[{"_1":2,"_112":-5,"_113":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76,88,100],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6028496,"mediaKeyId","5685864-9c5ebeaa471e8e6b378d1110a8f708f6","parentId",5685864,"title","Committee advances bill clarifying property‑tax treatment of RETA‑owned transmission improvements","audioSeconds",1026,"startMs",890000,"endMs",1916000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=5685864-9c5ebeaa471e8e6b378d1110a8f708f6&start=890&end=1916","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5685864-9c5ebeaa471e8e6b378d1110a8f708f6/thumbnail_890000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6028496/New-Mexico/Committee-advances-bill-clarifying-propertytax-treatment-of-RETAowned-transmission-improvements","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6028496-8f09ab00a6468c97416bf4172c7fec5e/orig.mp4?Expires=1770432719&Signature=A0BAMh7NWylokhzmjx7UQwZU~nN4estoYdBm4H86sBQSvkV6~UJJQK8N~ruAhZ9xQWb6HCTh7L122AxSvX3JpdXPY8JBboUDdldT4wZtVINQzNIdG88GYpQDYRaOfZGlzpakOSMeNgmKa3uePHRz8MCU0pEkNafx6ZnF8y~XTnEesb24JygutJ5bbWdtQGrkoyCw16z8ldhvDyOgKHrdcYkHO7DOv-MjhjIB82pD6AlPq9XPanDDtI-3juW6a02gynA1MPVqTkTzVsW7jI0zd-7z9liEwSQskgMfDjaKhFiC-PdBzZEkvcntLaPCRKBAHZryJACTaL6FMStX~6q4eA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","New Mexico Legislature","date","2025-02-15T00:00:00Z","article","Representative Small presented House Bill 295 to clarify how property improvements acquired by the Renewable Energy Transmission Authority (RETA) are treated for property‑tax purposes when leased back to private developers.

Lynn Mostetler (RETA) told the committee that RITA’s prior practice and project agreements were negotiated with the understanding that RETA‑owned improvements would not be subject to property taxes, and that the lack of clarity in the tax code creates uncertainty for private partners. She said counties to date have not collected property tax on RETA project improvements and that the bill would protect future projects from unanticipated tax liabilities that could chill transmission and renewable development.

Pattern Energy and other renewable developers and utilities testified in favor. Pattern Energy construction and compliance staff described local economic benefits during construction and operations — including direct payments in lieu of taxes (PILOTs) negotiated for wind developments that were unlocked by transmission — and said clarifying the tax code helps projects and local revenue planning.

Several committee members raised constitutional and legal questions. Representative Montoya and Representative Murphy referenced a 2017 New Mexico Supreme Court decision (El Castillo Retirement v. Martinez) and the state constitution’s Article 8, Section 3, which limit legislative authority to exempt property from taxation. Members pressed witnesses on whether the bill would create a statutory exemption from property tax and on how the change differs from industrial revenue bond (IRB) transactions that commonly carry negotiated tax treatments at the local level.

Outcome: The committee voted to pass House Bill 295; the final roll call showed the committee approved the measure 6–5. Supporters said the change is intended to preserve existing public‑private financing structures and continued renewable transmission investment; critics warned of the constitutional risk and said the statute may require broader cleanup to avoid litigation.

