>> FUNDING FOR NEW MEXICO IN FOCUS PROVIDED BY VIEWERS LIKE YOU.

THIS WEEK ON NEW MEXICO IN FOCUS, DISSECTING A MASSIVE TAX PROPOSAL.

POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT GWYNETH DOLAND FINDS OUT HOW IT WOULD IMPACT BUSINESSES, INDIVIDUALS AND ENVIRONMENTAL INITIATIVES AROUND THE STATE.

>> Lente: WE WANT TO BE ABLE TO PUT MONEY BACK INTO THE POCKETS OF HARD WORKING NEW MEXICANS AND MAKE PEOPLE ACCOUNTABLE FOR THE TAXES THEY MAY HAVE BEEN ENJOYING FOR A LITTLE BIT TOO LONG IN THE STATE.

>> Gene: AND AS DEADLINES FOR HUNTING APPLICATIONS APPROACH, THE DIRECTOR OF NEW MEXICO WILDLIFE FEDERATION SAYS THE SYSTEM NEEDS SOME ADJUSTMENTS.

NEW MEXICO IN FOCUS STARTS NOW.

THANKS FOR JOINING US THIS WEEK.

I AM YOUR HOST GENE GRANT.

HOUSING HAS BEEN A PUBLIC ISSUE RECENTLY IN ALBUQUERQUE AND A RECENT DECISION FROM CITY COUNCIL MARKS ANOTHER VICTORY FOR LANDLORDS.

IN LESS THAN 15 MINUTES, OUR LINE OPINION PANEL EXAMINES THE FAILED TENANT PROTECTION BILL AND SOME STATE-WIDE LEGISLATION THAT HASN'T MADE IT OFF THE GROUND.

IN THE SECOND HALF OF THE SHOW WE LOOK INTO A NEW CRIME BILL THAT HAS RECEIVED NEARLY UNANIMOUSLY BIPARTISAN APPROVAL.

THE LINE OPINION PANELISTS AND I DISCUSS HOW THE PROPOSED BILL WOULD CHANGE THE WAY PROSECUTORS CAN CHARGE REPEAT OFFENDERS, BUT WE BEGIN INSIDE THE ROUNDHOUSE WITH POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT GWYNETH DOLAND.

MONDAY THE HOUSE TAXATION AND REVENUE DEPARTMENT SENT A WIDE RANGING TAX PACKAGE TO THE FULL CHAMBER.

THIS WEEK GWYNETH TRACKED DOWN THE CHAIR OF THAT COMMITTEE TO UNDERSTAND WHAT IS INSIDE.

>> Gwyneth: REPRESENTATIVE  LENTE, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR TALKING TO US TODAY ABOUT  TAXES.

>> Lente: THANK YOU FOR THE  INTEREST IN WANTING TO TALK ABOUT TAXES.

>> Gwyneth: WHAT ARE THE OVERALL GOALS OF THE PACKAGE THAT YOUR COMMITTEE PASSED THIS WEEK?

>> Lente: THE GOALS OF THE COMMITTEE'S PACKAGE FOR THIS YEAR IS, ONE, WE WANT TO HELP WORKING FAMILIES OUT IN NEW MEXICO AND PUT MONEY BACK IN POCKETS OF HARD WORKING NEW MEXICANS AND ABLE TO LOWER TAXES WHERE APPLICABLE AND ALSO WANT TO MAKE PEOPLE ACCOUNTABLE FOR THE TAXES THEY MAYBE HAVE BEEN ENJOYING FOR A LITTLE BIT TOO LONG IN THE STATE.

>> Gwyneth: THAT LAST PART I WANTED TO ASK YOU ABOUT.

THE PLAN WOULD RAISE THE PERSONAL INCOME TAX RATE ON THE HIGHEST EARNERS.

WITH THIS BIG BUDGET SURPLUS, WHY BOTHER RAISING?

>> Lente: THAT IS A GOOD QUESTION AND WE THOUGHT ABOUT THAT A LOT.

DURING SURPLUS LIKE THIS, IT IS NOT ABOUT TRYING TO RAISE TAXES TO MAKE A POINT.

THE POINT IS THAT WE HAVE RIGHT NOW -- WE HAVE HAD ALMOST A FLAT TAX RATE FOR A LONG, LONG TIME AND THE FOCUS IS NOW TO BEGIN TO CREATE PROGRESSIVITY IN THE TAX RATE STRUCTURE SO AT THIS POINT WE ADDED TWO TAX BRACKET STRUCTURES FOR THE TOP HIGHEST EARNERS.

AND AT THIS TIME WE ARE LOOKING AT AFFECTING ABOUT 3% OF NEW MEXICANS THAT ARE THOSE TOP BRACKET EARNERS.

IF YOU MAKE 150,000 PLUS AS A SINGLE FILER, YOU WILL PROBABLY SEE, AT THAT 150,000 LEVEL, YOUR TAX WILL INCREASE ABOUT $2 A PERSON.

IF YOU GO UP TO 200,000, YOU MAY SEE A TAX INCREASE OF ABOUT 600 TO $700 FOR THAT PERSON.

THEN IF YOU GO UP 300 PLUS, YOU'LL SEE A TAX INCREASE OF ABOUT 1200 FOR THAT PERSON.

MARRIED FILING JOINTLY IS A DIFFERENT ANIMAL IN ITSELF.

SO EVERYBODY THAT HAS AN INCOME COMBINED OF 250,000, A QUARTER MILLION DOLLARS AND LESS, WILL SEE A TAX REDUCTION.

THOSE THAT ARE ABOVE THAT WILL SEE A TAX INCREASE OF ABOUT, FOR 250,000, I THINK THE AMOUNT IS ABOUT $600 AND THEN IF YOU GO TO 300,000 PLUS, IT ESCALATES TO CLOSE TO 1,000-DOLLARS.

>> Gwyneth: IN TERMS OF THE  CORPORATE TAX RATE, THERE IS A HIKE THERE TOO AND BUSINESSES WERE REALLY CRUSHED BY COVID.

IS THIS THE RIGHT TIME TO RAISE TAXES ON BUSINESSES?

>> Lente: THAT PROPOSAL WAS DONE BY REPRESENTATIVE JASON HARPER, A REPUBLICAN RANKING MEMBER HERE IN OUR COMMITTEE AND HE FELT THE FLAT TAX RATE OF 5.9% WAS IN FACT THE WAY TO GO.

IN SUPPORTING ALL MEMBERS ON THE COMMITTEE, I MADE IT A POINT TO MAKE SURE HE FELT INCLUDED IN THE PACKAGE AND THAT WAS HIS PROPOSAL AND WE ARE GOING TO GO WITH IT.

>> Gwyneth: THERE IS A DECREASE IN THE AMOUNT OF TAXES THAT WE PAY ON STUFF WE BUY AND SERVICES, THE GROSS RECEIPTS TAX.

>> Lente: WHEN YOU LOOK AT GROSS RECEIPTS TAX, THE DEDUCTION OF A QUARTER PERCENT LAST YEAR IN THE LAST LEGISLATIVE SESSION, IN ADDITION TO IF WE CAN GET THIS PACKAGE THROUGH OF A .5%, THAT IS 3/4 OF A PERCENT OF A REDUCTION IN OUR GRT RATE FOR THE STATE, WHICH DOES FAR MORE THAN ANY PYRAMIDING OR TAKING AWAY OF THE PYRAMIDING, WHATEVER YOU DO, YOU'LL SEE MORE FOR WORKING FAMILIES IN THE STATE THAT ARE RUNNING DOWN TO THE LOCAL GROCERY STORE TO PICK UP A GALLON OF MILK OR MAYBE BUY SCHOOL SUPPLIES OR WHATEVER IT MIGHT BE.

SO, THOSE TYPES OF REDUCTIONS ARE IN THIS CASE BOLD INITIATIVES IN A TIME WHERE WE NEED TO HAVE BOLD IDEAS TO CREATE THE OPPORTUNITIES TO MOVE FORWARD.

>> Gwyneth: YOU SAID PYRAMIDING.

SO I AM GOING TO FOLLOW UP ON  IT.

SO WHAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT IS THINGS BEING TAXED AT SEVERAL LEVELS SO THAT BY THE TIME THE CONSUMER IS PAYING FOR SOMETHING, THEY ARE EFFECTIVELY PAYING A BUNCH MORE TAX ON SOMETHING.

I UNDERSTAND THAT ALBUQUERQUE AND SANTA FE FOUGHT THIS REALLY HARD BECAUSE THEY WERE WORRIED ABOUT LOSING MONEY FROM THOSE TAXES.

BUT IS IT A GOOD IDEA?

>> Lente: YOU KNOW, THE CONCEPT IS UNDERSTANDABLE AND I THINK IN TERMS OF A SMALL BUSINESS THAT MAYBE DOES NOT HAVE THAT IN-HOUSE ATTORNEY OR DOESN'T HAVE THAT IN-HOUSE ACCOUNTANT THAT HAS TO SHOP THAT AROUND, IT COULD HELP THEM ABSOLUTELY.

THERE IS NO QUESTION ABOUT IT BUT WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE FUNDING REDUCTION THAT IN ALBUQUERQUE OR SANTA FE OR ANY POINT IN BETWEEN, IN THE SMALL TOWNS AND CITIES THAT HAD A LINE OUT THIS ROOM WHEN THEY HEARD ABOUT HOW IT WOULD AFFECT THEIR BOTTOM LINE, WAS SOMETHING THAT I ASKED THE SPONSOR AGAIN, JASON HARPER, RANKING MEMBER REPUBLICAN FROM THE COMMITTEE TO SAY, IF YOU CAN WORK WITH THESE COMMUNITIES AND FIND THEM AND GET THEM ON BOARD SO THEY CAN APPRECIATE WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO DO, I THINK AT THAT POINT WE CAN INCLUDE IT IN THIS TAX PACKAGE.

I WORKED WITH HIM SHOULDER TO SHOULDER TO A POINT WHERE AT THE 11TH HOUR I CALLED HIM UP AND SAID, WHAT IS THE STATUS, YOU KNOW, WE SHOULD PROBABLY CALL IT A DAY BECAUSE IT SOUNDS LIKE THEY ARE NOT COMING TO THE TABLE.

SO THE CONCERN WAS FOR THOSE COUNTIES AND THOSE MUNICIPALITIES IS THEM HAVING MILLIONS OF DOLLARS TAKEN AWAY MEANS THEY'LL HAVE LESS OF A POLICE FORCE, LESS OF AN OPPORTUNITY TO PROVIDE SOCIAL SERVICES FOR THEIR COMMUNITY MEMBERS AND THE LIST GOES ON AND ON.

SO, WE HAVE TO DO THINGS AND TRY TO BALANCE THE SITUATION THE BEST THAT WE CAN.

