BY LISA SHIN
Los Alamos

Dear Owners of VE Holdings:  

Ordinance 760 is on the agenda for tonight’s Council meeting.  This is your request for an $868,000 LEDA loan, interest-free over 10 years, with no payments for 2 years to redevelop properties at 118 State Road 4 in White Rock.  I have concerns regarding this Project Participation Agreement.  

Required Economic Activity

1. $1,260,000 in annual revenues for each calendar year, starting in 2027.  Start-up businesses are extremely difficult, even in a business-friendly environment (not Los Alamos).  It is unrealistic to expect a cold start operation to generate $1,260,000 in annual revenues by the end of next year.  I estimate that your proposed laundromat, sports bar, and yogurt shop operation in White Rock might generate $300,000 in annual revenue in the first year.  But this is only if everything is up and running by January 1, 2027.  It is highly unlikely that revenues would be tripled in just 5 years to $3,100,000 by 2031.  

2.  Creation of 5 full-time employees in the first year, then 8 full-time employees by 2028. Amid a labor shortage in both Los Alamos and White Rock, your start-up business would be fortunate to hire 3 full-time employees.  A reasonable expectation of $300,000 in gross revenues in the first year will not cover payroll expenses of at least $140,000 (5 employees x $28,000) plus cost of goods sold and operating expenses.  There could be a net loss in the first few years of operation.  Be aware that even a McDonald’s could not succeed in this location.

3.  GRT revenues for 2026.  I seriously doubt there will be $936,800 in construction expenditures to generate $30,797 in local Gross Receipts Tax revenue by the end of 2026, which is just 4 months from now.  

Performance Review and Measurement

This will be conducted via private meetings with our County Manager’s Office, with no independent oversight or accountability.  There should be no assumption of fairness and consistency.  Our County Manager Anne Laurent could overlook failures to fulfill Performance Measures and required economic activities.  However, she would be in violation of laws governing NM LEDA.   All personnel and employee compensation, financial reports, and tax returns will be subject to public scrutiny and obtainable by IPRA.    

The worst part:   Change of terms

4 (e).  County at its option may require VE Holdings to enter into additional agreements only to the extent reasonably necessary to secure County’s interest in Property 1 and Property 2.  

Here, the County can change terms and require additional agreements not in the original Project Participation Agreement.  Clearly, this Project Participation Agreement lacks sufficient legal protections for VE Holdings, if the County acts as a bad player.  Remember that the County, using our tax dollars, can outspend and outlast citizens in court.  Please read about Sirphey, LLC’s lawsuit over the County’s egregious red tag stop work order.  Most citizens do not have the time, energy, and resources for prolonged litigation.  Our County knows this.  

County Seizure of private property

4 (a):  “VE Holdings shall provide a first priority mortgage in Property 1 and Property 2 as provided for in the Promissory Note and Mortgage as provided for in Exhibit C to secure performance under the Agreement. County shall at all times during the term of this Agreement be the first priority lien holder on Property 1 and Property 2.”  “Missed payments, failure to meet performance measures…are events of default.   After a notice and a cure period, the County may….foreclose the mortgage on both properties.” This means the County will most likely seize the property and assume ownership.   

I strongly urge you not to sign this agreement.  Find another way to fund your project or downsize it.  I believe that you can offer something wonderful to the community of White Rock and Los Alamos, without this LEDA loan.  The strings attached are onerous, and you risk losing your most valuable asset:  your private property.  


Letters to the editor represent the opinions of the individual authors and do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, or editorial stance of the Los Alamos Reporter. The Reporter assumes no responsibility or liability for the factual accuracy of statements made by contributors.