Attorney General Gary King (Photo by Heath Haussamen)

Attorney General Gary King’s unsuccessful 2002 campaign for Congress broke federal law and FEC rules by using an electronic signature of a one-time campaign treasurer on finance reports that treasurer didn’t review.

From the Albuquerque Journal:

“The Federal Election Commission has concluded that Attorney General Gary King’s 2004 congressional campaign committee filed 45 official reports with the electronic signature of treasurer Bruce Malott – even though Malott never reviewed the documents.

“The signature is required to comply with federal rules that the treasurer has verified the accuracy of the information, and the commission’s legal analysis concluded the King campaign’s use of Malott’s signature failed to follow federal law and commission regulations.”

Malott contended that he resigned as treasurer in 2005. King claimed Malott never officially resigned, the Journal reported.

More from the article:

“The commission concluded in a ruling dated May 4 that the dispute over whether Malott had resigned was irrelevant.

“The commission staff found the differing versions of the facts to be in ‘sharp conflict’ but concluded that, even assuming King’s version was correct, ‘the committee used Malott’s electronic signature on reports that he did not personally review and certify as commission regulations instruct.’”

The campaign committee no longer exists, so the FEC plans no further action.

Pat Woods, left, and Angie Spears

The governor has offended some with her backing of Angie Spears in the GOP Senate District 7 primary race. Meanwhile, Pat Woods’ statements about campaign contributions and lobbying raise ethical questions about his prior activities in Santa Fe.

The GOP primary race to replace Clinton Harden in the N.M. Senate has been colored by controversy that includes anger over the governor’s backing of Angie Spears and Pat Woods’ shifting explanation for why he gave campaign contributions to Democrats.

The governor has offended some Republicans, and her involvement in the race led a third candidate to drop out and endorse Woods. Meanwhile, Woods’ statements about campaign contributions and lobbying raise ethical questions about his prior activities in Santa Fe.

The controversy started when Harden, R-Clovis, announced he wouldn’t seek re-election this year – and, as NMPolitics.net reported, “gave Gov. Susana Martinez her first victory of the 2012 election.” More from that article:

“Not that she’ll publicly claim victory or he’ll give it to her, but Harden’s announcement came days after the Clovis Republican learned that he would face a tough primary challenge that had the fingerprints of Martinez and her political adviser, Jay McCleskey, all over it.

“Martinez, also a Republican, has repeatedly threatened to help voters decide what to do about legislative incumbents who get in the way of the reforms she proposes. As of its last report in October, her political action committee had about $300,000 on hand to do just that.”

Spears jumped into the Senate District 7 race against Harden with several high-profile endorsements already lined up. She pledged support for the governor’s stances on driver’s licenses for undocumented immigrants and education reform. At the time, Harden had a campaign website up and appeared headed toward seeking re-election, but the quickly decided against it.

He had clashed with Martinez before. As McCleskey recently pointed out to the Clovis News Journal, Harden “was one of two Republican senators who voted for the 2003 law that gave driver’s licenses to illegal immigrants, Harden aggressively supported a $128 million tax increase that Gov. Martinez strongly opposed and vetoed, and Harden was the only Republican senator who sided with labor unions and against the governor on education reform.”

‘Not interested in our next senator being bought and paid for’

After Harden announced he would not seek another term, Martinez almost immediately endorsed Spears. McCleskey says Martinez didn’t recruit Spears, but Harden told NMPolitics.net he believes Martinez was privately backing her even before he decided against running.

Spears told NMPolitics.net she has wanted to run for Senate ever since working as a policy analyst during the Johnson administration. Before entering this year’s race, she said she heard Harden openly discuss “his ambivalence about serving another term, his lack of enthusiasm for the repeal of the driver’s license law and his stance against education reform,” so she decided to run.

Any claim that she was recruited by Martinez is false, Spears said.

But opinions like Harden’s persist. Last month, Mark Myers quit the GOP primary race and endorsed Woods, making it a two-person contest between Woods and Spears. Myers and Woods complained about Martinez’s involvement in the race.

“Pat and I have the same ideals; we appeal to the same people,” Myers was quoted by the Clovis News Journal as saying. “I’m not interested in our next senator being bought and paid for from the Rio Grande Valley.”

Woods’ explanation for contributions shifts

Martinez hit back in a statement from McCleskey to the Clovis newspaper pointing out that Woods has made political contributions to “liberal Democrats (that) are being used to attack Republican legislative candidates and the governor’s agenda in New Mexico.”

Woods decided to tackle that issue head-on, posting a page on his website that lists his political contributions since 2002 and breaking down the percentages given to Republicans (76 percent) and Democrats (24 percent).

Here’s what Wood’s website currently states about a $250 donation he gave to former Attorney General Patricia Madrid, a Democrat, in 2002 and a $100 donation he gave in 2009 to state Rep. Debbie Rodella, D-Española, who chairs the House Business and Industry committee:

“Contributions made as appreciation for support of beef check off and agricultural issues. I have never been a paid lobbyist. My occupation is farmer and rancher.”

That may be what Woods’ website says now, but it’s not how the site explained the donations until NMPolitics.net started asking questions. As this image taken by NMPolitics.net shows, early last week, the website explained the contributions this way:

“Contributions for specific lobbying efforts for the beef check off and the agricultural exemption to worker’s compensation.”

Then, as this image shows, later last week Woods added this statement:

“I have never been a paid lobbyist. I have only gone to Santa Fe as a private citizen. My occupation is farmer and rancher.”

Woods: ‘What you’re inferring is pretty silly’

So was Woods a lobbyist or not? And did he give the campaign contributions to try to influence official decisions – as his website originally seemed to state – or in appreciation of actions Madrid and Rodella had already taken – as his website now states?

The questions are important because giving contributions to affect official decisions is considered unethical – at best. In fact, when Madrid said during a debate in 2006 that campaign contributions buy people access to public officials, she faced harsh criticism from me and others.

Woods told NMPolitics.net any contributions he’s made “were because those individuals stood with me on agricultural issues.” He explained his “specific lobbying efforts” statement by saying that, “while I may not support every position held by a representative, I appreciated their position on important agricultural issues.”

