In April 2023 and then again in September 2024, two separate Albuquerque City Council’s took to task APD Director of Communications Gilbert Gallegos for using APD’s “X ” Account, formerly known as TWITTER, to engage in highly personal attacks against private citizens all because they are very  vocal critics of APD. Twice the Albuquerque City Council  condemned “mean tweets” posted by Gallegos on official APD social accounts in response to private citizen complaints.  The city council demanded he cease an desists with  his “mean tweets”.

Using official APD social media accounts, Gallegos  maligned  former APD Chief Michael Geier, the immediate predecessor of APD Chief Harold Medina,  private attorney Tom Grover, who is a retired APD cop and who has sued APD and represents police officers in personnel matters, Darren White, former Bernalillo County Sherriff and former Public Safety Cabinet Secretary who has commented to the press about inappropriate APD conduct. Gallegos has  accused  prominent businessman and commercial property owner Doug Peterson of being a whiner and complainer and a racist because of his complaints about APD mishandling of the homeless.  The Citizens Police Oversight Agency has sustained a complaint against Gallegos finding misconduct with his use of social media accounts.

Notwithstanding the City Council’s objections to the conduct of Gilbert Gallegos,   APD Police Chief Harold Medina and Mayor Tim Keller refused to put a stop to the “mean tweets” by Gallegos.  Mayor Tim Keller and APD Chief Harold Medina proclaimed the “mean tweets” are  legitimate push back against APD critics. They both expressed no problem with “mean tweets” even acknowledging the tweets violate city policy which states when replying to posts on city accounts, city employees are supposed to, “keep it professional and avoid confrontation.”

APD Chief Harold Medina said this:

“These are not random people. We are pushing back against the same individuals who use their positions to pursue a political agenda against APD. … .”

When asked if the tweets followed city policy, Medina said “some of them may not, but some of them bluntly point out differences. And I’m okay with that.” 

Mayor Keller for his part said he and his office “supports the department in their efforts to push back against misinformation on social media.”

RESOLUTION CALLING FOR NEW  SOCIAL MEDIA POLICY MANDATING GUIDELINES AND ACCOUNTABILITY

On September 13, 2024, in direct response to the conduct of APD Director of Communications and Spokesman Gilbert Gallegos,  District 9 City Councilor Renée Grout introduced resolution R-24-89 . The resolution is aimed at improving the use of official City social media accounts. The resolution directs the Keller Administration to develop a comprehensive social media policy that outlines clear guidelines for appropriate use, accountability, and consequences for misuse.

The resolution emphasizes the role of City government is to promote the public’s health, safety and growth. It directs the City Administration to create, implement, and enforce a comprehensive social media policy to be applied to all City public media accounts that includes:

• Behavioral expectations: Establishing clear guidelines for respectful and professional online conduct.
• Content specifications: Defining appropriate and inappropriate content for City social media accounts.
• Response guidelines: Providing guidance on how to respond to comments and messages, including those that may be negative or inflammatory.
• Monitoring and review: Implementing a system for regularly monitoring and reviewing social media accounts for compliance.
• Disciplinary actions: Outlining consequences for misuse of official social media accounts.

The resolution also requires the City Administration to make the social media policy easily accessible to the public and to establish a mechanism for reporting potential violations.

The link to the quoted source material on the Grout sponsored city council resolution is here:

https://www.cabq.gov/council/find-your-councilor/district-9/news/city-councilor-renee-grout-introduces-resolution-to-improve-social-media-accountability

City Councilor Renee Grout said that personal attacks against regular citizens by city government employees are unacceptable. Grout said this:

“[Gallegos’ conduct] disturbed me greatly. It also disturbed many others, it’s embarrassing to have this kind of behavior. We can’t respond that way. …  As City officials, we are in the customer service business. … . Anything posted on a City social media account should be true, helpful, and respectful. … We just need to have accountability and remember what we’re here for.  …  [W]e need to do a better job of responding to our customers and which are our constituents and help them out better”

I’m disappointed that it happened again and so we need lessons learned. We’re not going to do this again. So, we need to set expectations for the for the behavior. It needs to be outlined how, what is appropriate content to be posted? We need to set guidelines for, what is posted. We need to have guidelines for the appropriateness to, to respond to the negative or inaccurate posts, inflammatory comments and there needs to be discipline defined, discipline when things go wrong. There does need to be a disciplinary procedure.

We’re supposed to be following the law. We do have to take the higher road. What I say as a representative of the city of Albuquerque is very important. So, I need to be mindful of what I’m saying. We need to remember we’re representing the city of Albuquerque. We also would like to have social media policy put on the city’s transparency web page. So, we can all see it and we can all follow it.”

When asked about what’s the difference between her resolution and the new social media proposal and the city’s current social media policy and what she hoped to achieve with the new policy, Grout said this:

“The one that is in place doesn’t have the appropriateness. It doesn’t mention anything about the appropriateness of posts and what should be posted. It’s important that we remember that our personal opinions need to be left out. We need to remember that we’re representing the city of Albuquerque.

So, our personal opinions, personal attacks, those things are never OK. … Setting guidelines for employees is an administrative function. That’s why the Resolution directs the Administration to develop the social media policy but identifies things that the policy should include. 

There needs to be a disciplinary procedure and what is appropriate or what is not appropriate, and then what are the consequences for the inappropriate behavior.”

It was in April 2023 that then City Council President Pat Davis, who did not seek another term and is no longer on city council, vowed to work personally to defund Gilbert Gallegos position and to  prohibit APD from using the social media account unless the conduct stopped.

Grout stated that she is not seeking for the City Council to defund the position. Grout said this:

“That is not something that we can actually do. We can’t personally defund something. We can’t really defund the position because then there is a separation of powers. We can create a policy. The administration spends the money.”

THE KELLER ADMINISTRASTION RESPONDS

Ava Montoya, spokesperson for the mayor’s office, issued a very dismissive  statement regarding Councilor Grout’s new social media accountability resolution:

“The City already has a social media policy that’s posted online, and we welcome anyone to take a look at that.”

In a previous response to the controversy, Montoya said this”

“We’re focused on big issues, we don’t micromanage twitter banter. We support the department and their ability to push back on misinformation online.”

CIVILIAN POLICE OVERSIGHT AGENCY RESPONDS

On September 5, KOAT TV reached out to Civilian Police Oversight Agency executive director, Diane McDermott regarding Gilbert Gallegos’s X postings from APD’s account. She was asked if there has been any form of discipline following Gallegos’s use of the department’s twitter X page? If not, she was asked if there was a reason as to why? Also, she was asked what’s next, in terms of handling the situation?

McDermott made the following statement to KOAT TV over the phone:

“The Civilian Police Oversight Agency no longer investigates complaints regarding civilian employees. Due to an ordinance change, they’re investigated by the internal affairs within Albuquerque Police Department. We received a complaint, and it was forwarded to Internal Affairs Professional Standard.”

McDermott  also sent KOAT TV the following statement:

“The Civilian Police Oversight Agency must receive a citizen complaint to initiate an investigation. Due to an ordinance change in 2023, the CPOA Agency does not generally investigate APD civilian employees. Civilian employees such as operators, administrative personnel, or, in this instance, the PIO are investigated by Internal Affairs Professional Standards.

The Council wanted the CPOA’s primary focus to be on policing within the community. If a complaint is received regarding a civilian employee, it is transferred to IAPS unless it also involves the activities of sworn personnel, and then the CPOA will retain that investigation. Non-sworn employees will also be investigated by the CPOA performing similar police functions, such as Police Service Aides or APD Transit Safety personnel.

Regarding the question of discipline for Mr. Gallegos, the CPOA only recommends discipline, and so the question would have to be directed to the Office of Police Reform to determine if discipline has been imposed.

What is next would also be directed to the Department, but if a citizen complaint is received, it will be evaluated and, if it only concerns PIO responsibilities of non-sworn personnel, forwarded to IAPS for investigation.”

Links to quoted and relied upon news sources are here:

https://www.kob.com/new-mexico/albuquerque-metro/city-councilors-push-for-accountability-following-tweets-from-official-apd-account/

https://www.koat.com/article/albuquerque-police-social-media-policy/62195610

https://www.koat.com/article/albuquerque-police-department-chief-medina/62049109

https://www.koat.com/article/albuquerque-police-social-media/62073908

https://www.abqjournal.com/news/apd-slammed-for-social-media-conduct-this-time-by-city-councilors/article_7237b1ca-6ba0-11ef-9627-b3193d3a73c5.html

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

Councilor Grout’s resolution was introduced at the September 16 city council meeting.  It will be heard by at least one city council committee and it will be several weeks until the full 9 member city council votes on it. If approved, the city would have 30 days to develop the new policies.  The City Council should vote unanimously to enact the legislation and also vote No Confidence in Gilbert Gallegos and ask for his removal as APD Director of Communications.

The function of PIO’s is to interreact with the press and the public and distribute accurate information to the public and the press and give interviews where necessary. APD Spokespersons historically have been sworn police officers. Gilbert Gallegos is a civilian at will employee, is paid upwards of $120,000 a year, he is a former newspaper reporter and former spokesperson for elected officials and is essentially a public relations political hack..

Chief Medina and APD Spokesman Gilbert Gallegos have a warped misunderstanding of their role when it comes to dealing with the general public, processing citizen complaints and talking to the public in general.  Their attitude as reflected by “mean tweets” is that unless you agree with APD and all of its actions, you are “anti-cop” or you are a “cop hater”.

Chief Medina enabling a public relations political hack such as Gilbert Gallegos  to attack a private citizen because they are critical of APD is not appropriate. It is not cyberbullying as Medina has proclaimed. Calling a businessman who is exercising his right of free speech a racist as Gallegos did is not keeping it professional nor is it avoiding confrontation but libelous. Making fun of a former Police Chief implying mental infirmity affecting recall  is offensive.  Gilbert and Medina have a warped understanding of the concept of “to protect and serve”.  They know the “mean tweets” generate extreme hostility and mistrust towards private citizens they target. We also have a Mayor who allows them to do it.

A citizen who has what they believe are legitimate complaints about APD does not mean APD has the right to vilify them or take issue with them and just presume that what they say is inaccurate requiring a public “push back”.  It does not mean APD has the right to engage in libel and slander nor violate people’s first amendment rights of free speech.

Gilbert Gallegos has no respect for the wishes of the Albuquerque City Council as he continued with his attacks on private citizens after they demanded that he stop. Mayor Tim Keller and APD Chief Harold Medina have no respect for the City Council in that they have condoned and supported the conduct of Gilbert Gallegos.

