Welcome to New Mexico News Services LLC

sherry robinson 6-16-25 on

Corrupt nincompoops, toadies and public servants

By Sherry Robinson

All She Wrote

Western New Mexico University has now been investigated by four state agencies and sued by two of them.

Former President Joseph Shepard’s actions have kept reporters busy tracking allegations of misspending at the Silver City institution. It’s a lesson in ethics for the state’s other institutions.

But I’m not convinced we see the whole picture.

Let’s talk about what’s come to light, and then we’ll peel back the layers.

In 2023 reporter Joshua Bowling of Searchlight New Mexico broke the story about overseas travel on the university dime by Shepard, university executives, members of the Board of Regents and Shepard’s wife Valerie Plame (who had her own university procurement card).

Bowling also reported that Shepard spent some $27,740 in university money on exotic furnishings from a high-end Santa Fe retailer, which Shepard said he needed for entertaining potential donors at his home.

Since then Patricia Trujillo, acting secretary of the state Higher Education Department, took Shepard to task, and the State Auditor tallied $363,525 in wasteful and improper spending. International travel, seating upgrades and amenities, lacked “any documentation articulating the business need” for the travel. And Plame, who wasn’t an employee, shouldn’t have a university purchasing card. State Auditor Joseph Maestas said university management and regents violated WNMU’s own rules and breached their fiduciary responsibilities.

After regents inked a separation agreement with a $1.9 million golden parachute late last year, the Attorney General sued. And last month, the State Ethics Commission sued, claiming that Shepard took money intended for an ADA-compliant ramp and walkway and instead spent it on a patio where his daughter held wedding events.

WNMU defenders circled the wagons and argued that Bowling’s story and Trujillo’s remarks were intended to push Shepard from office. Regents agreed to a review of spending policies and an independent audit, but in July, they gave Shepard a glowing annual review and a $50,000 bonus. After the State Auditor’s report, members of the public called for Shepard’s and the regents’ resignations, reported Juno Ogle, of the Silver City Daily Press.

Regents Chair Mary Hotvedt countered: “This board has taken pummeling in the media and from some vocal critics. They have accused us of being corrupt nincompoops or mere political hacks and toadies, or really, just stupid. Our careful silence is taken to mean that we are unaware or complicit in something bad.”

Late in 2024 a regents’s subcommittee drafted a severance agreement. Shepard would step down on Jan. 15 and join the business school as a tenured faculty member (this was a surprise to the business school) at $200,000 a year. Plus eight months of sabbatical. Plus indemnity against future claims. Plus walking money of $1.9 million, which he received Jan. 2. The governor demanded regents’ resignation, and state Attorney General Raúl Torrez sued Shepard and all five regents.

There are several nagging aspects to this string of events.

Most people join boards not to do bad things but to make a contribution. They don’t expect to be cops. The flip side, as I’ve learned in my reporting, is that boards can be manipulated by charismatic executives with big budgets, and the usual tool is travel and luxury hotels.

At WNMU the governor appointed regents with impressive backgrounds – people you expect not to be manipulated, especially the two who authored the separation agreement. Daniel Lopez was the highly respected president of New Mexico Tech for 23 years and a former cabinet secretary. Dal Moellenberg is a Santa Fe attorney with decades of experience who appears on best-lawyer lists.

Why would either man want to blight his considerable reputation? Mary Alice Murphy’s December story in the online Grant County Beat sheds some light.

In reporting the December regents meeting, Murphy allows Shepard to tell his side of the story. When he came to WNMU in 2011, weeds were growing faster than enrollment, buildings were deteriorating, gas lines ruptured, staff morale was low and Silver City residents didn’t feel welcome on campus.

Shepard said he cut the budget by 25%, reduced faculty and staff, prioritized programs, beautified the campus, revitalized infrastructure, upgraded athletic and recreation facilities, built new residence halls, and welcomed the community. Enrollment is up, and a number of programs are nationally ranked.

Lopez told Shepard, “I've been very close to the university over the years… and the transformation is miraculous in every respect.”

