A shakeup in a major Senate committee has Sen. Richard Martinez, D-Española, replacing Sen. Cisco McSorley, D-Albuquerque, as head of the Senate Judiciary Committee. Martinez is more conservative than McSorley, especially on social issues.

Senate President pro tem Tim Jennings told the Santa Fe New Mexican’s Steve Terrell that it wasn’t about policy.

KRQE reported, “Some senators had complained how McSorley scheduled committee business, including the failure to consider some bills.”

The committee will also see a change with Sen. Eric Griego, D-Albuquerque, replacing Sen. Bernadette Sanchez on the committee. Griego is more liberal than Sanchez, and Jennings told Terrell that the committee would be more liberal after the moves.

This is a committee that has been key in such issues as domestic partnership and testimony in pay-to-play allegations.

Martinez has voted against domestic partnerships in the past, drawing the ire of Democratic and gay rights activists.

Sen. Peter Wirth, D-Santa Fe, will replace Martinez as Vice-Chair of the committee.

Deputy County Clerk Linda Padilla offered an additional explanation. Tallies were not received until after 2 a.m. Wednesday because absentee ballot boxes had to be driven to Tierra Amarilla from far-flung corners of the large northern New Mexico county for counting, Padilla and others said.

Rio Arriba wasn’t alone in delayed returns to the Secretary of State’s office, and none of Tuesday’s races were particularly close in Rio Arriba County, Secretary of State’s office records confirm.

Colfax and Mora counties also finished tallies early Wednesday, according to the Secretary of State’s office.

But Rio Arriba County has a history of questionable delays in turning in ballots and reporting election results, making any election night glitches a sensitive issue.

The County had similar election reporting problems with computer connectivity in 2006.

In 2008, results from the state Democratic Party’s presidential caucus were delayed when three ballot boxes were kept overnight by County election officials. The boxes had been kept at the homes of three polling-place managers, State Sen. Richard Martinez told Kate Nash at the Santa Fe New Mexican. But Martinez offered no explanation for why the results had not been reported to the state party on election night.

In 1998, Rio Arriba County election officials were convicted of vote fraud, a 12-year old case cited in Republican candidate for governor Susana Martinez‘s recent stump speeches.

Photo by Sara Grajeda

A bill that would require the Educational Retirement Board to publicly disclose the pension amounts for each of its 30,000 members passed the Senate Tuesday night and will now go to the governor for his signature. As The Independent reported in December, a state law passed last year prohibited disclosure of such information.

The Independent discovered the new rules in December, when in the course of investigating double dipping, it requested pension amounts for retirees. Retirees who return to work do not contribute to the pension system–but the state continues to pay into the system on their behalf.

During the floor debate, Senate Majority Leader Michael Sanchez asked if members would be able to opt out of such public disclosure.

“No one can opt out of this,” said Steve Fischmann, D-Las Cruces, who presented the bill sponsored by Rep. Jack Thomas, D-Rio Rancho.

“You must be able to disclose their disability or their pension amount…that is public information,” Fischmann said.

After more questions from Sanchez, Fischmann clarified that the disability benefit amount–but not the nature of the disability–would be public information.

Sanchez repeatedly questioned whether the bill might somehow jeopardize patient confidentiality and Fischman repeatedly denied that it would.

“Why would we need this bill?” asked Sen. David Ulibarri.

“Right now we’re frankly out of compliance with the legal requirements …of public information and this brings us into compliance. ..The salaries and benefits and the contributions are all public record and are required to be public record,” Fischmann responded.

“Because it’s public money paying for these pensions, disclosure is required,” Fischmann added, in order to comply with the New Mexico Inspection of Public Records Act.

IPRA prohibits the release of any medical records.

Sen. Richard Martinez opposed the bill on privacy grounds, saying “I’m retired and I really don’t think it’s anyone’s concern what I’m making in my pension.”

In his closing statement, Fischmann acknowledged the privacy concerns.

“This is simply an attempt to be sure we come into conformity with the current IPRA act and some small attempt to come into parity with PERA. I certainly und the chamber’s concerns and…maybe we need to go back and look at IPRA itself,” he said.

The measure passed by a vote of 21-18, with Sens. Richard Martinez, Mary Kay Papen, Nancy Rodriguez, George Muñoz, Linda Lovejoy, Cynthia Nava, Mary Jane Garcia, Howie Morales, Bernadette Sanchez, John Arthur Smith, David Ulibarri, Kent Cravens, William Sharer, Clint Harden, Steven Neville, Carroll Leavell, Gay Kernan and Dianna Duran voting in the negative.

