Three emergency filings were submitted to the Twelfth Judicial District Court on June 11, 2026 — asking a judge to stop Monday’s special meeting, compel sworn testimony from key officials, and preserve all communications surrounding an effort to appoint a city manager without public deliberation, without public candidate disclosure, and without a single commissioner stating their reasons before the citizens they serve. A sitting commissioner has signed a sworn statement confirming the April 28 reversal of the unanimous 7-0 vote was preplanned. The Mayor has condemned the process. The courts will decide.

By Chris Edwards | Publisher, 2nd Life Media Alamogordo Town News

June 11, 2026 — Alamogordo, New Mexico

The Alamogordo City Commission’s four-commissioner bloc, now increasingly led by District 1 Commissioner Baxter Pattillo, has posted notice of a special meeting for Monday, June 15, 2026 at 10:00 AM at City Commission Chambers — eight days before a June 23 court hearing in which the Twelfth Judicial District Court is set to consider whether the Commission has violated the New Mexico Open Meetings Act across thirteen documented incidents.

The special meeting has one substantive purpose: to convene an executive closed session for ‘City Manager recruitment and City Manager hiring’ and then, under Item 3, take whatever action emerges from that session. No candidate is named. No proposed contract terms are disclosed. No vetting criteria are described. The city attorney position is listed as Vacant.

In response, 2nd Life Media Alamogordo Town News, journalist Chris Edwards, and Concerned Citizens of Alamogordo filed three emergency documents with the court this afternoon. The filings ask the court to intervene before Monday morning.

“Following Dr. Hernandez’s departure, I repeatedly asked my colleagues to either appoint an Acting City Manager or start an open recruitment process. At least 3 times, those recommendations were rejected. The lack of foresight has now created the very urgency I warned about.” — Mayor Sharon McDonald, Official City of Alamogordo Facebook Page, June 11, 2026

Three Documents Filed With the Court Today — Here Is What Each One Says

The first document — the Emergency Supplement to the pending TRO Motion — is the comprehensive factual and legal statement supporting the request for immediate relief. It incorporates the special meeting agenda, Mayor McDonald’s written public statement condemning the process, Acting City Manager Dr. Hernandez’s written email response to this outlet confirming the City ‘is unable to make any comments’ due to pending litigation, a sworn statement from a sitting commissioner (addressed in detail below), reports from four independent business and construction community sources who each separately described the Stockwell appointment as a ‘done deal’ confirmed by the four commissioners, and IPRA confirmation that no HR Department notification and no vetting procedures have been initiated for any candidate.

The supplement makes the legal argument that the special meeting is a direct attempt to moot this Court’s jurisdiction — scheduling a dispositive appointment vote eight days before a transparency hearing that was already on the calendar. It also documents the self-created nature of the emergency: Mayor McDonald confirmed publicly that she asked her colleagues to begin an open process at least three times, and those requests were rejected. The four-commissioner bloc’s own inaction created the vacancy pressure it is now invoking to justify a rushed, secret appointment.

The second document — the Proposed Temporary Restraining Order — is submitted for the court’s immediate consideration. If granted, it would restrain the Commission from convening the June 15 special meeting for the purpose of appointing a city manager, from appointing any city manager in any capacity — permanent, interim, or acting — before the June 23 hearing, and from taking any action designed to circumvent the court’s jurisdiction. It would also require immediate preservation of all commissioner communications regarding the special meeting, Robert Stockwell, and any city manager appointment occurring outside properly noticed public meetings, for in camera review within seven days. The proposed order further asks the court to issue an oral ruling from the bench at the conclusion of the June 23 morning hearing — effective immediately — to address whether the Commission may take action at the June 23 6:30 PM regularly scheduled commission meeting before a written order is entered.

The third document — the Motion to Compel Appearance and Testimony — asks the court to require Mayor Sharon McDonald, City Clerk Rachael Hughes, and Acting City Manager Dr. Hernandez to appear and testify under oath at an emergency hearing. Commissioner Robinson confirmed directly to this reporter on June 11 that Commissioner Pattillo called him outside a properly noticed public meeting to discuss placing this special meeting on the calendar — a rolling quorum violation under the New Mexico Open Meetings Act. City Clerk Hughes is the official who posted the meeting notice and received the scheduling directive; her testimony is needed to establish the exact timestamp of the posting and whether it arrived through proper channels or bypassed the Mayor. Mayor McDonald has firsthand knowledge of communications she received about the meeting’s scheduling. Dr. Hernandez has knowledge of whether any commissioner directed city staff outside established channels.

