology that will “provide safe and reliable ways to reach the harder-to-mine oil and gas deposits.” He wants to make the office more transparent so that the public knows about public land exchanges, long-term leases and land sales. With Mr. Patrick Lyons everything was a big secret. The archaic State Land Office badly needs reform to bring it into the 21st century. The office is the second most important position in state government next to the governor. During his previous term as State land Commissioner, Dr. Powell operated an extremely efficient State Land Office that generated money for our schools, universities and hospitals. He has a proven record.
He probably is the best qualified candidate running for a state office and should get bipartisan support.