It is clear that the current city policy on the use of social media by city government employees is very inadequate  especially when its totally ignored an unenforced by the Mayor and Chief of Police. The very dismissive statement by Ava Montoya regarding the proposed resolution was nothing but further evidence the Keller Administration see  no problem with the abuse of social media accounts to attack private citizens.  Councilor’s Grout Resolution should be enacted by the full council but it should also be the first step to get a handle on a very serious problem.

City Councilor Rene Grout is very misinformed, or simply does not understand, the city council does have the exclusive  authority to defund the position. The city council has exclusive authority over all city finances and appropriations and can fund and defund entire programs and positions as they see fit and when they deem it necessary and appropriate. Not more than  a few years ago, the  City Council reduced or defunded  APD sworn personnel positions from 1,100 to 1,000  because APD had failed to fill 100  positions for an  number of years that had not been filled.

The City Council needs to take a vote no confidence and demand the termination of Gilbert Gallegos and go so far as defund the position if Mayor Tm Keller fails to act.

For many decades, the Albuquerque Journal has commissioned polls for general elections in New Mexico.  The newspaper retains as its exclusive pollster the polling firm Research & Polling. Founded in 1986 by its President and CEO Brian Sanderoff, Research & Polling Inc. is New Mexico’s largest full-service market research and public opinion research company. The company today serves a wide variety of prominent national and New Mexico clients. https://www.rpinc.com/ When it comes to New Mexico politics. Research & Polling Inc is considered the gold standard of political polls because of its lengthy  history of accuracy.

This year’s poll was conducted from September 6 to September  13 and excluded  the evening of September 10 due to the presidential debate. The 2024 general election year poll included polling on the top issues including crime, the economy, education, border security and gun control.  The poll included the race for the Presidency, the United States Senate and on Governor Michelle Lujan’s job approval rating mid term to her second full 4 year term.

During the week of September 16 to September 22  the Albuquerque Journal ran front page articles reporting on  the results of the poll.  This blog article is an edited an quoted summary of the articles and poll results on the Presidential election, the election for United States Senator and on Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham’s job approvale rating followed by the links to the quoted articles in full  relied upon.

PRESIDENTIAL POLL 

Democrat Vice President Kamala Harris has a sizeable lead over Republican Donald Trump in this year’s presidential race in New Mexico.  According to the Journal Poll, 49% of registered, likely voters surveyed said they planned to vote for Vice President Harris, while 39% said they planned to support former President DonaldTrump while 3%  said they would vote for independent candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who suspended his campaign last month but is still on New Mexico’s ballot. Of the remaining voters surveyed, roughly 7% said they had not yet decided who they would vote for in the November 5 general election.

In the 2020 election, President Biden defeated Trump in New Mexico by nearly 11% points or about 100,000 votes. Brian Sanderoff, the president of Research & Polling Inc., which conducted the poll,  said the Harris-Trump poll results suggest the likelihood of a similar outcome to 2020.

“Male voters in New Mexico were nearly split between Trump and Harris while female voters were far more likely to support Harris than Trump.  Mirroring the national trend, there was a significant divide by education level, as voters with a college or graduate degree said they would vote for Harris by a nearly 2-to-1 margin. In contrast, voters without a college degree were more likely to support Trump.”

“The Journal Poll found voters in the Albuquerque metro area and the traditional Democratic stronghold of northern New Mexico were much more likely to support Harris than Trump. Trump enjoyed a nearly 2-to-1 advantage over Harris in the state’s more conservative east side, but that is not enough to offset the vice president’s edge in New Mexico’s more populous areas of Albuquerque, Las Cruces and Santa Fe.”

“The poll  found Anglo voters were nearly split between the two leading presidential candidates, while Hispanic voters tended to favor Harris. However, Trump’s 36% support level among Hispanics was higher than some Republican candidates have received in recent New Mexico statewide elections.

Another trouble spot for Trump could be his performance among self-described moderate voters. Among such voters, 68% said they planned to vote for Harris, while 20% said they intended to vote for Trump.”

The link to the cited and quoted Albuquerque Journal news article is here:

https://www.abqjournal.com/election/journal-poll-kamala-harris-comfortably-ahead-of-donald-trump-in-new-mexico/article_0616e9d6-7201-11ef-b575-07a67a655850.html

UNITED STATES SENATE RACE

According to the Journal Poll, incumbent Senior Senator Democrat Martin Heinrich has a 12% lead over Republican Nella Domenici in the race for U.S. Senate. Heinrich is running for his third term representing New Mexico. This is  Domenici’s first run for public office.

“Heinrich garnered 50% of the registered, likely voters surveyed in the Journal poll while Domenici trails behind him with 38% saying they would vote for her. With rounded-off numbers, there were still 9% undecided and 4% who said they would vote for neither candidate. Heinrich has strong support from progressives, and Domenici has strong support from conservatives, but self-described moderates were also more likely to say they would cast a ballot for Heinrich.”

Heinrich and Domenici have unleashed a barrage of negative attack ads against each other. Domenici has tried to tie Heinrich to the opioid crisis,  dramatic increases in violent crime,  a failing economy and proclaim  that Heinrich has accomplished nothing for New Mexico in his 20 years as an elected official.  Heinrich has framed Domenici as an outsider and has claimed she has been recruited by Senate Minority leader Mitch McConnel and the MAGA Senate to enact a national abortion ban. One Heinrich attack ad claims a vote for Domenici is “a vote for a national abortion ban” and a Domenici ads have responded she would vote against such a ban.

“Although Domenici is the female candidate, she has much lower support than Heinrich among female voters. The poll found that Heinrich had a 22-point lead with women voters, with 55% of women supporting Heinrich compared to 33% supporting Domenici. Support for each candidate among male voters was close to a tie, with Heinrich ahead by 2 points.”

The link to the cited and quoted Albuquerque Journal story is here:

https://www.abqjournal.com/news/journal-poll-heinrich-builds-double-digit-cushion-over-domenici/article_fc405b94-739b-11ef-81e0-ab7f8f56170a.html

GOVERNOR MLG’S APPROVAL RATING TAKES A HIT 

Governor Michell Lujan Grisham is term limited and has two years left in office.

According to the poll,  45% of registered, likely voters surveyed said they approved of the job Lujan Grisham was doing as governor which is  down 14% from 59% in September 2020, during the peak of COVID-19.The new poll also found that roughly 44% of voters said they disapproved of the Democratic governor’s job performance, with the remaining voters unsure or declining to state their opinion.

The Journal Poll found varying levels of support for the governor’s job performance around New Mexico.  Sanderoff said this:

“The state’s equally divided on the governor’s job performance, and two of the state’s regions are as well”.

“In the Albuquerque Metro area, which has increasingly skewed Democratic in recent years, 48% of voters surveyed said they approved of Lujan Grisham’s job performance, while 42% expressed disapproval.

Voters’ views were similarly divided in northwest New Mexico, which encompassed both part of the Navajo Nation and more conservative-leaning Farmington area.

Lujan Grisham retained strong voter approval in the traditional Democratic stronghold of northern New Mexico, while voters in eastern New Mexico expressed disapproval by a more than 2-to-1 margin.

The governor also enjoyed more support among female voters than male voters, with 51% of women surveyed expressing support for Lujan Grisham’s job performance compared to just 40% of men.

Lujan Grisham’s current approval rating is similar to but slightly higher than that of her predecessor, Republican ex-Gov. Susana Martinez, at the same point in her tenure. Martinez had an approval rating of 42% in October 2016, and her support level continued to decline prior to her leaving office at the end of 2018.

In addition to Martinez, Sanderoff pointed out that former governors Bill Richardson, a Democrat, and Gary Johnson, a Republican-turned-Libertarian, also saw their approval ratings decline during their final years in office.”

THE LUJAN GRISHAM RECORD

Lujan Grisham is a former three-term congresswoman representing the Albuquerque area.  She was elected governor in 2018 and won reelection in 2022.  Her tenure was  marked by the COVID-19 pandemic that saw New Mexico record one of the nation’s highest death rates per capita, and by record-high state revenue levels generated in large part by surging oil production in southeast New Mexico’s Permian Basin.

The increase is state revenue has allowed Lujan Grisham to sign bills increasing New Mexico starting teacher pay, expanding financial assistance to college students and providing state taxpayers with tax rebates.

The governor has increasingly clashed with members of her own party in the Legislature on crime issues.  A special session called by the governor in July ended in a matter of hours with lawmakers not even debating her crime-focused agenda. Lujan Grisham responded by saying legislators should be “embarrassed” by their actions, but top-ranking lawmakers have pushed back by questioning the legality of the governor’s bills and whether they would have actually reduced crime rates.

Lujan Grisham was vetted for a possible Cabinet post in President Joe Biden’s administration in 2020, but ultimately decided to remain in New Mexico. Lujan Grisham has very close personal ties to  Vice President Kamala Harris, who presided over the Governor’s wedding,  and she spoke at the 2024 Democratic National Convention and was a key spokesperson for the Vice Presidents campaign during the convention. Lujan Grisham is also on the national committee to elect Harris.  Speculation is widespread in New Mexico that Governor Lujan Grisham will be appointed to a cabinet position should Harris win the presidency and step down mid term and with Luetenant  Governor Howie Morales becoming Governor for two years.

https://www.abqjournal.com/news/journal-poll-lujan-grishams-job-approval-rating-dips-as-governors-second-term-nears-midway-point/article_772b849a-7465-11ef-82f5-af335a3f6467.html

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

The Journal poll is based on a statewide random sample of 532 voters who cast ballots in the 2020 and/or 2022 general election, and a sample of adults who registered to vote since December 2022 and who said they are likely to vote in the upcoming election. The sample was stratified by race and county and weighted by age, education level, and party affiliation based on traditional voting patterns in New Mexico general elections, to ensure a more representative sample. The voter sample has a margin of error of plus or minus 4.2% percentage points. The margin of error grows for subsamples. All interviews were conducted by live, professional interviewers, based in Albuquerque, with multiple callbacks to households that did not initially answer the phone.

Whenever polls such as this are released, the general voting public and candidates themselves tend to dismiss them saying the poll is not accurate because so few are interviewed. Like it or not, the public still view them with intense interest much like when people slow down as they pass a car wreck. When it comes to the major issues facing New Mexico voters, the Albuquerque Journal poll provides a solid reflection of what is going on in voters’ minds.

The 2024 general election is on November 5, a mere 6 weeks away. Given the track record and reputation for accuracy of Research and Polling,  its more likely than not the Vice President Kamal Harris will prevail in New Mexico over former President Donald Trump. It also likely that Democrat Senior Senator Martin Heinrich will prevail over Republican Nella Domenici.  Harris has a 10% lead over Trump while Heinrich has a 12% lead over Domenici and such leads at this point in time  can be considered insurmountable.

When it comes to Governor Michelle Lujan, her future in New Mexico in all likelihood is tied to the fate of Vice President Kamala Harris an if she becomes President. If the Governor is in fact given the opportunity to move on to a Cabinet position under Kamala Harris, it likely she will move on preferring not to deal with antagonistic legislature for two years.

