When Eddie and Eva Bloor purchased their Cowlitz County, Wash., home in 2004, they had no idea the house had been used for methamphetamine production. Neither the sellers nor the real estate brokers disclosed to the Bloors that toxic chemicals had been found at the residence.

The newly minted homeowners were shocked when the local health department caught wind that the property was contaminated and deemed it unfit for occupancy. The Bloors were ordered to immediately vacate the residence and not remove any of their personal belongings due to the risk of cross contamination. They left with only the clothes on their backs and had to spend tens of thousands of dollars to relocate and replace virtually everything they owned.

Due the high cost of moving and replacement of clothing, furniture, electronics, appliances, toothbrushes and who knows what else, the property went into foreclosure. Shortly thereafter, the Bloors filed suit against the agents and former owners. Almost four years passed before the case finally made its way through the judicial process. In the end, the displaced homeowners were compensated for their losses and awarded punitive damages.

While the sellers and brokers were obligated to disclose the existence of the meth lab prior to the sale, the State of Washington had no law on the books that required law enforcement to disclose the existence of toxic chemicals to any persons or agencies. The same was true in New Mexico until Jan. 1, 2008, when a new law took effect requiring law enforcement agencies that bust meth labs to immediately post a warning on the property and notify the owners and/or renters that toxic chemicals were found on the premises.

The law also makes it mandatory for law enforcement agencies to notify the New Mexico Environmental Department’s (NMED’s) Hazardous Waste Bureau, which posts the addresses of the contaminated properties on its website https://www.env.nm.gov/hazardous-waste/clandestine-drug-laboratories/ until they’ve been cleaned up to the standards outlined in the law. Addresses of properties that were the subject of federal enforcement actions are also listed on the site.

Until full remediation of the problem has been completed and approved by NMED, owners cannot sell, rent or otherwise occupy the property. When the property is ready for the open market, owners are required to disclose in writing to buyers or renters that a meth lab was found on the premises and that full remediation was completed in accordance with the law. Violation of the statute is a criminal misdemeanor and can also result in a civil fine of up to $10,000 per day.

This is not the only housing-related disclosure law on the books. New Mexico law (NMSA 1978 § 47-13-2) says your real estate broker and/or the seller of the home you’re considering purchasing or leasing “shall not be liable for failure to disclose and shall not have a duty to disclose to any person who buys or leases a property that the property was the site of a natural death, a homicide, suicide, assault or sexual assault; that the home was occupied by a person with AIDS or who is HIV positive or that a crime punishable as a felony was committed on the premises”. Such properties are often referred to as “stigmatized”.

Federal law goes even further, making it a crime to disclose that a current or former occupant of a home, mobile home or apartment has or had AIDS or was or is HIV positive.

What about ghosts, you ask? According to a 2013 Harris Poll, 42 percent of us believe that such disembodied spirits exist. Unfortunately, we’ll probably never know if any of them inhabit a particular residence unless they themselves decide to tell us.

The State of New Mexico has additional resources that prospective homeowners and tenants can tap to evaluate a property or neighborhood. Soon-to-be occupants can check the New Mexico Sex Offender Registry athttps://sheriffalerts.com/cap_office_disclaimer.php?office=55290&fwd=aHR0cDovL2NvbW11bml0eW5vdGlmaWNhdGlvbi5jb20vY2FwX21haW4ucGhwP29mZmljZT01NTI5MA==  to determine if any registered offenders live in the area.

Think a neighbor may be a felon or has been arrested in the past? Homebuyers and renters can determine if such persons live nearby by looking up names of interest on the state’s Judiciary and Court website athttps://caselookup.nmcourts.gov/caselookup/.

Another method of assessing the character of a neighborhood or street is do what the cops do on occasion – stake it out. Drive through the area or park for a while on the street where you intend to reside. Evenings and weekends provide the best opportunity to get a sense of the amount of vehicular traffic, number of toddlers, teenagers, and general personality of the area. It’s also a good idea to speak with a few of the neighbors, some of whom will undoubtedly gossip ‘til your ears begin to melt. Want to dig a bit deeper? Log into the Las Cruces Police Department’s Community Crime Map https://communitycrimemap.com/.

