Sherry Robinson 11-20-23+

Welcome to New Mexico News Services LLC!

sherry robinson 11-20-23 on

Vocational education bill off and running

By Sherry Robinson

All She Wrote

Trades, especially the construction trades, have been saying for years that they need more workers. Community colleges and unions are doing their best to make that happen, but funding is up and down.

A bill that easily passed the House last week would stabilize funding for apprentice and training programs in the state.

It lines up with the widespread public realization that college is not for everybody and legislative intentions to boost vocational education. Last month the combined House and Senate education committees prioritized career-technical education (CTE).

House Bill 5 would use a $30 million appropriation to create the Workforce Development and Apprenticeship Trust Fund. The State Investment Officer would invest the fund and use returns, $2.5 million a year the first two years and $1.5 million a year thereafter, to distribute to the Public Works Apprentice and Training Fund and the Workforce Solutions Department. The goal is to get New Mexicans into high-paying jobs in the trades.

“Increasing the technical skills and practical experience of our workforce is good for workers and for business,” said lead sponsor Rep. Joy Garratt, D-Albuquerque. “Investing in our registered apprenticeship programs is a vital part of developing our workforce pipeline.”

Apprenticeship programs of one to five years involve paid on-the-job training and classroom instruction, according to legislative analysis. The Workforce Solutions Department funnels federal money to more than 50 programs in the state. More money would allow it to increase enrollment in apprenticeships, expand programs to new subject matter, and reimburse employers at a higher level.

Associated Builders and Contractors New Mexico runs the state’s largest apprentice program, said its president and CEO Carla Kugler, and the program has grown. “Now it’s not just construction, it’s a lot of other industries,” she told the House Appropriations and Finance Committee. “Funding is critical to retain instructors and expand around the state.”

Joan Baker, of UA 412 Plumbers and Pipefitters, said applications for its apprentice program have doubled in the last two years.

That’s a broad trend. Workforce Solutions reported 1,883 apprentices in fiscal 2022 and 2,273 in fiscal 2023, a 21% increase.

Minority Floor Leader Ryan Lane, R-Aztec, told the Albuquerque Journal last month that lawmakers wanted to approve more money for CTE programs. It would address the shortage of trade workers and get 18-year-olds ready for a job or an apprenticeship program, he said. And it’s a way to keep young people from leaving the state.

Republicans aren’t entirely on board. Three of four Republicans on the first committee voted against HB 5. Five Rs were opposed in the lopsided 63-to-5 vote in the House. Rep. Randall Pettigrew, R-Lovington, raised repeated objections during the House Appropriations and Finance Committee hearing and wanted to know the number of union and non-union programs. It’s one-third non-union and two-thirds union, responded Sarita Nair, secretary of Workforce Solutions. Ultimately Pettigrew voted for it in committee but opposed it in the House vote.

Another voc-ed bill is SB 67, by Sens. Craig Brandt and Joshua Hernandez, both Rio Rancho Republicans. It would create the Career Development Success pilot program. The Public Education Department could offer financial incentives to school districts for students completing industry-credential programs or workplace training programs. But SG 67 hasn’t made it out of its first committee.

At this writing, HB 5 appears to be the only CTE bill moving.

Rep. Nathan Small, D-Las Cruces, said, after it passed his House Appropriations: “This is so exciting. It’s the biggest investment in apprenticeships perhaps ever in the history of the state.”

HB 5 now goes to the Senate, where it will face competition from other worthy budget items plus the scrutiny of the Senate Finance Committee.

Advocates: Child welfare crisis is not a priority

By Sherry Robinson

All She Wrote

It was a rough week for CYFD. Already in the hot seat before exasperated legislators, the Children, Youth and Families Department was in the public eye again.

Two experts on child welfare reform blasted the department for crushing caseloads and a backlog of more than 2,000 investigations of abuse and neglect. In a letter to agency officials, obtained by The New Mexican, they demanded that the state take immediate action to remedy turnover and severe understaffing.

“(T)he agency must begin acting like there is in fact a crisis that threatens children’s safety and compels new, urgent, barrier-breaking activity,” wrote Judith Meltzer and Kevin Ryan after meeting with the governor, two cabinet secretaries and agency personnel.

Meltzer and Ryan oversee the settlement agreement of a 2018 class-action lawsuit known as Kevin S. intended to improve New Mexico’s child welfare system. Recent site visits convince them that conditions are worse since last year and unsafe for both children and staff. The department secretary’s reorganization has made things worse.

Also this week, a committee heard that payouts to settle lawsuits against the agency will reach nearly $17 million; the General Services Department has asked for more money.