He didn’t elaborate on what those issues were, though NMPolitics.net asked. NMPolitics.net asked a follow-up question: Did the contributions come in response to a position by the official that you appreciated, or were the contributions an attempt to get the official to take the position you wanted?

Here’s how Woods responded:

“Frankly, what you’re inferring is pretty silly. Do you really believe that $100 or $250 could possibly influence a legislator’s vote? My contributions to those elected representatives were made in appreciation of the positions they took on important agriculture issues.”

Then the language about “specific lobbying efforts” was replaced on Woods’ campaign website with the “appreciation” language.

Spears calls donations ‘play-to-play politics at work’

After hearing Woods, a farmer, talk about the contributions during a recent GOP breakfast, Spears told NMPolitics.net she heard Woods describe “pay-to-play politics at work.” She said he described fighting against a farm-related bill in explaining donations to Rodella and Sen. Tim Keller, D-Albuquerque.

Spears suggested Woods was referring to 2009 legislation that would have provided additional worker’s compensation coverage for farm and ranch workers – a bill that died in the committee Rodella chairs. That would match with the initial statement Woods posted on his website.

Spears also said Woods claimed to have given donations to Rodella and Keller in the hopes that the bill would not resurface in 2010 – and that he said he was pleased when it did not.

“I was surprised to hear Mr. Woods’ explanation that he made these contributions because these politicians helped him with a bill that benefited his business,” Spears said. “I believe candidates should be supported by those who believe in their philosophy, principles and agenda, not because they took an official act that benefited the donor financially.”

Woods was a registered lobbyist

In addition, though Woods said on an earlier version of his web page that he has “only gone to Santa Fe as a private citizen,” the Secretary of State’s Office confirmed that Woods was a registered lobbyist from 1997-2003, and that he represented the Farmer’s Electric Cooperative of New Mexico.

Woods told NMPolitics.net he may have been registered as a lobbyist for the coop or the N.M. Farm and Livestock Bureau, but he was never paid to lobby. He had to register as a lobbyist because he was a board member for both organizations, he said.

He stopped registering as a lobbyist in 2003 when the secretary of state advised both groups that their board members weren’t in Santa Fe during sessions long enough to be required to register.

“Other than gas mileage reimbursement for meetings and the health insurance that the Farmer’s Electric Coop makes available to all its board members, I have not received a dime,” he said.

Then Woods removed the statement from his website claiming he had “only gone to Santa Fe as a private citizen.”

Supporting the governor

In spite of his frustration with the governor’s backing of his opponent, Woods says he, like Spears, is supportive of the agenda of Martinez, who remains popular in New Mexico and especially among GOP voters. The most recent poll had Martinez’s approval at 54 percent overall and 87 percent among Republicans.

“I fully support Governor Martinez’s legislative agenda,” Woods said. “I believe it’s time to stop illegal immigrants from getting New Mexico driver’s licenses, reform education and cut spending to stay on budget.”

There’s no Democrat running, so unless an independent or minor-party candidate joins the race, the winner of the GOP primary will be uncontested in November. That means Martinez is likely to pick up an ally on some of her most high-profile initiatives.

Though he has been at odds with Martinez at times, even Harden told NMPolitics.net he’s supportive of the governor and wants her succeed. His issue, he said, is with McCleskey, and he said there’s a “loosely knitted” group in the GOP that opposes McCleskey’s involvement in the Martinez administration.

“My sense is there’s an anti-Jay McCleskey group more than an anti-Susana Martinez,” he said.

Harden said he believes McCleskey orchestrated Spears’ candidacy.

“I feel that way. I think the strategic shots are being called by Jay McCleskey, period,” he said. “That’s my opinion. I would really have to work hard to prove it. … But it’s darn sure my opinion, and it’s shared by a lot of people.”

It’s not the first time Martinez or McCleskey has faced that allegation. Both have told NMPolitics.net it isn’t true.

“When I make a decision, it’s because I’m informed,” Martinez has said. “I try to get both sides of the issues. I don’t surround myself with ‘yes’ people. I’m very independent. I’m not a figurehead.”

Daniel Manzano

The New Mexico Coalition Against Domestic Violence opposes any amendment, bill or substitution to the Violence Against Women Reauthorization Act that will weaken or eliminate provisions to protect Native American, LGBT and immigrant communities.

A version of the Violence Against Women Reauthorization Act was recently passed through the U.S. House Judiciary Committee. While on title alone this may sound good, it can be extremely harmful for victims of domestic violence, human trafficking, sexual assault, dating violence and stalking.

As introduced, the Violence Against Women Reauthorization Act of 2012 (VAWA) – H.R. 4970, sponsored by Rep. Sandy Adams, R-Florida – severely undermines protections available to people of New Mexico. The New Mexico Coalition Against Domestic Violence opposes any amendment, bill or substitution to VAWA that will weaken or eliminate provisions to protect Native American, LGBT and immigrant communities – all of who are vital to New Mexico’s diverse landscape.

Under its current guise, this is exactly what Congresswoman Adam’s version of VAWA does. Her version of the bill that passed the House Judiciary Committee on the vote of 17–15, an almost straight-party vote, contains dangerous changes for immigrant victims. It also omitted provisions to allow tribes to prosecute domestic violence committed by non-Indians. It weakens housing provisions that were included in the Senate bill and uses unacceptable “gender–neutral” language that ignores, rather than addresses, issues of LGBT victims.

We are asking our three congressmen to please follow the leadership provided by our two U.S. senators, Tom Udall and Jeff Bingaman. Both co-sponsored S. 1925, “The real VAWA,” in the Senate.

Senator Tom Udall stood up and spoke out about the current loophole affecting Native Americans. Indian women face rates of victimization many times higher than those faced by non-Indian women, due to a current gap in law enforcement and court jurisdiction over crimes of domestic and sexual violence occurring on tribal land.

State courts and state law enforcement have said very clearly that they cannot take on the responsibility of addressing this horrific level of victimization. The Senate’s version of VAWA addresses this loophole by allowing tribal courts to hold violent offenders accountable.

