Mike Smith
Artesia Daily Press
msmith@currentargus.com

Editor’s note: The Artesia Daily Press has submitted questionnaires to each candidate for Artesia City Council and mayor running in this year’s municipal elections on March 3. The paper is publishing each of the responses in the order they are received.

Charles Morgan Wagner II is a 36-year-old Artesia native and resident who is running for the Artesia City Council seat currently occupied by Dickie Townley, who decided not to seek another term. Wagner is facing former councilor Terry Hill in the March election.

What made you decide to run for this office?

“I decided to run because Artesia is home for my family, and I care deeply about its future. I want to be a voice on City Council that listens to residents, asks good questions and helps make thoughtful decisions for our city.”

What is your day-one priority if elected?

“My priority would be to gain a clear understanding of current projects and challenges, and most importantly to hear directly from residents in District 4. Building relationships with city staff, first responders and fellow councilors will be critical so that I can be effective, informed and ready to contribute.”

What do you see as the biggest needs for City Council, and what can you do as a councilor to meet those needs?

“One of our biggest needs is staying focused on core city responsibilities which I believe are public safety, infrastructure and reliable services while also being mindful of the city’s budget.”

How would like you to see the City of Artesia spend tax revenue for city services?

“I believe tax revenues should be spent responsibly and prioritized toward essential services that benefit the entire community. I also think it’s important to budget carefully and ensure taxpayers understand how their money is being spent.”

What can the City Council do to improve municipal services such as road maintenance for Artesia residents, especially those living in rural areas of the city?

“I believe the City Council should take a proactive approach by prioritizing repairs based on need and ensuring that less populated or less traveled roads are not overlooked. This requires listening to residents and coordinating closely with city staff, which will help improve consistency and service delivery.”

Mike Smith can be reached at 575-628-5546 extension-2361.

By Alex Ross
El Rito Media
aross@elritomedia.com

New Mexico motorists and truckers will pay higher fees and taxes on their vehicles under a law signed Thursday by Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham.

Lujan Grisham signed the legislation, Senate Bill 2, at the state Capitol in Santa Fe along with two bills designed to lure more physicians and social workers to New Mexico and another to prohibit local governments in the state from entering into agreements with the federal government to detain individuals accused of violating immigration laws.

The four bills were among the governor’s top priorities for the 30-day legislative session that began Jan. 20.

“Halfway through the session, we’re showing what’s possible when we focus on getting things done for New Mexicans,” she said in a news release issued after the signing ceremony/news conference at the Roundhouse.

Vehicle registration fees and road funding

In addition to raising vehicle registration fees by 25% and the weight distribution tax on commercial vehicles by 35%, SB 2 increases the amount of money the state can borrow for state road and bridge projects by $1.5 billion. The bill passed the House of Representatives by a vote of 44-23. The Senate vote for passage was 31-9.

According to the New Mexico Motor Vehicle Department, registration fees vary depending on a vehicle’s age and weight. For a passenger vehicle, the fee for a one-year registration currently ranges from $27 to $65 and a two-year registration costs between $54 and $124. Registration fees for trucks range from $38 to $207 for a one-year registration and from $76.00 to $414 for a two-year registration.

The increases in registration fees and the weight distribution tax, which is based on a vehicle’s weight and miles driven on Mexico roads, are scheduled to take effect July 1.

The bill also imposes a new surcharge on electric vehicles and hybrid plug-ins. Fees for electric vehicles will start at $70 in 2027 and rise to $90 in 2029. Owners of hybrid plug-ins will pay $35 in 2027 with that fee increasing to $45 in 2029. Those new taxes become effective Jan. 1, 2027.

An analysis of SB 2 by the New Mexico Taxation and Revenue Department found that in fiscal year 2027, which begins July 1, the new fees will bring the state an additional $69.9 million for road and highway maintenance and construction.

New Mexico Transportation Secretary Ricky Serna told legislators in November that the higher fees were necessary due to rising construction costs and an expected decrease in revenue coming into the road fund over the next 25 years.