The link to a related blog article on issues is here:

Albuquerque Journal Poll Reveals Voters Concerns On Major Issues; Causes Of Crime Believed To Be Drugs, Poverty And Homeless Not Broken Justice System; Crime Viewed As Big City Issue; Economy Viewed As Fair To Poor; 75% Support Age Restrictions On Purchase Of AR-15 Rifles, 52% Support Ban; Support For Border Wall Increases By Region And Party

For many decades, the Albuquerque Journal has commissioned polls for general elections in New Mexico.  The newspaper retains as its exclusive pollster the polling firm Research & Polling. Founded in 1986 by its President and CEO Brian Sanderoff, Research & Polling Inc. is New Mexico’s largest full-service market research and public opinion research company. The company today serves a wide variety of prominent national and New Mexico clients. https://www.rpinc.com/ When it comes to New Mexico politics. Research & Polling Inc is considered the gold standard of political polls because of  its lengthy  history of reliability and accuracy.

This year’s poll was conducted from September 6 to September  13 and excluded  the evening of September 10 due to the presidential debate. The 2024 general election year poll included polling on the top issues including crime, the economy, education, border security  and gun control.

During the week of September 16 to September 22  the Albuquerque Journal ran front page articles reporting on  the results of the poll.  This blog article is an edited an quoted summary of the articles and poll results on the major  issues as reported by the Albuquerque Journal followed by the links to the quoted articles in full  relied upon:

ISSUES MOST CONCERNING TO  VOTERS

The Albuquerque Journal poll asked respondents what is the biggest issue or concern facing New Mexico residents right now?   No single issue took precedence by a landslide. A majority of voters mentioned one of six issues as their top concern and those were inflation, crime, (K-12) education, weak economy/jobs/wages, illegal immigration/border security and homelessness.  Among other issues most cited were drugs, poverty, abortion, healthcare reform, gun control. Local/state government ethics, mental healt/behavioral health, quality of higher education system and climate change.

The results of the  six top issues of concern were:

• INFLATION: 18%
• CRIME: 16%
• QUALITY OF K-12 Education: 9%
• WEAK ECONOMY/JOBS/WAGES: 8%
• ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION/BORDER SECURITY: 8%
• HOMELESSNESS: 7%

Brian Sanderoff, president of Research & Polling Inc., said “this is just a way of getting a person’s top of mind, gut feeling [on] what’s the biggest thing. It doesn’t mean those other things aren’t of value.”  He noted that of the top five issues, two are related to the economy and two are related to crime.

Sanderoff said while the 18% and 16% difference between inflation and the economy isn’t that big, more voters are concerned about inflation because it impacts more people directly than crime does. Sanderoff said this:

“Everyone is impacted by the cost of living and cost of housing, cost of gasoline. … Crime is something that many people are directly impacted by, but many people are not. … Many people are just seeing it on TV news and reading about in the paper.”

“According to the poll, voters in the Albuquerque metro area are the most worried about crime, with 20% of people saying that’s the biggest issue. In contrast, only 6% of voters in eastern New Mexico said that’s the priority concern.

Only 14% of Albuquerque metro voters mark inflation as their top concern, much less than other areas of the state that had 18-24% of people most concerned about it.

Ideologically, voters leaning conservative, moderate and liberal largely agreed that inflation and crime are the top issues. The poll results found 17% of Democrats and 20% of Republicans thought that inflation was the biggest concern, while 16% of Democrats and 19% of Republicans said crime was the biggest issue.

Stark differences in partisanship came from those who chose illegal immigration or border security as their top issue. In the poll, 17% of Republicans compared to 2% of Democrats marked that as New Mexico residents’ biggest issue.

A few other concerns made the list, including poverty, abortion, health care reform and gun control, though only 2-3% of voters named any of those issues as their biggest concerns.  Meanwhile, 5% of those responding decided not to say or didn’t know what their biggest issue was.”

The link to the entire cited and quoted Albuquerque Journal article  with graphs  is here:

https://www.abqjournal.com/news/journal-poll-new-mexicans-are-the-most-worried-about-inflation-and-crime/article_25a3d906-7528-11ef-8787-c7308faa37f7.html

MOST NEW MEXICANS THINK CRIME IS A SERIOUS PROBLEM

According to the Journal poll, most New Mexicans think crime is a problem and that drugs, poverty and homelessness are to blame. A smaller number believe illegal immigration, a broken criminal justice system and guns are the leading cause. The results, came from two crime-related questions:

1. How serious of a problem is crime?
2. What is the leading cause of crime?

84% of likely voters think crime is a very or somewhat serious problem, 12% see it as a minor problem and 3% see crime as “no problem at all.”  Brian Sanderoff, president of Research & Polling Inc., said this:

“Crime is seen as a big problem and opinions do vary, depending on where you live and who you are.”

“Women were more likely than men, 57% to 46%, to see crime as a “very serious” problem, according to the poll. Younger adults, between the ages of 18 and 34, were less likely to see crime as a very serious problem compared with 61% of those ages 50 to 64 years old. Sanderoff said “Younger people are more likely to feel they’re invulnerable” but added that 82% of young people still feel crime is more than just a minor problem.”

REGIONAL PERSPECTIVES ON CRIME

The poll found that 60% of those who live in the Albuquerque metro area, where most of the state’s crime occurs, feel it is a very serious problem while 37% in eastern New Mexico and 39% in Las Cruces and the southwestern part of the state agree.

In north central New Mexico, 22% see crime as a minor problem. Sanderoff pointed out that area encompasses more than just Santa Fe and includes Taos, Las Vegas and smaller communities. Sanderoff said this:

“So we’re seeing a big difference in perceptions regarding the seriousness of crime when it comes to how very serious it is. …  Attitudes toward the seriousness of crime do vary based on where you live or which political party you’re a member of.”

PARTY AFFILIATION REFLECTS ATTITUDES TOWARD CAUSES OF CRIME

Republicans and conservatives were more likely, 60% and 61%, respectively, to say it’s a very serious problem compared with 47% of Democrats and 38% of liberals, according to the poll.

Sanderoff said this:

“You’re always going to hear those people, including probably [Albuquerque] Mayor Tim Keller and others, say, ‘Well, yeah, crime is a problem, but the crime statistics demonstrate that we are plateauing or even in declining in certain crime statistics.” And so you’ll always find some people who will say, ‘Yeah, I think the perception is worse than the reality.’ And liberals might be part of that group. They’re more likely to defend Democratic leadership, whether it be in Albuquerque or the state of New Mexico.”

“For the question on the cause of crime, those polled were not given choices and were asked to offer a response to the pollster calling.

The poll found that drugs took the top spot with 26% of likely voters saying it was the leading cause, followed by poverty with 16% and homelessness with 12%.  Sanderoff said “it’s pretty telling” that a high proportion of likely voters cited drugs. He said some may be thinking of cartels trafficking fentanyl across the border while others think of the violence with someone getting killed during a deal gone bad.”

In north central New Mexico 37%, the highest majority, cited drugs and Sanderoff said that could be tied to places like Rio Arriba County’s “generational problem with heroin.” Sanderoff said this:

“One thing of interest though — those three items are all interrelated. … The top three causes that people mentioned, drugs, poverty and homelessness are all interrelated, because some of the key causes of homelessness are either poverty or drugs.”

“Democrats were more likely to mention those three as leading causes, according to the poll. Democrats and liberals, 21% and 29%, respectively, cited poverty compared with 7% of Republicans and 6% of conservatives.”

“The poll found that 8% of likely voters, largely Republicans, felt the cause was judges giving light sentences, 7% blamed a broken criminal justice system and 6% cited so-called “catch and release.” Another 7% of likely voters said the cause was a poor economy, 7% said illegal immigration and 6% said guns.”

“Among Republicans, 15% cited illegal immigration compared with 1% of Democrats, according to the poll. Among Democrats, 9% said guns were the leading cause compared with 1% of Republicans.”

Sanderoff said this of the results:

“We’ve got the Republicans more likely to say things like light sentences from judges, illegal immigration, revolving door — they’re more likely to mention those things than are the Democrats. …  Democrats lean more toward things like poverty, homelessness, drugs as well. So all of that’s interesting. …  So there are differences in the parties as to what they think the causes of crime are.”

The link to the cited and quoted Albuquerque Journal report is here:

https://www.abqjournal.com/news/journal-poll-most-new-mexicans-think-crime-is-a-serious-problem/article_3b350cc8-7608-11ef-9735-ebca6118aa13.html#tncms-source=home-featured-7-block

THE ECONOMY: PEOPLE FEEL NO BETTER OFF NOW THAN BEFORE PANDEMIC

The Albuquerque Journal poll asked likely voters two questions on New Mexico’s economy:

1. How would you rate the conditions of New Mexico’s economy?
2. How would you rate your finances compared to just a few years ago before the pandemic?

According to the Journal Poll, most New Mexicans do not have a favorable view of the state’s economy. They rate the economy as fair or poor.  A majority say they are worse off financially or about the same as before the COVID-19 pandemic.

ECONOMIC CONDITIONS

“According to the poll, 40% of likely voters rated economic conditions as fair, while another 38% rated the economy as poor. Another 19% rated economic conditions as good, 1% responded excellent, and 2% either didn’t know or wouldn’t say. Among those in eastern New Mexico, 50% rated the state’s economy as poor, while 27% in north central New Mexico (Santa Fe and Taos)  rated it the same.”

PARTY AFFILIATION, EDUCATION IMPACT PERCEPTION OF ECONOMY

Brian Sanderoff said that party affiliation has an impact on perception of the economy.

“Republicans (61%) are much more likely to have rated New Mexico’s economy as poor compared to Democrats (25%). Democrats (43%) and independent/unaffiliated voters (50%) were more likely to rate the economy as fair. Those same groups were also more likely to rate the economy as good, with 28% of Democrats and 18% of independent voters rating it that way. Sanderoff said some likely voters, particularly Democrats, who rate the economy as good or fair may see improving economic conditions with inflation cooling significantly over the last few months.

Educational attainment levels are also a big predictor of the assessment of economic conditions. Those with a college degree are much less likely to rate economic conditions poorly, Sanderoff said. There aren’t “tremendously big differences,” Sanderoff said, when it comes to gender, with 42% of males and 37% of women rating the economy as fair, and another 36% of males and 41% of females rating the economy as poor.”

PERSONAL FINANCIAL SITUATION

Those surveyed were asked if they are financially better off, worse off or about the same compared to a few years ago. 38% of those surveyed said they were  worse off followed by 37% who said about the same. 24% percent of likely voters said they are better off.

