Roosevelt County debates limits on fairgrounds advertising amid free-speech concerns

Roosevelt County commissioners spent much of their May 19 meeting debating a draft policy to regulate advertising on county fairgrounds, with commissioners split over whether the county should bar ads for alcohol, tobacco, cannabis or issue-based campaigns.

The draft presented by county staff would add language to prohibit "advertisement of illegal intoxicating products" and to limit displays on county-controlled property. Miss Forier, who presented the policy, said the revision also proposed including alcohol, tobacco and "intoxicating products" in the list of restricted content and that staff had not yet set a price list for available spaces.

Commissioner Parker urged caution about excluding sponsors who provide significant revenue for events, saying sponsors often fund major gatherings and removing them could reduce gross-receipt taxes entering Roosevelt County. "If they're paying thousands of dollars to put this event on, then I personally... would hate to lose that venue because we didn't allow them to put their signs up for that event," Parker said.

Other commissioners focused on legal risk. One commissioner warned the board that restricting advertisements by subject matter amounts to content-based regulation, which can trigger constitutional challenges. "When we start regulating speech on a basis of content, we run into constitutional problems," a commissioner said, urging care to avoid litigation.

Panelists discussed a compromise: permit sponsor signage during privately rented or sponsored events while barring county-funded, county-sponsored events from hosting advertisements for intoxicating products. "You can certainly differentiate advertisements put up by or on behalf of the county and those otherwise put up by sponsors," an attorney or staff member told the board.

Commissioners also asked staff to clarify whether references to "illegal" products meant illegal under state law, federal law, or both. One commissioner recommended specifying both state and federal law to prevent confusion; another said tying limits to state law would address concerns about federally illegal but state-legal substances.

The board did not adopt the policy. Commissioners directed staff to collect and compare advertising policies from neighboring jurisdictions (Eastern New Mexico, Albuquerque and Roosevelt County itself) and to circulate revisions by email. Miss Forier was asked to prepare a revised draft that adds a county-sponsored-event exemption and clarifies whether prohibitions reference state or federal law.

The board scheduled further review and asked that individual commissioners submit written suggestions to Michael (staff) and Miss Forier before the next meeting.

What happens next: staff will compile suggestions and return an updated draft for further review at a subsequent meeting. The commission did not take a final vote at the May 19 session.