Geothermal Projects Development Fund
HB289 amends New Mexico’s Geothermal Projects Development Fund law to expand and clarify how the fund may be used. The bill keeps the fund in the state treasury, continues to allow it to receive appropriations and investment income, and preserves the rule that unused balances do not revert to the general fund. It authorizes the fund to support two main types of grants: study grants of up to $250,000 to evaluate the costs and benefits of proposed geothermal development projects, and project grants to finance approved geothermal development projects.
The bill also broadens and specifies eligible recipients and oversight requirements. Grants may be made to political subdivisions, state universities, and other entities participating in a competitive procurement process, and may be made to Indian nations, tribes, or pueblos if approved by the secretary of energy, minerals and natural resources. It requires that funded projects still comply with all applicable state and federal permits, allows some administrative and reimbursable department costs to be paid from the fund, and adds annual reporting duties to the governor, legislative finance committee, and legislative council service library. Section 2 appropriates $20 million from the general fund to the geothermal projects development fund for fiscal year 2026 and later years, with any remaining balance carried forward.
In practical terms, the bill would increase state support for geothermal energy planning and development and create a dedicated funding stream for feasibility studies and project financing. It would affect the Energy, Minerals and Natural Resources Department, local governments, public universities, tribal governments, and private or other entities that compete for geothermal-related work under the Procurement Code. The measure reinforces that geothermal projects receiving state support are still subject to ordinary permitting and regulatory requirements.
The general sentiment reflected in the available voting history appears supportive but not unanimous: the bill passed House final passage by a 35-23 vote. No committee transcript is available, so there is no recorded discussion to indicate detailed arguments for or against the measure. The vote margin suggests meaningful support for geothermal development funding, alongside a substantial minority of opposition.
The main points of contention likely center on the size and use of the $20 million appropriation, whether state funds should be directed to geothermal project development, and the scope of eligible recipients and project approvals. Potential concerns may also involve the balance between public investment and private or local project benefits, as well as the adequacy of oversight and reporting requirements.
HB289 would amend the Geothermal Projects Development Fund statute in the New Mexico Statutes Annotated by expanding authorized uses of the fund, clarifying eligible grant recipients, and adding reporting requirements. It also creates a $20 million general fund appropriation to the geothermal projects development fund for fiscal year 2026 and later years, with nonreverting balances, thereby increasing the state’s dedicated financial support for geothermal development activities.
The bill appears to have received mixed but generally favorable support in the House, as shown by its 35-23 final passage vote. There are no committee transcripts available, so the record does not show detailed debate, but the vote indicates a clear majority in favor with a notable minority opposed. Overall, the sentiment suggests support for geothermal energy investment tempered by concern from some members about the appropriation and program scope.
The likely areas of contention are the $20 million appropriation, the use of general fund dollars for geothermal development, and the breadth of entities eligible for grants, including political subdivisions, universities, and tribal governments. Opponents may also have concerns about whether the fund’s grant-making authority is sufficiently targeted or whether the state should be committing additional resources before projects are fully vetted. Supporters likely view the bill as a way to advance renewable energy development, economic activity, and project readiness through studies, grants, and state oversight.