In a decisive move Thursday night, the Rio Rancho City Council voted against a controversial proposal that would have eliminated the city’s long-standing voter ID requirement for local elections. Mayor Gregg Hull praised the decision as a victory for election integrity and local control. After the 3-3 failed vote, audience members could be heard clapping and celebrating on the council’s webcast.
The ordinance, known as Ordinance 13, sought to bring Rio Rancho’s municipal elections under the umbrella of the state’s election system—a move that would have scrapped the city’s voter ID requirement in favor of state-managed rules. Proponents argued the change could save taxpayers hundreds of thousands of dollars by consolidating elections with the November cycle. However, critics warned it would weaken safeguards designed to ensure that only eligible voters cast ballots in city elections.
Mayor Hull, who recused himself from deliberations due to his gubernatorial campaign, issued a forceful statement following the council’s vote. “I am pleased that the Council voted to maintain control of our local elections,” Hull said. “It’s a shame that the legislature and the Secretary of State put our City and our Council in the impossible position to decide between the safety and security of our elections or to protect the hard-earned dollars of our taxpayers.”
Hull’s opposition to state-led municipal election mandates isn’t new. In 2017, as chairman of the New Mexico Mayors Caucus, he publicly opposed House Bill 174, which attempted to centralize local election oversight at the state level. “Local elections should be free from government overreach,” Hull reiterated in his statement. “I am thrilled that we are preserving voter intent by securing Voter ID and safeguarding our right to operate our city elections.”
But while an editorial from the Rio Rancho Observer supported moving elections to November to alleviate these costs, the editorial expressed alarm over parts of Ordinance 13 that would have extended the terms of several elected officials by nearly two years, without voter approval. “It leaves the residents of the city without a voice in who their elected representatives are for 21 months,” the editorial warned. The publication called on the council to revise the ordinance to hold elections in November 2025, rather than extending current terms through 2027 and 2029.
Despite the debate over timing and costs, Mayor Hull made clear that voter ID is a non-negotiable safeguard for the city’s elections. “If elected Governor in 2026, I will prioritize passing statewide Voter ID laws that protect legally registered voters and the integrity of our elections, while allowing municipalities to govern their own election laws and processes,” Hull pledged.
The rejection of the ordinance marks a rare rebuke of state influence over local election procedures. “Today we witnessed the amount of power Santa Fe will wield to get what they want, only this time they failed to meet the moment,” Hull said. “Rio Rancho continues to be a beacon of hope, of common sense, and a city that answers only to the people who call it home.”
Rio Rancho voters can be assured that their elections will remain under local control, and their voter ID protections intact.
A huge victory for democracy.
Thank the council members who voted to keep Voter ID and not ignore the voters spoken wants of Voter ID in the past!!! Thank you councilors for listening and action on the people’s input.
respectfully
Jean Montoya a voter in Rio Rancho.
How is it possible that there exists such a reasonable and common-sense community like Rio Rancho right next door to the Albuquerque liberal cesspool?
Bravo Rio Rancho & Mayor Hull. We need you to bring your common sense election policy to Santa Fe. We need you as Governor. Hope the Piñon Post is a vocal supporter of of your candidacy. I will be. 🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸
Please publish who voted for and against in the council 3-3 vote. If my local councilman voted against my choice, I would like to contact him.
Mayor Hull’s leadership. Let’s work to get him as our next Governor!
Ken the info on Rio Rancho Observer website
I’m pleased, but it was a win win for Mayor Hull who recused himself before the vote…better if he had spoken out forcefully before and rallied against the vote. Maybe he had done so in private but something about the way it was handled leaves a lot to be desired. With this city as a last stand eternal vigilance is required.
Knowing the import of this vote to allow Mayor Hull to remain mayor while running for Governor I understand the recusal but what if he had waited to announce his candidacy until after the vote…he would have had to break the tie. His recusal allowed him to win either way the vote went. It just doesn’t sit well with me. Rather he should have fought against this vote publicly. Yes he has a record of talking against it but I judge by what he does not what he says. And what he did speaks volumes. It was weak.