SO, THE REDUCTION OF THE GRT, I THINK, BY FAR TAKES INTO ACCOUNT AN APPRECIATION FOR SMALL BUSINESSES AND HELPS TO CREATE LESS OF A BURDEN FOR THEM BUT WE HAD TO LISTEN TO OUR COMMUNITIES AS WELL, KNOWING THAT IF CRIME PLAGUES OUR COMMUNITIES, WE WANT TO MAKE SURE WE HAVE THAT EXTRA POLICEMAN OR POLICEWOMAN HIM THAT WE DON'T LOSE THEM TO A GRT REDUCTION.

>> Gwyneth: CAMILLE FEIBELMAN, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR BEING WITH US TODAY.

THE HOUSE TAX COMMITTEE THIS WEEK PASSED A BIG OLE PACKAGE OF A ZILLION DIFFERENT ELEMENTS, BUT SEVERAL OF THEM ARE CLIMATE RELATED AND YOU'RE FOLLOWING THOSE.

WHAT IS IN THERE?

>> Feibelman: WELL, FIRST OF ALL, DEMOCRATIC LEADERSHIP IN THE HOUSE AND THE CHAIRMAN MADE SURE THAT ALL THREE OF THE CLIMATE RELATED HOUSE TAX BILLS MADE IT INTO THE PACKAGE.

SO THAT IS INCENTIVES FOR PURCHASING ELECTRIC VEHICLES, FOR DOING HOME COMMERCIAL OR INDUSTRIAL STORAGE OF RENEWABLE ENERGY.

SO ESPECIALLY THE EV BILL IS REALLY GOOD FOR MIDDLE TO LOW INCOME FAMILIES BECAUSE IF YOU ARE WITHIN A CERTAIN INCOME LEVEL YOU CAN GET $4,000 OFF OF YOUR ELECTRIC VEHICLE.

IT COMES BACK TO YOU IN CASH IF YOUR TAX BILL ISN'T HIGH ENOUGH, AND YOU CAN COMBINE IT WITH THE 7500-DOLLAR TAX CREDIT THAT IS AVAILABLE FEDERALLY TO REALLY TAKE A BIG CHUNK OFF OF AN ELECTRIC VEHICLE, IMPROVING YOUR OWN AIR QUALITY, YOUR COMMUNITY'S AIR QUALITY BUT ALSO SAVING YOU MONEY AT THE GAS PUMP EVERYDAY.

>> Gwyneth: THERE IS ALSO AN ELEMENT THAT WOULD INCENTIVIZE ENERGY STORAGE SYSTEMS.

WHAT DOES THAT MEAN?

>> Feibelman: THERE ARE TWO BILLS AND IT DEALS WITH IT IN THREE DIFFERENT WAYS.

IF YOU SOLAR PANELS AT YOUR HOUSE, YOU COULD GET A TAX INCENTIVE TO HAVE A BATTERY OR IF YOU'RE AT A COMMERCIAL FACILITY, LIKE AN AG FACILITY, THEN YOU COULD GET A BATTERY TO STORE THAT ENERGY FOR LATER WHEN THERE IS NO SUN OUT AND TO USE IT LATER.

BUT, THERE IS A THIRD BILL THAT ALSO APPLIES SOME OF THE TAX CREDITS THAT THE SOLAR INDUSTRY HAS TO THE INDUSTRIAL STORAGE INDUSTRY, SO THAT THE SUN SHINES DURING THE DAY, YOU CAPTURE THAT IN A BATTERY AND YOU DEPLOY IT AT A TIME WHEN THERE IS LESS SUNLIGHT.

>> Gwyneth: THERE IS ONLY ABOUT A WEEK LEFT.

HOW CONFIDENT ARE YOU ABOUT MAKING IT OVER THE FINISH LINE WITH THESE?

>> Feibelman: JUST GIVEN THAT THREE OF THE BILLS ALONE ARE IN THE HOUSE TAX PACKAGE, THEY HAVE TO PASS THE HOUSE FLOOR, THAT THE SENATE WILL FOLLOW SUIT WITH THAT LEADERSHIP.

THERE ARE ALSO MANY OTHER BILLS THAT NEED APPROPRIATIONS IN THE BUDGET AND SOME POLICY BILLS THAT STILL HAVE TO GET OVER THE FINISH LINE.

WE ARE HOPING THAT ON DAY 60 THAT WE CAN SAY WE MADE GOOD PROGRESS FOR THE CLIMATE HERE AT THE ROUNDHOUSE ESPECIALLY AFTER A SUMMER OF FEROCIOUS FIRES, TERRIBLE FLOODS AND FAMILIES STILL SUFFERING THE EFFECTS OF GLOBAL CLIMATE CHANGE.

IT IS HERE NOW, IT IS A DISASTER AND IT IS AFFECTING REAL FAMILIES AND IF THE PEOPLE IN THIS HOUSE DON'T DO ANYTHING ABOUT IT, WE LEAVE OURSELVES THAT MUCH MORE EXPOSED.

>> Gwyneth: RICHARD ANKLAM, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR COMING AND TALKING TO US ABOUT TAX POLICY, WHICH IS YOUR FORTE.

>> Anklam: HAPPY TO, ANY TIME.

>> Gwyneth: ONE OF THE THINGS IN THE BILL PASSED BY THE HOUSE TAX COMMITTEE THIS WEEK IS TAX REBATES FOR REGULAR FOLKS.

IS THIS A GOOD IDEA?

>> Anklam: IT IS AN EXPEDIENT WAY TO GET RID OF SOME EXCESS CASH THAT THE STATE HAS THAT THEY DON'T KNOW THAT THEY CAN BAKE INTO THE BUDGET AND HAVE TO SPEND IN FUTURE YEARS.

ON THAT LEVEL, ABSOLUTELY.

COULD THE MONEY BE BETTER SPENT, IF YOU COULD SAVE SOME NUNS AND ORPHANS SOMEWHERE WITH IT, YES, ABSOLUTELY.

BUT, YEAH, I DON'T FAULT THEM OR FLAW THEM FOR TAKING THAT APPROACH.

>> Gwyneth: IT IS NOT JUST A POLITICAL GIVE-AWAY, HEY, WE ARE GIVING YOU MONEY BACK, VOTE FOR US AGAIN?

>> Anklam: THERE IS AN ELEMENT OF POPULISM TO IT, OF COURSE.

IT IS THE SECOND YEAR IN A ROW.

WE ARE BLESSED WITH EXCESS REVENUES BUT NONE OF US KNOW WHAT THE FUTURE LOOKS LIKE IN TERMS OF WILL THOSE CONTINUE, SO, RATHER THAN -- THEY ARE GROWING RECURRING BUDGETS AS WELL, BUT THEY ARE TRYING TO TAKE A LITTLE OFF THE TOP, I THINK, AND JUST GIVE IT BACK TO EVERYBODY.

I THINK THAT MAKES SENSE ON SOME LEVEL.

>> Gwyneth: WHEN PEOPLE GET REBATES, DO THEY PUT THE MONEY BACK INTO THE ECONOMY?

>> Anklam: GENERALLY SPEAKING, MOST PEOPLE SPEND EVERY DIME THEY HAVE, SO, YES, MOST OF THOSE REBATES DO END UP BACK IN THE ECONOMY AND SUBJECT TO GROSS RECEIPTS TAX AND ALL THAT KIND OF STUFF.

>> Gwyneth: I WAS GOING TO ASK YOU ABOUT GROSS RECEIPTS TAX.

EVERY YEAR WE ARE UP HERE TALKING ABOUT GRT AND IT IS A LOVE/HATE RELATIONSHIP.

SO WHAT IS IN THE WORKS RIGHT  NOW?

>> Anklam: RIGHT NOW IN THE HOUSE PACKAGE IS JUST A HALF PERCENT RATE REDUCTION ON THE STATE SIDE, SO, WHAT THAT TRANSLATES TO WHETHER YOU'RE IN LAS CRUCES OR ALBUQUERQUE OR SANTA FE, WHATEVER THE APPLICABLE RATE IS THERE, IT WILL GO DOWN BY ANOTHER HALF PERCENT.

AND THAT IS IN ADDITION TO THE QUARTER PERCENT THAT WAS REDUCED LAST YEAR.

LONG-TERM, YOU WERE ASKING ABOUT, CAN THAT HAVE IMPLICATIONS?

YES.

BECAUSE THAT IS A RECURRING EXPENSE.

IT IS A RECURRING SAVINGS FOR TAXPAYERS AND HELPS INDIVIDUALS.

IT REDUCES REGRESSIVITY.

IT REDUCES THE INCIDENTS OF PYRAMIDING FOR BUSINESSES, BUT AT THE SAME TIME IT IS A RECURRING COST.

SO, FIVE YEARS FROM NOW, IF WE ARE NOT BLESSED WITH REVENUES THAT WE HAVE TODAY, WOULD THEY POSSIBLY CONSIDER RESTORING PART OR SOME OF THOSE RATES, YES, ABSOLUTELY.

>> Gwyneth: AND THEN YOU GET ACCUSED OF RAISING TAXES.

>> Anklam: RIGHT.

THEN YOU'RE A TAX RAISER AND RIGHT NOW YOU'RE A TAX CUTTER BUT AGAIN IT IS NOT A TARGETED SOLUTION, BUT IT BROADLY TOUCHES A LOT OF ISSUES BUT NOT IN A HUGE WAY.

IT IS -- HALF PERCENT IS NOT -- IT IS MEANINGFUL BUT YOU'RE NOT GOING TO NOTICE IT TOMORROW ON YOUR RECEIPTS.

>> Gwyneth: SOME PEOPLE MIGHT NOTICE IS A CHANGE IN THE PERSONAL INCOME TAX RATE.

WHAT IS AT WORK RIGHT NOW?

>> Anklam: THE PROPOSAL THAT HAS COME OUT OF THE HOUSE ADDS A COUPLE OF BRACKETS TO OUR CURRENT STRUCTURE.

IT RESTRUCTURES THE BRACKETS AND FOR MOST INCOME LEVELS IT ACTUALLY REPRESENTS A TAX DECREASE BECAUSE OF THE -- YOU KNOW, FORMERLY YOU HIT THE HIGHEST BRACKET AROUND 18,000-DOLLARS IN TAXABLE INCOME, AND THEN IT WAS FLAT.

THAT IS A RESULT OF CHANGES YEARS AGO IN THE RICHARDSON ADMINISTRATION.

THEY BASICALLY PEELED OFF THE TOP FOUR BRACKETS.

THIS LEGISLATION RESTORES A COUPLE OF BRACKETS AND ACTUALLY DOES RAISE TAX RATES.

>> Gwyneth: WHAT EVERYONE WANTS TO KNOW IS WHO IS GOING TO PAY MORE?

