N.M. Stat. Ann. § 73-2-21
A. The commissioners shall:
B. The mayordomo or superintendent shall, under the direction of the commissioners, be the executive officer of the ditch and shall:
History: Laws 1895, ch. 1, § 4; 1897, ch. 44, § 1; C.L. 1897, § 11; Laws 1903, ch. 44, § 1; Code 1915, § 5754; C.S. 1929, § 151-424; 1941 Comp., § 77-1421; Laws 1945, ch. 47, § 1; 1953 Comp., § 75-14-21; Laws 1977, ch. 247, § 198; 1981, ch. 337, § 1; 2003, ch. 82, § 2; 2003, ch. 135, § 2.
Cross references. — For penalties against delinquent owners, see 73-2-25 NMSA 1978.
For commissioners' duties in connection with apportionment of waters supplying two or more ditches, see 73-2-47 to 73-2-51 NMSA 1978.
For duties of ditch officers in certain counties, see 73-3-4 NMSA 1978.
For appeals to the district court, see Rule 1-074 NMRA.
The 2003 amendment, effective March 1, 2004, added subsection designations throughout and added the provisions in Subsection E.
Laws 2003, ch. 82, § 2 and Laws 2003, ch. 135, § 2, both effective March 1, 2003, enacted identical amendments to this section. The section was set out as amended by Laws 2003, ch. 135, § 2. See 12-1-8 NMSA 1978.
The 1981 amendment deleted the former second paragraph which read "The books, records and accounts of both the mayordomo and commissioners shall be audited by an auditor approved by the secretary of finance and administration at least once each year" and, in the third sentence in the remaining language, substituted "money" for "moneys" and "of " for "as" following "custody."
The 1977 amendment added the section heading and substituted "secretary of finance and administration" for "state comptroller".
Standard of review of the decision of commissioners of acequias is constitutional. — The standard of review in an appeal to the district court from a decision by the commissioners of an acequia, which permits the district court to set aside, reverse or remand the decision if the district court determines that the commissioners acted fraudulently, arbitrarily or capriciously, or that the commissioners did not act in accordance with law, does not violate either N.M. Const., art. XVI, § 5 or the equal protection clause of art. II, § 18. Pena Blanca P'ship v. San Jose Cmty. Ditch, 2009-NMCA-016, 145 N.M. 555, 202 P.3d 814, cert. denied, 2009-NMCERT-001, 145 N.M. 655, 203 P.3d 870.
Ditch corporations are involuntary public quasi-corporations, with no powers except those expressly conferred by statute or such as are impliedly necessary to the performance of those statutory powers. Candelaria v. Vallejos, 1905-NMSC-019, 13 N.M. 146, 81 P. 589.
Legal expenses of controversy between commissioners proper expense. — Expense incurred, consisting of attorney's fees and costs in controversy between certain commissioners of a community ditch corporation, is a proper expense to be paid by water users in proportion to their interests in the ditch. State ex rel. Sanchez v. Casados, 1921-NMSC-101, 27 N.M. 555, 202 P. 987.
Bylaw allocating repair payments invalid. — Bylaw of a ditch company which provides that those farther from the inlet contribute a greater portion for repairs than those nearer the inlet is invalid. State ex rel. Black v. Aztec Ditch Co., 1919-NMSC-057, 25 N.M. 590, 185 P. 549.
Proper to make assessment to repay certain loan. — This section and Section 73-2-56 NMSA 1978, taken together, entitle commissioners to make an assessment for repayment of a loan directed to the change of location, expansion or reconstruction of a community ditch. 1964 Op. Att'y Gen. No. 64-95 (rendered before enactment of Section 73-2-22 NMSA 1978).
Commissioners possess power to make new regulations without consulting the voters who have elected them. 1916 Op. Att'y Gen. No. 16-1750.
Standard for water distribution is beneficial use. — Mayordomo must distribute acequia water according to beneficial use by ditch owners. Acreage of land with water rights is controlling factor in apportioning water to members of acequia association, but other matters may also be considered. 1974 Op. Att'y Gen. No. 74-23.