“Despite increases in wages and a relatively low unemployment rate, Sanderoff said he suspects that few voters rate the economy as excellent or good due to the cost of living and cost of housing, which have taken on sharp increases post-COVID.

In Albuquerque, for instance, the median sales price for a single-family detached home,  the most common type in the area,  was $361,000, according to the Greater Albuquerque Association of Realtors. That’s up from $226,000 in August 2019.

“Concerns about inflation, I think, are impacting people’s assessment of the economic conditions,” Sanderoff said.

Likely voters’ views on the state’s economic conditions, Sanderoff said, are partly reflected in how people perceive their finances.

62%  of both Republicans and self-reported conservatives said they are worse off compared to 23% of Democrats and 19% of liberals. And 32% of Democrats and 38% of liberals are more likely to say they are better off.

Roughly 44% of Democrats said they are financially about the same, compared to 25% of Republicans.

In eastern New Mexico, where more Republicans and conservatives tend to live, 58% said they are worse off compared to 34% in the Albuquerque metro.”

Those 18-34 years of age (36%) and 35-49 years of age (32%) were also more likely to say they are better off than before COVID compared to those between the ages of 50-64 (18%) and 65-older (16%).

Sanderoff said this about age:

“Younger people are still ascending in their positions at work,  they’re still getting promotions above and beyond salary increases. … And then as you get older — retirement years or beginning to plateau at work — you’re seeing less wage increases. … People who are retired are living on fixed incomes, and therefore are more susceptible to the ill effects of inflation.”

The link to the cited and quoted Albuquerque Journal article with graphs  is here:

https://www.abqjournal.com/news/journal-poll-4-in-10-voters-say-they-are-worse-off-than-before-pandemic/article_d4b34ea0-76d0-11ef-8e1e-b3b13c43c9e8.html#tncms-source=home-featured-7-block

GUN CONTROL

The journal poll asked two-gun control questions:

Do you support or oppose legislation in New Mexico raising the age t0 purchase an AR-15 style semiautomatic rifle from 18 to 21 years old?

• 75% support
• 20% oppose
• 4% were undecided
• 1% did not know

An overwhelming majority of 75% of registered, likely voters surveyed said they would favor legislation raising the minimum age to purchase an AR-15-style rifle, while 20% expressed opposition. A majority of both male and female voters supported the idea, though women were more likely than men to express support, and most voters surveyed in all regions of New Mexico backed the proposal. The poll results showed a majority of both Democratic and Republican voters in support, with 59% of Republicans expressing support compared to 36% in opposition.

Do you support or oppose legislation in New Mexico banning the sale of AR-15 style semiautomatic rifles?

• 52% support
• 43% oppose
• 4% were undecided
• 1% did not know

“A ban is a bridge too far for many Republicans and residents of certain parts of the state,” said Brian Sanderoff, the president of Research & Polling Inc.

“Support levels among male voters and Republicans dropped sharply when it came to the question of whether to enact a ban on AR-15-style rifles. The percentage of male voters who supported a ban was 38% — compared to 69% of male voters who supported increasing the minimum age to buy such firearms — and a majority of voters in three of the state’s five regions opposed the idea of an assault weapon ban. Most voters in the Albuquerque metro area and north-central New Mexico, which includes Santa Fe, expressed support for the proposal.”

The link to the cited and quoted Albuquerque Journal article with graphs  is here:

https://www.abqjournal.com/news/journal-poll-nm-voters-strongly-back-raising-age-to-buy-ar-15-style-rifles-more/article_8c2697ee-776d-11ef-baaf-ef4bb9b3c68f.html

SUPPORT FOR BORDER WALL INCREASES

The Journal poll found that New Mexicans’ support for a border wall along the U.S., Mexico border has increased since 2018.  The poll also found that  the state’s voters are also concerned with border security, with 84% of likely voters surveyed saying the border is a somewhat serious or very serious problem.

“Of the likely voters surveyed, 52% support building a border wall and 37% oppose it, with 8% who were undecided or said it depends, and 3% who don’t know or won’t say.  This is a dramatic change and is higher since  the last time the Journal polled this question in 2018, when 37% of voters supported building a border wall and 56% opposed it.”

“New Mexican voters are also more concerned about border security than they were in 2018. In a 2018 poll, 69% of people polled said border security was a very or somewhat serious problem. The new  poll found a 15 percentage point increase, with 84% saying border security was a very or somewhat serious problem. The new poll shows 53% of voters said border security was a very serious problem, 31% said it was a somewhat serious problem, 11% said it was a minor problem and 3% said it was no problem at all. In 2018, 39% said it was a very serious problem and 10% said it was no problem at all.”

PARTISAN DIVIDE ON BORDER WALL

“The poll reveals that  support for continuing to build a border wall was partisan, with a quarter of Democrats, and the vast majority, 91%, of Republicans in support. Independents were evenly split on the issue, with 41% in support, 42% opposed and 14% undecided.”

“Having a positive opinion of former President Donald Trump correlates strongly with support for continuing to build a border wall. Among voters with a favorable opinion of Trump, 90% support continuing to build the border wall, while the majority of voters with an unfavorable opinion of Trump oppose continuing to build the border wall, with only 23% in that group supportive of continuing to build the wall.”

REGIONAL DIFFERENCES ON BORDER WALL

“The Journal poll revealed big regional variations in border wall support. Support is strong for a border wall in northwest New Mexico at 61% and very strong within the eastern region of the state, with 71% of voters polled in that region supportive of continuing to build the border wall.”

“In the Albuquerque metro area support is weaker, with 49% of voters in favor and 40% opposed. The north-central region, which includes Santa Fe and Taos and is the most liberal leaning area of the state, is the only region where there is more opposition to the idea than support, with 33% supportive of building the border wall and 50% opposed.”

In the Las Cruces and southwest area where three counties are actually on the border with Mexico, there is slightly more support than statewide and slightly more opposition, with fewer voters undecided. Among voters in the southwest region 55% support continuing to build the border wall, 40% are opposed and 5% are undecided.”

The link to the cited and quoted Albuquerque Journal report is here:

https://www.abqjournal.com/news/journal-poll-new-mexican-voters-support-for-border-wall-rises/article_17f17a0c-778a-11ef-81a8-776fb805e69f.html

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

The Journal poll is based on a statewide random sample of 532 voters who cast ballots in the 2020 and/or 2022 general election, and a sample of adults who registered to vote since December 2022 and who said they are likely to vote in the upcoming election. The sample was stratified by race and county and weighted by age, education level, and party affiliation based on traditional voting patterns in New Mexico general elections, to ensure a more representative sample.

The voter sample has a margin of error of plus or minus 4.2% percentage points. The margin of error grows for subsamples. All interviews were conducted by live, professional interviewers, based in Albuquerque, with multiple callbacks to households that did not initially answer the phone.

Whenever polls such as this are released, the general voting public and candidates themselves tend to dismiss them saying the poll is not accurate because so few are interviewed. Like it or not, the public still view them with intense interest much like when people slow down as they pass a car wreck. When it comes to the major issues facing New Mexico voters, the Albuquerque Journal poll provides a solid reflection of what is going on in voters’ minds.

The New Mexico Legislature’s Courts, Corrections and Justice Interim Committee is one of the most influential committees of the legislature. It  consists of 32 House and Senate members and meets year-round.  On September 13, the committee met in Española, New Mexico at Northern New Mexico College.  Legislators where given very sobering if not depressing information regarding the state’s Children, Youth and Families Department (CYFD). One lawmaker lamented CYFD is New Mexico’s Hindenburg.

The CYFD information included staff turnover being higher than the national average with child maltreatment rates increasing all of which have occurred despite  significant  increases in  funding to the department in recent years.  Legislators expressed frustration about the trends during the committee meeting citing low completion rates in voluntary programs like home visiting for new parents.

Over the last few decades, New Mexico has struggled to address child welfare issues.  Lawmakers have gone so far as to propose bills seeking independent oversight of the Children, Youth and Families Department and other structural changes. Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham and her administration have opposed such efforts even though the governor last year herself described the department as “dysfunctional” and ordered the creation of a new advisory council and office of innovation within CYFD.

STATE SPENDING INCREASES BUT MISERABLE RESULTS

New Mexico is having an ongoing and historical state revenue boom. State spending on protective services for New Mexico children has grown by about $100 million over the last decade, to more than $200 million annually. But the turnover rate for CYFD case workers has remained exceedingly high.  Last year, according to legislative data, staff turnover was upwards of 34%  and the total number of protective services employees in New Mexico is at roughly the same level it was in 2017.  CYFD will see its insurance premiums increase by $1.5 million in the coming fiscal year, after the state paid out more than $21 million in settlements dealing with abused and neglected children since 2021.

Legislative Finance Committee analyst Rachel Mercer Garcia told lawmakers that CYFD in recent years has reduced the amount of public reports it publishes on child welfare issues. She said “There are likely opportunities to strengthen oversight mechanisms.”  Legislators were told some families are not being made aware of a support plan being created for them after a hospital finds a baby who was exposed to illicit substances.

Family Services Division, CYFD spokesman Andrew Skobinsky  disputed the claim of decreased reporting and complained that  agency officials were not invited to participate in the committee hearing. Skobinsky also said the child welfare agency expects to see steady progress when it comes to reducing child neglect and deprivation cases under a new Family Services Division.  However, Skobinsky said CYFD Secretary Teresa Casados has signed off on 34 new hires in the last two weeks, describing the agency as a workplace with “significant opportunities” to make a difference.

The CYFD “HINDENBERG”

Democrat Las Cruces Senator Joseph Cervantes called the state’s child welfare trends “shameful” during the committee hearing.  Cervantes asked rhetorically at one point, while growing visibly emotional, and said this:

“What are we doing? … There’s nobody who’s more vulnerable [than our children].”

Alamogordo Republican John Block referred to CYFD as the state’s “Hindenburg,” a reference to the disastrous explosion of the German airship and said this:.

“I feel like sometimes in these committees we’re just banging our heads against the wall.”

https://www.yahoo.com/news/increasing-spending-lawmakers-express-frustration-030100097.html

https://www.abqjournal.com/news/after-increasing-spending-lawmakers-express-frustration-over-nm-child-welfare-trends/article_4c94bd42-7081-11ef-8f42-efcf6d25012e.html’’

NM HOUSE SPEAKER SIGNALS CYFD OVERSIGHT BILLS WILL BE  BROUGHT BACK DURING 2025 LEGISLATIVE SESSION

On September 18, during the Legislative Finance Committee (LFC)  meeting held in Albuquerque,  House Speaker Javier Martínez signaled that House Democrats will push a package of bills during the upcoming 60-day legislative session aimed at bolstering New Mexico’s beleaguered child welfare system and the Children, Youth and Families Department (CYFD). The bills will be essentially the identical  legislation that failed during the 2023 legislative session.

