[{"_1":2,"_100":-5,"_101":-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],{"_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",6631987,"mediaKeyId","2676169-24be84c9b4a4a4fe9e2fcc63d363c12d","parentId",2676169,"title","Votes at a glance: committee moves several bills including magistrate court changes and education measures","audioSeconds",268,"startMs",2805000,"endMs",3073000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2676169-24be84c9b4a4a4fe9e2fcc63d363c12d&start=2805&end=3073","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2676169-24be84c9b4a4a4fe9e2fcc63d363c12d/thumbnail_2805000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6631987/New-Mexico/Votes-at-a-glance-committee-moves-several-bills-including-magistrate-court-changes-and-education-measures","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6631987-9981f19ac85127be1729645e871e72f4/orig.mp4?Expires=1771002118&Signature=BwxL5Ar8kAf1wnTrf4UnJBc3wqgd4ef~Nl5LRMddmQFQigsAVXWfX-pLwX8ZcljXsV5tabTrAJpNk9OH8NKIY7mn4-PkZWWy-ipKc0cbGD4mIOZk1tuv3YvRi29n34MVE1RbBrmFzi0RrYr6pXzHDuNfE66q89hCF18iSx6gKixmDXPor0baDQan9XdDEPuHkZEKIjN8FJYXyKxDm6I7926XkgK6oYqGrqaVqv3EI~bghFHJtsZD44LspJ~sxPUFmZYtQI38yyTNp2mLJ-Hw3R~f1sO5C83TC5TBnsSqJG6oVilVnMW9rdqyyMmwJHFCJxE9ah5l0WNTro16YgPOjA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","New Mexico Legislature","date","2025-03-17T00:00:00Z","article","The committee considered a number of bills with relatively brief debate and recorded recommendations. Items that received committee recommendations during the session include:

- House Bill 352 (magistrate court restructuring): Sponsor explained the bill would close, relocate or modify underutilized magistrate locations to improve resource allocation; the committee recorded a due‑pass recommendation (11 in the affirmative, 0 in the negative).

- House Bill 154 (raffle exemptions for nonprofit school and youth groups): Sponsor and Gaming Control testimony described the bill as exempting certain fundraising raffles for tax‑exempt groups; committee recorded a due‑pass recommendation (11‑0).

- House Bill 199 (tax data sharing with Legislative Finance Committee): Sponsor noted the bill allows Taxation and Revenue to share certain tax data with the legislature for evaluations; committee recommended due pass (11‑0).

- Teacher pay and education funding measures (including House Bill 156 and related bills): Committee adopted amendments and moved education bills (motions for due pass recorded by roll call; several recorded as 11‑0 or unanimous as noted in the hearing record). Committee members discussed data collection, teacher preparation program evaluations and the science‑of‑reading amendment on one education bill; agencies and sponsors said data collection will be used for evaluation and that program consequences could follow in statute or rule.

These items were advanced to the next stage with committee recommendations; the hearing record shows motions, seconds and roll‑call tallies recorded on the record for each vote. For bills advanced by the committee the text, amendments and any fiscal impacts will be carried forward to subsequent committee or floor consideration.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Senate - Finance Mar 17, 2025 4:30 PM - 6:28 PM","oneSentenceSummary","The committee recommended several bills for passage with unanimous or near‑unanimous votes on matters ranging from court reorganization to education funding formulas and teacher pay; several bills were advanced on voice votes or unanimous roll calls.","taxTitle","Senate, Legislative, New Mexico","taxId",78419,"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},6631992,"Senate committee advances bill to spur brackish water treatment for strategic supply, 10‑1",1718,4797000,6515000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2676169-24be84c9b4a4a4fe9e2fcc63d363c12d&start=4797&end=6515","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2676169-24be84c9b4a4a4fe9e2fcc63d363c12d/thumbnail_4797000.jpg","/articles/6631992/New-Mexico/Senate-committee-advances-bill-to-spur-brackish-water-treatment-for-strategic-supply-101","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6631992-c4a0b88d83a9b0bf36874808a99c8af4/orig.mp4?Expires=1771002118&Signature=LDgzZnRRnsy7RxjCKRAQObQqWf5ZzyGDxpQHMtry97ZjmJezeO3P7~GGoFV4n5fEVJNkJ7Bp3t1J9H664qZZjKJ4VUfY29-KB5I31LyxLyfHTLXns6kT5a1CRUZmCnv2Ige-56hop-yGAY3EoYpNw0IAeyVFVqcawUBBKeK9pBHHxcnQxWZR56Q5uIy~VktTf5KrMyegbsKpk3CXokXnY0YCSr288sBcULImM8fiI7xRceFoHAsb6k40bMUZh80vTb3z1BFZnl--p25dq39HGZdkfeP8N8~Gw5iafDAsmHmb9yJCTRdhuv6fhDNIep2J7Z-asWeVMWSfZxLr8~91AQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Sponsor testimony and bill purpose
A sponsor introduced House Bill 137 to promote development of brackish water supplies and treatment in New Mexico to increase drought resilience and reduce reliance on freshwater. The bill directs the Office of the State Engineer and the Environment Department to administer a program to support development of brackish sources and to establish eligibility, community benefit plan requirements, and grant/contracting authority.