Why it matters: Sponsors argue the clarification is necessary to maintain RETA’s role in enabling large transmission projects and the associated economic development. Opponents say the statute may run afoul of constitutional limits on exempting property by statute and recommended broader statutory reform or Attorney General review.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","House - Energy, Environment and Natural Resources - Feb 15, 2025 8:11 AM - 11:35 AM","oneSentenceSummary","House Bill 295 would clarify that transmission improvements acquired by the Renewable Energy Transmission Authority and leased back to developers are treated as RETA property for property‑tax purposes, sponsors said, preserving project financing assumptions made in prior deals.","taxTitle","Energy, Environment & Natural Resources, House of Representatives, Committees, Legislative, New Mexico","taxId",64955,"location","New Mexico","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6028492,"Committee tables repeal of clean‑fuel standard after divided testimony",4693,1720000,6413000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5685864-9c5ebeaa471e8e6b378d1110a8f708f6&start=1720&end=6413","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5685864-9c5ebeaa471e8e6b378d1110a8f708f6/thumbnail_1720000.jpg","/articles/6028492/New-Mexico/Committee-tables-repeal-of-cleanfuel-standard-after-divided-testimony","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6028492-4c1a0a8fb6c781c8471546472af39c61/orig.mp4?Expires=1770432719&Signature=o6fyBeKESd4MQcAn3sQASjfZYTFJVBkwOSFskMpzrgQL4I6iVWLhzvVzFC1p5bNsexQp4cL~aI7cuJKdjisYVqYTFFdqP0DO-7tP8X2xdx9P8-W7uiSouBCHh9EH4EXeHhJv07AURY4jJTpkJvIP4HZz8m71uh4t6SBVTlgTQhxL4NjitIoVn3a2RxZsur19ezgNfAEcbPb~nuZeygz1Bkn4IhunFnfAgQrb5c8ca0kPwMciERhdERse2KsMwgIGddzaM1IcEuD~Y6XaATUV93CV94iCCO6VHLvrdC4tNQPDFo-qB6DIjptq7eytD6Ie9Jp3Rbw1j6S5dEbiI50mxA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Representative Pettigrew introduced House Bill 328 to repeal the state’s 2024 clean‑transportation fuel standard and to prohibit the Environmental Improvement Board (EIB) from adopting or continuing rules implementing a clean‑fuel standard.

Opponents urged the committee to reject the repeal. Sierra Club volunteer Alyssa Kenny Geier and the Southwest Energy Efficiency Project told the committee that the standard (now in rulemaking) is intended to reduce transportation emissions, encourage lower‑carbon fuels and spur investment in clean transportation technologies.

Supporters, including the Independent Petroleum Association (represented by Jim Winchester), argued the standard functions like a fuel tax and would raise gasoline prices in a way that disproportionately affects rural and low‑income drivers. Winchester said market mechanisms for credits would shift costs to consumers and urged discontinuing the rulemaking before it takes effect.

Committee members asked a range of questions about rules, infrastructure readiness for electric vehicles, impacts on rural dealers and repair shops, and the role of statewide vs. local regulation. Sponsor Pettigrew argued the bill returns policy decisions to the Legislature rather than unelected rulemaking bodies and said the state lacks accredited electrical supply capacity to support rapid electrification.

Outcome: The committee voted to table House Bill 328. A roll‑call vote recorded seven members voting to table and four voting against tabling the measure, so the motion to table carried.

Why it matters: Repeal would have halted the clean‑fuel program and prevented EIB rulemaking; tabling leaves the program in rulemaking for now and signals continued debate over the state’s approach to reducing transportation emissions.","House Bill 328, which would repeal New Mexico’s clean‑transportation fuel standard and bar the Environmental Improvement Board from adopting related rules, drew divided testimony before the committee; the panel voted to table the bill.",{"_33":89,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":90,"_41":91,"_43":92,"_45":93,"_47":94,"_49":95,"_51":96,"_53":97,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":98,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":99,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6028501,"Committee OKs bill to broaden recycling fund and add circular‑economy staff positions",4739,572000,5311000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5685864-9c5ebeaa471e8e6b378d1110a8f708f6&start=572&end=5311","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5685864-9c5ebeaa471e8e6b378d1110a8f708f6/thumbnail_572000.jpg","/articles/6028501/New-Mexico/Committee-OKs-bill-to-broaden-recycling-fund-and-add-circulareconomy-staff-positions","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6028501-8e431d45ef38d43668cd4afee98555ce/orig.mp4?Expires=1770432719&Signature=HnYVsksEQFfWDPkmI-wb7IzkbxlcJ~rZf1UDYd~IoCeWHJbSL9S3KNgqyXA5Y67iJ3oGoEJJ~MQGGrIkgjWSnEnI4iGOxL9XIK1JObwZCmnTi9HA~PjAChTFXLI-afEufHgH-NDuNUktctI6XJboP-F1zYMf5qkG5qMiQs1WFgZ8UTwrJhONKddpwdHBt3rsw0fW5VPDymJSuG0V7kLghkD5VFowYtHeaVjoXAv~h2tLaW5QNe9QJ8tbNhwZBQdnjSWoeLgjMPqsThZ9SvxpxLxDhYivC-woygWTdJeV~xXwevcA~2A8P0inY1eaJwZ-iulikZdoTVleA4v-RD8grg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","House Bill 291, sponsored by Representative Romero, would change how New Mexico’s Motor Vehicle Tire and Recycling (RAID) fund is used, remove an outdated requirement that 75% of the fund be dedicated to tire projects, and create two funded positions in the Environment Department focused on recycling coordination and building local markets for recycled goods.

