Heath Haussamen / NMPolitics.net
Elections like this 2015 Doña Ana Soil and Water Conservation District contest will be merged with elections for other local governing bodies starting in 2019 if the governor signs a bill that recently passed the Legislature.
For the second consecutive year, a bill that aims to increase voter turnout by consolidating most nonpartisan local elections into one awaits action by Gov. Susana Martinez. Martinez failed to act on the legislation in 2017, so it died.
House Bill 98 is a lengthy, complex piece of legislation that aims to merge many local elections systems that are all different. Under the current system, voters have to keep track of several elections each year that are held at different times and often don’t get much public attention.
If Martinez signs the bill, supporters say, it will simplify voting in addition to increasing efficiency and reducing the costs of running elections. Martinez hasn’t said whether she will OK the legislation.
Here’s what the bill would mean for voters:
What elections would be merged?
Elections for school districts, community college districts, flood control districts, special zoning districts, soil and water conservation districts, and water and sanitation districts would be merged starting in 2019. In 2022, conservancy districts would be added to the consolidated elections. Many conservancy districts have complex voter rolls, and the delay is to give them and county clerks time to work things out.
New Mexico has more than 100 towns and cities, and those municipalities would have the option to join the consolidated elections but not automatically be added.
When would elections be held?
Beginning in 2019, consolidated elections would be held the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November during odd-numbered years. That’s intended to simplify things for voters who are used to partisan general elections for races like president, governor and county commissioner in November of even-numbered years. The intent is that voters know there’s one big election every November.
Municipalities that don’t join the consolidated elections would have to hold their elections in March in odd-numbered years. Many already do that.
Will cities join the consolidated elections?
Some will, some won’t. A bill sponsor said during debate on the legislation in the recent session that, based on his conversation with municipal officials, he expected 80 of the state’s more than 100 cities and towns to opt to hold their own elections in March instead.
Albuquerque, Rio Rancho, Hobbs and Clovis require people to show photo ID to vote. If they hold their elections in March, they can keep their photo ID laws. If they join the consolidated elections in November, they have to comply with the state’s election code, which doesn’t require photo ID to vote.
The bill creates unique choices for Albuquerque and Las Cruces because they don’t currently hold elections in March.
Albuquerque holds its municipal elections in October, so if this bill becomes law the city will have to move its elections. The city can opt to keep its photo ID requirement and hold its own election in March, or drop it and hold elections with other government agencies in November.
Las Cruces is the only city in New Mexico that already holds its elections in November, so assuming officials there have no objection to joining its election with others, the transition could be the easiest for voters there. Or the city could opt to move to March and hold its own elections.
And because Silver City is technically a “territory,” not a city or town, the bill would allow it to keep holding elections every year in March, while others would have to hold their elections every other year going forward.
Are there alternatives?
Cities don’t have to join the consolidated November elections. All other government agencies listed above do. Their only other option is to hold special elections in between regular, November contests.
The bill would require that all special elections be held by mail to ensure every qualified voter gets a ballot.
What other changes would this implement?
Many local governments don’t currently have a provisional ballot process for people who show up to vote but for some reason aren’t listed as a qualified voter. That means they can currently be turned away. Because the consolidated elections would be subject to the state’s elections code, provisional ballots would have to be offered to such people, and would be considered after Election Day to determine whether they should be counted.
The bill could also increase election transparency and campaign reporting requirements. If local governments have their own campaign reporting rules in place, those would remain the law for their elections. But agencies that don’t have their own campaign reporting ordinances would be subject to the state’s reporting system and more rigorous requirements for disclosure about money in politics.
What are the arguments for this?
Under the current system each local government holds its own elections. They’re low-profile and don’t attract a lot of voters. And it costs lots of money to hold separate elections constantly throughout the year, supporters say.
Merging elections, they say, would make it easier for voters to know when they can vote and require them to take less time off from work or other tasks to vote. One large election would draw more attention and increase turnout, supporters say, and would help build a stronger culture of civic engagement in New Mexico.
What are the arguments against it?
Some supporters of requiring a photo ID to vote expressed concern, particularly about the cities that already require photo ID. The bill that passed the Legislature this year allows those cities to hold their elections in March and keep their photo ID laws if they want. And any cities in the future that want to implement photo ID laws could do so if they are willing to hold their own elections in March instead of joining the consolidated November elections.
Other local governments like school districts that would be required to join consolidated elections would be subject to the state’s elections code, which does not require a photo ID to vote.
The governor is among those who have expressed concern about photo ID laws. That’s why she let the election consolidation bill that passed the Legislature in 2017 die. Some legislators who support photo ID laws voted for this year’s bill after being assured that the cities that require photo ID can continue to do so.
Some school districts also oppose merging elections, with school officials expressing concern that increased voter turnout could harm their efforts to get construction bonds approved and jeopardize their school board members’ re-election bids.