Do the wise decisions outweigh the self-serving inclinations that smack of entitlement? Shepard deserves credit for the good he’s done, but the courts of law and public opinion will probably focus, as they should, on loose spending and lax oversight.

Let’s have an honest debate on public lands

By Sherry Robinson

All She Wrote

During the Great Depression, western ranchers faced crashing commodity prices and the ravages of drought and Dust Bowl. But that wasn’t all. The federal government was creating new national parks and monuments and expanding earlier designated areas. In states like New Mexico many were pleased to have new attractions for their budding tourism trade, but others objected. Unlike national forests, these new carve-outs didn’t allow grazing, mining, drilling or logging.

I came across this information last week while I was researching the Depression and was surprised to learn that we’ve been having pretty much the same arguments over public lands for the better part of a century.

In the latest chapter, Congress saw a bare-knuckle fight over a provision in the budget reconciliation bill to sell more than 250 million acres of public lands, including 14 million acres in New Mexico. Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, claims he wants to expand the nation’s housing supply by using public lands.

The provision died after the Senate parliamentarian ruled against it, but Lee returned with a new provision requiring the federal Bureau of Land Management to sell hundreds of thousands of acres within five miles of population centers. In the final bill, that provision also died. But we haven’t heard the end of this debate.

Two pretty obvious points: Most of the land in these proposals is in the middle of nowhere, and housing developers will only build in places where people want to live. Plus, they want some infrastructure. You know, utilities, streets and sewers.

Lee’s approach all along has fallen short of honest debate. When his Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee finally revealed properties on the auction block, the list had the look of selection by dart throwing. Mt. Taylor? Seriously? Some nitwit in Washington D.C. chose a dominant geologic feature in the state – from the top you can see one-third of New Mexico – and a peak sacred to multiple tribes.

In New Mexico the first list of 61 properties was loaded with active recreation areas, including busy hiking trails north and east of Los Alamos, the beautiful Grindstone Canyon Loop Trail near Ruidoso, the Zuni Mountain Trail System that Gallup actively markets to tourists, and the famous and historic Dog Canyon Trail near Alamogordo. Seriously?

Carlsbad’s La Cueva trail system, managed by the BLM, is 15 miles of trails through 2,200 acres of Guadalupe Mountains foothills and Chihuahuan desert. It’s been popular for biking, hiking and horseback riding since the mid-1990s. On websites for bikers, it draws praise and tips. La Cueva’s sale would do what for housing?

Lee and his staff had vast tracts to choose from but went out of their way to poke a finger into the eyes of tourism and outdoor advocates. Further, the now-deleted provision would have hurt the outdoor recreation industry, which the state has carefully cultivated and was good for $3.2 billion and 29,000 jobs in 2023.

Last week, I suggested half seriously that since Utah was so anxious to cash in its public lands we let them be a test case. I don’t think they’d sell their crown jewels, but I’m curious how far they would go. Mark Allison, of New Mexico Wild, pointed out correctly that “these lands don’t belong to Utah, they belong to all Americans.”

We’ve already had such an experiment, he says. “The Southern Nevada Public Land Management Act of 1998 provided a legal mechanism for sales of public lands in the national areas. There were 68,000 acres of BLM lands authorized in Clark County. After 26 years, almost two-thirds of that land remains unsold. Importantly, only 562 acres have been reserved for affordable housing – and of that only 30 acres have been sold. The experiment has failed.”

That gets me to the other side of the public lands argument. If we stop pretending this is about housing and take a good hard look at public land, we might have to admit that not every inch is a scenic or environmental gem. If we stop throwing darts at a map and actually ask the land agencies, they would tell us which parcels are difficult to manage or don’t really serve the national interest.

If we had an honest debate, we might also look at the fact that the federal government owns 63% of Utah and 80% of Nevada. That drives the agitation to sell coming from these two states. When the government seems to own everything, their restlessness is understandable, but why are they forcing New Mexico, with federal land ownership of around 32%, into land sales it doesn’t want?