Representative Romero said the bill repurposes existing fund balances rather than creating new taxes or using new appropriations, and would help communities that have projects but cannot access current fund rules. Shirlene Sitton, the Environment Department’s solid‑waste bureau chief, and John Roderick, deputy cabinet secretary, told the committee the changes would free up money that has accumulated because fewer tire projects qualified under the old rule and would allow grants for other recycling infrastructure and illegal‑dump remediation.

Supporters from the recycling and solid‑waste sector praised the bill at the hearing. Speakers included Scott Scanlon for the Tire Manufacturers Association, Marla Schoetz of the South Central Solid Waste Authority, Alyssa Kenny Geier for Sierra Club, Sarah Pierpont of the New Mexico Recycling Coalition and Jean Logsdon of the League of Women Voters. They described unmet demand for balers, trucks, community recycling hubs and other infrastructure that could increase diversion of materials from landfills.

Committee members focused on implementation details and unintended consequences. Representative Montoya asked whether the change could disadvantage existing county landfills that currently handle bulky items such as appliances and refrigerators; sponsors answered that existing grant priorities remain and that the bill replaces bracketed legacy language with a new statutory framework that explicitly includes illegal‑dump abatement and recycling infrastructure. Members discussed the constitutional limit on direct grants to nonprofits; the committee accepted a friendly procedural amendment to remove language that would have explicitly allowed direct grants to nonprofit organizations and clarified that public entities could contract with nonprofits for services.

The committee approved one amendment in committee to address the constitutional concern and then voted to pass the bill as amended. Committee members who spoke in favor highlighted rural needs and the potential to create “hub‑and‑spoke” systems that help rural communities aggregate materials to reach commercial recycling markets.

Outcome: The committee passed House Bill 291 as amended.

Why it matters: Sponsors and supporters argue the bill will expand practical recycling capacity in rural and urban communities by unlocking existing fund balances and adding two staff positions for outreach and circular‑economy development.","House Bill 291 would modernize the state’s tire‑rate fund, allow a wider set of projects and applicants to receive grants, and create two Environment Department positions focused on recycling education and circular‑economy development. The committee approved the bill as amended.",{"_33":101,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":102,"_41":103,"_43":104,"_45":105,"_47":106,"_49":107,"_51":108,"_53":109,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":110,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":111,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6028505,"Lawmakers hear bill to ban PFAS in fracking and require pre‑permit chemical disclosure",5406,244000,5650000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5685864-9c5ebeaa471e8e6b378d1110a8f708f6&start=244&end=5650","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5685864-9c5ebeaa471e8e6b378d1110a8f708f6/thumbnail_244000.jpg","/articles/6028505/New-Mexico/Lawmakers-hear-bill-to-ban-PFAS-in-fracking-and-require-prepermit-chemical-disclosure","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6028505-3fc96671b3674432d14ff3c435a52be1/orig.mp4?Expires=1770432719&Signature=f5HJCv8skreMRl1qT~5xwu55jzxa6dyJTamUm7YjzPzMfrxzGKBe~M8FMRYiJFpZEFWEmlh92j4kiDVT-7rkLgioFgEYtRGFY2DD3YtmlH6EHXkxbt8We0iEEInaaiP643hRUFFHNY8mkaHzNUzQOeUOA1KrdWq8ioFL~ssg-rM-tAmDXE6-Jieq42kI1LyvdqcqewhG7HO4xDoGfVJDpcZ60qzFBeGkoJ~xRlZzLInd2texxpg7GxWN1hbivKpv6XaEXizkxlfWhyK2LNJhB-tyR-d1oEQhcbW2YZcSjbguay1n2C8sYkMuuOggdMWulMdKAs1ejEVYHgCqkxbhMg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Representative Romero introduced House Bill 222 to the House Energy, Environment & Natural Resources Committee on Saturday, saying the measure would require chemical disclosures for non‑fracking downhole operations and ban PFAS in fracking fluids.

