New Mexico HOA Pet Restrictions

New Mexico pet restrictions at a glance

Section 1: Overview — How pet restrictions work in New Mexico

New Mexico has no statute regulating pets in homeowners associations. Pet restrictions come from the recorded declaration or CC&Rs and from rules an association board adopts, and the main legal limit on those restrictions is fair housing law's assistance-animal reasonable-accommodation requirement.¹ The state uses a two-statute framework: condominiums are governed by the New Mexico Condominium Act, NMSA 1978, §§ 47-7A-1 to 47-7D-20, the state's version of the 1980 Uniform Condominium Act, while planned-community associations are subject to the Homeowner Association Act, NMSA 1978, §§ 47-16-1 to 47-16-18, enacted in 2013, a disclosure-and-governance statute rather than a comprehensive common-interest code.^2,3

New Mexico has enacted no statutory right to keep a pet that overrides a no-pet declaration, in contrast to California, where Civil Code § 4715(a) provides that "[n]o governing documents shall prohibit the owner of a separate interest within a common interest development from keeping at least one pet within the common interest development, subject to reasonable rules and regulations of the association," and it has not adopted the Uniform Common Interest Ownership Act.³ The dominant constraint on any pet rule is fair housing law: the federal Fair Housing Act and the New Mexico Human Rights Act require reasonable accommodations for assistance animals, with complaints administered by the New Mexico Human Rights Bureau and HUD.⁴ Nationally, New Mexico sits in the large group of states that pair a Uniform Condominium Act-based condominium statute with a limited homeowner association statute, where the federal assistance-animal requirement is the floor common to every state.¹ What follows sets out the legal framework, the operational rules, recent activity, and New Mexico's national position.

Section 2: The legal framework for pet restrictions

2A. The two-statute framework and the source of pet authority

Pet restrictions in New Mexico carry no statutory basis. The recorded declaration or CC&Rs impose them, along with rules the board adopts under the authority those documents grant.¹ The source of rule-making authority depends on community type. In a condominium, the Condominium Act, NMSA 1978, §§ 47-7A-1 to 47-7D-20, supplies the governing framework for creation, management, and enforcement, and pet rules appear in the declaration and bylaws adopted under it.² In a planned community, the recorded CC&Rs are the substantive source of any pet rule, and the Homeowner Association Act, NMSA 1978, §§ 47-16-1 to 47-16-18, governs disclosure, records access, budgets, and certain governance matters.³ By its own terms, the Homeowner Association Act does not apply to a condominium governed by the Condominium Act.⁵

The Homeowner Association Act governs disclosure and process, not the substance of pet rules, and New Mexico has not adopted the Uniform Common Interest Ownership Act.³ Most associations are also incorporated under the New Mexico Nonprofit Corporation Act, NMSA 1978, § 53-8-1 et seq., which supplies corporate formalities such as board authority, meetings, and voting.⁶ New Mexico has no statutory pet-keeping right, and the governing instrument is the declaration, not a master deed.³

For any pet question, the order of precedence runs: federal and state fair housing law, mandatory, first; then the mandatory provisions of the Condominium Act or Homeowner Association Act; then the declaration or CC&Rs; then the bylaws; then board rules. The rule that actually governs a given community is the declaration or CC&Rs, read against the statutory framework and the fair housing floor. New Mexico courts construe ambiguous restrictive covenants in favor of the free use of property, as the Court of Appeals did in reading a "Household Pets" covenant to allow backyard hens kept as pets, holding that "the restrictive covenant does not disallow the owners from keeping hens that are recognized as household pets."⁷

2B. Federal fair housing constraints: assistance animals

The Fair Housing Act, 42 U.S.C. § 3601 et seq., bars disability discrimination in housing and makes it unlawful to refuse a reasonable accommodation in rules, policies, practices, or services when the accommodation may be necessary to give a person with a disability an equal opportunity to use and enjoy a dwelling, under 42 U.S.C. § 3604(f)(3)(B).⁸ Homeowners associations and condominium associations are covered housing providers.⁹ Permitting an assistance animal despite a no-pet policy or a pet restriction counts as a reasonable accommodation, and because assistance animals are not pets, no-pet bans, breed limits, size and weight limits, number limits, and pet fees and deposits simply do not reach a qualifying assistance animal.⁹ The Fair Housing Act's disability-accommodation standard runs broader than the Americans with Disabilities Act's public-accommodations service-animal rule: it has long reached animals that perform tasks and animals that provide disability-related support.⁹

