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

>> LOU: THIS WEEK ON NEW MEXICO IN FOCUS, A QUESTION MARK HANGS OVER NEXT MONTH'S SPECIAL SESSION.

OUR ROUNDTABLE EXPLORES THE DEEPER QUESTIONS AROUND WHAT THE GOVERNOR CALLS PUBLIC SAFETY LEGISLATION, AND CONSIDERS WHETHER ANY OF IT WILL PASS.

>> BAKER: THESE THINGS WE LEAD THE NATION IN.

THESE THINGS ARE UNTENABLE.

WHATEVER WE CAN DO TO MOVE TOWARDS A SAFER NEW MEXICO, SINCE WE BELIEVE IT CAN'T WAIT.

>> LOU: AND, UNITED AGAINST URANIUM WASTE.

A GROUP OF STUDENTS FROM THOREAU HIGH SCHOOL SPEAKS OUT AGAINST FEDERAL PLANS TO STORE TOXIC WASTE IN THEIR HOMETOWN.

NEW MEXICO IN FOCUS STARTS NOW.

THANKS FOR JOINING US THIS WEEK, I'M SENIOR PRODUCER LOU DIVIZIO.

A GROUP OF VOCAL HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS IS PUSHING BACK AGAINST THE GOVERNMENT'S PLAN TO MOVE URANIUM WASTE TO THE RED ROCKS DISPOSAL FACILITY IN THEIR HOMETOWN OF THOREAU, NEW MEXICO.

IN THE SECOND HALF OF TODAY'S SHOW, OUR LAND'S LAURA PASKUS SPEAKS WITH THREE OF THOSE STUDENTS ABOUT THEIR EFFORTS.

NOW, WE'RE JUST A FEW WEEKS OUT FROM A SPECIAL LEGISLATIVE SESSION TO ADDRESS CRIME AND PUBLIC SAFETY.

I SPOKE WITH THE GOVERNOR AFTER SHE MADE THE ANNOUNCEMENT THIS SPRING.

DURING THAT INTERVIEW SHE GAVE ME SOME INSIGHT ON HER PRIORITIES.

BUT IN THE MONTHS SINCE, THE AGENDA FOR THE SESSION HAS BEEN ALL OVER THE PLACE.

PLANS FOR AN ASSISTED OUTPATIENT TREATMENT BILL APPEAR TO HAVE BEEN SCRAPPED THIS WEEK AND THE GOALPOSTS CONTINUE TO MOVE WHEN STATE GOVERNMENT CONSIDERS HOW IT CAN MAKE NEW MEXICANS SAFER.

LATER IN TODAY'S SHOW, I ASK A SPECIAL ROUNDTABLE TO CONSIDER WHAT THE GOVERNOR IS ACTUALLY TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH STARTING JULY 18TH.

BUT FIRST, EXECUTIVE PRODUCER JEFF PROCTOR SITS DOWN FOR A VIRTUAL CONVERSATION WITH LUJAN GRISHAM'S SENIOR PUBLIC SAFETY ADVISOR BENJAMIN BAKER.

WE WANTED TO NAIL DOWN SOME OF THE DETAILS, THE BILLS WE EXPECT FOR THE SPECIAL, AND THE SPECIFIC PROBLEMS THEY'RE MEANT TO ADDRESS.

HERE'S JEFF.

>> JEFF: BEN BAKER, THANK YOU FOR JOINING ME ON NEW MEXICO IN FOCUS.

>> BAKER: ABSOLUTELY MY PLEASURE.

THANK YOU FOR HAVING ME, AND THANK YOU TO YOUR VIEWING AUDIENCE FOR LETTING US USE THIS PLATFORM TO CONNECT WITH NEW MEXICO.

>> JEFF: ABSOLUTELY.

I WANT TO GET ONE THING OUT OF THE WAY FIRST.

IT IS MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THE PROPOSAL TO MANDATE ALL JUDICIAL DISTRICTS IN NEW MEXICO TO ESTABLISH ASSISTED OUTPATIENT TREATMENT PROGRAMS HAS BEEN PULLED.

IS THAT RIGHT?

IS THAT BILL STILL ALIVE?

>> BAKER: WE'LL BE PRESENTING TO THE COURTS AND CORRECTIONS AND JUSTICE INTERIM COMMITTEE LITERALLY IN AN HOUR FROM NOW.

AND MY PARTNER CHIEF COUNSEL HOLLY AGAJANIAN WILL BE BRIEFING COURTS AND CORRECTIONS ON THE EXACT NATURE OF WHAT WE INTEND TO PURSUE.

