The local business community is small and often reliant on the federal government. Thus, when it comes to big policy issues they have a long history of getting pushed around.

But sometimes bad decisions and self-inflicted policies lead to bad results. Take the latest push for yet another tax hike on local lodgers being pushed by…local lodgers. The idea behind the tax is for the City to use the funds generated to market the City and its attractions to drum up business. Why this couldn’t be done by interested local hoteliers directly instead of using the City to force others to “play ball” by imposing a tax is lost on me.

More importantly, it’s as if the folks at Visit Albuquerque haven’t got memories. Do these people not remember late 2019 (way back in pre-pandemic times) when Mayor Keller used the money generated by the hotel tax for all kinds of non-tourism priorities?

As Pete Dinelli notes in his blog post above, the Mayor’s “sports tourism” uses of the lodgers’ tax money wasn’t exactly geared toward actual tourism:

• $10 million to improve Los Altos Park, including new softball fields, a BMX pump track and concession improvements.

• $3.5 million for a soccer complex

• $3.5 million for the Jennifer Riordan Spark Kindness Complex (a West Side baseball venue formerly known as the Albuquerque Regional Sports Complex).

• $2.5 million to buy property for balloon landing sites.

• $2.5 million to replace the city’s 16-year-old indoor track currently used by the University of New Mexico and for track and field competitions.

• $2 million for a “multiuse trail” linking East Downtown to Downtown.

• $1 million for Isotopes Park upgrades, such as netting and field improvements. The Isotopes Park upgrades include nets to protect young children and families during games and field improvements to provide for an easier transition from baseball to other uses including concerts.

• $500,000 for a “Northwest Mesa gateway.”

Here’s some unsolicited advice for the folks at Visit Albuquerque: if you want it done right, do it yourself. Don’t impose another tax on your customers only to have that money spent on projects that are only tangential at best to generating tourism.

UPDATE: According to the folks at Visit Albuquerque THIS money will be under control of the non-profit that manages the tourism campaign. We’d vastly prefer this effort NOT involve government and taxation, but perhaps this particular program will not fall prey to government.

New Mexico’s public colleges and universities are required to provide various public records. Unfortunately the process of requesting many of those records is onerous. That’s where the Rio Grande Foundation comes in.

We have requested, received, and published public payroll records and contracts for the relevant school leaders of each school for most of New Mexico’s colleges and universities. You can find that information here.

To their credit, University of New Mexico publishes its payroll records here.

On this week’s podcast conversation Paul and Wally discuss:

• The latest COVID maps are out and the situation seems to have stalemated or even worsened.
• Will the State change its metrics and if so, how?
• The deposition of NM’s Health Secretary throws “science” into question. Reporter Patrick Hayes questions Scrase who tap dances.
• NY Times says wearing masks outdoors makes no sense.
• Census data are out including data on New Mexico’s slow population growth and national population shifts.  
• Sierra County news article uses RGF data to question Spaceport. Of course, SpaceX is running ahead.
• Bernalillo County building taking shape with the name emblazoned across Albuquerque skyline.
• Las Cruces City Council considering a plastic bag ban. RGF op-ed in Las Cruces paper argues against this.
• RGF publishes payroll for NM cities & will continue to roll out additional data.

Albuquerque Public Schools enrollment continues to plummet and, with COVID 19 this past year more families than ever are choosing to pay for private alternatives, home school their kids, or make the difficult and expensive decision to leave the District entirely.

While the District cries to the media about how much money they stand to lose due to all the students fleeing the District, thanks to federal stimuli, state budget largesse, AND those students leaving, the District will likely see per-pupil spending skyrocket in the next few years.

Already APS spent an astonishing $18,594 annually per student during the school year prior to the Pandemic (you can find APS’ 2019-2020 budget here). Below are charts pulled directly from the budget to illustrate the point: Divide the total budget $1,475,755,646 by the student population of 79,363 to get: $18,594 spent annually per student.

APS spends a lot of money for terrible results. It is getting even more money from state and federal sources in the years ahead. Sorry Nelly, It must (not) be about the money.

