Funding for New Mexico in Focus is provided by: Viewers Like You >> Jeff: This week on New Mexico in Focus, wins, losses, and TBD█s from the recently concluded State Legislative Session.

The governor takes stock.

>> Grisham: We showed that we can fund it at this level for every infant.

This is something no state has ever achieved.

And if I sound really -- like I'm leaning in and proud, make no mistake, I am, and I thank -- bipartisan, the legislators, >> Jeff: Also, a veteran investigative reporter, dives into the children, youth and families albatross still hanging from the state's neck.

New Mexico in Focus starts now.

Thanks for joining us this week.

I'm Executive Producer, Jeff Proctor.

Nash Jones, our regular host, has jury duty.

Tonight, you're going to hear a lot from Govenor Michelle Lujan Grisham who just passed the signing day deadline following her final regular legislative session in office.

Nash had a long conversation with the second term Democratic Governor earlier this week.

But don't worry, we'll give you a few chances to catch your breath throughout the three part interview.

A little ways into this evening's program, we'll also take a look at an Executive Order from Lujan Grisham that went into effect just last week.

It bans the Children, Youth and Families Department, or CYFD, from continuing its longtime practice of placing foster kids not in homes with parents, but their own office buildings with caseworkers.

You're looking at some of the damage caused during those office days right now.

The state says the unsafe and inappropriate placements are now a thing of the past.

We'll get the latest from journalist Ed Williams, of Searchlight New Mexico, who's been reporting on the beleaguered agency and the kids caught up and hurt by it, for years.

And at the bottom of the hour, we've got a bit of a palate cleanser for you.

It comes courtesy of Tara Walch, a producer for Colores, the NMPBS Arts and Culture show.

Her story spotlights an innovative solar project meant to help farmers more effectively grow crops, create energy and save precious water, in and along the Rio Grande.

But we begin tonight with part one of Nash's wide-ranging interview with the governor.

>> Nash: Governor, thanks so much for having us in your lovely office here, really appreciate your time.

>> Grisham: Thank you for coming.

>> Nash: You're -- probably you█re biggest win of the Session was a new, permanent Universal Child Care program here in New Mexico.

>> Grisham: It█s my big win in eight years.

>> Nash: Yeah, I mean -- >> Grisham: It█s been a long time coming -- and thank you for recognizing that as the achievement that it is.

>> Nash: No doubt.

And, you know -- there was some back and forth throughout the session, debates, amendments -- there was a call for wealthier families to pay co-pays, a version of that did make it into the final bill.

How do you feel about what lawmakers got to your desk?

>> Grisham: I feel really good.

Look, my preference is still, “you don't need co-pays in a system.” It's not universal then.

It can be better than it is anywhere else for access for working parents and families.

But you create equality in a system, right?

When everyone goes public education, even for its downsides.

And there are some here in New Mexico still, you want it to be available in the same way to everyone.

>> Nash And so it's not -- How does that feel?

>> Grisham: So -- I didn't want it.

But this is consensus is about productive compromise.

So here's what they did.

They said look, “if there's a downturn in the economy,” right?

Where states, including this one have had to make really tough choices, including they cut education in the last administration because we didn't rebound from the 2008 recession, for a long time.

So, if we have an economic downturn, that's got fair measures right.

It can't be a moment.

Can't be one gas price.

It can't have -- oil by the barrel drop to 50 for a month or two.

These are sustained problems over a year.

Then the department can institute co-pays.

>> Nash: Right.

So, there's these triggers -- >> Grisham: There█s triggers, and those triggers are at 600% of poverty.

There's not a state anywhere in America that gets anywhere close to that.

>> Nash: How do the communities across New Mexico meet the new demand for now, free or at least low cost, Child Care?

What is workforce development in this space look like?

>> Grisham: Well, we are at 67% to the good, as compared to the rest of the nation.

And actually, I want people who challenge us.

And so thank you.

[Nash laughs] But for every naysayer that said, on November 1st, “there is no way you can build this system when we have gaps.” Well, 13,000 plus children later, I would tell you we did exactly that.

We did it by investing in a workforce at the same time, by doing the training at the same time, by allowing the certification of home based providers, by not picking one kind of system like public schools, or faith based or private or nonprofit versus private -- >> Nash; Bit of a patchwork.

>>Nash: It's everything.

And I wouldn't say it's a patchwork.

It's a smart design that allows parents to have choices and for providers to have the kinds of things, systems that they're comfortable in running and having available in the community.

So we met the need.

Now, the second part, meeting the need in a much more flexible system, more certified workers, more in a career path, more new buildings for child care.

Because we're learning things, the country is, the state is, about the best way to teach or, support a two year old, in a brand new childcare system.

There's different tools and techniques, and all of that gets built into a brand new structure, which is why we're paying for those structures and low interest loans.

We're building as fast as we're delivering.

I think New Mexico is the model for the rest of the country to follow and I assure you that's happening.

>> Nash: And if that's the case -- let's envision the future, after this is implemented -- New Mexico has, for years been, too often at the bottom of negative lists when it comes to childhood well-being.

What do you envision Universal Child Care to do to all of the various measures that go into that?

>> Grisham: Well, we█re already seeing what it█s done.

I mean, we did pre-K first, and we also then lifted, right?

So we had free child care for a lot of New Mexico families because until November we were at 400% of poverty.

So we're taking children and families out of poverty.