After the vote, Sarah Welsh of the Foundation for Open Government told The Independent: “I’m glad that the Senate voted for more transparency for public money. …We’re giving out taxpayers’ money and they have a right to monitor expenditures. That’s the idea of government for and by the people.”

“My opinion is that they should have judged her on her professional qualifications,” the Governor said.

Holguin’s nomination got caught in the crosshairs of an internal fight over control of the Democratic Party and controversy over state environmental regulations.

Holguin managed the 2008 political campaigns of Sens. Tim Keller and Eric Griego. The duo knocked off then-Democratic Sens. Shannon Robinson and James Taylor a the June primary election that was considered a victory for progressive voters. In November of that year Tim Eichenberg defeated Republican Diane H. Snyder.

The political upheaval split Democratic lawmakers into rival fractions. And incumbent lawmakers from both political parties charged that several nonprofits had improperly influenced the legislative elections.

The losing lawmakers sued the nonprofits, a complaint later dismissed by state courts. Meanwhile, the state filed a lawsuit to force the nonprofits to disclose the origin of the money that had paid for what they said were educational mailers critical of the state lawmakers who later lost. A federal judge shot down the state’s lawsuit last year, and the state has appealed.

Holguin in an e-mail expressed surprise and disappointment at Tuesday’s vote.

“Since July, I’ve served on the Environmental Improvement Board in a thoughtful and principled manner,” she said in the e-mail. “I have a long track record of working on conservation in New Mexico. I will continue to advocate for the responsible stewardship of our natural resources and the public health, safety and welfare of New Mexicans.”

A tally sheet of the Senate vote shows that 10 Democrats joined 15 Republicans to reject Holguin’s nomination.

They were Linda Lopez, David Ulibarri, John Arthur Smith, John Sapien, Bernadette Sanchez, John Pinto, Mary Kay Papen, George Munoz, Howie Morales and Richard Martinez.

Bernadette Sanchez, in particular, spoke out in opposition to Holguin’s nomination on the Senate floor.

Sanchez’s constituents in 2008 received educational mailers sent out by the nonprofits before that year’s primary election. Sanchez did not face an opponent.

All 15 Republicans voted against Holguin’s nomination too.

It’s hard to discern what led to that, but also in play in Holguin’s nomination is an ongoing battle over state environmental regulations.

An organization has requested that the Environmental Improvement Board roll back New Mexico’s emissions to 25 percent below their 1990 levels by 2020 — far below anything being considered at the federal level and something critics say would devastate the state’s economy.

Photo by Robert Terrell

The vast majority of government retirees couldn’t “double dip” after July 1 under a bill the Senate passed Monday.

Senators passed the legislation 35 to 6 after a lengthy, complex debate that exposed urban-rural tensions among lawmakers. The legislation now heads to the House.

Currently a public retiree can earn both a pension and government paycheck, commonly referred to as “double dipping.”

But that practice would stop for government employees who retire after July 1 and return to work for state, local or county governments if the bill clears the House and Gov. Bill Richardson signs it.

Under the new rules workers would have to sit out for 12 months following retirement before returning to government work–and then stop receiving their pensions for as long as they work.

Those exempted would be elected officials, temporary legislative employees and the more than 1,400 people who currently double dip.

Temporary legislative employees work for the Legislature during the 30-day and 60-day legislative sessions.

While the legislation doesn’t go after current double dippers, it does require those individuals to begin contributing into the state’s retirement funds.

Current double dippers–unlike most employees–don’t do that.

“We need to put the genie back in [the bottle],” said the bill’s sponsor, Sen. David Ulibarri of Grants.

The state allowed government retirees to return to work while collecting a pension several years ago. But over the past year the practice has gained in notoriety and scrutiny. This bill (SB207) is a proposed solution.

Critics have pointed out that New Mexico can’t afford double dipping in hard economic times.

Because current double dippers don’t contribute into the state’s retirement funds, the state is forced to pay a double share into the retirement funds – the employee’s and employer’s – for these particular workers. Those payments come out of the state’s general fund, the state’s main account, which has a projected budget shortfall of several hundred million dollars next year.

Other critics say that double dipping keeps younger workers from moving up the job ranks because retirees inhabit them.

Although the ‘double dipping’ legislation passed, many lawmakers Monday groused that the bill before them wasn’t a perfect fix.

Some pointed out that the bill doesn’t stop double dipping altogether by retroactively preventing those who benefit from it now from living under the new rules after July 1.