“It’s a done deal, Stockwell will be installed, the 4 have confirmed it, which is good for the builders.” — Business community source, one of four independent individuals reporting the same language to 2nd Life Media

A Sitting Commissioner Has Sworn Under Oath: The April 28 Vote Was Preplanned

Among the most significant documents filed today is a notarized sworn statement from Commissioner Warren Robinson — a sitting member of the Alamogordo City Commission who was physically present in the April 28, 2026 executive closed session that produced the 4-3 vote reversing the unanimous March 10 directive.

Commissioner Robinson swore, under penalty of perjury, to the following: He voted in favor of the 7-0 public directive to offer Dr. Hernandez a contract. He seconded the motion. He entered the April 28 closed session in good faith. During that session, it became apparent to him that the four-commissioner bloc had no intention of offering Dr. Hernandez a valid contract. He states directly: ‘It was obvious to me that the majority had preplanned the meeting and decided the outcome before the session began.’ He informed the group he would not be part of their ‘underhanded maneuverings’ and left the session before its conclusion. He left ‘disappointed in the lack of honesty and integrity of the actions’ he witnessed.

In paragraph 8 of his sworn statement, Robinson wrote: ‘In my judgment, the executive closed session of April 28, 2026 was not a genuine deliberation on the noticed topics. The outcome had been determined before the session began. The proceedings were inconsistent with the ethical conduct required of elected officials and with the public’s right to transparent government under the New Mexico Open Meetings Act.’

This is not allegation. It is not inference. It is sworn testimony from a sitting commissioner who was in the room. The statement was signed, witnessed, and notarized on June 11, 2026 in Otero County, New Mexico, and filed with the court the same day.

“It was obvious to me that the majority had preplanned the meeting and decided the outcome before the session began. I informed the group that I would not be a part of their underhanded maneuverings.” — Commissioner Warren Robinson, Notarized Sworn Statement, June 11, 2026

January 23 Reporting Validated — Again

Nearly five months ago, on January 23, 2026, this outlet reported that political insiders were quietly championing Robert Stockwell for the Alamogordo city manager position despite a documented history that includes a 5-1 commission vote to terminate him in 1997, a failed 2016 rehiring attempt approved on a controversial 4-3 vote, and a paid administrative leave and resignation from California City, California in 2019. That reporting was met with skepticism in some quarters.

Today, a special meeting has been posted to potentially install that same individual. Four independent members of the business community — each speaking separately without knowledge of the others — have each described the appointment as a ‘done deal’ confirmed by the four commissioners.

Commissioner Robinson has sworn under oath that the April 28 session was preplanned. Mayor McDonald has confirmed that open process recommendations were rejected three times. Dr. Hernandez’s EEOC complaint, now documented in court filings and confirmed in her own public statement, was not adversarial litigation — it was a negotiation vehicle she used because the traditional contract route was being deliberately stalled for seven weeks after the unanimous vote.

Our reporting from January was accurate. The pattern it documented has continued, uninterrupted, into June.

What the Agenda Does Not Say — and Why That Matters

The June 15 special meeting agenda is a two-page document. It contains a mission statement, a call to order, an invocation, an agenda approval, and three substantive items. Item 1 is the executive closed session. Item 2 is the reconvene and post-session statement. Item 3 is ‘Action, if any.’

It does not name a single candidate. It does not describe any process by which candidates were identified, screened, or compared. It does not reference any job posting, any recruitment firm, any candidate criteria, or any compensation range. It does not require any commissioner to state their position publicly before a vote is taken. It does not provide for any public comment period before any action is taken.

Under Item 3 — ‘Action, if any’ — the Commission could emerge from a closed session and immediately vote to appoint a city manager. At that moment, after months of closed sessions, taxpayers would learn for the first time who will manage their city, at what cost, and on what terms. They would have no opportunity to respond before the decision is made. That is what this lawsuit is about. That is what it has always been about.

Our Position — Precise and Unchanged

We want to be unambiguous about what we are seeking and what we are not.

We have no objection to Robert Stockwell being named interim or permanent city manager if he is the best qualified candidate from a pool of multiple candidates who have been publicly identified, publicly vetted, and publicly deliberated upon. We do not oppose the man. We oppose the process — or more precisely, the absence of one.