We're number one in the Nation for moving the needle further and faster than any state in America's history.

So we were 50th to your point.

And now we're 21st, right?

It's all of these investments, the number one indicator for child well-being, whether it's going to be good or bad is poverty.

What happens when you're in poverty?

Trauma, stresses, family instability, drug addiction, alcohol addiction, high risk environments.

All of that gets attenuated.

Is it always all gone?

That's an impossible standard.

But we are seeing those outcomes.

>> NAsh: So do you see that starting to trickle forward to our third graders, fifth graders, eighth graders with those different tests?

>> Grisham: Yes, and in fact, we've seen bigger gains in New Mexico than the Mississippi Miracle in terms of what we're seeing in our grade schools in literacy jumps.

Are we there?

No.

And did our middle schoolers get free child care and free pre-K?

[they] didn't.

And did our high schoolers?

They didn't.

So you're going to see gaps that we're working on.

We're not ignoring middle school and high school.

That's why we now have it literacy mandated for everyone, everywhere.

But the things that you must have as a state, you must address poverty.

You must address crime, you must address behavioral health.

We're the only state in America that eliminated behavioral health access for, you know, nearly eight years in the state and then had to deal with Covid.

We got every kind of risk on top of risk than any state has ever had to deal with.

And we've tackled all of it.

And I am feeling better than bullish.

Childcare really is about making sure that working families can stay at work and make the choices that they've always deserved to be able to make.

But I believe unequivocally, to your point, I really want to hit hard because you've been the first person to really get there.

This is going to impact risk in New Mexico and child well-being, and we have waited 100 years to do all of the things all at once.

We can't just do a piece of it.

You have to do all of it, and then you have to sustain it.

And what did this legislature do?

They did it for five years.

It's a five year funding model.

They have to kind of say yes again every year.

But we showed that we can fund it at this level for every infant, 0 to 3 for five years between general fund and the trust fund.

This is something no state has ever achieved.

And if I sound really like I'm leaning in and proud, make no mistake, I am.

And I think bipartisan, the legislators who built this along this eight years.

>> Nash: The Immigrant Safety Act was another really big bill this year.

The counties must end their contracts with ICE, for immigrant detention as soon as practical.

Any word on whether, private prisons, like Coors Civic, for instance, may, contract directly with ICE and continue operating within the state of New Mexico?

>> Grisham: I think with what happened in America and in Minnesota, I think the federal government is going to be careful about what they do.

I can't promise New Mexicans that they won't try to do, you know, private prisons.

We won't run, the state won't contract with the private prison, entity.

We do it ourselves.

We've taken over two private, prisons.

And I think our outcomes, in fact, I can show you the data unequivocally better as they should be, right?

We have a constitutional duty to keep, prisoners and inmates or folks in jail safe and to meet their basic human needs and to provide those services with dignity.

>> Nash: When we spoke to you during the session, you spoke with Gwyneth Doland, you said if this step wasn't enough, you would find other ways to protect New Mexicans.

How will you know if more is needed?

And to your point about what the state actually has the ability to do, federal immigration falls very squarely under the federal government's purview.

So what can you do and when will you know if more is needed?

>> Grisham: So I think the state's in a good spot currently, but will the feds reach in directly?

I assure you they will.

And we're going to be watching.

>> Jeff: Okay.

Time for one of those catch your breath moments I promised at the beginning of the show.

And while you're breathing, a quick update.

After our interview, the governor line item vetoed a few budget provisions, including language that low income families be moved to the front of the line for child care assistance.

Next, we get into a novel strategy she and Democratic lawmakers first used back in 2019 and rolled out again this year to get a bunch of priority bills to her desk in the opening stretch of the 30 day session.

We have a lot of questions, ranging from how the public should feel about the appearance of backroom deals to make it possible, which bills got the speedy treatment, and whether it's a tool the next governor could consider using.

>> Nash: I do want to talk about a little bit about the rocket docket that you had done.

You had three bills passed very, rapidly through the legislature.

We've discussed them at length on this show.

It was, civil commitment law, updates, the road bonds package and interstate medical compacts.

Why were those the items that you wanted to see happen as quickly as they did?

>> Grisham: Well, because they feel like emergencies to me.

Look, our roads are not safe.

People are paying, on average, $1,000 in, car and road maintenance.

And we just had a very lengthy discussion about poverty in the state of New Mexico.

I want this to be the most affordable place with no poverty.

Right we don't want to meet any of those standards.

That should be every governor's goal.

I need these roads fixed, and we need some stability.

Well, otherwise we lose whole industries like the contractors that can't afford to even buy the equipment or even get loans for the equipment unless they know road money is coming.

>> Nash: Now, road money in particular, you got 100, $1.5 billion through, the Transportation Department has said that they've got $7.5 billion grant funded program.

So, how do you prioritize?

How do you meet that need?

>> Grisham: Well, that's done by the, Transportation Commission and by the feds for matching.

So we have a really good robust process I'm really confident about that's transparent.

So you can go online and take a look and see if your road is in there or your interchange.

And so can legislators.

And they get interim reports routinely.

But it isn't enough money.

And I will tell you that the next governor is really going to have to lean in and look at other short and long term financing mechanisms, to make sure that you have sustainable funding for road.

And then we have been debating danger to self for years in the state.

And so that's been something the public's been involved in.