HUD's operative guidance on this analysis had been the January 28, 2020 notice, FHEO-2020-01. That posture changed materially in 2025 and 2026. HUD withdrew FHEO-2020-01, along with the 2013 assistance-animal notice, effective September 17, 2025, a withdrawal confirmed in a Federal Register notice published April 6, 2026.¹⁰ On May 22, 2026, HUD's Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity, in a memorandum authored by Assistant Secretary Craig W. Trainor that "permanently rescind[ed] FHEO's 2020 notice regarding assistance animals," provided that "FHEO will find reasonable cause and recommend charges only for [animal-related] cases involving animals trained to provide disability-related assistance." Requests for animals "trained to perform specific disability-related services are presumptively reasonable," whereas "requests to waive pet policies for untrained ESAs are not," and FHEO "no longer expects housing providers to categorically extend accommodations for trained assistance animals to untrained ESAs."¹¹ The memorandum cited President Trump's February 2025 Executive Order 14219, directing agencies to de-prioritize enforcement "based on anything other than the best reading of a statute," and the July 2025 decision in Henderson v. Five Properties LLC, which found the 2020 guidance unpersuasive. It does not change the statute, preserves the right to file a private lawsuit within two years, and leaves state and local law unaffected.¹¹

For a disability or disability-related need that is not obvious, an association may request reliable documentation, such as a statement from a health-care provider. It may not require registration, certification, or licensing of the animal, a specific breed, or detailed medical records, and online "ESA registration" products satisfy no legal standard.¹¹ Under the reasonable-accommodation framework retained in the HUD and Department of Justice Joint Statement, an association may deny a specific accommodation only on an individualized finding that it would impose an undue financial and administrative burden, fundamentally alter operations, or that the specific animal poses a direct threat or would cause substantial physical damage no other accommodation could reduce; denial cannot rest on breed, size, or generalized fear, and the owner remains responsible for the animal's conduct and any damage.¹² The ADA generally governs public accommodations and government programs, not an association's internal residential operations, though it can reach association facilities open to the public, such as a clubhouse rented to non-residents.⁹

2C. New Mexico law overlay

The New Mexico Human Rights Act, NMSA 1978, §§ 28-1-1 to 28-1-15, bars housing discrimination based on physical or mental disability where the disability is unrelated to the person's ability to acquire, rent, or maintain the housing, under § 28-1-7(G), and it backs the same disability-accommodation analysis that applies under the Fair Housing Act.¹³ It is a standard state anti-discrimination statute operating alongside the federal law, enforced through the New Mexico Human Rights Bureau within the Department of Workforce Solutions, with the Human Rights Commission and the district courts having jurisdiction over housing claims; the Act does not separately define assistance animals or emotional-support animals.¹⁴

New Mexico has enacted a public-accommodations service-animal statute, the Service Animal Act, NMSA 1978, §§ 28-11-1 to 28-11-6, and a service-animal misrepresentation provision at § 28-11-6, making it a misdemeanor to knowingly present an animal as a qualified service animal when it is not.¹⁵ That Act governs access to public places and expressly excludes emotional-support, comfort, and therapy animals from the definition of a qualified service animal; it stands apart from the housing accommodation analysis and does not control an HOA dwelling request.¹⁵

On dog and breed law, New Mexico regulates dogs substantially at the local level: counties and municipalities provide for control of dogs by ordinance, under NMSA 1978, § 77-1-12.¹⁶ The state does not have a comprehensive statewide dangerous-dog classification scheme beyond the Dangerous Dog Act, NMSA 1978, §§ 77-1A-1 to 77-1A-6, which addresses registration and handling of dogs adjudicated dangerous or potentially dangerous and requires, for criminal liability, a showing that the owner knew of the dog's propensity to inflict serious injury.¹⁷ Owner liability is largely common-law, resting on a known dangerous propensity rather than a strict-liability dog-bite statute.¹⁷ New Mexico does not broadly preempt municipal breed-specific regulation, and some localities maintain dangerous-dog or breed ordinances — governmental rules, distinct from a private association's CC&R-based limits.¹⁶

