Adrian Hedden
Carlsbad Current-Argus
achedden@currentargus.com

Eddy County Commissioners said landowner rights in the county would be violated if a federal project moves forward to set aside areas of the U.S., including southeast New Mexico, for developing electricity transmission.

The board voted unanimously Tuesday to approve a resolution demanding input on the project. With passage of the resolution, Eddy County opted to become a “cooperating agency” meaning the county would be kept abreast of further proceedings in the project and would be granted the opportunity to provide input.

The U.S. Department of Energy proposed last year to create National Interest Electric Transmission Corridors (NIETCs) – areas of the U.S. where the energy department determined electrical transmission to be lacking and in need of federal support.

Electrical transmission can include infrastructure to generate power or move it to markets where it is needed.

On Dec. 16, 2024, the department published proposals for three corridors, including New Mexico counties along its eastern border to Texas: Eddy, Lea, Otero, Roosevelt, Curry, Quay and Union. The other two were the Lake Erie-Canada corridor, including parts of Lake Erie and Pennsylvania, along with the Tribal Energy Access Corridor in North Dakota, South Dakota and Nebraska.

The Department of Energy would partner with developers chosen by the agency to design and build the projects in the specified areas. The intention, according to the agency, was to increase electrical reliability in rural areas.

“A lack of transmission infrastructure can directly contribute to higher electricity prices, more frequent power outages from extreme weather, and longer outages as the grid struggles to come back online,” read a statement from the Department of Energy.

District 4 Commissioner Bo Bowen said it was clear the proposal would violate the rights of landowners throughout the county.

“It is the most egregious thing I have ever seen put before us,” Bowen said. “It’s deceptive. It’s something that just can’t begin here.”

The department’s proposal got off the ground in December 2023, when it opened a public comment period to propose locations, settling on 10 by May 2024. The 10 were then whittled down further to the three proposed at the end of last year – the third of four phases in the project.

The federal agency was accepting comments until Feb. 14 for Phase 3.

This would be the first time the energy department has used its power to designate transmission corridors since being granted the authority to do so in 2005.

Key concerns the county expressed included “ambiguity” in the proposal’s definition and a range of 5 to 125 miles wide for projects in the potential corridor. Officials also worried that “eminent domain” could be used by the federal government to acquire private land for the project.

Eminent domain allows a federal agency to determine the value of private land and buy it from a landowner unwilling to sell. According to the energy department’s proposal such proceedings would only be allowed to occur if negotiations broke down between landowners and local governments, and with a court order.

Eddy County Manager Mike Gallagher said it was unclear what local input the federal government had in determining the locations of the corridor. He also said the proposal did not consider local development plans put in place by county commissions and other governing bodies.

“It’s a bit ambiguous how the department came up with this. They did not consult with any of the local entities,” Gallagher said. “It did not take into any consideration the local development policies the local governments considered and passed.”

He said the wide range of potential dimensions made it unclear how large the projects in the corridor would be and raised the possibility they could impede oil and gas or ranching in the area.

“The width could negatively impact residents or industries,” Gallagher said. “Any type of activity in this corridor could be impacted.

District 1 Commissioner Ernie Carlson said providing feedback as the project proceeds is crucial to protecting property values and economic activity in Eddy County.

“If we don’t stand up and take a voice, this is going to happen,” Carlson said.

Revenue climbs from oil and gas

Eddy County Finance Director Roberta Gonzales said the county received about $5.8 million in gross receipts taxes, or sales tax paid by businesses and other entities, including oil and gas companies working in the county, in November 2024. Overall, the oil and gas industry sent about $7.2 million in taxes to Eddy County during that month.

Gross receipts totaling $5.6 million were received in December 2024, up about $2.5 million from the same time last year, while December 2024 saw about $23.5 million in total taxes brought in by the oil and gas industry.

November and December 2024 were the most recent months analyzed by the county’s finance department and presented at Tuesday’s County Commission meeting.

Gonzales said there were about 50 oil and gas drilling rigs running in the county during those months, a total she said the industry was expected to maintain through early 2025.

Staff reports

Eight Eddy County celebrities will participate in the United Way of Eddy County’s inaugural “Dancing with the Eddy County Stars” fundraiser at the Walter Gerrells Performing Arts Center in Carlsbad.

The fundraiser will be modeled after several popular competition television shows, with professional dancers from the Utah Ballroom Dance Company partnering with Eddy County’s VIP dancers.

“This will be a memorable evening starring some of Eddy County’s most recognizable faces,” said Catalina King, United Way of Eddy County board member and event chair. “We know this will be an event you don’t want to miss.”

Tickets and sponsorships are available at onecau.se/dwtes. Those purchasing tickets or a sponsorship will have the option of giving points to one of the eight competitors. Dancers will be scored based on this fundraising, a live audience vote, and judging.

During the April 18 event, all eight competitors will perform with their professional partners. Audience members will get a chance to vote for their favorite during the intermission, and they will also be treated to a special performance by the Utah Ballroom Dance Company. The 2025 winner will then be announced.

Cal’s Shade Western is also partnering with the United Way of Eddy County.

“The United Way of Eddy County is deeply committed to maintaining its role as a grant-provider to Eddy County nonprofits, while also providing utility relief services through its 211 program,” King said. “In order to meet these two wonderful goals, we are looking at this new, exciting fundraiser as a way to help us better serve the citizens of Eddy County.”