But we've done it in special sessions, we█ve done it in regular sessions and it doesn't, I've got competency addressed but without danger to self, and the real debate is we were debating it in a health care context.

We needed to be debating it in a legal context.

It's a legal definition, right?

For legal capacity.

All right.

It's not about your behavioral health issue is whether or not you meet the legal definition to be able to make a concrete decision for yourself.

And you have to meet a narrow, serious danger to yourself or others, right?

It is not about being unhoused.

>> Nash: What do you say to people who shudder at the idea of involuntarily committing people who haven't been prosecuted for a crime?

>> Grisham: What we're basically saying to people who have serious mental illness is we don't see you.

You can be in an at risk, you can be trafficked, you can be the product of years of self-medication because nobody provided you the service.

And we're going to look away.

It's the cruelest American situation I have ever seen in my life.

And there isn't a family, impacted, including mine.

This is not a treatment scenario for people who are not dangerous to themselves.

And others, and cannot make a decision about treatment themselves, that it took 16 years to pass it because you should take seriously that being committed to any service, program or institution when you don't want to is something that requires serious right evaluation and a judge who is trained with then, mental health professionals who all agree that's the only option.

I think this is the right approach in the right way.

And if it isn't, and I don't believe that it's not, you have a 60 day session to then make, you know, adjustments if you need them.

But we needed to do something and I'm really glad that we did.

>> Nash: And then finally, medical compacts were part of that rocket docket.

>> Grisham: They were, thank goodness too, social workers and docs.

I wish they'd passed many more compacts.

But again, these have been debated for more than just the last couple of sessions, and they've been in the interim.

And I did the rocket docket in 2019.

I took 40 bills that had nearly unanimous support by the legislature.

These bills did, and were debated in the interim multiple times and have been vetoed by the former governor.

That's not a judgment, but they were.

And, it seemed to me that if they had been debated and in a legislative context, litigated over and over and over again, if people still wanted them and they were relevant, why don't you just get them into one committee of referral, since they've been in every committee multiple times, haven't substantially changed, and give a governor a chance to sign up and all the new things, then they don't get bogged down in the committees over and over again, and they never get debated.

>> Nash: As you said, it's been a successful tool for you.

Do you think it's replicable for your successor to use this?

>> Grisham: I hope so, I mean, this, every gubernatorial candidate should be talking to legislators right now about what ought to be on a rocket docket, where it should start, and they should commit to voters right now that they plan in getting five, ten, 50 bills signed in two weeks that show that they're ready to govern, they're ready to lead, and the legislature is ready to support them.

>> Nash: And what should they say to voters who say, well, if it's ready to go in two weeks, that means that most of the work happened behind closed doors, or at least like not within view of the public after the session, gavels in, they were basically ready to go.

>> Grisham: They are I mean, I think that people, given the federal government, have every right to feel anxious about what government is doing or not doing.

We have a really good transparent process with webcasting and inter required interim hearings and all of that and the bills are online for people to see.

I mean, it really is easier in New Mexico now than it is in most legislative, arenas in most other states in America.

Just building consensus doesn't mean that there's something underhanded or not transparent.

And I think we have to maybe with your work, people need to, embrace that a little bit better.

Consensus building is happening all of the time.

It's not just- >> Nash: That's what's not happening in the interim hearings that are on streaming.

>> Grisham: They are happening.

You can go, you can look it up.

You can see what happens.

You can call, you can do an Ipra You don't need an Ipra.

You can call an agency.

You can call your legislator.

They answer their phones.

Their cell phones are online.

If there's an issue that you feel has never been discussed, likely it has.

You can find out about it.

You can call my office.

I really find it to be very transparent.

I would argue that it's so transparent and that every New Mexican can weigh in, that sometimes it creates sort of this burden of influx of information.

That's far better than not having public input at all.

But this rocket docket is a good idea.

It doesn't mean that a brand new idea doesn't get fully vetted in a legislative session.

Those are going to get three committee referrals.

Those are going to be debated, and likely they don't quite get over the finish line.

>> Jeff: Many thanks to Governor Lujan Grisham for the post session deep dive, which has become a bit of an annual tradition for us during her tenure.

Stick around for part three of our interview when we'll look ahead to her final months in office.

But for now, let's shift gears.

You may have seen the governor announced last week that her administration had finally ended the longstanding catastrophic practice of housing foster children in office buildings.

Searchlight, New Mexico Investigative journalist Ed Williams first shed light on these so-called office stays and their devastating consequences a few years back, and he stayed on the story ever since, never taking his eye off how the state Children, Youth and Families Department has continued to fail the vulnerable kids in its care.

We asked him to come in this week to take stock of the governor's announcement.

The state of the long troubled CYFD and what New Mexicans should look for going forward.

>> Nash: Ed thanks so much for joining us.

>> Williams: Thanks for having me.

>> Nash: For folks who haven't been following this story, they may be shocked to hear that foster kids have been living in offices.

Can you just paint a picture of what that looks like?

>> Williams: Yeah you know, over the years, it's a problem that's gotten worse and worse, really, starting with the, closure of all the residential treatment centers in New Mexico in the early years of Lujan Grisham term.

What's been happening?

Increasingly, until this executive order, is that, you know, there's a group of kids, mostly teenagers, who just have needs that are too high for traditional foster homes.

And so there's a shortage of foster homes, there's a shortage of appropriate placements.

