Commission recommends retaining all NM judges it evaluated - By Nash Jones, KUNM News
A commission charged with evaluating judges who are up for election recommends New Mexicans vote to keep everyone it reviewed on the bench.
The Judicial Performance Evaluation Commission (JPEC) released its 2024 evaluation Friday. It looked at 34 of the 39 judges standing for retention in the upcoming election. The other four have not served long enough to be considered, according to the commission.
Former Vice Chair of JPEC, retired District Court Judge Jim Hall, told KUNM ahead of the last general election about the criteria the group uses to make its calls.
“One is legal ability; the second is fairness; the third is communication skills; and the fourth category includes preparation, attentiveness, temperament and control over the proceedings,” he said.
The commission collects anonymous surveys from people who interact with the judges, like court staff, attorneys and jurors. It also uses data on caseloads and how quickly they are resolved, as well as meeting with each judge who conducts a self-evaluation.
In past years, JPEC has recommended not retaining certain judges. Hall said that largely comes from not improving after a bad interim evaluation.
“And then, when we see judges that do not score well for displaying fairness and impartiality, that is often a very important factor,” he said.
Here is a full list of the supreme court justices and appeals court, district court and metropolitan court judges JPEC recommends retaining this year. Find out which judges you’re voting for on the Secretary of State's voter portal. Election Day is Nov. 5, 2024. Early voting begins Oct. 8.
Head of state Aging Department steps down - By Nash Jones, KUNM News
The head of the state department charged with supporting seniors and adults with disabilities has stepped down, according to the Governor’s Office.
Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham announced late Friday afternoon that Secretary of Aging and Long-Term Services Jen Paul Schroer would clock out for good at the end of the day.
Schroer had led the department for just over a year. The governor appointed her to the position in August 2023 after previously serving as the state’s tourism secretary. The New Mexico Senate confirmed her to the position just this last February.
In a statement, Schroer thanked the governor for the opportunity to lead the department. She expressed confidence that the agency “will thrive” under the leadership of Deputy Secretary Antoinette Vigil.
In her announcement, Lujan Grisham called Schroer a “a strong, dedicated leader,” highlighting her work as “crucial” during the pandemic, when she helmed the Tourism Department.
Judge hears closing arguments in Obelisk trial — Austin Fischer, Source NM
A ruling is expected later this fall in the trial over a controversial monument in New Mexico’s capital city that ended this week.
Closing arguments came on Friday morning from the lawyers who represent Union Protectiva de Santa Fe, a historical Spanish colonial group that sued the city after the monuments and others were removed from public spaces.
Union Protectiva and lawyers from the city of Santa Fe must turn in written factual findings and legal arguments by Sept. 27, First Judicial District Court Judge Matthew Wilson said.
Wilson said he will then issue a written ruling “in due time.”
If Wilson rules in favor of the city of Santa Fe, then the Union Protectiva is likely to ask an appeals court to review the ruling.
What follows is a summary of both sides’ closing arguments this week.
STATE LAW REQUIRES PROTECTION OF HISTORIC SITES
Kenneth Stalter said the New Mexico Prehistoric and Historic Sites Preservation Act prohibits the city of Santa Fe from spending public money on altering the Plaza, unless there’s no alternative. He argued on behalf of his clients with Union Protectiva that the project must include all possible planning to preserve, protect and minimize harm to the site.
He said Santa Fe Mayor Alan Webber’s June 2020 emergency order counts as an action, and therefore a project, supported by public money under state regulation.
He pointed to Webber’s testimony that he didn’t do any planning before issuing the emergency proclamation, and didn’t consult with the State Historic Preservation Office.
Stalter said the box placed over the base of the obelisk, the sign attached to the box and the removal of a plaque first installed in 1973 all count as “projects” because they were paid for with public money.
‘BACK TO SQUARE ONE’
Stanley Harris, the attorney for the Santa Fe City Council, said there is no program or project about the Soldier’s Monument requiring “use” of the historic Plaza or the historic district that surrounds it, because the city government has not made a final decision on the matter.
Stalter said the city’s changes to the obelisk after protesters damaged it counts as a “physical and visual element” under the State Historic Preservation Office regulation. He’s asking the court to force the city government to “repair and restore” it back to the way it was before in the Plaza.
Harris said the plaintiffs haven’t proposed an alternative with any basis in sound engineering, telling the judge that Union Protectiva “has no idea and has not shown that such repair and restoration is in any way feasible, prudent or even physically possible.”
BOX AND SIGN HAD NO ADVERSE EFFECT ON PLAZA, CITY SAYS
Stalter said state law includes a definition of an “adverse effect” as the “introduction of physical, audible, visual or atmospheric elements that substantially impair the historic character or significance of the site, or substantially diminish the aesthetic value of the site.”
He said the testimony and evidence show the Soldier’s Monument has been the Plaza’s central feature since the late 19th century.