The great land rush of 2025

By Sherry Robinson

All She Wrote

We now know which public lands in New Mexico that Congressional Republicans might sell, and it’s quite a list -- 61 properties in 20 counties. Authors of the budget reconciliation bill have been secretive, but Sen. Martin Heinrich recently extracted some specifics.

Heinrich, a Democrat who is the ranking member of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, released the list on June 18, saying the bill mandates the unprecedented sale of two to three million acres.

We’ve been having this public lands debate for years. Sometimes discussion swings to the left, sometimes to the right, but it’s never resolved.

In 2012 Utah’s governor demanded that 20 million acres of federal land be transferred to his state. A few other western states (but not New Mexico) looked into it. The argument was that states could better manage these lands than federal agencies.

The reality? States have nowhere near the personnel and funding to take this on and would have to sell or lease some land to finance management of what remained. In 2014 Heinrich, then the state’s junior senator, predicted that states would sell the best, most desirable lands and “taxpayers would be saddled with the costs of overseeing the rest.” And the public would find more locked gates and the end of access to prized hunting, fishing and hiking areas.

Others observed that state ownership could backfire, as states raised fees for grazing and recreation and jacked up royalties for mining and energy development.

However, Paul Gessing, of the conservative Rio Grande Foundation, countered that in the previous two years the federal government, with only a signature by President Obama, had placed more than 783,000 acres of New Mexico land in two monuments – the Rio Grande del Norte and Organ Mountain.

President Trump during his first term tried to shrink some national monuments, including those two, provoking an outcry in Las Cruces and northern New Mexico.

“After many protests and photos of Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke on horseback, what happened is: Not much,” I wrote in 2017. “The blowback was hotter than Zinke and the administration anticipated; public comments, overwhelmingly in support, topped 2.3 million.”

In 2022, during the Hermit’s Peak-Calf Canyon fire, the right-wing ALEC (American Legislative Exchange Council) renewed the push for state ownership, arguing in the Albuquerque Journal that federal land managers had been poor stewards, and millions of acres were at high risk for wildfire. A northern New Mexico landowner wrote in response that the Virginia-based group should butt out of New Mexico land policy.

The poor-stewardship argument is an old one. A representative of Trout Unlimited has argued that the same people demanding state ownership have for years cut funding to land agencies, making it impossible for them to do necessary preventive maintenance.

In 2022, the governor joined a Biden administration initiative to conserve 30% of lands and waters by 2030. But 15 counties hollered “land grab” and passed resolutions in opposition. Never fear. The so-called 30x30 initiative morphed into a committee embedded in state bureaucracy and likely won’t be heard from again.

Now we’re looking at the sale of public lands.

In the House, our own Rep. Gabe Vasquez joined with former Interior Secretary and now Republican Rep. Ryan Zinke of Montana to found the Bipartisan Public Lands Caucus. They removed language from the bill that would have placed a half million acres on the block.

The Senate version, however, would unload up to 3.3 million acres of public lands; an amendment adds a whopping 258 million acres in the next five years, according to outdoor journalist Wes Siler. And the process sounds something like the Oklahoma land rush of 1889 with no hearings, no debate, no public input.

In New Mexico, about 6.5 million acres of U.S. Forest Service land and 7.8 million acres of BLM land could be eligible for sale. This doesn’t include national parks, monuments, historic sites, wildlife refuges or fish hatcheries, according to Source New Mexico.

How about grazing land? Nobody knows, and the bill’s authors aren’t saying.

If this bill is so good for us, why can’t its sponsors roll it out of the garage and let us kick the tires? What we don’t know is as scary as what we do know. It amounts to a big experiment.

So I have a modest proposal. Utah wants to sell federal land within its borders. Why not let them? They can be a pilot project for federal land sales, and we can see how it works out.

Who’s going to milk your cows?

By Sherry Robinson

All She Wrote

When the Dairy Producers of New Mexico meet in Ruidoso this week, the most important topic won’t be on the agenda. The conversations in the hallway and on the golf course will be about labor in a time of ICE raids.

