Local programing on KRWG Public Media, made possible in part by viewers like you.

Thank you.

This is Fronteras: A Changing America.

I'm KC Coutns.

Thank you for joining us.

The New Mexico Foundation for Open Government is a nonpartisan nonprofit which aims to protect and promote transparency across the state.

It's been operating since 1989 and, according to its website, has filed over 30 lawsuits mainly related to violations of the inspection of Public Records Act, or Ipra.

NMFOG's executive Director and legal director Join Fronteras: A Changing America to talk about what they do and what current cases may be of interest to KRWG viewers.

We begin with executive Director Christine Barber.

Welcome to the program.

Hi, and thank you so much for having me.

Well, I think getting an overview of what the New Mexico Foundation for Open Government does for the public is probably the right place to start, because I think people often think of it as a source for journalists.

Yes, exactly.

and so actually is, we work for the public.

So the we protect the laws that protect democracy in New Mexico.

There's two big laws.

And you spoke about one of them in the intro, the Inspection of Public Records Act.

And then there's the Open Meetings Act.

Oh, that's a bunch of fancy words to say.

We make sure that you, the public, can get records from the government when you need to, and that you can attend meetings of the government, of your city council, county commission when you want to.

And that is our job.

And, you know, that's been a very big topic of conversation, locally within our viewing area, related to a couple of different things that we'll talk about throughout the course of the program.

But maybe you can go back a little bit and talk about the formation of NM fog and how it got started.

So we actually got started almost 40 years ago.

there was a group of journalists, and so the Inspectional Public Records Act and the Open Meetings Act, they actually kind of came into law in about the 1940s.

and so but they actually go much beyond that.

It was the Founding Fathers who said the citizens have to be informed that we cannot have a democracy unless we have citizens that are informed about what their government is doing.

So that's how we got to our, our, our laws about open meetings and our laws about, public records.

Because with both of those, you get to see and read what the government is doing.

So we in, 19, you know, back in 1989, we were sitting with a lawmaker and this lawmaker actually insulted all the journalists in the room who he had yet to form fog.

And they were, journalists were fighting for more, access to records and more access to open, meetings.

And the legislator said, well, you guys are just a special interest group.

You're, you know, basically you're not fighting for the public.

And that kind of made them all really mad because they were like, no, we inform the public.

And so they decided to start a nonprofit that all it did was fight for the public to make sure that these, that they can always get information about what their government is doing.

And so, that is who we are today.

Well, let's talk a little bit about the information, the Inspection of Public Records Act, that is, and how it works.

How can anyone take advantage of it and file for public records?

Every single person can take advantage of the Inspection of Public Records Act.

It sounds that all that sounds like a lot.

Just think of it as public records.

But, when you to give an example of when you might access public records, if you've been on a fender bender and you have to give your insurance company a, an incident report about the crash, that's a public record that you are asking the government for.

Now, you already paid for that public record as the taxpayers.

You've paid for it to be created, and the record's custodians are holding it for you in trust for you to go ask for it.

and so that's how public records work.

And every single person can ask for whatever records they want.

that's not totally true.

I'm going to take that back.

There are some exceptions.

So you can't ask for everything.

There's some exceptions written into the law.

Like, for instance, you wouldn't want to get any information that is actually going to help with a terrorist attack.

But a lot of other stuff is, that includes emails, between, different local government officials.

text messages, contracts, all of these things.

So let's talk a little bit about what the process is like for someone that's going through an Ipra request and some of the challenges associated with it.

So let's let's say, for instance, right now you're really interested in finding out about if a data center is coming to your area.

so you're going to want to see if there has been any non-disclosure acts filed by your county commission, city council or anything.

It could be any record.

First thing you'll do is you'll do a Google search that you'll just put in the name of the agency.

Dona Ana County, Las Cruces.

And then just put the words, public records or the, abbreviation for the inspection of Public Records Act, which is Ipra or Ipra.

Every by law, every single agency has to have a web page that tells you how to file a request for a public record.

And so you just go to that page and you follow the instructions.

and then within, three days and then again in 15 days, they have to give you certain responses by law.

Now, some months ago, New Mexico Foundation for Open Government was in Las Cruces doing a seminar on Ipra requests.

And that effort continues around the state.

Tell us a little bit about that.

I believe you're speaking about the, inspection of Public Records Task Force.

So the public records tax task force.

so again, how does this matter to the actual public?

Well, the, what it started because records custodians, the people who are holding the records and trust at every single agency in a secure association and soil conservation district.

