1. A. The recall petition shall be composed of a face sheet and a subsequent page. An individual, group or organization desiring to initiate the recall process may obtain the forms from the district court.
2. B. The petition shall be on eight and one-half inch by eleven inch paper.
3. C. All information written on the petition form shall be in compliance with the federal Voting Rights Act of 1965, as amended.

4. D. Each face sheet of a petition shall contain the following:

   1. (1) a space for the initiation date;
   2. (2) a notice at the top of the sheet stating: "Recall is a local decision to be funded by local money. State funds will not be advanced to support recall.";
   3. (3) a space for the name of the named official;
   4. (4) a space for the name of the local jurisdiction in which the named official has been elected;
   5. (5) a space for the name of the individual, group or organization initiating the petition;
   6. (6) a space in which to list the specific charges to support recall of the named official that constitute malfeasance in office, misfeasance in office or violation of oath of office; and
   7. (7) a notice stating "Signatures are valid for a maximum of ninety days from the initiation date.".
5. E. The remaining portion of the face sheet shall be substantially in the following form:

6. "I, the undersigned, a registered voter and a resident of the ______________ (name of local jurisdiction), hereby petition for the recall of the named official on the face sheet of this petition.

   1. ______________ Usual Signature ______________ Name Printed As Registered ______________ Address As Registered _________ City or Zip Code _________ Date Signed 2. ______________ Usual Signature ______________ Name Printed As Registered ______________ Address As Registered _________ City or Zip Code _________ Date Signed".

7. 1.
8. ______________ Usual Signature
9. ______________ Name Printed As Registered
10. ______________ Address As Registered
11. _________ City or Zip Code
12. _________ Date Signed
13. 2.
14. ______________ Usual Signature
15. ______________ Name Printed As Registered
16. ______________ Address As Registered
17. _________ City or Zip Code

18. _________ Date Signed".

    1. F. One completed face sheet or duplicate thereof shall be the first page of all circulated petitions.
    2. G. Each subsequent page shall describe the purpose of the petition, provide the name of the named official sought to be recalled and indicate that additional details are contained on the face sheet and be substantially in the form provided in this section.

History: 1953 Comp., § 77-4A-6, enacted by Laws 1977, ch. 308, § 6; 1993, ch. 226, § 17; 1978 Comp., § 22-7-6, recompiled and amended as § 1-25-4 by Laws 2019, ch. 212, § 162.

ANNOTATIONS

Recompilations. — Laws 2019, ch. 212, § 162 recompiled and amended former 22-7-6 NMSA 1978 as 1-25-4 NMSA 1978, effective April 3, 2019.

The 2019 amendment, effective April 3, 2019, revised the form of a recall petition; in the section heading, added "Recall"; deleted former Subsection A and added a new Subsection A; in Subsection B, after "by", deleted "fourteen" and added "eleven"; in Subsection D, added new Paragraph D(4) and redesignated former Paragraphs D(4) through D(6) as Paragraphs D(5) through D(7), respectively, in Paragraph D(7), after "maximum of", deleted "one hundred ten" and added "ninety", and after "days from", deleted "date of initiation" and added "initiation date"; in Subsection E, after "registered voter", deleted "in the county of _______, New Mexico", and after "resident of the", deleted "school district" and added "name of local jurisdiction"; and in Subsection G, after "subsequent page", deleted "of the petition shall have approximately twenty-five lines numbered one to twenty-five" and added "shall describe the purpose of the petition, provide the name of the named official sought to be recalled and indicate that additional details are contained on the face sheet", after the next occurrence of "and", deleted "shall", and after "provided in", deleted "Subsection E of".

The 1993 amendment, effective July 1, 1993, substituted "this section" for "section 6 of the Local School Board Member Recall Act" at the end of Subsection G and made stylistic changes.

Protections when exercising the right to petition. — Where respondent, a Taos school board member, brought a malicious abuse of process claim against petitioners, eighteen members of an unincorporated citizens’ association who sought to remove respondent from office, the district court properly granted petitioners’ motion to dismiss, because petitioners who pursue the recall of a local school board member under the Local School Board Member Recall Act, 22-7-1 to 22-7-16 NMSA 1978, are entitled to the procedural protections of the New Mexico statute prohibiting strategic litigations against public participation (Anti-SLAPP statute, 38-2-9.1 NMSA 1978), and are entitled to immunity under the Noerr-Pennington doctrine when they exercise their first amendment right to petition. Cordova v. Cline, 2017-NMSC-020, rev’g 2013-NMCA-083, 308 P.3d 975.

Standing to file recall petition. — Where defendants formed an unincorporated organization to file a petition to recall plaintiff who was a member and officer of a municipal school board; the organization registered with the county clerk pursuant to Section 53-10-1 NMSA 1978; and defendants were residents and voters of the county in which the school district was located, the organization had standing to file a recall petition. Cordova v. Cline, 2013-NMCA-083, cert. granted, 2013-NMCERT-007.

District court's finding of probable cause to support an allegation of malfeasance sufficient for a recall petition to proceed was error. — Where petitioner filed a petition to hold a recall election for a Rio Arriba county commissioner, alleging the commissioner committed malfeasance in office by violating the Open Meetings Act, specifically alleging that the commissioner made a public policy decision outside of a public meeting of the Rio Arriba county commission to install a statue depicting Don Juan de Oñate, the district court erred when it found probable cause that the commissioner committed malfeasance or misfeasance without also finding that the decision to install the statue was made by a quorum of the county commission, a requirement to prove a violation of the Open Meetings Act. Pena v. Rio Arriba Cnty. Comm'r, 2025-NMSC-045.