And, you know, the kids will be placed in a shelter somewhere, run away, and then eventually they run out of places to put them so they go to the office, right?

And in some cases, just, you know, sleep on a cot in the floor in the office for, you know, on and off or for an extended period of time for, you know, a good part of their teenage lives.

There's also a group of kids, who have medical conditions, you know, kids who might be in wheelchairs, on feeding tubes, things that foster home can't handle.

Given the resource shortage, we have those kids we're also living in the office -- >> Nash: A particular population of kids, some of whom are medically fragile.

>> Williams: Right?

Right.

And these are I mean -- what they call hard to place youth, right?

These are kids that aren't like the babies that have an easier time finding a traditional foster home.

Kids with, you know, high needs, serious trauma related issues that just, you know, they need more care than the foster system has been equipped to give them.

There's nowhere else to put them.

They end up in the office.

And so that was happening, more and more and more, and, you know, recently, the situation kind of changed, >> Nash: Right so as you're saying it, this was a years long crisis, really.

And then in January, the governor, issued an executive order that started a 40 day countdown clock to end this practice for good.

Did Lujan Grisham provide any kind of resources or support to CYFD to get that transition done?

>> Williams: No and that's been one of the big criticisms of this executive order, right?

Like ever since, the Kevin S, settlement, which was, big, you know, legal agreement that was, entered into, like six years ago.

The state has been, you know, under an order to stop putting kids in office and, you know, develop a system of mental health care and a foster system that can handle them.

That's never happened.

So all the -- >> Nash: There's a court order that they never then complied with?

>> Williams: That's right.

I mean, it was a settlement agreement coming from a class action lawsuit that found that, you know, the state of New Mexico is locking, its foster children into a cycle of trauma and destruction, basically by, not having appropriate placements for them.

And so they were supposed to end, not just offices, but congregate care stays, you know, entirely under that order.

It never happened.

And, you know, so to just kind of wave a magic wand, the critics say, and say, no more offices.

Well, the problem is, there's no supports to make that happen.

So it's a dangerous situation for kids who, you know, the office, certainly everyone agree is wasn't a good or safe place.

And we can get into some of the, you know, scary things that have happened there.

But, you know, where else are you going to put them?

And the executive order.

No, it didn't have any, supports like that.

>> Nash: Well, despite that, according to the governor, not only did they meet that March 1st deadline, they got it done early and met it by February 12th.

What do we know about how they got it done with with no additional supports when they haven't gotten it done for six years?

>> Williams: I mean, very little CYFD hasn't given much clarity on exactly how they made that happen.

I mean, they've said that we've put these kids in safe placements.

But, you know, we know that those safe placements, just don't exist to the level that they need to.

Right?

So maybe you've found a temporary situation in a foster home or a shelter, where you can have a kid leave for a little while.

But remember that these are kids who have, you know, you know, serious mental health needs, for the most part, right?

That, like, they're not getting psychiatric services in shelters.

Unless it's a treatment foster home.

They're not getting those kinds of surfaces, services in a foster care family.

So inevitably, the cycle has been over the years that the kids reach some sort of crisis, whether it's running away or a suicide attempt or a violent outburst, and then they're out of that placement.

So we don't know exactly where, you know, where they put them.

They did give some answers to that.

>> Nash: Yeah.

The, acting secretary, Valerie Sandoval, thanked the quote, “many partners who have stepped up to help place children in safe and appropriate settings.

So -- if they're partner organizations, do we know if these are state partners?

Are they public entities or are they private companies?

>> Williams: Yeah, again -- it's kind of a vague, shout out to someone.

We're not clear what exactly they're talking about, but they could be talking about shelters, you know, youth homeless shelters, treatment, foster care organizations.

These are non-profits that run kind of a higher level foster care, you know, Presbyterian Health Services, who runs the Medicaid, and we we don't exactly know, they did say, to, Esteban Candelaria, a reporter at the New Mexican, that they'd put the majority of these kids, I think ten of them into foster homes.

Six of them, if I'm remembering the numbers correctly, into, shelters or congregate care settings, and, you know, some kind of -- in a smattering of other placements.

Several have been put in the hospital.

We mentioned the, the medically fragile kids that were in the office.

And I know at least one and I think more, were put directly into a hospital bed.

After the office closed, because there was just nowhere else to put them.

>> Nash: Looking at this patchwork.

And it's pretty vague what makes it up?

But is there a concern about oversight that CYFD is able to oversee these different sites if they are partner organizations, hospitals, the smattering of other places that you're talking about?

>> Williams: Well, I mean, there's been, you know, a really significant staffing shortage at CYFD.

You know, the turnover rate is, really astronomical.

I mean, Bernalillo County had like 100% turnover rate of protective services workers, on a recent, evaluation schedule there in terms of oversight, like are the CYFD able to make sure these kids are safe.

I mean, we, you know, they're they're placement worker.

They're they're social workers.

Should be visiting them.

And making sure that their needs are met.

But remember, these workers have incredible caseloads.

More kids than any one person can reasonably be expected to handle.

So I think the the realistic answer is no.

There's not enough employees at CYFD to give the kind of oversight that really, is needed.

>> Nash: So is that is it an assumption then, that these, these new placements are necessarily safer than the offices that these kids were living in?

And is there a way to actually determine that, or is it just you know, offices are clearly an inappropriate, unsafe environment for a kid to be living in.

