In a formal response to city officials, Amanda López Askin says Sunland Park recorded its bond documents but never completed the election process, leaving voters without three proposed measures.

Damien Willis, Organ Mountain News

SUNLAND PARK - Doña Ana County Clerk Amanda López Askin has provided a formal explanation for why Sunland Park's proposed $8.25 million bond package never reached voters in Tuesday's general election, maintaining that the city recorded its paperwork in August but failed to complete the process required to place the questions on the ballot.

In a two-page letter dated Friday, Nov. 6, López Askin confirmed that the County Clerk's Office received the city's resolution and two ordinances on Aug. 21, four days before the statutory filing deadline. But she said the documents went to the county's Recording and Filing Department rather than its Bureau of Elections, which handles ballot preparation and certification.

The letter responds to Sunland Park City Manager Mario Juarez-Infante's Oct. 31 request for an investigation into why three bond questions approved by the City Council were omitted from the Nov. 3 ballot.

The city maintains that it submitted the required resolution before the deadline and has sought a detailed accounting of what happened. The county acknowledges receiving the documents but disputes whether that submission completed the necessary election procedures.

Council approved bond package in August

The controversy began with a proposal that had appeared to be proceeding toward a November vote for more than two months.

As Organ Mountain News reported Aug. 20, the Sunland Park City Council voted unanimously, 6-0, on Aug. 18 to approve three proposed general obligation bond questions.

The package included:

• $3.5 million for existing roads, new roadways and water and wastewater infrastructure.
• $2.5 million for construction of a public safety complex and the purchase of emergency equipment and vehicles.
• $2.25 million for a regional recreation center, improvements to parks, multiuse trails and wayfinding.

Each question was intended to appear separately on the ballot, allowing voters to approve or reject the spending categories individually.

During the Aug. 18 council meeting, bond counsel Chris Muirhead explained that the financing would replace existing debt as it was retired, rather than adding another layer of debt.

"The property tax rates, which are currently in place, are not anticipated to increase," Muirhead told councilors.

The proposal would have continued a general obligation bond program approved by Sunland Park voters in 2022. Under the proposed financing, the city would have four years to issue the new bonds, with individual debt obligations potentially extending as long as 20 years.

But the questions never appeared on the November ballot.

Clerk says recording did not complete election process

López Askin's Nov. 6 letter identifies the documents Sunland Park submitted Aug. 21 as a resolution recorded under Instrument No. 2620001 and two ordinances recorded under Instrument Nos. 2620002 and 2620003.

Those documents were processed under the county's standard recording procedures.

"Recording a document establishes an archived public record," López Askin wrote. "It does not, by itself, submit a local-government ballot question to the Bureau of Elections for placement on an election ballot."

The clerk explained that preparing local ballot questions requires coordination with the Bureau of Elections, including review of the proposed language and translations before certification to the New Mexico Secretary of State.

Under Section 1-16-3(B) of the New Mexico Election Code, local governments must file proposed ballot-question resolutions with the county clerk at least 70 days before a general election. The county clerk must certify the questions to the secretary of state no later than 67 days before Election Day.

For the Nov. 3 election, those deadlines were Aug. 25 for the city's filing and Aug. 28 for the county's certification.

Sunland Park's documents were received Aug. 21.

However, López Askin wrote that the Bureau of Elections has no record of communication from the city expressing its intent to place the bond questions on the ballot before the applicable deadlines.

According to the clerk, the bureau first learned of the problem on the afternoon of Friday, Oct. 30.

Without the resolution being submitted for election processing, the questions were never reviewed for ballot language and translation, certified to the secretary of state or placed on the ballot.

The clerk's explanation reinforces the position her office outlined in an Oct. 31 statement, which was detailed in OMN's earlier report on the missing bond questions.

County clerk says Sunland Park never completed ballot process for $8.25M bond questions

Doña Ana County says Sunland Park recorded its $8.25 million bond resolution but did not coordinate ballot placement. The city wants answers.

Organ Mountain NewsDamien Willis

Clerk identifies missed opportunities to catch omission

López Askin also pointed to several occasions when the absence of the bond questions could have been detected before Election Day.

Sample ballots became available in late September. Early voting began Oct. 6, and the official Notice of Election was published Oct. 13.

The clerk wrote that each represented an opportunity to identify the omission and bring it to the Bureau of Elections' attention.

Sunland Park Mayor Javier Perea previously said he discovered the questions were missing when he went to vote early Oct. 30.

The city subsequently requested an investigation into how its resolution was received and routed, whether actions or omissions by either government contributed to the problem and what remedies might be available.

Juarez-Infante also asked for relevant records to be preserved, including correspondence, ballot versions and communications with election vendors.

In its Oct. 31 statement, Sunland Park said it was not assigning blame before the facts were established. The city reserved the right to seek reimbursement for documented costs associated with a special election if county actions were found responsible, to the extent permitted by law.

López Askin's latest letter does not assign legal liability or address reimbursement.

Special election remains possible

With the Nov. 3 election completed, Sunland Park voters have yet to decide whether to authorize the proposed $8.25 million in borrowing.

The city previously announced plans to hold a special election in spring 2027 and said it was working with its bond counsel and financial adviser to determine the next steps.

López Askin's letter identifies a special election or the next regular local election in November 2027 as possible options, subject to applicable legal requirements and coordination with the secretary of state.

"The County remains prepared to work with the City of Sunland Park and the New Mexico Secretary of State's Office to identify lawful next steps," she wrote.

The clerk also said her office would distribute the letter to news organizations to explain the election process and the county's efforts to resolve the matter collaboratively.

Sunland Park has not announced a special election date or publicly responded to the Nov. 6 letter.

For now, the dispute remains centered on a question neither government's statements have conclusively resolved: whether Sunland Park's timely submission of its resolution to the County Clerk's Office satisfied its legal obligation, or whether additional coordination with the Bureau of Elections was necessary.

Updates on the city's proposed bond election are available through its general obligation bond information page.

Damien Willis is founder and editor of Organ Mountain News. If you have a personal story to share or a lead we should follow up on, reach out at OrganMountainNews@gmail.com or connect with him on X at @damienwillis.