The following chart from APS says a lot about the State of the District itself, but also about the stagnant population of New Mexico which is seeing overall declines in the number of young residents.

The REAL student population declined by 5,200 (including two students in the Gessing household) but the media helpfully attributed “only” 4,000 of that decline to COVID. Of course, even that is an oversimplification as many students (including ours) left the District because of the State’s political handling of COVID, not COVID itself.

Oddly enough, APS which will likely see further per-pupil budget increases managed to whine about the budget impact of the number of students fleeing their schools. There is no public discussion of allowing the money to follow the students.

Furthermore, this drop was hardly unexpected. If the APS School Board was interested in turning this sorry situation around, perhaps they should have added some kind of incentive to that effect to his contract.

While Americans continue to (generally) move South and West, New Mexico sticks out as a bastion of slow population growth among its fast-growing neighbors. It is hardly surprising that the charts (population growth from the US Census and Economic Freedom from the Fraser Institute) below match up rather well.

After all, while Americans obviously like warm weather and the beauty of the American West they also need employment and don’t usually want to pay high taxes. Needless to say the list of wants can become quite long but the aforementioned are SOME of the major factors in recent population shifts.

Recently, a letter-writer wrote in to the Santa Fe New Mexican in response to an RGF commentary to make the following statement: (Gessing’s) charge that

“New Mexico Democrats have controlled the Legislature for years” has no merit until the recent contests that turned out five conservative senators who were Democrats In Name Only. If Gessing has been disappointed in what Democrats could do while former Sen. John Arthur Smith barred the way to real reform, hold your breath, Paul. Change for the better is coming through.”

Here is a chart RGF put together illustrating that fact which is also below.

Was Sen. John Arthur Smith really a “conservative?” On the issues RGF cares about there has been little in the way of “conservative” Democrat influence in Santa Fe from John Arthur Smith or anyone else on the Democratic side of the aisle.

Back in 2015 then-Gov. Susana Martinez needed a mere three Senate votes to get a “Right to Work” law in New Mexico. Did John Arthur Smith vote for it? No. No Senate Democrats stepped up to vote for Right to Work. 

In 2019 with a $1 billion surplus and as Chair of the powerful Sen. Finance Committee Smith supported a massive tax hike (HB 6).  That same year Smith supported an 11% single-year budget increase. We could go on.

True, Smith opposed tapping the Land Grant Permanent Fund, was (perhaps) a moderate on abortion/life issues, and opposed marijuana legalization, but those hardly make him a “conservative” or a closet Republican.

And, while Smith and others have had some sway in New Mexico’s Legislature over the 91 years of Democrat dominance, the fact remains that New Mexico has been dominated by Democrat policymakers for nearly 100 years now. Our rankings as having the worst performing education system and being the most federally-dependent state in the nation must be considered part of that legacy of single-party rule.

The following appeared in the Las Cruces Sun News on Sunday, April 25, 2021

The City Council of Las Cruces is considering a ban on plastic bags, specifically those bags which are thinner than 2.25 millimeters thick. Restaurants may or may not be exempted from the statute, but banning plastic bags is not a viable solution to our solid waste challenges.

In fact, nearly all cities around the country and State of New Mexico including Albuquerque put their bag bans on hold for the duration of the COVID 19 pandemic. Albuquerque’s ban remains in place with no return date set.

Furthermore, while curbing the use of thin bags may seem like a reasonable policy, stores simply replace thin bags with thicker plastic bags as was done in Albuquerque. That shift led Albuquerque City councilor Pat Davis to say that he wanted to amend the City’s bag ban to also get rid of plastic bags that are thicker than 2.25 thousandths of an inch. The thicker bags were exempted from the law for the simple reason they are considered “reusable,” but Davis called the provision a “loophole.”

This discussion was going on in early March of 2020 which thankfully means it was never adopted. And, while the Centers for Disease Control has said that surface transmission of COVID 19 is extremely rare, that does not mean that banning plastic bags is a good thing for public health.

