1. A. The term of office of every state, county or district officer, except those elected to fill vacancies, shall commence on the first day of January next after the officer's election.
2. B. A state, county or district officer elected to fill a vacancy in office shall take office on the first day of January next after the officer's election to serve the remainder of the unexpired term for that office.
3. C. The term of a state, county or district officer may be adjusted by law to align or stagger the election of officers for a particular state, county or district office throughout the state. Any such adjustment shall require a legislative finding that the adjustment is to provide for consistency in the timing of elections for that office or to balance the number of offices appearing on the ballot. The term of any officer affected by such adjustment shall not be shortened or extended by more than two years. An extended term shall be counted as one term for the purposes of any limitation on the number of terms an officer may serve. A shortened term shall not be counted as a term and shall be disregarded for the purposes of any limitation on the number of terms an officer may serve. No statewide elective office may be adjusted pursuant to this subsection. (As amended November 3, 2020.)

ANNOTATIONS

The 2020 amendment, which was proposed by H.J.R. No. 8 (Laws 2020) and adopted at a general election held on November 3, 2020 by a vote of 503,308 for and 277,744 against, permitted the adjustment by law of terms of non-statewide elected officers and to standardize the date an officer begins to serve; in Subsection A, after "except", deleted "those elected at the first election held under this constitution, and", and after "after", deleted "his" and added "the officer’s"; and added Subsections B and C.

Cross references. — For term of persons elected to fill vacancies, see N.M. Const., art. XX, § 4, and art. V, § 5.

For commencement of terms of officers elected at first election, see N.M. Const., art. XXII, §§ 19 and 22.

Constitutional amendment implicitly repealed the requirement that all district and metropolitan court judges stand for retention at the same time. — Where petitioners, sitting district and metropolitan court judges and their association, filed a petition for writ of mandamus challenging the constitutionality of §§ 1-26-5 and 1-26-6 NMSA 1978, which provide for staggered retention elections of district court and metropolitan court judges, respectively, claiming that N.M. Const., Art. VI, § 33, specifically requires that retention elections of all district judges statewide occur at the same time and that N.M. Const., Art. XX, § 3, generally authorizes the legislature to stagger the dates of elections of district officers, and that because the two constitutional provisions conflict, the general provision must yield to the more specific provision, and as a result, §§ 1-26-5 and 1-26-6 are unconstitutional, the petition was denied because, although Art. XX, § 3 irreconcilably conflicts with N.M. Const., Art. VI, §§ 33, 35, 36, and 37 and Art. VI, § 33 is the more specific of the two provisions, Art. XX, § 3, as amended by the voters in 2020, implicitly repealed the requirement in Art. VI § 33 that all district and metropolitan court judges stand for retention election at the same time. Article XX, § 3 therefore, authorized the legislature to amend §§ 1-26-5 and 1-26-6 to stagger retention elections for district and metropolitan court judges. State ex rel. Franchini v. Toulouse Oliver, 2022-NMSC-016.

"District officer" not special class. — It was not intention of section to create a class of officers, i.e., district officers, unknown to New Mexico and relieve them from inhibitions imposed upon all other designated officials. District attorneys are state officers. State ex rel. Ward v. Romero, 1912-NMSC-011, 17 N.M. 88, 125 P. 617.

Term of appointee filling vacancy. — Under N.M. Const., art. V, § 5, an appointee filling vacancy in state office holds his office only until next general election, and term of office of elected successor commences upon date he qualifies since he has been elected to an office to fill a vacancy. 1952 Op. Att'y Gen. No. 52-5612.

Election alone not enough to oust predecessor. — Election or appointment of officer does not serve to oust his predecessor from office. One must first qualify, i.e., take the oath and give bond where required. Election alone is not enough. 1958 Op. Att'y Gen. No. 58-233.

Section defines term for compensation purposes. — Fact that county clerk, assessor and sheriff were elected to respective offices in November of 1968 and charter for county setting salary for these offices did not become effective until January 1, 1969, was not violative of N.M. Const., art. IV, § 27 (relating to changes in compensation of public officers), since term of these officers did not commence until January 1, 1969, as provided by this section. 1969 Op. Att'y Gen. No. 69-134.

Am. Jur. 2d, A.L.R. and C.J.S. references. — 63A Am. Jur. 2d Public Officers and Employees § 160.

"Until" as word of inclusion or exclusion where term of office runs until a specified day, 16 A.L.R. 1100.

Beginning or expiration of term of elective office where no time fixed by law, 80 A.L.R. 1290, 135 A.L.R. 1173.

Time of giving official bond, constitutional, statutory or charter provision as to, as mandatory or directory, 158 A.L.R. 639.

Time of taking oath of office, constitutional, statutory or charter provision as to, as mandatory or directory, 158 A.L.R. 639.

67 C.J.S. Officers and Public Employees § 68.