And attorneys who have sued CYFD repeatedly spoke to the Senate Judiciary Committee during a special presentation, “Children, Youth and Families — The Cost of Inaction and Silence.” Michael Hart and Andrew Schultz also advocated for the reforms mandated by Kevin S. CYFD has complained the mandates are time-consuming and onerous, but the lawyers said they’re necessary to transform the system. They also said the difference between New Mexico and states that have successfully overhauled their child welfare systems is “the lack of buy-in from the top levels of leadership.”

In this session a half dozen CYFD bills have been introduced, but if they’re not on the governor’s call for this short session, they won’t survive.

One measure that doesn’t need the governor’s blessing is Senate Joint Resolution 6, by Sen. Jerry Ortiz y Pino, D-Albuquerque. It calls for a constitutional amendment to remove CYFD from the executive branch and place it under an independent commission.

The administration opposes it because it would slow decision making and isolate CYFD from other agencies. Attorneys Hart and Schultz didn’t think the move would necessarily lead to improvements.

I don’t either. It’s another layer of bureaucracy that would replace or second guess management. Why not just hire competent managers?

Another bill is HB 121, by Rep. Gail Armstrong, R-Magdalena. It would require CYFD to conduct assessments, provide services and investigate if parents or guardians fail to comply with their plan of care.

Of course, all the reforms in the world won’t accomplish anything if CYFD doesn’t have enough case workers.

Watchdog Maralyn Beck, founder of the New Mexico Child First Network, tweeted, “It's really frustrating to continue to hear CYFD as an agency blame the media, the public and now the legislators in Santa Fe for ‘poor employee morale.’ She told The New Mexican: “I am so disappointed that all we proved is that these children and this crisis really are not a priority. The governor won’t add CYFD to her call. The agency refuses to follow the Kevin S settlement agreements…”

If anybody is benefiting from this bureaucratic black hole it’s the lawyers successfully suing CYFD, and yet Schultz invited legislators to put him and his colleagues out of business.

“I would love nothing more for the rest of my career than to never see a plaintiff’s foster abuse case again,” he said. “But the truly sad part is that we have discovered that no matter how many lawsuits we file, no matter how many injured and deceased children we have represented, no matter how much money we are able to recover… those lawsuits… have not been able to adjust the system that we have been suing.”

Putting a wedge in the revolving door of justice

By Sherry Robinson

All She Wrote

Devin Munford should have stayed in jail. He was a repeat offender, arrested for shooting from a vehicle with a stolen gun. The prosecutor tried to keep him locked up, but the judge put Munford on pretrial release, and he left wearing a GPS ankle monitor.

Munford violated the conditions of his release over and over. That included firing a shotgun through an apartment door, killing a man, firing a shot over the head of a woman who asked him to move his car, and robbing a 7-Eleven at gunpoint. Last week he was sentenced to life plus 25 years in prison.

Munford is the reason Albuquerque city councilors support a change in the pretrial detention law, which is part of the governor’s package of crime bills. But Bernalillo County opposes the change, which could swamp the county detention center at a time it’s understaffed and struggling to fill positions.

If the state’s largest jail can’t handle an increase in prisoners, where does that leave the other 24 jails, nearly all badly understaffed and underfunded?

SB 121, by Republican Sens. Craig Brandt and Mark Moores, would make defendants prove they’re not a danger to the community. Currently, the prosecutor has to prove they are.

“That ankle monitor didn’t stop Munford from violating the conditions of his release 113 times. With no consequences. None.” This is from retired police officer and new Albuquerque City Councilor Dan Champine, writing in an op-ed. He believes SB 121 would “put a wedge in the revolving door of justice.”

The trouble is, the door of justice is sagging on its hinges.

I wrote recently that the 25 counties with detention centers spend a third to half of their budgets on these facilities. Guard vacancy rates in some are above 40%, and pay for a stressful, dangerous job is not competitive.

Last week, the online news source City Desk reported that the Bernalillo County Detention Facility Advisory Board will oppose SB 121. County Attorney and former House Speaker Ken Martinez said the bill “would mean a lot more people waiting” in jail. The board projects an inmate population increasing by 60% to 66%, which would bring the understaffed jail to the breaking point.

So far in this legislative session, the governor wants to give State Police a big raise and everybody else a small raise. Is anyone paying attention to jail guards or jails? Recently, the courts complained that proposed budgets would gut their ability to keep tabs on ankle monitors, although Munford’s case tells us they’re not doing a good job now.