A common purpose

The Violence Against Women Act was enacted in 1994 and reauthorized twice in 2000 and 2005. It has a long history of uniting lawmakers with the common purpose of protecting survivors of domestic violence. When VAWA was first conceived, Congress recognized that the noncitizen status of battered immigrants can make them particularly vulnerable to crimes of domestic violence, sexual assault, dating violence and stalking. The abusers of undocumented immigrants often exploit the victims’ immigration status, leaving victims afraid to seek services or report the abuse to law enforcement and making them fearful of assisting with the investigation and prosecution of these crimes.

Congress sought to address this through the enactment of provisions in VAWA that enhance safety for victims and their children and provide an important tool for law enforcement to investigate and prosecute crimes.

The changes proposed in H.R. 4970 dramatically undercut these existing provisions to protect immigrant survivors. In fact, the bill would create more obstacles for immigrant victims seeking to report crimes, which increases the danger to these victims by eliminating important confidentially protections, undermining current anti-fraud protections, and rolling back years of progress and commitments made on the part of Congress to protect our most vulnerable victims.

On behalf of the 27 domestic violence shelters and programs we represent, and on behalf of all the clients they serve, we ask Congressmen Pearce, Heinrich and Luján, to not let this version of VAWA pass the House floor. Pass a version of VAWA that is similar to the Senate’s bill (S. 1925), which will protect survivors of domestic violence here in the Land of Enchantment.

Daniel Manzano is director of policy at The New Mexico Coalition Against Domestic Violence, a nonpartisan, nonprofit organization serving as a statewide advocacy organization, coordinating a response to domestic violence through public awareness, education, training, technical assistance and legislative and policy work. 

Andrew Moralez, left, and Joseph Cervantes

The special audit of Sunland Park released Monday includes findings related to Andrew Moralez and Joseph Cervantes. Both say they were trying to clean up the government in the scandal-plagued city.

The special audit state officials used to justify suspending two Sunland Park city officials on Monday includes findings related to two current candidates for seats in the N.M. Legislature.

Andrew Moralez and Joseph Cervantes both say they were trying to clean up the government in the scandal-plagued city.

Moralez, who was Sunland Park city manager for 10 months until he was fired by the city council in July 2011, is named several times in the state auditor’s report, which you can read here.

In announcing the suspensions of the city’s finance director and purchasing agent on Monday, DFA said others might also have been suspended, had they still been employed by the city, including two former city managers – one apparently being Moralez.

Moralez, a Democrat who is now seeking the open District 52 seat in the N.M. House, is cited in the report as having approved expenditures from a fund aimed at securing a new border crossing in Sunland Park “without proper supporting documentation.” He’s also named as failing to “request support for costs before approving payments” from the fund.

That fund has been at the center of controversy. The auditor’s testing of almost $1 million spent from it identified many problems, including fraud that’s already at the center of a criminal case against then-Mayor Pro Tem Daniel Salinas and others. In that criminal case, money from the fund was allegedly used to pay for alcohol, strippers and prostitutes for Salinas and others during a trip to a conference in Mexico.

Moralez wasn’t on that trip to Mexico and has not been accused of any criminal wrongdoing. And he was no friend to Salinas, who was instrumental in his firing.

The audit also states that Moralez failed to submit a complete city budget for fiscal year 2012 to DFA.

‘Anybody who walked into the mess I walked into…’

Moralez told NMPolitics.net no one in his position – trying to clean up a city so plagued by scandal and with a budget deficit of several hundred thousand dollars – would have been in the job for 10 months without making a mistake. It took time to learn who he could trust, he said.

In the meantime, expenditures were brought to him for approval that had already gone through a department head, the finance director and the head of purchasing, and his priority was delivering services to the city’s 14,000 residents.

“Anybody who walked into the mess I walked into, it’s going to happen,” Moralez said.

He cited one audit finding – procurement code violations related to a contract with Javier Ortiz to assist with the border crossing project – as evidence that he was standing up to corruption. The audit states that the contract with Ortiz lacks Moralez’s signature. Moralez said that’s because he refused to sign a contract he viewed as problematic and in violation of the law.

Once Moralez started challenging the status quo in Sunland Park, he claimed, his time as city manager was short. He says he asked DFA for help in December 2010 but was told the agency didn’t have the resources. He started his own, internal investigations into nepotism and problems with contracts in May and June of 2011.

“When I started asking all these questions and started these investigations, looking into stuff, then I wasn’t very popular,” Moralez said.

Turning to Cervantes for help

That’s about the time Moralez brought in Cervantes, an attorney, to help. Cervantes, a Democrat, is vacating his state House seat to run for the N.M. Senate seat that includes Sunland Park. Moralez is seeking to replace Cervantes in the House.

Moralez hired Cervantes as a city contractor in June 2011. The audit notes that the city paid Cervantes $150 per hour, which added up to $6,593 – a low enough amount that city council approval and competitive bidding were not required.

But the audit states this:

“We did not note any documentation that indicated that the City procured the services (from Cervantes) according to the ‘best obtainable price,’ which is required for this monetary amount.”

The audit doesn’t accuse the city of a procurement code violation in the hiring of Cervantes.

Moralez said he needed the help of an attorney with ethics and experience. Cervantes is the town attorney for Mesilla and has pushed reform legislation in Santa Fe.

‘No willingness to accept this legal advice’

When he hired Cervantes, Moralez was trying to get rid of the city’s longtime contract attorney, Frank Coppler of Santa Fe, and replace him with an in-house attorney who he said would be more accessible and accountable. Moralez terminated the city’s contract with Coppler in June or July 2011, then entered into the contract with Cervantes – an agreement Moralez said he intended to keep in place until he could hire a new lawyer as an employee.

It was not meant to be. The Albuquerque Journal reported that, at a chaotic council meeting on July 15, 2011, the city terminated contracts with Coppler and Cervantes and the council fired Moralez on a vote of 4-2.

Cervnates had advised the council that firing Moralez would violate the state Open Meetings Act because the public wasn’t given proper notice of that agenda item. Coppler disagreed and the council sided with him.

Coppler was later rehired and remains the city’s attorney to this day.

The Santa Fe attorney’s contract, the special audit states, violated the procurement code because the city didn’t seek bids for the contract. During the 2010-2012 fiscal years, the city paid Coppler $481,378.86 in legal fees.

