State Supreme Court leaves question: Which law protects our water?

On July 8, the New Mexico Supreme Court had a chance to answer a big question that affects all of us: What law protects our water from being contaminated by wastewater?

But instead of answering, the court said it was too soon to decide. They told us we have to finish the state’s permitting process first — and only after that can we raise the issue again in a lower court.

This was not the outcome we hoped for. But the issue is far from over.

Our petition to the Supreme Court came from a simple concern: We believe the New Mexico Environment Department is not following the law designed to protect public health and drinking water. Officials are ignoring the stronger, newer rules passed by our Legislature to stop water contamination before it happens.

Here’s why that matters:

In 1967, New Mexico created rules called the Ground and Surface Water Protection regulations. These rules allow wastewater to be dumped into the ground — as long as the levels of certain contaminants don’t go above a set limit. That means pollution is allowed, just not “too much” of it.

But in 1971, legislators decided that wasn’t enough. So they passed a new law, the Environmental Improvement Act.

This law created the Environmental Improvement Board and told it to make stronger rules to protect public health from on-site liquid waste — like sewage from homes, businesses and hotels.

The result was a much better set of protections called the Liquid Waste Disposal and Treatment regulations. These rules are clear and strict. They say where, how and how much wastewater can be dumped into the ground. They also make sure the soil can safely treat the waste before it reaches drinking water.

These newer rules apply to all properties — big or small. And they are meant to prevent pollution from happening in the first place, not just respond after it’s already in the water.

But we don’t believe the Environment Department is applying those rules in the case of Bishop’s Lodge, a luxury resort trying to dump 30,000 gallons of partially treated sewage per day into a leach field just above Little Tesuque Creek.

That leach field is too close to our creek, too small for the waste, and too risky for the drinking water hundreds of families depend on. But the state says the liquid waste disposal rules don’t apply and that they can rely on the older, weaker surface water rules instead.

That’s why Protect Tesuque asked the Supreme Court to step in. We wanted the court to tell the Environment Department: Follow the law passed by the Legislature and use the right rules. But instead, the court said: not yet. That means we now have to go through the full permit process, wait for a final decision and then raise the issue again in a Court of Appeals.

We respect the court, but this delay means the public still doesn’t have an answer to a very important question: What law is supposed to protect our water?

Because here’s the truth: Everyone should be held to the same standards. No one — not even a wealthy developer — should be allowed to skip the rules that protect our health and environment. So we ask again: When will our courts tell us what law actually protects our water?

Until we get that answer, we’ll keep fighting to make sure the voices of our community are heard — and that our water is safe for generations to come.