“We want to give a very special thanks to Perry Oilfield Service for being an early-entry ‘Salsa’ ($10,000) level sponsor, which really provided us with the confidence to move forward with this fundraiser,” said Kyle Marksteiner, executive director of the United Way of Eddy County. “This is going to be a show that people are going to talk about for a long time.”

Dancers competing:

Johnny Chandler – Owner of KCCC Radio and Broadcast Media Program Manager at Southeast New Mexico College

Caleb Cunningham – Carlsbad MainStreet board member and active community volunteer

Frankie Davis – Owner of Little Digger Man and member of the Lions Club and Knights of Columbus

Tiffany Frintz – Nurse Practitioner and Owner of Harmony Healing in Carlsbad, NM and Preventive Medicine Centers in Palm Springs, CA, Chair of Southeast New Mexico College Board of Trustees

Matt Hutchinson – Eddy County Sheriff and nonprofit volunteer

Allyson Joy – Registered Dietitian, Owner of Heirloom Acres in Artesia and associate publisher of Focus Magazines.

Angeline Maxwell – Owner of Paradise Salon and Spa and a Carlsbad Chamber Ambassador

Dr. Amanda Ryan – Owner of the Advanced Heart and Vascular Center of New Mexico

Judges:

Hayley Klein – County Commissioner and Artesia Chamber of Commerce Director

Chad Ingram – Carlsbad Chamber of Commerce Director

Dr. Missi Currier – President and CEO of the New Mexico Oil and Gas Association

For more information, please visit onecau.se/dwtes or call the United Way of Eddy County office at (575) 887-3504.

El Rito New Mexico News Services

A state judge on Monday axed the New Mexico Public Education Department’s controversial “180-day rule.”

Fifth Judicial District Judge Dustin Hunter struck down the agency’s requirement for all public districts and charter schools in the state to include 180 instructional days in their calendar each year, finding the rule “does not align with the Legislature’s clear intention.”

“The PED lacks the authority to implement a rule mandating a minimum number of instructional days for public school districts and charter schools,” Hunter wrote in his decision.

The ruling is “a final judgment” in a lawsuit filed in April 2024 by the New Mexico School Superintendents Association and more than 50 school districts across the state — including Santa Fe Public Schools — against the Public Education Department. Although, the agency could file an appeal within 30 days.

The 180-day rule generated more than a year of disagreement, with teachers, school district leaders and lawmakers speaking out against the proposal.

Public Education Secretary-designate Mariana Padilla said in a statement the agency is “dissatisfied” with the outcome of the case and is “currently in the process of reviewing the decision for the purposes of determining the appropriate next steps.”

“PED firmly believes that our students can achieve better educational outcomes when we maximize learning opportunities, as the Rule intended,” Padilla said.

For Stan Rounds, executive director of the New Mexico Coalition of Educational Leaders, which includes the superintendents association, it’s time to move on. He’s “hopeful” Hunter’s decision will be the final word on the matter, allowing schools and policymakers to refocus on other education issues.

“Now, we need to work on how we use the 1,140 hours that students have in school,” he said, referring to 2023 legislation increasing school time.

The fight over a 180-day mandate for schools began long before the recent rule and legal challenge.

It dates back to 2009, when the Public Education Department first decided to impose a rule requiring 180 instructional days. However, lawmakers repealed the rule before it went into effect after learning in 2011 it would cost the state $13 million for each extra day of classroom time.

Lawmakers again took up the issue of school time in 2023, passing House Bill 130, requiring 1,140 instructional hours per year at every school. The bill made no mention of a minimum number of days.

Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham’s administration began the rule-making process shortly after HB 130 went into effect.

In December 2023, hundreds of teachers and school administrators showed up at a public hearing on the proposed rule, arguing it constituted an overreach of the education department’s powers.

Thousands more sent in written comments, with the overwhelming majority opposed to the rule. In particular, rural districts — many of which operate on four-day school weeks — voiced worries about the disproportionate impacts they might face.

Lawmakers weighed in on the issue, too. Opposing the rule turned into a bipartisan effort, with Andrés Romero, D-Albuquerque, calling the effort a “definite affront to the legislative branch,” and Rep. Gail Armstrong, R-Magdalena, inviting Lujan Grisham and then-Public Education Secretary Arsenio Romero to join students in rural New Mexico on their long bus rides to and from school.

(Armstrong, notably, has filed legislation this year to explicitly clarify local school boards or charter school governing bodies “shall determine the total number of instructional days per year.”)

The Public Education Department announced in March 2024 — shortly after the conclusion of that year’s legislative session — it would nonetheless move forward with the rules.

The superintendents association filed a lawsuit the following month, and a judge ordered an injunction barring the rule’s enforcement in May 2024 until the legal matter was resolved.

Hunter argued the Legislature intended to impose a new requirement on in-school hours — not days — “to allow local flexibility while still requiring 1,140 instructional hours.”

As a result, he added, the rule is “invalid and unenforceable as it directly conflicts with the existing statutes … which expressly repealed the 180-day requirement and maintained that a minimum hour requirement shall be the law governing for school calendars.”

Rounds said the decision is “very clear direction” that the 1,140-hour minimum — not a minimum number of instructional days — is the law of the land.”

“The decision that came down from the judge today reaffirms our position and our belief that school districts, under the current law, have a fair amount of discretion about how they want to set their calendars,” he said.

Now, Rounds said, it’s time to focus on a bigger question: “How do we flex our support and instruction for students so that we can assure parents that we are productive and we are helping their child gain as much as possible day to day?”

He added, “It would wonderful if this could be set aside and we could get into those kinds of dialogues instead.”