Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Lands Federal topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commissioners, sheriff raise concerns after BLM cedes public lands south of Highway 9 to Army; county seeks clarity
Summary
Commissioners and the sheriff said they were told Bureau of Land Management lands south of Highway 9 have been ceded to the U.S. Army, potentially expanding military control over public lands and raising questions about public access, jurisdiction and enforcement; county staff said they will seek maps and formal information from federal agencies.
Doña Ana County elected officials and the sheriff told the board May 13 they are concerned about recent federal steps that transfer certain public lands south of Highway 9 to U.S. Army control, and they asked for clearer mapping and legal guidance on access and enforcement.
Why it matters: Commissioners said BLM’s recent actions — described at the meeting as ceding public lands south of Highway 9 to Army use — could limit public access to those lands, change which authorities respond to incidents on that land, and normalize expanded military presence and enforcement in areas within the county.
What was said: A county commissioner reported that Bureau of Land Management (BLM) representatives informed local officials that public lands south of Highway 9 had been transferred to Army control, a swath the commissioner described as at least five miles wide in places. The commissioner said the transfer was broader than earlier public descriptions that spoke only of a narrower “Roosevelt Reservation” or a 60‑foot strip.
Sheriff Kim Stewart told the board she has sought official maps and said written responses from state and federal agencies have been inadequate. She urged local leaders to “stand up” for the county, telling commissioners: “Stand up. Stand up for your county.” The sheriff said she has requested specific information, and warned that the public‑safety and jurisdictional questions raise practical concerns such as who would respond to an accident or a death on former public land now under Army control.
Commissioners asked staff to obtain formal, map‑based information from BLM and other federal agencies and to clarify the memorandum of understanding — if any — that governs military use. Board members also raised concerns about the potential criminal‑law implications, including use of trespass statutes against people on lands that were previously open to the public.
Context and legal limits: Officials repeatedly emphasized that the matters involve federal actions beyond the county’s direct control, but that county leaders and constituents have legitimate interest in understanding how the transfers affect recreation, access, enforcement and migrant‑processing practices. Commissioners asked county staff to pursue additional federal clarification and to discuss whether the county should object or seek formal assurances about public access and enforcement jurisdiction.
Next steps: County staff said they will continue to pursue formal mapping and documentation from federal agencies and report back to the board. Commissioners recommended coordinating with elected state officials and the county attorney to evaluate legal options if public‑land access is constrained.
