Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Historic Preservation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Mesilla trustees reopen contested historic‑property nomination after owner and residents raise objections
Summary
Trustees voted to reconsider a recent historic‑registry nomination for 2090 Snow Road after staff described the nomination timeline and residents, including the property owner, said the process harmed a pending sale. The meeting included warnings of possible litigation and a pledge from staff to follow up.
Trustees voted March 23 to reconsider the town's recent steps to nominate 2090 Snow Road for the Mesilla historic registry after staff laid out the timeline and residents said they had been surprised by staff contact with a prospective buyer.
The board agreed to the reconsideration motion after Community Development Director Eddie Salazar summarized events: staff were first alerted in December and referred the buyer to preservation staff while also advising the buyer and seller about zoning and the nomination timetable. Salazar told trustees the nomination process required posting and hearings and that the town had tried to allow time for comment before final action.
The reconsideration followed public testimony from the property's owner, Richard Knopp, who said he had actively marketed the property for two years and had recently found a buyer. "I'm not clear what changed between the last meeting and this meeting," Knopp said, contending that staff discussions with his prospective buyer discouraged a sale and caused financial harm. Van Bullock, another resident, told trustees, "I have a grudging admiration for your historical preservation... But she made a mistake," and said he had witnesses to support claims that staff misrepresented the property's status to the buyer.
A preservation presenter who briefed the board explained the criteria used for landmark nominations and said she had consulted with preservation counsel and the State Historic Preservation Office. She told trustees the preservation law allows municipalities to nominate properties without owner consent in certain circumstances and described the CLG/SHPO advisory role.
Trustees who supported reconsideration emphasized they wanted more complete documentation in the record and acknowledged the need for clearer communications with property owners and prospective buyers. One trustee apologized for earlier disruptions in a prior meeting and said the board should be careful in how staff and trustees interact with pending transactions.
The board did not adopt or finalize the nomination that night; the motion approved only reopens consideration and directs staff to provide supplemental information and, if necessary, additional notice and opportunities for public comment. Trustees and staff told attendees they would follow up with the owner about next steps.
What happens next: staff will provide the board a fuller timeline and documentation related to the nomination and the buyer contact; any formal nomination or designation would follow the posted hearing process required by municipal code and state preservation law.