Lujan Grisham said the legislation will help address the state’s deteriorating roads. A report released in January by the National Transportation Research Group, known as TRIP, found that New Mexico has $7.5 billion in projects that need funding.

Medical compacts

The two bills aimed at the shortage of medical practitioners in the state, Senate Bill 1 and House Bill 50, both passed the House and Senate without opposition.

SB 1 enables New Mexico to join the Interstate Medical Licensure Compact, which provides 43 other states, the District of Columbia and the territory of Guam with a common path to licensing qualified physicians across state lines.

An analysis of SB 1 by the New Mexico Medical Board projects that the state will experience a 10% to 15% increase in physician license applications after joining the compact.

HB 50 enables New Mexico to join the Social Work Licensure Interstate Compact, which allows social workers to practice in multiple states.

Although 31 states participate in the compact, an analysis of HB 50 by the New Mexico Regulation and Licensing Department found that no multistate licenses are currently being issued. However, the analysis found those licenses could start being issued as soon as this year if the compact’s “administrative infrastructure” is in place.

Lawmakers and the governor have rallied around the compacts as a way to deal with the state’s shortage of health care workers.

Immigrant detention

The bill dealing with immigration detention centers – HB 9, also known as the Immigrant Safety Act – passed the House and Senate on mostly party-line votes. It advanced out of the House 40-29, with Democratic Reps. Martha Garcia of Albuquerque, D. Wonda Johnson of Rehoboth and Patricia Lundstrom of Gallup voting against it. In the Senate, George Muñoz of Gallup was the only Democrat who opposed the measure.

The bill prohibits local governments from contracting with federal authorities to detain individuals on civil immigration violations. It also bans law enforcement in New Mexico from performing certain immigration enforcement functions.

In New Mexico, facilities in three counties are party to such detention agreements: the Otero County Processing Center in Chaparral; the Cibola County Detention Center in Milan; and the Torrance County Detention Facility in Estancia.

Under the agreements, the counties receive federal payments for housing detainees and use the money to contract with private companies to operate the facilities.

Last year, the New Mexico Advisory Committee to the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights voted 7-2 to endorse a report recommending an end to county-level agreements with federal agencies for immigrant detention, citing concerns about conditions at the facilities.

Officials from those areas opposed HB 9 out of concern it could lead the companies that manage the facilities to leave those communities, costing them jobs and local tax revenue.

RB Nichols, attorney for Otero County Processing Center, told the Legislature’s Courts, Corrections and Justice Committee the center is responsible for 284 jobs.

Legislative reporter Alex Ross can be followed on X @alexrosstweets.

Mike Smith
Artesia Daily Press
msmith@currentargus.com

Editor’s note: The Artesia Daily Press has submitted questionnaires to each candidate for Artesia City Council and mayor running in this year’s municipal elections on March 3. The paper is publishing each of the responses in the order they are received.

Leadership and service are not new for Artesia District 2 City Council candidate Nathan Ryno.

The 50-year-old Denver native served in the U.S. Army for 22 years and is a special education teacher and assistant girls’ soccer coach in the Artesia Public Schools.

He and Joseph W. Wright are running to replace incumbent George Mullen who decided not to seek another term.

What made you decide to run for this office?

“I have several reasons for running for Artesia City Council. If I had to pinpoint a couple, one is for my girls. My beautiful wife and daughters are everything to me. My wife and I are resource foster parents. We have seen what happens to families and more to the point children when not enough people are involved in the community and their families. My family motivates me to do more for the community. Which leads to a second reason. I see a lot of people in my district and in Artesia that need help. They need a voice they can count on to support them. I want to be that voice.”

What is your day-one priority if elected?

“I want to thoroughly review Artesia’s budget and really see where we are spending taxpayer money. This will lead to working on some of the areas I want to address while on the council. For instance, a review of available funding for a revamp of the baseball and softball fields at JC Park and more services for our animal control and shelter department.”

What do you see as the biggest needs for City Council, and what can you do as a councilor to meet those needs?

