Image

Beginning Jan. 1, 2025, a new work requirement will take effect for some Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) customers throughout New Mexico. Those directly impacted will receive a mailed notice from the Health Care Authority (HCA) starting November 12.
“We understand that this change may be significant for some of our SNAP customers and we are committed to supporting each individual through this process,” said Niki Kozlowski, director of Income Support Division. “We are working with our federal partners to ensure that all eligible New Mexicans have access to the food benefits they need.”
These work requirements are a federal requirement which apply to people who are between the ages of 18-54, are physically able to work, do not have any dependents (such as children or other individuals they care for), live in one of the designated areas (see below), and do not qualify for any other exception. There are certain exceptions which exempt an individual from having to comply with Able-bodied adults without dependents (ABAWD) work requirements, visit the FAQ page for more information.
The ABAWD work requirement changes will apply to SNAP customers who currently reside in Bernalillo, Santa Fe, Eddy and Los Alamos counties. Additionally, this change will apply to those living in the following pueblos: San Ildefonso, Pojoaque, Santa Clara and Laguna.
Current SNAP customers who fall under these criteria must meet specific work requirements to receive food benefits for more than three months. To continue receiving benefits, they must:
ABAWD SNAP customers should confirm that they are exempt from ABAWD work requirements by contacting the Health Care Authority by:
several students placed in the top five statewide and nine in the top three
And that out of what appears to be a class of 7.
Gotta love the new math.
Sunny, with a high of 89 and low of 63 degrees. Sunny in the morning, clear during the afternoon and evening,
Are we over reacting to these measles outbreaks?
From the headlines and stories you'd think measles were as deadly as Anthrax.
Before the 1970's, getting the measles was just part of growing up, and for the most part was treated with the same urgency as a cold or skinned knee.
"if we can prevent a disease, why not take those preventative measures?" well said.
in this day and age, anyone who imagines that there is any non-partisan election anywhere in this nation - from president to dog catcher - is living in a fairyland. as noted herein, disputes between city & county are exhibit #1 to show the concept is a sham.
I agree with the first part of Mr. Mitchell's statement, there's no such thing as a totally non-partisan elected official.
But I don't agree that disagreements between city & county are proof of concept.
for perhaps a better perspective - let's zoom in a little closer....can you tell me that there is never discord between the majority republican alamogordo city officials and the democratic controlled state government. more specifically, can you say that and keep a straight face?
May officer Ontiveros rest in peace.
If there's a ****, I hope the devil is enjoying a slow roasted bbq of Dennis Armenta, the scum bag who shot officer Ontiveros multiple times.
From the Durango Herald;
My sincere condolences to the family, friends, and coworkers of Officer Ontiveros.
as i stated a couple days ago - government by people who couldn't find their fanny with a flashlight and a mirror.
Removing the list from the website doesn't mean the list has been deleted.
I would think that counties and sheriff's offices alike would want the list to remain public.
a vital step in preserving our constitution from those who would ignore all forms of checks & balances, and grant de facto authority to persons and groups whose intentions are dismantling our constitutional form of government for their own personal wealth and power.
So you recognize and agree with the reasons that president Trump had for transforming USDS in DOGE as a vital step in preserving our country.
i recognize that trump's bromance and monetary dependence on musk resulted in an entirely unconstitutional transfer of power to an unelected foreign-born billionaire - who personally profited huge sums of money by removing potential legal liabilities facing him.
is that what you're referencing?