Support and technical witnesses
The sponsor brought technical staff including Rebecca Roosch and Jonas Armstrong and was joined by Tanya Trujillo, deputy state engineer. Supporters at the hearing included the Albuquerque Bernalillo County Water Utility Authority (Marla Schoetz), the Middle Rio Grande stakeholders (John Thompson), and the Greater Albuquerque Chamber of Commerce (Terry Cole). Testimony cited El Paso and Alamogordo as operational examples and urged investment in research, treatment technology and aquifer characterization.

Key issues and committee questions
Committee members asked whether projects would use unappropriated water or trigger normal state‑engineer permitting; witnesses confirmed existing state engineer procedures and impairment review would apply. Senators pressed on who could receive grants (the bill limits grants to public entities), whether private contracting would be permitted, how contracts would be structured (capital support versus price subsidies), who would own and sell treated water, and how community benefit plans would be evaluated and made public. Deputy State Engineer Trujillo and environment department witnesses said proposals would be evaluated for water rights impacts, public health and environmental protections, and that community benefit plans would be posted for public review.

Treatment, disposal and scale
Witnesses described treatment processes that remove dissolved minerals and produce a potable product; by‑products (minerals) may be sold for agricultural use and non‑salable waste streams reinjected. Costs vary by project scale; witnesses cited roughly $25–110 million for sample facilities (El Paso and Alamogordo examples), and said facilities can be sized to local needs.

Economic development and contracting
Committee members sought clarity on whether private firms could build and sell treated water under contracts and whether state investments would include clawbacks or lead‑project protections. Witnesses said contracting could include a variety of structures — capital support, price incentives, or other terms — and that the bill directs agencies to design solicitations and evaluation criteria. Some senators urged stronger limits or use of existing financing authorities; others noted the bill is part of the governor’s 50‑year water action plan.

Vote and next step
After discussion the committee voted to give HB 137 a due pass recommendation: 10 in favor, 1 opposed. The sponsor and agency staff said rulemaking and funding details would be developed if the bill advances.","The committee gave HB 137 a due‑pass recommendation after testimony that brackish water treatment could bolster drought resilience and support economic development; members discussed permitting, public ownership, community benefit plans and contracting arrangements.",{"_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},6631997,"Panel backs bill to create long‑term stewardship fund for CO2 storage, 10‑1",1386,1390000,2776000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2676169-24be84c9b4a4a4fe9e2fcc63d363c12d&start=1390&end=2776","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2676169-24be84c9b4a4a4fe9e2fcc63d363c12d/thumbnail_1390000.jpg","/articles/6631997/New-Mexico/Panel-backs-bill-to-create-longterm-stewardship-fund-for-CO2-storage-101","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6631997-a60e5c79bb50b4f8a5e36ad397a6b7e1/orig.mp4?Expires=1771002118&Signature=PPh9Dh1~RCRN16YZwXjWA5q-0X6fbe4Phjr6RsMnutGk7NuLNNt1JsmSFSj35feMjudXrf7cBS-GHo52n3JDwk7KB1tOVtfmNQwFTk5Wu2DXAx5rMLypU8QaVfd4GCPm70YWoJ~d6Dsw5fNLQ-PuxBWt7Dl8QqWM~IsiM2h9WpVgUzhbc3-fQ2OOAWhLXnacjeSY6J2ArrHfukT7AXP-sxfHOfZee7JpWTNf4TH3tgKa4jDLe3J1o-0LyPOZ6ap-aStPK4hOju-Q39tjFuX6ISrN2qTTRltvYGqUHDPG9fraFe0PMHaZ15nZtGb-96~2tBXgMExPmFXGL6l5coaCJg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Representative Dixon introduced HB 458, a bipartisan, bicameral bill to create a long‑term stewardship fund for carbon dioxide storage projects in New Mexico. The measure would require operators to pay an initial fee of no less than $0.10 per metric ton of CO2 injected over the operating life of a project, with the Department of Energy, Minerals and Natural Resources (MERND/MNERD in testimony) authorized to publish a fee schedule to meet projected stewardship needs. The bill also requires continued monitoring and reporting and bars issuance of a certificate of closure until at least five years after injection ceases.