>> Anklam: PEOPLE MAKING MORE THAN ME AND THAT IS WHAT MATTERS TO MYSELF AND MOST OF YOUR VIEWERS PROBABLY.

BUT IT IS THOSE INCREMENTAL RATES ARE AT HIGHER INCOME LEVELS.

>> Gene: TIME TO WELCOME OUR LINE OPINION PANELISTS FOR THE WEEK.

WE ARE HAPPY TO BE JOINED IN STUDIO BY CATHRYN MCGILL, FOUNDER AND DIRECTOR OF NEW MEXICO BLACK LEADERSHIP COUNCIL.

TO HER LEFT, FORMER STATE SENATOR DIANE SNYDER.

ALWAYS GOOD TO HAVE THE SENATOR WITH US.

ACROSS THE TABLE, SERGE MARTINEZ, PROFESSOR AT UNM SCHOOL OF LAW AND PRESIDENT OF THE HOUSING ASSISTANCE NONPROFIT AMPARO.

WE BEGIN THIS WEEK WITH ALBUQUERQUE CITY COUNCIL VOTING AGAINST A TENANT PROTECTION BILL THIS WEEK SIDING WITH LANDLORDS IN A 4-5 DECISION.

PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL TENANT PROTECTION ORDINANCE AUTHORED BY COUNCILOR TAMMY FIEBELKORN WOULD HAVE LIMITED APPLICATION FEES TO $150 AND REQUIRED LANDLORDS TO DISCLOSE SCREENING STANDARDS TO APPLICANTS INCLUDING THEIR CHARGING RATES FOR PARKING, PEST CONTROL AND PET OWNERSHIP.

ACCORDING TO THE JOURNAL TWO COUNCILORS LOUIE SANCHEZ AND TRUDY JONES ASKED TO TABLE THE ORDINANCE FOR AMENDMENTS TO THE BILL.

WHEN THAT WAS DECLINED THE TWO VOTED AGAINST IT.

SERGE, HOW DID THIS BILL FAIL?

LET ME STICK WITH THAT FIRST QUESTION.

WHAT HAPPENED HERE?

WHY DID IT FAIL?

WHY THE 4-5 VOTE?

THESE SEEM LIKE SIMPLE, COMMON SENSE -- THEY DON'T EVEN QUALIFY AS PROTECTIONS.

THEY JUST SEEM LIKE NORMAL COURSE OF BUSINESS.

WHAT HAPPENED HERE?

>> Serge: THESE ARE TO ME, VERY MINIMAL PROTECTIONS, RIGHT.

THE BARE MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS FOR SOMEBODY TO SAY, HERE IS HOW MUCH YOU'RE GOING TO PAY.

WE ARE NOT GOING TO HAVE UNREASONABLE FEES, THINGS ALONG THOSE LINES.

IT IS NOT ALL THE THINGS THAT HAVE TO DO WITH HELPING TENANTS IN NEW MEXICO.

THEY ARE MAKING IT PRETTY CLEAR THERE IS A REALLY STRONG VOICE SAYING TENANTS DON'T MATTER.

THEY CAN'T MATTER, RIGHT?

AND EVEN THE TINIEST BIT OF REGULATION OR WATCHING OVER THIS IS GOING TO BRING DOWN CATASTROPHES, THE LIKES OF WHICH WE HAVE NEVER SEEN AND CATACLYSMS.

>> Gene: SOME OF THE PEOPLE THAT WERE OPPOSED USED THAT KIND OF LANGUAGE, LIKE CATACLYSMIC.

>> Serge: I DON'T THINK ANYBODY ACTUALLY BUYS THAT BUT IT GIVES YOU SOMETHING TO HANG YOUR HAT ON, RIGHT, AND SAY, YES, THIS IS RIGHT.

AND THERE IS THIS CONSTANT DRUM OF ANY REGULATION WILL MAKE SURE NOBODY EVER BUILDS A HOUSE AGAIN IN NEW MEXICO.

ANY NEW REGULATION WILL DRIVE EVERYBODY OUT OF BUSINESS IN NEW MEXICO.

AND, FRANKLY, IF YOU'RE BUSINESS IS SUCH THAT YOU CANNOT GIVE RECEIPTS, THAT YOU CANNOT DISCLOSE THE FEES THAT YOU'RE CHARGING, THEN, MAYBE YOU'RE OPERATING A LITTLE BIT TOO CLOSE TO THE MARGINS AS WELL.

BUT I THINK LOST FROM ALL OF THIS IS THIS IDEA WHEN WE TALK ABOUT HOUSING, WE ARE NOT TALKING ABOUT A BICYCLE OR THE LATEST TOY.

WE ARE TALKING ABOUT SOMETHING THAT EVERYBODY NEEDS THAT IS A BASIC HUMAN NEED AND TREATING IT LIKE ANYTHING ELSE IS MISSING THE BOAT COMPLETELY BUT, YEAH, I MEAN AS A PRACTICAL MATTER IT IS THIS IDEA THAT WE ARE ONE REGULATION AWAY FROM EVERYBODY, EVERY DWELLING IN ALBUQUERQUE DISAPPEARING AND NO ONE EVER COMING HERE AGAIN AND EVERYBODY LOSING THEIR BUSINESSES.

>> Gene: IT IS INTERESTING.

CATHY, I AM INTERESTED IN YOUR TAKE ON THIS BUT THE MAYOR HAS COME OUT AND SAID THESE WERE JUST CONSERVATIVE SAFEGUARDS WHICH IS A PRETTY, I WOULD SAY, A PRETTY ACCURATE DESCRIPTION OF WHAT I AM READING HERE.

IS THE MAYOR WRONG HERE?

HOW DID YOU TAKE THE VOTE WHEN YOU SAW THIS.

>> Cathryn: I WOULD SAY THAT THE BILL FALLS INTO THE CATEGORY OF SOMETHING TO NOTHING.

THIS IS SIMPLE CONTRACT LAW.

IF, GENE, YOU KNOW, YOU GAVE ME $1000 AND YOU SAID, CATHY, CAN I GET A RECEIPT?

NO, YOU CAN'T HAVE A RECEIPT.

WHAT WOULD YOU SAY?

I AM NOT GOING TO DO BUSINESS WITH YOU.

I CAN'T GET A RECEIPT?

SO, YOU KNOW, BUSINESS TRANSACTIONS SAY THAT WE HAVE A RIGHT TO GET A RECEIPT.

I CAN WAIVE THAT AND SAY, THAT IS OKAY, I TRUST YOU, YOU DON'T HAVE TO GIVE ME A RECEIPT, BUT YOU SHOULD GIVE ME A RECEIPT.

AND I WANT PEOPLE TO READ THE LEGISLATION.

READ IT.

I THINK DON'T TAKE MY WORD FOR IT, READ IT AND SAY, WELL, YEAH, YOU KNOW, IF I APPLY FOR AN APARTMENT AND I PAY $250 AND YOU DON'T PROCESS MY APPLICATION, I WANT MY MONEY BACK.

THAT IS ALL IT IS.

>> Gene: WHY IS IT UNREASONABLE?

>> Cathryn: YOU TELL ME.

YOU TELL ME WHY THAT IS UNREASONABLE.

>> Gene: HOW DO LANDLORDS GET TO KEEP THE $150 FOR THE APPLICATION AND THEN DON'T EVEN LOOK AT THE APPLICATION AND KEEP THE 150.

I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHERE COUNCIL IS GOING HERE.

>> Cathryn: IF I GAVE YOU TWO CENTS AND YOU SAID YOU'RE GOING TO DO SOMETHING FOR ME AND YOU DON'T DO IT, I WANT MY MONEY BACK.

BELIEVE ME, CATHY MCGILL, I AM GOING TO COME AND SAY I WANT MY MONEY BACK.

>> Gene: I LOVE IT.

YOUR THOUGHTS ON THIS.

WAS THIS GOING TOO FAR FOR YOU WHEN YOU READ THE ORDINANCE.

>> Diane: TRUTHFULLY NO.

I CONFESS I HAVEN'T READ THE WHOLE BILL BUT TO ME THE ONE THAT STRUCK ME THE MOST WAS NOT DISCLOSING THE ADDITIONAL FEES.

I MEAN, DIDN'T WE EVEN MAKE IT NOW WHERE HOSPITALS AND DOCTORS HAVE NO DO THAT SO THAT YOU CAN DO SOME SHOPPING.

SO IF I AM SHOPPING FOR MY HEALTHCARE, THEN, BECAUSE I WANT TO KNOW.

MY BUDGET MAY BE THAT I CAN PAY $1000 FOR RENT BUT I HAVE DETERMINED THAT I CAN ONLY PAY $250, OR WHATEVER, FOR ALL MY UTILITIES AND PARKING.

IF YOU'RE GOING TO CHARGE ME FOR PARKING, I WANT IT INSIDE, COVERED AND ALL THOSE KIND OF THINGS.

OR ELECTRIC CHARGER, YEAH.

I WANT TO KNOW WHAT I AM GETTING.

THAT ONE I TOTALLY DON'T UNDERSTAND THAT YOU'RE GOING TO SPRING ALL THESE THINGS ON ME.

THAT DOESN'T -- FIRST OF ALL IT DOESN'T MAKE GOOD SENSE FOR YOU AS A BUSINESS PERSON, BECAUSE IF TWO OR THREE MONTHS FROM NOW WHEN I HAVE ABSOLUTELY HIT THE WALL BECAUSE I HAVE ALL THESE ADDITIONAL COSTS, I AM GOING TO LEAVE YOU IN THE HOLE.

I AM GOING TO GET UP AND MOVE.

>> Gene: THAT IS AN INTERESTING POINT THE IDEA THAT THIS COULD SHUFFLE PEOPLE AROUND MORE THAN PREVIOUSLY.

I AM INTERESTED IN WHAT YOU THINK ABOUT THAT.

AGAIN, PEOPLE ARE HUSTLING NOW TO FIND PLACES THAT ARE AFFORDABLE.

>> Serge: AS A PRACTICAL MATTER THAT IS A HOLLOW THREAT BECAUSE THAT IS WHAT EVERYBODY WANTS, RIGHT?

THE QUICKER YOU CAN TURN OVER TENANTS, THE FASTER YOU CAN RAISE THE RENT.

>> Gene: BECAUSE YOU GET THE FIRST, THE LAST, THE CLEANING FEES, ALL THOSE.

>> Serge: RIGHT.

I MEAN, AS RENTS GO UP, YOU'RE LIKE, I DON'T WANT TO BE STUCK WITH THIS PERSON WHO IS PAYING THAT OLD RENT.

I MEAN, IT IS A HOT MARKET.

IT IS A CHALLENGE FOR TENANTS TO GET ANY -- GET ANY SORT OF FOOT HOLD AT ALL.

>> Gene: WHAT DO WE THINK ABOUT THE LANGUAGE, GUYS, START WITH YOU ON THIS, THAT INDUSTRY CALLED THIS POTENTIALLY MEDDLESOME, PROBLEMATIC.

