House committee approves $1.3 billion capital outlay substitute, members seek details on a $15 million hospital purchase

The House committee voted to advance the Senate Finance Committee substitute for Senate Bill 240, approving the measure on a 9-3 roll call after members debated funding priorities and pressed for more information on several specific projects.

The substitute "appropriates $1,300,000,000 to capital projects statewide," the committee chair said, outlining the bill's financing: $525 million in projects prioritized by House and Senate members and the governor; $445 million from the general fund; $444 million in severance tax bonds; and $280 million in supplemental severance tax bonds. The chair said Senate floor amendments corrected drafting errors and clarified sponsors' intent so grantees would not face delays.

Members discussed how the package balances cash and bond financing. Cali Farswell, introduced as an expert on capital outlay practice, said the committee has increasingly used general-fund surpluses to pay for smaller assets and equipment and has reserved bond capacity for larger projects with a lifespan of 10 years or more. "We have done that in this bill because the bonding capacity was really reserved for the statewide side of the bill," Farswell said.

The clearest point of contention concerned a $15 million line item identified by staff as a governor's share to purchase a facility in San Miguel County. Representative Duncan asked whether the purchase "will be used for abortion," a concern echoed by Representative Montoya, who noted the governor previously set aside $10 million for a northern New Mexico facility. The committee chair said the bill language is vague about intended services and that he "cannot confirm" the funds would be used for abortion; he urged members to contact the governor's office for intent.

Wesley Billingsley, who leads the capital outlay division in the Department of Finance and Administration and was introduced to the committee, said he did not have additional detail about the San Miguel purchase or its price. "All I know is that there is going to be ... the facility that they're trying to purchase in San Miguel County, and I have no idea what else is gonna happen with that facility," Billingsley said. Several members asked that the governor's office provide specifics before the bill reaches the floor.

Members also flagged a likely error in the committee's project chart: Representative Lundstrom noted the Navajo Code Talker Museum is listed for San Juan County but should be assigned to McKinley County; staff said the bill language refers to the Navajo Nation and that the chart likely contains a clerical error they would confirm and correct as needed so funds can be used at the intended site.

A motion to pass the substitute was offered and seconded by members identified in the committee. The roll-call vote produced nine yes votes and three no votes; Representatives Henry, Montoya and Terrazas recorded no votes. Members who supported advancing the bill said they voted to get the measure to the floor so the full House can continue review and obtain any outstanding details from the governor's office.

The committee chair announced the substitute had passed and closed the session, thanking staff for their work on capital outlay preparation. The bill will move to the floor for further consideration and any additional inquiry into the flagged items.