The legislation will include proposals to add more outside oversight to the Children, Youth and Families Department.  The proposed legislation will likely set up a showdown with Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham, who opposed such proposals during  the 2023 legislative session.

During the LFC hearing, Martínez and other lawmakers expressed frustration about recent child welfare trends in the state, including high staff turnover and increased child maltreatment rates.

Speaker Martinez noted that the state’s child welfare crisis was inherited by Lujan Grisham but added that after upwards of 6  years, her administration “owns it” now. Martinez said “It’s hard for me to understand why we are so resistant to outside perspectives.”

https://www.abqjournal.com/news/house-speaker-signals-cyfd-oversight-bills-will-be-brought-back-at-the-roundhouse/article_25dc05b8-760b-11ef-bfea-8705375e864d.html#tncms-source=home-featured-7-block

Governor Lujan Grisham has opposed efforts to increase outside oversight of CYFD.  Instead she ordered the creation of a new advisory council and office of innovation within CYFD.

CYFD Cabinet Secretary Teresa Casados testified that she is not opposed to outside oversight of the agency, but said it already receives ample scrutiny under a 2020 legal settlement and from other groups. Casados was appointed in November 2023 as the governor’s third CYFD secretary since Lujan Grisham took office in 2019.

Casados told members of the Legislative Finance Committee this:

“I just feel like there is a lot of oversight right now.”

Magdalena Republican Gail Armstrong  said she would not want Casados’ job, but said she’s exhausted from hearing reports of new CYFD initiatives that ultimately don’t lead to systemic changes. Armstrong asked “When are we going to make a difference?” before imploring Casados to “Fix it, please.”

The legislative push to revamp the state’s child welfare system could be bipartisan, as Republican lawmakers have also expressed frustration.

Speaker Martínez cited the Cabinet secretary turnover saying, “There’s something that’s not working — something’s missing.”

He also said the state’s inability to reduce child maltreatment rates has cast a cloud on New Mexico’s progress in other areas, including expanding pre-kindergarten and other early childhood programs.

New Mexico has paid out more than $21 million in settlements dealing with abused and neglected children since 2021, which has caused CYFD’s insurance premiums to rise.

Relied upon and quoted news source is here:

Albuquerque Journal “House speaker signals CYFD oversight bills will be brought back at the Roundhouse” by Journal staff reporter Dan Boyd

https://www.abqjournal.com/news/house-speaker-signals-cyfd-oversight-bills-will-be-brought-back-at-the-roundhouse/article_25dc05b8-760b-11ef-bfea-8705375e864d.html#tncms-source=home-featured-7-block

 KIDS COUNT DATA BOOK RANKINGS FOR NEW MEXICOS CHILDREN

On June 11 the New Mexico Voices for Children released the “2024 Kids Count Data Book, State Trends In Child Well Being.” The annual “Kids Count” Data Book is prepared by the Annie E. Casey Foundation. The Casey foundation is a nonprofit based in Maryland focusing on improving the well-being and future of American children and their families. It assesses how New Mexico children are faring in a number of areas including economic well-being, education, health, and family and community.

The link to the 2024 Kids Count Data Book is here:

https://www.aecf.org/resources/2024-kids-count-data-book

DEPRESSING STATISTICS

The 2024 Kids Count Data Book contains an astonishing number of  depressing statistics for New Mexico’s children as they relate to overall  child well-being,  education, health and economic well-being. In 2024, out of all 50 states, New Mexico ranked 50^th in overall childhood well-being, ranked 50th in education, ranked 48th in economic well-being, ranked 44th in health and ranked 49th in family and community. Forty-one percent of New Mexico students between 2021 and 2022 were chronically absent from school.

The 2024 Kids Count Data Book statistics are essentially identical to the 2023 Kids Count Data Book statistics with a 1% decrease in Family and Community.  The statistics for both years for comparison are:

In 2024, New Mexico ranked 50^th in EDUCATION.  In 2023, New Mexico also ranked 50^th  in EDUCATION.

In 2024 New Mexico ranked 48th in ECONOMIC WELL-BEING.  In 2023,  New Mexico ranked 49^th in ECONOMIC WELL-BEING RANKING.

In 2024, New Mexico ranked 49th in FAMILY AND COMMUNITY.  In 2023, New Mexico ranked 48^th in FAMILY AND COMMUNITY.

In 2024 New Mexico ranked 44^th in HEALTH RANKINGS.  In 2023,  New Mexico ranked 44^th in HEALTH RANKINGS.

The link to the 2023 Kids Count Data Book is here:

Click to access aecf-2023kidscountdatabook-2023.pdf

The link to review New Mexico’s 2024 Kids Count Data profile page giving the state the overall ranking of 50 and the statistics in the categories of Economic Well Being, Education, Health, and Family and Communication is here:

Click to access 2024-KCDB-profile-NM.pdf

Maralyn Beck, founder and executive director of New Mexico Child First Network, which aims to improve foster care in the state said this about the statistics:

“Our kids are not OK. … Solutions exist to do better, but we need political will and political courage to push forward solutions that we know will improve outcomes for our children.”

Beck said that children in foster care also have lower educational outcomes and are at the “highest risk.” Beck said the Kids Count Data book highlights the average New Mexican student but does not fully address kids in foster care who are even more vulnerable. Beck said this:

“The kids I’m working with are the most vulnerable. … Kids in foster care have the lowest education outcomes. One in 7 kids will graduate from high school. One in 50 will graduate from college.”

 CHILDREN LIVING IN POVERTY

According to the 2024 Kids Count Data Book, New Mexico ranks 48^th with Children Living in Poverty. A November 17, 2023 report prepared by the Legislative Education Study Committee found that nearly 40% of students were chronically absent from school in New Mexico during the 2022-23 school year. The number is slightly less than the previous year, but it’s still a major concern for educators and lawmakers who say children can’t learn if they aren’t in class. According to the report nearly 60.8% of students who are experiencing housing insecurity are also chronically absent. Chronic absenteeism is defined in New Mexico state law as missing 10% or more of classes or school days for any reason, whether excused or unexcused.

 ADVERSE CHILDHOOD EXPERIENCE

Across 2021 and 2022, one in two New Mexico children experienced an adverse childhood experience (ACE) defined as “a traumatic experience that could include abuse, neglect or witnessing domestic violence.” New Mexico tied with Mississippi for the highest rate of kids who had experienced such trauma.

George Davis, a child psychologist who has worked with the state Children, Youth and Families Department and children in the juvenile justice system, said Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACE), can disrupt normal child development. Davis said children who are separated from their parents, for example, may later show struggles with self-regulation through aggression, trusting adults, trouble making friends and even challenges sitting still or paying attention in school. Davis said this:

“It undermines the foundations that you need to progress in life in very fundamental kinds of ways.”

Davis said poverty alone is not ACE, but it can be associated with other traumatic experiences. The state has made some improvements in the childhood poverty rate, the report noted, but it still remained at about 24% in 2022, 8% higher than the national rate.

Davis said that addressing statewide gaps in health care and substance abuse treatment, as well as poverty, is needed to prevent ACE. Although Davis said he sees a political interest in preventing childhood trauma, the next steps may seem unclear. Davis said this:

“I think people don’t know what to do at the state level. … But I think there definitely is the will.”

https://www.nmlegis.gov/handouts/ALESC%20111523%20Item%208%20.1%20School%20Attendance%20and%20Chronic%20Absence-Final%20Attendance%20Report%20-%20All%20Files.pdf

New Mexico Appleseed is an organization focused on reducing child poverty.  Jennifer Ramo, founder of New Mexico Appleseed, said homelessness can compound some of the issues raised in the Kids Count Data Book report. Ramo said transportation can be difficult for children who are homeless contributing to absenteeism.  Even if kids make it into the classroom, those factors can make it difficult to learn. Ramo said this:

“The teacher and the students, they’re both outgunned by poverty.  … In general, I don’t know how you can expect these kids to learn and be ready emotionally, and be focused, when maybe they haven’t eaten or they were sleeping on the floor or they have four people in their bed.”

Ramo said basic guaranteed income is something New Mexico Appleseed is pushing for as well as a statewide program to pay kids to show up to school.  Ramo said this:

“Most families are working and trying to get multiple jobs, and it’s still not adding up. … They still are not meeting the cost of living. … We can’t keep doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different outcome.”

A test program in two school districts in northern New Mexico paid students $500 per month if they attended tutoring, attended school 90% of the time and attended one socio-emotional meeting. The program worked. Ramo said this:

“They did it. … It’s a pretty profound impact. Between both districts, it was 93% [graduation rate for the participants].”

 NEW MEXICO’S FINANCIAL COMMITMENT TO KIDS EDUCATION

During the last 6 years, the New Mexico legislature has been very aggressive when it comes to increased funding to turn things around for New Mexico’s children when it comes to education and their wellbeing. Much of the legislatures efforts  have been a direct result of the 2018 landmark education case of Yazzie-Martinez v. New Mexico Public Education Department  where a  First Judicial District Court ruled the State of New Mexico violated students’ fundamental rights by failing to provide a sufficient public education mandated by the state constitution.  The court found that New Mexico students have a right to be college-and career-ready, a standard that was not being met by New Mexico’s education system. To address this, the state was ordered to take immediate action and establish an educational system that ensures at-risk students in New Mexico will be college and career ready.

In the summer of 2022, the New Mexico Public Education Department (PED) released updates on the progress made in response to the Yazzie-Martinez ruling. The report highlights various initiatives undertaken by the state, including increased funding, expanded access to pre-kindergarten programs, and targeted support for struggling schools.

“According to the report, the state’s spending on public education has received a substantial boost. In fiscal year 2018, New Mexico’s education system was funded at the tune of $2.69 billion; in fiscal year 2024, the education system is being funded at $4.17 billion. That is an increase of $1.3 billion over five years. State funds have been channeled toward reducing class sizes, hiring additional teachers, improving professional development programs, and enhancing resources for English language learners and special education students.”

In fiscal year 2019, public education funding spiked. The biggest accomplishments of the 2019 Legislative session were the dramatic increases in public education funding, creation of the Early Childhood Department (CYFD), the mandates to Children, Youth and Families and Public Education departments, not to mention raises for educators and increasing CYFD social workers by 125 were clearly the biggest accomplishments of the 2019 Legislative session.

Funding spiked in 2019  and was up to $306 million, including the following:

• $64 million for Pre-K to better prepare children for elementary school.
• $45 million for family, infant, toddler programs to help families with children with developmental delays.
• $30 million for K-3 Plus to add 25 days to the school year.