Why it matters: supporters said the fund and related statutory language would position New Mexico to host commercial carbon storage safely, create jobs, and give the state tools to oversee long‑term monitoring if operators cease active management. Opponents said carbon capture and storage (CCS) can act as a “false solution” that prolongs fossil‑fuel infrastructure and raises risks for frontline communities.

What sponsors and experts told the committee
Representative Dixon opened the hearing and described the bill’s key elements, and introduced two technical witnesses: Dr. Robert Balch of New Mexico Tech and Ben Shelton, deputy secretary at the Energy, Minerals and Natural Resources Department. Dr. Balch and other experts described Class VI injection wells, deep geologic formations used for storage, monitoring programs, and the mechanics of injection and long‑term containment. Dr. Balch said commercially mature projects exist and pointed to acid‑gas disposal wells and pilot projects in New Mexico and the U.S.

Supporters at the hearing included PNM (represented by Jerk Roanhorse) and the New Mexico Federation of Labor (John Lipshoots in testimony). PNM told the committee CCS remains a developing technology but that HB 458 would help New Mexico be positioned to sequester CO2 if CCS becomes feasible and cost effective. Labor testified the bill could support high‑paying jobs connected with the industry.

Opponents included Youth United for Climate Crisis Action (Sofia Jenkins Nieto) and the Sierra Club Rio Grande chapter (Camilla Feibelman). Testimony in opposition argued CCS risks extending the life of the oil and gas industry, can be energy‑intensive and costly, and may not deliver the emissions reductions advocates seek. Witnesses asked for more tribal consultation and raised questions about liability if an operator declares bankruptcy.

Liability, stewardship and rules
Witnesses and committee members discussed how stewardship responsibilities would transfer to the state at a minimum of five years after injection ceases, and that the bill—together with companion legislation (HB 457 referenced in testimony)—is intended to secure state primacy for Class VI wells (permitting authority under EPA rules) so New Mexico can add state requirements beyond federal standards. Witnesses said the house amendments narrowed the state’s assumed responsibilities largely to long‑term monitoring; other legal obligations could remain with operators. Financial assurance and bonding mechanisms were discussed as subject to rulemaking and companion bills.

Economic and program details
Witnesses explained the $0.10/ton baseline fee was a conservative estimate to build a stewardship fund under assumptions about annual storage volumes; one example projection assumed up to 10 million tons per year for 35 years and estimated a stewardship fund on the order of hundreds of millions of dollars depending on interest rates and fee adjustments. Committee members pressed on royalty and landowner payments, federal incentives (Section 45Q tax credits), and whether projects would be privately financed, publicly contracted, or a mix.

Questions from members focused on risks (seismicity, leakage), monitoring timeframes, who pays response costs if a leak is discovered after stewardship transfers, how sites are sited and characterized, and whether rulemaking and companion bills provide adequate financial assurance. Experts described monitoring systems, the chemical and physical trapping mechanisms that reduce leak risk over time, and remediation techniques used if well integrity problems arise.

Vote and next steps
After extended discussion, the committee moved a motion for a due pass on HB 458. On a roll call the Senate committee recorded 10 votes in favor and 1 opposed; the measure was given a “do pass” recommendation to the next committee or floor stage.

Provenance: the committee record includes the sponsor’s introduction, technical witness testimony, public support and opposition statements, a question‑and‑answer period with senators, and the recorded roll‑call vote.","Lawmakers advanced HB 458 to establish a state stewardship fund paid by a per‑ton fee on CO2 injections and to set a minimum five‑year post‑injection monitoring period; the bill drew support from utilities and labor and opposition from youth and environmental advocates.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Votes at a glance: committee moves several bills including magistrate court changes and education measures

Senate committee advances bill to spur brackish water treatment for strategic supply, 10‑1

Panel backs bill to create long‑term stewardship fund for CO2 storage, 10‑1