Those records custodians are just being inundated because of technology, or they're being inundated with tons of records requests and they can't keep up.

So they formed the Public Records Task Force to to have listening sessions across the state to find out ways to lessen that burden on the records custodians, while keep keep while keeping access for the public so they don't lose anything.

And that's why we were in that area.

and did, actually, a handful of, listening sessions and the task force, released its findings last week.

Let's talk about those then.

What are some salient takeaways?

so the list of recommendations, there's, 11 of them.

the the the beginning ones actually have, some really great ideas as far as, like certification and, you know, trying to get more money for software.

But the one we really like, from the Foundation for Open Government that we think is best for the public and will solve the problem.

A lot of the problem for the records custodians is putting records online.

So remember that, police report, after you get in the fender bender, will you have to wait 15 days to get that?

What if instead it was automated that it would be automatically uploaded online, and then you, as the person involved in the accident, would get an access code that you could get immediately.

So no more waiting to get that.

No more making your insurance company wait and you not knowing if you're going to get reimbursed or get your car fixed.

That is what we're pushing for.

The biggest reason is the majority, 60 to 80% of the records requests that records custodians get 80% and up to 80% are for those, crash reports.

You take all of that away, you automate it, put it online.

You are now freeing up their time.

And at the same time, you are making it so much easier for the public to get what they need so they can get on with their lives.

Well, let's talk a little bit about some efforts to kind of go in a different direction.

There are other concerns like protecting victims.

in these situations.

Talk about how the legislature has handled Ipra and what concerns, if any, you might have going into the next legislative session in January.

So the recommendations actually, do a couple of other things where they, suggest a couple of changes that should be made to the law or have reviews that should be done.

so when it comes to victims, what the records custodian spoke about is that they just have a hard time when they're trying to actually, when someone asks for a record that has some confidentiality issues like I want, and if someone says I request to see the, incident report with the, you know, that it's going to list the victims of a crime who might be underage.

given that information is there, it's there.

What's the concern?

What's the privacy?

What's the safety of the person?

there definitely needs to be a group that looks at that closely and says, this is how and gives advice to the records custodians because they're floundering about how to do their best to protect people.

And the public will also giving records.

But there are other things that we know are going to be suggested during the legislature that are going to restrict, the public records.

In fact, there has not been, anything than in decades.

There has not been anything put forward to change the public records law, to make it easier for the public to get records every year.

It's only this to make it harder.

And it's this suggests this and this like reasons you shouldn't get a record.

And we believe that'll be the case again this year, that groups will be suggesting this is these are ways to, to, make it harder for you to get records because that will really relieve the burden on the records custodians by saying that you are getting, if you if you ask for less records of the public than the records custodians, they have less work to do.

We do not see that as an answer.

You should.

It's amazing if the public wants to ask for more records, that is absolutely what should be happening.

You shouldn't be punished for that.

Well, obviously, a story to continue to follow.

NMFOG executive Director Christine Barber, thank you so much for joining us and giving us just that overview of what the organization does.

We appreciate your time.

Thank you so much.

And thank you for having me.

And we turn now to legal director Amanda Lavin to talk about some specific cases of interest, especially to care viewers in southern New Mexico, but also statewide.

Thank you for being with us.

Thank you.

We just heard from Christine, the executive director, your one colleague at an Fog, I should add.

And she really spearheaded the investigation.

She spearheads all the investigations for and in fog.

But I want to talk first about the fact that even though you specialize in legal cases, we don't always have to come to litigation.

And one example of that is in Las Cruces.

a letter to city council asking them to revisit a select committee that was formed a few years ago ended in a positive result.

Tell us about that.

Right.

So that's a lot of the times how we begin to address any sort of problem that's brought to sans attention in terms of compliance with the transparency law.

We want to engage with the government agency that where the violation is occurring, and just see if we can't advocate sort of on the front end.

Filing a lawsuit is really the last resort.

So in the case of the City council of Las Cruces, Miss Barbara did reach out to them via letter and ask them and encourage them to revisit the ordinance that led to the creation of this unlawful secret committee in the first place.

And they were really responsive to that letter and did repeal the ordinance, as I understand it.

All right.

And so once those efforts are exhausted and it's time for litigation, really?

When do you make that decision?

Every case is different.

I think it just kind of depends on the nature of the of the violation of the law.

What the kind of records are that we're looking for, or if it's an open meeting, the exact violations of what's at stake in terms of how the law has been broken.