I THINK WHAT YOU WILL SEE IS SOMETHING DIFFERENT THAN PERHAPS WHAT YOU HAD BEEN HEARING ABOUT BEFORE.

>> JEFF: OKAY.

GOTCHA.

WE'LL LOOK FORWARD TO THAT MEETING THEN.

LET'S STAY ON THE BEHAVIORAL HEALTH LANE FOR JUST A MOMENT.

CAN YOU TELL ME BRIEFLY WHAT'S IN THE CIVIL COMMITMENT BILL, AND WHAT SPECIFICALLY, WHAT SPECIFIC PROBLEM YOU ALL ARE TRYING TO SOLVE WITH THAT?

>> BAKER: SURE.

I THINK THAT'S AN EXCELLENT QUESTION.

AND ONE OF THE THINGS I WANT TO PREFACE ALL OF MY DISCUSSION TODAY, WE'RE OF THE BELIEF THAT PUBLIC SAFETY CAN'T WAIT.

WE FEEL AS THOUGH THERE ARE A NUMBER OF PRESSURES THAT ARE CURRENTLY ESCALATING IN NEW MEXICO THAT CONTRIBUTE TO A PLACE THAT REDUCES THE PUBLIC SAFETY FOR ALL NEW MEXICANS.

SO, ALL OF THESE THINGS I WANT AS WE DISCUSS TODAY, I WANT US TO THINK ABOUT IS NOT BEING SILOED IN INDIVIDUAL CATEGORIES BUT BEING AS PART OF A LARGER PROCESS, AND PART OF THINGS THAT MUST WORK TOGETHER IN ORDER TO BE EFFECTIVE.

SO, WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT CIVIL COMMITMENT, AND I HAVE SOME NOTES HERE AND I HAVE SOME THINGS THAT I THINK WILL BE HELPFUL TO THE VIEWING PUBLIC AND YOU RELATED TO HOW WE UNDERSTAND WHAT THIS IS.

WHAT THE GOAL OF ANY OF THESE THINGS RELATED TO COMPETENCY OR COMMITMENT IS TO CREATE AN ENVIRONMENT WHERE PERSONS WHO ARE IN NEED OF SERVICES, WHETHER THEY BE SIGNIFICANT MENTAL HEALTH RESOURCES, WHETHER THEY BE SUBSTANCE ABUSE ADDICTION RESOURCES, WHETHER THAT INTERSECTION WAS FUELED AND STARTED BY AN INTERSECTION BETWEEN CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM AND LAW ENFORCEMENT AND A CITIZEN IN NEW MEXICO OR OTHERWISE, THE GOAL IS TO CONNECT NEW MEXICANS WITH SERVICES.

WE DO NOT BELIEVE THAT WE HAVE A SHORTAGE OF SERVICES TO OFFER NEW MEXICANS.

WHAT WE STRUGGLE IS THE ABILITY TO CONNECT NEW MEXICANS WHO ARE OTHERWISE HAVING TROUBLE MAKING THE INFERENCE AND DETERMINATION THAT THEY'RE ABSOLUTELY IN NEED OF THESE SERVICES.

AND THAT SHOWS ITSELF IN MANY WAYS IN THE COMMUNITY.

AND A LOT OF THOSE WAYS IS WITH INTERSECTIONS WITH THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM.

SO, THE GOAL IS TO CREATE AN OPPORTUNITY FOR THE COURTS, IN A FAIR AND REPRESENTED WAY, GET FOLKS TO SERVICES WHEN THEY'RE NOT ABLE TO MAKE THAT DETERMINATION ON THEIR OWN.

>> JEFF: OKAY, IS THE ADMINISTRATION CONFIDENT AT THIS POINT THAT THE STATE HAS DUG OUT OF THE MASSIVE HOLE LEFT BY THE PREVIOUS GUBERNATORIAL ADMINISTRATION IN TERMS OF THE INFRASTRUCTURE AND OVERALL BEHAVIOR HEALTH SAFETY NET?

ARE WE BACK REALLY COOKING ON THAT FRONT YET?

>> BAKER: THAT'S RIGHT.

AND I'M ALSO EXCITED TO INTRODUCE THAT OUR FORMER HHS SECRETARY AND CURRENT SECRETARY KARI ARMIJO WILL BE PRESENTING TOMORROW TO COURTS AND CORRECTIONS AND IS GOING TO DISCUSS WITH PRECISE DETAIL THE EXACT DIG-OUT YOU'RE DESCRIBING.

AND YES, THE ANSWER IS WE HAVE RECOVERED SIGNIFICANTLY.