Moralez said it was outrageous that a city with 14,000 residents was spending so much on an attorney.

“We had to pay $1,500 just for him to travel from Santa Fe and back,” he said.

Cervantes told NMPolitics.net that Moralez asked him to “come in and try to help Sunland Park government get out of an unlawful contract” with Coppler.

“It became immediately clear that there was no willingness to accept this legal advice, and the council rejected my efforts to have the city government comply with the Open Meetings Act,” he said.

NMPolitics.net e-mailed Coppler for comment but has not yet heard back.

Eric Griego

I’ve made Wall Street accountability a core issue in my Democratic primary against two more conservative opponents in New Mexico’s First Congressional District.

Today, I’m proud to become the first congressional candidate in the nation to air a TV ad that stands for a simple, principled idea: Wall Street bankers who broke the law belong in jail.

I’ve made Wall Street accountability a core issue in my Democratic primary against two more conservative opponents in New Mexico’s First Congressional District. If candidates like Elizabeth Warren and me win this year, it will send a signal to the political establishment that it’s time to truly hold Wall Street accountable.

Here are five specific things I would do if elected to Congress:

• Fight to increase 20-fold the number of investigators for the financial crimes federal task force led by New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman. Right now, this task force only has 55 investigators and prosecutors. The Savings and Loan crisis of the 1980s was staffed with over 1,000 investigators, experts and prosecutors. That effort yielded more than 600 convictions and $130 million for taxpayers. One of the first bills I offer will be to increase the funding and staffing for this financial crimes task force.
• Push for increased funding for the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau – the federal watchdog on Wall Street, created by Elizabeth Warren – to strengthen its investigative capabilities. Even a small additional investment can avert billions, or trillions, of dollars in economic damage by Wall Street.
• Push the U.S. Justice Department to more aggressively prosecute white-dollar crimes by Wall Street bankers. To this day, not one Wall Street banker who broke the law, tanked the economy and took away people’s homes and savings is in jail. We need to hold them accountable, and members of Congress can exert key leverage with the Justice Department to make investigations and prosecutions happen.
• Strengthen the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, and close the loophole in the legislation’s “Volcker Rule” that was exploited by JPMorgan recently – when their risky bets lost $2 billion. Many of the legislation’s provisions are designed to go in effect in 2014, so the rules are still being written. Congress can’t allow Wall Street bankers to write their own rules – we need Wall Street reform to stay on the agenda in Congress.
• Pass a new Glass-Steagall Act to separate investment banks from traditional banking – so people’s life savings are not gambled away by Wall Street. Elizabeth Warren and the Progressive Change Campaign Committee started a grassroots campaign for a new Glass-Steagall on Monday, and within hours over 40,000 people joined the cause. I’m proud to be one of those people – and passing a new Glass-Steagall will be a priority of mine in Congress.

A long, consistent record

In this race for Congress in New Mexico’s First District, I am the one Democrat with a long, consistent record of taking on the status quo and powerful corporate interests. Not just when it’s easy, but even when it’s hard.

On the Albuquerque City Council, I took on predatory lenders and fought to get corporate money out of Albuquerque elections. I took on the mayor’s Republican coalition to fight to increase the minimum wage and to create the inspector general’s office to investigate fraud and abuse in City Hall. I also took on the mayor and his powerful big developer allies to fight for smart growth.

In the State Senate, I took on the oil and gas industry to invest in clean energy jobs. I took on the insurance companies to stop them from charging women higher premiums. I even took on my own party’s conservative Blue Dog leadership – the same ones who have endorsed Commissioner Michelle Lujan Grisham in this congressional race – and their Republican-ALEC coalition against their proposed cuts to Medicaid, pensions, public education and women’s health. And I took them on again with bills to get the rich to pay their fair share, to end corporate contributions in state elections, and to shut the revolving door between politicians and lobbyists.

My opponents like to brag about working with or for Republicans to cut programs, privatize public services, deregulate industries and block reforms that have helped the rich and big corporations at the expense of kids, seniors and working families.

I am a different kind of Democrat. I stand on my Democratic principles, and I am not a go-along-to-get-along politician. I am proud of my long, consistent progressive record of taking on the status quo, even in my own party, to change the system and deliver results that have really helped kids, seniors and working families. In Washington, I will fight to hold Wall Street accountable.

State Senator Eric Griego is running to represent New Mexico’s First Congressional District.

Sunland Park City Hall (Photo by Heath Haussamen)

Following the release of an eagerly awaited special audit, the state suspended two city officials today and assumed control of their duties; meanwhile, the city council opted once again to postpone the appointment of a new mayor.

The state Department of Finance is suspending the finance director and purchasing agent in Sunland Park, assuming control of those employees’ duties and taking control of the disbursement of city funds.

The action – believed to be the first time in state history that DFA has suspended local-government officials – followed the release of an eagerly awaited special audit that identified statutory, regulatory and criminal violations.

“We have met numerous times with the state auditor and his team and we will continue to work together to methodically and diligently ensure the proper expenditure of taxpayer dollars in Sunland Park,” Gov. Susana Martinez said in announcing the suspensions. “The extraordinary level of financial mismanagement in Sunland Park is unacceptable; protecting public funds will be our highest priority.”

Meanwhile, the Sunland Park City Council had been scheduled to appoint a new mayor tonight – an action that would not be affected by DFA’s decision. But, during the course of the chaotic day, the city briefly cancelled the meeting, then held it anyway, then decided at the meeting to postpone its decision until Friday at 6 p.m.

DFA suspended Finance Director Helen Gonzalez and Purchasing Agent Neryza Rivera. Each will receive a hearing within five days unless they request additional time. The city might also have suspended several other officials, including the former mayor, two city managers and the city clerk, but they’re no longer in those positions so they’re not subject to suspension.