A LOT OF ADD LANGUAGE THERE.

I DON'T KNOW, MAYBE I SHOULDN'T BE SURPRISED THAT AN ELECTED BODY SITTING IN FRONT OF THESE PEOPLE WOULD PUT A FEW QUESTIONS TO THEM AND ASK THEM, WELL, EXPLAIN HOW YOU HAVE TO LEAVE THE STATE OR THE CITY IF WE THIS?

>> Serge: THE WHOLE MESSAGE HERE IS, NO, NO, YOU CANNOT PUT ANY REGULATION ON US, WE HAVE THE RIGHT TO OPERATE IN AN UNFETTERED MARKET.

I MEAN, THAT IS NOT WHAT A GOVERNMENT IS SUPPOSED TO DO.

IT IS SUPPOSED TO PROTECT THE PEOPLE WHO ARE IN NEED OF PROTECTION AND WHO MAKE UP THE COMMUNITY THAT WE ARE PART OF AND TO SORT OF -- IT IS, TO ME, JUST BEYOND UNDERSTANDING WHY THE IDEA, THE VERY IDEA, OF HAVING SOME COMMON SENSE PROTECTIONS AND SAFEGUARDS FOR SOME OF THE MOST VULNERABLE.

WE KNOW THESE ARE THE POOREST PEOPLE, THAT THEY ARE DISPROPORTIONALLY PEOPLE OF COLOR, RIGHT, THAT ARE IN THE RENTAL MARKET AND THE FACT THAT WE ARE SAYING, NO, NO, NO, EVEN THE LIGHTEST BIT OF PROTECTION AND REGULATION IS TOO MUCH, IT IS GOING TO CAUSE THIS WHOLE INDUSTRY TO COLLAPSE.

I MEAN IT IS A HOLLOW THREAT BUT IT IS CLEARLY EFFECTIVE.

>> Diane: HAVEN'T WE OVER THE YEARS, WE BEING ANY ELECTED OFFICIALS, GIVEN THE INDUSTRY CERTAIN ADVANTAGES SO -- STAY WITH ME HERE -- OKAY, SO, YOU HAVE GOT TWO ENTITIES, THEY HAVE BEEN GETTING ALL THE STRAWBERRIES AND HERE THEY ARE SAYING WE WOULD LIKE A CHERRY OR TWO OR AN APPLE OF SOMETHING.

IT JUST SEEMS LIKE TO SAY WE ARE MEDDLING -- THAT THE ELECTED OFFICIALS ARE MEDDLING, WELL, YOU DIDN'T THINK THEY WERE MEDDLING WHEN THEY WERE HELPING YOU.

>> Gene: THAT IS RIGHT.

DO YOU NOT HEAR A GREEN LIGHT FROM LANDLORDS?

COULD YOU IMAGINE THE HOOPLA IN THE LANDLORD WORLD RIGHT NOW.

I MEAN MY ANTICIPATION IS FEES ARE ACTUALLY GOING TO GO UP FOR THESE THINGS.

>> Cathryn: AND THEY ARE LIKE, HEY, COME FOR ME, BECAUSE I AM GOING TO TELL YOU THAT WE ARE UNTOUCHABLE AND WHAT I WAS TOLD WAS THAT WE ARE GOING TO SPEND A MILLION DOLLARS AND IF YOU HAVE SEEN THE ADS FROM CASA AND I DECIDED I WOULD CALL THAT HOT LINE TO SEE WHAT I WOULD GET.

I GOT AN ANSWERING SERVICE AND THEY SAID SOMEONE WOULD CALL ME BACK.

NO ONE EVER DID.

I GOT AN EMAIL AND A TEXT WHERE HOUSING WAS MISSPELLED.

IT WAS SPELLED H-O-U-R-S-I-N-G.

I CAN PROVE IT, IF YOU GUYS WANT TO SEE IT.

I CANNOT MAKE THAT UP.

THEY ARE LIKE, THIS IS AS DISINGENUOUS AS IT CAN GET AND EVERYDAY WE HAVE TO CALL A STING A STING.

AND WHAT THIS IS WE BELIEVE THAT IF WE GIVE AN INCH, WE ARE GOING TO GET CLOSER TO RENT STABILIZATION AND RENT CONTROL SO WE ARE GOING TO SHOW THAT YOU WE ARE NOT GOING TO GIVE AN INCH.

I TELL YOU IT IS THE DUTY OF THE PUBLIC BODY TO CORRECT THIS AND THEY DID NOT DO IT, WHICH MEANS THEY DID NOT DO THEIR JOB.

>> Gene: I THINK YOU JUST SAID IT.

I THINK THIS IS ALL A BIG OFFENSIVE FRONT FOR WHAT THEY ARE AFRAID OF THAT IS OUT THERE RIGHT NOW.

DON'T FORGET, SIMILAR BILLS PROTECTING RENTERS AND TENANTS STATE-WIDE HAVE DIED THIS YEAR IN THE ROUNDHOUSE.

I MEAN WE HAVE GOT SENATE BILL 99 WHICH WOULD HAVE ALLOWED CITIES, TOWNS AND COUNTIES TO LIMIT RENT INCREASES.

SENATOR, I AM CURIOUS, WAS THAT APPROPRIATE TO LET THAT ONE GO?

IS THAT SOMETHING MAYBE A LITTLE TOO FAR FOR YOU HAVING SANTA FE DETERMINE FOR MUNICIPALITIES WHAT THEY CAN DO WITH THEIR RENTAL PROPERTIES?

>> Diane: I DON'T KNOW.

I THINK OF THAT IN TWO WAYS.

ONE IS I THINK MOST OFTEN IT IS BETTER TO HAVE THE SAME RULES AND REGS AND TAXES ACROSS THE BOARD, THE WHOLE STATE, BECAUSE IF YOU'RE MOVING FROM LAS CRUCES TO ALBUQUERQUE OR WHATEVER, BUT THEN I LOOK AT IT IN TERMS OF, BUT THE NEEDS ARE DIFFERENT IN DIFFERENT COMMUNITIES.

THERE MAY BE -- HOBBS IS A PERFECT EXAMPLE.

WHEN THE OIL BOOM CAME IN THERE WAS NO PLACE TO RENT, NO PLACE TO BUY.

YOU COULDN'T EVEN BUY TRAILER HOMES TO PUT IN, SO A DIFFERENT SITUATION OCCURS.

SO, I GUESS I DON'T HAVE AN ANSWER FOR THAT.

>> Gene: WE HAVE FOUR BILLS IN COMMITTEE STILL AS OF THIS TAPING.

YOUR SENSE OR YOUR OPTIMISM ABOUT HOUSING BILLS RIGHT NOW.

IS THERE A TREND YOU'RE SEEING HERE.

>> Serge: THE TREND IS, EVERYONE IN SANTA FE IS TALKING ABOUT HOUSING, HOUSING AND HOW WE NEED TO DO HOUSING BUT ALL THE BILLS ARE GETTING TABLED, DYING, YOU KNOW.

THERE IS STILL SOME LEFT AND THIS IS THE THIRD YEAR IN A ROW THEY HAVE BEEN TALKING ABOUT MAKING CHANGES TO THE TIMING FOR EVICTION COURT TO PROCEED AND A COUPLE THINGS LIKE THAT.

THAT I THINK THERE IS STILL SOME HOPE THAT MIGHT GO SOMEWHERE, BUT, YEAH, THE MESSAGE IS THAT HOUSING IS REALLY IMPORTANT BUT NOT -- BUT THIS ISN'T THE ONE SO WE ARE NOT GOING TO DO THIS AND END UP DOING NOTHING.

>> Gene: 30% OF US HERE RENT.

STATE-WIDE.

THIS HAS SERIOUS ISSUES.

I AM TELLING YOU THIS IS GOING TO COME UP AGAIN, BECAUSE I AM HEARING, JUST AN OPINION, I AM HEARING A FRONT HERE, OFFENSIVE FRONT, THAT LANDLORDS AND PROPERTY OWNERS HAVE DECIDED THIS IS A TIME TO GET ORGANIZED.

BECAUSE, PEOPLE ARE GETTING ORGANIZED SO, YOU KNOW, IT IS INTERESTING.

THANKS TO OUR LINE OPINION PANEL.

WE'LL BE BACK HERE AT THE TABLE IN LESS THAN A MINUTE AFTER A SNEAK PEEK AT WHAT IS AHEAD FROM ENVIRONMENT REPORTER LAURA PASKUS.

>> Deubel: IN THE GILA IT IS NOT UNCOMMON TO SEE AN ELK TAG, A SINGLE ELK TAG -- I SHOULD SAY AUTHORIZATION THAT EVENTUALLY CONVERTS TO A TAG FOR $20,000 OR MORE.

THAT IS JUST FOR THE AUTHORIZATION.

WE ARE NOT TALKING ABOUT OUTFITTING SERVICES OR GUIDING SERVICES OR MEALS OR LODGING, OR ANY OF THAT, JUST FOR A UNIQUE FIVE DIGIT CODE.

IF IT SELLS FOR $20,000 DOLLARS THERE IS JUST NOT THAT MANY NEW MEXICANS WHO HAVE THE ABILITY TO PAY THAT KIND OF MONEY FOR AN OPPORTUNITY TO HUNT THE ELK THAT WE PUBLICLY OWN.

>> Gene: FOR OUR SECOND TOPIC ON THE LINE WE ARE TAKING A CLOSER LOOK AT SOME LEGISLATION MOVING THROUGH THE ROUNDHOUSE TARGETING CHILD WELFARE ISSUES.

RIGHT NOW LAWMAKERS ARE CONSIDERING A BILL THAT WOULD CREATE AN OUTSIDE OFFICE TO OVERSEE CHILDREN, YOUTH AND FAMILIES DEPARTMENT.

HOUSE BILL 11 WOULD CREATE AN INDEPENDENT OFFICE WITH A HEAD CHILD ADVOCATE.

INTERESTING.

TO OVERSEE AND INVESTIGATE COMPLAINTS MADE AGAINST CYFD.

ALTHOUGH THE BILL HAS SEEN BIPARTISAN APPROVAL, GOVERNOR MICHELLE LUJAN GRISHAM HAS SPOKEN OUT AGAINST IT SAYING IT WOULD CREATE A CONFRONTATIONAL RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN TWO GOVERNMENT OFFICES.

THAT NEVER HAPPENS, WAIT A MINUTE.

GIVEN THE PROBLEMS WE HAVE HAD, CATHY, WITH CYFD, EARLY STROKES HERE, OMBUDSMAN, BASICALLY, SOMEONE WHO COULD LOOK, A FINAL WORD TO SAY WE NEED TO DO BETTER HERE.

