TAOS — Taos County Commissioner Nick Jaramillo said he is pleased cases against seven Taos Gorge Bridge vendors were dismissed this week, though the underlying conflict has yet to be resolved.

State police cited the vendors Nov. 5 for "wrongful use of public property," charges Magistrate Judge Ernest Ortega dismissed Tuesday.

Last year, those selling arts and crafts near the bridge — a graceful steel span 650 feet above the Rio Grande that is a tourist attraction near Taos — became a focus of state police, the Taos County Sheriff's Department and the state Department of Transportation, all of which have said the activity on the U.S. 64 right of way violates the law.

"I'm really happy about the decision of the court," Jaramillo said. "There was never criminal trespass. That's a public place."

State police representatives couldn't be reached for comment on a possible appeal of the ruling to state District Court.

Defendant David Baca interpreted the magistrate's ruling to mean the bridge vendors aren't breaking the law despite "ongoing drama" with law enforcement.

"We're just out trying to make a living," he said. "We're not selling anything illegal, and we're not doing anything illegal."

Vendor Dawn Kohorst, who was not among those cited Nov. 5, attended Tuesday's hearing. "We saw it as a huge victory," she said. "We're very grateful that justice prevailed. ... Our livelihoods depend on it. We're really quite worn down by this whole ordeal."

According to state law, "wrongful use of public property" occurs when someone knowingly enters public property "without permission of the lawful custodian" when the property is not open to the public; remains on public property "after having been requested to leave by the lawful custodian who has determined the property is being used "contrary to its intended or customary use" or "may be damaged or destroyed by the use;" or "(deprive) the general public of the intended or customary use" of the property.

"The problem with the charges filed by the state police against (the vendors) is that none of the sections of this statute apply to the vendors," attorney Darryl Bouchard, who represented the vendors, argued in motions to dismiss.

Bouchard's motions state the area the vendors occupy is not used for other public purposes and is not a public gathering place; he also argued the vendors aid the general public with car problems and occasionally pool their funds to buy gravel and fill potholes on the shoulder.

"The state police are trying to force these vendors to stay away from the Taos Gorge Bridge because someone at DOT has taken a dislike to the tradition of vendors making a meager living by selling their wares at the Taos Gorge Bridge," a motion to dismiss states.

Ortega said he made his ruling "strictly on law." The ruling found the facts of the cases were not in dispute, the facts and the defendants' actions do not constitute the charged offenses, and the statute under which the defendants were charged is "without sufficiently definite standards to be enforceable," based on an earlier Court of Appeals ruling.

Kohorst said the hearing was "tense," especially since state police officers have told vendors to leave the bridge or be ticketed as recently as Feb. 13.

"They weren't giving up," she said. "They were continuing to throw us off."

Jaramillo said he has been in contact with newly installed DOT District 5 engineer Miguel Gabaldon Jr. about finding an agreeable solution that allows for vending at the Gorge Bridge.