Fiscal impact reports (FIRs) are prepared by the Legislative Finance Committee (LFC) for standing finance

committees of the NM Legislature. The LFC does not assume responsibility for the accuracy of these reports

if they are used for other purposes.

Current FIRs (in HTML & Adobe PDF formats) are a vailable on the NM Legislative Website (legis.state.nm.us).

Adobe PDF versions include all attachments, whereas HTML versions may not. Previously issued FIRs and

attachments may be obtained from the LFC in Suite 101 of the State Capitol Building North.

F I S C A L I M P A C T R E P O R T

SPONSOR McCoy

ORIGINAL DATE

LAST UPDATED

HJM 64

SHORT TITLE Ranchito Grant as Part of Coronado Monument

SB

ANALYST Baca

APPROPRIATION (dollars in thousands)

Appropriation

Recurring

or Non-Rec

Fund

Affected

FY06

FY07

NFI

(Parenthesis ( ) Indicate Expenditure Decreases)

Relates to Appropriation in the General Appropriation Act

SOURCES OF INFORMATION

LFC Files

Responses Received From

Indian Affairs Department (IAD)

SUMMARY

Synopsis of HJM

House Joint Memorial 64 requests that the Governor designate the Ranchito Grant as part of

Coronado State Monument and that the Museum of New Mexico (MONM) be granted an interest

in the property in order to protect the grant's archaeological resources.

SIGNIFICANT ISSUES

HJM 64 addresses two major issues: 1) the request that the MONM be grant the University of

New Mexico (UNM) an undivided half interest in the property (26 and ˝ acres) in order to pro-

tect and preserve its archaeological resources, and 2) request that the university of New Mexico

refrain from divesting itself of the Ranchito Grant property for any commercial uses and that the

governor be requested to designate the Ranchito Grant as part of Coronado State Monument.

House Joint Memorial 64 – Page

2

OTHER SUBSTANTIVE ISSUES

The IAD submits the following observations:

HJM 64 is premised (See page 3, lines 6 and 11) on the assumption that the Pueblo of

Santa Ana (“Pueblo”) is currently seeking to purchase, or otherwise acquire, lands that it

had previously exchanged with UNM. This Department has no tangible evidence that the

Pueblo seeks to purchase any of the land in question. As such, HJM 64 may not be

timely or relevant as regard to the Pueblo.

Further, HJM 64 appears to erroneously designate the Ranchito properties as “grant prop-

erties.” Pursuant to the land histories set out in U.S. v. University of NM, 731 F.2d 703

(10

th

Cir. 1984) and P.L. 99-575, (Act of October 28, 1986), [both relating to the 1985

land exchange mentioned on Page 2, Line 14 of HJM 64] the Ranchito property is not a

true “land grant” as defined in New Mexico; rather, that property was created through a

series of purchases by the Pueblo from Spanish settlers during the period of 1709-1763.

As such, those laws relating to land grants in New Mexico do not necessarily apply to

this property. It would appear that when the Pueblo’s title to the property was confirmed

in 1898 by the Court of Private Land Claims, that the Court used the term “grant.”

Finally, in the first “Be it Resolved” paragraph (page 3, lines 22-24), there is a request

“that the governor be requested to designate the Ranchito grant as part of Coronado state

monument.” Significantly, UNM owns only a small portion of the entire property known

as the Ranchito property; the Pueblo owns the vast majority of the same (some 5000

acres). The language of the memorial would purport to allow the Governor to designate

the entire property as part of the State monument. The Governor does not now have the

authority to unilaterally appropriate tribal properties.

WHAT WILL BE THE CONSEQUENCES OF NOT ENACTING THIS BILL

The requested actions may not take place.

LRB/mt