SUNLAND PARK, N.M. (KFOX14\/CBS4) \u2014 A strange twist: Sunland Park officials say voters will not see an $8.2 million general obligation bond package on the Nov. 3 general election ballot after the city learned the bond questions were left off<\/p>\n
According to the City of Sunland Park, three General Obligation Bond questions asking voters to approve funding for parks and recreation, a public safety complex and vehicles, and roads, water and sewer improvements will not appear on the Nov. 3 ballot.<\/p>\n
The City said it is working with its bond counsel and financial advisor to bring the bond questions to voters in a special election in Spring 2027– possibly in March.<\/p>\n
The City said it is asking the Dona Ana County Clerk’s Office to determine what happened, stressing that it submitted the approved questions in Resolution 2026-85 on August 18.<\/p>\n
City officials emphasized that the Nov. 3 general election will continue as scheduled and that all other races and questions on the ballot are not affected. The city also said people who voted early do not need to take action.<\/p>\n
The City said it is updating mailers, posters and other materials that list the bond questions on the Nov. 3 ballot because that information is now out of date. <\/p>\n
Updates on the special election will be posted at SunlandPark-NM.gov\/GO-bond<\/a>.<\/p>\n “Residents were expecting to see these questions on their ballots, and we owe them a clear explanation,” City Manager Mario Juarez-Infante, PE, said. “We are working to find out what happened and to give voters the chance to decide on these projects in the spring.”<\/p>\n While searching for answers on how this could have happened, KFOX14\/CBS4 spoke with Sunland Park Mayor Javier Perea, who said the City is working to pinpoint exactly what went wrong, saying that he believes the blame could fall on a miscommunication from the Dona Ana County Clerk’s Office.<\/p>\n “Some communication that we have received is that we’re supposed to send it over to the state, but I think there’s conflicting advice on that. So that’s how we’re going to continue investigating this issue, to figure out exactly where the mistake occurred,” Perea said.<\/p>\n Early voting started in New Mexico on Oct. 6, and Perea confirmed that the ballot issue wasn’t noticed until Friday, when he went to vote.<\/p>\n “When I got my ballot, I realized that the city questions were not on the ballot, and I raised some of these questions over to the city manager and that’s what we’re investigating right now,” Perea said. <\/p>\n RELATED: <\/a>Sunland Park voters to decide on $8.2M bond package split into three ballot questions<\/a><\/p>\n Before the bond questions were left off the ballot, Sunland Park voters were expected to decide in November on the $8.2 million package, which was to be divided into three separate ballot questions. <\/p>\n City officials had said approving the bonds would not have resulted in a new tax or an increase to current property taxes because the funding would have come from revenue already being collected.<\/p>\n Under the proposal, one question would have directed $2.25 million to parks and recreation, a second would have allocated $2.5 million for a public safety complex and vehicles, and a third would have provided $3.5 million for roads, water and sewer improvements. <\/p>\n City officials also said passing the bonds could have positioned the city to apply for up to $35 million in additional state and federal funding.<\/p>\n When the Perea was asked what would happen to the project after this mishap, Perea said, “The projects themselves are not going to be on hold for the time being, because right now we do have some cash where we think we can continue to move forward because of our strong financial health, but we were counting on these fundings to have available for projects.”<\/p>\n “So right now, the city has maintained a very strong financial position. We operate at a surplus every single year. So we’ve been able to put some money aside for projects throughout the entire community,” Perea said. “What the GO bond allows us is to be able to tap into more funds with additional revenues for these projects and be able execute these a lot faster.”<\/p>\n When asked if he had a message to the community after this debacle, Perea ultimately said that he is disappointed. <\/p>\n “So I’m a little disappointed in this news, but we are resilient and we’re going to continue to move forward to make sure that this question does go out to the public as soon as possible,” Perea said.<\/p>\n Attached below is the resolution:<\/p>\n 2026-85-general-obligation-bondPDF previewPreview PDF<\/p>\n View PDF<\/a><\/p>\n RECOMMENDED: Do\u00f1a Ana County voters weigh Todd Garrison vs. Vanessa Ordonez in sheriff race<\/a><\/p>\n