And that gave many lawmakers the most heartburn — that the legislation wouldn’t stop the more than 1,400 double dippers from benefiting from the practice.

“The people cried reform…and there is no reform,” said Sen. Rod Adair, R-Roswell, adding that “we are not addressing the problem.”

The people of New Mexico are angry at people who get $80,000 in retirement pensions and $90,000 to the do the same job he or she retired from, not the police captain who retires and then returns to work as a patrol officer, Adair said.

Adair attempted unsuccessfully to amend Ulibarri’s bill to prevent a retiree from returning to the same job he or she held before they retired.

“He is hurting the unemployment rate,” Adair said, referring to a generic double dipper. “He is hurting office morale.”

But that amendment failed 13 to 28.

Several rural state lawmakers also attempted to change Ulibarri’s bill, complaining that an end to ‘double dipping’ would make it more difficult to fill certain jobs when the new rules go into effect.

Often the most qualified candidates for public safety jobs are retired police officers in small towns and county governments, lawmakers said.

Because the retirees already have been trained, the towns and counties don’t bear the cost of training them. But with the new rules, training costs will rise for these small communities, lawmakers said.

That’s because forcing future double dippers to temporarily give up their pensions to go back to work will dissuade the most qualified candidates from applying, the lawmakers said.

Sen. Stuart Ingle, R-Portales, tried unsuccessfully to exempt small, rural communities from the new rules in the bill, but the amendment would have applied to as many as two-thirds of the counties in the state.

Under that amendment small communities could identify “critical needs” and then hire double dippers to fill them. Those individuals wouldn’t have had to sit out for 12 months or give their pension up temporarily.

Not everyone liked the amendment, including Sen. Richard Martinez, D-Española.

“Coming from a small and very political county, I can only imagine what the critical needs are,” quipped Martinez, who comes from Rio Arriba County, famous for its political intrigue.

After Ingle’s amendment failed by a 14 to 26 vote, Sen. Gay Kernan, R-Hobbs, said the cost to small communities would be significant.

“I’m sorry that those in urban communities don’t have a feel for what we go through in small communities,” Kernan said.

An earlier version of the ‘double dipping’ bill had exempted retirees who returned to work in small communities around the state, as well as public safety officers and firefighters. All told, about 700 people would have been exempted from the new rules.

But Ulibarri’s bill removed those exceptions after the Public Employees Retirement Association (PERA) estimated in a Feb. 9 letter that the fund would lose $16 million in contributions during the first year if all those retirees were exempted.

That’s because the retirees would be in jobs instead of active employees who contribute into the fund, PERA’s director Terry Slattery, wrote.

Ultimately the majority of lawmakers were persuaded by PERA’s concerns.

Steve Allen, Director of the good government group Common Cause, expressed disappointment to The Independent about the vote, and said there is still a lot of education needed on the barriers that exist to voting.

“For Common Cause and other good government groups, this legislation is all about expanding access to the ballot box,” he said. “Similar to a long line of measures taken down through the years, like getting rid of the poll tax, same day registration and voting would enable many more people to exercise their right to vote.”

Sen. Richard Martinez, D-Española, left the room before the vote on SB 161 occurred in the Senate Judiciary committee last night, which left ten Senators to vote on the bill.  Sen. Bernadette Sanchez, D-Albuquerque, voted with the four Republicans on the committee against the bill. The five remaining Democrats voted in support of the bill, resulting in a tie.

The measure then failed this morning in the House Voters and Elections committee, with Rep. Danice Picraux, D-Albuquerque, and Rep. Debby Rodella, D-Espanola, voting against HB 123. Speaker of the House Ben Lujan left the room before the vote occurred. Otherwise, the breakdown was also along party lines, with  Democrats in favor and Republicans against.

Martinez didn’t name names, though he threatened to release to the media a list of Democratic and Republican colleagues he said collect per diem checks for interim legislative committee meetings that they barely attend. He made a pointed reference to Sen. Linda Lopez, D-Albuquerque and a candidate for lieutenant governor, who was presiding over the Senate at the time of his rant.

“There’s a lot of members of this body that go to into the interim committees just before lunch, sign the voucher, stay for the free lunch, and then book. You never see them again. …  If we want to save money, let’s stop abusing the system,” Martinez said.

“I could name names. I’ve got lists. Believe me, in nine years I’ve collected a list,” Martinez said. “And it would be very embarrassing if I let go of that list to the media. Are you listening madam president (referring to Lopez)? Because you’re on several committees with me too!”

Lopez did not respond.

Martinez also added that some freshman lawmakers have quickly become “really good” at abusing the system, but again, he didn’t name names.