Mayor Hull has led the fight against this issue since 2017. He has always been for home rule elections. This was set forth 2-3 weeks after he indicated his intentions to run. The only ethical thing to do was recuse himself. His record on this is established. The councilors agreed to hear this in their 6-0 vote because the SOS has increased the cost so much. Here in Rio Rancho it went from 45k to almost 450k to conduct home rule elections. Our councilors had a fiduciary obligation to tax payers to hear it and bring it forth, as the budgets for 2025-2026 are being finalized. Rio Rancho is 1 of 8 municipalities that are holding out.
And now here is the “rest of the story”. The below comments (below the dotted line) by a citizen were posted by the RR City Clerk as part of the public record associated with this proposed Ordnance.
https://legistarweb-production.s3.amazonaws.com/uploads/attachment/pdf/3331123/Public_comment_05082025.pdf
Unless you have resided in RR during the “Mayor Hull” years and observed up close and personal City politics, be aware that this vote by the Councilors was in fact self-serving in order to keep the status quo alive.
Hull is a “wolf in sheep’s clothing”; he is not the staunch conservative Republican as most people believe. A few years ago Hull appointed the District 5 Councilor who is a liberal Democrat. The recently elected District 1 Councilor is the Co-Chair of the Sandoval County Democratic Party. I predict that during the next MOE that the Dems will make further in-roads into City government.
“For Conservatives, seeing is believing; for liberals. Believing is seeing.” George Will
*******************************************************************
1. I am in favor of the proposed ordnance O13 and have previously (February 8 2025) communicated my thoughts and reasons along with other Municipal Officer Elections (MOE) issues to City Clerk Noel Davis (refer to the attached).
2. This ordnance will likely increase voter turnout by at least a factor of two with the additional benefit of reducing MOE costs to the City to zero. S.B. 218, which is referenced in the agenda packet, indicates it is just a matter of time before State repeals NMSA 1978 Municipal Officer Election Day.
3. There have been numerous studies that support the fact that low voter turnouts favor the incumbent. I have cited several at the end of this document. Turnout and Incumbency in Local Elections – Jessica Trounstine, Incumbent advantage: Unpacking the Incumbent Advantage in Election Periods – Faster Capital, Municipal elections in California: Turnout, timing, and competition – Hajnal Zoltan L, et. al.
4. According to these studies higher voter turnout helps to blunt the influence of special interest groups who support incumbents which in turn aids challengers.
5. The City currently has three “back-door” Councilors*, defined as an individual who was never elected to their first term. These individuals became “back door incumbents” when their predecessors resigned to create a vacant position. They were appointed by the Mayor and then confirmed by a majority vote of the Governing Body (GB) per City Charter.
6. This City Charter process fosters a “group think” mindset which has led to a virtually 100% approval (many with no discussion whatsoever) of every Resolution and Ordnance that has been presented to the GB in recent years.
7. With the ordnance O13 any complaints regarding MOE (i.e. candidate ethics, voting irregularities, etc.) will be directed to the Sandoval County Clerk. This will inject a measure of impartiality and rapidity into a decision.
8. The above discussion reveals the unintended consequences (low voter turnout which favors incumbents over challengers) caused by the voter approved Proposition 34 in 2012. Proposition 34 required photo ID for MOE. Unfortunately, New Mexico is one of only 14 states that does not require a document to vote. https://www.ncsl.org/elections-and-campaigns/voter-id
To “RRMAGA”:
1) George Will is a RINO who bashes Trump, so quoting him doesn’t help your cause — it actually shows you’re the real RINO.
2) None of your links or points incriminate Hall in anything whatsoever. And what Democrat did he appoint? Be specific. You can’t because it’s a lie. Also, are you saying that anyone who fills a vacant position is just a hack? Isn’t it better to have someone to fill the seat instead of having taxpayers and voters in that district without someone?
3) They brought this up for consideration after Hull had already announced for governor
4) As the comments and the letter in the article show, Hull has been for voter ID and election integrity for awhile.
I think you just have personal beef with the guy for some unknown reason, so you’re trying to dredge up a bunch of fury against the guy as he’s running for governor. Seems this whole voter ID thing was meant to try to attack him but it just proved he’s a voter integrity hero. Thanks for cementing my vote for Gregg for governor