But, essentially, we do have a board of directors at NMFOG who I consult with their many lawyers on our on our board, who have many years of experience litigating, transparency cases.

And I consult with them before bringing in any sort of lawsuit.

So there is a lot of thought that goes into which cases we we decide to pursue in the courts.

Well, obviously, a very high interest in southern New Mexico and across the state because data centers are popping up, at least in concept, all over the place.

Project Jupiter, obviously under construction in Santa Teresa and with ongoing litigation coming from all directions.

We really don't know what to expect next.

But and in got involved there.

Tell us about your involvement in Dona Ana County Commissions actions regarding Project Jupiter.

So back approximately a year ago, at the end of 2025, when the commissioner for meeting, and having these meetings discussing approving, funding bonds to support Project Jupiter, there was a lot of community attention to those meetings, a lot of community outcry, I would say, at sort of the perceived lack of transparency and accountability on behalf of the commissioners and so far was receiving a lot of reports about concerns that community members were having.

And one of the concerns was about a violation of the Open Meetings Act that had occurred, at one of the meetings where they did approve, the, the IRBs, which are essentially tax breaks for Project Jupiter, while they operate in southern New Mexico.

And, we had submitted public records requests about who had, notified the the commissioners about the, Open Meetings Act violation.

They said they didn't have any records when we knew for a fact that they did have letters and other communications notifying them of these Open Meetings Act violations.

And then sort of later down the line a few months later, another group had been requesting construction permits and other things related to the actual construction of the data center and emails and other documents were being withheld under exemptions under the Inspection of Public Records Act.

That didn't really apply to those, withheld records.

So earlier in our program, Christine mentioned that there are certain cases where it's totally legitimate to redact some information, not release some records.

And one of the examples she cited was something that may aid in a terrorist attack.

if I'm not mistaken, that was one of the arguments made against releasing documents related to Project Jupiter.

Explain that to us.

That's correct.

So Ipra, the Inspection of Public Records Act does have a number of categories of information or types of public records that government does not have to release to the public.

And it's the government.

It doesn't matter if it's state, municipal, any sort of level of government has developed what's called a tactical response plan.

that, if released, could facilitate the, the risk of a terrorist attack, then those are the types of plans that do not have to be released to the public.

Those are public records otherwise, but they fit this narrow definition of a tactical response plan that could facilitate a terrorist attack.

And those are the types of things that the legislature has said under Ipra do not have to be disclosed to the public.

And so you are correct that the the Dona Ana County Commissioners in fact, invoked this exception.

And so that apply to emails about the construction of Project Jupiter.

And categorically speaking, emails do not fit the definition of a tactical response plan.

And so they can't use this exception to Ipra to hide emails that are public records about construction of this mega data center that has a lot of public interest.

All right.

Well, what else would you like to say on this case?

There's so much involved here.

talk about the timeline that we might expect in terms of some resolution.

Well, we just filed the case in June, and the most recent, thing that has occurred in that case is Project Jupiter Oracle, which is the company behind Project Jupiter, has has asked the court to, grant them to intervene as a party.

And what the Oracle company is saying is that these emails that were withheld by the Diana County commissioners are actually their own trade secrets.

They're confidential and proprietary.

And again, we're talking about public records, that were created or maintained by a public agency, in this case, the Dona Ana County, Board of Commissioners.

And really, these are these are public records that the public has a right to see.

And so when and whenever, a government contracts with a private entity, that private entity has to understand that any sort of written communication or other records that might get created during the course of these transactions are going to be have to be available to the public.

And so far, there's opposing, Project Jupiter's intervention.

In this case, we don't think they have the right to be a party.

we're not talking about confidential proprietary documents.

We're talking about public records.

And so that case has been set for a hearing in early November, or, excuse me, that that request by the by project Jupiter has been set for a hearing in early November.

So we'll expect a judge to issue a ruling around that time as to whether or not Project Jupiter is going to be allowed to actually become a party to this case.

Okay.

Well, we'll keep that in mind as we're having this conversation.

It is not yet November, and the program is, of course, airing in early November.

So there may be some updated information to be had, and we will be sure to bring that to our viewers as soon as possible.

I think one of the most interesting cases, and maybe complicated for someone like me who doesn't necessarily follow sports very closely, but the cases involving Nmsu and UNM over name, image and likeness and how the universities are going to be paying millions of dollars to students.

How can you characterize this case and your involvement in it?

