WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

HJR 12

COLLEGE BOARDS OF REGENTS CHANGES, CA

2025 Regular Session Introduced by Anita Gonzales and 4 co-sponsors

Constitutional amendment: establish fiduciary duties for regents and admins, let Legislature define duties, and move removal to district court; requires voter ratification.

action postponed indefinitely
#constitutionofnewmexico #education #postsecondary
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · HJR 12

Summary — HJR 12: "College Boards of Regents Changes" (New Mexico)

Status: Action postponed indefinitely (June 3, 2025). Introduced in 2025; passed the House (floor substitute/amendment adopted) and reported DO PASS by House committees; sent to Senate but later postponed. If adopted by the Legislature and ratified by voters, the resolution would amend Article XII, Section 13 of the New Mexico Constitution.

Main purpose

To amend the state constitution to (1) establish and specify fiduciary duties for members of boards of regents of state higher‑education institutions, (2) permit the Legislature to assign additional duties or define the scope of boards by statute, and (3) change how and where regent removal actions are litigated and who may initiate them.

Key provisions

  • Fiduciary duty language: each regent “holds a position of trust and owes a fiduciary duty” to the institution. Explicitly lists duties including:
    • Undivided loyalty;
    • Duty of due care and prudent administration;
    • Duty to act in good faith;
    • Obligation to conduct business in accordance with New Mexico law and internal institutional policies.
  • Extends fiduciary duties to institution administrators to whom the board delegates authority.
  • Authorizes the Legislature to provide additional duties or define the scope of a board’s control and management (i.e., statutory authority over matters now governed by the constitution).
  • Removal standards: members may be removed for “incompetence, neglect, breaches of fiduciary duties, breaches of other duties or malfeasance in office.”
  • Venue and initiators for removal:
    • Moves original‑jurisdiction for removal actions from the New Mexico Supreme Court to the district court in which the institution is located (House Floor Amendment No. 1 clarified venue language).
    • Allows removal actions to be filed by the Attorney General or by a majority of the other members of that board.
  • Ratification: The proposed constitutional amendment would be placed before voters at the next general election (November 2026) or a special election called for that purpose and would take effect only if approved by voters.

Who is affected

  • Members of boards of regents and institutional administrators (subject to clarified fiduciary duties and potential new removal procedures).
  • State higher‑education institutions (may need policy and governance changes; possible training).
  • Attorney General and district courts (new authority/venue for removal actions).
  • Legislature (gains ability to assign or modify board duties by statute).
  • Secretary of State (ballot printing and publication duties for the constitutional amendment).

Fiscal and administrative impact

  • One‑time election/ballot printing cost estimated at $35,000–$50,000 (General Fund) per constitutional amendment (Secretary of State obligations for bilingual samples and newspaper publication).
  • If adopted, institutions may incur minimal, indeterminate costs to revise policies and provide regent training (e.g., fiduciary duty training); these are expected to be manageable within existing appropriations.
  • Potential need for additional regent training to meet fiduciary standards.

Significant issues & related legislation

  • Supporters argue the amendment clarifies duties and creates clearer remedies for misconduct.
  • The Council of University Presidents flagged concerns that legislative authority over board duties could invite political involvement in academic/ personnel matters and risk accreditation problems (accreditors require governing boards be free from undue external influence).
  • Related bills: SB266 (creates a private cause of action for fiduciary breaches), SB19 (mandates regent training including fiduciary duties), and SJR7 (proposed limits on gubernatorial appointment power via nominating committees).

Procedural timeline / next steps

  • Passed the House with a floor amendment (clarifying district‑court venue).
  • Sent to the Senate (Rules and Judiciary). Status: action postponed indefinitely (June 3, 2025).
  • If reactivated, the joint resolution would require legislative approval and then voter ratification at the designated election to become effective.

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.