“I believe the City Council and Mayor have done a great job in Artesia. Everything has room for improvement and growth, though. I believe communication with Artesia residents before decisions are made can be improved. I believe we can do this with proven leadership and new points of view on the council. I want to step into the council with an open mind, a fresh perspective on what we can do moving forward and be that communication with my district and community.”

How would you like to see the City of Artesia spend tax revenue for city services?

“After conversations with Artesia residents, neighborhood safety and crime reduction are high on the list. Speed deterrents such as flashing stop signs and speed bumps in neighborhoods are wanted. Upgrading the baseball and softball fields at JC Park is a request I’ve received often. Adding affordable veterinary services and spay and neuter programs to our animal control department has been requested. People are also excited to see work being done on the movie theater. I would also support this endeavor. These are just some of the requested areas for spending tax dollars.”

What can the City Council do to improve municipal services, such as road maintenance for Artesia residents, especially those living in rural areas of the city?

“First thing we need to do is ask and listen to the residents in the rural areas, perhaps with a town hall for discussions or an online/mailed survey. Many people I have spoken with feel their voices aren’t heard. We need to analyze our budget and include rural areas as a greater priority than they have been. If elected to the council, I would promote communication with community meetings to give residents a chance to share ideas and keep them informed of city plans and decisions. As leaders of the city, we cannot assume what the people want, we must ask and act.”

Mike Smith can be reached at 575-628-5546 extension-2361.

Adrian Hedden
Artesia Daily Press
achedden@currentargus.com

Oil and gas companies could lease another 30,000 acres of public land in New Mexico this spring.

The Bureau of Land Management said it was planning to lease the lands in an auction planned for May 2026.

The bureau completed its environmental analysis of the lands proposed for lease, and opened a public comment period on Wednesday, Jan. 21, for input on the analysis until Feb. 20.

This followed a “scoping period” in December 2025, where comments could be submitted after the proposed parcels were released.

Here’s what to know about the sale, and how to comment.

How to submit public comments

Public comments can be submitted online at the bureau’s website, https://eplanning.blm.gov/Project-Home/?id=543adaf8-a7f2-f011-8407-001dd80db62a, after clicking the “Participate Now” link.

The environmental analysis can be accessed under the “Documents” section of the page.

Where is the land?

About 94% of the lands offered in the lease sale – 31,525 out of the total 33,530 acres – were in southeast New Mexico’s Permian Basin region spread out between Eddy and Lea counties.

Thirty-five parcels are in Eddy County on 14,289 acres – about 42% of the total lands offered in the sale. Another 24 parcels were offered in Lea County on 16,015 acres, or 47% of the sale.

The sale also includes three parcels on 360 acres in Quay County, and a single, 320-acre parcel in Roosevelt County, along New Mexico’s eastern border with Texas.

In the northwest corner of New Mexico, 11 parcels were offered on 2,168 acres spread among Sandoval, Rio Arriba and San Juan counties.

The lone Texas parcel was on 156 acres in McMullen County.

Analysis finds ‘no significant impact’

Up to 142 oil and gas wells could be drilled on the lands nominated for leases, read the environmental analysis published by the Bureau of Land Management.

In its analysis, the bureau argued the area where the leases were proposed was designated by the federal government for oil and gas production, and that such operations are common nearby.

Most impacts to air quality from oil and gas drilling on the lands would be “short-term,” the report read, and peak within the first 60-90 of operations as the well is completed.

“Emissions are anticipated to decline during operations and maintenance as the need for earth-moving and heavy equipment decreases,” read the report. “Ongoing operations of well sites would be subject to state and federal permitting requirements, which ensure compliance with air quality emission standards.”

The agency reported water use would also peak during this time as the well is drilled using hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, when water and chemicals are pumped underground to break up shale rock to extract fossil fuels.

But the report did warn there was “uncertainty” as to when underground aquifers would be recharged after water is used for drilling, meaning any impact to local groundwater supplies could be “long-term.”

What are the terms of the leases?

Federal oil and gas leases are for 10 years or as long as oil or gas is produced.

Leasing is the first step to production on federal public land, granting a company access to the acreage.