IS THIS ON THE RIGHT TRACK TO YOU FOR CYFD?

>> CATHRYN: I THINK IT IS ON THE RIGHT TRACK AND I ALSO SEE THE GOVERNOR'S POINT IF SHE IS TALKING ABOUT THINGS BEING FURTHER BOTTLE NECKED IN TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT HAPPENS WITH WHERE A CHILD IS GOING TO WIND UP, WHERE IS THE BEST PLACE FOR THEM TO WIND UP.

WHAT WE ARE SEEING, AND I KNOW THAT IS THE FRUSTRATION, IS THAT WE ARE 50TH IN CHILD WELL-BEING AGAIN.

AND THAT THERE ARE ALL OF THESE VERY HIGH PROFILE CASES THAT ARE POORLY HANDLED.

THERE ARE JUST AS MANY THAT ARE DONE WELL.

SO, THERE ARE A LOT OF ISSUES IN THE DEPARTMENT AND I THINK THAT WE HAVE TO LOOK AT HOW THE DEPARTMENT IS STRUCTURED.

I MIGHT WANT TO LOOK AT THAT MORE THAN HAVING AN OMBUDSMAN TO SAY, YOU KNOW, SHOULD WE HAVE CHILD WELFARE AND JUVENILE DETENTION IN THE SAME DEPARTMENT.

MAYBE THE DEPARTMENT IS TOO  BIG.

>> Gene: INTERESTING POINT  THERE.

SENATOR, INTERESTINGLY HOUSE BILL 11 IS SPONSORED BY FIVE DEMOCRATS, NOT SURE IF THAT MAKES A BIG DIFFERENCE, BUT THERE IS BIPARTISAN SUPPORT FOR THE REFORM.

IT IS JUST THE HOW IS DIFFICULT.

ARE YOU SEEING A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN REPUBLICANS AND DEMOCRATS HOW THEY WANT TO ATTACK CYFD AND IS THE PROPOSAL REPUBLICAN FRIENDLY?

THE GOVERNOR IS NOT FOR IT.

DOES THAT MAKE IT AUTOMATICALLY SOMETHING REPUBLICANS ARE FOR.

I AM BEING A WISE GUY,  CERTAINLY.

>> Diane: I AGREE -- NO IT DOESN'T AUTOMATICALLY MAKE REPUBLICANS FOR IT.

I THINK AND I DIDN'T DO THIS LITTLE RESEARCH BUT IF YOU GO BACK AND LOOK, THIS IS LIKE THE CRIME BILLS.

THESE VERY SAME BILLS HAVE BEEN BEING INTRODUCED FOR 10 YEARS NOW BY BILL REHM, SO IT IS JUST WHO HAS DECIDED TO BE THE LEAD SPONSOR.

AND I THINK THAT MAY BE MORE THE CASE HERE OF IT IS NOT THAT THE IDEAS ARE NOT SHARED BY BOTH GROUPS, IT IS JUST THAT YOU DON'T GET TO HAVE ANY CREDIT FOR IT.

SO, WHICH COULD BE.

I MEAN A LOT OF STUFF HAPPENS THAT WAY BUT THE MAIN THING, I THINK, IS THAT THEY ALL RECOGNIZE HOW DISASTROUS THIS DEPARTMENT IS AND I THINK ABOUT IT.

I THINK ABOUT MRS. KING, ALICE KING, WHO HELPED PUT THIS TOGETHER, IN HER HEART AND IN HER MIND, EVERYTHING WAS IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION AND I CAN'T IMAGINE THAT SHE WOULDN'T BE HORRIFIED, JUST HORRIFIED, BY THE WAY THINGS ARE NOW.

I LIKE THE IDEA OF A SEPARATE ENTITY, NOT AN IN-HOUSE ENTITY.

WE HAVE HAD SEVERAL GOVERNORS HAVE OUT-OF-STATE STUDIES DONE, ENTITIES DO STUDIES AND THINGS LIKE THAT, AND IMMEDIATELY WHEN GOVERNOR MARTINEZ DID IT, THE DEMOCRATS SAID IT WAS ALL WRONG.

WHEN MR. RICHARDSON DID IT, THE R'S SAID IT WAS ALL WRONG.

WE HAVE DONE THAT SO OFTEN, BUT SOMEONE THAT IS OPERATING AND, AS I RECALL, THIS WOULD BE WITHIN THE ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE, NOT IN THE DEPARTMENT.

>> Gene: GOT YOU.

>> Diane: SO THEY DON'T HAVE A VESTED INTEREST IN ONE SIDE OR THE OTHER.

>> Gene: YOU ARE THE GOVERNMENT PERSON HERE, DOES THE GOVERNOR HAVE A POINT ABOUT TWO CONFLICTING OFFICES THAT WAY?

>> Diane: NO, I MEAN THERE HAVE BEEN FIGHTS BETWEEN DEPARTMENTS FOR YEARS AND THERE WERE GREAT ONES ANY TIME WHEN A NEW CABINET POSITION IS CREATED THERE IS THAT TERRITORIAL, YOU'RE TAKING MY RESPONSIBILITY.

THERE IS ALWAYS THAT.

WE MAY BE NICER THAN THAT IN PUBLIC BUT, NO, THAT GOES ON ALL THE TIME.

>> Gene: YOU ARE RIGHT, THOUGH.

WHAT IS INTERESTING ABOUT THE PERSON THAT OVERLOOKED THIS IS REPRESENTATIVE JARAMILLO, ONE OF THE CO-SPONSORS, TOLD THE JOURNAL THAT 43 OTHER STATES ALREADY HAVE A SIMILAR INDEPENDENT OFFICE, 43.

THAT IS A PRETTY COMPELLING NUMBER.

WE SHOULD JUST GO THERE, RIGHT?

>> Serge: JUST BECAUSE A LOT OF PEOPLE ARE DOING SOMETHING, BUT, YEAH, IT HAS BEEN A REASONABLY SUCCESSFUL MODEL IMPLEMENTED AROUND THE COUNTRY.

ESPECIALLY RECENTLY FOLKS ARE SAYING, OH, THIS IS A WAY WE CAN DO THIS.

I THINK IN PRINCIPLE, THAT DOES RESONATE WITH ME.

I DO WONDER A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THERE IS A LOT OF DIFFERENT MODELS TO FOLLOW AND AS I READ THE BILL THIS OFFICE WOULD HAVE THE ABILITY TO WRITE REPORTS AND GET PEOPLE TOGETHER TO TALK, RIGHT.

I AM NOT SURE, LIKE, AND THE POWER TO REFER IT OUT TO OTHER AGENCIES.

OTHER STATES, THEY HAVE SAID, GIVEN A LOT MORE POWER AND SAID, YOU HAVE THE ABILITY TO TAKE AGENCY X TO COURT.

AND I THINK, I AM A LAWYER, SO TAKE IT WITH A GRAIN OF SALT BUT I THINK THAT MIGHT BE A MORE EFFECTIVE MODEL RATHER THAN ANOTHER AGENCY THAT IS GOING TO GENERATE REPORTS.

>> Gene: INTERESTING POINT.

>> Diane: IT MAY BE THE ONLY STEP WE CAN GET RIGHT NOW.

>> Gene: REFORM IS NEEDED HERE.

>> Serge: THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH A REPORT BUT I DO LIKE, YOU KNOW -- >> Gene: ANOTHER BILL, HOUSE BILL 10, WOULD REQUIRE CYFD TO BE MORE TRANSPARENT WITH INFORMATION AND COOPERATIVE WITH INVESTIGATIVE ENTITIES INCLUDING POLICE AND PROSPECTIVE ADOPTIVE PARENTS.

WE ARE NOT DOING THAT NOW?

ONCE AGAIN.

>> Cathryn: COMMON SENSE STUFF, RIGHT?

WE NEED A BILL FOR THIS, YOU KNOW.

I WONDER WHY WE NEED A BILL FOR IT AND I THINK IT GOES BACK TO HOW THE DEPARTMENT IS RUN AND WHAT ARE THE -- DO WE HAVE THE COURAGE TO SAY THAT THERE ARE SOME THINGS THAT ARE ABOUT HOW THE DEPARTMENT IS ADMINISTERED AND I AM GOING TO KEEP SAYING, THIS DEPARTMENT IS HUGE.

AND I ALSO DON'T WANT TO DENY THE FACT THAT, YOU KNOW, OF COURSE, THEY ARE SUFFERING AS MANY OTHER ORGANIZATIONS ARE SUFFERING FROM STAFFING ISSUES.

AND BEING ABLE TO HIRE GOOD STAFF WHO ARE GOING TO BE ABLE TO BE RETAINED, THEY DO HAVE A VERY HIGH CASE LOADS BUT IS THE ANSWER TO HAVE SOME OTHER ENTITY THAT IS LOOKING INTO IT.

I THINK THE ANSWER IS THAT WE OUGHT TO GET IN THERE AND START GOING THROUGH TO SEE WHERE ARE THE REAL DISCONNECTS IN BEHAVIORAL HEALTH AND IN CHILD PROTECTIVE SERVICES?

AND WHAT ARE THE THINGS THAT WE ARE SEEING AND HAVING A REPORT TO SAY THAT WAS BAD, WELL, YEAH, WE KNOW THAT.

WE ARE ALREADY KNOW THAT.

SO, BUT WHAT DO WE DO ABOUT THE PROCESSES THAT ARE IN PLACE.

MAYBE THE REPORT IS GOING TO SAY, YOU NEED TO CHANGE THESE THING.

I THINK WE ALREADY KNOW THAT.

>> Gene: I AM INTERESTED IN WHERE THE NEXUS IS BETWEEN LAW ENFORCEMENT AND WHERE CYFD'S MISSION IS, GUYS.

AT SOME POINT SOMEONE HAS TO GO TO THE FRONT DOOR, SOMEONE WITH A BADGE AND SAY, YOU KNOW, WE NEED TO RECTIFY THE SITUATION, SENATOR.

IT IS A HUGE DIFFICULTY.

I DO HAVE ONE LAST QUESTION.

>> Cathryn: CAN I JUST SAY THAT THERE IS AN ASSESSMENT WHERE THAT INDIVIDUAL WHO NEEDS TO SHOW UP AT THE DOOR IS GOING TO SAY, YEAH, I NEED TO REMOVE THE CHILD FROM THE HOUSE.

>> Gene: THAT POWER IS A BIG PART OF THIS, THAT IS EXACTLY RIGHT.

WE ARE DOWN TO CRUNCH TIME.

IS THERE ENOUGH TIME TO GET SOMETHING LIKE THIS INVOLVED DONE.

THIS IS ANOTHER ONE OF MY PET PEEVES ABOUT A PART-TIME LEGISLATURE.

THIS IS VERY TECHNICALLY INVOLVED.