Details of the audit

Many of the violations identified in the audit, which you can read here, weren’t surprising because they’re allegations that have already been made public as part of the criminal cases against numerous city officials. A summary of the more serious violations from the audit, from a news release sent out by the State Auditor’s Office:

• “The special audit confirmed the fraudulent misappropriation of public funds from the City’s Border Crossing Fund by former Mayor Pro-Tem Daniel Salinas. The audit’s findings show the City expended $42,161.35 from the restricted Border Crossing Fund as a result of fraudulent invoices submitted by EnviroSystemsManagement Consultants, Inc. (EMC) and the Diaz Consulting Firm. The money was used to pay for prostitutes for Salinas and the City’s former Public Information Officer, Arturo Alba, during a trip to Mexico. Additionally, the funds were used to pay the costs of a campaign video for Salinas. It was also used to pay a private investigator who filmed a video used to extort Salinas’ opponent in the Mayoral election;
• “The City violated the Procurement Code by hiring Frank Coppler as City Attorney without following a competitive sealed bid process. The City has paid Coppler $481,378 in legal fees;
• “The City violated competitive sealed bid requirements of the Procurement Code in its award of a $2,400,000 contract to EMC. The money used was from the Border Crossing Fund;
• “The City violated state law in fiscal year 2010 by exceeding its approved budgeted expenditures for the Joint Utility Fund in the amount of $769,882;
• “Former City Manager Aguilera and former Mayor Pro-Tem Salinas were responsible for reducing customers’ utility billings and accounts in violation of the state law and the New Mexico Constitution. One bill was reduced from $767.00 to $195.80. Auditors found no evidence that the City Manager reduced the bills based on criteria approved by the City Council; and
• “In July 2010, the City Council also forgave approximately $200,000 in utility bills for residential customers in violation of the Anti-Donation Clause and state law.”

Mayor pro tem expedited release of audit

State Auditor Hector Balderas and auditors conducted an exit conference this afternoon to discuss the situation with city officials.  Balderas commended the current mayor pro tem, Isabel Santos, for “helping expedite the public release of the special audit.” By law, the city is entitled to see and respond to the audit before it becomes public.

“I appreciate the mayor pro tem’s commitment to transparency,” Balderas said. “Embracing the special audit’s recommendations is a positive step forward in improving the city’s financial situation.”

Balderas also referred the audit to state and federal criminal investigators and other agencies.

Sunland Park City Hall (Photo by Heath Haussamen)

BREAKING NEWS UPDATE, 1:35 p.m.:

Sunland Park’s City Council has cancelled tonight’s meeting at which it was scheduled to appoint a new mayor. Check back later for more information.

ORIGINAL POST:

The City Council plans to go ahead tonight with a public meeting at which it will interview Javier Perea and Gerardo Hernandez and then appoint one to the job. But the mayor pro-tem is continuing to express concerns about compliance with the Open Meetings Act and has been seeking additional applications for the job.

Sunland Park might get a new mayor tonight. Then again, it might not.

The City Council plans to go ahead tonight with a public meeting at which it will interview Javier Perea and Gerardo Hernandez and then appoint one to the job. But the mayor pro-tem – currently the highest-ranking official in the city – is continuing to express concerns about compliance with the Open Meetings Act and has been seeking additional applications for the job.

The Las Cruces Sun-News has the newest:

“The two men who stepped forward for the vacant mayor’s office during a contentious outdoor meeting on May 4 are the only candidates who will be considered Monday at a public hearing.

“Meanwhile, like she did on May 4, Sunland Park Mayor Pro-Tem Isabel Santos is questioning the legality of tonight’s special city council meeting, which is scheduled for 6 p.m. in the courtyard outside city hall at 1000 McNutt Road.

“Santos said Friday that she had not seen or approved the meeting’s agenda.”

Here’s what should happen tonight, from the newspaper:

“City Councilor Carmen Rodriguez said the five city councilors legally scheduled tonight’s meeting to appoint a mayor. The council will decide between Javier Perea, a 24-year-old former diamond salesman, and Gerardo Hernandez, the former mayoral candidate who lays claim to the title.”

Of course, the last meeting was quite chaotic. This meeting, like that one, will be held outdoors to accommodate the expected massive crowd.

The Sun-News reported this last week in a separate article about what Santos is doing:

“Sunland Park’s top city official said Monday she’ll accept résumés through the end of (last) week for the vacant mayor’s post, following a tumultuous meeting last week in which councilors postponed selecting a mayor.

“…Sunland Park Mayor Pro Tem Isabel Santos, the city’s top official, said she wants more time in advance of a May 14 meeting to review the résumés of anyone wanting to become the city’s mayor.”

Did you know the next time you go to the emergency room worried that a bad cold might be a super flu, you could be charged $50? Even if the nearest doctor’s office is 50 miles away?

Did you know that Native Americans may soon be prevented from getting health care services from a preferred doctor and instead be required to enroll in a managed care network?

These are the types of major changes that the state plans for its Medicaid program that serves more than half a million low-income New Mexicans.

If you haven’t heard about the changes, you’re not alone – the state hasn’t mentioned anything to the public about them for almost a year now. It’s a surprising move from Gov. Susana Martinez’s administration, which prides itself on transparency and open government.

In fact, the administration just managed to avoid federal rules that would have required more transparency. The state plans to overhaul Medicaid in ways that are not currently allowed under federal law, so the state must get approval by the federal government to waive current laws.

Avoiding new transparency rules

New federal rules just went into effect on April 27 that require all states to have public hearings and provide real opportunities for input before submitting these “waiver” applications. New Mexico avoided these rules by sending its application on April 25, two days before the new rules went into effect and in spite of promises made by the state’s Human Services Department to comply with the spirit of the new regulations.

Nobody saw this final application before it was submitted – not legislators, not health care providers and certainly not the public. Even the Medicaid Advisory Committee, a federally created stakeholder group that is supposed to be consulted on these very issues, didn’t see the final proposal.

The last time the Human Services Department sought input on its proposals was last summer. They held six public meetings around the state where they presented some rough ideas about their plans and led a scripted question-and-answer period. Unfortunately, the meetings were held in the middle of the day, making it difficult for most people with day jobs to attend.

HSD then held four workgroups with experts and then presented a rough draft of the waiver application to the same audience of experts and legislators at two invitation-only meetings. Since no public meetings were held, most of the half-million Medicaid recipients and most of the rest of the public didn’t know what the state was planning.