So New Mexico Foundation for Open Government submitted public records requests, a little over a year and a half ago regarding how the universities are making these payments to athletes as of last year.

there there are new rules in place, where public universities and private universities can pay their athletes up to $20.5 million per year, in order to profit off, these athletes name, image and likeness.

And these are expenditures by public institutions and for the position that the public has the right to know how these public universities are spending public money, especially when we're talking about millions of dollars.

I mean, one of the core purposes of transparency laws and one of the one of the main reasons people care about government transparency is they want to know where the money's going.

And these universities are paying athletes up to the tune of 2 million, $20 million a year.

And we don't get to see the receipts for that.

We don't know how that money is being spent.

are you suggesting that even at universities like Nmsu, we're talking potentially that much money to an athlete?

University spokespeople have come out and publicly said they're not spending at that level.

That's the cap, that these new rules around these types of the what they call revenue sharing permit universities to do, there's a cap of $20 million.

But the reality is we just don't know how much they're spending because they haven't, allowed any sort of public access into what those payments look like.

Well, well, I tell you what, there are so many more interesting cases that and NMFOG is currently involved in and tell folks how they can read about more of these cases and get more information about services they might be interested in from the New Mexico Foundation for Open Government.

We would always welcome the public to look at our website.

We try to keep it updated with all of our our different things that we have going on, including various lawsuits they can visit Nmsu morgue and click on the legal tab at the top of the website, and they should be able to get an overview of the different litigation that we have ongoing right now.

They should be able to access the actual lawsuits themselves, follow those lawsuits on the court website.

And of course, we operate a helpline that the public is always, welcome to call if they ever want to, ask any sort of question about to fog about, open records or open meetings.

And we'd be happy to try and assist people if we All right.

Well, that number is on our screen.

NMFOG legal director Amanda Lavin, thank you so much for explaining these sometimes very complicated cases.

We sure appreciate it.

Thank you KC.

KRWG Public Media Senior TV producer, Jonny Coker hit the road and the gravel with the Graveleros in our newest Living Here episode.

my name is Matt Mason.

I started these gravel rides.

we do them every Thursday evening, sort of April through September, maybe nine years ago.

We started.

And the idea was just to connect people with each other and the landscape, show people the back roads and safe ways to get from downtown out to Oregon mountains, desert peaks, and get people excited about, exploring the desert by bike, Yeah.

I created the Monumental Loop in about 2016, which is a 250 mile bike packing route around Doña Ana County, connecting all four units of Organ Mountains, desert peaks.

And there was some excitement about that.

But to get more local excitement and build a community around it, I started hosting these Thursday evening rides to get people excited about what's possible and what's out there.

So I was showing them little snippets of the monumental loop and sort of building that community and getting everybody on the same page and up to speed with what we were doing, Tonight's ride is a little piece on the monumental loop.

and we'll do a new trail that the Southern New Mexico Trail Alliance just made.

a lot of dirt.

That tends to be where we focus is, you know, the more beautiful places and away from cars.

So we'll ride some trails near Tortugas Mountain up towards Sierra Vista Trail, and then descend on pavement pretty quickly back to town.

Yeah, I think so much of life is online these days.

So when we get people together in person and move through the landscape together, sort of as a unit, relying on each other, it just builds that trust and camaraderie.

which is, I think, more important now than it ever has been.

I kind of think people are at their best when they're outside moving and working together.

Yeah.

It used to be I, I started every route and led every route.

And then over the past couple of years, I've sort of open that up and told people, hey, if you want to lead a ride, even if you've never been to one, you can lead a ride and show us the community through your eyes.

Well, bikes for me at least represent like freedom.

You don't have to have like a subscription to like, get around, which pretty much.

And so it's important to community that's becoming more car centric.

I think, it gives people chances to like, talk to each other, like doing something which is important.

I think, as well.

we are welcoming to all levels and it's not like you have anything to lose by.

befriending some of these people who you may not have agreements with, Weve become a fractured society We got we've got to have places like this to to come together and and love one another Oh, well, public lands mean that we all get to take a part in loving our planet, which is not a hippie thing.

It's just something that I believe God gave us.

And we all have the opportunity to just do the best with it that we can.

So why not, right?

Why not keep the trash out of the wilderness?

Why not keep roads from eroding the state of wilderness, you know?

Yeah, just get out there.

get out there.

You can find Living Here episodes and all our local programs at KRWG.org.

Where you can also sign up to receive airwaves.

Our monthly TV programing guide via email up to two weeks before the start of the month.

Thank you for watching and for supporting local programing on KRWG Public Media.

I. I. Don't.