A 2018 report from Loma Linda University used data from an experiment in which researchers purposely “contaminated” a reusable bag with a harmless form of a virus. A single shopper then went through a typical grocery store, and the research team tracked the spread of the virus.

Quoting directly from the executive summary of the report, “The data show that MS2 (virus) spread to all surfaces touched by the shopper; the highest concentration occurred on the shopper’s hands, the checkout stand, and the clerk’s hands.”

Additionally in 2012 epidemiologists from the Oregon Public Health Division and Oregon Health & Science University published a peer reviewed article in the Journal of Infections Disease that documented a reusable grocery bag was the point source in an actual virus outbreak in the Pacific Northwest.

For years, people have simply believed that people will wash their bags. But Loma Linda researchers found only 3% of bags get washed. That rate may be better post-COVID than it was before, but there is also a diminished environmental benefit to reusable bags – especially in our desert environment – if they have to be washed regularly.

Instead of the City of Las Cruces micromanaging consumers’ use of plastic bags, I recommend that residents concerned with plastic pollution recycle or reuse their plastic bags instead. Plastic bag recycling programs with bins outside of local big box stores seem to have been one of the many casualties of the pandemic. Hopefully these programs return soon.

Until then, the bags make great trash can liners and can be used to pick up pet waste. I take along a bag or two on my walks and use them to clean up the neighborhood by picking up trash or aluminum cans along the way.

This final point really highlights the need for individual responsibility. Plastic bags are what you make of them. Government mandates can’t make us “green,” rather it is our responsibility to be good stewards of the environment around us. There will always be “loopholes” in laws such as the thickness of the plastic bags handed out at stores. For good reasons restaurants also need plastic bags and other utensils.

If you don’t want or need a bag, you are the customer and can refuse them or bring your own reusable bags. Don’t force your views on those of us who are responsible and repurpose these bags for useful, even “green” purposes.

The Rio Grande Foundation is an independent, non-partisan, tax-exempt research and educational organization dedicated to promoting prosperity for New Mexico based on principles of limited government, economic freedom and individual responsibility.

On this week’s podcast interview Paul sits down with Michael Johnson to discuss energy reliability both in Texas AND New Mexico.

Recently Texas suffered from serious energy reliability failures, but a decade ago many New Mexicans went without natural gas for days during one of the coldest times in recent memory. Michael Johnson is a New Mexican. He wrote the definitive report on what happened in New Mexico a decade ago.

Johnson, a member of ERCOT for several years in the ’90s, has also studied what happened in Texas and what caused the recent outages.

Johnson’s experience includes serving as the CEO of Conoco Gas and Power, the midstream business of Conoco Inc., and early 2000s, he was also Chairman of the Natural Gas Supply Association headquartered in DC for several years over the same period, which represents large natural gas producers.

In another installment in what has already been a big week for COVID science, the New York Times published the following which essentially debunks the case for mask wearing outdoors. Despite the lack of scientific justification for them Gov. Lujan Grisham continues to mandate masks for outdoor usage including student-athletes.  The following is cut-and-pasted directly from the paper’s “Morning Briefing” April 22nd, 2021.

Of course outdoor mask wearing DOES have significant virtue-signaling implications.

On the latest Tipping Point New Mexico Paul discusses the fact that the CDC has now confirmed that he was correct in questioning “surface spread” of COVID over a year ago. Last year at this time Mayor Keller shut down Albuquerque playgrounds and parks. Paul and his family did not obey these restrictions and were criticized for it at the time.

NM has high unemployment and yet businesses can’t find workersbecause too many are getting checks for doing nothing.

Some “blue” states are making COVID rules permanent. Paul is concerned this could happen in New Mexico.

Scott Elder has a brand new contract at APS. Paul and Wally discuss the particulars and problems with the contract.

A new report finds the US Department of Interior (headed by Deb Haaland of New Mexico) is shortchanging NM on conservation funding.

The Biden Administration wants another $2 trillion “Stimulus” infrastructure via the so-called “American Jobs Plan.” Paul discusses the fact that most of the money Biden wants to spend in the bill is not infrastructure-related. He also outlines a few policy changes that COULD be addressed if Biden actually wanted to improve infrastructure in the US.

