Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Public Safety topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

House committee approves HB160 to apply train warning-signal rule to on‑track equipment

5695606 · February 14, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The House Judiciary Committee voted Feb. 14 to give House Bill 160 a do‑pass recommendation after debating whether New Mexico’s train‑warning requirement should also apply to other on‑track equipment.

The House Judiciary Committee on Feb. 14 recommended House Bill 160 for passage, voting to advance the bill after a brief debate about a committee substitute that would apply New Mexico’s existing train warning-signal requirement to other on‑track equipment.

The bill, introduced by Representative Lundstrom, would incorporate definitions and the horn/bell-warning requirement already applied to locomotives into a separate statutory section governing other on‑track equipment. Representative McQueen presented a committee substitute (sub #23074.2) that adds those definitions and language to the on‑track‑equipment statutory section.

Committee members questioned whether applying the horn requirement developed for faster-moving trains is appropriate for slower, heavy on‑track equipment. Representative Romero asked if the cut‑and‑paste approach would impose a standard used for other trains; McQueen said the sub inserts the same statutory requirement that requires a locomotive to sound a horn a quarter mile from a crossing. Members and the committee’s outside expert noted that on‑track equipment sometimes moves at slow speeds, which led some members to ask whether federal or interstate standards could be affected.

The committee briefly considered McQueen’s sub, then voted to table that proposed substitute. Later the committee took up the underlying bill and voted to recommend it for passage. The committee record shows the bill received a do‑pass recommendation from the House Judiciary Committee.

Supporters said the change closes a gap between the two statutory sections that separately address visual and auditory crossing signals. Opponents and some members urged caution so the state’s language remains consistent with other states and with federal or interstate practices.

The chair noted committee practice about amendments and committee substitutes and allowed sponsors to argue whether they wanted changes heard or rolled. Representative McQueen and Representative Lundstrom both spoke during debate; an expert who joined by remote connection answered technical questions about train and equipment speeds and statutory wording.

The committee forwarded HB160 with a recommendation to the full House.