Senate committee advances veterans state-park pass, geothermal grants, wildfire and forest buffer measures; conservancy-district election bill clears

A Senate committee on conservation and natural resources on March 1 advanced five bills ranging from a veterans state-park pass to geothermal development funding, wildfire suppression and post-fire recovery money, legal authority to create forest and watershed buffer zones, and restoration of election procedures for conservancy districts.

The measures drew detailed technical testimony from state agency staff, experts and tribal and utility representatives. Committee members voted to report the bills out of committee with due-pass recommendations and asked several agencies for follow-up information on program design, eligibility, mapping and oversight.

The bills matter because they direct new competitive grant programs, clarify legal authority for wildfire mitigation projects, provide funding for suppression and post-fire erosion work, and restore locally governed election procedures that affect tribal lands and private property owners in conservancy districts.

State parks pass for veterans

Sen. J. Block presented House Bill 161 to allow a single pass that eliminates a previous three‑day camping pass and expands the definition of veteran eligible for an unlimited-use State Park day pass to include reserve components and some uniformed-service officers not previously covered. Block said separation must be “under honorable conditions” to qualify and cited unanimous approval in the House committee and on the House floor.

Walt Morton, a U.S. Navy veteran and member of the Veterans and Military Families Caucus, testified in support, saying, “I walk regularly in my own Villanueva State Park, and being in nature at 78 and safe out there helps keep me sharp.” The committee adopted a due-pass recommendation; the committee recorded a unanimous due‑pass vote.

Geothermal projects and the development fund

House Bill 289 would expand and administer a geothermal project development fund. Rebecca Puckstair (identified in testimony as the director of the Energy Conservation Management Division at the Energy, Minerals and Natural Resources Department) told the committee the office would oversee a competitive process and that grants would be capped at $250,000. She said the statute is written to allow funding for shallow geothermal systems (heating and cooling) but that department rulemaking and competitive priorities would likely lean toward supporting utility‑scale projects and subsurface mapping to reduce drilling risk.

Travis Kellerman, senior climate adviser to the governor, testified: “New Mexico is sixth in the nation for our geothermal potential and capacity.” Tom Solomon, facilitator of the New Mexico Geothermal Working Group, described existing mapping work and the department’s effort to compile temperature and drilling data from past oil‑and‑gas wells to prioritize targets. Testimony noted examples of existing shallow geothermal use (greenhouse heating near Lordsburg) as distinct from deep geothermal power production, which can require drilling to several thousand feet (examples cited during testimony ranged from roughly 5,000 feet for useful heat in some locations to tests at about 18,000 feet). Solomon gave an example temperature reached in a deep test well: about 250°C (about 450°F), which is sufficient to generate power.

The bill’s language sets a competitive grant cap of $250,000 and the committee was told approximately $10 million is included for the fund in the governor’s budget (House Bill 2), though appropriation and final amounts depend on the budget process. The department explained grant awards would commonly be reimbursement‑based with milestones and permitting requirements to reduce risk of bad actors and bankruptcies. The committee moved HB 289 with a due‑pass recommendation (vote recorded in committee: 7 yes, 0 no, 2 excused).

Forest and watershed buffer zones

Representative Vincent presented House Bill 175, which would amend the Forest and Watershed Restoration Act and add legal definitions and authority to create and maintain buffer zones in the wildland‑urban interface. The bill would allow the Forest Land Protection Revolving Fund to be used to establish protective buffers in defined high‑risk areas and to support treatments that reduce wildfire spread from wildlands into residential neighborhoods. Vincent cited the South Fork Fire that affected Ruidoso on June 18, 2024, to underscore the urgency.

State Forester Laura McCarthy said the buffer‑zone definition and the fund authority are “part of our mitigation strategy to keep our communities safe.” Multiple tribal representatives and utilities testified in favor, describing local needs for buffers and watershed protection. Witnesses cited a previously published estimate that every $1 million spent on tree thinning and forest treatment generates about 22 jobs in the region studied. The committee voted to give HB 175 a due pass (committee recorded a unanimous due‑pass recommendation).