>> Diane: ONE OF THE THINGS I  AM VERY SURE OF, BECAUSE I HAVE SEEN IT HAPPEN AS A LOBBYIST AND SENATOR IS IF THE SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE AND PRESIDENT PRO TEM AND MAJORITY LEADER IN THE SENATE WANTED THAT, IT WILL HAPPEN.

SO, IT IS A MATTER OF WILL, MORE THAN IT IS TIME.

>> Gene: INTERESTING POINT.

I THINK THERE IS A LOT OF WILL BUT SOMEHOW I DON'T KNOW IT DOESN'T FEEL LIKE THE WILL IS QUITE THERE.

SO, WE'LL HAVE TO THINK ABOUT THAT.

THANKS AGAIN TO THE LINE OPINION PANELISTS.

WE'LL BE BACK HERE ONCE MORE TO TALK ABOUT LEGISLATION AIMED AT CRACKING DOWN ON RETAIL CRIME.

THAT IS A BIG ISSUE HERE.

BUT FIRST, AN ASSESSMENT ON HUNTING IN OUR STATE.

HERE IN NEW MEXICO WILDLIFE SPECIES LIKE DEER AND ELK BELONG TO THE PEOPLE BUT ARE MANAGED BY THE STATE.

SOME HUNTERS SAY THAT THE DISTRIBUTION OF HUNTING AUTHORIZATIONS, BETTER KNOWN AS HUNTING TAGS, AREN'T FAIR TO RESIDENTS WHO DEPEND UPON THE MEAT HUNTING YIELDS, NOT TO MENTION TIME OUTSIDE WITH FAMILY AND FRIENDS.

IT TAKES A WHILE TO HUNT SOMETIMES.

THIS WEEK OUR LAND LAURA PASKUS TALKS WITH NEW MEXICO WILDLIFE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR JESSE DEUBEL ABOUT THOSE COMPLAINTS AND ASKS IF THERE IS A WAY TO REFORM THE STATE'S GAME COMMISSION AND INSULATE THOSE DECISIONS FROM POLITICS.

>>Laura: HI JESSE.

>>Deubel: HI LAURA,HOW ARE YOU?

>> Laura: I AM GOOD.

THANKS FOR BEING WITH ME HERE TODAY.

>> Deubel: THANKS FOR HAVING ME.

IT IS GREAT TO SEE YOU.

>> Laura: WE ARE HERE IN NEW  MEXICO.

I AM A NEW MEXICO RESIDENT.

WHAT WOULD I DO IF I WANTED TO, LIKE, SAY, APPLY FOR AN  ELK TAG?

>> Deubel: IF A NEW MEXICAN OR  A NONRESIDENT OF NEW MEXICO WANTS TO HUNT BIG GAME IN NEW MEXICO, YOU APPLY IN THE NEW MEXICO BIG GAME DRAW.

THAT IS ADMINISTERED BY THE NEW MEXICO DEPARTMENT OF GAME AND FISH.

AND AN INTERESTED HUNTER CAN GO ON THE DEPARTMENT'S WEBSITE, FILL THE APPLICATION OUT ONLINE.

THE DEADLINE TO DO THAT IS MARCH 22.

SO THE APPLICATION PERIOD IS CURRENTLY OPEN AND IT CLOSES 5:00 P.M. MARCH 22.

>> Laura: THEN WHAT HAPPENS?

CAN I JUST DO WHAT I WANT?

>> Deubel: AFTER YOU APPLY, YOU HAVE TO WAIT FOR THE DRAW RESULTS.

IT TAKES ABOUT A MONTH AND IN THE MIDDLE OF APRIL THE DEPARTMENT WILL SEND OUT EMAIL NOTICES OR INDIVIDUALS CAN GO ON THEIR ACCOUNT, THEIR CUSTOMER ACCOUNT WITH NEW MEXICO DEPARTMENT OF GAME AND FISH TO SEE DRAW RESULTS.

JUST LIKE NEW MEXICO HAS RED AND GREEN CHILE, WHEN WE GO TO DRAW RESULTS WE WANT TO SEE A LOT OF GREEN, BECAUSE GREEN MEANS YOU HAVE DRAWN THE TAG AND RED MEANS YOU WERE UNSUCCESSFUL IN THAT PARTICULAR DRAW.

>> Laura: SO THEN THERE ARE SOME TAGS THAT THE STATE RESERVES FOR PRIVATE LANDOWNERS; IS THAT RIGHT?

>> Deubel: THAT IS CORRECT.

SO, IF WE ARE TALKING ABOUT ELK, THERE ARE ONLY 62% OF ALL ELK TAGS ARE ACTUALLY INCLUDED IN THE PUBLIC DRAW.

SO, NEW MEXICO STATE STATUTE SAYS THAT IN THE PUBLIC DRAW NEW MEXICO RESIDENTS GET 84% OF THE AVAILABLE TAGS.

NONRESIDENTS WITHOUT AN OUTFITTER GET 6% AND THOSE INDIVIDUALS WHO HAVE A CONTRACT WITH AN OUTFITTER, THEY HAVE 10% OF THE TAGS RESERVED FOR THOSE APPLICANTS THAT COULD BE RESIDENTS OR NONRESIDENTS.

BUT TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, 38% OF THE TAGS FOR ELK IN PARTICULAR ARE ISSUED TO PRIVATE INDIVIDUALS AND THOSE ARE TRANSFERABLE AUTHORIZATIONS.

SO, WHOEVER RECEIVES THOSE AUTHORIZATIONS CAN SELL THEM TO THE HIGHEST BIDDER.

THEY CAN GIVE THEM AWAY.

THEY CAN DO WHATEVER THEY LIKE WITH THEM.

AND WHOEVER ULTIMATELY HAS THAT AUTHORIZATION CAN CONVERT IT INTO A TAG TO HUNT ELK IN NEW MEXICO.

>> Laura: THESE LIKE PRIVATE LANDOWNERS WHO GET ACCESS TO TAGS, THEY CAN SELL THOSE, RIGHT?

HOW MUCH DO THOSE GENERALLY COST AND WHO GETS THOSE?

>> Deubel: THAT IS A GOOD QUESTION.

MOST OF THE TIME THOSE TAGS ARE BEING SOLD TO NONRESIDENTS OF THE STATE.

THAT IS JUST BECAUSE OF ECONOMICS.

RESIDENTS HAVE EVERY OPPORTUNITY TO BUY THE TAGS JUST AS A NONRESIDENT DOES, BUT IN THE GILA, IT IS NOT UNCOMMON TO SEE A SINGLE ELK -- I SAY TAG -- AUTHORIZATION THAT EVENTUALLY CONVERTS TO A TAG, FOR $20,000 OR MORE.

AND THAT IS JUST FOR THE AUTHORIZATION.

WE ARE NOT TALKING ABOUT OUTFITTING SERVICES, NOT TALKING ABOUT GUIDING SERVICES, OR MEALS OR LODGING OR ANY OF THAT, JUST FOR A UNIQUE FIVE DIGIT CODE.

IF IT SELLS FOR $20,000, THERE IS JUST NOT THAT MANY NEW MEXICANS WHO HAVE THE ABILITY TO PAY THAT KIND OF MONEY TO HUNT THE ELK THAT WE PUBLICLY OWN.

>> Laura: LET'S TALK ABOUT THAT A LITTLE BIT.

INASMUCH AS SOMEBODY -- AN ANIMAL BELONG TO PEOPLE, BUT WILDLIFE IN NEW MEXICO BELONGS TO NEW MEXICANS; IS THAT RIGHT?

>> Deubel: THAT IS CORRECT.

THE WILDLIFE OF THE STATE ARE MANAGED AS A PUBLIC TRUST RESOURCE.

SOME PEOPLE MIGHT BE OFFENDED BY THE TERM RESOURCE AS WE ALLUDED TO.

OUR WILDLIFE ABSOLUTELY HAS INTRINSIC VALUE.

WE LOVE WILDLIFE.

I GENERALLY REFER TO THEM AS THE WILD OTHERS BECAUSE I FEEL LIKE WE ARE ALSO JUST ANIMALS LIKE THEY ARE.

SO, I HAVE A VERY STRONG RELATIONSHIP WITH WILD ANIMALS BUT HUMANS HAVE ALTERED THE LANDSCAPE IN SUCH A WAY THAT IT REQUIRES MANAGEMENT.

WE HAVE TO MANAGE THESE SPECIES.

NOTHING EXISTS ANYMORE BY ACCIDENT.

WILDLIFE IS HERE BECAUSE WE WANT IT TO BE HERE.

AND DIFFERENT THAN A LOT OF OTHER SYSTEMS AROUND THE WORLD, LIKE IN EUROPE, IF A WILD ANIMAL IS STANDING ON PRIVATE PROPERTY, IT DOESN'T BELONG TO THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY.

WILDLIFE BELONGS COLLECTIVELY TO ALL OF THE RESIDENTS OF NEW MEXICO AND WE HAVE A STATE GAME COMMISSION WHO SHOULD BE ACTING AS THE TRUSTEE TO THE BENEFICIARIES OF THE TRUST, BENEFICIARIES BEING THE RESIDENTS OF NEW MEXICO AND THE TRUSTEES BEING THE GAME COMMISSION AND WILDLIFE SHOULD BE MANAGED AS A PUBLIC TRUST RESOURCE.

>>Laura: ARE THEY IN NEW MEXICO?

>> Deubel: WELL, THAT IS  ARGUABLE.

I BELIEVE GOING BACK TO THAT  35% OF OPPORTUNITY BEING ALLOCATED OR BEING GRANTED TO NONRESIDENTS OF THE STATE, I THINK THAT IS VERY DISPROPORTIONATE.

I DON'T THINK THE RESIDENTS OF NEW MEXICO ARE SEEING THE TYPE OF MANAGEMENT PRACTICES THAT ARE COMMON ACROSS THE WEST THAT REALLY PRIORITIZES THE RESIDENT OF THE STATE AS IT RELATES TO THE MANAGEMENT OF THE WILDLIFE IN THE STATE.

>> Laura: I AM CURIOUS WHERE HUNTING IN GENERAL IN NEW MEXICO FITS INTO THE FOOD SECURITY ISSUE.

LIKE DO MOST NEW MEXICO HUNTERS EAT WHAT THEY ARE HARVESTING?

>> Deubel: I WOULD SAY, LAURA, THAT THAT IS PROBABLY THE NO.

1 MOTIVATING REASON THAT MOST HUNTERS IN NEW MEXICO HUNT IS TO FILL THE FREEZER.

THAT CERTAINLY IS MY PRIMARY REASON.

THERE IS A LOT OF REASONS.

YOU LOVE TO BE OUTSIDE AND COMMUNE WITH NATURE AND SPEND TIME WITH FRIENDS AND FAMILY AND ALL THOSE THINGS ARE IMPORTANT, BUT FILLING THE FREEZER IS A TOP PRIORITY OF EVERY NEW MEXICAN HUNTER I KNOW.