So of course this is better.

>> Williams: I think -- I mean it█s going to going to depend on the on the place they were sent to, you know, the the governor's executive order did say they have to be in safe placements, right?

But the problem is, is like, okay, we have a number of kids in residential treatment centers that were from the office.

These are placements that were shut down by the state.

And, you know, the Kevin S lawsuit specifically singled out as dangerous for children, right?

There's been so many cases of abuse and mental health trauma that occurs in these, you know, congregate care settings that I don't know how you can make the argument that now they're suddenly safe.

And of course, we don't have but, you know, a very, very few number in New Mexico anymore.

So, you know, these kids could be going out of state, congregate care RTC█s where their caseworker is probably not visiting them because they could be in Texas or, you know, who knows where else.

>> Nash: It sounds like this is not a long term solution.

How sustainable is it?

>> Nash: It's certainly not a long term solution.

I mean, like I mentioned, the the pattern of these kids, kind of escalating in these inappropriate placements and then blowing out of them, we we can't expect that to just disappear because there is an executive order.

So, you know, the question is, what's going to happen when they do and when these current placements are no longer viable for them?

Or are they going to be on the street?

Are they going to be, you know, in a situation they could be exposed to human trafficking?

It is not, secure, long term solution.

And, you know, I on the backdrop here is that the state has, year after year, failed to provide the kind of infrastructure it needs to make those, placements stable.

Like we don't have a single, mobile crisis unit, you know, a stepped down facility, all these things that, most other states might have to make sure that when a kid does get into a serious mental health situation in a foster care setting, that that can be addressed, right?

Without sending them to a hospital.

>> Nash: They don't just lose the the placement that they're in.

>> Williams: Exactly.

And so, you know, the concern is that these kids are going to be bouncing again right from these placements.

And now they don't have the office to fall back to.

And, you know, there is certainly a lot of concern about the safety of those kids when they do, inevitably kind of bounce out of these temporary.

>> Nash: You've mentioned the Kevin S settlement, and that the state has been under an order to end office stays for six years now and haven't gotten it done.

So if that's the case, then what's to keep CYFD from violating this executive order?

>> Williams: Well, there's nothing in the order that specifically lays out any consequences for that.

>> Nash: And no accountability mechanism >> Williams: An office stay would be, you know, would not be a legal stay.

You could argue that that's been the case since the Kevin S agreement was, was, you know, signed in the first place.

But, you know, and they have in created a new kind of receiving center, they call it as, in Las Cruces, which is basically an office.

It's not it's not an actual office, but it's being used the same way, right?

As a short term housing opportunity for kids with nowhere else to go.

So.

>> Nash: So they're making, options available that aren't technically offices, but sort of that same, like, catching any case, >> Williams: Yeah I guess.

I mean the difference that I see if it's a receiving center is just it doesn't have, you know, CYFD employees in a cubicle in the same building.

But like, you know, other than that, the licensing standards, I'm not sure what they would be for that, setting, but, it seems to be a very similar process.

Now they are making, new progress, I think, to try to address these things, you know, but it's it's a monumental task.

Obviously, the state's been trying for, for, you know, over half a decade to get it done and it hasn't been able to.

>> Nash: Well and speaking of Kevin S just last week, as we were talking about this interview, a new remedial order came down.

What can you tell us about what that includes?

>> Williams: That was, a remedial order basically addressing some of these shortfalls that we've just been talking about.

Right.

Like the state hasn't moved forward on key, targeted outcomes for, the Kevin S agreement.

And so some of the things that they talked about, one of the notable ones was treatment, foster care.

And we said earlier that this is the kind of like enhanced foster care, right, that is supposed to deal with kids who have greater mental health needs.

There has been, a huge, denial rate for referrals to treatment, foster care organizations raised recently, you know, over 80, 85%.

>> Nash: What's driving that?

>> Williams: Well, the the directors of the treatment, foster care organizations say that the referrals we're getting these kids are not, you know, appropriate for this kind of care.

They need a higher level of care.

They need, you know, in some cases, a congregate care setting, which is, of course, the kind of setting that we're trying to, to put a stop to >> Nash: The agreement.

It said that congregate care like, a homeless shelter, for instance, isn't an appropriate placement either.

>> Williams: Right.

That's true.

And so but, you know, from the perspective of the treatment, foster care, like clinical staff and directors, right?

They're getting a referral and seeing, you know, maybe this kid has a criminal history.

Maybe they've destroyed property, in a CYFD office.

And that's something that's happened really, you know, frequently.

Right.

And the fear is that we cannot this is not clinically appropriate for us to put into a foster family home, even if there's more services available, because it's not safe for the foster family.

It's not safe for the kid.

>> Nash: Is there anything about the remedial plan that gives you hope?

>> Williams: Well, so one of the things they do is, direct a lot more analysis of that referral process and why they're getting, denied to treatment, foster care.

And there's other things in that, order as well.

But, the hope being that we can identify some of those kind of barriers.

Right.

And then, provide the services that we need to make those, placements work better.

I know, you know, talking to the Kevin S plaintiffs, that, they are more optimistic now than I've heard them be, in a long time about the outcome.

You know, of this remedial order and the potential for things to actually get better at this point.

And so that's been a, a change because it's been kind of, you know, huge frustration for the people involved in that settlement that we've been, you know, just nothing changes, you know?