The Rio Grande Foundation recently gained access to the transcript of a deposition on the Gov.’s decision making process relating to COVID 19 and found “the science” to be lacking. Channel 4 KOB TV’s Patrick Hayes used this information to ask the Gov.’s health advisor David Scrase some questions during the press conference this week. As you can see from the story, Scrase doesn’t exactly answer the question about “the science.”

You can see the full story below:

UPDATE: You can watch David Scrase dance around the question of “science” as opposed to lawyers making decisions for full context below:

The Rio Grande Foundation offices are near the new Bernalillo County headquarters building. This is the building which was formerly filled with PNM staffers and was purchased by the County. Cost of the building quickly went up by 50% to nearly $50 million.

The big letters on top were added this week. The building is attractive, but when one of the largest buildings in your biggest city’s downtown is occupied by government it really says a lot about the size and scope of government.

Here are a few skylines of comparable-sized cities (Albuquerque has 560,000):

Milwaukee 590,000:

Tucson 548,000:

At RGF we tend to follow New Mexico media outlets pretty closely, but we had missed The Sierra County Sun. The Spaceport is based in Sierra County and no County wants manned commercial space launches than Sierra County, one of the most economically-challenged counties in our already-economically-challenged State.

Later this year (October 18 of 2021) the facility will “celebrate” its 10th anniversary, but after a decade we are STILL waiting for something resembling manned space tourism launches at the facility. Interestingly, relying heavily on Rio Grande Foundation analysis, The Sierra County Sun has one of the most trenchant and thoughtful analyses of the Spaceport that we’ve seen in the numerous media outlets that have explored the facility and its “impact.” Check it out here.

You can read the RGF analysis by Danny Seymour here.

Recently (on February 19, 2021), Tracie Collins, M.D., New Mexico Secretary of Health was deposed in a case in US brought by various businesses that have opposed the Gov.’s lockdown policies relating to COVID 19.

The Deposition was videotaped, so we can provide broadcast news outlets (or even just YouTube and similar platforms) with clips. Here is the full transcript of Collins’ deposition.

Key Take-aways:

1. The Department of Health does not consider the economic impact of lockdowns in crafting its Public Health Orders.
2. The Department of Health does not adjust “positive COVID test” results to account for false positive tests.
3. The Department of Health cannot explain why Florida and Texas, which are not locked down, have lower COVID fatality rates than New Mexico. The experiences of other states are not considered by the Secretary or the New Mexico Department of Health in crafting the Public Health Orders.
4. The Department of Health does not take into consideration other adverse health impacts, like increased depression, suicide, and childhood obesity in crafting the Public Health Orders.
5. The Secretary places significant reliance on the Department of Health’s legal staff when crafting the Public Health Orders. She does not know if any of the Department’s lawyers have any training or education in public health.
6. The Secretary is unaware of any scientific studies that support the specific restrictions, prohibitions, and permitted activities under the Public Health Orders.
7. The Secretary cannot say whether the risk from COVID must be zero, before the Public Health Orders will end.

Below are Page and Line references to deposition testimony:

Data and Experience from other States “can” be considered in crafting New Mexico’s Public Health Orders, but Secretary Collins will not say that it “should” be considered.  See, page 11, line 2 to line 14 (“11:2 – 14”)

The Department of Health has minimized economic harm from the shutdowns by reducing morbidity and mortality from COVID-19 and keeping people alive so that they will have an opportunity at some time in the future to reopen their business.  See page 32, line 24 to page 34, line 5 (“32:24 – 34:5”)

The Department does not track or control for false positive tests, or make adjustments to their numbers based on the presence of false positive tests.  34:11 – 37:17; and 37:21 – 41:11

The Secretary cannot explain why Florida and South Dakota, which are not locked down, have a lower COVID-related fatality rate than New Mexico.  Nor is she interested in using such data to determine whether lockdowns work.  48:3 – 53:19

The Secretary does not know why New Mexico has not done a regression analysis to determine whether the shutdown orders have had a positive impact on COVID transmission rates.  54:2 – 56:2