AND IT IS ABSOLUTELY A FOOD SECURITY ISSUE AND THAT IS ONE OF THE REASONS THAT HAVING 35% OF THE ELK HUNTING OPPORTUNITY GOING OUT OF STATE IS INAPPROPRIATE BECAUSE THAT MEANS 35% OF THE MEAT TAKEN FROM ELK OFF OF OUR LANDSCAPE IS ALSO GOING OUT OF STATE.

FROM AN AVERAGE ELK, I AM GOING TO GET ABOUT 200 POUNDS OF LEAN, HEALTHY ORGANIC SUSTAINABLY HARVESTED PROTEIN.

AND FOOD SECURITY IS A SERIOUS ISSUE IN NEW MEXICO.

THE LICENSE FEE INCREASE BILL THAT I JUST MENTIONED INCLUDES A PROVISION THAT ANY NEW MEXICAN WHO QUALIFIES FOR SNAP BENEFITS, STATE NUTRITIONAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM, WILL RECEIVE A 25% DISCOUNT ON THEIR HUNTING AND FISHING LICENSE AND THAT IS BECAUSE WE RECOGNIZE THAT HUNTING IS CRITICAL TO MANY FAMILIES WHEN IT COMES TO ENSURING THEY HAVE AN ADEQUATE FOOD SUPPLY.

>> Laura: WE HAVE TALKED ABOUT THE NEW MEXICO DEPARTMENT OF GAME AND FISH AND THERE IS ALSO THE GAME COMMISSION.

I HAVE BEEN COVERING WILDLIFE ISSUES IN NEW MEXICO FOR DECADES AND IT IS A COMMISSION THAT THERE HAVE BEEN UPS AND DOWNS AND PROBLEMS OVER ADMINISTRATIONS, BUT IT DOES SEEM LIKE RIGHT NOW THE GAME COMMISSION HAS BEEN IN SOMEWHAT OF A CRISIS.

WHAT IS HAPPENING?

>> Deubel: THE COMMISSION IS IN SHAMBLES.

THAT IS A REALITY AND THE NEW MEXICO WILDLIFE FEDERATION WAS CRITICAL IN ESTABLISHING THE NEW MEXICO STATE GAME COMMISSION BACK WHEN LEOPOLD WAS RUNNING THE ORGANIZATION SO I AM CERTAINLY WALKING IN SOME HUGE FOOTSTEPS THERE, BUT THE COMMISSION WAS CREATED SO THAT IT COULD CREATE INSULATION BETWEEN WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT AND POLITICS.

WE NEED TO MANAGE WILDLIFE BASED ON SCIENCE NOT BASED ON POLITICAL MOTIVATIONS.

UNFORTUNATELY, OUR CURRENT COMMISSION STRUCTURE ALLOWS A GOVERNOR TO REMOVE ANY COMMISSION, ANY COMMISSIONER, AT ANY TIME, WITHOUT CAUSE.

SO, AS LONG AS THAT STRUCTURE IS IN PLACE, WE STRUGGLE WITH GETTING A GAME COMMISSION WHO CAN OPERATE AND MAKE DECISIONS INDEPENDENTLY OF POLITICAL PRESSURES.

THERE IS ALSO A BILL IN THE STATE LEGISLATURE, KEEP GOING BACK TO POLITICS HERE, BUT GAME COMMISSION REFORM BILL, HOUSE BILL 184, AND IT WOULD MAKE IT SO IF A COMMISSIONER WAS GOING TO BE REMOVED, THERE WOULD HAVE TO BE JUST CAUSE FOR REMOVAL.

AND A GOVERNOR COULD MAKE THE RECOMMENDATION BUT THAT RECOMMENDATION WOULD THEN GO TO THE SUPREME COURT JUSTICES IN THE STATE AND OUR STATE SUPREME COURT JUSTICES WOULD MAKE THE DECISION AS TO WHETHER OR NOT REMOVAL WAS APPROPRIATE.

THAT IS, IN MY MIND, THE NO.

1 MOST IMPORTANT FIX WE CAN DO TO ENSURE WE DON'T FIND OURSELVES IN A SITUATION LIKE WE ARE IN TODAY WHERE OUR SEVEN-PERSON COMMISSION ONLY HAS THREE COMMISSIONERS.

WHICH MEANS THEY CAN'T EVEN FORM A QUORUM WHICH MEANS THEY ARE COMPLETELY DYSFUNCTIONAL.

THEY CANNOT FUNCTION.

I AM NOT JUSTING USING DYSFUNCTIONAL AS AN ADJECTIVE BUT AS DESCRIPTOR OF THEIR INABILITY TO ACTUALLY MAKE A DECISION AT THIS MOMENT IN TIME BECAUSE THEY DON'T HAVE ENOUGH COMMISSIONERS.

>> Laura: THANKS JESSE, THANKS FOR BEING WITH ME HERE TODAY.

>> Deubel: THANK YOU, LAURA.

I REALLY APPRECIATE THE INVITATION, ALWAYS A PLEASURE TO SIT DOWN AND HAVE CONVERSATIONS WITH YOU.

AND I REALLY APPRECIATE YOUR THOROUGH AND ACCURATE COVERAGE OF THESE IMPORTANT ISSUES.

>> Gene: THANK YOU LAURA.

YOU CAN WATCH THAT ENTIRE CONVERSATION ON THE OUR LAND YOUTUBE PAGE OR LISTEN TO IT ON THE NEW MEXICO IN FOCUS POD CAST, AVAILABLE ANYWHERE YOU FIND YOUR POD CASTS.

LET'S RETURN ONE LAST TIME TO OUR LINE OPINION PANELISTS.

NEAR UNANIMOUS BIPARTISAN VOTES OF APPROVAL ARE RARE THIS TIME OF YEAR AT THE ROUNDHOUSE AND YET A REGIONAL CRIME BILL DID JUST THAT.

LAST WEEK HOUSE BILL 234 WAS APPROVED BY THE HOUSE IN A 62-3 VOTE.

IF APPROVED BY THE SENATE, THE ROBBERY AND ORGANIZED RETAIL CRIME BILL WOULD CREATE AND DEFINE ORGANIZED RETAIL CRIME AS A NEW CHARGE HERE IN NEW MEXICO.

THE NEW ORGANIZED RETAIL CRIME OFFENSE COULD THEN BE CHARGED IN CASES INVOLVING THEFT OF AT LEAST 2500 IN MERCHANDISE FROM ONE OR MORE RETAILERS OVER THE COURSE OF A YEAR AND SENTENCE OFFENDERS UP TO NINE YEARS IN PRISON.

ALTHOUGH THIS HAS YET TO RECEIVE A SENATE VOTE, IS IT SAFE TO SAY THIS BILL RECEIVED THE GOVERNOR'S, WILL GET ON THE GOVERNOR'S BILL DESK THIS MONTH, BUT, MORE IMPORTANTLY, WHAT DOES THIS SAY ABOUT RETAIL CRIME HERE IN NEW MEXICO AND WHAT WE ARE TRYING TO DO TO STOP THIS INCREDIBLE WAVE OF A PROBLEM.

IT COSTS US A LOT OF MONEY, RETAIL CRIME.

>> Serge: GENE, I AGREE WITH YOU.

JUST THIS LAST MONTH THERE CEO OF WALGREEN'S IN A BIG CALL SAID MAYBE WE WERE OVERSTATING THE WHOLE RETAIL CRIME AND SHOPLIFTING.

THERE HAVE BEEN A FEW REALLY HIGH PROFILE THINGS, VIDEOS, THINGS THAT ARE, YOU KNOW, EXTREMELY VIOLENT.

WE ACTUALLY HAVE LAWS ABOUT THAT, ALREADY, RIGHT.

I THINK THIS IS -- I AM NOT SAYING IT DOESN'T HAPPEN AT ALL BUT I THINK IT IS OVERBLOWN.

WHETHER IT EVEN IS A THING IS SOMETHING THAT IS HOTLY DEBATED.

IT IS CERTAINLY TRENDY AND SOMETHING THAT HAS CAPTURED THE PUBLIC'S ATTENTION.

IF YOU WANT TO SHOW YOU'RE TOUGH ON CRIME, RIGHT, THIS IS A GREAT THING BECAUSE IT IS VERY MUCH IN THE NEWS AND HIGH PROFILE.

AND I HAVE HEARD A LOT OF ANECDOTES BUT NOT SEEN A TON OF DATA AND WHAT DATA I HAVE SEEN HAS NOT BEEN VERY CONVINCING OF THE OVERALL SIZE OF THE PROBLEM.

I KNOW RETAIL THEFT THROUGH THE SELF CHECK OUT AT THE GROCERY STORE, RIGHT, IS MORE THAN IT IS CLAIMED.

>> Cathryn: PEOPLE FORGET.

>> Gene: RIGHT, FORGETFUL MOMENT.

A 2021 REPORT, GUYS, FROM THE RETAIL INDUSTRY LEADERS ASSOCIATION, TOTAL ESTIMATED ECONOMIC IMPACT OF STOLEN SALES IN NEW MEXICO ADD UP TO 819 MILLION DOLLARS.

THAT IS WITHIN HAILING DISTANCE OF A BILLION.

THAT IS A LOT OF MONEY.

I HEAR SERGE'S POINT BUT WE HAVE THESE SMASH AND GRAB ORGANIZED PEOPLE DRIVING RETAILERS CRAZY.

THE INVENTORY LOSS IS A LOSS FOR THEM.

REPLACEMENT IS A COST TO THEM.

IT IS A MAJOR PROBLEM FOR RETAILERS.

HOW ARE YOU SEEING THIS ONE?

>> Diane: INSTALLING LOCKED AREAS FOR EVERY-DAY KIND OF PURCHASES.

TWO THINGS, ONE IS THE TARGET CLOSEST TO ME NOW HAS, I THINK, IT IS IPA IS THE NAME OF THE FIRM, THAT THERE ARE AT LEAST THREE OFFICERS THERE MOST OF THE TIME IN THE PARKING LOT AND RIGHT AS YOU COME IN THE BUILDING.

AS YOU ALSO HAVE TO EXIT.

I WAS ACTUALLY STANDING IN LINE AT MY WALGREEN'S A FEW WEEKS AGO.

A YOUNG MAN HAD JUST FINISHED PAYING AND HERE COMES ANOTHER GUY WITH BIG BAGS OF STUFF GOING OUT THE FRONT DOOR AND THE YOUNG MAN WHO HAD PAID, THE CUSTOMER GOES, I AM GOING TO GET -- AND THE REGISTRATION LADY SAID, DON'T GO, DON'T GO, DON'T DO ANYTHING BECAUSE SHE TOLD US THEY ARE INSTRUCTED TO NOT DO ANYTHING BECAUSE OF THE DANGER OF HURTING THEM.