Even with Munford’s alarming episode, there is some debate about the need for changes in pretrial detention. It boils down to how many Munfords are out there.

In 2022 the state Administrative Office of the Courts and UNM released a study of four judicial districts: the 11th (San Juan and McKinley counties), 13th (Cibola, Valencia and Sandoval counties), 5th (Hidalgo, Grant, and Luna counties), and 3rd (Doña Ana). Of 3,595 defendants held between Oct. 1, 2021, and June 30, 2022, and released under pretrial supervision, 468 were charged with committing a new crime and 180 were charged with committing a new violent crime.

Another study of Albuquerque defendants between 2017 and 2022 showed that nearly one quarter of people held under pretrial detention weren’t ultimately convicted of anything, according to the Public Defender Office.

If I were a victim of a criminal out on pretrial release, I’d want them to stay behind bars. If I were responsible for stretching too few county dollars over many demands, I’d take a harder look at the relatively few people who re-offend while they’re out on pretrial release.

Last year these same questions came up, and a similar bill died on issues of constitutionality and cost.

Cops and the public are aggravated by the “catch and release” system, but without some fine tuning and jail funding the fix-it bill will die again.

Gun bills return in governor’s crime package

By Sherry Robinson

All She Wrote

Guns are back on the governor’s priority list this year. She and the sponsors of several defeated bills from last year hope for a better outcome, but the dynamics haven’t really changed. In the legislative session starting Jan. 16, are:

House Bill 127, by Rep. Reena Szczepanski, D-Santa Fe. It would raise the age to buy automatic firearms from 18 to 21.
HB 129, by Rep. Andrea Romero, D-Santa Fe. It requires a 14-day waiting period for gun purchases and completion of a federal background check.
The GOSAFE Act, to be introduced by Romero. It’s a ban on assault weapons.

Szczepanski, a mother of two young boys who practices responsible gun ownership, said raising the age to buy semi-automatic weapons “simply prevents the firearms most capable of rapidly taking human life from falling into the hands of those most at risk of hurting themselves or others.”

Romero has said the waiting period “will help prevent a moment of crisis from becoming a tragedy, by instituting a cooling off period between firearm purchase and acquisition.” The assault weapons ban would “protect New Mexicans from the most deadly, dangerous weapons designed to inflict maximum harm on human beings.

” Last year, the governor called for an assault-weapons ban in her State of the State speech. SB 171 would have prohibited the manufacture, transfer or purchase of all automatic and semi-automatic weapons, including handguns.

As such bills always do, it provoked impassioned testimony for and against.

Some speakers were desperate enough to call for any step that would cut down on gun violence. Allen Sánchez, executive director of the New Mexico Conference of Catholic Bishops, said, “We bury the victims. I want to repeat that. We bury them. These are real people.”

The bill passed one committee, but Senate Judiciary Committee members of both parties tabled SB 171 on questions of constitutionality.

“I don’t think the bill would remotely stand a constitutional ruling,” Sen. Joseph Cervantes, D-Las Cruces, said in a Santa Fe New Mexican story. He later tweeted that legislators had too much to do to spend time on bills the federal courts would probably strike down. Two other states had passed similar laws that faced court challenges, and the U.S. Supreme Court had previously expanded the right to bear arms.

A similar bill from last year, HB 101, aimed only at assault-style weapons. Romero, a co-sponsor, said the bill would prevent mass shootings and improve public safety by prohibiting .50-caliber assault weapons and high-capacity magazines. Current owners could keep their weapons if they registered them with the State Police. HB 101 died in the House Judiciary Committee after concerns about possible Second Amendment violations.

HB 100, to impose a 14-day waiting period, made it to the House floor agenda, but time ran out before a vote, despite pressure from interest groups. At the time, Deborah Marez-Baca, with the New Mexico chapter of Moms Demand Action, said, “Twenty-two states have waiting periods prior to possession of a firearm after purchase. Nine states already prohibit assault weapons, and 14 states prohibit high-capacity magazines.”

Republicans argued that the bill would deprive law-abiding citizens of their rights and hinder self-defense in places where police response times are slow.

SB 116, to raise the age to 21 to buy or possess semi-automatic firearms including assault weapons, died in the Senate Judiciary Committee after a series of party-line tie votes. With two weeks left in the session, Szczepanski and her co-sponsor didn’t have time to revamp the bill and get another vote in committee.

Besides the usual dueling between parties, gun debates reflect urban-rural differences. Rural legislators just don’t see the same urgency as their urban counterparts. Romero, however, doesn’t expect a replay of last year. Sponsors have learned what hindered their bills before and recalibrated.