WE HAVE INCREASED SERVICES UPWARDS OF 70% ACROSS NEW MEXICO.

SHE HAS CHARTS AND GRAPHICS THAT WILL BREAK OUT THE EXACT AMOUNT OF SERVICES THAT EXISTED BEFORE AND THAT EXIST TODAY.

SO, WE'VE MADE TREMENDOUS PROGRESS IN THAT SPACE AND WE'RE VERY, VERY EXCITED ABOUT WHAT THAT MEANS FOR OUR FUTURE.

>> JEFF: ANY CONCERNS FROM THE ADMINISTRATION THAT BY MANDATING, BY FORCING PEOPLE TO GET TREATMENT, THAT YOU ARE REDUCING OPTIONS FOR FOLKS WHO ARE LOOKING FOR TREATMENT VOLUNTARILY ON THEIR OWN?

>> BAKER: I THINK THAT'S GREAT QUESTION, JEFF.

I WANT TO ANSWER IT BY THIS, WHILE I'M NOT A SUBJECT MATTER EXPERT ON THAT TOPIC AND SECRETARY ARMIJO IS GOING TO COVER THAT TOPIC WITH PRECESSION AS WELL, ONE OF THE THINGS I CAN SAY CONFIDENTLY IS THAT WE HAVE THE DATA THAT REFLECTS THAT VOLUNTARY SERVICES ARE AVAILABLE, WAIT TIMES ARE SIGNIFICANTLY REDUCED, AND THEY'RE NOT BEING UTILIZED.

>> JEFF: OKAY, SPEAKING OF DATA AND EVIDENCE, WHAT EVIDENCE IS THE ADMINISTRATION USING TO SHOW THAT FORCED TREATMENT WORKS?

>> BAKER: SO, I THINK THAT'S A COMPLICATED QUESTION.

I THINK IT'S A FAIR ONE THAT'S IMPORTANT.

I THINK THAT WE'RE IN A PLACE RIGHT NOW WHERE WE CAN DEMONSTRATE AFFIRMATIVELY, AND I'LL LET SECRETARY ARMIJO TOUCH ON THE BIG-PICTURE ITEMS AS SHE IS A SUBJECT MATTER EXPERT ON ALL OF THE TREATMENT MODALITIES IS THAT WE KNOW WHAT WE'RE DOING TODAY IS RESULTING IN THOUSANDS OF NEW MEXICANS NOT RECEIVING SERVICES.

WE ALSO KNOW THAT WE HAVE MADE THE SIGNIFICANT EFFORT TO RECOVER THE CAPACITY TO BE ABLE TO DELIVER THOSE SERVICES FOR PRECISELY THAT REASON.

SO THAT NEW MEXICANS CAN RECOVER.

THAT THEY CAN GET TREATMENT, THEY CAN GET SERVICES.

BUT WHAT WE'RE STARTING TO DISCOVER, AND WHEN WE'VE CONSULTED WITH NATIONAL LEADING EXPERTS ON TOPICS SUCH AS THESE IS THAT IT IS DIFFICULT WHEN YOU'RE SUFFERING FROM SOME OF THESE VERY COMPLEX AND VERY DIFFICULT TO OVERCOME CONDITIONS IT'S NOT A MATTER OF WILLINGNESS.

IT'S A MATTER OF CAPACITY TO MAKE THAT DECISION.

I THINK OUR GOAL IS TO DRAW A VERY CLEAR LINE OF WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE AS WE TALK ABOUT WHAT IS HARM TO OTHERS, POTENTIAL.

WHAT IS HARM TO SELF, SPECIAL.

AND INCLUDING WHAT LOOKS LIKE GRAVE PASSIVE NEGLECT OF ONE'S SELF ATTRIBUTABLE TO THE CONDITION THAT UNDERPINS THE ISSUE.

>> JEFF: I WANT TO CHANGE GEARS FOR JUST A MOMENT, BEN.

REPRESENTATIVE BILL REHM, AS YOU KNOW, HAS BEEN TRYING FOR MANY, MANY YEARS TO PASS A BILL MAKING IT A FELONY IN STATE COURT TO BE A FELON IN POSSESSION OF A FIREARM.

LIKE REPRESENTATIVE REHM, YOU WERE A COP FOR A REALLY LONG TIME.

HOW WOULD A LAW LIKE THIS REDUCE GUN VIOLENCE?

>> BAKER: GREAT QUESTION.

I AM GOING TO SPEAK TO YOU AS A SUBJECT MATTER EXPERT ON THIS.

>> JEFF: INDEED.

>> BAKER: THIS IS A PLACE WHERE I HAVE LOT OF UNDERSTANDING.