New Mexico is 1 of just 4 states with a stand-alone department dedicated to services targeting children through age 5. The initial operating budget for the new department was $419 million for the 2020-2021 fiscal year. The new department is tasked with overseeing the state’s growing investment in prekindergarten, home visiting programs for new parents, childcare and similar services that previously were scattered across several departments. One of the key goals is to better coordinate the state’s network of early childhood services by housing them in one department rather than having them overseen separately by other departments.

In 2020 the New Mexico Legislature created a $320 million early childhood education trust fund. In 2021, lawmakers and the governor agreed to up the spending on early childhood programs to $500 million.

2022 EDUCATION BUDGET FUNDING

During the 2022 New Mexico Legislative session, a trio of bills were enacted to fund programs to help Native American students succeed in school. The house bills provided more than $70 million to tribal entities to help offer culturally relevant lesson plans and access to virtual and after-school programs for those students.

The first bill appropriated $20 million from the state’s general fund to the Indian Education Act to be used to create culturally relevant learning programs, including Native language programs, for students in the K-12 system.

A second bill appropriated $21.5 million to help tribal education departments develop learning plans and programs for students, extend learning opportunities and support tribal school libraries.

The third bill was aimed at higher education and  appropriated $29.6 million to four state colleges and three tribal colleges for 53 initiatives.

In 2022, voters approved tapping the state’s Land Grant Permanent Fund for roughly another $240 million annually for early childhood education and K-12 schools. The additional distribution of funding from the Permanent Land Grant Fund goes into effect on July 1. The Early Childhood Education and Care Department recently reported it will experience a 68% increase in funding for Fiscal Year 2024.

The link to news source on funding is here:

https://www.abqjournal.com/opinion/money-doesn-t-make-kids-count/article_65c5ecd8-0ca4-11ee-917e-93ee3771e5b3.html

 2023 EDUCATION BUDGET FUNDING

The enacted 2023-2024 New Mexico State budget contains major expenditures for  education and child wellbeing.  Those expenditures include:

• $220.1 Million for extended in-classroom learning time by increasing the number of minimum instructional hours per year in public schools.
• $30 Million to provide healthy universal school meals and to eliminate school meal costs for every New Mexico child.
• 9 Million to the Children, Youth and Families Department for 60 new protective services staff, to be supported by additional federal matching funds.
• $277.3 Million for continued investments in affordable, high-quality child care.
• $131 Million to maintain and expand access to high-quality pre-k education.
• $40.4 Million for the continued expansion of early childhood home visiting.
• $111.1 Million to provide a four percent salary increase forall school personnel.
• $157.4 Million for the Opportunity Scholarship program

 Links to quoted news source material are here:

https://www.governor.state.nm.us/2023/01/10/gov-lujan-grisham-releases-fy24-executive-budget-recommendation/

https://www.abqjournal.com/2563462/governor-calls-for-rebates-tax-cuts-and-increased-school-spending-in-budget-plan.html

https://www.krqe.com/news/politics-government/ahead-of-2023-legislative-session-new-mexico-governor-releases-budget-suggestion/

 2024 EDUCATION BUDGET FUNDING

On February 12, 2024, the 2024-2025 Fiscal Year state budget was passed by the New Mexico Legislature. It contains  a 6.5% increase in recurring funds from last year’s  2023-2024 fiscal year.  The largest slice of the general fund goes to public schools, which are slated to receive about $4.3 billion for the fiscal year. That includes more than $94 million to give a flat 3% raise to all public-school employees, an amount that was trimmed by a Senate Finance Committee. Before public school employees were looking at a total average of 4% raises.  The final version the budget approved by the Senate includes $30 million for summer reading intervention programs, $14 million for early literacy and reading support and $5 million to train secondary educators in the science of reading.

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

 After a full 6 years and millions spent each year on the state education,  programs and departments created, it difficult to accept any excuses given as to why New Mexico has not been improving when it comes to child wellbeing. If anything, the ratings are getting worse. The sad reality is that New Mexico poverty levels will always have the most serious and direct impact on child wellbeing.  No matter the millions spent on programs and state agencies for child wellbeing, not much progress will be made until New Mexico deals with its chronic poverty.

One thing is for certain, the Governor and the legislature, need to recognize once and for all that despite all the increases in funding over the last 6 years, the performance of the Children Youth and Families Department is simply just not cutting it and there is a need for drastic changes.  When the governor herself  last year described the CYFD  department as “dysfunctional”, she was foolish then not to taken any responsibility  and foolish not to agree to a complete overhaul of the department, including changes at the very top.  Instead, the Governor ordered the creation of a new advisory council and office of innovation within CYFD. During the 2025 legislative session, the legislature needs to take control and call for an outright reorganization of the department and demand more oversight and make sweeping changes to insure accountability and performance.

On September 15, former President Donald Trump was the target of a second attempted assassination. The  suspect is identified as  Ryan Wesley Routh, 56,  who is in custody after being identified as a man seen with a rifle at Trump’s golf club in West Palm Beach, Fla. The incident began around 1:30 p.m. ET on the Trump International golf course where the former president was playing.  It ended miles away after Routh’s vehicle was spotted on Interstate 95. It occurred two months after Trump was grazed on the top of his right ear in Butler, Pa.  at a Trump rally. Trump was safe following the second assassination attempt.

PRESIDNT BIDEN AND VICE PRESIDENT HARRIS REACT

President Biden reacted and said this about the assassination attempt:

“I am relieved that the former President is unharmed. … There is an active

investigation into this incident as law enforcement gathers more details about what happened. As I have said many times, there is no place for political violence or for any violence ever in our country.”

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2024/09/15/donald-trump-assassination-attempt-biden-reaction/75243382007/

On September 15, speaking at the 2024 National HBCU Week Conference in Philadelphia, President Biden said this:

“I’ve always condemned political violence, and I always will. … In America, we resolve our differences peacefully at the ballot box, not at the end of a gun. America suffered too many times the tragedy of an assassin’s bullet. It solves nothing. It just tears the country apart. We must do everything we can to prevent it and never give it any oxygen.”

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/biden-secret-service-after-apparent-trump-assassination-attempt/story?id=113725116

Vice President Kamala Harris, echoed Biden’s sentiments in a statement of her own and said this:

“I am deeply disturbed by the possible assassination attempt of former President Trump today. … As we gather the facts, I will be clear: I condemn political violence. We all must do our part to ensure that this incident does not lead to more violence.”

Harris said she is “thankful that former President Trump is safe” and reiterated Biden’s pledge to make sure the Secret Service is equipped to “carry out its critical mission.”

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2024/09/15/donald-trump-assassination-attempt-biden-reaction/75243382007/

FORMER PRESIDENT TRUMP BLAMES BIDEN AND HARRIS

On September 16, in an exclusive interview on Fox News Digital,  former President Trump said it was  President Biden and Vice President Harris’ “rhetoric” against him that  is causing him to be “shot at.”  Trump told  Fox News Digital that the suspected gunman “acted” on “highly inflammatory language” of Democrats.   Trump said this:

“[The suspect] believed the rhetoric of Biden and Harris, and he acted on it.  …. Their rhetoric is causing me to be shot at, when I am the one who is going to save the country, and they are the ones that are destroying the country — both from the inside and out. … They do it with a combination of rhetoric and lawsuits they wrap me up in. … These are the things that dangerous fools, like the shooter, listen to — that is the rhetoric they listen to, and the same with the first one.” 

Trump pointed to Biden and Harris’ past comments casting Trump as a “threat to democracy,” while telling Americans they are “unity” leaders. Trump said this:

“They are the opposite. … These are people that want to destroy our country. … It is called the enemy from within. They are the real threat.” 

Would be assassin Routh previously echoed Biden and Harris’ anti-Trump comments, that “Democracy is on the ballot” on his social media pages this year, and that Democrats “cannot lose.” 

Democrats, meanwhile, have repeatedly blamed Trump for his inflammatory rhetoric  and have accused him of being a “threat to democracy,” particularly in regards to his Jan. 6, 2021 speech inciting the riot at the U.S. Capitol.  Biden has also suggested that Trump was trying to incite violence with  his comments about Haitian immigrants in Springfield, Ohio.

TRUMP’S EXTENSIVE HISTORY OF INCITING VIOLENCE

It is so very disgusting that Trump is blaming President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala for the second assassination attempt.  For that reason, Trumps extensive history of inciting violence and attacks on others merits review.

THEIR EATING CATS AND DOGS

During the September 10 debate between Trump and Vice President Harris, Trump aggressively asserted false and debunked claims that Haitian immigrants in Springfield Ohio were abducting and eating pets, repeating during the  televised debate the type of inflammatory and anti-immigrant rhetoric he has promoted throughout both of his campaigns for President.

There is no evidence that Haitian immigrants in the  Ohio community are doing that, officials say. But during the debate with Vice President Kamala Harris, Trump specifically said that in Springfield Ohio, immigrants were taking over the city. Trump said this:

“They’re eating the dogs. They’re eating the cats. They’re eating the pets of the people that live there.”

Trump’s comments echoed claims made by his campaign, including his running mate, Ohio Sen. JD Vance, and other Republicans. Harris for her part called Trump “extreme” and laughed in his face after his comment. Debate moderators pointed out that city officials have said the claims are false. Springfield City and Ohio State Officials have said there have been no credible or detailed reports about the claims, even as Trump and his allies use them to amplify racist stereotypes about Black and brown immigrants.

BOMB THREATS MADE IN SPRINGFIELD

On September 16, Ohio Governor Mike DeWine said at a news conference after he met with city officials that at least 33 bomb threats have been made in Springfield, Ohio, since the false claims pushed by former President Donald Trump and his running mate Ohio Senator JD. Vance surfaced about Haitian migrants’ eating people’s pets. Sen. JD Vance spread online the  false claim that Haitian migrants were causing problems in Springfield and that “[r]eports now show that people have had their pets abducted and eaten by people who shouldn’t be in this country.”

Last week, schools in the city of around 58,000 were evacuated after bomb threats were reported. City Hall also received a threat against city facilities. Some targeted Springfield schools, including elementary school campuses. Governor  Mike DeWine said this  at a news conference after he met with city officials:

“Our children deserve to be in school. Parents deserve to feel that their children are being educated and that their children are safe.”

More than 15,000 Haitians live and work in Springfield, Ohio. Haitian migrants have been granted Temporary Protected Status by the U.S. government because of unrest in Haiti, including violent by gangs ruling the streets.

Republican Goverer DeWine, a strong Trump ally,  defended the Haitian migrants working in Springfield. He said that Trump, Vance and any other politicians has a right to talk about immigration and issues at the U.S.-Mexico border and that “it is a legitimate issue.” However, DeWine said this:

“I have a job, though, in regard to people who are here legally in Springfield and a community that is, you know, people are making comments about them. I have an obligation to speak out. … “Following what the mayor has said, what the city manager has said and what the chief of police has said is: We have no evidence that anyone is eating someone’s pets in Springfield, Ohio.”