State transportation czar wants stable revenues

By Sherry Robinson

All She Wrote

In a big state with a small population, paying for roads has always been tough, even during boom years. We simply have needs that outstrip whatever money is available.

Last year, an interim legislative subcommittee took an idea from the past and reshaped it for transportation. New Mexico has a number of trust funds established during times of high revenues. Instead of just spending all the money, lawmakers set it aside to be invested for future use.

In this case, the interim Transportation Infrastructure Revenue Subcommittee tried to create a transportation trust fund from a one-time appropriation. The state would then invest that money, and returns would flow to the State Road Fund for projects the state Department of Transportation has prioritized.

The bipartisan bill had a lot of support, especially from rural lawmakers. It passed the House unanimously but died in the Senate Finance Committee because “people on the budget committees didn’t include it in the budget,” said co-sponsor Rep. Patty Lundstrom, D-Gallup. And once the budgets are set, legislators don’t like to tinker with them.

This year, the subcommittee is back with another trust fund bill, HB 42, which sponsors have pre-introduced. And the trust fund still isn’t in either the legislative budget or the governor’s budget, Lundstrom said.

“It means a lot to rural New Mexico,” she said.

HB 42 responds to August testimony by state Department of Transportation Secretary Ricky Serna, who said his agency needs financial stability. His budget has grown steadily but so have costs.

NMDOT receives no money from the general fund. Instead it relies on fuel taxes, the motor excise tax, and registration fees. These revenues fluctuate (fuel taxes plummeted, for example, during the pandemic), and electric vehicles don’t pay fuel taxes. As fuel efficiency has improved, that too has depressed tax revenues.

Expenses are up for construction, maintenance and salaries. At any given time the department manages 90 active projects and 34 construction crews.

Maintenance is a catchall that covers everything from striping to rest-area improvements to emergencies like sinkholes and wrecks. The department maintains the state’s second largest amount of space among state agencies, including 16 rest areas.

“Maintenance is the low hanging fruit,” Serna said, meaning it’s the easiest to cut. He’d like more money for maintenance.

For its 2,500-plus employees, NMDOT must meet legislative mandates for higher pay. It has a 20% vacancy rate, but in hiring engineers it must compete with the private sector.

To fill the gaps, NMDOT leans on the State Road Fund, which is stretched over many categories of spending.

In recent years of strong budgets, lawmakers agreed to one-time spending on transportation.

Since 2019, Serna said, NMDOT has received more than $1.5 billion and used it for maintenance, construction, equipment, airports, wildlife corridors and more. New Mexico roads improved noticeably, he said, but transportation planners can’t count on one-time appropriations in the future.

That’s why the department and the subcommittee will ask again for a transportation trust fund. Day Hochman-Vigil, D-Albuquerque and co-sponsor of HB 42, said in November that it would use a one-time general fund appropriation to create a fund, and investments would then generate recurring revenue for NMDOT. It could only be spent on “approved projects prioritized by a cooperative and comprehensive process of the Department of Transportation that aligns with the department’s long-range plans and addresses the multimodal needs of New Mexico’s transportation customers,” according to the bill’s language.

Sen. George Muñoz, chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, urged the interim subcommittee to endorse the bill. In a text he said that the hurdle in creating a trust fund is appropriating a large enough amount of money to produce a good return.

However, the transportation trust fund isn’t in either the governor’s or the legislative budgets, Lundstrom said. And it’s a 30-day session, which doesn’t allow much time for maneuvering. This may be another good idea that takes years to accomplish.

Old restrictions on Legislature no longer work

By Sherry Robinson

All She Wrote

When New Mexico became a state in 1912, the first legislative session was 90 days long because legislators had a lot to do in forming the new state. After that, sessions, held after every general election, were 60 days until 1940, when a constitutional amendment divided it into two 30-day terms, with a 30-day recess between terms.

In 1946 a second amendment did away with the recess, and sessions returned to 60 days.

In 1964 a third amendment set the lengths we have today – 60-day sessions in even-numbered years and 30 days in odd-numbered years. Short sessions were limited to budget and finance except for matters the governor added to the agenda. That setup has now been in place for 59 years, and it stopped working years ago.

What we can expect of the 30-day session that starts Jan. 16 is that, as usual, lawmakers will introduce too many bills for anyone to read and understand. In the crush of activity, floor sessions will run into the wee hours. Bills, good and bad, will die, and our sleep-deprived public servants will pass flawed legislation that must be fixed next year.