NOT ONLY THAT, A PASSION.

I'M RAISING A FAMILY IN BERNALILLO COUNTY, NEW MEXICO.

I'M A LIFELONG NEW MEXICAN, AND I'M HERE TO TELL YOU WE'RE IN THE MIDST OF FELONS WHO CONTINUE TO POSSESS FIREARMS CRISIS.

THEY ARE THE DRIVERS OF CRIMINALITY WITHIN NEW MEXICO.

VIOLENT CRIMINALITY IN NEW MEXICO.

IT IS A FELONY IN NEW MEXICO TO POSSESS A FIREARM ONCE YOU ARE CONVICTED OF A FELONY.

MOST OF MY CAREER, THE FIRST 20 YEARS OF MY CAREER, WAS IT WAS A FOURTH-DEGREE FELONY.

I WILL TELL YOU THAT FOURTH-DEGREE FELONY WOULD GET NEGOTIATED AWAY IN LIGHT OF A SUBSTANCE, LET'S SAY POSSESSION, OR A BURGLARY OR AN AUTO THEFT.

ALMOST NO ONE WAS GETTING CONVICTED.

I'LL SHARE WITH YOU SOME OF THE STATS OF FELON IN POSSESSION AND HAVING ANY ACCOUNTABILITY OVER IT.

OVER THE YEARS THE LEGISLATURE HAS ADDRESSED THIS TO A DEGREE, AND THEY HAVE RAISED TO A THIRD-DEGREE FELONY, WHICH IT IS TODAY.

I'M GOING TO GIVE YOU A VERY SPECIFIC EXAMPLE BECAUSE I THINK IT'S MATERIAL TO WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.

IT HAS TO DO WITH -- THE BILL WE'RE SUGGESTING AND THE MOVEMENT WE'D LIKE TO SEE IS MANDATORY PUNISHMENT FOR FOLKS WHO ARE CONVICTED FELONS WHO CHOOSE TO PICK UP FIREARMS AND ARM THEMSELVES.

THE REASON WHY THAT'S SO IMPORTANT, JEFF, IS BECAUSE THIS IS RARE AIR.

IT IS NOT EASY WORK TO BECOME A CONVICTED FELON, AND THEN MOREOVER YOU'RE ON ABSOLUTELY THE MOST SPECIFIC NOTICE A HUMAN BEING COULD BE THAT YOU'RE NO LONGER PERMITTED TO TOUCH FIREARMS.

BOTH BY FEDERAL LAW AND OUR STATE'S LAW.

YET, WITH AN ALARMING FREQUENCY FELONS ARE PICKING UP GUNS IN OUR COMMUNITY.

WE HAVE 151 FELONS ARRESTED FOR THE CRIME OF FELON IN POSSESSION OF FIREARM WITHIN THE FIRST FIVE MONTHS OF THIS YEAR IN BERNALILLO COUNTY.

THAT'S SIGNIFICANT BECAUSE THAT'S ONE A DAY.

AND THE REASON WHY WE'RE HAVING SOME OF THESE PROBLEMS IS BECAUSE WHEN I EXAMINED SOME OF THESE COURT RECORDS, YOU HAVE A FELON WHO POSSESSES A FIREARM, WHICH MEANS HE OR SHE IS A PREVIOUSLY CONVICTED FELON.

THEY'RE CHARGED, THEY'RE ADJUDICATED, AND THEY'RE SENTENCED USUALLY TO PROBATION.

THE CEILING ON THAT CRIMINAL PENALTY IS SIX YEARS.

THREE YEARS FOR THE STANDARD.

IF YOU'RE A SPECIAL VIOLENT OFFENDER, IT'S SIX YEARS.

WE'RE PROPOSING THAT THRESHOLD TO NINE YEARS MANDATORY AND TWELVE YEARS IF YOU'RE A SPECIAL VIOLENT OFFENDER.

>> JEFF: I WANT TO TALK ABOUT THE PANHANDLING BILL.

I KNOW THE ADMINISTRATION IS CHARACTERIZING THAT BILL AS A ROADWAY AND PEDESTRIAN SAFETY BILL.

I WON'T ASK YOU TO WEIGH IN ON WHAT IT IS SURE TO BE A CONSTITUTIONAL BATTLE, IF THAT ONE GOES FORWARD.

I DO WANT TO ASK, DOES THE ADMINISTRATION HAVE ANY DATA SHOWING THAT IT'S FOLKS HANGING OUT IN MEDIANS WHO BECOME THE VICTIMS OF PEDESTRIAN FATALITIES?

>> BAKER: JEFF, GREAT QUESTIONS.

