[{"_1":2,"_88":-5,"_89":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6285295,"mediaKeyId","2573726-fb27ae404e876505a22db5e5bdaffbbb","parentId",2573726,"title","Committee advances racketeering expansion, litigation‑funding transparency and stormwater utility authority; several bills pass committee","audioSeconds",3461,"startMs",2739000,"endMs",6200000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2573726-fb27ae404e876505a22db5e5bdaffbbb&start=2739&end=6200","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2573726-fb27ae404e876505a22db5e5bdaffbbb/thumbnail_2739000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6285295/New-Mexico/Committee-advances-racketeering-expansion-litigationfunding-transparency-and-stormwater-utility-authority-several-bills-pass-committee","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6285295-2eef355a98df17672a094ec6d09eb707/orig.mp4?Expires=1770451369&Signature=AvUKFV2bZaYF5ARjPvd8JWRf0mSzYByWapkypGqs6URHTnD~KNn~KRnHRh2dvPVFyncwyz8a8CD14lbdwyYlx6vCJOYmECt~kFfeJ5ZXe1BPZU2AqFS50bm4jnA4Y9zjD4oX-SM5Bunk1BhTb7ri7K7GPaPQ93mtBOfatb1-htHKInM~FLFkg-ST6iV3L0xmY0VyqkUz8x78tSIzG~2I45vNZN3RJQMLOx5yeaUFJDWSiZ3cd4pqJNvQ5WiAY6a~800oNuu3q1kb6DmeSzXcmdE~p4zNI-JTyxhbaaI-aNRzj3UlWvUlNTAc3Ib0jeyo8v2y~YRmLFRTjHuOAfbuqQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","New Mexico Legislature","date","2025-03-12T00:00:00Z","article","The House Government, Elections and Indian Affairs Committee advanced multiple bills on Thursday, voting to recommend passage for measures addressing racketeering, third‑party litigation financing transparency, municipal stormwater utilities and several board sunset extensions. Committee members also approved a set of senate bills on consent.

Senate Bill 70: Expand racketeering statute

The committee gave a due‑pass recommendation to Senate Bill 70, a measure amending New Mexico's racketeering law to add several crimes to the statute's enumerated offenses. The sponsor told the committee the change updates an out‑of‑date law to allow prosecutors to use racketeering tools against organized‑crime enterprises engaged in modern criminal activity.

The committee heard support from prosecutors, law‑enforcement representatives and business groups. Deputy Chief Dale Wagner of the New Mexico State Police and JD Bullington of the Greater Albuquerque Chamber told the committee the change gives prosecutors additional tools to dismantle criminal enterprises involved in human trafficking, drug trafficking and related offenses. Rob Hart, director of the Organized Crime Commission and a deputy district attorney in Bernalillo County, told the committee the bill does not change the underlying crimes but lets prosecutors charge an enterprise where leaders profit from enumerated offenses.

The committee also heard opposition focused narrowly on the inclusion of cockfighting within the list. Several public commenters urged removal of that item on cultural and economic grounds; other witnesses noted cockfighting has been illegal in New Mexico since 2007 and that prosecution under a racketeering theory would require felony‑level conduct and proof of an enterprise. Committee members debated the point but ultimately advanced the bill. The motion for a due pass was moved by Representative Locke and seconded by Representative Borrego; the committee approved the motion by voice (no recorded roll call in the transcript).

House Bill 312: Third‑party litigation‑funding transparency

House Bill 312, which would require disclosure of third‑party litigation financing agreements in certain circumstances, received a due‑pass recommendation after debate. Sponsors described third‑party litigation finance as an opaque and growing industry in which investors — including hedge funds and specialized lenders — supply capital to plaintiffs or law firms in return for a share of a recovery.

Supporters including the New Mexico Business Coalition, the New Mexico Medical Society and the New Mexico Medical Society's representatives said the bill is a transparency measure, not a prohibition, and urged disclosure to protect fairness and guard against hidden influence, including potential foreign funding. Opponents, including trial attorneys who spoke at the hearing, argued mandatory in‑camera review and court‑ordered sanctions could raise separation‑of‑powers and constitutional concerns and that disclosure could give defendants a tactical advantage.

The committee adopted a motion for a due pass on HB 312; the transcript records a roll call: the motion passed by a vote of 6‑3.

Senate Bill 7: Municipal stormwater utilities

Senate Bill 7 allows municipalities to create stormwater utilities and charge a fee to fund routine stormwater management. Municipal officials and engineers told the committee that local governments currently use scarce street or general funds to meet stormwater requirements and that a dedicated utility — optional, set by local councils — is a common practice in other states to fund stormwater infrastructure and water‑quality obligations.

Supporters included the New Mexico Municipal League, municipal engineers and conservation groups; speakers said a modest, locally determined fee is typically used to pay for routine stormwater programs and compliance with federal water‑quality standards. Some committee members voiced concern about imposing new fees on residents and asked whether municipal councils would set rates equitably; sponsors said fees are optional and set at local public hearings. The committee approved a due pass; the transcript records the motion carried (voice vote recorded as \"by a vote of 6‑3\" in committee minutes).

