69° and Clear
RPNM Must Stop the Torrance County Reorganization Until It Follows Its Own Rules By Gary Person
RPNM’s proposed reorganization of the Republican Party of Torrance County should be suspended immediately.
The issue is not personalities. It is authority.
RPNM issued a July 20, 2026 call for a “Biennial Organizational County Convention” to elect a new County Central Committee, county officers, and SCC contingent.
But USR 3-2-1(C) places the Biennial Organizational County Convention in odd-numbered years. It is the convention used to elect precisely those positions.
2026 is not an odd-numbered year.
RPNM relies on USR 2-1-4(F)(7), but that rule is a limited remedy allowing the state chairman to call a regularly required organizational convention when a county fails or refuses to hold it. It does not expressly authorize RPNM to terminate existing terms, remove an entire county organization, or create an additional organizational election in an even-numbered year.
The SCC Did Not Adjudicate the Case
USR 2-1-2(D) gives the State Central Committee authority to act when it finds that a county caucus, convention, or election was improperly held or not held.
The Torrance County matter was placed on the SCC agenda, but the June 20 meeting did not reach quorum.
Therefore, the SCC did not make findings, approve removals, or authorize a complete county reorganization at that meeting.
A memorandum titled “Issue for the SCC to consider” is not an SCC ruling. It lists allegations involving resignations, residency, finances, records, and the closure of the county bank account, but it does not constitute a vote or adjudication.
The Executive Committee, Executive Director Leticia Muñoz, and Mark Van Dyke cannot substitute their judgment for an SCC decision unless they can produce a valid rule or recorded SCC delegation authorizing them to do so.
No Lawful Removal Process Has Been Shown
The USRs require specific procedures to remove county officers, County Central Committee members, and SCC contingent members. Those procedures generally require:
- A meeting properly called for removal;
- At least 51 percent of the full County Central Committee present in person;
- A two-thirds vote; and
- No proxy voting.
RPNM should produce the notices, quorum records, motions, vote totals, and minutes showing that these procedures were followed.
Until then, it should not act as though the entire Torrance County organization has already been lawfully removed.
Vacancies Do Not Erase the County Party
Even if several county offices are vacant, the rules provide methods for filling vacancies. They do not state that vacancies automatically dissolve the County Central Committee or cancel every existing SCC position.
USR 3-1-1 identifies the County Central Committee as the governing body of the Republican Party within the county.
RPNM must follow the vacancy and removal rules before replacing the entire organization.
RPNM Must Account for Torrance County’s Money and Property
RPNM’s own document states that the Torrance County bank account was closed on March 4, 2026.
Torrance County officials further allege that funds were removed by the former treasurer and that RPNM is retaining county money, records, or property.
Those allegations require an immediate written accounting stating:
- How much money was removed;
- Where it was transferred;
- Who authorized the transfer;
- Who currently controls it; and
- What county property or records RPNM possesses.
According to Leanne Tapia, Mark Van Dyke told her that the only way Torrance County could “get back to work” was to hold the proposed election.
Tapia also sent a written notice disputing RPNM’s factual basis for the reorganization, requesting cancellation of the meeting, and asking RPNM to identify the rule authorizing it. Van Dyke was copied on that correspondence.
If the county’s money, records, property, or ability to operate are being conditioned on participation in the disputed election, RPNM should immediately withdraw that condition.
County assets should not be used as leverage in an internal political dispute.
Leticia Muñoz Previously Recognized the County’s Records
In 2024, Leticia Muñoz asked whether the Torrance County Central Committee had voted to approve two SCC members. After receiving confirmation, she replied, “Awesome! Thanks Betty!”
RPNM’s later records also listed Torrance County officers and SCC members.
Those records may require review, but they undermine any suggestion that RPNM never recognized a functioning Torrance County organization.
The Rules Apply to RPNM Leadership Too
USR 1-5-2 states that the Uniform State Rules apply throughout the state and cannot be suspended at either the state or county level.
Judge Cindy M. Mercer expressed the same principle in the Amy Barela litigation:
“By voluntarily joining the party, Defendants agreed to be bound by its bylaws.”
That principle applies equally to the Executive Committee, Leticia Muñoz, Mark Van Dyke, and every other RPNM official.
What RPNM Should Do
RPNM should:
- Suspend the proposed Torrance County election.
- Return or fully account for all county funds, records, and property.
- Produce every alleged removal vote and SCC authorization.
- Present the evidence to a properly convened SCC meeting.
- Follow the vacancy, removal, notice, and convention rules exactly.
Until that occurs, RPNM has not demonstrated lawful authority to replace the entire Torrance County Republican organization.
Return the county’s property.
Stop obstructing its work.
Let the SCC decide the dispute.
Follow the rules.
