News and Analysis: Block Sponsored a 2026 Tax Increase on PNM's & Other Utilities Power. State Analysts Said Ratepayers Would Pay

ALAMOGORDO, N.M. —News and Analysis:  Kelly and James Metcalf raise five children on one income. On Sept. 17 they opened a PNM bill for $1,949.26. The same stretch last year cost about $506. Johnny Martin, 74, spent $12,000 on a new air conditioner and appliances and still got four straight bills over $400. 

Residents packed a town hall to tell regulators their bills had doubled or tripled. Regulators blame a meter-reader shortage and a two-stage rate increase.

Rep. John Block was in the room, and regulators praised him for coming. One of his neighbors did not. Tanya Burns told the crowd that Block is seldom around, that he has not responded to her on a number of issues, and that he has not been an advocate for affordable power. She called his appearance political theater weeks before an election. 

Those are her views. The record below is why its important to review rather or not that she has a point.

The bill

Block sponsored House Bill 113 in 2026. It would have taxed electricity generated from renewable resources at 3.75% of its wholesale value, starting Jan. 1, 2027.  A similar bill was filed in 2025. 

In 2025, 57% of PNM's generation came from wind and solar. 

What it would have cost

The Taxation and Revenue Department projected the tax would collect $27.45 million in its first half-year and between $56.5 million and $59.8 million in each of the next three years.  That is more than $200 million collected from renewable generators statewide in three and a half years.

The state's energy department said the tax would increase retail electricity prices for New Mexico ratepayers, that is those very locals already complaining about their PNM Bill last week to the PRC. It was estimated at roughly $3 per megawatt-hour in added cost during peak months of 2024. 

That did not cause the Metcalfs' bill to increase because Block's bill got no where. It was a charge in the wrong direction, every month, while bills are already climbing, sponsored by Block who claims he is there for you the concerned consumer.

The damage beyond the bill

The monthly charge is the smallest part of what the state's analysts warned about.

• Higher rates over time: The energy department said the tax would raise the cost of utility-scale solar and wind, which it called the most cost-effective generation, and could push utilities into imprudent investments and inflated rates. 
• The households least able to pay: About a quarter of New Mexico households, 196,612 of them, already spend 6% or more of their income on energy. The department said the tax would strain them further. 
• Jobs and investment: Tax and Revenue said the tax may discourage investment in new projects and could lead to job losses.  The energy department said higher costs for commercial and industrial customers could hinder efforts to attract employers. 
• A tax on top of a tax: Electricity is already subject to gross receipts tax. This would have been added to it.
• Lost state income: The State Land Office said the tax would likely cut renewable production on state trust lands and the lease payments that come with it. 
• A policy fighting itself: Tax and Revenue listed eight existing state tax incentives the new tax would conflict with, and said taxing an activity while subsidizing it is poor tax policy. 
• The cost of collecting it: About $3.5 million to implement.

None of the money would have come back to ratepayers. It was directed to the Severance Tax Permanent Fund.

If the goal was fairness, why raise a tax?

The rate in Block's bill, 3.75%, matches the state's severance tax rate on oil and gas. One state analysis described the bill as taxing renewable energy in a way similar to that tax.  The apparent argument is parity: if oil and gas pay, wind and solar should too.

There are two ways to make two tax rates equal. You can raise the lower one or cut the higher one. Block chose to raise one.

That is a notable choice for this legislator who claims to be a fiscal conservative.  On energy, he filed a tax increase, and it landed on the power source that supplies most of this city's electricity.

This outlet's editorial stance is limited government. A new excise tax, stacked on an existing one, with a $3.5 million bureaucracy to collect it, is not that.

In 2024 Block voted against raising royalty rates on new oil and gas wells on state land. In 2026 he co-sponsored a bill, as its third sponsor, to have combined-cycle natural gas counted as renewable.  So he has opposed higher charges on oil and gas, backed a friendlier label for gas, and proposed a new tax on wind and solar.

None of his 2026 energy bills advanced.  Voters should still ask why the tax was filed twice?

It's been reported in Santa Fe that he is in a race for his life. Per Tanya Burns comments and the analysis that followed it is clearly, why!

Grace Nagamine, the independent on the Nov. 3 ballot, has her specific position on PNM billing and utility costs, are found in videos one her campaign Facebook Page.

Block has declined to speak with Alamogordo Town News, was invited to an upcoming community forum and has not responded.  Written questions about this article, including why he chose a new tax instead of a cut, were sent on 10/5/26 and were not answered by publication. 

ATN will publish his response in full if he provides one.

Sources

1. Alamogordo Town News, "Alamogordo residents press regulators over soaring PNM bills," Sept. 30, 2026. https://2ndlifemediaalamogordo.town.news/g/alamogordo-nm/n/391892/alamogordo-residents-press-regulators-over-soaring-pnm-bills
2. House Bill 113 text, 2026 regular session. https://www.nmlegis.gov/Sessions/26%20Regular/bills/house/HB0113.html
3. Taxation and Revenue Department, Bill Analysis and Fiscal Impact Report, HB 113, Jan. 27, 2026. https://www.nmlegis.gov/Sessions/26%20Regular/AgencyAnalysis/HB0113_333.pdf
4. Energy, Minerals and Natural Resources Department, Agency Bill Analysis, HB 113, Jan. 24, 2026. https://www.nmlegis.gov/Sessions/26%20Regular/AgencyAnalysis/HB0113_521.pdf
5. TXNM Energy Inc., Form 10-K for fiscal 2025. https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1108426/000110842626000006/pnm-20251231.htm
6. State Land Office, Agency Bill Analysis, HB 113. https://www.nmlegis.gov/Sessions/26%20Regular/AgencyAnalysis/HB0113_539.pdf
7. House Bill 226 text, 2026 regular session. https://www.nmlegis.gov/Sessions/26%20Regular/bills/house/HB0226.html
8. LegiScan, Rep. John Block, 2026 sponsored measures and status. https://legiscan.com/NM/people/john-block/id/24684
9. Legislative Finance Committee, Fiscal Impact Report, HB 45 (2025). https://nmlegis.gov/Sessions/25%20Regular/firs/HB0045.PDF
10. BillTrack50 scorecard, Rep. John Block, HB 48 House final passage vote, Feb. 10, 2024. https://www.billtrack50.com/public/scorecard/legislator/YDrv-cP4XE2MF-QmdGxNfg/28488
11. Source New Mexico, "Oil and gas donations shifting away from Republicans in New Mexico," Feb. 19, 2024. https://sourcenm.com/?p=14268
12. Agency Bill Analysis, HB 113 (agency code 305). https://www.nmlegis.gov/Sessions/26%20Regular/AgencyAnalysis/HB0113_305.pdf
13. Legislative Finance Committee, Fiscal Impact Report, HB 226, Feb. 13, 2026. https://www.nmlegis.gov/Sessions/26%20Regular/firs/HB0226.PDF

More News from Alamogordo

• Early voting has begun in Otero County - Alamogordo Candidates are encouraging early voting locally.
• Joseph Vazquez Arrested for First Degree Child Abuse Child abuse arrest