Wildfire suppression and post‑fire funds

House Bill 191 would create two funds administered by the Energy, Minerals and Natural Resources Department: a wildfire suppression fund and a post‑wildfire fund for recovery activities including erosion control. Representative Small and Senator Campos described the legislation as aligning New Mexico’s practices with Pew Charitable Trusts recommendations to track and stabilize wildfire‑related expenditures.

McCarthy and a Legislative Finance Committee analyst said the bill codifies suppression and post‑fire spending definitions that align with potential federal reimbursements. Committee discussion clarified that the bill focuses on suppression and post‑fire work, while mitigation (for example, prescribed thinning and buffer creation) is covered through other bills and budget appropriations. The committee adopted HB 191 with a due‑pass recommendation; members cited an estimated package of appropriations the legislature is considering that includes multi‑million‑dollar allocations for forest management beyond this bill.

Conservancy districts and local election procedures

Past Judiciary Committee substitute for House Bill 308 would remove conservancy districts from the consolidated Local Election Act and restore authority for conservancy districts to administer elections under rules tailored to property‑owner elector lists. Jason Yosuga, CEO and chief engineer of the Middle Rio Grande Conservancy District (MRGCD), and multiple pueblos and conservancy districts testified that the Local Election Act’s voter‑roll procedures are administratively incompatible with conservancy‑district elections, which are based on ownership or residence on tribal land and historically have been run by the districts.

Supporters described the bill as restoring a long‑standing practice used by the MRGCD and Arch Hurley Conservancy District and allowing pueblos to provide qualified‑elector lists for tribal lands. The committee gave HB 308 a due pass by recorded vote (committee recorded 8 yes, 0 no).

Votes at a glance

- HB 161 (State park day passes for veterans): Committee action — due pass (unanimous committee vote). Motion to report carried; second recorded. - HB 289 (Geothermal project development fund): Committee action — due pass (committee vote recorded as 7 yes, 0 no, 2 excused). Grants capped at $250,000; approximately $10 million referenced in House Bill 2 for the fund in the budget proposal; department to administer competitive, reimbursement‑based grants and rulemaking. - HB 175 (Forest and Watershed Restoration Act amendments; buffer zones): Committee action — due pass (unanimous committee vote). Bill would amend section 68‑4‑2 NMSA 1978 and authorize use of the Forest Land Protection Revolving Fund for buffer projects. - HB 191 (Wildfire suppression and post‑fire funds): Committee action — due pass (committee vote recorded as 8 yes, 0 no). Establishes suppression and post‑fire funds administered by EMNRD; aligns definitions to federal reimbursement categories. - HB 308 (Conservancy districts/local election procedures): Committee action — due pass (committee vote recorded as 8 yes, 0 no). Restores conservancy‑district administration of elections for districts organized under the Conservancy Act (cites provisions in 73‑14 NMSA 1978); includes an emergency clause.

What was not decided or needs follow‑up

Committee members asked the agencies for follow‑up information on several items: the final budget amounts and whether the House appropriation language remains in the enacted budget (geothermal fund); more detail about competitive criteria, fraud safeguards, and reimbursement process (geothermal); mapping and subsurface data used to prioritize drilling targets; the precise scope and vendor lists for ongoing post‑fire erosion control work (post‑fire fund); and rulemaking and implementation timelines for conservancy‑district elections (HB 308). Several senators also pressed for clarity on grant priority (utility‑scale vs. distributed shallow systems) and on protections against private actors capturing public funds without needed performance milestones.

Quotes

“I walk regularly in my own Villanueva State Park, and being in nature at 78 and safe out there helps keep me sharp,” Walt Morton, U.S. Navy veteran and member of the Veterans and Military Families Caucus, told the committee in support of HB 161.

“New Mexico is sixth in the nation for our geothermal potential and capacity,” Travis Kellerman, senior climate adviser to the governor, said in support of expanding geothermal grants.

“This buffer zone definition and the ability to use the Forest Land Protection Revolving Fund to put buffers in is part of our mitigation strategy to keep our communities safe,” Laura McCarthy, state forester, said about HB 175.

Ending

Committee staff said the panel will reconvene Saturday at 9 a.m. to consider seven more bills. Committee members and witnesses noted that several of the measures rely on parallel budget decisions and detailed rulemaking that will be completed after the committee reports the bills to the full Senate.