Senate committee backs 'Clear Horizons' climate bill after hours of testimony; vote 5–4

The Senate Conservation Committee on an undisclosed date recommended Senate Bill 18, the Clear Horizons Act, with a do-pass report after several hours of testimony and a 5–4 roll call.

Sponsor Senator Stewart told the committee the bill would codify the governor’s executive order and the environment department’s climate action plan into law, setting statewide targets of at least 45% fewer emissions than 2005 by 2030, 75% by 2040 and net-zero (relative to 2005) by 2050. “This bill turns collaboration into vision and vision into reality,” Stewart said, and she described new, New Mexico‑based voluntary offsets and a 10,000‑metric‑ton floor so the program focuses on large stationary sources.

James Kenny, secretary of the New Mexico Environment Department, said SB 18 is designed to give agencies “the flexibility they need” while protecting communities. “The department’s role is to build inclusive rulemaking that considers technical and economic feasibility,” Kenny said, adding the Environmental Improvement Board would lead formal rulemaking under existing law.

Opponents, speaking during the organized opposition hour, warned the bill’s mandates and broad delegation to the Environmental Improvement Board could raise costs and deter investment. Representatives of the state’s agricultural, livestock, restaurant and construction sectors argued the measure creates regulatory uncertainty without firm cost caps or clear timelines for compliance. “This bill will increase our operating costs and push production out of rural communities,” Lauren Patterson of the New Mexico Cattle Growers Association said.

Industry analysts and trade groups offered modeled scenarios that projected potential revenue impacts if production or investment declined; one witness cited examples from other states to warn of reduced in‑state activity and lower tax receipts.

Supporters included the acting cabinet secretary for Energy, Minerals and Natural Resources (EMNRD), county officials and public‑health and environmental groups, who argued SB 18 would protect frontline communities and create long‑term planning certainty. “Passing this bill will deliver cleaner air and health benefits,” said Michael Bueno of the Environmental Defense Fund, citing agency estimates of the value of avoided health costs.

Several senators pressed the sponsor and agency witnesses on the bill’s scope and effects. Questions focused on the choice of a 2005 emissions baseline, whether New Mexico‑only reductions materially change global climate outcomes, how imported electricity and out‑of‑state generation would be counted, and whether local jurisdictions could adopt stricter rules. Secretary Kenny and the sponsor said the bill includes tribal consultation, requires the EIB to consider economic and technical feasibility during rulemaking, and that local boards may pursue equivalent programs where they have capacity.

The committee also debated a floor amendment that would have changed the baseline year; that amendment was tabled. The committee then voted to report SB 18 as amended. The roll call contains individual recorded responses in the hearing transcript; the chair announced the committee report as do‑pass by 5–4. The committee left rulemaking authority and many implementation details to future EIB proceedings, which supporters and opponents both identified as key to the bill’s practical outcome.

The committee scheduled further committee and floor actions; the chair closed the hearing and thanked witnesses and sponsors.

Notes on attribution and record: quotes and specific figures above are drawn from the public hearing transcript. Where the transcript records a committee‑announced final tally (5–4) but parts of the roll call transcript omit or duplicate specific entries, this article attributes the outcome to the committee’s announcement and attributes individual statements only to the named witnesses who spoke on the record.

What happens next: the committee reported the bill to the next chamber stage with a do‑pass recommendation; implementation and detailed compliance requirements will depend on subsequent rulemaking by the Environmental Improvement Board and the Environment Department.