“I don’t think anyone would dispute that physical and visual elements have been introduced,” Stalter said while displaying to the courtroom two photos of the obelisk before and after its destruction by protesters and alteration by city officials.
Harris said what’s important is the “use” itself is the “adverse effect” on the site, which is not the case here.
“There’s no testimony or evidence that (the box) was anything except protective, that’s what it was doing,” he said. “It was not a program or project that has an adverse effect on the Plaza.”
HOW COURTS HAVE INTERUPPTED THE LAW
Harris said the only time New Mexico courts have interpreted the law at issue is called National Trust for Historic Preservation v. City of Albuquerque.
Stalter said the ruling in that case allows someone to sue when their use or enjoyment of a historic site is threatened. He pointed to Vigil’s testimony about how the destruction of the obelisk affected his and his organization’s use and enjoyment of the Plaza.
Harris said it’s the plaintiff’s burden — not the defendant’s — to prove there was an alternative design for the project which wouldn’t cause substantially equal damage to the site. He said even if the plaintiffs had proven that, the project can still be legal if the less-damaging alternative is infeasible or imprudent.
Stalter said National Trust came up through the courts in a very different procedural history than this case. He said in that case, the city of Albuquerque had participated in the regulatory process with the State Historic Preservation office, where alternatives to the government’s proposal were identified and debated.
“None of that has been done here,” Stalter said.
WHAT SHOULD THE JUDGE LOOK AT FOR HISTORICAL SIGNIFICANCE
Harris said the changes made to the obelisk after its destruction did not affect the Plaza’s listing on the National Register of Historic Places because the obelisk isn’t mentioned in the listing.
He pointed to Kimberly Parker’s expert testimony that the reason any property is listed on the National Register is for its significance, and the Soldier’s Monument is not part of the significance of the Plaza being listed.
Harris said the description part of the form also includes other things like benches, concrete sidewalks and large Cottonwood trees. That doesn’t make them part of the Plaza’s historic significance, he said.
Stalter said state law doesn’t mention the nomination form, and the National Park Service was using those forms before the New Mexico Legislature passed the law in 1989.
“If the Legislature had wanted to hang everything on the nomination forms, they very clearly could have used that and state it in this Act,” he said. “They’re putting words into this that are not in this section.”
He pointed to Parker’s testimony that even if the nomination is important, the form as a whole, including the description section, identifies the Soldier’s Monument.
He said the judge isn’t constrained to just looking at the form’s contents, because there’s nothing in state law or regulation saying so. He suggested the judge look at other evidence like expert testimony or the 2005 Cultural Landscape Report.
“We’re not saying just because benches or concrete sidewalks or Cottonwood trees are mentioned, that anything to do with them affects the historic character,” Stalter said. “What we’re saying is that defines what the property is — evaluate the historic character of these features.”
WAS UNION PROTECTIVA HARMED?
Stalter said under National Trust, an organization has grounds to sue under the state Prehistoric and Historic Sites Preservation Act when it has members who use, enjoy or benefit from the site.
“That time can never be brought back,” he said in defense of his clients who have lived for more than three years without the monument in place at the Plaza.
Harris said plaintiffs don’t have standing, but for a different reason: National Trust says standing is denied if the case will undermine the effective functioning of the Act or interfere with its administration.
“Because there’s no violation of the [Prehistoric and Historic Sites Preservation Act], plaintiff can’t show an injury or hardship from any action taken by defendants,” Harris said.
Stalter said asking for enforcement of the law “ultimately in no way undermines or interferes with the statute and regulations.”
Soldier’s Monument not significant to the Santa Fe Plaza history, expert testifies in civil case - Austin Fisher, Source New Mexico
Santa Fe city government officials didn’t violate the law when they started the process of removing a controversial monument in 2020, because in a strict legal sense it is irrelevant to the plaza’s historical significance, the mayor of Santa Fe and an expert witness said in court Thursday afternoon.
The first day of the trial over the former Soldier’s Monument, which is at the center of New Mexico’s capital city, ended about 30 minutes early after both sides heard from witnesses.
The plaintiffs, the Union Protectiva de Santa Fe, rested their case after hearing testimony from defendant Alan Webber, the city’s mayor.
The defense called its last witness, a historian and archaeologist, later on Thursday afternoon.
On Friday morning starting at 9 a.m., both sides intend to make closing arguments. First Judicial District Court Judge Matthew Wilson will determine the outcome for the case with a judgment.
MAYOR DIDN’T WANT RERUN OF 2017 ENTRADA PROTEST
The Union Protectiva argued Webber’s proclamation was unlawful because the city government never did the legally required planning to come up with alternatives to remove three monuments in the city. The group argued that Santa Fe was barred from spending public funds in the way it did to remove the monuments.