Any measure aimed at complex problems – say, crime or healthcare – will take several years to pass because New Mexico has the nation’s third shortest legislative sessions. New Mexico takes more than two years to accomplish what Colorado legislators do in one year.

Last year, a group of women legislators introduced two measures intended to modernize the Legislature.

House Joint Resolution 2 called for 60-day sessions yearly with a five-day recess after the first 30 days. The pause would allow legislators to study bills and work out kinks that could bog down the process. Also, in the following year legislators could take up where they left off and not have to start over again.

HJR 8 would have created a commission to set salary levels for state legislators. Pay in other states ranges from $100 in New Hampshire to $114,877 in New York, which has a full-time legislature. Our neighbors’ payment is $7,200 in Texas, $24,000 in Arizona, $40,242 in Colorado and $47,500 in Oklahoma.

New Mexico is the only state in the country with an unpaid legislature, although our per diem is more generous than some states’ salaries.

“The time has come to enact some commonsense reforms… and enter the modern era,” said Mario Jimenez, executive director of Common Cause New Mexico. “The public is behind it, and the reforms are long overdue.”

The organization’s survey showed that 64% of respondents supported legislator salaries, and 70% supported longer sessions. Support cut across party and regional lines.

The two measures ran into walls and died, but they stimulated a healthy discussion.

Many lawmakers argue that salaries would allow people to serve who are not rich or retired. Others say salaries won’t make them better legislators. And some, like Rep. Martin Zamora, R-Clovis, found it awkward. “In my view, it’s just hard to give myself a raise,” he said.

Some were lukewarm on salaries but liked the idea of having staff to help with constituent issues. From this discussion came a proposal for each lawmaker to have a local office with staff. Because some of our districts are larger than eastern states it’s an idea, but the price tag could be a shocker.

My reading of the situation is that they all know this isn’t working, but extending the sessions would take a bigger bite out of their lives and incomes. They’d rather put up with current time limits. A salary might make a difference.

Sponsors may reintroduce their bills but can’t do much in 30 days, so they will be back in 2025. If you’ve ever wondered why it takes so long to get anything done in New Mexico, this is a big reason.

Asha can’t be a regular wolf – she has a role in lobo recovery

Sherry Robinson

All She Wrote

Asha, the Mexican grey wolf, took us on a journey this year.

The region’s most famous escapee, she made her break from a federal wolf reintroduction program in Arizona and migrated through New Mexico before her recapture Dec. 9.

Coincidentally, the feds will soon transplant gray wolves from an Oregon program into southern Colorado’s prime wolf habitat, where Asha was headed.

However, our nomadic Asha would not have been allowed to breed with the newcomers because she is a subspecies, Canis lupus baileyi, or “lobo,” the most genetically distinct lineage of gray wolves in the Western Hemisphere.

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), sounding like protective parents, might say to their girl, “They’re not your kind.”

It’s one reason Asha can’t just be a regular wolf and wander as her ancestors did. The other is that thousands of ranchers make a living raising livestock, and in their view, it’s hard enough doing what they do without do-gooders adding another predator to the landscape.

I understand the need to restore wolves to the ecosystem. Asha and her kin, unlike the coyote, feed on elk and keep them from tramping down streambeds and eating forage that could support lots of animals, including cattle. But I also sympathize with livestock raisers, who still aren’t compensated fairly.

That’s changing. About a year ago, the County Livestock Loss Authority was formed. With federal and county funding, it will pay for wolves’ livestock depredations within 14 days, reported the Taos News. And U.S. Sen. Ben Ray Lujan introduced the Wolf Act of 2023 to increase compensation for confirmed kills to 100% of market value and cover increased management costs and decreased birth rates.

A little history: Before Anglo settlement, wolves and their prey were balanced. Cattle ranching changed all that. As domestic animals competed with wildlife, prey numbers dropped, and wolves began eating cattle. Hunting, trapping, and poisoning eliminated every last lobo from New Mexico. In 1998 the FWS reintroduction program began, but after 25 years just 241 Mexican grey wolves inhabit portions of New Mexico and Arizona. The agency is focused on increasing their numbers, and Asha, known to agents as F2457, has a role. She descends from the seven remaining Mexican wolves.

Named by school children, Asha was born in Arizona in 2021 and left her pack in 2022. A radio collar allowed FWS to track and catch her near Angel Fire in January. At the Sevilleta National Wildlife Refuge, north of Socorro, she was introduced to male wolves in hopes she would breed. Alas, no chemistry.

Released in June, she headed north again, traveling 650 miles before her second capture. Now back in Sevilleta, she has two new suitors. FWS hopes to release her again in 2024, this time with pups.