The Secretary is not aware of New Mexico attempting any other analysis of the adverse economic impact of the shutdown orders.  She does not know if the State has done anything to consider the economic cost and damage caused by the shutdown orders.  She does not know if the economic costs and damages arising from the shutdown orders is significant.  57:15 – 58:22; and 100:15 – 20

The Secretary does not know what adverse health consequences have arisen as a result of having to close business and losing jobs.  The Secretary has done no study regarding the adverse health consequences caused by lockdowns (increased depression, suicide, childhood obestity, etc.).   58:23 – 63:3

The Secretary is not aware of any studies that the business activities that are permitted under the Public Health Orders are less risky than the business activities that have been prohibited.  63:4 – 64:7

The Secretary would have to confer with the Department’s general counsel (i.e., its lawyers) to understand why certain businesses, like TopGolf and New Mexico United are allowed to operate, and others are not.  64:8 – 66:13

The Public Health Orders do not consider the potential harm or damage to the businesses that are being closed.  The Secretary does not know who, if anyone, in State government is supposed to look at the cost and damage to the businesses and people subject to the Public Health Orders.  67:10 – 69:1

The fatality rate from COVID for children ages 5 to 14 is 0.001%, or 1 out of every 100,000 children who contract the virus.  For children age 19 and under, the fatality rate is 0.003% or 3 out of every 100,000 children who contract the virus.  This is lower than the fatality rates for other infectious diseases.  69:4 – 70:4.

New Mexico has not studied the effect of the pandemic on childhood obesity.  72:20 – 74:13

The Secretary is unaware of any studies by the Department of Health of the impact of play deprivation on children resulting from the lockdowns and public health orders.  80:11 – 82:4

The Secretary cannot say whether the Public Health Orders will continue until the risk of COVID is zero.  82:5 – 83:5

In general, other factors such as adverse health consequences to children and adults and adverse economic impacts on businesses and employees are not taken into consideration by the Department or the Secretary when it comes to the contents of the Public Health Orders.  84:5 – 85:8.

Decisions about which businesses are in what category in the Public Health Orders is determined by the legal department working with the Secretary.  The Secretary does not know if there is a “written trail” for the decision as to which type of businesses will go in which category; nor does she know if any of the lawyers in her department have any education in public health.  89:1 – 18

The Secretary is unaware of any analysis or studies that were performed before gyms, group fitness classes, skating rinks, bowling alleys, and personal trainers were taken off the “prohibited from opening list” in the Public Health Order, to the permitted to open under limited capacity list.  93:23 – 94:14

The Secretary would have to confer with the Department’s lawyers before she could say how an industry or particular business activity can have its category or definition changed and be allowed to open.  94:15 – 95:7.

The Secretary would have to confer with the Department’s lawyers to understand why some business that cannot practice social distancing, like massage parlors, barbershops and nail salons are open, while other businesses, like trampoline parks and other “close-contact recreational facilities” where the Department is concerned about social distancing, are closed.  100:21 -101:23.

UPDATE: RGF has obtained Collins’ full deposition. It is below in three parts:

New Mexico cities big and small are required to provide various public records. Unfortunately the process of requesting many of those records is onerous. That’s where the Rio Grande Foundation comes in.

We have requested, received, and published public payroll records for most of New Mexico’s major cities. You can find that information here.

To their credit, a few (typically larger) cities publish their payroll records online. You can find Albuquerque, Las Cruces, Los Alamos, Rio Rancho, and Santa Fe.

The following appeared in the Albuquerque Journal on April 18, Santa Fe New Mexican, and other New Mexico media outlets.

If there were an overall theme for New Mexico’s current political situation it would be the ongoing attempts by Democrats to placate their environmentalist base which opposes traditional energy sources while at the same time keeping energy dollars flowing into the State’s coffers.

The Biden Administration’s moratorium on oil and gas permitting is the most notable example of this conflict. Gov. Lujan Grisham has publicly spoken out about it, but Attorney General Balderas has refused to join a lawsuit challenging the policy that was recently filed by a dozen states. None of those states have as much to lose as does New Mexico, but our elected leaders are unlikely to challenge a President of their own party.