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/30-bomb-threats-made-springfield-ohio-false-pets-claims-rcna171392

OTHER INCIDENTS OF PROMOTING VIOLENCE

There have been numerous instances where Trump has incited violence.

On March 28, Former President Donald Trump shared a video on social media that included an image of President Joe Biden bound and restrained in the back of a pickup truck.  The 20-second video, which Trump indicated was taken in Long Island, New York, shows a truck emblazoned with “Trump 2024” and a large picture depicting Biden tied up and lying on his side.

Trump was in Long Island  for the wake of fallen NYPD officer Jonathan Diller.

When reached for comment on the image in the video, Trump campaign spokesperson Steven Cheung said, “That picture was on the back of a pick up truck that was traveling down the highway.” Cheung also accused “Democrats and crazed lunatics” of calling for violence against Trump and his family, arguing that “they are actually weaponizing the justice system against him.”

Cheung pointed to comments by Biden in 2018, before he declared his candidacy, when he said that if he and Trump were in high school he’d “take him behind the gym and beat the hell out of him” if he heard him demeaning women.

Biden campaign spokesman Michael Tyler slammed Trump for posting the video.

“This image from Donald Trump is the type of crap you post when you’re calling for a bloodbath or when you tell the Proud Boys to ‘stand back and stand by.  Trump is regularly inciting political violence and it’s time people take him seriously — just ask the Capitol Police officers who were attacked protecting our democracy on January 6.”

 Trump has previously used violent imagery and rhetoric, both in his 2024 presidential campaign and before.  On March 16, he vowed that there would be a “bloodbath” if he was not re-elected, while speaking about the economy. Last year, before his numerous indictments, Trump warned about “potential death and destruction” if he were to be charged in the Manhattan district attorney’s hush money case against him.

Trump  also shared an article on Truth Social that had an image of him with a baseball bat near Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s head. The post was deleted. Trump also  used his Truth Social platform to go after Judge Juan Merchan, who is overseeing the hush money case, as well as the judge’s daughter after being hit with a partial gag order.

The link to the quoted news story with photos is here:

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2024-election/trump-shares-image-depicting-biden-tied-back-pickup-truck-rcna145712

On January 23, 2016, Donald Trump said at a rally in Sioux Center that his supporters are so loyal that he would not lose backers even if he were to shoot someone in the middle of downtown Manhattan, New York City and said this:

“I could stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody, okay, and I wouldn’t lose any voters, okay? … It’s, like, incredible.”

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/trump-says-he-could-shoot-somebody-still-maintain-support-n502911

On February 21, 2016, Trump told a crowd of his supporters in Cedar Rapids that he would pay their legal fees if they engaged in violence against protesters and said this:

“If you see somebody getting ready to throw a tomato, knock the crap out of them, would you? Seriously, OK? Just knock the hell out of them … I promise you I will pay for the legal fees. I promise, I promise.”

http://time.com/4203094/donald-trump-hecklers/

On March 9, 2016, as a protester was being escorted out of a Trump rally in Fayetteville, North Carolina, the protester was sucker-punched by another attendee and Trump said nothing when it was brought to his attention.

At a Las Vegas campaign rally in March, 2016 Trump said security guards were too gentle with a protester and said “He’s walking out with big high-fives, smiling, laughing. … I’d like to punch him in the face, I’ll tell you.”

In yet another campaign rally in March, 2016 in Warren, Michigan, Trump said of a protester “Get him out. …Try not to hurt him. If you do, I’ll defend you in court. Don’t worry about it.”

In July 2017 during a speech to police officials, Trump encourage law enforcement officials to be more violent in handling arrested offenders when he said:

“When you see these thugs being thrown into the back of a paddy wagon, you just seen them thrown in, rough. I said, ‘Please don’t be too nice … When you guys put somebody in the car and you’re protecting their head you know, the way you put their hand over [their head],” Trump continued, mimicking the motion. “Like, don’t hit their head and they’ve just killed somebody, don’t hit their head. … You can take the hand away, OK?’”

During a rally in Montana ahead of the 2018 midterms, Trump praised Republican Greg Gianforte for body slamming a reporter while running for his congressional seat in 2017 and said “any guy who can do a body slam, he is my type!”

PIPE BOMBS SENT TO TRUMP CRITICS BY TRUMP SUPPORTER

In October, 2018, 14 pipe bombs were sent to Democrats who were outspoken critics of President Trump and people who he has vilified at his political rallies and on TWITTER.

The New York Times reported that on October 26, 2018 Federal authorities made an arrest in connection with the nationwide bombing campaign against outspoken Democratic critics of President Trump. The suspect was identified as Cesar Sayoc Jr., 56, of Aventura, Florida. Sayoc is a registered Republican.  He has a lengthy criminal history in Florida dating back to 1991. Sayoc’s criminal record includes felony theft, drug and fraud charges, as well as being arrested and accused of threatening to use a bomb.

Pipe bombs were sent to the home addresses of:

Former President Barack Obama
Former Vice President Joe Biden
Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton
Former United States Attorney General Eric Holder
Former Director of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) John O. Brennan
California Congresswoman Maxine Waters
Florida Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz
Billionaire philanthropist George Soros
Actor Robert Di Nero

A pipe bomb was also delivered to the offices of CNN in Midtown Manhattan, New York City.

During his arrest, Sayvoc’s white van was also seized as evidence. The van’s windows were plastered with a thick collage of pro-Trump stickers. Photos of the van showed that one of the stickers depicted President Trump standing in front of flames and the American flag. Another was of Hillary Clinton’s face in the crosshairs of a rifle scope. A third said: “CNN SUCKS.”

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/26/nyregion/cnn-cory-booker-pipe-bombs-sent.html

Photos and video emerged of Sayvoc attending a February, 2017 Trump Rally in Melbourne, Florida. He was holding a placard reading “CNN SUCKS”. Social media posts maintained by Cesar Sayoc Jr., contain conspiratorial memes promoting President Trump and mocking, criticizing and threatening virtually every prominent Democrat he sent a pipe bomb.

One post involving former Attorney General Eric Holder appointed by President Obama said “See you real soon. Tick Tock”.

In a September TWEET to former Vice President Joe Biden a person  wrote:

“Hug your beloved son, Niece, wife family real close every time U walk out your home.”

https://talkingpointsmemo.com/muckraker/mail-bomb-suspect-sayoc-shared-social-media-posts-about-targets

On Wednesday, October 24, 2018, after a briefing with FBI, DOJ, Homeland Security and Secret Service and during a subsequent White House function, President Trump had this to say about the “pipe bomber”:

“The safety of the American people is my highest and absolute priority. … The full weight of our government is being deployed to conduct and bring those responsible for these despicable acts to justice. We will spare no resources or expense in this effort. And I wanted to tell you that, in these times, we have to unify, we have to come together, and send one very clear, strong, unmistakable message, that that acts or threats of political violence have no place in the United States of America.”

https://deadline.com/2018/10/donald-trump-suspected-bombs-sent-to-his-favorite-targets-no-place-in-united-states-1202488702/

On Thursday, October 25, 2018, despite his lofty proclamations that “the safety of the American people is my highest and absolute priority’” and the very a day after CNN and Democrats were the targets of the pipe bombs, Trump in a TWEET blamed the media for much of the “anger” in society by saying:

“A very big part of the anger we see today in our society is caused by the purposely false and inaccurate reporting of the Mainstream Media that I refer to as Fake News. It has gotten so bad and hateful that it is beyond description. Mainstream Media must clean up its act, FAST!”

https://www.cnn.com/2018/10/25/politics/trump-blames-media-for-anger-after-attacks/index.html

JANUARY 6, 2020 CAPITAL RIOT

On the Morning of January 6, a defeated Donald Trump for reelection spoke to thousands of his upset and angry supporters in Washington, DC in front of the White House before the Congress was to schedule to accept the electoral college vote as mandated by the United States Constitution and electing Joe Biden President.  As usual, Trump’s speech was inflammatory and full of lies. Trump told the crowd that the election had been “rigged” by “radical democrats” and the “fake news media” and he said in part:

“We will never give up. We will never concede. It doesn’t happen. You don’t concede when there’s theft involved. … Our country has had enough. We’re not going to take it anymore.”

Not at all surprising, Trump stoked his followers to take action and head to capitol hill to protest and said:

“And after this, we’re going to walk down there, and I’ll be there with you, we’re going to walk down … to the Capitol and we are going to cheer on our brave senators and congressmen and women. … And we’re probably not going to be cheering so much for some of them. Because you’ll never take back our country with weakness. You have to show strength and you have to be strong. You’re the real people. You’re the people that built this nation. You’re not the people that tore down this nation.”

Soon after Trump spoke, his supporters believing all Trumps lies that the election was rigged, when it was not, went to the United States Capitol to protest. The Congress had already begun the process of counting and certifying the electoral college vote. A mob was able to breach security and successfully enter the building, where one person was shot and later died.

Hundreds of pro-Trump protesters pushed through barriers set up along the perimeter of the Capitol, where they engaged with officers in full riot gear, some calling police officers “traitors” for doing their jobs. About 90 minutes later the domestic terrorists got into the building and the doors to the House and Senate were locked. Shortly after, the House floor was evacuated by police. Vice President Mike Pence was also evacuated from the chamber, he was to perform his role in the counting of electoral votes. Some of the terrorists had even started to chant “HANG MIKE PENCE, HANG MIKE PENCE”.

The protesters first breached exterior security barriers, and video footage showed the domestic terrorists gathering and some clashing with police near the Capitol building. A number of Trump terrorists climbed up the side of the Capitol building to gain access. Windows were broken to gain access. Protesters roamed the interior of the building and went to the House Chamber and congressional offices and did property damage. In the end, 6 people died, one domestic terrorist shot and killed by capitol police with one capitol police officer succumbing to his injuries.

Within 7 hours after protestors took over the Capitol building and after they were evacuated from the building, the Congress returned to work and about 4:30 am in the morning on January 7, President Joe Biden was elected the new President of the United Sates. The final electoral college vote was Joe Biden 306 electoral votes, Donald Trump 232 electoral votes.

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

Both assassination attempts on Trump are nothing more than a reflection of just how seriously divided this country has become mostly because of Trump. The first assassin was killed but not before wounding Trump as well as killing one and critically injuring two spectators. The second assassin was at least caught and will likely spend the rest of his life in federal prison.

There is no place for violence, political or otherwise, in this country.  We are in dangerous times and we must appeal to our better angels.  The political rhetoric and acts of violence in this country must stop and it should be condemned in no uncertain terms by all.

For the last 8 years, there is little doubt that Trump promoted hostility, mistrust and violence towards the press as well as his critics with his words and conduct. Trump promoted violence, hostility and mistrust when he first ran for President and he is doing it again as he runs in 2024 for a second term.

