Los Alamos County Council adopts 2025 state priorities, adds malpractice‑reform language and references nuclear energy

The Los Alamos County Council voted unanimously on Jan. 7, 2025, to adopt its 2025 state legislative priorities after adding two substantive clarifications: (1) language on improving access to behavioral health and medical professionals that ‘‘includes, but is not limited to, interjurisdictional compacts and options for malpractice reform,’’ and (2) expanded language in climate and resource protection priorities to reference renewable and nuclear/low‑carbon energy options.

Danielle Duran, the county’s intergovernmental affairs lead, summarized the draft priorities and described the compacts the county supports. On telepsychology she said PSYPACT ‘‘allows psychological professionals to provide telepsychology to other state citizens if they are a member of this compact’’ and noted, ‘‘there are at least 40 states that are members of this compact.’’ Duran also described the Interstate Medical Licensure Compact and told councilors the county had heard questions about physician shield laws but that ‘‘there haven't been any cases like that under the Interstate Medical Licensure Compact Commission,’’ a point she offered to underscore the legal context being considered.

Councilors debated whether to make malpractice reform an explicit priority. Several members said malpractice insurance costs are a major barrier to recruiting and retaining providers in New Mexico; Councilor Reger proposed adding language calling for options to address malpractice reform, and Councilor Reedy suggested phrasing that would allow the county to consider multiple policy approaches as bills emerge.

On energy, councilors agreed to expand item B in the priorities to read broadly that the council supports ‘‘measures that support New Mexico and Los Alamos County climate action plans, including renewable and nuclear/low‑carbon energy options, and resource protection initiatives.’’ Councilors discussed the difference between highlighting items that already appear in the county plan versus explicitly naming nuclear energy; several councilors said the explicit mention would give staff and the county’s legislative delegation authorization to discuss nuclear options during advocacy and to request studies or further investigation at the state level.

A public commenter asked that staff proactively notify local press when state items of interest arise; another said a county newsletter and other briefings had been useful. Duran noted the county would continue monitoring legislation, and that the priorities document allows county administration to act on other bills on an ad hoc basis when appropriate.

A motion to approve the 2025 state legislative priorities as amended was made and seconded; the council approved the amended priorities on a 7‑0 roll call.