N.M. Stat. » N.M. Stat. / Chapter 6 / Article 6
New Mexico Statutes

N.M. Stat. § 6-6-12 (2026)

Exemptions from Bateman Act.

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NM-LEGnmonesource.com JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar 
     Insurance contracts not exceeding five years, joint projects between two or more
local public bodies not exceeding five years, lease-purchase agreements, lease
agreements, contracts providing for the operation or provision and operation of a jail by
or with another local public body or by an independent contractor entered into by a local
public body set out in Section 6-6-11 NMSA 1978 and guaranteed energy savings
contracts and installment payment contracts or lease-purchase agreements pursuant to
guaranteed energy savings contracts are exempt from the provisions of Section 6-6-11
NMSA 1978, and such contracts, lease-purchase agreements, lease agreements and
jail contracts are declared not to constitute the creation of debt.

History: 1953 Comp., § 11-6-6.1, enacted by Laws 1968, ch. 72, § 8; 1984, ch. 22, § 2;
1993, ch. 231, § 11; 1999, ch. 198, § 1.

                                     ANNOTATIONS

The 1999 amendment, effective June 18, 1999, inserted "joint projects between two or
more local public bodies not exceeding five years" following "five years" and inserted
"by or with another local public body or" following "jail".

Lease-sale. — If an option price required to be paid by a county is nominal or
nonexistent, a purported lease may be treated as a sale, creating the type of future
economic commitment that requires the arrangement be approved by the voters,
pursuant to N.M. Const., art. IX, § 10. Montano v. Gabaldon, 1989-NMSC-001, 108
N.M. 94, 766 P.2d 1328.

Municipalities may enter into long-term lease agreements and lease purchase
agreements without violating the provisions of the Bateman Act (6-6-11 and 6-6-13 to 6-
6-18 NMSA 1978). 1969 Op. Att'y Gen. No. 69-39.

Lease purchase agreements. — In spite of the language of this section, certain lease
purchase agreements may constitute the creation of debt within N.M. Const., art. IX, §§
10, 11 and 12. 1969 Op. Att'y Gen. No. 69-39.

The purchase of school yearbooks does not fall within any of the exceptions
provided in this section. 1969 Op. Att'y Gen. No. 69-17.

Lease purchase agreements binding on future councils. — Although a municipality
may not earmark receipts of the future so that these receipts will go to the payment of
the amount due each year under a lease purchase agreement, nevertheless, such
agreements are binding on future councils and mayors of municipalities. 1969 Op. Att'y
Gen. No. 69-39.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5 cases, 1960–1989 · leading case: Montano v. Gabaldon, 766 P.2d 1328 (N.M. 1989).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Montano v. Gabaldon, 766 P.2d 1328 (N.M. 1989). · cites it 2× “NMSA 1978, § 6-6-12. We recognize that county governments may have entered into lease-purchase agreements similar to the agreement under consideration here, in which the option purchase price is nominal or nonexistent, in reliance upon a 1976 Attorney General’s Opinion which…”
State Ex Rel. Gary v. Fireman's Fund Indem. Co., 355 P.2d 291 (N.M. 1960). · cites it 2× “1953; because not brought within two years after final payment was due as provided in its bond; because no notice was given within 90 days, as required by § 6-6-12(a), N.M.S.A.1953; and that plaintiff cannot recover because the work .”
State Ex Rel. Komac Paint & Wallpaper Store v. McBride, 392 P.2d 577 (N.M. 1964). · cites it 5× “Plaintiff- (appellant) sued on a general contractor’s payment bond under the provisions of § 6-6-12, N.M.S.A.1953, for unpaid materials and supplies furnished a subcontractor'for use in construction of a public building.”
Emp. Sec. Comm'n v. C. R. Davis Contracting Co., 462 P.2d 608 (N.M. 1969). “Appellant contends that the one-year statute of limitations, set forth in § 6-6-12 (c), N.M.S.A., 1953 Comp., would run against part of the recovery for taxes, because they were incurred on jobs which were completed more than a year prior to the bringing of this action.”
State Ex Rel. State Elec. Supply Co. v. Mcbride, 444 P.2d 978 (N.M. 1968). · cites it 9× “, a corporation, hereinafter referred to as “Electric,” brought suit on a general contractor’s payment bond under § 6-6-12, N.M.S.A., 1953 Comp., for use in the construction of an annex to the science building of the Farmington High School.”
N.M. Stat. § 6-6-12(a): 2 cases
State Ex Rel. Gary v. Fireman's Fund Indem. Co., 355 P.2d 291 (N.M. 1960). “1953; because not brought within two years after final payment was due as provided in its bond; because no notice was given within 90 days, as required by § 6-6-12(a), N.M.S.A.1953; and that plaintiff cannot recover because the work .”
State Ex Rel. State Elec. Supply Co. v. Mcbride, 444 P.2d 978 (N.M. 1968). “, a corporation, hereinafter referred to as “Electric,” brought suit on a general contractor’s payment bond under § 6-6-12, N.M.S.A., 1953 Comp., for use in the construction of an annex to the science building of the Farmington High School.”
N.M. Stat. § 6-6-12(c): 1 case
State Ex Rel. Gary v. Fireman's Fund Indem. Co., 355 P.2d 291 (N.M. 1960). “1953; because not brought within two years after final payment was due as provided in its bond; because no notice was given within 90 days, as required by § 6-6-12(a), N.M.S.A.1953; and that plaintiff cannot recover because the work .”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.