Section 3: Operational rules and compliance obligations

A. Enforceable pet restrictions (what holds up)

When properly adopted in the declaration or CC&Rs, restrictions on the number, size, weight, and type of animals, along with leash and waste rules in common areas, generally hold up, subject to the limit that they be reasonable and clearly stated.¹ New Mexico courts construe ambiguous covenants against the restriction and in favor of free use, so vague pet language may not be enforceable as an association intends.⁷ Every such restriction yields to the assistance-animal accommodation requirement for a qualifying animal.⁹

B. Handling an assistance-animal request

An association may ask whether the animal is needed because of a disability and, for a non-obvious disability or need, may request reliable documentation of the disability and the disability-related need; it may not demand certification, registration, a specific breed, or detailed medical records, and it should respond in a timely, good-faith, interactive manner.¹¹ A denial is defensible only on an individualized finding of undue burden, fundamental alteration, or a direct threat or substantial property damage posed by the specific animal that no other accommodation could reduce.¹² Since HUD's May 22, 2026 memorandum, requests for trained assistance animals remain presumptively reasonable, while HUD will not pursue enforcement for the denial of an untrained emotional-support animal; boards should still evaluate each request individually and account for the New Mexico Human Rights Act and private-suit exposure.¹¹

C. Pet fees, deposits, and insurance

An association may charge pet fees or deposits for ordinary pets if the declaration or CC&Rs authorize them.¹ It may not charge a pet deposit, pet fee, or extra insurance premium for a qualifying assistance animal, though the owner remains liable for any damage the animal causes.¹² Under HUD's 2026 enforcement posture, an untrained emotional-support animal may be treated under ordinary pet rules for HUD-enforcement purposes, but state law and private litigation may still reach fee decisions, so consistent, documented treatment is advisable.¹¹

D. Enforcement and disclosure

Pet violations are privately enforced. In a condominium, the board enforces the declaration and bylaws under the Condominium Act; in a planned community, the board enforces the CC&Rs and, under Homeowner Association Act § 47-16-18, may levy reasonable fines after written notice and an opportunity to dispute the alleged violation.¹⁸ There is no dedicated state HOA agency; disputes proceed through the courts.¹⁹ The Homeowner Association Act's disclosure and records-access requirements make governing documents and rules available to members and to prospective buyers, who must receive a disclosure certificate before purchase, which is how pet restrictions are surfaced at resale.²⁰

Section 4: Recent legislative and judicial activity

New Mexico holds a 60-day legislative session in odd-numbered years and a 30-day session in even-numbered years, so most substantive activity falls in odd years. The 2025 session produced one enacted measure bearing on associations, and no New Mexico bill or appellate ruling on pet restrictions or assistance animals turned up in the relevant window; the federal assistance-animal framework controls in their absence.

A. Recent bills

B. Recent appellate rulings

No New Mexico Court of Appeals or New Mexico Supreme Court decision from July 2023 to July 2026 addresses HOA or condominium pet restrictions or assistance-animal accommodation. The leading New Mexico appellate authority on pet covenants remains Eldorado Community Improvement Association, Inc. v. Billings, 2016-NMCA-057, 374 P.3d 737, which construed an ambiguous "Household Pets" covenant in favor of free use — but it falls outside the 36-month window.⁷ In the absence of a recent state ruling, the federal Fair Housing Act analysis, as reshaped by HUD's 2025 and 2026 actions, controls assistance-animal questions.¹¹

C. Active legislative debates

Homeowner association oversight remains a recurring subject in Santa Fe, with proposals in recent sessions to add lot-owner remedies and to limit disclosure or transfer fees, but no pending measure specific to pet rules, assistance animals, or dog law turned up as of July 2026.²²