Entitled to know

They are entitled to know. Some of the plans will seriously affect both patients and health care providers. For example, the state is planning to charge fees to people who go to the emergency room that are later found not to have had a true emergency. The state also wants to end the practice of paying three months of past medical bills for new Medicaid recipients, even though they were eligible when they incurred the bills and even though it will lead to more medical debt, burdening doctors and hospitals with the unpaid bills.

The state also wants to require all Native Americans to use managed care despite vocal opposition from many tribal leaders and a troubled history with managed care in the past.

Because the state didn’t ask, they don’t know what the public thinks about these significant and now final decisions. Major policy changes to the Medicaid program are precisely the kind of information that should be shared with the public.

Medicaid provides health insurance to one out of every four New Mexicans, bringing in between $6.3 billion and $8.7 billion in new federal money to the state economy. Medicaid sustains 60,000 jobs in New Mexico and makes up 16 percent of the state budget. This is precisely the sort of issue Martinez should publicize.

The federal government recognizes that changes to a program so vital to the economic and physical health of our state cannot be made behind closed doors. Why hasn’t our state?

Robinson is a staff attorney for the N.M. Center on Law and Poverty.

The altercation took place after Taos resident Roy Cunnyngham and his wife returned home and found the signs on their property, across the street from the campaign event. The Taos News reported that Cunnyngham began removing the signs because he hadn’t given anyone permission to post them on his property.

From the newspaper:

“Cunnyngham told the police that an unidentified old man then approached him and told him to put the signs back and began shoving him.

“‘All of the sudden two more men showed up and started to hit and shove Mr. Cunnyngham,’ Sgt. John Wentz wrote in the report.

“Cunnyngham’s wife Joni also told police that when she got out of the car to help, someone held her from behind and kept her in place while the men beat her husband. Another witness, who had also gotten out of the car, was shoved in a ditch.

“While the Cunnynghams told police that a small group of bystanders from Casa los Córdovas broke up the fight, other witnesses such as Francisco ‘El Comanche’ Gonzales were ‘standing on the patio of the bar laughing and taunting him after the men left him alone,’ according to the police report.”

Police told the newspaper they’re working to identify those involved.

Cruz, who called the incident “unfortunate” but said she didn’t witness anything, is challenging incumbent Sarah C. Backus in the Democratic primary. There are no Republicans in the race.

Jeff Steinborn, left, and Antonio Lujan

The difference between Antonio Lujan and Jeff Steinborn, the Democratic candidates for State House District 35, lies in their life experience, personality and political style.

Few primary races this year will offer as much of a contrast as will the Democratic race for State House District 35, whose new boundaries now include much of central and northeast Las Cruces.

Politically and ideologically, incumbent Antonio Lujan and his challenger Jeff Steinborn probably agree on the vast majority of issues, if their legislative records and agendas are any indication.

The difference really does lie in their life experience, personality and political style.

Lujan’s quiet, laid-back demeanor belies a long record as a fierce advocate of social justice. He came of political age in Las Cruces’ Chicano empowerment movements of the early 1970s, and built his grassroots strengths as a director of social ministry for the Catholic Diocese of Las Cruces.

It’s true little of the legislation he’s sponsored has made it through a session (though the same can be said about many others), but he says most of his energy, primarily as a member of the Appropriations and Finance Committee, goes to keeping up on all legislation coming before the House.

The 68-year old great-grandfather ran his first campaign when the 42-year old Steinborn was barely out of diapers, but he really hasn’t faced a stiff challenge for the seat he’s held since 2002.

Conversely, Steinborn has never had an easy time in any of his campaigns, ever since his first run for office in 2004 at the age of 32, when he ran (and lost) in a contested primary for New Mexico’s District 2 seat in the U.S. House.

Another unsuccessful run for the state House followed later in 2004. But once he was elected to the Legislature in 2006, few in Santa Fe could say that Steinborn was not a hard worker who, reportedly on at least one occasion, went against his own party’s leaders during Democratic caucus meetings. He even voted in 2010 against the leadership-crafted budget.

Some have criticized Steinborn as brash, and even arrogant. Steinborn, an unmarried native of Las Cruces, says he’s aware how some see him, but that his “passion” for the issues can lead to him being misunderstood.

He’s not ashamed to admit he wants to hold political office, something he’s focused on since his early 20s as a political science undergraduate at the University of Texas-Austin. But he also says his ambitions lie no further than Santa Fe.

Steinborn also acknowledges that his challenge against a popular incumbent – Lujan has run uncontested in the last two races – has rankled some within the party. But he points out, and Lujan agrees, that with the significant redrawing of the boundaries under the recent redistricting, District 35 has really become a new district. Steinborn says up to 75 percent of it is new area for Lujan.

In the House, Democrats came out of the 2010 “Republican wave,” which saw incumbents like Steinborn losing their seats, with only a three-seat majority, its slimmest since 1953, when Republicans held the majority for one year. The last time Republicans held the majority in the House before that was 1929.

This year, Democratic Party leaders will watch races like the one between Steinborn and Lujan more closely than years before.

The incumbent

“For me my life has been about social justice. It’s been about promoting and supporting the dignity of the human person and looking out for the common good of our communities, for the people who don’t have a voice.” – Antonio Lujan

Lujan moved to Hatch from Marfa, Texas at the age of nine, the fifth of eight children. His parents spoke little English and the family worked a variety of jobs, including running a restaurant in Hatch.

His father Frank, an Army draftee who fought in Europe during World War II, emphasized education and literacy at an early age.

“He was a poet, a deep thinker. He had a fifth-grade education, but he was an avid reader,” Lujan said of his father. “He made the sacrifice to buy us the Britannica (encyclopedia). The reason we moved from Hatch to Las Cruces (in 1960) was to be closer to the university.”

Lujan would become the first in his family to graduate from college; all of his children are college graduates. But he had a hard time “relating” as a student at Las Cruces High School, and would spend hours at the university library reading philosophy, literature and history.

While still a senior, he and a large group of other seniors volunteered for the U.S. Navy. He would end up serving in the early years of the Vietnam War.

Lujan doesn’t mention being a veteran in his campaigns, and is hesitant to talk about his service, other than to say he came out of the service in 1965 opposed to the war.