Webber said at the time he issued the emergency proclamation to state that Santa Fe was facing the possibility of civil unrest, due to reports of imminent demonstrations and counter-protests at monuments.
He said he was worried about the potential for violence.
Taking inspiration from formal Pueblo boycotts of the Santa Fe Entrada pageant in the late 1970s, a new generation of activists reinvigorated the public debate around the event, which boiled over during a high-profile protest in 2017.
Webber said when he had taken office in 2018, he had been briefed on what happened, and heard about police carrying sniper rifles on rooftops and arresting demonstrators that day in 2017.
He told the court on Thursday that learning about that situation made him feel obligated as mayor to never allow something similar to happen under his watch.
After the obelisk in the Plaza was torn down, Webber and the Santa Fe City Council created the Culture, History, Art, Reconciliation, and Truth (CHART) Process. It was modeled after similar commissions in the U.S. and globally.
“It was a yearlong community engagement effort and it, in some ways, was very successful,” Webber said. “We had community conversations that otherwise would not have taken place. There were people who were very involved who became friends — who thought they were adversaries — because of this process.”
What it revealed was that the divisions over the Soldier’s Monument existed before the review and remain unresolved afterwards, Webber said.
“I think it’s not just the monument, it becomes the object upon which people can express those divisions,” he said.
Webber said the CHART Process does not meet the definition of a project or process as defined in state law governing historically significant sites because it did not obligate the city government to do anything.
He added that it specifically recommended more discussion about the Soldier’s Monument.
There is a resolution about the Soldier’s Monument currently going through the city’s legislative process and has not yet been accepted by the City Council, Webber said.
OBELISK IRRELEVANT, EXPERT TESTIFIES
Webber also said he did not consult with the state historic preservation officer before issuing the proclamation because he and Santa Fe officials thought the public safety emergency was enough to move forward.
“I feel pretty clear that we didn’t trigger that requirement by doing this, because we didn’t adversely affect the site,” Webber said.
The defense’s other witness was Kimberly Parker, senior project manager and architectural historian for Albuquerque-based Environmental Consulting and Technology.
Judge Wilson qualified Parker as an expert in the way federal law is applied when listing a property on the National Register of Historic Places.
Places can get on the register when either a member of the public or Congress nominates it through a form created by the National Park Service, Parker said.
The Santa Fe Plaza was designated a national historic landmark by the National Park Service in 1960, Parker said.
The National Historic Preservation Act was passed in 1966, the National Register of Historic Places didn’t exist until 1969, and the Plaza was included automatically because it was already a national historic landmark, Parker said. It didn’t go through the formal nomination process until 1975, she said.
In her opinion, the Soldier’s Monument is irrelevant to the Santa Fe Plaza’s listing on the register because even though the nomination form mentions the obelisk in the Plaza’s physical description, it is not included in the part of the form used to describe the Plaza’s historical significance.
On cross-examination, Parker said she is not giving an opinion about whether the Soldier’s Monument could or should be eligible to be listed, or whether it is significant on its own.
A bag of Cheetos created a huge impact on a national park ecosystem - By Susan Montoya Bryan, Associated Press
A bag of Cheetos gets dropped and left on the floor. Seems inconsequential, right?
Hardly.
Rangers at Carlsbad Caverns National Park in southern New Mexico describe it as a "world-changing" event for the tiny microbes and insects that call this specialized subterranean environment home. The bag could have been there a day or two or maybe just hours, but those salty morsels of processed corn made soft by thick humidity triggered the growth of mold on the cavern floor and on nearby cave formations.
"To the ecosystem of the cave it had a huge impact," the park noted in a social media post, explaining that cave crickets, mites, spiders and flies soon organized to eat and disperse the foreign mess, essentially spreading the contamination.
The bright orange bag was spotted off trail by a ranger during one of the regular sweeps that park staff make through the Big Room, the largest single cave chamber by volume in North America, at the end of each day. They are looking for straggling visitors and any litter or other waste that might have been left behind on the paved trail.
The Big Room is a popular spot at Carlsbad Caverns. It is a magical expanse filled with towering stalagmites, dainty stalactites and clusters of cave popcorn.
From this underground wonderland in New Mexico to lake shores in Nevada, tributaries along the Grand Canyon and lagoons in Florida, park rangers and volunteers collect tons of trash left behind by visitors each year as part of an ongoing battle to keep unique ecosystems from being compromised while still allowing visitors access.
According to the National Park Service, more than 300 million people visit the national parks each year, bringing in and generating nearly 70 million tons of trash — most of which ends up where it belongs in garbage bins and recycling containers.
But for the rest of the discarded snack bags and other debris, it often takes work to round up the waste, and organizations like Leave No Trace have been pushing their message at trailheads and online.