The internal conflict was on full display in the recently-completed legislative session as well. Thankfully, the most radical bill on energy which would have banned “fracking,” (an oil and gas drilling process without which New Mexico’s oil and gas industry would be immediately decimated) failed without gaining traction.

Making it much further in the process only to fail unexpectedly was Sen. Mimi Stewart’s “clean fuel standard” SB 11. In 2019 Gov. Lujan Grisham made national headlines stating that New Mexico was going to increase vehicle mileage in New Mexico to 52 MPG by model year 2022.

SB 11 would have instead forced motorists to use “alternative” fuels with the goal of reducing carbon emissions while passing off the hard work of actually developing the technology onto the private sector. Presumably blame for higher fuel costs would have been shifted as well. The bill faltered after passing the Senate.

Anti-energy bills that did make their way into law included SB 8 which allows local governments  to enact more restrictive air quality regulations than are imposed by the federal government. It is unlikely that conservative counties where much of the Industry is located (and people are far more supportive of the Industry than liberal Albuquerque or Santa Fe) will enact such regulations, but this is about politics, not policy.

Speaking of politics, SB 112 which also made its way into law creates a “sustainable economy task force.” The task force’s stated goal is “diversifying New Mexico’s economy while reducing reliance on traditional energy sources.” Of course, New Mexico Democrats have controlled the Legislature for decades and with total Democrat control under Lujan Grisham, they have had ample time to enact the public policies necessary to “diversify” New Mexico’s economy.

Unfortunately, Santa Fe has repeatedly failed to reform the gross receipts tax, eliminate Social Security taxes, reduce onerous regulations, and expand educational choice (to improve workforce preparedness). In recent legislative sessions we’ve instead seen tax hikes passed at times of big budget surpluses. During both the 2019 (HB 6) and 2021 (SB 317) sessions tax hikes were adopted. Such cash grabs do nothing to diversify New Mexico’s economy. At best they diversify government revenues. In addition to tax hikes, policies like minimum wage hikes, paid sick leave mandates, and ongoing COVID restrictions imposed by the Executive only hinder economic growth and diversification.

Finally, this session, while the Legislature continued its piecemeal attacks on energy, after a decade of attempts they passed an amendment to increase distributions from the Land Grand Permanent Fund (the fund is generated by oil and gas). HJR 1 not only increased distributions by 1% but added an additional .25% to that amount for a total increase of 1.25%.

Continued existence of the fund happens only if the oil and gas industry thrives, so Democrats’ plan to take more money out while less money is put in seem problematic at best.

Rather than killing off energy first, New Mexico’s elected leaders should focus on diversifying the economy. When we are no longer among the very poorest states in the nation the Legislature can address ways to make the New Mexico less dependent on oil and gas.

Paul Gessing is president of New Mexico’s Rio Grande Foundation. The Rio Grande Foundation is an independent, nonpartisan, tax-exempt research and educational organization dedicated to promoting prosperity for New Mexico based on principles of limited government, economic freedom and individual responsibility

The Rio Grande Foundation and our friends at the Institute for Justice along with what ended up being a bipartisan win for “food freedom” in New Mexico. The issue is discussed at length in an Albuquerque Journal opinion piece authored by a bipartisan group of legislators after the Gov. signed the bill.

RGF sent various alerts throughout the session as well as asking supporters to send notes to the Gov. asking her to sign the bill.

As the op-ed writers note:

Although 49 states allow the sale of foods made in a home kitchen, New Mexico has had one of the strictest laws in the country. It is illegal to even sell homemade cookies to your neighbor. Instead, home bakers can sell only at farmers’ markets. And before a home baker can sell her cookies at the market, she needs to get a permit from the state that requires a stack of paperwork and can require thousands of dollars in kitchen upgrades. Making matters worse, Albuquerque bans the sale of homemade foods completely – one of the only cities in the nation to do so.