I'M GOING TO WADE INTO SOME OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL WORK BECAUSE I'VE DONE LOT OF CONSTITUTIONAL WORK ON THIS.

AND I AM VERY INVESTED IN THIS AS WELL.

NOT ONLY AS A PARENT, AS A NEW MEXICAN, AND AS A LAW ENFORCEMENT PROFESSIONAL.

WHAT WE'RE DEALING WITH IS A STATE THAT CONTINUALLY LEADS THE NATION IN THE CATEGORY OF PEDESTRIANS KILLED BY AUTOMOBILES.

AND I'VE RESPONDED TO LITERALLY HUNDREDS OF THESE DURING THE COURSE OF MY CAREER.

THE DATA THAT IS COLLECTED BY A POLICE OFFICER WHEN A PERSON IS KILLED IS A PEDESTRIAN IS NOT GOING TO IMPUTE WHAT THEY WERE DOING AT THE TIME.

THAT'S WHY THIS BILL THERE WILL BE NO REFERENCES TO PANHANDLING.

THIS IS NOT ABOUT PANHANDLING.

THIS IS ABOUT WHERE IS IT SAFE FOR PEDESTRIANS TO STAND RELATIVE TO ROADWAYS.

AND THAT IS ALL.

AND THAT SURVIVES AND ACTUALLY WE THINK EXCEEDS THE CONSTITUTIONAL THREE-PRONG TEST RELATED TO THE CONTENT OF THE SPEECH, THE LOCATION, IT BEING NEUTRAL, IT DOESN'T MATTER IF YOU'RE COLLECTING MONEY FOR CANCER RESEARCH OR YOU'RE DOING SOMETHING ELSE, WE DON'T WANT YOU IN PLACES WHERE YOU'RE LIKELY TO BE PART OF THAT NATION-LEADING STATISTIC WHERE WE'RE THE WORST IN AMERICA AS IT RELATES TO PEDESTRIAN SAFETY.

SO, WE'VE CREATED THE LEGISLATION TO BE VERY COGNIZANT OF THE FIRST AMENDMENT ITEMS, AND WE ALSO BELIEVE THAT WE HAVE TAILORED IT NARROWLY ENOUGH SO THAT LITERALLY HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF LINEAR FEET WITHIN NEW MEXICO WILL BE AVAILABLE TO PEOPLE WITHIN THE SAME PROXIMITY, JUST NOT PUTTING THEM IN THE SAME DANGER THAT THEY WOULD BE IF THEY WERE STANDING IN THE AREAS WE PRESCRIBED TO BE PROHIBITED.

TO ANSWER THE BIGGER PICTURE QUESTION, I THINK IT WILL BE CONTROVERSIAL.

I THINK PEOPLE FAIL TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THE INTENT IS BEHIND THIS -- YOU'VE ASKED ME EARLIER WHAT WILL THE BILL DO IF IT'S EFFECTIVELY WORKED OUT IN THE LEGISLATURE AND ASSIGNED.

REDUCE FATALITIES TO PEDESTRIANS IN NEW MEXICO.

THAT IS THE GOAL.

THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH PANHANDLING OR THE FIRST AMENDMENT TO ANYONE'S RIGHT TO FREE SPEECH WHICH WE FULLY SUPPORT.

>> JEFF: OKAY, LAST QUESTION, BEN.

I KNOW THAT YOU ARE HEADED TO TESTIFY, AS YOU MENTIONED, IN THE COURTS CORRECTIONS AND JUSTICE COMMITTEE AFTER YOU FINISH WITH THIS ZOOM CALL WITH ME.

I'VE BEEN READING THE PAPERS LIKE EVERYONE ELSE, AND I'VE SEEN A LOT OF FRUSTRATION ABOUT THIS SPECIAL SESSION FROM LAWMAKERS ON BOTH SIDES OF THE AISLE.

I'M WONDERING WHAT SORT OF RECEPTION YOU EXPECT TO GET WHEN YOU GET TO THE COMMITTEE THIS AFTERNOON.

AND BEYOND THAT, WHAT SORT OF PROSPECTS YOU BELIEVE SOME OF THESE PROPOSALS HAVE TO ACTUALLY GET TO THE GOVERNOR'S DESK NEXT MONTH?

>> BAKER: CERTAINLY, GREAT QUESTION, JEFF.

I HESITATE TO SPECULATE ON WHAT I WILL RECEIVE FROM A GROUPING OF LIKE 30 PEOPLE.

I'VE SEEN AND HEARD THE SAME THINGS THAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT.