Senate Bill 113 and consent items

Senate Bill 113, a technical bill extending sunset review dates for five boards, received a due pass recommendation with no opposition on the committee record. The committee also approved several senate bills on consent earlier in the hearing: SB 47, SB 75 (as amended), SB 82 and CS/SB 19. The consent motion was seconded and the chair announced those bills were \"consented and passed out of this committee.\" No formal roll calls were recorded in the transcript for the consented items.

Procedure and next steps

Where roll calls were recorded, the committee reported the following outcomes in the transcript: HB 312 passed on a 6‑3 roll call. Several other measures were advanced by voice vote or unanimous consent; the transcript lists due‑pass recommendations for SB 70, SB 7, SB 113 and the consented bills. Sponsors and committee members indicated some measures will be refined or carried forward to other committees; HB 363 and HB 292 were rolled for later floor committee consideration.

Votes at a glance

- SB 70 (racketeering expansion): motion for due pass moved by Representative Locke, seconded by Representative Borrego; outcome: due pass (voice; count not specified in transcript). Key additions: sexual exploitation of children, criminal sexual penetration, criminal sexual conduct, dogfighting, cockfighting, contraband in places of imprisonment, human trafficking.

- HB 312 (litigation‑funding transparency): due pass; roll call recorded — tally: 6 yes, 3 no.

- SB 7 (municipal stormwater utilities): due pass (voice; transcript records vote as \"by a vote of 6‑3\").

- SB 113 (sunset extensions for five boards): due pass (voice; no opposition recorded).

- Consent package (SB 47; SB 75 as amended; SB 82; CS/SB 19): approved on consent; no roll calls recorded in committee transcript.

What members and witnesses said

Prosecutors and law‑enforcement officials urged passage of SB 70 to equip district attorneys to pursue organized‑crime leaders. Rob Hart, director of the Organized Crime Commission and a deputy district attorney, said the statute lets prosecutors pursue \"the people who are making a business out of it\" while noting prosecutors must still prove the elements of an enterprise.

Supporters of HB 312 argued disclosure is narrowly tailored to transparency and consumer protection. Sponsors cited other states' actions and noted national examples of foreign funders discovered through disclosure rules. Opponents warned of constitutional concerns and potential tactical harms for vulnerable plaintiffs; trial attorneys asked that courts retain rulemaking authority.

For SB 7, municipal officials said a local, optional fee allows targeted maintenance and compliance with federal water‑quality obligations. Opponents cautioned about new costs for residents and urged that any fee decisions be subject to transparent local hearings.

Committee action summary

The committee advanced several bills to the next stage of the legislative process while rolling others for further work. Sponsors and committee leaders signaled ongoing drafting and stakeholder engagement in the interim on the most contested items.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","House - Government, Elections And Indian Affairs Mar 12, 2025","oneSentenceSummary","The House Government, Elections and Indian Affairs Committee advanced multiple bills Thursday, recommending passage of measures to expand racketeering offenses, require disclosure of third‑party litigation funding, authorize municipal stormwater utilities and extend sunset dates for five boards.","taxTitle","House of Representatives, Legislative, New Mexico","taxId",78418,"location","New Mexico","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6285300,"Committee delays vote on major rewrite of New Mexico public‑records law after heated public comment",2422,52000,2474000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2573726-fb27ae404e876505a22db5e5bdaffbbb&start=52&end=2474","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2573726-fb27ae404e876505a22db5e5bdaffbbb/thumbnail_52000.jpg","/articles/6285300/New-Mexico/Committee-delays-vote-on-major-rewrite-of-New-Mexico-publicrecords-law-after-heated-public-comment","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6285300-4fe8876c04efeea58aed3cc651c484ed/orig.mp4?Expires=1770451369&Signature=bF0qQolarKn-wKzZFvQ4Gb1gwh3glI1RbeI3wmYNG4pgVNep2H4RpYCHdMs4ZpsC3Y7E8Kw6GRKnNyXmeV-xzSAuzm8tfhIlwsolVcvccF0KVyg3xA76x7S8YNZ1MRUo2MdF-mwCmZS3EUaiaUk5-plw9F5KX0~BKenN7Z3CGMy1yaSPpsBHCdrYWomtFJ4ktTu5ovreha1SS1gMzIsfgzXHYsVhsVkmwDkCX~xoojswb-JQSptuZRKmI7PsU45OggofP84x78gCN8A2Y75wXCMFNq6TO6X8xHA~6xLm0dACVBiJevbW8CZHBxlUyhzd-pV00U6g5F48nl8Nuqv13A__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Representative Brown on Thursday presented House Bill 497, a comprehensive package of proposed changes to New Mexico's Inspection of Public Records Act (IPRA), but the House Government, Elections and Indian Affairs Committee agreed to roll the bill for further work after extended testimony from government officials, media representatives and open‑government advocates.

