Water, fire, roads: Council debates, passes resolutions on Project Ranger

RIO RANCHO — “We’re the caboose of this project.”

That was an often-repeated sentiment from Rio Rancho City officials, councilors and Mayor Gregg Hull Thursday night during a long meeting that included votes on three resolutions involving the proposed Project Ranger facility on Sandoval County land.

One resolution involved a $1 million budget amendment for economic development expenditures for the project proposed by Castelion Corporation. The money “would be expressly dedicated to the extension of NM347/Paseo del Volcan within city limits,” the cover page of the resolution states. That portion of the extension would run from Unser Boulevard to Rainbow Boulevard.

Another issue brought before the council revolved around the city providing water and wastewater service for the facility outside city limits.

City documents and previous presentations from Castelion Corporation note the limited use of water Project Ranger would require — for “domestic” needs such as for drinking fountains, breakrooms and bathrooms — noting that the water needs would be equivalent to about 50 homes annually as well as fire hydrants and suppression if applicable..

That estimate places the usage at about 22 million gallons annually, while the city’s water production ranges from 10-15 million gallons per day.

However, providing water services outside of city limits would be a change from current practice.

Since 2009, water letters of availability have been limited to properties only within Rio Rancho’s borders, and in 2014, “the Governing Body rejected exploring the issuance of water, wastewater and reuse water letters of availability outside of municipal boundaries,” according to city documents. This was the last time the issue was looked at.

However, the same document notes that the city’s water utility system “has production, transmission and distribution west of city limits,” where Project Ranger would be located. Wells 9, 13 and 14 “all have sizable production capacities,” noting that the city can provide water service that would be cost-neutral to residents.

If the city decided not to provide water services, the document notes that Castelion Corporation could pursue drilling its own private well under the approval of the Office of the State Engineer. “A new well most likely would have impact on the city’s wells and water production from these wells,” the document states.

But the bulk of the discussion around the project centered on an intergovernmental agreement with Sandoval County, which included a presentation from Castelion cofounder and CFO Andrew Kreitz, comments from Rio Rancho Fire Rescue Chief James Wenzel on emergency response planning for the facility, background information on votes the Sandoval County Commission has made in an effort to recruit the facility to New Mexico, and public comment.

“As I have quipped, we are the caboose on this item, and in some cases, the caboose hasn’t exactly been connected to the train,” City Manager Matt Geisel said while giving an overview of the IGA and actions already taken by the county.

In discussing RRFR’s automatic aid responsibility for that part of Sandoval County, Wenzel went over some of the responsibilities that need to be outlined as multiple agencies have jurisdiction of the site in different ways: the site lies on Sandoval County, RRFR has an automatic aid requirement for the area, and the State Fire Marshall oversees code enforcement.

Rio Rancho Fire and Rescue is currently under an intergovernmental agreement with Sandoval County Fire and Rescue to provide automatic mutual aid for Intel and the unincorporated area west of city limits.

This agreement was largely based on RRFR being located closer to the response and service areas in the agreement, with the nearest Sandoval County station located approximately 15 miles — or 26 minutes — from Project Ranger at the intersection of US 550 and NM 528.

When looking at the impact on call volume from Project Ranger, the city noted six types of calls that could be expected:

• Fire alarm activations

• EMS calls for employee injuries and health issues

• Motor vehicle accidents

• Hazardous material transport accident

• Small-scale fire suppression

• Large-scale fire suppression

In comparison with a similar agreement to Intel, the city noted that in 2023 and 2024, RRFR responded to an average of 75 calls. So far in 2025, that number is 59.

However, the city noted the “considerable difference” in location of the calls.

“If RRFR units respond to Intel, when they clear, they are inside of city limits, in district, and close to their stations,” the document reads, also noting proximity to two hospitals. “In the case of Project Ranger, a response takes the units outside of city limits and the calls are arguably ‘long’ calls based on location and potential transport. It requires the district to be covered by other units. It starts to stretch the system with the potential for increased response times.”

Wenzel noted that if the site were to be developed in Sandoval County, his crews would need area familiarization, establish a working relationship with the site team and develop an incident action plan. The department would also be responsible for conducting the annual inspection with the state fire marshall and the inspection of fire suppression and alarm systems.

The concerns he presented were “limited and inconsistent” communication with the department’s staff, the effects on the department, including routine calls, Hasmat calls, and multiple alarm response, and the determination of authority having jurisdiction, or AHJ, for emergency response.

Wenzel did note that earlier that day, a possibility of a memorandum of understanding was proposed that “would offer an official, formal request to the various parties and what expectations and involvement they would have on site.”

Deputy County Manager Eric Masterson noted that such an agreement would be important to the city and the county and pledged a joint, collaborative effort with the city.

However, councilors continued to voice concerns about the project, and ultimately, Geisel came back to the governing body with two proposed amendments to the intergovernmental agreement, which were passed unanimously:

• Amendment 1: Rio Rancho Fire & Rescue (RRFR) is the primary first responders to the proposed project site due to a currently in effect automatic aid agreement. Therefore, prior to any funds by the city to the county pursuant to this agreement, the city and county shall enter into a written MOU that establishes the relationship between the city, county and State Fire Marshall’s Office regarding fire safety and emergency response related to the project. The MOU shall include which entity is the Authority Having Jurisdiction, which entity is responsible for plan review and approval, fire code enforcement, annual fire inspection(s), site safety pre-incident planning, incident action plan development, and any other relevant terms relating to fire safety deemed necessary by the parties.

• Amendment 2: Prior to any release of funds by the city to the county pursuant to the agreement, the county and city shall enter into a written MOU detailing the Paseo del Volcan construction plan, any ancillary/related projects and improvements (i.e. improvements related to 28th Avenue NE), and anticipated timing for all phases of road construction. The MOU shall also include identified funding sources, anticipated maintenance responsibilities, and improvement design specifications.

Ultimately, after the passage of the amendments, all three resolutions passed on a 5-1 vote with Councilor Karissa Culbreath dissenting.