And so, CYFD does have some new people, including, the CLO there that got, another, child welfare agency out of a renewal order or out of a settlement agreement in another state.

So they're they're people on the team at CYFD, that, people have faith in that could actually move the needle this time.

>> Nash: Now we are reaching the end of governor.

Lujan Grisham█s term, it took her, as seven out of the eight years of her terms to get this, done in terms of the office stays ending.

Will the prohibition stick?

Does it have enough time to stick before we get a new governor in office in January.

>> Williams: That's a great question.

I mean, I guess it all depends on whether or not they're able to make these kind of ad hoc, you know, emergency placements, work in the long term.

I'm skeptical that they will.

And, you know, that, again, is the great concern what happens when these kids run away or they just feel that they're not getting the care that they need or, you know, is the state equipped to handle that emergency when it inevitably arrives?

And I don't at this point, I think the answer is no.

But if they're able to really, you know, hustle and get some services available to these kids, maybe the office closure can be, you know, a positive step that lasts.

>> Nash: I mean, you spoke in this a little bit in terms of, one option would be that kids run away.

They're they're no longer in the system.

But if they if this order gets changed, it doesn't stick.

The next governor has different ideas about how to comply or not comply with Kevin S. Where does that leave the kids that are in?

CYFD care?

>> Williams: I really think that's an open question at this point.

I mean, I think there's a lot of people that would probably welcome, a new set of leadership and, just kind of a hard reset.

And probably a lot of people that say, well, now we're making progress.

So, you know, changing track, now might be destructive.

We really haven't heard this, come up that much on the campaign trail so far.

So I'm going to be really interested to see what ideas the candidates have.

You know, come November and what that might mean for kids.

>> Nash: Ed Williams, thanks so much.

>> Williams: Thanks, Nash.

>> Jeff: Thanks so much to Ed Williams for his years of work investigating and documenting the failures at CYFD, and for coming in to share some of his insights with us.

Much of what we know We know because of Ed's diligent reporting.

Now, let's return to the final stretch of Nash's interview with Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham.

They finish up by discussing one of her biggest successes from the session changes to the state's medical malpractice laws and perhaps her biggest failure, another defeat for cementing her climate goals into law.

And though this isn't an exit interview for a governor with nine months left in her term, we did look a bit at the tail end of her To-Do list.

Here's that last bit with the governor.

>> Nash: We were just talking about compacts.

A lot of Republicans were arguing early on in the session.

Those compacts don't matter much without medical malpractice reform.

This was, yet again, something that you had been calling for for years.

You got a version of it done this year.

A significant part of the call behind medical malpractice reform was these high insurance premiums that doctors were facing.

What guarantees do we have that with this now, the law of the land that we'll start to see those premiums go down for providers?

>> Grisham: Well, I would love to tell you that every bill I sign, I guarantee, is going to have the impact that we believe it's going to have.

If I could do that, we've never need another legislative session.

Everything is just fine.

You need multiple sessions.

But here's what gives me great confidence.

We were such an outlier in occurrences, in punitive damages, and unlimited liability, in the lowest level burden of proof to bring punitive damages, that there was no review panel, that it became a strategy for the highest possible settlement, had very little to do with proving out whether or not you had a legitimate malpractice claim, which meant then nobody would sell insurance here and there payouts were so high that we were such an outlier that those premiums, because that's how insurance companies can guarantee they can pay it out.

They charge you more.

You█re paying for it.

>> Nash: So are they are they going to lower things?

I mean, I don't think insurance companies are necessarily renowned for, lowering the prices of things.

>> Grisham: Well, but the difference now is we're not an outlier.

So more companies will sell, we're more competitive.

And if they don't now you've got a bad faith insurance environment that gives you a different set of legal tools.

And more importantly, if you have more physicians and more health care practitioners in the state who are all collectively buying insurance, that changes the marketplace, it's going to be driven by the private sector, but it's not impossible that the next governor is going to have to say, here's what will happen if you won't sell insurance in the same way you do in Colorado and in Arizona and in Nevada and in Texas and in Oklahoma and in Louisiana and in New York and in California.

I'll sue you.

And that's what's going to happen.

>> Nash: So there's there may be more steps >> Grisham: and hospitals will do it and the MCOs will do it.

So I'm pretty bullish.

I'd like it to happen tomorrow.

We'll have to wait and see about how long, but I'm feeling as good as you can.

And the most important thing about what we've done is that physicians didn't want to practice here, wouldn't come and wouldn't stay.

That climate changes rapidly, in my opinion, because of this law.

>> Nash: And now it wasn't all wins.

You had some big wins this session, but it wasn't all wins.

Lets just do wins, Come on.

>> Nash: I got to, switch to some of your losses, including the Clear Horizon Act.

That was a biggie.

That was meant to solidify in law your climate goals that you have, that you set out early on in your tenure, as part of executive order?

That didn't happen.

So how do you feel potentially leaving office with those goals still simply being, executive orders that are really at the whim of the next governor?

>> Grisham: Yeah, well, I'm feeling, as good as you can.

I mean, I want to do a couple things, but I was really interested.

So I want to really highlight the courage of the pro tem.

I had a bill ready to go.

That's just the codification.

I mean, what she did in this bill that was really good, that I don't think enough people know about, is if you're below 10,000 metric tons of carbon in a year, you're exempt.

It is harder for smaller businesses.

