Senate Finance Committee advances Clear Horizons Act (Senate Bill 4) after hours of testimony

Senate Bill 4, called the Clear Horizons Act, would codify the governor's greenhouse gas targets into law and direct the Environmental Improvement Board (EIB) and New Mexico Environment Department (NMED) to adopt monitoring, inventory and regulatory steps intended to reach those targets.

Senator Kristen Stewart, sponsor of the measure, told the Senate Finance Committee that the bill "sets in place a regulatory framework and investments necessary to protect our families, communities, and economy from escalating climate disasters," and outlined the bill's timeline and percentage targets: a 45% reduction from a 2005 baseline by 02/1930, 75% by 02/1940 and net-zero by 02/1950. She said the EIB would be empowered to make rules, publish a first inventory by 12/31/2026 and produce monitoring rules to be adopted by 09/30/2026 and effective 01/01/2027, with inventories every two years thereafter.

Professor Gabe Pisiniak, introduced by Stewart as an expert witness from the University of New Mexico law faculty, described the bill's structure as modeled on the state's long-standing framework for conventional air pollutants and federal Clean Air Act implementation: "This bill builds on a proven architecture for reducing pollution," he said, adding that the bill's approach mirrors steps taken by other states and by international scientific guidance.

The committee heard more than an hour of public testimony. Organized environmental and public-health groups, teachers' and student speakers, youth climate advocacy groups, tribal representatives and public-health groups testified in strong support. Testimony in favor included statements that the bill would create jobs in clean-technology sectors, expand monitoring and transparency, and prioritize overburdened communities. Students from Ezekiel Madre Elementary School said they supported the bill; one student said, "We're here to support SB 4 or the Clear Horizons Act." Conservation Voters New Mexico, NEA New Mexico, the American Lung Association and the Sierra Club were among the statewide supporters who spoke.

Speakers and organizations representing agriculture, oil and gas, county governments, chambers of commerce, mining, utilities and rural communities urged caution or opposed the measure. Opponents raised concerns about economic impacts on small businesses, farmers and rural households, the speed and clarity of the regulatory timeline, potential increases in energy and transportation costs and the bill's reliance on EIB rulemaking. Several testimony points emphasized that the bill does not apply on tribal trust lands; Patty Williams, representing the Navajo Nation Council Office of the Speaker, said the nation has "no position on this bill" because it does not extend onto tribal lands.

Committee members questioned the sponsor and witnesses about baseline years, which emissions the bill accounts for, how the inventory is calculated and how the EIB would implement sector-by-sector measures. Professor Pisiniak noted that the 2005 baseline and the inventory methodology follow commonly used accounting approaches and that New Mexico's most recent published greenhouse gas inventory (December, year not specified in testimony) showed reductions since 2005 but projected the state was not on track to meet the 2030 target without additional measures.

On final committee action the Senate Finance Committee recorded a roll-call vote after a late motion to advance the committee substitute. The tally recorded on the floor was six in favor and five opposed. The committee clerk read votes as: Yes — Brandt, Lanier, Tobias, Woods, Shandoh, Munoz; No — Campos, Gonzales, Padilla, Steinborn, Trujillo. The motion recorded in the transcript was to "do pass Senate Finance Committee substitute for Senate Bill 4." The transcript shows debate about tabling and substitute motions before the roll call; the committee proceeded with the substitute and the recorded tally was 6-5 in favor.

The bill requires the Environmental Improvement Board to consider equity and impacts on overburdened communities, tribal consultation during rulemaking, and to allow differentiation by operator size and recognition of voluntary action by regulated entities as part of compliance planning. The sponsor said several amendments in the committee substitute were added in response to industry and agency feedback, including provisions allowing the EIB to recognize operators that have already made progress and to seek shortfalls from sectors not meeting targets before shifting burdens to others.

What the bill does not do, as stated in testimony, is extend the state's authority onto tribal trust lands; speakers also emphasized that some sectors (the testimony named agriculture and others) may be addressed via incentives rather than direct regulation, at least in early implementation. Several witnesses warned that implementation details will determine costs to consumers and to specific industries.

The committee substitute will move forward consistent with the committee's procedures; next steps will follow the Senate's scheduling and any additional amendments that come in subsequent committee or floor action.

Ending: The Clear Horizons Act prompted extensive, split public testimony across New Mexico's environmental, tribal, agricultural and energy sectors. The committee vote to advance the substitute was narrow, and supporters and opponents both told the committee that the bill's costs and benefits will hinge on the specifics of future rulemaking and on the technical details of inventorying and counting emissions over time.