2024 NM Constitutional Amendments & Bond Issues

It’s important that voter’s are educated about the 4 Bond Issues and 3 Constitutional Amendments (CA) being voted upon on Election Day. If these ballot measures pass (good or bad) they will become law. Voters are encouraged to look at the summaries and consequences of each one below:

CA 1: Disabled Veteran Property Tax Exemption

Summary: This amendment proposes extending property tax exemptions to veterans who are
less than 100% disabled and to their widows or widowers. The amount of the exemption would be based on the veteran's disability rating, allowing more veterans to receive property tax relief proportionate to their disability percentage.

Pros:

Extends tax relief to more veterans, including those with partial disabilities.
Helps veterans on fixed incomes by reducing their property tax burden.
Demonstrates state support for veterans’ sacrifices, potentially attracting more veterans to move to New Mexico

Cons:

Could increase property taxes for other residents to compensate for lost revenue.
May provide benefits to financially stable veterans who do not need tax relief.
Critics argue that property taxes should be based on the value of property, not the personal circumstances of the owner.

What if you vote YES? You support amending the state constitution to extend the disabled veteran property tax exemption to all disabled veterans (or their widows or widowers) in proportion to their federal disability rating.

What if you vote NO? You oppose amending the state constitution to extend the disabled veteran property tax exemption to all disabled veterans (or their widows or widows) in proportion to their federal disability rating, thereby maintaining that the exemption only applies to veterans with a federal disability rating of 100%.

CA 2: Increase Veteran Property Tax Exemption

Summary: This amendment seeks to increase the property tax exemption for honorably
discharged veterans and their widows or widowers from $4,000 to $10,000, with the amount adjusted for inflation. It aims to provide greater tax relief for veterans and their families. Note: The veteran property tax exemption reduces the taxable value of a veterans home, which lowers the final tax. It is not a $4,000 dollar reduction of property tax (or $10,000 in the proposed amendment.)

Pros:

Increases the tax exemption, providing more financial relief for veterans and their families.
Includes an inflation adjustment, preventing the need for future amendments.
Supports homeownership for veterans, especially those on fixed incomes.

Cons:

Other property taxpayers may face higher taxes to offset the exemption increase.
Some argue that veterans’ benefits should be the responsibility of the federal government, not the state.
The exemption could benefit veterans regardless of financial need, which critics see as inequitable.

What if you vote YES? You support amending the state constitution to increase the property tax exemption for veterans from $4,000 to $10,000 and adjust it annually for inflation.

What if you vote NO? You oppose amending the state constitution to increase the property tax exemption for veterans from $4,000 to $10,000.

CA 3: NM Judicial Nominating Commission Amendment

Summary: This amendment would allow the dean of the University of New Mexico School of Law to appoint a designee, such as an associate dean or faculty member, to the Judicial Nominating Commission.

Pros:

Allows the dean to focus on academic duties by delegating responsibilities.
Ensures that an equally qualified legal scholar could serve as chair of the nominating commission.
Provides flexibility in administration without sacrificing the commission’s effectiveness.

Cons:

Risk of Entrenching Political Bias: With the judiciary already perceived as biased towards liberal justice reform agendas, allowing the dean to delegate their role could worsen this bias.
Some fear the loss of neutrality in tie-breaking votes if a designee replaces the dean.
Critics argue that the dean is appointed to chair the judicial nomination commission for a reason. His/her legal expertise is vital for vetting judicial candidates, and losing his/her direct involvement could weaken the process.

What if you vote YES? You support authorizing a designee of the dean of the University of New Mexico Law School to serve as chair of the judicial nomination commission and requiring the designee to be an associate dean, a faculty member, a retired faculty member, or a former dean of the law school.

What if you vote NO? You oppose authorizing a designee of the dean of the University of New Mexico Law School to serve as chair of the judicial nomination commission and requiring the designee to be an associate dean, a faculty member, a retired faculty member, or a former dean of the law school.

CA 4: NM County Officer Salaries

Summary: This amendment would give local boards of county commissioners the authority to set the salaries of county officials, removing this responsibility from the state legislature. It also ensures that any fees collected by county officials are paid into the county treasury.

Pros:

Provides local control over county officials’ salaries, allowing decisions to be made by those familiar with local conditions.
Could help attract better-qualified candidates for county offices by offering
competitive salaries.
Promotes more efficient government by removing the legislature from local salary decisions.

Cons:

Potential for Corruption and Self-Interest: Allowing county commissioners to set their own salaries and those of other officials without state oversight increases the risk of corruption or self-serving decisions.
Erosion of Uniform Standards: The current system ensures uniformity across New Mexico, with salaries tied to county size and classification. Giving commissioners full discretion could create inconsistencies, eroding public trust and leading to inefficiencies in local government.
Critics are concerned about potential conflicts of interest, as county commissioners would set their own salaries.
Removing legislative oversight could reduce accountability in the use of
county funds.

What if you vote YES? You support amending the state constitution to authorize the board of county commissioners to set salaries for county officers and clarify that fees collected by the county are to be deposited into the county treasury.

What if you vote NO? You oppose amending the state constitution to authorize the board of county commissioners to set salaries for county officers, thereby maintaining that the state legislature sets the salaries of county officers.

BI 1: NM Public Safety Radio Comm. Systems Bond

Summary: This bond measure would issue $10.3 million in bonds to modernize and stabilize public safety radio communications systems, repaid through property taxes.

Pros:

Modernizing public safety communications systems is essential for
improving emergency response, potentially saving lives.
Enhances coordination between emergency services such as police, fire, and
medical teams, ensuring better overall public safety.
A relatively small investment ($10.3 million) could lead to significant
improvements in public safety infrastructures.

