Latest news with #HouseGovernment
Yahoo
12-03-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
IPRA overhaul bill would add fees, more exemptions for public records
During a legislative session heavily focused on public safety, a bill that would limit the public's access to police records as part of a major overhaul of state open records law is set to be considered. House Bill 497, or "Inspection of Public Record Act Changes" sponsored by Rep. Cathrynn Brown, R-Carlsbad, would also add fees to many records requests, extend the timelines agencies have to respond and make it more difficult for requesters to seek damages for violations of the law, among other changes. The bill was introduced Feb. 20 and is scheduled for its first hearing Wednesday morning in the House Government, Election and Indian Affairs Committee. In a statement, Brown wrote the goal of the bill is to set "clear definitions to ensure that IPRA processes are standardized across our state. "The bill also provides records custodians with adequate time to properly fulfill requests," she wrote. "Other goals are to reduce abuse of public records request processes and ensure government resources are used efficiently, all the while allowing public access to non-exempt records." House Bill 497 The legislation was met with concern from others, however, who said it could significantly curtail the public's access to records. "The bill completely damages transparency but it also will badly affect ordinary citizens," who file the majority of open records requests, New Mexico Foundation for Open Government Executive Director Christine Barber said in a Tuesday interview. What would it do? The bill proposes a raft of changes to IPRA's structure along with significantly expanding what can be made exempt from public records. New exemptions would include: * Records about cybersecurity information or critical infrastructure. * Public entities' "disaster mitigation, preparation, response, vulnerability or recovery" plans. * Records submitted by bidders on a public contract relating to the financial stability of a bidder, including tax returns and bank statements. * The work schedules of law enforcement employees and employees of correctional facilities. * The "reports, notes and evidence generated by internal investigations of personnel or students." * Police body-worn camera footage taken in a private place, unless the recording is of an alleged crime or of an encounter between an officer and a citizen where the person is killed or injured, where an officer discharges their weapon or something that is the subject of an ongoing legal proceeding. Kenneth Stalter, an attorney who has represented a number of clients in public records lawsuits, said he thought additional exemptions for cybersecurity made sense but was concerned about the impact of limiting access to police body camera footage. He said it didn't make sense to exempt footage only if it was the subject of a lawsuit, because in many cases having access to evidence is what determines whether someone is able to go forward with a suit in the first place. "This whole bill is treating symptoms rather than the disease," Stalter said, which he described as shoddy record keeping at some agencies and a lack of sufficient staff to meet demand. In an email, ACLU New Mexico Interim Executive Director Leon Howard also expressed concerns with the restrictions on police body camera footage, citing the recent scandal over drunken-driving cases in Albuquerque which has implicated more than a dozen officers as an example of the need for oversight. "By restricting access to law enforcement records, this bill would effectively conceal police misconduct, excessive use of force, and other abuses from public scrutiny, making it harder for communities to hold law enforcement accountable," he wrote. The bill would also extend many IPRA timelines, adding in language stating law enforcement agencies have 45 days from becoming aware of a crime to having to respond to any related records requests and extending the timeline for when agencies need to respond to requests for "current records" from 15 to 21 days. Agencies can already extend the timeline if a request is considered "broad and burdensome," something Brown's bill defines as any record that takes longer than three hours to produce. Along with taking more time to produce those records, agencies could now charge $30 an hour for any work past three hours. It would remove language stating records custodians may not charge a fee for the cost of determining whether a given record is subject to disclosure and states records custodians may decline to allow someone to inspect a record if they have already inspected it previously. Who can request is also limited: The bill bars prisoners from being able to submit records requests by stating the definition of "person" in the law "does not include an individual incarcerated in a correctional facility." It also states records custodians are not required to respond to anonymous or pseudonymous requests, which Barber said could pose a risk to victims of domestic violence, human trafficking or other crimes attempting to obtain police records for legal purposes. The bill would also make it more challenging for people to successfully seek redress for violations of open records law by requiring a requestor to provide written notice to a public body of any alleged violation of IPRA, after which the public body has 21 days to respond and 21 more days to provide the records. Only afterward would the public body be subject to damages, with the fines being changed from up to $100 per day to per "business day." The bill states a court may award damages "only in cases where the public body did not act in good faith or failed to provide a reasonable denial," something Stalter said appears designed to keep people from being able to attract legal counsel. "You don't know when a client comes in the door whether a public body acted in good faith or not," he said. Other IPRA bills This is the third bill this session seeking to overhaul the Inspection of Public Records Act. The other two have stalled and, with just 11 days left in the session, it's unclear how much traction Brown's will be able to garner. A bill sponsored by Rep. Kathleen Cates, D-Rio Rancho, would similarly have made sweeping changes to IPRA but was withdrawn after it became the subject of widespread criticism. Cates said she had introduced the bill to start a discussion. Another bill, House Bill 283, "Law Enforcement Record Changes," sponsored by Reps. Christine Chandler, D-Los Alamos, and Linda Trujillo, D-Santa Fe, was referred out of the House Government, Elections & Indian Affairs on Feb. 24 with no recommendation. No further action has been taken since. A fiscal impact report attached to the bill noted it would likely decrease state employee workload by reducing the volume of IPRA requests, citing earlier analysis of Cates' bill. "If House Bill 497 were to have a similar chilling effect on records requests, the savings across all state agencies would be significant," the report said. "However, because the savings would be spread out over dozens of agencies, the reduction in IPRA requests is unlikely to result in a reduction in positions or spending in state agencies." Barber said she sympathizes with records custodians who are overwhelmed with requests, but said there are other ways agencies can streamline their records process, such as the city of Santa Fe's recent decision to automatically publish all of its accident reports online after redacting sensitive information. "There [are] other ways to go about this that do not include everybody having to give up their rights, which is basically what this [bill] is," she said.