Tethered to my computer, I’ve enjoyed the travels of freedom-loving Asha, along with many other rooted observers.

Environmentalists were ecstatic, urging FWS to let her be. They were crushed at her capture. “Asha deserved to live her wild life and not be used as a pawn in the political battles over wolf recovery in the West,” Greta Anderson, deputy director of Western Watersheds Project, said in a news release.

Brady McGee, Mexican wolf recovery coordinator, said they captured her “out of concern for her safety and well-being.”

I’m with McGee. The last wandering wolf, a male named Anubis, was illegally shot and killed near Flagstaff last year during his second foray. He was wearing a pink tracking collar, so the shooter “knew the wolf was an animal of value to science,” reported the Arizona Republic.

I’d rather know that Asha will live to see another trek and do her part for the Mexican gray wolf gene pool.

Historical sleuthing corrects fabrications in Billy the Kid’s story

By Sherry Robinson

All She Wrote

I didn’t think any more could be written about Billy the Kid because eager Billy buffs have scoured every speck of data about the state’s favorite bad guy.

But last year Kurt House and Roy B.Young published “Chasing Billy the Kid: The Untold Story of the Manhunt for William H. Bonney.” They introduced a new character into the Billy pageant, Frank Stewart, and corrected the historical record. Lately, they even arranged for the forgotten Stewart to get a tombstone.

What we’ve read for years is that on December 23, 1880, lawman Pat Garrett led the posse that tracked down and caught Billy and his gang at Stinking Spring and took them to Las Vegas and then Santa Fe. In July 1881, after Billy’s dramatic escape from the Lincoln jail, Garrett shot Billy in Fort Sumner.

House and Young ask us to rewind that movie to 1880 and the first capture. Garrett and fellow lawman Frank Stewart together led the posse to Stinking Spring, east of Fort Sumner. However, later on Garrett became the long hero in an autobiography he crafted with a ghost writer; they played down Frank Stewart’s role. A third lawman, Charlie Siringo, also wrote a book barely mentioning Stewart. Those “lesser lights,” wrote House and Young, stole from Stewart his rightful recognition. The project began with a gun.

House, a gun collector and firearms expert, acquired a factory-engraved, pearl-handled Colt revolver. The Colt’s provenance was excellent. It was one of a pair of guns given to Stewart by a Las Vegas hotel owner grateful for the Kid’s capture. House wanted to know more and enlisted his friend Young in the research. Over the next five years the two historians documented an extraordinary life.

“Neither Roy nor I were interested in Billy the Kid,” House said in video posted on the WWHA website, but with a better understanding of Frank Stewart, they wanted to set the record straight.

They learned that Frank Stewart was an alias for a German immigrant named John Wallace Green, born Oct. 23, 1852. In this region Green became a livestock detective in the 1880s when rustling was rampant, and that was probably why he took the alias of Frank Stewart. The success of the 1880 posse that captured Billy led many men to claim they took part when they didn’t, House said. He and Young determined exactly who was there and listed them in an appendix.

“My research on the chase and capture of Billy the Kid has revealed that Pat Garrett overstated his role in the events of November-December 1880,” Young wrote. “Charlie Siringo’s self-aggrandizing book, ‘A Texas Cowboy,’ is worse. Evidence shows the important role of cattle detective and Deputy U.S. Marshal Frank Stewart.”

Stewart would later be a railroad detective, a deputy sheriff and a ranch foreman. When he married at age 48 he used his given name. He died at age 83 on May 11, 1935, and was buried in Raton without a marker.

House and Young traveled to Raton last year to find the lawman’s resting place, but despite meetings with local experts – local historians, cemetery sextons, funeral home directors, and city officials – they couldn’t identify the plot. With the help of the cemetery sexton, they chose “a most desirable unused plot… to honor Stewart/Green with a grave marker,” according to their news release.

Recently, the Wild West History Association installed a grave marker in Raton, completing the process. The marker reads: “John Wallace Green/ Alias Frank Stewart/ October 23, 1852 – May 11, 1935/ He captured Billy the Kid December 23, 1880.”

It might be 142 years late, but Frank Stewart finally got his due – and a 423-page book.

Who benefits from immigration myths?

By Sherry Robinson

All She Wrote

About those holiday discussions…

Recently, I wrote about studies suggesting that instead of avoiding politics as we share meals with the extended family, we should go ahead and dive in – to the food and the subject matter. If we can manage civil conversations, the researchers suggest, it might reduce the national temperature.