What if you vote YES? Authorizes the state to issue $10,297,100 in bonds to modernize public safety radio communications systems.

Cons:

New Mexico ranks 37th in property tax burden, but taxes are based on assessed values, which have been rising, creating a heavier burden on small businesses and individuals.
New Mexico’s poverty rate is 18.4%, so any continuation or additional property tax burden could disproportionately harm residents already struggling financially.
Lack of accountability: There is no language in the bond measure ensuring that the funds will be used exclusively for modernizing public safety communications. Without specific oversight, these funds could be diverted to administrative costs rather than the intended public safety projects.
With a $3.6 billion surplus from oil and gas revenues, the state should use its financial resources to fund public safety improvements without increasing property taxes.
Lack of specificity: The bond measure mentions “capital expenditures for
public safety radio communications systems stabilization and modernization” but does not specify which systems will be updated or how the funds will be allocated. This lack of detail leaves the process open to potential misallocation of resources or favoritism, with no clear mechanisms for accountability.

What if you vote NO? Does not authorize the state to issue $10,297,100 in bonds to modernize public safety radio communications systems.

BI 2: NM Public Education Bond

Summary: This bond measure proposes issuing $230.3 million in bonds to fund capital improvements and acquisitions for higher education institutions, special schools, and tribal schools in New Mexico, repaid through property taxes.

Pros:

Enhances educational infrastructure, benefiting students and faculty by
improving facilities and modernizing campuses.
Includes special and tribal schools, ensuring that funds are distributed to often-overlooked communities.
A large investment could have long-term positive effects on the state’s educational outcomes and economic development.

What if you vote YES? You authorize the state to issue $230,258,400 in bonds to fund public higher education, special public schools, and tribal schools.

Cons:

New Mexico ranks 37th in property tax burden, but taxes are based on assessed values, which have been rising, creating a heavier burden on small businesses and individuals.
New Mexico’s poverty rate is 18.4%, so any continuation or property tax increase disproportionately affects those already struggling financially.
Lack of accountability: The bond language includes no mention of oversight or mechanisms to ensure the funds will be used exclusively for capital improvements in higher education. Without specific oversight, there’s a risk that the funds could be diverted to other bureaucratic expenses.
With a $3.6 billion surplus from oil and gas in 2024, the state should use its existing resources to fund these educational improvements without raising taxes.
Lack of specificity: The bond measure mentions “capital improvements and acquisitions for certain higher education, special schools, and tribal schools” but does not specify which institutions or what improvements will be made. This leaves too much room for discretion, potentially leading to favoritism or misallocation of funds without clear accountability or transparency

What if you vote NO? You do not authorize the state to issue $230,258,400 in bonds to fund public higher education institutions, special public schools, and tribal schools.

BI 3: NM Senior Citizens Facilities Bond

Summary: This bond measure proposes issuing $30.7 million in general obligation bonds to improve, construct, and acquire equipment for senior citizen facilities, repaid through property taxes.

Pros:

Supports much-needed improvements in senior citizen facilities, enhancing care and quality of life for New Mexico’s elderly population.
Stimulates the local economy by funding construction projects and equipment acquisition.
Addresses the growing needs of an aging population across the state.

Cons:

New Mexico is ranked 37th in property tax burden, and assessed property values, on which property taxes are based, have been rising,
disproportionately impacting small business owners and individuals.
New Mexico has one of the highest poverty rates in the country at 18.4%, meaning increased property taxes could disproportionately hurt low income residents.
Lack of accountability: The bond language does not include specific provisions for oversight to ensure that the funds will be spent as intended. This raises concerns that the money could be diverted to administrative costs or bureaucracy instead of senior citizen facility improvements.
With a $3.6 billion surplus from oil and gas revenues in 2024, these improvements should be funded by existing state funds, rather than
increasing bond capacity.
Lack of specificity: The bond measure refers to “certain” senior living facility improvements but does not specify which facilities or what types of improvements will be made. This vagueness could lead to favoritism, corruption, or misallocation of funds. There is no clear accountability or guarantee that the funds will be distributed fairly across the state.

BI 4: NM Public Libraries Bond

Summary: This measure would issue $19.3 million in bonds to acquire resources for academic, public school, tribal, and public libraries across the state, repaid through property taxes.

Pros:

Expands resources for libraries across the state, improving access to educational materials, especially in underserved and rural areas.
Promotes literacy and lifelong learning opportunities for children, students, and adults.
Helps bridge the digital divide by supporting technology and resource acquisitions in public and tribal libraries.

Cons:

New Mexico ranks 37th in property tax burden, but the taxes are based on rising assessed property values, putting more pressure on small businesses and individual homeowners.
New Mexico’s poverty rate is 18.4%, so any continuation or property tax increase disproportionately affects those already struggling financially.
Lack of accountability: The bond language does not mention any oversight or transparency measures to ensure the funds will be used solely for library resource acquisitions, which could result in money being diverted to other areas of bureaucracy.
The state’s $3.6 billion oil and gas surplus should be used to fund library acquisitions, avoiding additional taxes on residents.
Lack of specificity: The bond measure vaguely refers to “capital expenditures for academic, public school, tribal, and public library resource acquisitions” without specifying which libraries or what types of resources will be acquired. This opens the door to potential favoritism or misallocation of funds. There is no clear information about how or where the funds will be distributed, making it difficult for the public to ensure fair and transparent use of the money.

What if you vote NO? Does not authorize the state to issue $19,305,000 in bonds to fund public libraries.