What we object to, specifically and without qualification, is this: a process conducted entirely behind closed doors, with no public identification of any candidate before a vote is taken, with no public disclosure of proposed contract terms before a vote is taken, with no opportunity for citizens to weigh in before a decision is finalized, and — most critically — with no commissioner required to stand before the public at the dais and state, on the record, their reasons for supporting a specific candidate and their justification for the decision they are about to make with public tax dollars.

That last point is not procedural. It is fundamental. An elected official’s obligation to the public they serve is not fulfilled by casting a vote in silence after a closed session. It is fulfilled by deliberating openly, by defending their reasoning, by accepting accountability for their judgment in the room where the people they represent can hear them. That is what a commission meeting is for. That is what the Open Meetings Act was written to require. And that is what has been systematically absent from every single city manager deliberation this Commission has conducted since February 2026.

If Robert Stockwell walks through a transparent, publicly deliberated process and emerges as the most qualified candidate, we will report that and respect the outcome. If he is installed through Monday’s special meeting without a single commissioner explaining publicly why they support him — over whom, based on what criteria, through what process — then the citizens of Alamogordo will have been denied something they are legally entitled to. And over 32 percent of those citizens live below the poverty line. They count their dimes. They deserve to know how their tax dollars are being committed and by whom.

Win or Lose — We Will Keep Reporting

The courts may rule in our favor before Monday. They may not. We filed these documents because we believe the law requires relief and because the citizens we serve deserve to have someone make the argument on their behalf. We may be wrong about the legal outcome. We are not wrong about the principle.

If the court grants the TRO, the Commission will be required to wait thirteen days — until after the June 23 hearing — before taking action. In those thirteen days, it could announce candidates publicly, post proposed terms, schedule public comment, and have commissioners stand at the dais and explain their thinking. None of that is unreasonable. All of it is required.

If the court denies the TRO and the Commission installs Stockwell on Monday, our January reporting will have been correct from start to finish. The entire arc — the 7-0 vote, the seven-week delay, the eleven closed sessions, the $485,000 settlement, the predetermined April 28 outcome sworn to by a sitting commissioner, and the special meeting timed to precede a transparency hearing — will have played out exactly as sources told us it would in January. The commissioners responsible will have chosen to govern in secret rather than in the open. The citizens will bear that cost.

We will continue to report regardless of Monday’s outcome. We will continue to protect whistleblowers under the legal protections guaranteed to press organizations. We will continue to use every available tool — including the judiciary — to ensure the public of Alamogordo has access to the information that affects their lives and their tax dollars. That is not a political position. It is a press organization’s obligation, and we take it seriously.

Documents filed June 11, 2026 in Case No. D-1215-CV-2026-00514, Twelfth Judicial District Court, Otero County, New Mexico: (1) Petitioners’ Second Emergency Supplement to Ex Parte Motion for Temporary Restraining Order; (2) Proposed Order Granting Emergency Temporary Restraining Order; (3) Emergency Motion for Order Compelling Appearance and Testimony of Mayor Sharon McDonald, City Clerk Rachael Hughes, and Acting City Manager Dr. Stephanie J. Hernandez, and for IPRA Preservation Order. All documents available for public review at the Otero County District Court, 1000 New York Ave., Alamogordo, NM.

Special Meeting: June 15, 2026, 10:00 AM, Donald E. Carroll City Commission Chambers, 1376 E. Ninth Street, Alamogordo, NM. All members of the public are entitled to attend. Scheduled Hearing: June 23, 2026, 8:00 AM, remote via Zoom.

Related coverage: ‘Alamogordo Insiders Accelerate Push for Controversial Ex-City Manager Robert Stockwell as Court Hearing Looms’ (June 11, 2026) and ‘Alamogordo Insiders Reportedly Champion Former City Manager Robert Stockwell — Despite Questionable History — for Open Position’ (January 23, 2026). Both available at 2ndlifemediaalamogordo.town.news.

Tips, documents, and whistleblower communications may be directed to cedwards121788@icloud.com or 575-520-2785. Whistleblower protections apply under New Mexico law. Chris Edwards is the lead journalist of 2nd Life Media Alamogordo Town News and a named petitioner in Case No. D-1215-CV-2026-00514.

More News from Alamogordo

• Alamogordo Insiders Accelerate Push for Controversial Ex-City Manager Robert Stockwell as Court Hearing Loom s
• NM Supreme Court Denies Emergency Appeal, Upholds Ouster of Republican Party Chair Amy Barela Barela faces another loss in court…