GRANTS, N.M. – In a special meeting Wednesday, March 11, the Grants City Council reached a split decision on the eligibility of District 1 Councilor Dolores P. Vallejos, finding unanimously among voting members that she met the Charter’s residency requirement at the time she filed and still meets it, but also finding she is in violation of the Charter’s dual-office rule because she currently holds another elected public office.
Vallejos, who also serves as Cibola County Assessor and has nine months left in her term, was asked to step away from the dais after the council’s decision. Councilor Fred Rodarte was absent.
Vallejos abstained from both votes because the matter concerned her eligibility. The remaining members voted 2–0 on each determination. The March 11 hearing was the latest turning point in a months-long controversy that began after the Nov. 4, 2025, Regular Local Election, when Vallejos won the District 1 race by three votes – 133 to 130 over incumbent Zachery T. Gutierrez, with Bob W. Tenequer also on the ballot. The dispute has since broadened into a larger, ongoing fight over Charter compliance and election administration in Grants, including litigation and questions tied to the city’s decision not to hold a municipal election on Municipal Officer Election Day this year on March 3.
The Crisis Leading to this Decision
In the days after the November election, Mayor Erik Garcia raised public questions about whether Vallejos lived in District 1 at the address tied to her voter registration.
Vallejos told the Citizen she changed her voter registration to her mother’s Del Norte Boulevard address in July 2025 for caregiving and medical reasons – not politics – and said she spends most of her time caring for her mother, who has dementia.
Public records show Vallejos had previously registered at Davis Street (2007) and Kabrico Drive (beginning 2011). On July 28, 2025 – less than four months before the election – she updated her voter registration to the Del Norte address while keeping Kabrico as her mailing address.
The Charter’s residency standard is explicit: a councilor candidate must be a resident of the district “on and after” the filing date and must continue to live in the district throughout the term.
But the controversy did not stay limited to residency.
A separate Charter provision had long been in the background: Section 8.02(A), which states, “Except as authorized by state law, no elected officer of the City shall hold any other elected public office during the term for which the official was elected.”
A City Charter Under Strain
As the Vallejos issue unfolded, Grants’ broader Charter crisis remained unresolved.
The Charter itself sets the city’s election baseline, stating that the New Mexico Municipal Election Code applies “except” where it conflicts with the Charter – “in which case the Charter shall govern” – and that “the regular municipal election shall be held on the first Tuesday in March of each even-numbered year.”
This year, Grants did not hold a municipal election on that March date, a decision city officials have attributed to the city’s earlier opt-in actions shifting municipal officer elections to the consolidated November “regular local election” schedule.
The missed March election intensified public scrutiny as multiple legal actions moved forward, including lawsuits filed by former mayor Martin W. Hicks challenging the city’s election schedule and the relationship between state election deadlines and Charter qualifications.
Meanwhile, the residency question that sparked the public controversy was repeatedly scheduled, delayed, tabled, and removed from agendas during the winter – including a Dec. 17 where these questions could have been addressed before Vallejos was sworn-in, a meeting that ended with the city attorney resigning after a tense debate over the Charter and process.
Despite the questions, Vallejos was still sworn in on Dec. 31 as the certified District 1 winner, with law- suits continuing a separate track.
March 11 Charter Enforcement Hearing
At the start of the March 11 proceeding, Mayor Erik Garcia told the room the council was not reconsidering vote totals or deciding who should have won the election. Instead, he said the council was acting under the Charter’s requirement that it judge the qualifications of its members – a power the Charter explicitly grants the governing body.
The council’s agenda mirrored the Charter’s structure:
• Residency review under the Charter’s district-residency rules (Section 2.02).
• Dual-office review under Section 8.02.
Council was presented with a decision framework offering multiple outcomes, including eligibility, ineligibility, forfeiture, or additional proceedings.
The agenda for this meeting agenda explained it would begin with testimony, and then the Grants City Council would address each controversy separately.
Before testimony, the mayor read into the record a list of documents that had been provided to the council. The list included versions of the city charter, district boundary ordinances and maps, Vallejos’ filing documents, voter and address records, property and utility information tied to multiple addresses, and attorney emails regarding the hearing’s procedures.
The packet also included items Vallejos supplied, such as medical information describing caregiving responsibilities, mail and banking correspondence tied to the Del Norte address, vehicle registration material, and a set of legal references and opinions – including references to prior Attorney General guidance and what appeared to be screenshots related to an AI-generated “charter opinion,” according to the mayor’s read-in.
Vallejos’ Residency defense: “I spend more than 50% of my time there”
Vallejos told the council she believed the mayor “has his own agenda of removing me from the office,” and said she viewed the proceeding as personal. She also questioned why the issue was not raised when she filed, and said she had not read the Charter before running.
