Image
TULAROSA, N.M. — Sept. 8, 2026 — The Village of Tularosa Planning and Zoning Commission spent the bulk of its Tuesday meeting putting a proposed cell tower under the microscope, with one commissioner delivering a line of questioning so exhaustive that the applicant said he had never seen anything like it in hundreds of hearings.
Cell tower reapplication faces detailed scrutiny
The commission reviewed a reapplication from Flagship One LLC for a cell tower at 44 Sunset. Rather than voting on the project, the commission will issue findings of fact to the Village Council, which is responsible for scheduling and holding the required public hearing. Certified notices will be mailed to roughly 10 to 12 nearby property owners once a hearing date is set.
Company representative Sean Milks told commissioners the tower has been lowered from approximately 199 feet to 190 feet and repositioned so it now sits about 200 feet from all property lines — more than a one-to-one setback — meaning that even in a worst-case collapse it would not land on neighboring property. The tower is engineered to hold up to four wireless carriers, with Verizon as the anchor tenant at the top and space potentially available below 150 feet for municipal or public safety use at free or nominal rent.
Commissioner Bucky Johnson pressed Milks on a long list of technical and legal points, noting that because the village has no wireless ordinance yet, "I have to go question for question." Among the issues raised:
• Decommissioning: How the village would know if the tower "goes dark," and the terms of the removal bond. Milks said a submeter visible from outside the compound would show whether the site is drawing power, and that the removal obligation would be backed by a surety bond, with removal costs borne by his company, not the landowner. He also agreed to provide an annual written certification that the tower remains in active use.
• Engineering standards: Milks said the tower is designed to ANSI/TIA-222 Revision G and the 2025 New Mexico building code as a Risk Category 2 structure, with stamped manufacturer drawings to come. Johnson questioned whether adding municipal or emergency communications equipment would push the tower into Risk Category 3, with higher wind and ice factors; Milks said it typically would not, but that a certified New Mexico engineer would rerun the structural analysis before any new equipment is added.
• Outstanding studies: A geotechnical soils report is still in process, as is the NEPA and Section 106 State Historic Preservation Office review — a concern given Tularosa's historic district. Milks said he has hired the firm TriLeaf to complete that review and expects the roughly 140-page report within about 30 days.
• Site conditions: The site would be served by a dirt access road and visited only about once a month or every two months. Johnson pushed for dust and erosion control, suggesting hydroseeding around the foundation — a condition Milks said he had never been asked for before but would accept. There is no backup generator planned; carriers would rely on 8 to 10 hours of battery backup, and any future fuel tank would require village approval.
• Liability: Johnson sought assurance that the village would be indemnified against claims arising from the tower.
Because several reports remain outstanding, the commission agreed to make its recommendation conditional, with all required documents to be provided before a state building permit application can proceed through the New Mexico Construction Industries Division.
"That was thorough and you are doing your job," Chairwoman Hilton told Johnson. Milks agreed: "I've been in hundreds of these hearings and I don't think I've ever had someone go through it so thorough."
Two-lot split approved
In the meeting's only vote on an action item, the commission unanimously approved a two-lot split for Nancy Carr at Riata Road. Carr had withdrawn an earlier subdivision request in favor of the simpler split. Commissioners noted the property cannot be split again for five years, though they believed that restriction would not carry over to a future buyer.
Vacant building ordinance moves ahead
Commissioners spoke favorably of a proposed vacant building registration and maintenance ordinance now in the village's hands, along with a unified fee schedule, both part of a broader 2026 planning and zoning reform effort. The commission voiced frustration that attorney review of its proposed changes has dragged well past an expected 90-day window and asked staff to find out where the documents stand. Because the vacant building measure is a new ordinance and the fee schedule adjusts fees, both may require public hearings.
Johnson said he has already completed a property-by-property survey of problem parcels — covering the original 49 blocks and the area from 8th Street back to West Street — but noted that citations must go through the village's lone code enforcement officer. "I know you can't eat an elephant in one bite, but you can damn sure eat it a bite at a time," he said, suggesting the work be tackled section by section.
Commissioners also floated giving residents advance notice before code enforcement sweeps a street and reviving a spring cleanup with community dumpsters.
Abatement case stalls
On unfinished business, commissioners revisited a long-running nuisance abatement case involving a property connected to Carolina and Felipe Bermudez Marino. Officials said the property owner remains incarcerated and that the village has been waiting for the court to appoint a guardian ad litem before proceeding with cleanup. Some commissioners argued the village can legally act now and should, describing the property as a fire hazard. The matter will be placed on the next village meeting agenda.
The meeting was adjourned following a motion by Johnson, seconded by Commissioner Stephanie Dubois. Approval of the previous meeting's minutes was tabled.
Note: Names and spellings are based on an audio transcription and may be misspelled and are subject to correction. .