Section 5: National positioning and related coverage

States fall into two groups on HOA pets: a small group with a statutory pet-keeping right, of which California's Civil Code § 4715 is the clearest example, and the large majority, New Mexico included, where pet authority is based on the declaration or CC&Rs with no pet statute.³ Every state shares the same federal floor — the Fair Housing Act's assistance-animal requirement — though the scope of that floor narrowed in 2025 and 2026 as HUD withdrew its assistance-animal guidance and realigned enforcement toward trained animals.¹¹ For multi-state operators, the practical point is that in New Mexico, the binding pet rules come from the declaration, the Homeowner Association Act adds disclosure and governance requirements, and the federal assistance-animal analysis applies uniformly.¹ New Mexico's distinctive features are a Uniform Condominium Act-based condominium act paired with a 2013 homeowner association disclosure-and-governance act, and a standard intermediate Court of Appeals sitting below the Supreme Court.²

HOA Weekly's New Mexico Pet Restrictions coverage updates quarterly as the Legislature and the courts act. The federal Fair Housing Act's assistance-animal framework applies to New Mexico associations regardless of the state framework.

Footnotes

1. Homeowners Protection Bureau, New Mexico HOA Laws, Regulations & Resources (declaration/CC&Rs as source of authority; Fair Housing Act overlay) ↩
2. New Mexico Law Library, Uniform Legislation Resource Guide (Condominium Act, NMSA 1978, §§ 47-7A-1 to 47-7D-20, is New Mexico's Uniform Condominium Act) ↩
3. Homeowner Association Act, Laws 2013, ch. 122 (NMSA 1978, §§ 47-16-1 et seq.; disclosure-and-governance statute) ↩
4. 9.1.1 NMAC, New Mexico Human Rights Bureau procedures ↩
5. NMSA 1978, § 47-16-15 (Homeowner Association Act does not apply to a condominium governed by the Condominium Act) ↩
6. RunHOA, New Mexico State Laws (Nonprofit Corporation Act, Ch. 53, Art. 8; no CAM-specific license) ↩
7. Eldorado Community Improvement Association, Inc. v. Billings, 2016-NMCA-057, 374 P.3d 737 (Court of Appeals, decided March 28, 2016) ↩
8. 42 U.S.C. ch. 45, Fair Housing (reasonable accommodation, § 3604(f)(3)(B); direct threat, § 3604(f)(9)) ↩
9. Animal Legal & Historical Center, FAQs on Emotional Support Animals (HOAs are covered providers; assistance animals are not pets; ADA vs. FHA distinction) ↩
10. Federal Register, Notification of Withdrawal of FHEO Guidance Documents (FR-6571-N-01; withdrawal of FHEO-2020-01 and FHEO-2013-01 effective September 17, 2025) ↩
11. Ward and Smith, P.A., analysis of HUD's May 22, 2026 FHEO enforcement memorandum (Assistant Secretary Craig W. Trainor) on animal-related accommodations ↩
12. HUD and DOJ Joint Statement on Reasonable Accommodations Under the Fair Housing Act (individualized direct-threat and undue-burden analysis) ↩
13. NMSA 1978, § 28-1-7 (unlawful discriminatory practice, including housing disability discrimination at subsection G) ↩
14. Nolo, New Mexico Laws on Service Dogs and Emotional Support Animals (Human Rights Act does not mention service animals; FHA governs housing assistance animals) ↩
15. Service Animal Act, NMSA 1978, §§ 28-11-1 to 28-11-6 (misrepresentation at § 28-11-6; ESAs excluded from qualified service animal) ↩
16. New Mexico consolidated dog laws (local control by ordinance, NMSA 1978, § 77-1-12; local breed regulation permitted) ↩
17. Dangerous Dog Act, NMSA 1978, § 77-1A-6 (criminal liability requires showing the owner knew of the dog's propensity to inflict serious injury) ↩
18. NMSA 1978, § 47-16-18 (enforcement of covenants; reasonable fines after written notice and opportunity to dispute) ↩
19. Community Associations Institute, New Mexico Legislative Resources (no dedicated state HOA oversight agency; enforcement through the courts) ↩
20. NMSA 1978, §§ 47-16-5, 47-16-11 and 47-16-12 (record disclosure to members and disclosure certificate to purchasers) ↩
21. New Mexico Senate Bill 72 (2025), Nonprofit Condominium Association Remote Business (signed as Chapter 62) ↩
22. New Mexico Senate Bill 239 (2025), Homeowner Association Lot Owner Remedy (amending § 47-16-18; did not pass) ↩