AND I WILL TELL YOU THE POSITION FROM OUR OFFICE IS THAT IT IS OUR BELIEF THAT PUBLIC SAFETY CAN'T WAIT.

SOME OF THESE PLACES, PARTICULARLY GUN VIOLENCE, WHICH WE'VE HEARD ABOUT ON A NATIONAL LEVEL AFTER THE GOVERNOR'S DECLARED AN EMERGENCY WITHIN NEW MEXICO ABOUT GUN VIOLENCE.

AND RELATED TO PEDESTRIAN SAFETY.

THESE THINGS WE LEAD THE NATION IN.

THESE THINGS ARE UNTENABLE.

THE TIME IS NOW AND IT'S THE EMERGENCY.

I THINK WHAT IS NEEDED IS DESCRIPTIONS AND UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT THE INTENT OF WHAT THE OFFICE IS TRYING TO DO, COUPLED WITH THE CONSTITUENCY OF ALL OF THE LEGISLATIVE BODY, NOT JUST THIS COMMITTEE, BUT ALL THE LEGISLATORS, THEIR CONSTITUENCY, AND WHAT THEY WANT.

I THINK NEW MEXICO IS PRIME FOR A VECTOR CHANGE RELATIVE TO HOW IT FEELS ABOUT SOME OF THESE VERY SPECIFIC TOPICS.

THEY DON'T WANT TO LEAD THE NATION IN PEDESTRIAN DEATHS, AND THEY DON'T WANT REPEAT VIOLENT OFFENDERS TO CONTINUE TO PICK UP GUNS AND KILL PEOPLE WITHIN OUR COMMUNITY.

THAT IS THE MESSAGE WE'RE RECEIVING FROM THE SAME CONSTITUENCY, AND WE BELIEVE WE'LL BE ABLE TO CONVEY THAT TO OUR COLLEAGUES WITHIN THE LEGISLATURE.

AND WE HOPE TO HAVE THEIR SUPPORT.

MY EXPECTATION IS, JUST LIKE IN EVERY OTHER SESSION, THINGS WON'T ALWAYS LOOK THE WAY THEY DO AT THE BEGINNING AT THE END.

I EXPECT THAT'S THE PROCESS, AND THE LEGISLATURE'S JOB IS TO WORK THROUGH THAT PROCESS.

I WILL BE ATTENTIVE AND IN ATTENDANCE AT EVERYTHING THAT I CAN DO TO BE ASSISTIVE TO THEM TO UNDERSTAND THE FACTUAL PREDICATE THAT BASES ALL THESE THINGS, AND WHATEVER WE CAN DO TO MOVE TOWARDS A SAFER NEW MEXICO SINCE WE BELIEVE IT CAN'T WAIT.

>> JEFF: BEN, THANKS FOR THE TIME.

I APPRECIATE THE CHAT.

>> BAKER: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, JEFF.

>> LOU: THANKS, JEFF.

AND THANKS TO THE GOVERNOR'S OFFICE FOR MAKING SOMEONE AVAILABLE TO TALK THROUGH THEIR HOPES FOR THIS UPCOMING SPECIAL SESSION.

NOW, I WANT TO WELCOME A SPECIAL PANEL HERE TO TALK ABOUT THAT.

THOSE PREFERRED PROPOSALS FROM THE GOVERNOR.

WELCOME BACK DEDE FELDMAN, FORMER DEMOCRATIC STATE SENATOR.

GREAT TO HAVE YOU HERE.

ALWAYS GREAT TO HAVE TRIP JENNINGS, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF NEW MEXICO IN DEPTH.

AND DANIEL WILLIAMS FROM THE ACLU OF NEW MEXICO.

THANK YOU, ALL.

>> WILLIAMS: THANK YOU.

>> LOU: NOW, I WANT TO OPEN WITH SOME OF YOUR REACTIONS TO THAT INTERVIEW BETWEEN JEFF AND BEN BAKER.

DEDE, WHAT WAS YOUR TAKEAWAY FROM THE GOVERNOR'S SENIOR PUBLIC SAFETY ADVISOR?

>> FELDMAN: WELL, I HEAR HIM WHEN HE SAYS PUBLIC SAFETY CAN'T WAIT.

I THINK THAT'S THE MANTRA OF THE GOVERNOR IN DOING THIS SPECIAL SESSION.

AND IT SEEMED AT FIRST AS THOUGH THE GOVERNOR'S SPECIAL SESSION WAS GOING TO BE ABOUT MENTAL HEALTH AND THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN BEHAVIORAL HEALTH AND CRIME.

I'M NOT SO SURE ABOUT THAT NOW.