The bill’s sponsor, Representative Romero, told the committee the measure “is a public’s right to know” and would require pre‑permit disclosure of fracking chemicals rather than the current practice of reporting to FracFocus 45 days after drilling. Senator Steinborn, appearing as a co‑sponsor, said the bill is “foundational” for how New Mexico manages produced water and contamination risks and argued the law would help communities and first responders know what they might face in spills or leaks.

The bill drew sharply divided testimony. Industry groups including the New Mexico Oil and Gas Association and the Greater Albuquerque Chamber of Commerce urged the committee to oppose the bill, saying it is too broad and could conflict with ongoing agency rulemaking and the state’s trade‑secrets protections. Ashley Wagner of NMOOGA said removing FracFocus as the primary disclosure tool and forcing new reporting at the state level “could result in older, less safe chemicals being used” to preserve trade secrets.

Environmental and public‑health advocates, including WildEarth Guardians’ attorney Tim Davis and witnesses from Sierra Club, Center for Biological Diversity and community groups, urged the panel to approve the bill. Davis cited a Physicians for Social Responsibility analysis of FracFocus disclosures that, he said, found PFAS compounds were reported in New Mexico fracking between 2013 and 2022 and that many disclosures list “trade secret” in place of chemical identifiers. “We don’t know what’s being injected into the ground in New Mexico,” he said. Supporters argued the measure would close gaps that leave communities and first responders blind to chemical hazards.

Committee members pressed sponsors on legal and practical concerns. Representative Rosanna Murphy asked where PFAS is used in the industry; sponsors and experts said the state record shows some historic use but that trade‑secret reporting obscures the full picture. Several members asked why the bill singled out oil and gas rather than a broader PFAS ban across sources; sponsors said the industry’s large volumes of injected water make it a logical initial focus. The committee also discussed whether the Environmental Department (OCD) and other agencies had been consulted and whether statute‑level changes would preempt or duplicate rulemaking.

Public testimony and sponsor exchanges emphasized two recurring points: supporters said disclosure and a PFAS ban would protect public health and enable reuse of produced water with confidence; opponents warned of legal exposure under trade‑secret law and of potential economic impacts. The sponsor said the bill would not force companies to reveal trade secrets; rather, it would require that any chemical used in New Mexico be disclosed or not used here.

Outcome: The committee agreed to “roll” the bill for further work rather than move it forward at the hearing. No formal committee action was recorded on the bill at today’s session.

Why it matters: Backers say the bill fills a perceived gap in oversight of produced water and non‑fracking downhole chemical uses; opponents say it risks legal challenges and could disrupt ongoing agency rulemaking. The measure is likely to be revised before returning to committee.","A legislative hearing on House Bill 222 focused on banning PFAS in oil‑and‑gas operations and requiring companies to disclose chemicals before receiving drilling permits. Supporters said the public has a right to know; industry groups warned of trade‑secret and implementation problems. The committee rolled the bill for further work.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Committee advances bill clarifying property‑tax treatment of RETA‑owned transmission improvements

Committee tables repeal of clean‑fuel standard after divided testimony

Committee OKs bill to broaden recycling fund and add circular‑economy staff positions

Lawmakers hear bill to ban PFAS in fracking and require pre‑permit chemical disclosure