Yahoo
28-02-2025
- Entertainment
- Yahoo
NM Legislative Recap Feb. 27: Preserving joy in human expression
Jono Manson isn't your typical expert witness seen at the New Mexico Legislature. (Photo by Austin Fisher / Source NM) Meet Jono Manson: musician, audio engineer, producer – and expert witness on the human soul. Manson provided testimony on House Bill 221, which would regulate the use of artificial intelligence to create a digital replica of an artist's voice or likeness, and prohibit such use without their consent and compensation. The nature of lawmaking often relegates the role of expert to wonks: economists, attorneys and the like. But it was Mason who joined the bill's sponsor, Rep. Tara Lujan (D-Santa Fe), to testify before lawmakers on the bill during a hearing before the House Government, Elections and Indian Affairs Committee last week. 'It's difficult enough for us, as artists, to chase after the royalties that are due to us from the work we actually have created, without also having to also chase after work that's being created in our likeness without our consent,' he told Source NM. In an interview on Thursday, Manson said the issue of digital replicas is a matter of economic justice for everyday musicians being underpaid and exploited by streaming platforms, of countering plagiarism and even of what constitutes art and human expression. 'What makes human beings special and unique among all the species living and now extinct who've walked this planet?' he said. 'Part of that is our ability to express ourselves through these various forms of expression. If we're choosing to give up that control, then it in a sense makes us, in my opinion, less human.' HB221 isn't designed to protect only pop stars or people whose faces and voices we instantly recognize, Manson said, but the vast majority of working musicians who try to make a living performing and recording music. Manson runs The Kitchen Sink, a recording studio in Santa Fe. Manson said Feb. 21 was the first time he had ever testified in front of a legislative committee. He said he hosts the annual New Mexico district advocate meeting for Recording Academy, where he has advocated for legislation related to creatives in the music field. Manson said while he doesn't know if his voice or likeness has been replicated, technology is advancing faster than legislation can keep up, and he's sure it's already happening to others. For example, applications exist that allow a producer to make a digital replica of a studio singer's voice, then make that replica sing whatever words they feed it, with whatever melody, inflection or volume they choose, on any subsequent record they want, he said. 'If there's no law prohibiting me from doing that, then I can do it without paying her to do it, which would put her out of work,' Manson said. 'I don't do it because I'm opposed to it and plus, I find joy in human interaction.' The bill passed the committee with Republicans in opposition, and awaits a hearing in the House Judiciary Committee. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE The House of Representatives voted 40-26 in favor of House Bill 260, which would prohibit some kinds of physical restraints of students in schools, including chemical restraint, mechanical restraint, prone restraint and seclusion without continuous line-of-sight supervision. At press time on Thursday, the House was debating House Bill 252, which would create a three-year pilot program in five counties that would provide services or referrals, including legal representation, public assistance and economic support, to grandparents raising grandchildren and other kinship caregivers. In the upper chamber, lawmakers passed a bill to strengthen the state's powers on water pollution Wednesday evening. During Thursday's session, the Senate voted 31-7 on Senate Bill 38, which would create an Office of Special Education in the Public Education Department. The Senate voted 34-3 on a substitute version of Senate Bill 115, which would authorize the New Mexico Mortgage Finance Authority to loan money for infrastructure and community development projects. The Senate voted unanimously in favor Senate Bill 280, which would make the New Mexico Military Institute eligible for public school capital outlay funding; Senate Bill 283, which would require the Children, Youth and Families Department to apply for federal benefits on behalf of children in its custody; Senate Bill 7, which would allow municipalities to manage stormwater runoff as a utility; and Senate Joint Resolution 11, which would allow school boards to have bond elections during general elections. The Senate, without debate, voted unanimously in favor of Senate Bill 343, which would strike a single line in the law that some school districts have interpreted in order to deny teachers a minimum salary for doing career and technical education; and Senate Bill 202, which would streamline agency processes, investment management, and conflicts of law. A bill creating a Turquoise Alert, similar to a Silver Alert or an Amber Alert, passed a Senate Committee on Thursday afternoon. The bill compels the state