Operators are still required to gain various approvals from the bureau to install the necessary infrastructure and to commence drilling via an application to permit drilling, known as an “APD.”

Once operations begin, the leaseholder must pay a royalty rate to the federal government, taken as a percentage of the proceeds from oil and gas production, which is reported annually based on the volume extracted and current market pricing at the time of the report.

Revenues from federally-leased lands for oil and gas development are split with the host state.

The Bureau of Land Management currently charges a 12.5% royalty rate, after it was decreased from 16.67% with the July 4, 2025, signing by President Donald Trump of a sweeping spending bill known to supporters as the “One Big Beautiful Bill.”

The 16.67% rate was enacted by former President Joe Biden, increasing from the previous 12.5% royalty.

Supporters of the lower rate said it would aid the oil and gas industry’s growth.

“The recent adjustment to federal royalty rates helps maintain New Mexico’s competitiveness in attracting investment,” said Missi Currier, president of the New Mexico Oil and Gas Association, a trade group that lobbies for industry interests. “It’s important to note that taxpayers benefit most when production occurs.”

But a Jan. 22 report from national government watchdog group Taxpayers for Common Sense said the lower rate would cost New Mexicans tens of millions of dollars.

The group’s report pointed to 17,889 acres in New Mexico leased after July 2025, when the lower rate went into effect, bringing in about $154.4 million. If the higher rate had been maintained, the group reported, another $84.3 million would have gone to the government.

And New Mexico oil and gas production grew heavily in 2023 and 2024, the report read, undeterred by the higher rate charged in those years.

“New Mexico continues to demonstrate that competitive leasing occurs where resource potential justifies investment, not where terms are tilted to favor operators,” read the report.

Managing Editor Adrian Hedden can be reached at 575-628-5516, or @AdrianHedden on the social media platform X.

Alex Ross
El Rito Media
aross@elritomedia.com

The New Mexico Senate passed a bill Tuesday, Feb. 3, that would prohibit local governments in the state from entering into immigrant detention agreements with the federal government.

House Bill 9 was approved on a 24-15 vote as just one Democrat, Sen. George Muñoz of Gallup, sided with the 14 Republicans who voted in opposition. Rio Rancho Republican Sens. Jay Block and Craig Brandt, and Sen. Martin Hickey (D-20) of Albuquerque were absent and did not cast a vote.

Senators debated the bill after the House passed it Jan. 30 by a vote of 40-29.

Democratic Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham will sign the bill, according to her communications director Michael Coleman.

HB 9, also known as the Immigrant Safety Act, will prohibit local governments from entering into agreements with the federal government to detain people charged with civil immigration violations, including being in the country without legal status or overstaying a visa.

Under these agreements, counties enter into and manage contracts to house immigrant detainees, for which they receive federal payments. The counties then subcontract with private contractors who are paid to operate the facilities.

Three such detention facilities currently operate in New Mexico: the Cibola County Detention Center in Milan; the Otero County Processing Center in Chaparral; and the Torrance County Detention Facility in Estancia. HB 9 would require those counties to end their involvement in immigration detention.

The legislation also prohibits local law enforcement personnel from being deputized by federal authorities to carry out some immigration enforcement duties.

Tuesday’s action by the Senate came after years of debate over similar proposals. During the 2025 legislative session, an immigrant detention ban cleared the House but died in the Senate.

Democratic Rep. Melanie Stansbury supported the bill over concerns about conditions at the facilities, as did immigrant advocacy groups.

But many lawmakers, including some who represent communities that host the facilities, opposed the bill, citing public safety issues and concerns that if HB9 became law the detention centers would close and lead to a loss of local jobs and tax revenue.

It is unknown if CoreCivic, the Tennessee-based company that manages the Cibola and Torrance County facilities and owns the buildings that house them, would remain in those communities without the agreements.

Rebecca Sheff, an attorney for the ACLU of New Mexico, told the House Judiciary Committee during its debate on the bill that the legislation would not prohibit the federal government from detaining immigrants in the state but only prevent local governments from being involved in the process.

Legislative reporter Alex Ross can be followed on X @alexrosstweets.