THINGS ARE CHANGING RAPIDLY, BUT I DO THINK IT'S UNDENIABLE THAT THERE'S A CONNECTION THERE.

AND THE THING THAT REALLY STRUCK ME ABOUT HIS REMARKS WAS THE IDEA THAT HE FELT WE HAVE ENOUGH SERVICES FOR PEOPLE WITH MENTAL ILLNESS.

AND WE HAVE PROVIDERS OUT THERE THAT WOULD BE WILLING TO STEP UP AND, YOU KNOW, AND TREAT FOLKS THAT ARE IN TROUBLE WITH THE COURT OR WHO WON'T TAKE THEIR MEDS, AND SO ON.

HE FEELS THAT THE WHOLE PROBLEM THAT WE HAD WITH THE DISMANTLING OF BEHAVIORAL HEALTH SERVICES DURING THE MARTINEZ ADMINISTRATION IS OVER.

HE SAID THAT IN HIS REMARKS.

YOU KNOW, I THINK THAT'S MAGICAL THINKING.

>> LOU: HE DID SAY 70% BACK.

I JUST WANT TO THROW THAT OUT THERE.

>> FELDMAN: OH, 70% BACK.

OKAY, WELL, GOOD.

THAT FLIES IN THE FACE OF EVERYTHING WE KNOW ABOUT THE SHORTAGE OF PSYCHIATRISTS, THE SHORTAGE OF CLINICAL PSYCHOLOGISTS, THE SHORTAGE OF ALL KINDS OF PROFESSIONALS THAT WE NEED TO PRESS INTO SERVICE TO ADDRESS THESE PROBLEMS.

>> LOU: OKAY.

NOW, THE CONVERSATION SURROUNDING PUBLIC SAFETY, WE'LL GET TO THAT CONNECTION IN A MINUTE.

I WANT TO ASK YOU ABOUT THAT, DANIEL.

TRIP, FIRST.

THIS PUBLIC SAFETY CONVERSATION HAS BEEN GOING ON FOR A WHILE.

IT'S BEEN THE CENTER OF THE GOVERNOR'S AGENDA IN A LOT OF WAYS.

WITH THE CHANGES THAT WE'VE SEEN IN THESE PROPOSALS LEADING UP TO THIS SPECIAL, DO YOU THINK THAT SHE HAS A CLEAR PLAN TO ADDRESS IT?

>> JENNINGS: I MEAN -- I'M GOING TO TRY TO BE DIPLOMATIC, BUT I'M A JOURNALIST, SO MAYBE I WON'T BE DIPLOMATIC.

FIRST OFF, THEY'VE JUST YANKED A MAJOR PIECE OF LEGISLATION THAT THEY WERE CONSIDERING.

WHICH LEADS ME TO BELIEVE THAT THERE WEREN'T VOTES THERE.

THERE WASN'T ACTUALLY A CONSENSUS.

WHEN GOVERNORS CALL SPECIAL SESSIONS TYPICALLY, IN MY EXPERIENCE, THEY HAVE A WELL-DESIGNED KIND OF LIKE STRATEGY.

THEY HAVE BILLS -- AT LEAST CONCEPTUALLY, LEADERS AGREE ON.

THERE'S ENOUGH CONSENSUS AMONG LAWMAKERS.

RIGHT NOW, WHAT I'M HEARING IS NONE OF THAT EXISTS.

SO IF YOU ADD ALL THAT UP, I THINK YOU PROBABLY DON'T HAVE A PLAN THAT MAYBE I'VE WITNESSED IN PREVIOUS SPECIAL SESSIONS.

SHE CALLED SOMETHING ON CANNABIS A COUPLE YEARS AGO.

I KNEW WHAT THAT SPECIAL SESSION WAS ABOUT.

THAT WAS TO GET RECREATIONAL CANNABIS LEGALIZED HERE.

HERE, I DON'T KNOW WHY IT'S MID-YEAR AND A PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION YEAR.

AN ELECTION YEAR WHEN ALL THESE GUYS ARE UP FOR REELECTION, OR MANY OF THEM, I JUST DON'T SEE THAT PLAN RIGHT NOW.

MAYBE THEY HAVE SOME THING THAT THEY CAN ROLL OUT, BUT I JUST DON'T SEE IT.

>> LOU: OKAY.

DANIEL, BACK TO THAT INTERSECTION BETWEEN BEHAVIORAL HEALTH AND CRIME.

IS THERE ANY DANGER FROM, TWO POINTS, A PUBLIC PERCEPTION PERSPECTIVE, AND A CONSTITUTIONAL PERSPECTIVE IN DRAWING A CONNECTION BETWEEN THOSE TWO THINGS?