Department of Public Safety to issue alerts for Indigenous people reported missing, an effort to increase awareness and stem the tide of missing and murdered Indigenous people in New Mexico. The House Energy, Environment and Natural Resources Committee approved a bill that would ban single-use plastic bags, which now heads to House Commerce and Economic Development. The Senate Tax, Business and Transportation Committee tabled a proposal that encouraged state fund managers to invest savings into Bitcoin. On Thursday morning, the Senate Conservation Committee passed a substitute version of Senate Bill 358, which would create a trust fund to pay for horse rescues and homeless horses; and Senate Bill 469, which would set aside $15 million to remove hazard trees near power transmission lines of the Mora-San Miguel Electric Cooperative. The Senate Finance Committee unanimously passed Senate Bill 199, which would move more liquor excise tax revenues to the Department of Finance and Administration and less to local governments; and voted 7-3 in favor on Senate Joint Resolution 3, which would create an elected 11-member state school board. In a hearing on Wednesday night, the Senate Judiciary Committee passed Senate Bill 57, which would create an exemption for public sector abortion providers in the state's sunshine law; Senate Bill 299, which would require a resigning lawmaker to notify county commissioners in their district about their seat becoming vacant; and Senate Bill 319, which would require all drivers to carry uninsured and underinsured motorist insurance for their vehicles. Reporter Patrick Lohmann contributed reporting to this story. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Yahoo
26-02-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Constitutional amendment to restore voting rights to incarcerated people passes first committee
Rep. Patricia Roybal Caballero (D-Albuquerque) is co-sponsoring legislation that would ask New Mexico voters to amend the State Constitution to remove criminal conviction for a felony as a constitutional restriction on eligibility to register to vote. (Photo by Austin Fisher / Source NM) A proposed amendment to the New Mexico Constitution that would extend the right to vote to people incarcerated in state prisons passed its first legislative hurdle on Wednesday. The House Government, Elections and Indian Affairs Committee voted 5-3 along party lines in favor of House Joint Resolution 10, with Republicans in opposition. HJR 10 would ask New Mexico voters to amend the State Constitution to remove criminal conviction for a felony as a constitutional restriction on eligibility to register to vote. Sponsor Rep. Patricia Roybal Caballero (D-Albuquerque) said HJR10 would affirm New Mexicans' right to participate in democracy. Her expert witness, Selinda Guerrero with Millions for Prisoners New Mexico, said HJR 10 would fulfill the promise of the 15th amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which prohibits the denial of the right to vote based on race, color or previous condition of servitude. 'Black and Indigenous peoples of this land remain significantly disenfranchised due to overcriminalization and lack of polling locations,' Guerrero said. 'Universal suffrage is still at the forefront of one of the most important issues to preserving our democracy and access to the ballot for all people is crucial to fulfilling this promise of democracy.' She said if the constitutional amendment passes, enabling legislation in a future session could specify the creation of polling places in state prisons. Supporters attending the hearing in committee on Wednesday included the American Civil Liberties Union of New Mexico, the Burque Autonomous Brown Berets, Common Cause New Mexico and the League of Women Voters of New Mexico. No opponents attended. Rep. John Block (R-Alamogordo) asked if the sponsors would consider only extending the franchise to people convicted of felonies who get halfway through their prison sentence. Roybal Caballero said they would not, because the legislation's point is to entirely end disenfranchisement. 'If we continue to create divides, then we're defeating the intent and purposes of this piece of legislation,' she said. House Majority Floor Leader Reena Scepanski (D-Santa Fe) said she supports the bill because of the 'tragic history' of people entirely losing the franchise, as opposed to other rights that are only partially taken away if someone commits a crime. 'When you have people in custody, they are completely subject to the control of the state, and so who is more important to have a voice in the leadership of the state than those who are completely at the state's whim?' Scepanski said. Block asked about the 2022 law that restored the right to vote to New Mexicans once they're out of prison. Guerrero said despite that law, county clerks are still denying hundreds of New Mexicans in those circumstances from registering to vote. 'There's unending confusion within state agencies to be clear about who's able to vote and who's not able to vote,' she said. 