Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Nuisance Abatement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Hearing officer to decide on county request to abate hazards at 331 & 329 County Road 84 after owners describe cleanup plans
Summary
Santa Fe County staff presented photos and inspection history for a 5.86-acre parcel at 331 & 329 County Road 84 (case 25Dash8122), asked the hearing officer to find a public nuisance and recommend abatement authority; owner Robert W. Higginson described recent boarding and an engineering assessment scheduled next week and asked for more time.
Santa Fe County asked a hearing officer to find that the parcel at 331 and 329 County Road 84 (case 25Dash8122) constitutes a public nuisance under the county nuisance-abatement ordinance and to recommend a resolution authorizing abatement if the owner does not complete required cleanup.
County staff described conditions on the roughly 5.86-acre parcel that include a structure destroyed by fire earlier in 2025 (county reference: approx. 04/01/2025), an unsecured dwelling without utilities, a burned vehicle, and widespread debris and open storage. The county told the hearing it had received an adjacent-resident complaint (06/03/2025), conducted inspections (June 4–5, 2025), issued a notice of violation (06/24/2025), a final notice (07/24/2025), and a written order (08/15/2025); the owner met staff on-site 09/09/2025 and was given 60 days to start compliance but county follow-up (11/14/2025) found no measurable change.
The county requested findings of fact and conclusions of law that the property constitutes a public nuisance and recommended a resolution to authorize Santa Fe County to abate the nuisance either by overseeing owner-led abatement or, if necessary, by conducting county-led abatement.
Owner Robert W. Higginson, sworn for testimony, said he has secured much of the main house and presented photographs he said he took the night before showing boarded windows. Higginson said he has an appointment with an engineering firm for an assessment of the guest house the following Tuesday and expects to remove pallets and a damaged car in the coming weeks. "I've already made substantial progress in securing the main house," Higginson said, and asked for additional time to complete the cleanup.
A property-management representative identifying herself as Jennifer offered a crew to help clear debris on terms that could accommodate the owner's limited funds; the hearing officer directed the parties to discuss that offer after the hearing. The hearing officer closed the record and said he would issue a decision within five working days.
What happens next: the hearing officer will issue written findings on whether the property meets the nuisance standard and any recommended county action within five working days of the hearing.