This is not to tell New Mexicans that we don't care about those emissions.

We care.

But she created an onramp, if you will, for those smaller industries that may not have the same tools available to move beyond that as quickly as everybody else.

And the big actors is where we want the biggest reduction.

That's why we focused on oil and gas and utility sector with both our methane rules and oil and gas and ozone precursors and the utility sectors first.

I don't want them investing in dirty energy, right, we focused in a place that would give you the biggest benefits.

She really had a smart design.

I think we'll see what we need in the 60 day session.

>> Nash: All right.

Public safety.

You had a signature gun control bill fail.

That was, Senate Bill 17.

You have prioritized public safety, crime fighting more broadly, throughout your entire tenure as governor.

And I wonder if you see this as, I do, that it has become a real sticking point within the Democratic Party.

>> Grisham: Yes.

>> Nash: In New Mexico and maybe more broadly, but how would you like to see Democrats proceed?

>> Grisham: I think they have to own that we have a public safety problem in New Mexico.

Here's the problem I think with the Democratic Party in general, is that we are the party of and I'm proud of that.

That's why I'm a proud, one of the multitude of reasons we tell the truth, we're evidence based, we believe in science.

There is real work behind doing exactly how you started this interview.

There is evidence about reducing risk, reduce poverty.

People need jobs.

They need a fair chance.

You have to reduce risks.

You have to have real behavioral health services.

All the things that we know make a difference, that those in a vacuum will never be enough.

Just like if you tried to arrest every person for everything, we're going to arrest everyone who by accident, drops a gum wrapper.

This is not going to make any of us safer.

This makes no sense whatsoever.

You have to do both.

You need real accountability.

You need real measures for safety.

And you have to keep leaning in to root causes of crime.

And what I end up with by the Democratic Party around the country and here is you pick one or maybe the other, >> Nash: And it's the root causes that they're picking?

>> Grisham: They're picking root causes.

But we have done a mountain of work that they should be really proud of.

You should be doing the same thing on the public safety side.

>> Nash: You think that will resonate in the midterms?

>> Grisham: I believe that it does.

I think, I am not the DNC and it's not I can't predict to you how Americans or libertarians and independents and all, folks who are not registered Democrats are feeling about a number of these issues.

But unless you feel safe in your community, businesses aren't going to keep coming.

People will move out of their neighborhoods.

We're not going to be able to redevelop.

We're going to continue to have real risks.

You have to reconcile it is never one or the other a robust, holistic way to lean into democratic values is to show that the investment in our values will make a difference short term and long term.

But accountability should not be partisan issues.

Those are common sense solutions that are required always, and you should be right sizing it all of the time.

That's my message to New Mexico Democrats.

>> Nash: By the time this airs, your last regular legislative session will have been officially behind you.

You've signed what you're going to sign, and you're leaving office at the end of the year.

So, what else as the executive, regardless of what the lawmakers will do in partnership with you, what do you want to get done for the rest of the year?

>> Grisham: Well, I want New Mexicans to know that I've got a robust set of priorities between now and, just over nine months.

I need to do my math.

One, I want all of the things that we need to finish building, like the Literacy Institute.

I want to walk through those doors.

I want to do another stunning increase this summer.

So let's beat 17,000 kids in structured literacy tutoring.

Let's add I'm going to go big, another 10,000 students and let's have another double digit literacy increase.

And let's see it take hold in mid schools, let's announce again a stunning increase in graduation rates.

And not just be where everybody else is at 80%.

Let's get to 87, or maybe even 90% showing that we can get huge things done in just nine months.

Let's get more kiddos into the reading at grade level in mid schools.

Let's have more of our, challenge classes for mid school boys and girls who are typically our high dropout rates.

Let's show child well-being in the context of CYFD.

We've had a stunning positive record in KERA.

Let's not have one slip up, that's a hard thing to say that we'll do.

It won't be, for lack of trying that means my entire the whole of government is going to keep leaning in into those issues in CYFD.

Let's get more high performing hospitals into that high performing range between now and the end of nine months.

Let's make sure that competency and danger to self are beginning to show real improvements.

And last but not least, let's move people in to affordable houses statewide, we can build far more than 10,000 homes in a year.

Let's make sure that we get to closer to 25,000.

That's a really heavy lift.

But if you don't set remarkable goals, nobody will do them for you.

You have to set that up and create that kind of competitive spirit.

And that can do attitude for New Mexicans statewide.

And that's exactly what I intend on doing.

>> Nash: Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham, thank you.

>> Grisham: You're welcome.

>> Jeff: Thanks one more time to the governor for speaking with us.

This likely won't be our last interview with her, but it will be the last time we talk after our regular legislative session.

Remember, at the top of the hour when I promised you something a little brighter, a little less heavy for the end of the show well you've made it.

And we're delighted to bring you this piece from Tara Walch.

She produces for Colores the Arts and Culture Show here at NM PBS, and this will air on that show over the weekend too.

Tara pays a visit to engineer Kenneth Armijo, who built a system that converts sunlight directly into electricity, all while providing shade for crops and at the same time decreasing evaporation to conserve water and the Rio Grande.

[Spanish guitar] >> Armijo: I grew up with a lot of stories.

A lot of dichos -- about the land and about our family.

They taught me about farming and about being able to be creative during difficult times of hail, droughts, of blight.

They never called it engineering, but they called it creativity.