'We believe this ballot measure will help to remove all of that burden from clerks across the state.' Despite wrongful denials, New Mexico veteran who completed his sentence for a felony finally votes Rep. Martin Zamora (R-Clovis) said allowing people in prison to vote would lead to them getting into arguments over politics, which would disrupt prison security. 'If there's two prisoners in there, and they're passionate about the two different presidents that ran for president of the United States this time, and they get to arguing about it, and they cause a fight or a riot, to me, that can happen if we start doing this,' he said. Rep. Janelle Anyanonu (D-Albuquerque) said political speech is not outlawed in New Mexico's prison system, so the act of filling out a ballot will not cause someone to be violent or increase risk. 'I think passage of this resolution reduces risk and maintains dignity,' she said. Co-sponsor Rep. Pamelya Herndon (D-Albuquerque) said Zamora seemed to overlook the fact that what he's describing is happening both in and outside the prisons, 'so it doesn't make a difference.' 'If they have the right to vote, then they will have the right to participate, like everyone else has the right to participate as citizens of this nation,' Roybal Caballero said. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Yahoo
08-02-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Tough-on-fentanyl bills move forward in Santa Fe, Washington
Bills toughening penalties for fentanyl trafficking moved forward in both the Roundhouse and the U.S. Capitol Friday, dividing Democrats between tough-on-crime advocates and those who don't think stiffer sentences address the root causes of the crisis. In Santa Fe, House Bill 16, sponsored by state Rep. Charlotte Little, D-Albuquerque, passed the House Government, Elections and Indian Affairs Committee on a 6-3 vote. House Democrats who voted against the bill posed questions about the implications and efficacy of slapping more prison time on fentanyl traffickers. People caught with 100 to 500 fentanyl pills, or 10 to 50 grams of fentanyl powder, could face an extra three years in prison under Little's bill. Those caught with 500 or more pills — or 50 grams or more, which is a little less than two ounces — could face an extra five years, as could those found to have supervised, directed or recruited someone else to traffic fentanyl. The bill is not meant to target addicts or lower-level players but serious traffickers, attorney Mark Baker told lawmakers. He added the sentencing enhancements are not mandates — rather, they're options for judges to consider that help illustrate the problem of fentanyl. According to a New Mexico Sentencing Commission analysis of the bill, fentanyl was implicated in about 18% of drug trafficking cases resulting in prison sentences in fiscal years 2023 and 2024. 'Given the seriousness of the fentanyl inflow into New Mexico, it would underscore the need for courts to treat that seriously,' he said. Still, some lawmakers expressed concerns about the notion of increasing incarceration, arguing tougher penalties do not necessarily translate to a decrease in the flow of drugs. 'Manufacturers aren't necessarily driven by potential penalties, they're driven by profit,' said Rep. Janelle Anyanonu, D-Albuquerque. 'And at the federal level, we increased minimum sentencing for specifically fentanyl-related charges in 2018, but we haven't seen a reduction in use, which is the ultimate goal.' HB 16's first test came as a bill to permanently make fentanyl-related substances a Schedule I drug backed by Sen. Martin Heinrich, D-N.M. cleared the U.S. House of Representatives. The bill passed the House 312-108 Thursday, with all but one of 215 Republicans voting in favor and Democrats divided, with 98 in favor and 107 against. New Mexico's delegation was split, with Rep. Gabe Vasquez in favor and Rep. Melanie Stansbury against; Rep. Teresa Leger Fernández did not vote. Heinrich introduced a Senate version in late January alongside Republicans Chuck Grassley of Iowa and Bill Cassidy of Louisiana. Fentanyl-related substances are currently considered Schedule I drugs on a string of extensions of a 2018 Drug Enforcement Administration order. That designation, though, is set to expire in March; Heinrich's bill would codify the Schedule I designation. That bill, called the Halt All Lethal Trafficking of Fentanyl Act, would permanently impose penalties for fentanyl trafficking based on the amount a person was found with, according to a news release. For 10 grams or more, a first-time offender would face a minimum of five years in prison. Those sentences would scale up based on the amount an offender is caught with and their number of offenses, ending with a discretionary maximum sentence of life in prison for 100 grams of fentanyl or more. 'I'm pleased that my HALT Fentanyl Act is one step closer to becoming law,' Heinrich said in the release. "I urge my Senate colleagues to swiftly bring the legislation to the floor for passage. It is urgently needed to help our law enforcement personnel crack down on illegal trafficking, get deadly fentanyl out of our communities, and save lives.'