On this week’s episode, Paul interviews Grover Norquist, president of Americans for Tax Reform. There has been a lot of bad policy coming out of Washington, DC, during the first few months of the Biden Administration. Whether it is the $2 trillion “stimulus” or another $2 trillion “infrastructure” bill or attacks on free speech and Right to Work, the amount of transformationally bad public policy moving in Washington is almost too much to keep up with.

Thankfully Grover spends his days and even nights working on these issues. If you want to know what is happening in the federal government you don’t want to miss this conversation.

NOTE: we are posting episodes of Tipping Point NM here as well as on our YouTube channel. You can find the archives here and audio-only articles here.

As of February 2021 according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics New Mexico has the 5th-highest unemployment rate in the nation. You can see a partial list below. New Mexico which remains among the most locked down states in the nation (especially its population areas) has had an elevated unemployment rate for much of the COVID crisis.

But, with the federal government’s generous (debt-fueled) “stimulus” plans  making it lucrative for people to not work, it is clear that many New Mexicans would rather stay home and cash checks than work for a living. Here are a few recent news stories showing how challenging it is for businesses to find people here and here.

Simply put, as businesses try to reopen and get back to something akin to normal, bad policies out of Washington, most notably the recent $2 trillion “Biden-bucks” scheme will make it more difficult for the economy to reopen.

The Albuquerque Journal did a write-up on newly-minted Albuquerque Public Schools Superintendent Scott Elder’s contract, but we wanted to take a closer look at the document.

If you’re inclined, you can read the 7 page document here. It took a bit of sleuthing to find it on the APS website.

As reported Elder will make $225.000 annually with 22 paid leave days, use of a car, and a $500 monthly “allowance” for expenses. All of that is rather routine.

According to the agreement Elder will ALSO receive contributions from APS to a supplemental retirement plan of $50,000 at the end of the 2021-2022 contract year, $55,000 at the end of the 2022-2023 contract year and $60,000 at the end of the 2023-2024 contract year. The kicker is that Elder who has worked for APS since 1991 is ALSO eligible for benefits under the Education Retirement Board (ERB) pension system available to all education employees in the State. So, Elder will truly be living large in retirement and his REAL compensation dwarfs the $225,000 in take home pay.

Furthermore, according to clause 18 of the contract is a provision that sets up mandatory binding arbitration between the District and Elder in case of a dispute. The fees and charges of the arbitration will be paid by the Board.

Finally, and arguably most importantly, there are absolutely NO performance incentives for Elder contained in his contract. So, no matter how far enrollment plummets (it has been and the situation shows no sign of abating) and regardless of how well or poorly APS students perform, Elder’s pay will not be affected.

With the District facing so many challenges we wish Elder luck, but fear that not much is going to change at APS until the school board itself changes.

A year ago New Mexicans and many folks around the country were concerned about contracting COVID 19 via surface transmission. This led Albuquerque Mayor Tim Keller (and other politicians state/nation wide to close down city parks and take other actions that the Centers for Disease Control now says were/are unnecessary.

As the New York Times reports:

But the era of “hygiene theater” may have come to an unofficial end this week, when the C.D.C. updated its surface cleaning guidelines and noted that the risk of contracting the virus from touching a contaminated surface was less than 1 in 10,000.

The following is a screen shot of the RGF president’s Twitter response to Keller’s closing of the playgrounds. The deleted tweets were from a New Mexico-based union official that RGF often spars with in Santa Fe.  The gist of the interaction was Gessing saying that he was going to take his kids to the playgrounds anyway (as he did) and the union official telling Gessing he was a “bad parent.”

A clear cut case of “we were right, they were wrong.”

The following is a press release from our pro-energy friends at the Western Energy Alliance. We felt that it was worth reposting the information in its entirety.