On residency, Vallejos said the documents she submitted showed her residence is on Del Norte Blvd. in District 1 and said she spends more than half her time there because she is her mother’s caretaker.
She acknowledged she owns other homes in Grants and “come[s] and go[es] on a daily basis,” but said she did not want to elaborate further and asked the council to proceed.
No member of the public presented “opposing evidence” during the formal portion of the residency hearing.
Councilor Beverly Michael again raised the argument that residency challenges to a candidate’s eligibility to run are generally time-limited under state election law and must be brought in district court within days of a filing – a position that has been debated repeatedly in this controversy since November.
Mayor Pro Tem George Garcia questioned why Vallejos’ residency was being challenged.
In response, Mayor Garcia described his belief that Vallejos lived outside District 1 and said residents had raised the issue with him. Garcia then questioned Vallejos directly about whether she lived at the Del Norte address at filing and whether she lives there now; Vallejos said she had been with her mother since 2014 and reiterated that she lives at Del Norte.
After discussion, the council voted to adopt the finding that Vallejos met residency requirements at filing and continues to meet them, consistent with the Charter’s residency standard for councilors.
The vote was 2–0 among those voting, with Vallejos abstaining and Rodarte absent.
On the question of residency, the Grants City Council found Vallejos in compliance with the Grants City Charter.
Dual-Office Review: Vallejos Refuses to Resign Assessor Post
The hearing then turned to Section 8.02, the Charter’s dual-office rule. The language is brief but sweeping: “Except as authorized by state law, no elected officer of the City shall hold any other elected public office during the term for which the official was elected.”
Vallejos told the council that city officials and the public knew she was county assessor throughout the campaign, and she argued the issue should have been addressed earlier.
She cited the Charter language and argued she was not elected county assessor “during [her] term as councilor” because she already held that office when elected to the city council. She said her assessor term ends later this year and that she did not intend to resign.
Councilor Michael asked Vallejos whether she had considered resigning from the assessor’s office to be in compliance; Vallejos said she did not intend to resign and added that she did not know what she would do months from now.
Mayor Pro Tem George Garcia stated that, in his view, the Charter controls because he did not see state law clearly authorizing holding both elected offices.
Pro Tem Garcia also raised a broader point that would echo in later council comments: even if the city has struggled with Charter compliance in other areas, that does not automatically invalidate every Charter provision.
Michael said she believed the Charter language was clear but expressed uncertainty about procedure “what now?” – including whether further legal steps might follow.
After discussion, the council voted to adopt the determination that Vallejos holds another elected public office during her term and is in violation of the Charter — effectively disqualifying her from continuing to serve as District 1 councilor under Section 8.02 of the Grants City Charter.
Because the Charter treats the loss of required qualifications as an automatic resignation/ forfeiture, the vacancy question follows directly from the Charter’s forfeiture section, which provides that a councilor “shall be deemed to have automatically resigned” if the councilor “lacks, loses or otherwise fails to possess” required qualifications during the term.
The vote was 2–0 among those voting, with Vallejos abstaining and Rodarte absent.
Vallejos was asked to step away from the dais following the decision.
Councilwoman Michael asked if Vallejos would have an opportunity to appeal, the answer was that the city would have to consult legal advice. Since the Vallejos decision led to the resignation of legal counsel, the city has not had and does not have an attorney available.
Appointment clock, then the next election
With District 1 effectively vacant, the Charter outlines the replacement process: Within 45 days of the vacancy, the mayor “shall appoint a qualified successor” (as defined in the Charter’s qualification section) subject to confirmation by the governing body, and the appointee serves until the next regular municipal election for that position.
The Charter also lays out how mayoral appointments are to be noticed and confirmed, including timelines if the council does not confirm an initial nominee.
The next “regular municipal election” date is itself now part of the broader dispute in Grants. The Charter sets March elections in even-numbered years, while the city’s opt-in ordinances and current practice point to November regular local elections.
“Not Personal,” but “The Charter is Our Constitution”
In closing remarks, council members emphasized that the vote was about Charter enforcement, not personal animus.
Michael said she wished the council had not needed to be there and urged future candidates to read the Grants City Charter before running.
Pro Tem Garcia called the Charter “our constitution of the city” and said he had come to believe, after research, that even if some Charter provisions are in dispute, that “doesn’t invalidate the entire charter.”
Mayor Erik Garcia described the day as “tough,” said he did not intend the proceeding to be personal, and said the city is continuing work on Charter changes – including clarifying issues such as dual roles, term limits and the election cycle.
Ultimately the Grants City Council found their newest member Dolores Vallejos ineligible of holding the office of Grants City Councilor as she refused to resign her Cibola County Assessor job. The Grants City Council now has a vacancy that needs to be filled.
The Cibola Citizen will continue following this situation as it evolves.