I had an opportunity to try this out. It wasn’t over Thanksgiving dinner but over a speaker phone in a car as my cousin and his wife drove to his brother’s house for dinner. After the usual joking and catching up, the conversation turned to immigration.

A little background: Cousin Bruce, a union plumber in New York City, had his own plumbing business for years in a building leased from Fred Trump. One day, a young Donald stopped by to suggest that Bruce make some improvements. Bruce pulled out his lease and pointed out that said improvements were the responsibility of the owner. Donald kept arguing, and Bruce kicked him out, telling him not to come back until the lease was up. The next day Fred appeared. “I hear you met my son,” he said. Bruce recounted their conversation. “His mother spoils him,” said the father.

The point here is that Bruce would rather pull out his fingernails than vote for Trump, but he and his wife are troubled by immigration and what they see as hordes of people pouring across an open border, who then receive welfare.I told them the border is not open. If it was, I said, my state would be overrun with migrants, and it’s not. In fact, it’s so hard to get in that there’s a big camp of miserable people biding their time in Juarez. This was all news to my relatives.

(This was a spirited discussion, and we’re all still friends.)

Cousin Bruce is among 56% of Americans (and most migrants) who believe the border is open, according to a September Harvard-Harris poll, and among 53% of Democrats who think illegal immigration is getting worse. (The number is 88% for Republicans.)

The fact is, according to multiple public sources, the border is NOT open. With the end of Title 42, which two administrations used to expel migrants during the pandemic, border processing reverted back to existing law covering illegal border crossings. The Border Patrol has quadrupled agents over 30 years to nearly 20,000 today, and those agents routinely break border arrest records. In addition, the feds have tightened asylum rules, added barriers and increased high-tech surveillance.

The right-leaning Cato Institute has written that the open-borders criticism “is not simply inaccurate: it is unhinged from reality in a way that distinguishes itself from normal political hyperbole. Indeed, U.S. immigration policy is effectively closed borders, and Biden’s immigration policies and goals are largely the same as those of President Donald Trump.”

Rev. Todd Thomason, surprised at the momentum of the open-border myth, wrote recently in baptistnews.com: “A coordinated misinformation campaign is afoot, heightening xenophobic anxieties on the right and scapegoating foreigners for many of America’s current problems.”

How about the second myth, that our welfare system embraces everybody?

The reality, according to the National Immigration Forum, is that undocumented immigrants, even Dreamers, CANNOT receive food stamps, Medicaid, Supplemental Security Income, or Temporary Assistance for Needy Families. They’re not eligible for Obamacare. They may receive benefits necessary to protect life.

Even green-card holders don’t have full access. Neither do refugees, asylum seekers and victims of human trafficking. If they’ve been here legally for five years they qualify for limited benefits.

Clinton’s welfare reform in 1996 restricted federal benefits for legal immigrants but allowed states to fill in the gaps. For that reason, benefits vary from state to state.

We’re not likely to see Republicans debunk these myths – immigration is too good an issue for them going into an election. The surprise is that Dems aren’t doing more.

Criminal justice debates must include county jails

By Sherry Robinson

All She Wrote

Maybe in the future a speaker will urge new high school graduates to consider the rewarding career of a detention center guard. If counties can shake more money out of the state. If the state takes responsibility for its part of counties’ expenses. If our jails get the attention they need.

If…

Legislators recently heard about the sorry state of New Mexico jails from the New Mexico Association of Counties, presenting before the interim Courts, Corrections and Justice Committee.

New Mexico has more people in detention than in prison, which is unusual, said Grace Philips, general counsel of the association.

“Bizarre” is the word used by Sen. Moe Maestas, D-Albuquerque. “We’re one of the few states with more inmates in the county jail than in state prison,” said the former prosecutor. “That’s way too many people in jail.”

The way the system works is that people arrested in the county go to a county detention center. To serve a sentence for committing a crime, they should be in prison. The county jail is intended to hold people temporarily, but many detainees spend a lot of time in county facilities. Among other reasons, they can get drug treatment in county jails that’s not available in state prison.

How backward is that?

Philips admits to being a numbers geek, and her numbers paint quite a picture.

Of the state’s 33 counties, 25 have detention centers. Together, they cost $336.8 million. That’s a third of their collective budgets. (Some counties are spending half their budget on the detention facility.) In fiscal 2023, 45% of detention spending was for personnel, 31% was operations, 19% was medical, and 5% capital improvement.

That brings us to the next shocking number – staffing vacancies. McKinley County had the highest vacancy rate (56.67%) on Oct. 20, followed by Quay County at 54.55%, and Bernalillo County adult and juvenile facilities at 41.36% and 46.39%.