DENVER – Interior Secretary Deb Haaland recently announced that out of $1.6 billion in deferred maintenance funding for public lands nationwide, New Mexico will receive only $6.8 million. The conservation funds come primarily from federal oil and natural gas royalties, as directed by the Great American Outdoors Act. New Mexico’s share is paltry considering the state contributed $1.35 billion in royalties to the federal government and ranks first in oil production and second in natural gas on public lands. Contrast New Mexico’s share to these states which provide next to no federal oil and natural gas royalties:

• Virginia – $247.5 million
• North Carolina – $153.8 million
• New York – $50.5 million
• Washington – $50.3 million
• New Jersey – $28.3 million
• Massachusetts – $25.4 million
• Oregon – $12.5 million

“It’s astounding that New Mexico contributes so much in oil and natural gas wealth for the country but is rewarded so meagerly. Instead of addressing needs at sites like Chaco Canyon and Aztec Ruins in New Mexico, prosperous costal states are allowed to cash in,” said Kathleen Sgamma, president of Western Energy Alliance. “To make matters worse, the president is on a path to eliminate the very source of revenue that underwrites national park deferred maintenance funding. By banning new leasing on federal lands and embarking on policies to make development on existing leases prohibitive, the federal government will soon struggle to pay for any additional public lands conservation.

“The policies that are the hallmark of the first 100 days are, paradoxically, a good way to ensure the massive backlog of maintenance at national parks remains into the future. Besides killing up to 58,676 oil and natural gas related jobs annually, the president’s ban threatens over 108,000 long-term jobs fixing national park infrastructure.

“The small share New Mexico will receive barely makes a dent in the $147 million maintenance backlog in the state’s national parks, including nearly $19 million at Chaco Cultural Historical Park and $5.2 million at Aztec Ruins National Monument. Rather, New Mexico’s $6.8 million share will go to repair dams, visitor facilities, roads, and water systems on Bureau of Land Management lands. It’s ironic the Interior Department is not doing more for Chaco, given Sec. Haaland has supported eliminating oil and natural gas development in the vicinity outside the park, supposedly to protect it. It seems like a missed opportunity to directly fund facilities and cultural resource protection inside the park.

“Furthermore, removing development will devastate the livelihoods of thousands of Indian mineral owners who wish to develop their oil and natural gas resources as a means to provide for their families. Annually,21,000 Navajo mineral owners receive about $100 million from oil companies that develop the minerals on their behalf. Depriving Native Americans of their royalty income in an economically disadvantaged area is not justifiable from an environmental justice perspective,” added Sgamma.

The funds are authorized under the Great American Outdoors Act passed by Congress in an overwhelming bipartisan fashion last summer. The act authorizes up to $1.9 billion annually, predominantly from oil and natural gas production on non-park, non-wilderness public lands, for maintenance and conservation in national parks and other protected public lands. The act also permanently funds the popular Land and Water Conservation Fund to the tune of $900 million annually, which is exclusively generated from offshore oil and natural gas. Western Energy Alliance supported the bill because it provides an appropriate balance between responsible energy development on working landscapes while preserving our nation’s treasured public spaces.

“The federal oil and natural gas program is basically the sole source of new conservation and maintenance funding for our public lands. With his ban on federal oil and natural gas leasing, President Biden is risking $2.8 billion annually for our national parks and other iconic public lands,” added Sgamma.

# # #

Western Energy Alliance represents 200 companies engaged in all aspects of environmentally responsible exploration and production of oil and natural gas in the West. Alliance members are independents, the majority of which are small businesses with an average of fourteen employees. Learn more atwww.WesternEnergyAlliance.org.

Note to editors: The  list of FY2021 projects by state is included in the agency’s press release.

New Mexico: $ 6,805,000

On the latest Tipping Point NM conversation, Paul and Wally discuss a few articles showing that there is “no such thing as a free lunch” when it comes to energy.

ABQ/Bernalillo County remains in Yellow. San Juan County moves from Turquoise to green. There is no end in sight for MLG’s rules.

Back to School seems to be going fine, but the number of students in school is down.

Gov. signs “food freedom” bill but vetoes “earmark” of federal funds for unemployment insurance. The unemployment veto is important for both policy reasons as well as separation of powers.

Paul goes through the results of the Foundation’s annual Freedom Index :

New Mexico’s Human Services Department’s data book paints a bleak picture of NM.