[Spanish guitar] >> Armijo: They figured out how to engineer their way out of different challenges.

[Birds singing] >> Armijo: What do you know of Grandpa Clemente?

>> Armijo, Sr: Irrigated from this whole ditch here.

This was the old Sabinal ditch.

So when I first moved over here, there were pear trees, like the one that's kind of buried in there.

Not only did he raise cattle, but he also grew crops.

And he had this land here for several years.

And he grew crops that were meant for his family to survive on.

Back in the 1930s, the conservancy district had just been formed, so a lot of the waters were to spreading all over.

This was the main canal, so there was a lot of water.

>> Armijo: What I've noticed over the years growing up on this farm is that things have become drier, things have become hotter, and the thing that has been motivating to me is being able to come up with technologies and new ways of doing things in the farming practice to do more with the little water that we have.

[leaves rusting] >> Armijo: My family's been farming for over -- spanning over three centuries, and we've grown a lot of chili peppers, grown a lot of alfalfa.

But recently, in the last 30 years, we've been growing a lot of berries.

We started with grapes, and then we moved on to blackberries.

In the blackberry field that we have -- right on the very first row of blackberries on that very first trellis.

It's near some trees.

One of the trees is from my great grandfather, and it casts a lot of shade.

We noticed when we were growing the blackberries -- season after season.

All the blackberries that grew under the shade of that tree.

The plants produce better quality blackberries than the ones that were in full sun, not under that shade.

And so just looking at those poles -- those trellis poles, I guess I got to thinking -- could we use existing infrastructure to provide shade, and could we do something more from that shade than just helping to reduce sun scorch?

Why don't we put something that produces electricity?

Why not something that produces power?

[Spanish guitar] >> Armijo: There's so much solar energy on Earth -- so much.

[Spanish guitar continues] >> Armijo: In order to understand the impacts of shade from solar PV on crop growth, we needed to collaborate with other farmers.

[Spanish guitar continues] >> Armijo: Solar energy can help our farms to produce electricity, but also using solar panels that are required to make the electricity to help with shading.

Shading of crops.

One of the challenges with higher temperatures right now is the fact that we as farmers are dealing with sun scorch and blossomed.

Where when the buds get a little bit too hot, they start to wither and fall off, and that little bud -- is what eventually turns into a fruit or vegetable.

If it doesn't get too hot.

Solar panels are very interesting because they actually cast shade.

And so if you put solar panels over -- different types of crops, like berries, you can create shade so the buds don't get too hot and get sun scorched.

[Spanish guitar continues] >> Armijo: We are leveraging the Medanales agrivoltaic system in a general way to understand farming practices and adoption.

Medanales has a system that helps a single farmer.

If you multiply that system across multiple farms and ranches, there is so much potential in not just the sheer electricity produced that can help the surrounding community, but also in fostering new ways that the farmer and the rancher can use the electricity to provide more value added products to improve their own businesses.

They could provide power for our irrigation pumps.

Solar energy will provide power for electrified tractors that need to do skiing and plowing, and cultivating electricity can also run fans in a hoop house and our greenhouses, and in the winter time, it provides electricity for the heaters in those greenhouses.

[Spanish guitar continues] >> Armijo: Community based solar has become a hot topic for many people, especially farmers and ranchers.

The idea that you don't have to rely on electricity from a grid that can be unstable is huge for so many of them.

[Upbeat festive music] >> Armijo: The Rio Grande Community Farm is a partner organization that works with us on this project, where they provide the land and the farmers to -- allow our system to be deployed and proven at a very high maturity level.

And the tomatoes under the solar panels, we're getting like a third, two thirds higher yield because we have optimized the shade.

And it's not just taking my word for it, the data speaks for itself.

The weight measurements we have of the tomatoes that we've been doing throughout the whole process, and this is what's awesome about those farmers at the Rio Grande Community Farm they█ve been diligent about weighing all the produce, our photosynthesis sensors and the evaporation sensors have been showing us how the plant health has been doing.

[Upbeat festive music continues] >> Armijo: And we can raise and lower those panels up and down and it adjusts the level of shade.

Some plants need more sunlight at the beginning of the season versus during the middle and the end.

Right now we are producing about 12 to 14 kW of power.

An average home in New Mexico uses about 11kW.

So we're producing much more than that from this -- just this small agrivoltaic microgrid test bed that we have up there.

[upbeat guitar] >> Armijo: As climates and crop shift, we need to be flexible as farmers, we also need to be flexible in our creative ways of dealing with the challenges that are to come.

My grandfather once told me that I'm a 11th generation New Mexican, and he used to tell me stories about the Rio Grande.

About how the Rio Grande has changed, how it's had to be resilient over the different political winds, over the different environmental changes, so many different things, and how farmers have had to be resilient with the Rio Grande and all of its changes.

What this whole technology and this development has meant to me, is basically myself being able to put my imprint, my chapter in this long legacy of generational farming in New Mexico, and being able to make other farmers of my generation more resilient in their farming practices and in their lifestyle.

>> Jeff: Thanks to Tara Walch for sharing Kenneth Armijo█s story with us.

Thanks to the governor for her time, and to Ed Williams for his dogged reporting on CYFD.

Tune in next week for more news and analysis from around the state, for New Mexico PBS, I'm Jeff Proctor.

>> Funding for New Mexico in Focus is provided by: Viewers Like You