Section 3-22-6 - Applicability to state capital outlay projects; limitation.
3-22-6. Applicability to state capital outlay projects; limitation.
A. Recognizing the fragility of the state's historic heritage, the purpose of this section is to establish a procedure under which the state and its municipalities and counties will commit to collaborate in good faith and work jointly to preserve and protect the historic districts of New Mexico.
B. Ordinances enacted by a municipality or county pursuant to the Historic District and Landmark Act [3-22-1 NMSA 1978] shall apply to a state capital outlay project only as provided in this section and only if the ordinances contain special provisions and standards applicable to state buildings, including provisions concerning the design, construction, alteration or demolition of the exterior features of state buildings. If requested by a resolution of the governing body of a municipality or county, the staff of the capitol buildings planning commission shall work jointly with the staff of the municipality or county in developing the provisions and standards required by this subsection.
C. The applicable state agency shall carry out a capital outlay project in a manner that is harmonious and generally compatible with the municipal or county ordinances.
D. Before commencing the design phase of a capital outlay project, the applicable state agency shall consult with the municipality or county as to the design standards in the ordinances and how those design standards would impact costs and the operation or manner in which the capital outlay project will ultimately be expected to function, provided that, if the municipality or county has an agency or other entity review projects within the area zoned as an historic district or landmark, then the consultation shall be with that review agency or other entity. The state agency shall work collaboratively with the municipality or county or its review agency or other entity to arrive at compatibility with the design standards, considering reasonable costs and preserving essential functionality. If the municipality or county has identifiable community groups involved in historic preservation, the agency shall also make every reasonable effort to obtain input from members of those identified groups before commencing the design phase.
E. After the design phase and before soliciting a bid or a proposal for design-build or lease-purchase for a capital outlay project, the applicable state agency shall transmit its plans for review and comment to the municipality or county or its review agency or other entity and shall also conduct a public meeting to receive public input. Notice of the public meeting shall also be given to any identifiable community groups involved in historic preservation in the municipality or county.
F. Within sixty days after the public meeting, the municipality or county or its review agency or other entity, any identifiable historic preservation community group and any other interested party shall communicate recommendations and comments in writing to the state agency. The state agency shall consult with the municipality or county or its review agency or other entity to resolve any issues raised. If, at the end of the sixty-day period, unresolved issues remain, the municipality or county may, within five days after the end of the period, notify the applicable state agency that the issues remain unresolved and should be finally determined pursuant to Subsection G of this section; provided that, if notice is not timely given, the applicable state agency may, after incorporating those provisions to which the state agency and the municipality or county have agreed, proceed with the capital outlay project.
G. If notice is timely given by a municipality or county, pursuant to Subsection F of this section, that issues remain unresolved, those issues shall be decided pursuant to the following provisions:
(1) within five days after the notice, a state-local government historic review board shall be formed, consisting of eight members as follows:
(a) one member appointed by the capitol buildings planning commission, who shall chair the board and who shall vote only if there is a tie among the other board members present;
(b) one member appointed by the cultural properties review committee;
(c) the state historic preservation officer or a designee of the officer;
(d) one member appointed by the agency or other entity that reviews projects within the area zoned as an historic district or landmark, provided that, if the municipality or county has no such agency or other entity, the member shall be appointed by the governing body of the municipality or county;
(e) one member appointed by the agency or entity of the municipality or county that is concerned with historic preservation, provided that, if the municipality or county has no such agency or other entity, the member shall be appointed by the governing body of the municipality or county; and
(f) three public members who have a demonstrated interest in historic preservation appointed as follows: one member appointed by the secretary of general services, one member appointed by the governing body of the municipality or county and one public member appointed by the other two public members;
(2) the staff of the capitol buildings planning commission shall serve as the staff of the state-local government historic review board; and
(3) the state-local government historic review board shall, at a public meeting, consider each of the unresolved issues and, within twenty days of its formation shall, for each issue, make a final decision that is harmonious and generally compatible with the municipal or county ordinance.
H. Appeals from the decisions of the state-local government historic review board shall be taken to the district court in the manner provided in Section 39-3-1.1 NMSA 1978.
I. The state agency shall not take any irrevocable action on the capital project in reliance on the plans until the procedures set forth in Subsections F and G of this section have been followed.