BUT, I JUST LOOKED AT IT AND I GO, THEY WON'T EVEN HAVE CARTS BECAUSE PEOPLE STEAL THEM ALL THE TIME.

I AM JUST GOING BUT WE WATCH IT -- I WORK FOR NOW WE'RE COOKING AND WE ARE STANDING UP AND TO WATCH OUT OUR FRONT WINDOW.

THERE IS A YOUNG COUPLE, EVERYBODY LOOKS YOUNG NOWADAYS TO ME, AND SHE CHANGES CLOTHES AND GOES OVER TO THE OTHER RETAIL STORES ACROSS THE COMPLEX AND COMES BACK WITH BIG SHOPPING BAGS FULL OF STUFF.

AND SHE THEN CHANGES CLOTHES AGAIN AND GOES BACK OVER AND THIS GOES ON FOR THREE OR FOUR HOURS.

I DON'T THINK SHE IS BUYING EVERY ONE OF THOSE THINGS.

>> Serge: WE ALREADY HAVE LAWS ON THE BOOKS ABOUT THAT KIND OF STUFF, RIGHT.

>> Diane: BUT THEY ARE MISDEMEANORS.

>> Serge: MISDEMEANORS ARE -- I MEAN, I WOULD NOT WANT TO BE CHARGED WITH A MISDEMEANOR.

>> Gene: WELL, YOU ESPECIALLY WOULDN'T WANT TO BE CHARGED WITH A FELONY.

IT WOULD RUIN YOUR LIFE.

>> Serge: THE TARGET YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT, DO THEY HAVE THOSE CHECKOUTS?

CAN YOU GO IN AND FIND SOMEONE ACTUALLY WORKING THERE?

THERE IS UNDERSTAFFING.

THESE PLACES ARE UNDERSTAFFED, THEY HAVE CHOSEN TO NOT DO THAT BY MAKING IT A CRIME.

MAKE IT A FELONY.

GUESS WHO THEN IS ENFORCING YOUR POLICY?

THE PUBLIC.

THE POLICE.

YOU'RE ESCALATING THE VIOLENCE  AND INCREASING THE COST TO THE PUBLIC WITHOUT HAVING TO PAY  WORKERS.

>> Diane: BUT THE POLICE ARE IN SUPPORT OF THIS BECAUSE IT GIVES THEM A TOOL TO BE ABLE TO USE.

A MISDEMEANOR BASICALLY IS  NOTHING.

NOTHING HAPPENS TO THAT  PERSON.

WHEREAS IF THEY MAKE IT A SECOND DEGREE FELONY BASED ON THE AMOUNT OF MONEY -- >> Cathryn: I DON'T WANT TO SAY THAT IT IS NOT AN ISSUE.

THERE IS AN ISSUE, YOU KNOW.

WE HAVE THAT KIND OF SLIPPAGE IN A YEAR'S TIME.

THAT IS AN ISSUE.

THERE ARE A WHOLE BUNCH OF OTHER ISSUES AND I AGREE WITH SERGE WE ALREADY HAVE LAWS ON THE BOOKS TO HANDLE THESE KIND OF THINGS.

AND THE SPEED AND WILLINGNESS OF US ABLE TO GO AND GET THESE KIND OF THINGS OF PASSED AND I AM STILL GOING TO GO BACK TO HOUSING AND WE CAN'T GET ANYTHING DONE WITH HOUSING AND IT BECOMES LIKE, WELL, WHAT WAS IT THAT WAS SO COMPELLING ABOUT THIS ON THE PART OF TARGET, WALGREEN'S AND WALMART THAT YOU HAD TO COME AND SAY, WELL, WE BETTER DO SOMETHING ABOUT THIS?

>> Gene: LET ME ASK YOU THIS, GUYS.

THERE HAS BEEN OTHER INITIATIVES.

IT GETS TO SERGE'S POINT A SECOND AGO.

WE HAVE THE NEW MEXICO ORGANIZED RETAIL CRIME ASSOCIATION FORMED LAST FALL.

WE HAVE GOT THE NEW BUSINESS ADVISORY COUNCIL FOR CRIME REDUCTION ANNOUNCED BY THE GOVERNOR AT THE START OF THE SESSION.

AND, AGAIN, SERGE WE HAVE GOT THESE THINGS COMING FROM MULTIPLE ANGLES THAT SEEM TO WORK.

IF THIS IS NOT THE WAY, WHAT IS THE WAY?

I AM CURIOUS.

FOR A RETAILER, THIS IS A DISASTER.

I HAVE TALKED TO A LOT OF THEM OVER THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS AND THEY ARE REALLY IN A PANIC ABOUT THIS.

>> Serge: I THINK UNDERSTANDING THE ACTUAL SCOPE OF ALL OF THIS.

AGAIN, I AM NOT SAYING -- THAT 819 MILLION-DOLLARS THAT IS NOT ALL PEOPLE WHO ARE SMASHING AND GRABBING.

THAT IS THEFT BY EMPLOYEES.

THAT IS THEFT BY THE SELF CHECK OUT.

OTHER SORTS OF THINGS.

SO I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW EXACTLY WHAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT BUT I THINK THAT THE REASON THE PEOPLE DO THIS IS, YOU KNOW, THERE ARE SOCIETAL SYSTEMIC ISSUES THAT PUT PEOPLE IN THIS SITUATION.

I AM NOT SAYING EVERYBODY IS DOING THIS BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT ALL JEAN VALJEAN, BUT I THINK THERE ARE -- THERE ARE REAL UNDERLYING CAUSES AND IT IS TRUE, WE HAVE HOW MANY TASKFORCES NOW?

HOW MANY TASKFORCES DO WE HAVE TRYING TO CREATE MORE HOUSING, TRYING TO CREATE STABILITY.

WE THINK EVERY PROBLEM CAN BE SOLVED THE SAME WAY BY MORE -- INCREASING THE INCARCERATION, MAKING IT BE A CRIME.

IF THAT WORKS, WE WOULD HAVE THE SAFEST STATE EVER BECAUSE WE ARE WILDLY OVER-LAWED, OVER-CRIMINALIZED.

>> Gene: GUYS, THIS IS ORGANIZED SYNDICATES.

AND THEY ARE TRADING THIS STUFF FOR GUNS.

IT IS NOT AS IF THEY ARE BUYING -- STEALING CLOTHES TO PUT AND LOOK GOOD ON CENTRAL ON FRIDAY NIGHT.

THIS IS A SERIOUS PROBLEM.

AND TO ALBUQUERQUE WE NOW HAVE THE WALMART CLOSING SAN MATEO AND CENTRAL, GOING TO SHUT ITS DOORS AND THE CITY LOOKS LIKE IT IS GOING TO BUY IT AND I AM REALLY EXCITED ABOUT THAT CATHY.

IT HAD THIS REPUTATION FOR YEARS ABOUT CRIME AND THIS AND THAT AND THE OTHER THING AND EVERYONE ASSUMED THAT IS WHY IT SHUTDOWN.

WE ARE NOT SURE IF THAT IS THE CAUSE OR NOT.

WAS THAT AN APT EXAMPLE, THE WALMART ON SAN MATEO, ABOUT WHERE ALBUQUERQUE IS AT?

>> Cathryn: WELL, WHAT I WAS TOLD ABOUT WALMART IS THAT THEY ARE SCATTERED ALL OVER THE COUNTRY AND THAT THEY HAVE THE HIGHEST NUMBER OF POLICE CALLS IN THE COUNTRY.

SO THAT IS A STRATEGY FOR WALMART.

>> Gene: THEY ARE CLOSING TWO IN PORTLAND, THE LAST TWO IN THE CITY OF PORTLAND, THEY ARE CLOSING AS WELL.

>> Cathryn: I AM NOT SAD ABOUT REDUCING OUR RELIANCE ON BIG BOX RETAILERS.

AND I ALSO THINK THAT THERE ARE OTHER THINGS AT PLAY THAT PEOPLE SHOULD KNOW ABOUT.

THE FACT THAT WALMART WANTS TO COMPETE WITH AMAZON FOR THE ONLINE RETAIL BUSINESS.

SO, THEY ARE CLOSING -- IT IS ABOUT THEIR PROPERTY, REAL PROPERTY ASSETS AND CLOSING THOSE ASSETS.

AND IT IS A TREND THAT IS IN THE COUNTRY THEY ARE DOING.

>> Gene: LET ME INTERRUPT BECAUSE WE ARE SHORT ON TIME.

THEY HAD 708 CALLS FOR SERVICE LAST YEAR ALONE AT THAT LOCATION.

NOT ALL FOR THIEVING, BUT STUFF IN THE PARKING LOT, ASSAULT AND STUFF.

BUT 708.

IMAGINE IF APD DOESN'T HAVE TO DEAL WITH THOSE 708 AND OTHER THINGS AS WELL.

WE'LL SEE WHAT HAPPENS.

THANKS AGAIN TO OUR LINE OPINION PANEL AS ALWAYS THIS WEEK.

BE SURE TO LET US KNOW WHAT YOU THINK ABOUT ANY OF THE TOPICS THE LINE COVERED ON FACEBOOK, TWITTER OR INSTAGRAM PAGES AND CATCH ANY EPISODE YOU MIGHT HAVE MISSED ON THE PBS APP OR YOUR ROKU, OR MORE IMPORTANTLY, YOUR SMART TV.

A QUICK NOTE TO NOTE THE PASSING OF NEW MEXICO IN FOCUS LINE GUEST ARTHUR ALPERT WHO PASSED AWAY RECENTLY AFTER A LONG CAREER AS A PROFESSIONAL JOURNALIST, NEWSPAPER COLUMNIST, MEDIA CRITIC AND MOST NOTABLY HERE ACTING IN THEATER CAREER IN ALBUQUERQUE WHICH LASTED A GOOD LONG TIME.

ARTHUR WAS A WONDERFUL PANELIST.

ENERGETIC, INSIGHTFUL, QUICK TO CALL OUT INJUSTICE.

WHENEVER ARTHUR WAS ON, WE WOULD RECEIVE LOTS OF NOTES FROM VIEWERS, MANY OF THEM ROOTING HIM ON AS A SHARP SENIOR THROWING DOWN WITH THE YOUNGSTERS.

I ALWAYS LIKED THAT.

WE WILL MISS ARTHUR ALPERT, SO GRATEFUL TO HAVE KNOWN HIM AND SHARED SOME WONDERFUL OFF-CAMERA MOMENTS BECAUSE HE HAD A SHARP WIT ABOUT HIM AND HE WAS REALLY, REALLY FUNNY AS WELL.

RIP, GOOD SIR.

A LIFE WELL LIVED.

UNTIL NEXT TIME, WE'LL SEE YOU AGAIN NEXT WEEK IN FOCUS.