Now that Trump is twice a victim of gun violence himself, it is clear he has no intention of toning down his rhetoric of violence as he plays the martyr and escalates things even further and continues with his lying ways.

In 1997, the New Mexico Judicial Performance Evaluation Commission (JPEC) was created by the Supreme Court of New Mexico to improve the performance of judges and provide useful, credible information to voters on judges standing for retention.  The JPEC was established after the New Mexico Judiciary went from a system of strict partisan elections to a “hybrid” system of one partisan election followed by retention elections. The JPEC is a taxpayer and State funded Commission created by the New Mexico Supreme Court to improve the performance of all state judges

2024 RETENTION ELECTION RECOMMENDATIONS

On September 13, 2024, the New Mexico Judicial Performance Evaluation Commission issued the following press release making recommendations as to what Judges should be voted to be retained in the November 5 elections:

“FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE – September 13, 2024

ALBUQUERQUE – The New Mexico Judicial Performance Evaluation Commission (JPEC) today recommended voters retain 35 of 39 judges who are standing for retention on the 2024 General Election ballot. The other four judicial retention candidates have not served sufficient time for JPEC to make a recommendation to voters. Under state law, the judges must receive at least 57 percent approval to remain on the bench.

“We are pleased that all the judges we evaluated earned retain recommendations this year, due to mostly positive evaluations from those they interact with including other judges, lawyers, resource staff such as law enforcement and probation/parole officers, CASA volunteers, CYFD, interpreters and, in some cases, jurors. A number of judges had improved their survey scores since their previous evaluations,” said Denise Torres, chair of JPEC.

Lee Hunt, vice chair of JPEC, added, “Some judicial candidates expressed a willingness to address any weaknesses and a sincere desire to continue improving their performance during our personal interviews with them.”

This year, JPEC’s recommendations to voters statewide are:

Retain Honorable Briana H. Zamora, Supreme Court of New Mexico

Retain Honorable Jennifer L. Attrep, Megan P. Duffy and Shammara H. Henderson of the New Mexico Court of Appeals

For the District Court, JPEC’s recommendations are:

First Judicial District Court – Serving Los Alamos, Rio Arriba and Santa Fe counties
Retain Honorable Bryan Paul Biedscheid, Shannon Broderick Bulman and Matthew Justin Wilson.

Second Judicial District Court – Serving Bernalillo County
Retain Honorable Denise Barela-Shepherd, Cindy Leos, Victor S. Lopez, Brett R. Loveless, Daniel E. “Dan” Ramczyk and Courtney Bryn Weaks.

Insufficient time to evaluate Honorable David Allen Murphy and Emeterio L. Rudolfo.

Third Judicial District Court – Serving Doña Ana County
Retain Honorable Richard M. Jacquez, James T. Martin and Conrad F. Perea.

Fourth Judicial District Court – Serving Guadalupe, Mora and San Miguel counties
Retain Honorable Floripa “Flora” Gallegos.

Fifth Judicial District Court – Serving Chaves, Eddy and Lea counties
Retain Honorable James M. “Jim” Hudson and Lisa B. Riley.

Insufficient time to evaluate Honorable Ann Marie Cherokee Lewis.

Sixth Judicial District Court – Serving Grant, Hidalgo and Luna counties
Retain Honorable James B. “Jim” Foy.

Seventh Judicial District Court – Serving Catron, Sierra, Socorro and Torrance counties
Retain Honorable Shannon L. Murdock-Poff.

Eighth Judicial District Court – Serving Colfax, Taos and Union counties
Retain Honorable Jeffrey B. “Jeff” Shannon.

Ninth Judicial District Court – Serving Curry and Roosevelt counties
Retain Honorable Fred Travis Van Soelen.

Eleventh Judicial District Court – Serving McKinley and San Juan counties
Retain Honorable Sarah V. Weaver.

Twelfth Judicial District Court – Serving Lincoln and Otero counties
Retain Honorable Daniel A. “Dan” Bryant.

Thirteenth Judicial District Court – Serving Cibola, Sandoval and Valencia counties
Retain Honorable Cindy M. Mercer and Allen R. Smith.

Insufficient time to evaluate Honorable Allison P. Martinez.

For the Bernalillo County Metropolitan Court, JPEC’s recommendations are:

Retain Honorable Felicia Blea-Rivera, Rosemary Cosgrove-Aguilar, Michelle Castillo Dowler, Asra I. Elliott, Yvette K. Gonzales, Nina Aviva Safier and Renée Torres.

Judges are evaluated on their overall performance in four main areas: 1) legal ability; 2) fairness; 3) communication skills; and 4) preparation, attentiveness, temperament and control over proceedings.

JPEC also reviews statistics from the Administrative Office of the Courts for each judge including caseloads, excusals (reasons a judge is excused from hearing a case) and the time it takes to get cases resolved.

In addition, JPEC meets one-on-one with each judge being evaluated to review the survey results as well as his or her self-assessment of performance.

JPEC has posted evaluations in English and Spanish on its website, www.nmjpec.org. Individuals may download voter’s guides for their judicial district or call 1-800-687-3417 to request information by mail. In addition, JPEC will inform voters about its evaluations through advertising and social media.

“We encourage each individual to vote in all elections for which they are eligible – including the judicial retention elections. These elections are near the end of the ballot, so please take the time to go all the way through the ballot. Your vote does matter,” Torres concluded.

JPEC has 15 volunteer members, including seven lawyers and eight non-lawyers who are appointed to staggered terms. Members are appointed to represent diverse professions, backgrounds and geographical areas of the state.”

The link to the press release is here:

https://nmjpec.org/en/news/122-2024-nmjpec-news-091324

https://www.kob.com/new-mexico/nonpartisan-commission-recommends-35-of-39-judges-for-retention-in-this-years-election/

ABOUT THE JUDICIAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION COMMISSION

The Judicial Performance Evaluation Commission (JPEC) is a nonpartisan volunteer commission.  The JPEC is made of up 15 individuals, 7 lawyers and 8 non-lawyers, who are appointed to staggered terms by the Supreme Court of New Mexico and who are from all over the State of New Mexico.  Commission members are selected from nominations by the Governor, Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, Speaker of the House, President Pro Tempore, House Minority Leader, Senate Minority Leader and President of the State Bar.

Members are appointed to represent divergent professions, backgrounds and geographical areas of the state.  Members go through an approval process and agree to donate a significant amount of time to evaluate judges midway through their terms in office as well as when they are standing for retention.

https://nmjpec.org/en/

https://nmjpec.org/en/staff/jpec-commissioners

PARTISAN ELECTIONS FOLLOWED BY RETENTION ELECTIONS

New Mexico Court Judges at all levels are initially elected in partisan elections to full terms and then after serving the term, they must go before voters thereafter for retention to serve another term.  Every election cycle where Judges appear on the ballot, the JPEC evaluates judges by sending out a confidential survey to all licensed attorneys who grade the Judges.  The Commission then rates the judges and recommends to voters who they should retain.

Once a judge is appointed or is elected first in a partisan race by 50% plus one of the vote, that judge faces a retention vote for subsequent terms and must garner 57% of the vote to be retained. Any Judge who does not secure a “YES” vote from 57% of those voting on their retention are removed from office and the Governor then appoints a judge to fill the vacancy.

To perform the evaluations, the JPEC distributes confidential surveys to licensed attorneys, court jurors and others who interact with the court. The commission also interviews the judges, reviews statistics from the Administrative Office of the Courts and sends observers into the courtroom. New Mexico judges who are up for retention must receive approval from 57% of voters to keep their seat on the bench and not the 50% plus one required in contested partisan.

The JPEC posts all their results and recommendations to vote “YES” to retain or vote “NO” to retain on its web site. Historically, judges who JPEC recommends not be retained receive about 12% fewer votes than judges who are recommended for retention.

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

It is believed that this is the first time in a very long time, and it may be the very  first time,  that the Judicial Performance Evaluation Commission (JPEC)  has recommended retention of all judges for election.  In the past there have been a number of controversial “do not retain” judge recommendations and those judges have gone on to be voted out of office.  Past “do not retain” recommendations have included removal of a long term Metro Court Presiding Judge and another Judge with decades of trial experience and the commanding officer to the New Mexico National Guard. The JPEC has sent out mailers advertising what judges should and should not be retained using taxpayer funding appropriated to the commission.

All State of New Mexico Judges are strictly prohibited by the Code of Judicial Conduct from holding any elected or appointed positions in political parties. All State Judges are strictly prohibited from endorsing any candidate for office and cannot solicit donations for elections.

Candidates running for Judge must have a confidential finance committee set up to raise money for them, the committee is prevented from disclosing to the judicial candidate names of donors to prevent the Judges from knowing who donated to their campaigns to avoid the appearance and accusation of giving preferential treatment in decisions rendered.

A Judge is also prevented by the Code of Judicial Conduct from making “extrajudicial comments” to the media or groups that may reflect on their fairness and impartiality. Judges are prohibited from defending their decisions and sentencings and their job performance in a public forum outside of their courtrooms so criticizing judges is like “shooting fish” in a barrel.

The JPEC recommendations do have a definite impact on any Judge’s chances for retention. Once the Judicial Performance Evaluation Commission issues its ratings, there is virtually very little or no recourse for any Judge to dispute the no retention recommendation given to them by the JPEC. The JPEC does not give “equal time” on their web page to the Judges who are recommended not to be retained as would be the case at a debate on an incumbent candidate’s job performance.

The JPEC  is suppose “to provide useful, credible information to voters on judges standing for retention”, yet there is nothing in great detail on its web page.  It is doubtful that confidential surveys and interviews from those who may have a personal axe to grind against any judge are much of a use to give a complete and accurate picture of any judge’s job performance every day they are on the bench.

The JPEC wants voters to accept as gospel without challenge the recommendations they make on retention.  JPEC goes so far as to boast when it releases its evaluation results that it will inform voters about its evaluations through advertising and social media. It is essentially campaigning on behalf of or in opposition to Judges.  It is totally inappropriate for a government agency, funded with taxpayer money, to be telling people how to vote.

Elected officials working in other branches of government aren’t subjected to similar evaluations and that is what political elections are all about.  There has to be a better way for JPEC to seek removal of Judges for poor job performance than to go to voters with recommendation and removal should be done by the Supreme Court.

If there is indeed a problem with the job performance of any judge that would justify removal, the appropriate remedy would be an investigation by the Judicial Standards Commission and result in the Judge’s removal by the New Mexico Supreme Court.

The JPEC is a threat to the independence of the Judiciary and the New Mexico Supreme Court should abolish it.  The New Mexico Judicial Performance Evaluation Commission is nothing more than a “political hit squad” that uses taxpayer money to actively campaign for or against Judges.