Funded by the GI Bill and a series of jobs including counselor for the Boys Club of Las Cruces, Lujan earned his bachelors degree in history from New Mexico State University in 1969, at a time when political activism on campus was nearing its peak.

After receiving his master’s degree in social work from Tulane University in New Orleans in 1971, Lujan returned to NMSU as one of the only Hispanic members of the faculty.

“If it weren’t for affirmative action, I wouldn’t have had the opportunities I had,” Lujan said.

Yet change came slow, and Lujan helped organize the Alianza Universidad, which advocated for more Hispanic faculty, and the first Chicano Programs. He also protested alleged brutality by Las Cruces police.

“When I was still teaching, the class was ‘Social Issues in Action,’ and one of my students ran for city commission. The class became the (campaign) committee. That really sparked an interest for me,” Lujan said.

First race

In 1975, the father of three ran unsuccessfully for the Las Cruces School Board against popular incumbent Mary Salopek:

“I was just dissatisfied with the school system. I was very angry. I don’t know how fair I was (in my criticism). In retrospect, I was confusing policy and programming, that the school board somehow had the ability to enact the change I wanted to see.”

Lujan lost the urge to run for office, but got involved with the Democratic Party and running campaigns. He also worked with the Social Ministries for the Diocese, focusing on improving conditions within the colonias “before it was fashionable.”

His interest in political office changed around 2001, when the ailing District 35 state representative Benjamin Rios, an old friend and political ally who lived just down the block from Lujan in the Mesquite Historic District, urged him to run.

“(Former representative) J. Paul Taylor also talked to me about running. He knew about my reputation as an organizer. He said he’d held out for a long time for someone who cares for the poor,” Lujan said.

That was his first campaign, for which he raised $24,000. Much of it, according to campaign finance records, came from party insiders, industry and trade lobbyists, and his political friends.

At the time, District 35 was still primarily an inner city district, heavily Democratic and Hispanic. For a community organizer with fluent ease with Spanish, he prevailed easily over his Republican challenger, as he did against Republican Lawrence Joy in 2004 and 2006.

He’s run unopposed since.

‘Common good’

As a legislator, Lujan points to directing millions of state dollars into the ongoing revitalization of downtown Las Cruces, including some of the first beautification projects for the Mesquite Historic District. He also sponsored legislation expanding rights and protection to day laborers.

He hopes to try again in his attempt to get his bill through that would ban texting while driving, which has been killed in committee the last two years.

Lujan wasn’t happy with the governor’s redrawn District 35 boundaries. The district now includes almost 30,000 voters in a disparate area ranging from the oldest Las Cruces barrio to the semi-rural areas off Doña Ana Road and the still-developing East Mesa neighborhoods north of Elks Drive.

After the new district was determined, Lujan got a call from Steinborn.

“He said he’d heard I was going to retire. I said I didn’t know where he got that, but that no district belongs to anybody, and that he should go ahead and run. The one thing I asked him in a demonstration of leadership was that we run positive campaigns, and as far as I can tell, that’s what he’s done. I don’t have any animosity towards him at all. It is his right.”

Lujan says he’s come to live his life according to Don Miguel Ruiz’s “The Four Agreements,” a sort of self-help guide that emphasizes, in part, modesty, integrity, sincerity and not taking anything personally.

“I really don’t enjoy the publicity. I’m not being falsely modest. On the floor (of the Legislature) or in committee, when I speak, it is because something that hasn’t been said needs to be said. There are a lot of people who talk, who repeat things, because they like to hear themselves,” Lujan said.

“For me my life has been about social justice. It’s been about promoting and supporting the dignity of the human person and looking out for the common good of our communities, for the people who don’t have a voice. That’s what’s kept me from giving up,” he said.

The comeback kid

In April 1970, Steinborn and his identical twin brother Dan became some of the last people born at Memorial General Hospital at the corner of Alameda Boulevard and Amador Avenue.

He grew up here, attending Las Cruces’ public schools, and spent much of his youth oblivious to the shadow that would follow him for much of his early political career.

His father was David Steinborn, credited and extolled, as well as criticized and even reviled by some, for his role in the growth of Las Cruces towards the east.

The older Steinborn was a prominent and successful developer and later served as city mayor of a city commission that approved a controversial annexation of thousands of acres on the East Mesa.

For years, some of the first questions Steinborn would answer were about his father.

“There’s no question. Obviously Steinborn was a well-known name when I first ran for office. The only association people had was my father,” Steinborn said.

But as a kid, his dad’s public service really didn’t spark much of an interest in politics.

“Later on, when I learned more about public policy and how things get done, I definitely learned to appreciate the things he did as mayor,” Steinborn said. “A lot of people give him credit for making Las Cruces what it is. The city is still growing into the shoes he made. We’re extremely close; we talk all the time. He’s been on the receiving end of criticism, and he knows what that’s like. ”

As the teenage son of recently divorced parents, Steinborn said he had other things on his mind, like playing drums.

“As a 13-year old kid, I wasn’t into politics. I was just struggling to make it in junior high. I was honored and proud of him. But yes, kids would sometimes tease you about it,” Steinborn said.

He ended up following his older brother Alan’s footsteps at the New Mexico Military Institute, where he’d eventually graduate in 1988.

“There is no culture shock like having a 15-year old, head shaved, standing at attention, marching and being yelled at, losing all your freedom a 15-year old is used to. It was pretty extreme at times,” Steinborn said.

Steinborn said he got used to the rigor, and soon his unit was choosing him to represent them in competitions.

Political drummer

The political switch got turned on watching the 1988 presidential campaign of Dukakis-Bush.

“I was just fascinated,” Steinborn said.

He considered going into the Army after graduation, and even took the entrance exam, but severe allergies led to the Army delaying his enlistment. He opted instead to enter college – he was accepted into the Army after he’d already left for school – at the University of Texas in Austin, where his mother and identical twin brother Dan lived.

There he not only immersed himself in college life and political science studies, but he also pursued his other passion: music. He played drums with his bass-playing brother in a rock-n-roll band called Urban Roots, playing parties and clubs around Austin.

At one of their shows, Joe King Carrasco, a Tex-Mex rock-n-roll legend of sorts, approached the band about playing some shows with him. Steinborn maintained a friendship with Joe King, even backing him up on percussion at a show at El patio several years ago.