At Carlsbad Caverns, volunteers comb the caverns collecting lint. One five-day effort netted as much as 50 pounds (22.68 kilograms). Rangers also have sweep packs and spill kits for the more delicate and sometimes nasty work that can include cleaning up human waste along the trail.
"It's such a dark area, sometimes people don't notice that it's there. So they walk through it and it tracks it throughout the entire cave," said Joseph Ward, a park guide who is working specifically on getting the "leave no trace" message out to park visitors and classrooms.
The rangers' kits can include gloves, trash bags, water, bleach mixtures for decontamination, vacuums and even bamboo toothbrushes and tweezers for those hard-to-reach spots.
As for the spilled Cheetos, Ward told The Associated Press that could have been avoided because the park doesn't allow food beyond the confines of the historic underground lunchroom.
After the bag was discovered in July, cave specialists at the park settled on the best way to clean it up. Most of the mess was scooped up, and a toothbrush was used to remove rings of mold and fungi that had spread to nearby cave formations. It was a 20-minute job.
Some jobs can take hours and involve several park employees, Ward said.
Robert Melnick, professor emeritus at the University of Oregon, has been studying the cultural landscape of Carlsbad Caverns, including features like a historic wooden staircase that has become another breeding ground for exotic mold and fungi. He and his team submitted a report to the park this week that details those resources and makes recommendations for how the park can manage them into the future.
The balancing act for park managers at Carlsbad and elsewhere, Melnick said, is meeting the dual mandate of preserving and protecting landscapes while also making them accessible.
"I don't quite know how you would monitor it except to constantly remind people that the underground, the caves are a very, very sensitive natural environment," he said.
Pleas to treat the caverns with respect are plastered on signs throughout the park, rangers give orientations to visitors before they go underground, and reminders of the do's and don'ts are printed on the back of each ticket stub.
But sometimes there is a disconnect between awareness and personal responsibility, said JD Tanner, director of education and training at Leave No Trace.
Many people may be aware of the need to "keep it pristine," but Tanner said the message doesn't always translate into action or there is a lack of understanding that small actions — even leaving a piece of trash — can have irreversible damage in a fragile ecosystem.
"If someone doesn't feel a personal stake in the preservation of these environments, they may not take the rules seriously," Tanner said.
Diana Northup, a microbiologist who has spent years studying cave environments around the world, once crawled up the main corridor at Carlsbad Caverns to log everything that humans left behind.
"So this is just one thing of very many," she said of the Cheetos.
As many as 2,000 people cruise through the caverns on any given day during the busy season. With them come hair and skin fragments, and those fragments can have their own microbes on board.
"So it can be really, really bad or it can just be us and all the stuff we're shedding," Northup said of human contamination within cave environments. "But here's the other side of the coin: The only way you can protect caves is for people to be able to see them and experience them."
"The biggest thing," she said, "is you have to get people to value and want to preserve the caves and let them know what they can do to have that happen."
Auburn tries to rebound from mistake-filled loss, hosts New Mexico - By Associated Press
New Mexico (0-2) at Auburn (1-1), Saturday, 7:30 p.m. ET (ESPN2)
BetMGM College Football Odds: Auburn by 28.
Series record: First meeting.
WHAT'S AT STAKE?
Auburn desperately wants to rebound strongly from a mistake-filled loss to California. It raised questions about the job security for quarterback Payton Thorne, who was intercepted four times in that game. The Lobos are seeking their first win after playing No. 20 Arizona close for a half before losing 61-39. They're led by first-year head coach Bronco Mendenhall.
KEY MATCHUP
Auburn's offense needs a get-well game after committing five turnovers in a 21-14 loss to Cal. New Mexico's defense might be the perfect tonic. The Lobos rank last among 133 FBS teams in total defense, allowing 597 yards per game. They're also 131st in scoring and run defense and 129th in pass defense. Auburn freshman receiver Cam Coleman (shoulder) and right tackle Izavion Miller (hip) are questionable with injuries.
PLAYERS TO WATCH
New Mexico: QB Devon Dampier passed for 260 yards and three touchdowns against Arizona, while rushing for 130 yards and another two scores. He was also intercepted twice.
Auburn: QBs Thorne/Hank Brown. Freeze didn't rule out benching Thorne in favor of his backup. Freeze said Thorne has consistently been the best practice performer but has also been inconsistent and mistake prone at times in games. It's a safe bet that Brown gets some playing time in this game one way or the other.
FACTS & FIGURES
The Tigers have won their last 32 homecoming games, including a 45-13 win over Samford last year. ... Auburn's wide receivers have already caught seven touchdown passes, matching the season total for last year's group. ... New Mexico's opening loss to Sam Houston State was the program's first to an FCS team since falling to the Bearkats in 2011. ... The Lobos have scored touchdowns after all three forced turnovers. They managed only 28 points off turnovers last season. ... Auburn is tied for second in the Southeastern Conference with 19 tackles for loss.