ROSWELL, N.M. – Roswell police are investigating a double homicide after two people were found shot to death inside a car near Alice Reischman Smith Park.

The Roswell Police Department said officers responded Sunday night to reports of shots fired near G Street and East Wells Street.

Police said they found 19-year-old Joseph Romero and 20-year-old Robbie Adams dead inside a Chrysler 300 parked next to the park.

The department said the car had been hit by multiple gunshots and both men had multiple gunshot wounds.

Anyone with information is asked to call the Roswell Police Department at 575-624-6770.

This story originally appeared in New Mexico In Depth at nmindepth.com.

Two political groups spending heavily in New Mexico’s primary elections have found a way to keep their donors hidden. Whether the arrangements comply with state law is unclear.

The setup is an example of what political spending watchdogs call “gray money,” where a nonprofit gives money to a political committee, or PAC. Under state law, the PAC has to disclose the nonprofit as the source of money it’s using in its efforts to influence elections.

The term “gray money” refers to political spending that is only partly transparent — visible up to the nonprofit, but not beyond it to the original donors. The people who gave money to the nonprofit stay hidden from public view.

The twist here is that the two PACs and their nonprofit donors have reported enough information to raise questions about whether the PACs themselves formed the nonprofits in order to keep their donors hidden.

One PAC that was created on March 3, Accountable New Mexico, has reported receiving $650,000 from a nonprofit called Stand for New Mexico, which incorporated March 2. The nonprofit was the sole donor reported in its second primary disclosure. The political group and the nonprofit share a treasurer, Alyssa Brooks, and a Washington D.C. address.

Brooks did not return a phone call or respond to an email from New Mexico In Depth asking about the nonprofit’s donors.

Accountable New Mexico has spent heavily on negative television ads targeting former Interior Secretary Deb Haaland, who is running against Bernalillo County District Attorney Sam Bregman for the Democratic nomination for governor.

Bregman spokesperson Joanie Griffin said in an email that the campaign has “no idea” who funds the nonprofit.

“The campaign has no relationship nor communication with Accountable New Mexico,” she wrote.

Another political group, New Chapter New Mexico, is similarly relying on one nonprofit for its funds. Its entire $262,000 came from a nonprofit that shares its exact name, New Chapter New Mexico, and its mailing address.

New Chapter’s treasurer, Greg Gallegos, ran as a Republican against Democratic Rep. Marian Matthews in 2024, a race he lost. In 2026, the group’s disclosure reports note spending on advertising to support Matthews and seven other Democrats in legislative races, as well as a payment of almost $7,000 to Gallegos’s firm, KGH Strategies, for “compliance consulting.”

Gallegos did not respond to a phone call or email from New Mexico In Depth. He has also created another PAC called Back Forty New Mexico, listing himself as treasurer. Back Forty has not yet filed disclosure reports. Videos supporting seven of the eight candidates that New Chapter is supporting can be seen on youtube channels of Back Forty and New Chapter.

These arrangements have raised questions about whether the nonprofits were created by the PACs they are funding, given their shared officers, addresses and, in one case, the same name. State law prohibits making contributions “with an intent to conceal the names of persons who are the true source of funds used to make independent expenditures.”

Whether the nonprofits themselves are required to disclose their donors depends on how they are classified under state campaign finance law.

Nonprofits whose primary purpose is raising or spending money to influence elections can qualify as political committees, a designation that triggers stricter donor disclosure requirements.

But if political activity is not a nonprofit’s primary purpose, the organization is required to disclose only the donors who funded political advertising it paid for directly, rather than all donors to the organization. And if a nonprofit gives money to a PAC instead of paying for ads itself, as in these two cases, it is not required to file reports identifying its donors at all.

It’s unclear if these two nonprofit’s primary purpose is political activity. The groups’ IRS Form 990 tax filings may provide insight into that question because the filings show an organization’s overall revenue and spending, allowing the public to compare those figures with campaign finance reports and determine whether most of the groups’ money was spent on politics. But those records may not become public for more than a year — well after the June 2 primary election.