After federal agents crippled a Lea County dairy, an industry newsletter warned, “Your operation is next.”

Dairy is one of New Mexico’s success stories. Our 182 dairy farms are nearly all family owned. They have made us 9th in the nation for milk production and 4thfor cheese production, according to NMSU. The industry’s direct and indirect economic impact is $4.45 billion.

However, nationally 51% of dairy workers are immigrants. New Mexico’s reliance is probably higher.

On June 4 masked, rifle-toting ICE agents raided Outlook Dairy Farms in Lovington, arrested 11 workers for fake documents, and forced owner Isaak Bos to fire another 24 on the spot.

“Losing 35 out of 55 workers at that particular facility meant milk production had effectively ceased,” the Albuquerque Journal reported, “with all available hands — including nonfarm staff, family members and some high school students on summer break — focused on caring for the livestock until more workers could be found.”

Bos said: “We’re barely able to keep going. And the next problem is going to be the labor I have left, pushing it to the limit.”

The Bullvine, an online newsletter by and for dairy professionals, wrote: “The Lovington raid isn’t just another enforcement action; it’s a stark preview of what happens when immigration policy meets the reality of who actually milks America’s cows.

“Outlook Dairy Farms in Lovington went from operating normally to crisis mode in one morning… (A)gents didn’t just arrest workers—they dismantled an entire operation that depends on precise timing and experienced hands.

“But here’s the kicker that should terrify every dairy producer: this wasn’t random enforcement. The raid followed an employment audit conducted months earlier, proving federal agents are systematically targeting agricultural operations with surgical precision.”

Dairy farmers face a Catch-22: They can’t find workers, but the H-2A temporary worker visa is designed for seasonal work, and cows must be milked 365 days a year. Also, the government’s E-Verify system, which employers use to check employee paperwork, is broken, say ICE agents.

“So, let’s get this straight,” writes The Bullvine’s managing editor, Karen Hunt.”You’re legally required to verify employment eligibility using systems that federal enforcement admits don’t work, yet you face severe penalties when those systems fail…

“The choice facing every dairy producer is simple: Who’s going to milk your cows, and what will it cost when there’s nobody left?”

Technology can help, but it’s not the answer. “Dairy operations require experienced workers who can identify health issues, handle birthing complications, and manage the countless variables that arise with living animals,” says Hunt.

What happens after ICE has hollowed out the industry? The nation would lose 7,000 dairy farms, and milk prices would nearly double, predicts The Bullvine. “For an industry already operating on razor-thin margins, these aren’t just statistics—they’re operational death sentences.”

To reach the targeted 3,000 daily arrests set by the Trump administration, agriculture is ripe for plucking. (So are the state’s tourism and hospitality industries.) Do they chase ag workers until the food supply fails?

Congress is still dithering on the only remedy – the Farm Workforce Modernization Act. Meanwhile, countries like New Zealand, The Netherlands and Canada run worker programs that ensure reliable labor pools with no enforcement disruptions.

Lately, the president observed: “Our great Farmers and people in the Hotel and Leisure business have been stating that our very aggressive policy on immigration is taking very good, long time workers away from them, with those jobs being almost impossible to replace… We must protect our Farmers, but get the CRIMINALS OUT OF THE USA. Changes are coming!”

Next he ordered a pause in arrests at farms, restaurants and hotels, only to reverse the order a few days later.

Here’s what’s troubling, aside from the fear and panic spreading through communities. Zoom out with me for the 30,000-foot view. Pull thousands of people out of the economy, and they’re not buying groceries or clothing or furniture, they’re not making car payments, and they’re not paying rent or buying houses. The logical end is grim.

“The Lovington raid isn’t just one farm’s struggle—it’s a preview of American agriculture’s future under current policies,” writes Hunt. “We’ve built a food system that depends on immigrant labor while criminalizing their presence. That’s not sustainable economics; it’s systematic dysfunction.”

Welcome to New Mexico News Services LLC

sherry robinson 6-16-25 on

This website uses cookies.