Steinborn still plays, most recently with his group the Rhythm City Dogs.

“I think some people would be surprised I can actually deliver a pretty good cumbia,” Steinborn said.

But it was always politics where Steinborn wanted to be. After graduation, he landed a job in 1995 as a congressional aide to then-U.S. Congressman Bill Richardson.

Between 2001 and 2003, Steinborn worked as an aide to Sen. Jeff Bingaman, primarily serving as a field representative in southern New Mexico.

He also co-founded several policy oriented action groups, including the High Tech Consortium, the Southwest New Mexico Border Task Force, and CURBside Recycling, which helped successfully lobby for the implementation of curbside recycling in Las Cruces.

State ambition

Since 2005, Steinborn has worked for the New Mexico Wilderness Alliance, and is now its current Southern New Mexico director. Most recently in that role, Steinborn has helped lead the effort to secure national monument protection for the Organ Mountains and at least some of the surrounding areas.

All of these reflect Steinborn’s interest in policy, which he says is his primary motivation in seeking office.

He got some flak for his precociousness for his primary run for Congress in 2004. He said he did have some experience in Washington and in working the district, but that the Democratic leadership backed Gary King, and probably didn’t want Steinborn in the primary to begin with.

“I had a burning passion for that office. Wild horses couldn’t have kept me from that race. I felt then as I feel now (District 2 U.S. Rep.) Steve Pearce’s policies are wrong for this country,” Steinborn said. “I was being true to who I was. It was something I needed to do.”

It did force him to focus more at the state level, where policy affected New Mexico. After another failed run at state office later in 2004, Steinborn finally won the open state House seat in 2006. He retained his seat in 2008.

“I don’t view state office as a stepping stone at all. I’m going to give this job my all. It’s going to take all my time and energy. I’m really not someone who needs the limelight and the accolades,” Steinborn said.

But he’s not shy about telling people what he’s done, or wants to do, in office:

“I definitely learned the only way constituents will know what you have done is if you tell them. I’m not one of those guys who sits in his chair and, frankly, doesn’t work very hard. It does sound like you’re being self-promotional sometimes. Sometimes I do cringe when I do it, but people are sick of politicians promising things. I can actually show I’ve done the things I promised I would do, or at least tried to do. The more people get to know me, the more they know what’s in my heart.”

In his campaign literature, Steinborn offers a list of accomplishments, including securing funding for the city’s downtown revitalization project, jobs training, expanded hospice services, and even for the planning of a state veterans museum in Las Cruces. He supported legislation to reduce taxes on veterans, limit campaign contributions in state elections, and reforms of the state land office.

In 2010, Steinborn lost his seat to Terry McMillian, who he said not only waged a good campaign but also benefitted from the political pendulum swing to the right.

“It was a wave election, by and large. Voters were frustrated with Washington and wanted to send a message,” Steinborn said.

Steinborn said “one or two people” have said they were a little upset he chose to run against Lujan. He knows Lujan will have the endorsements of some of the groups who backed him in the past.

But he said the new District 35 includes 38 percent of his old district. And besides, he wants the job.

“This is not about Antonio. I have great respect for him. It’s about my record of achievement. I knew getting into this he would have most of the endorsements. I know that’s not personal. I’m a person of substance, and a pretty hard worker. People can get caught up in style. Judge me for what I have done and what I want to do.”

The campaign picture

Lujan and Steinborn agree District 35 is really a new district.

It now includes almost 30,000 people, and encompasses within its jigsaw, seemingly arbitrary borders much of the downtown area north to Engler Road off Valley Drive and to the northeast up the East Mesa to Rinconada Boulevard.

Steinborn says up to 75 percent of it is new to Lujan, while 38 percent of it used to lie in his district.

Both will have to do a lot of introducing themselves over the next few weeks, and since there are no forums or major events planned, that’s going to mean lots of mailers and going door-to-door, one street and neighborhood at a time.

Against Steinborn, Lujan will probably have to raise more money than he ever has before. He has raised a total of $69,885 since his first race in 2002; Steinborn has raised seven times than that.

Lujan’s going against someone who has shown an ability to raise large sums, although in the past a good chunk of that has come from the Democratic Party or top leaders, neither of which are likely to play a role in this primary.

The 2012 Democratic primary may end up being the toughest campaign Lujan has yet had to undertake.

He’s run totally unopposed in the last two elections. His last challenge came in 2006 against Joy, who he also resoundingly beat in 2004. Joy did not get the full political backing of the Republican Party, and Lujan not only totally outraised him, he also prevailed by a 3-to1 vote margin.

Lujan won his first race in 2002, winning longtime legislator Benjamin Rios’ backing and his open seat. In his first election, Lujan beat Republican Henry Young resoundingly and outraised him $24,000 to $590.

According to FollowTheMoney.org, in the past Lujan’s top contributors have included various lobbyists, including the New Mexico Trial Lawyers Association, as well as trade and industry unions, party committees and fellow candidates.

In comparison, Steinborn’s victories have come after highly competitive and sometimes-contentious campaigns. He seems nonplused about taking on formidable challenges.

He first ran for District 37 in 2004 against incumbent Republican William “Ed” Boykin. He outraised Boykin but lost the race.

Boykin opted to not run for reelection in 2006. According to FollowTheMoney.org, Steinborn raised $113,097 that year, and in one of the closest and most expensive legislative campaigns, narrowly beat Republican Scott Witt by just more than 300 votes.

In the 2008 general, Steinborn beat former Doña Ana County Commissioner W. Kent Evans, buoyed by a $201,107 campaign chest, half of which came from the party and other House Dems (with more than $15,000 derived from lobbyists or industry group lawyers).

Steinborn lost his seat by fewer than 400 votes in 2010 to Republican McMillan, a Las Cruces physician who took 51 percent of the vote to Steinborn’s 48.

Obviously, this June it will come down to who can motivate their supporters to actually show up at the polls. Whoever wins will face Republican political newcomer Charles D. Green in the general.

Christopher Schurtz is a freelance writer and historian in Las Cruces. He has covered Las Cruces and New Mexico politics since 1999.