27-03-2025
Lawmakers, advocates lament Gov's veto of parole reform
A New Mexico Department of Corrections official walks toward the front entrance of the Western New Mexico Correctional Facility in Grants in November 2021. (Photo by Austin Fisher / Source New Mexico)
Sponsors and advocates who had hoped to see reforms for New Mexico's board governing parole continue to question the rationale behind Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham's Saturday veto.
Senate Bill 17 would have enacted a series of changes to professionalize the New Mexico Parole Board, and change how its members consider incarcerated people's requests for release.
At the all-volunteer board's quarterly public meeting on Tuesday, Chair Abram Anaya said SB17 would have allowed its members 'to do some really wonderful things' like receive payment for their work and require the governor to have cause to remove them 'like every other board.'
'We're one of the only ones at the whim of the governor,' said Anaya, who has been on the board for 13 years.
Not only did the bill aim to change the board, it also sought to reform the larger system of parole.
Parole Board Director Roberta Cohen said Tuesday the veto isn't the outcome members hoped for, but added, 'Maybe we'll take a look at it if there's a special session or next year in the 30-day session.'
Lujan Grisham wrote in the veto message that she believes the parole board should be a state agency so members can be paid for their work and have their positions protected as state employees. She wrote that to accomplish this, she commits to submitting a special message authorizing lawmakers to debate the proposal during next year's 30-day session.
Lujan Grisham wrote in her veto message that while she supports modernizing the board's metrics for hearing parole requests, she disagreed with part of the legislation that would have made it harder for the executive branch to remove members of the Parole Board.
Currently, state law allows the governor to remove members at will. She wrote that SB17 would have made it 'virtually impossible' to remove them.
In a written statement to Source NM, SB17 co-sponsor Rep. Andrea Romero (D-Santa Fe) called Lujan Grisham's veto 'especially perplexing' because it disregarded the broad consensus on the bill and 'misrepresented a key provision' about board member removal.
Romero said the Legislature has long protected members of boards and commissions from arbitrary removal and SB17 'simply mirrored standard language already present in numerous New Mexico board and commission statutes.'
'These due process protections were not only reasonable; they were consistent with existing law and the fundamental fairness that our parole board members deserve,' she said.
Indeed, the language the governor characterized as unworkable in her veto message already protects members of the Ethics Commission, the Nursing Board, the Pharmacy Board, the Optometry Board, the Lottery Authority, the Architects Board, the Engineering and Surveying Board, the Landscape Architects Board, the Social Work Board and the Physical Therapy Board.
Romero told Source NM that SB17's sponsors spent a lot of time and energy before the session talking with stakeholders to ensure the bill was based on evidence, responsive to crime victims' needs and bipartisan in nature.
'We were proud to bring such a well-vetted bill to the 60-day session, particularly in a time of deep political polarization around public safety,' she said.
Romero, Sen. Leo Jaramillo (D-Española) and Rep. Nicole Chavez (R-Albuquerque) carried the bill, which the House of Representatives unanimously passed on Feb. 19 and the Senate pas passed on March 17.
Romero pointed out that SB17 'brought together advocates, agencies, and stakeholders who are often on opposing sides of these issues.'
Before voters sent Chavez to the Roundhouse, she often testified on bills as a victims' rights advocate. She told Source NM in a text message on Thursday that as a lawmaker and a victim of crime, she is deeply disheartened by the veto.
'I remain committed to working across party lines to get this done because public safety and justice should never be partisan issues,' she said.
SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
The protection offered by SB17 would have shielded board members from arbitrary or politically motivated removal while maintaining their accountability to professional standards and legal obligations, the American Civil Liberties Union of New Mexico said in a news release reacting to the veto on Saturday.
When Source NM sent the Parole Board an email seeking an interview with either Cohen or Anaya about the veto, a spokesperson for the New Mexico Corrections Department sent a statement on the board's behalf that directed Source NM to the governor's veto message.
'The New Mexico Parole Board fully stands by the contents of this message,' said Corrections Department Public Information Officer Brittany Roembach.
Lena Weber, ACLU-NM's interim policy director, said Lujan Grisham's veto message 'embodies the very kind of executive attitude we hoped to protect the parole board from in passing SB17.'
'To now have the governor defend her power to remove public officers without cause by vetoing legislation that received overwhelming support is deeply disappointing,' ACLU-NM staff attorney Denali Wilson, who helped draft SB17, said in the statement.
Sheila Lewis, a former Parole Board chair whom Lujan Grisham removed in 2020, told Source NM she thinks it's a mistake to have board members fearful of losing their appointment because they make difficult decisions, even when they're the right one.
'It does put a damper on the decision-making process,' Lewis said.
SB17 wasn't the only bill dealing with the governor's power to remove public officials that was affected by Lujan Grisham's veto this session. She also struck part of Senate Bill 5, which would have enacted similar protections for members of the New Mexico Game Commission.
Brittany Fallon, a policy manager with Western Resource Advocates, told Source NM on Thursday both pieces of legislation were bipartisan, instituted a public removal process for public officials, were negotiated with the governor's office and the relevant state agencies and accepted amendments from the governor's office.
'She had ample opportunity to weigh in and didn't in both cases,' Fallon said. 'It's not really about the Game Commission, it's about executive power, which is the same with the Parole Board bill.'
Aside from the board member provisions, SB17 would have updated the factors board members consider when making a parole decision and ensured more considerate scheduling of hearings for victims' families, ACLU-NM said on Saturday.
Weber said for New Mexico's parole system to function, it's critical for board members to not fear losing their position 'simply because they aren't politically aligned with the governor.'
'By vetoing SB17, the governor has chosen to reject common-sense reforms and insisted on preserving her unilateral removal authority, forcing our parole system to continue operating under antiquated standards that fail to properly consider evidence of rehabilitation and readiness for reentry,' she said.
Lewis told Source NM the reforms proposed in SB17 were more important than the board member protections but have been 'lost in the shuffle' because of the veto. New Mexico law on this issue originally intended for the punishment phase of a prison sentence to end after three decades, 'but it was never clearly articulated,' said Lewis, a former public defender.
The bill would have clearly told the parole board to stop looking back at someone's crime and instead consider whether they're ready to reenter society, she said.
'I've been doing this my whole life, for over 40 years, and there are lots of people I don't want to see out of prison but the people who I've been dealing with who've served life in prison, are really kind of extraordinary people,' Lewis said. 'They've made tremendous changes, and they've done tremendous work within the institution.'
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