The bill would create new privacy and security exemptions, add procedural definitions and timelines, permit limited labor charges for particularly large or burdensome requests, and change enforcement remedies. Representative Brown said the measure is intended as a practical starting point to reduce what many local governments call an unsustainable workload while preserving public access.

Supporters, including Sandoval County Attorney Michael Eshelman and municipal lobbyists, said a small number of high‑volume or commercial requesters and data brokers impose outsized burdens on local governments. Eshelman told the committee that Sandoval County routinely turns around many requests within days but sometimes faces repeated, costly litigation by a small number of requesters and large commercial resellers such as LexisNexis. He said the bill includes three broad categories of change: exemptions for personal and security information; clearer process rules for handling claims and requests; and adjustments to remedies and enforcement.

Opponents, including the ACLU of New Mexico, the New Mexico Foundation for Open Government (NM FOG) and the Foundation for Open Government, said the bill would weaken accountability and make it harder for journalists and citizens to obtain records. Daniel Williams, policy advocate at the ACLU of New Mexico, said the bill \"threatens government transparency by restricting public access to records that are critical for accountability and public trust.\" Lucas Pearman, assistant managing editor of the Albuquerque Journal and president of NM FOG's board, warned the $30‑per‑hour labor charge proposed for requests that take more than three hours would create a financial barrier for news organizations and members of the public.

Representative Brown walked the committee through the bill's major provisions in some detail. Key elements described in the hearing include:

- Expanded exemptions: The draft adds specific exemptions for certain personal information and for what it calls \"critical infrastructure\" materials, and it lists additional law‑enforcement‑sensitive items (for example, kidnapping and human trafficking material and certain photographs) as nonpublic in the bill text.

- New definitions and thresholds: The bill would define \"broad or burdensome\" as a request requiring more than three staff hours to locate records and redact exempt information, define \"current records\" as those no more than 12 months old, and provide a statutory definition of \"good faith\" for custodial searches.

- Timelines: The proposal would extend the response window for routine requests from 15 to 21 days and set a 60‑day maximum for producing older, archived records.

- Fees: The measure would permit labor charges of $30 per hour for work beyond the initial three hours of staff time needed to comply with a written request; the first three hours would be excluded from charges. It also contains a provision treating five or more requests from the same requester within 45 days as a single request for purposes of computing labor charges.

- Law‑enforcement delay: If a law‑enforcement agency becomes aware of a crime that relates to a records request, the bill would toll the response period for law‑enforcement records for 45 days from the date the agency becomes aware of the crime.

- Notice and administrative cure: Before filing suit, a requester could file a written notice of violation and the public body would have a fixed period to respond. The bill would change certain damage provisions from mandatory to discretionary and cap a possible award for untimely explanations at $100 per business day in some circumstances.

Supporters urged the committee to treat the bill as the start of a dialogue. Larry Horan, registered lobbyist for Sandoval County, and Matt Thompson, registered lobbyist for several smaller cities and counties, urged relief for understaffed municipal offices that spend substantial staff time reviewing video footage and other records. Cass Brewlot, general counsel for the Office of Broadband Access and Expansion, testified in favor of a \"critical infrastructure\" exemption, saying some broadband grant materials contain security details that, if released, could create risks to water, power and emergency systems.

Opponents said the bill in its current draft would chill scrutiny of government and grant private agencies broad authority to withhold records. Christine Barber, executive director of the Foundation for Open Government, told the committee the measure \"would charge everyone $30 an hour. That includes the media, and that includes regular New Mexicans, who are the majority of requesters.\" Amanda Lavin, an attorney with the New Mexico Foundation for Open Government, described the bill as a \"fundamental departure\" from IPRA's intent to provide the public with the greatest amount of information possible.

Committee members asked detailed questions about drafting and potential unintended consequences. Representative Luhan said he was \"redlining a lot of things\" in the bill text and suggested further work over the interim. A number of members proposed forming a stakeholder task force with balanced representation of requesters, litigants, cities, counties and state agencies.

Representative Brown told the committee she intended the bill to start a conversation and said she welcomed input; she agreed to roll the bill for further study. Sandoval County's attorney offered to host interim meetings and the sponsor invited emailed input from stakeholders.

The committee did not vote on the bill during Thursday's session. Representative Brown said she will collect stakeholder suggestions and pursue interim study before bringing a revised proposal back to committee.

\"This bill was filed to start a conversation,\" Representative Brown said at the close of testimony. \"Please send me your comments and we'll collect everything for the interim.\"","Representative Brown on Thursday presented House Bill 497, a comprehensive package of proposed changes to New Mexico's Inspection of Public Records Act (IPRA), but the House Government, Elections and Indian Affairs Committee agreed to roll the bill for further work after extended testimony from government officials, media representatives and open‑government advocates.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Committee advances racketeering expansion, litigation‑funding transparency and stormwater utility authority; several bills pass committee

Committee delays vote on major rewrite of New Mexico public‑records law after heated public comment