Asked by NMI to name names following the outburst on the Senate floor, Martinez declined.

Ultimately, the Senate, on a voice vote, tabled the resolution from Sen. Mary Kay Papen, D-Las Cruces, calling on all lawmakers to voluntarily reduce their per diem reimbursements by at least 10 percent for the remainder of the special session.

Martinez made it clear that he needs the money for expenses including hiring a caretaker for his 94-year-old mother and boarding his dog every time he has to travel to an interim committee meeting in another part of the state.

Senate President Pro Tem Tim Jennings, D-Roswell, was among those expressing concern about Papen’s proposal. He said some lawmakers might not be able to afford a 10 percent cut.

Papen countered that the intent was for lawmakers to make a sacrifice along with everyone else. She said it could be 1 percent or 20 percent – whatever each could afford.

The debate over pay and per diem

Lawmakers currently receive $159 per day in per diem when they’re working. New Mexico is one of a few states where legislators aren’t paid a salary. For years, there’s been a debate about whether lawmakers should be paid (disclosure: I have said they should get a salary).

There’s also been a debate about how per diem should be used. Sen. Cisco McSorley, D-Albuquerque, has collected per diem (from taxpayer dollars) for travel, then also reimbursing his expenses from his campaign account – a practice that has earned him the criticism of some who accuse him of double dipping.

McSorley has said, according to the Albuquerque Journal, that he “has done nothing wrong and that he doesn’t consider the per diem he receives from the state to be an allowance for lodging, meals and incidental expenses.”

“That is supposed to be trying to make up for what I lost at home” while away from work, the Journal quoted McSorley as saying.

Sen. Garcia a top per diem collector

Wondering which lawmakers collect the most per diem from the state? Often at or near the top of the annual list is Sen. Mary Jane Garcia, D-Doña Ana. I’ve written before that she collected $26,000 in per diem in 2005, more than any other lawmaker that year. And I’ve written about the myriad of lawmakers, other politicians and political watchers who have told me that Garcia has often barely attended the meetings she’s been paid to attend.

Garcia has said she works hard for the per diem she receives.

Update, 8:40 p.m.

Lopez released this statement:

“Sen. Martinez’s reference to abusing per diem is unfounded. While there may be some of my colleagues who do not stay for the full committee hearing for which they are being paid per diem for, as a part-time, citizen Legislature, some may need to step out of a committee hearing to deal with business, constituent or other types of ‘fires’ that need to be dealt with.”

The Independent’s Gwyneth Doland contributed to this report.

You should follow NMI on Twitter and become a fan of NMI on Facebook. Got a news tip? Want to pitch a story idea? Send us an e-mail.

In fact, these local Democrats are pushing for the legalization of same-sex marriage to be added to the state Democratic Party platform. In this year’s legislative session, domestic partnership failed after a floor vote in the Senate, but Gov. Bill Richardson is open to adding the domestic partnership proposal to a special session later this year.

“If the marriage resolution passed, that should send some message to legislators that action should be taken,” Liz Stefanics, a state party central committee member, Santa Fe County commissioner and former state senator, told the Albuquerque Journal.

The bloggers and activists at Democracy for New Mexico advocated for adding gay marriage to the Democratic platform at the Democratic Party of Bernalillo County Central Committee hearing earlier this year.

Barb Wold wrote:

The energy in the hall was electric on this one, as a series of commenters — some gay, some straight — spoke in favor of the proposal. The resolution was passed on a voice vote — with only a few NOs emanating from the crowd. It was a satisfying show of support from our fellow Dems. Perhaps most importantly, it sparked a lot of discussion and thoughtful responses inside the hall and beyond. So many folks came up to us afterwards and pledged to help and get more active on this issue — including County Party officers. So many Dems — gay and straight — made it clear they’re ready to keep this issue on the front burner of local Democratic politics. And we will, one way or another, whatever it takes.

However, there is resistance against adding support for gay marriage to the Democratic Party platform. The Albuquerque Journal notes that Sen. Richard Martinez, D-Española, doesn’t think gay marriage “belongs” on the Democratic platform. Martinez was one of ten Democratic state senators to vote against domestic partnership.

“I think the general consensus of the Democratic Party is (gay marriage) shouldn’t be part of the party platform,” Martinez told the Albuquerque Journal.

State Democratic Party chairman Brian Colon, however, predicted the proposal would go through.

Colón predicted the resolution will be approved Saturday, saying he considers it to be a basic civil rights issue and adding, “We are a big tent.”