Starting pay for a detention officer ranges from $15 an hour in Quay County and $16.92 in McKinley County to $21.75 in Rio Arriba County, $23.75 in Eddy County and $27.30 in Lea County.

Counties have raised salaries, but they’re still hard pressed to hire guards. There’s only so much money to go around, and it’s a dangerous job. Workers’ compensation claims tell us detention workers are much more likely than other county workers to have work-related injuries, and the injuries are more likely to be severe.

“The counties and (state) Corrections (Department) are often just stealing from each other,” Philips said. “When you’re understaffed it’s very, very hard to recruit.”

The association wants lawmakers to add $10 million to the Detention and Corrections Workforce Capacity Building Fund for recruitment and retention.Liability is another cost, and it’s substantial, Philips said. The association administers a self-funded insurance pool. Costs are up, and coverage is down. Counties are paying more for less protection.

Counties get some revenue from local taxes and state and federal governments, but the association made clear that the state isn’t paying its fair share. After a 2006 lawsuit, the state created a detention reimbursement fund, but it’s never been fully funded. Katherine Crociata, the association’s government relations officer, said the average cost to counties of housing state detainees is $7.5 million. Just last year, the reimbursement fund got up to $5 million. The state has also not reimbursed for transportation.

Rep. Gail Chasey, D-Albuquerque, said, “We’ve been trying to get the counties their money for 26 years.” She and the counties want a way to bill the state directly.

In the next legislative session, crime will be a priority as usual, but the debate must look at all the moving parts of the criminal justice system, including the humble county jail.

Political opposites can have a civil conversation over turkey

By Sherry Robinson

All She Wrote

Looking forward to those family gatherings over the holidays? Or maybe not?

There’s that one relative who is all about politics. Or worse, two on opposite sides of the fence. Aunt Martha worries they’ll ruin dinner.

Research tells us these exchanges can be a good thing. Jennifer Wolak, a Michigan political science professor, finds that those discussions set the table for compromise and civility in national political discourse. That’s because if two people with different political views can have a reasonable give and take over Aunt Martha’s turkey or enchiladas, we will believe and even expect politicians to do the same.

“The average American is still really keen on compromise,” Wolak writes.Aunt Martha’s turkey reinforces social norms. Most people aren’t going to offend her or the rest of the family by shouting at each other. The professor concludes that social norms can be a powerful motivator for civility.

At this point, you’re thinking about your own family and wondering if this could work.

In my family, all the holiday dinners I remember took place in my Aunt Grace’s mobile home, where she managed to get an astonishing number of people around the table to enjoy great food and each other’s company. People were happy to see each other and just wanted to catch up. I don’t remember a single political conversation.

Nowadays my cousins and I do have some strong political opinions, which we mostly don’t share because we value the relationship more. To the extent we’ve discussed anything, my position is always, we are blood, I love you, and I care far more about that than making a political point. I’m not going to end a relationship with family or friends because we vote differently.

The professor makes a good point, but I think these discussions need a foundation in place. The parties should understand they’re not going to change each others’ minds and be willing to listen.

Two researchers, writing in a political science journal, give us a model.“You wouldn’t try to convince a die-hard Alabama football fan not to be an Alabama football fan. You know that’s a losing battle. You might be able to convince someone that Alabama’s quarterback didn’t have a great game or that Auburn played well last week. The goal isn’t to convert the Alabama fan. The goal is to have a conversation about football that doesn’t rely on blind loyalty, (personal) attacks, or false accusations.”

Three learned folks wrote that most people don’t find these conversations all that bad. In fact, they may even be listening to each other.

“When you’re having these conversations, they can feel really frustrating, but actually you’re being influenced,” says a faculty member at Notre Dame. “It means you’re influencing your family as well. There is actually some element of productive discussion going on, even when it may not feel like it.”

More researchers, sorting through survey data, were unable to link a bad Thanksgiving to talking politics. “Americans appear to be largely successful at putting aside their political differences and enjoying Thanksgiving dinner with relatives and friends with whom they differ,” they wrote. The meaning I draw from that is that family dynamics – old grudges, dysfunction and personal differences – do more damage to a festive occasion than political debates.

Going back to my own family, I think we could all survive a political discussion with our mashed potatoes, even without the moderating influence of my Aunt Grace. I would not have said that before because I wouldn’t want to take the risk and because not talking about this stuff is a long habit. However, if thousands of such conversations could reduce the temperature nationally, it’s worth a try.

Welcome to New Mexico News Services LLC!

sherry robinson 11-20-23 on

This website uses cookies.