>> WILLIAMS: YEAH, I THINK THERE'S SIGNIFICANT DANGERS.

I THINK WE KNOW THAT THERE IS AN INTERSECTION BETWEEN PEOPLE WHO ARE EXPERIENCING MENTAL HEALTH CRISIS THAT AREN'T BEING TREATED SUFFICIENTLY AND THE CRIMINAL LEGAL SYSTEM.

AND WE KNOW THAT REALITY EXISTS.

I THINK THAT WHAT WE WANT TO AVOID IS STIGMATIZING BOTH PEOPLE WHO ARE INVOLVED IN THE CRIMINAL LEGAL SYSTEM AND PEOPLE WHO EXPERIENCE PSYCHIATRIC DISORDERS BY SAYING THE REASON PEOPLE COMMIT CRIMES IS THEY'RE NOT TAKING THEIR BIPOLAR MEDS.

I THINK THAT'S REALLY HARMFUL TO EVERYONE.

AND TO DEDE'S POINT ABOUT BEN BAKER SAYING PUBLIC SAFETY CAN'T WAIT, THAT'S NOT GOING TO ADVANCE PUBLIC SAFETY BY JUST DIGGING DEEPER INTO MYTHS ABOUT PEOPLE WHO HAVE MENTAL ILLNESS.

YES, I THINK THERE ARE SIGNIFICANT CONSTITUTIONAL ISSUES.

PEOPLE HAVE RIGHTS TO DUE PROCESS.

PEOPLE HAVE RIGHTS TO THEIR OWN BODILY AUTONOMY.

AND PASSING POLICIES LIKE SOME OF THE THINGS WE'VE SEEN PROPOSED BY THE GOVERNOR'S OFFICE THAT WOULD REALLY EXPAND THE REACH INTO PEOPLE'S MEDICAL LIVES, DEPRIVING THEM OF THEIR LIBERTY JUST ON THE BASIS OF THEM HAVING A MENTAL ILLNESS WITHOUT THAT HAVING THAT REALLY, REALLY HIGH BAR OF DANGEROUSNESS, REALLY EXPANDING THAT DEFINITION OF DANGEROUSNESS, THAT'S SOMETHING FOR US AT THE ACLU AND FOLKS WHO ARE CONCERNED ABOUT CIVIL LIBERTIES, AND FOR FOLKS WHO ARE CONCERNED ABOUT BODILY AUTONOMY AND THE DIGNITY OF EVERYONE IN OUR COMMUNITY, THAT'S REALLY SCARY AND VERY CONCERNING.

>> LOU: UNDERSTOOD.

SOMETHING DEDE BROUGHT UP EARLIER I WANT TO ASK YOU NOW ABOUT, TRIP.

THE GOVERNOR'S OFFICE HAS BEEN PUSHING THIS LEGISLATION THAT WOULD INCREASE THE BURDEN ON OUR BEHAVIORAL HEALTH SYSTEM.

AND ALREADY PEOPLE WHO VOLUNTARILY WANT THESE SERVICES SOMETIMES HAVE TROUBLE GETTING THEM.

IS THIS TOO MUCH OF A BURDEN FOR THE SYSTEM TO ADD MANDATED CARE ON TOP OF THAT?

>> JENNINGS: I MEAN, I WANT TO GO BACK TO SOMETHING THAT YOU MENTIONED.

I ALWAYS SAY SENATOR FELDMAN BECAUSE IT'S A WAY OF, YOU KNOW, FORMER SENATOR FELDMAN.

I AM WITH HER ON THIS SITUATION.

I DON'T KNOW RIGHT NOW.

I KNOW THAT THE ADMINISTRATION IS SAYING WE'RE KIND OF 70% BACK.

I'M NOT -- I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE DATA, FIRST OFF.

I'M A JOURNALIST.

I'D LIKE TO KNOW -- IT'S EASY TO SAY SOMETHING, BUT I WANT TO KNOW HOW THEY'RE MAKING THAT CONCLUSION.

WHAT ARE THEY USING, THE METHODOLOGY.

BECAUSE I'M HEARING FROM FOLKS, LIKE THE LAST 11 YEARS, IT WAS 2013 WHEN THEY WENT AFTER ALL THE PROVIDERS.

I'VE HEARD THE STATE HAS BEEN DIGGING OUT EVER SINCE AND WE'RE NOT TOTALLY BACK.

SO, IS IT GOING TO PUT A BURDEN ON THE SYSTEM?

TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, I'D LIKE TO SEE THE DATA ON THE SYSTEM, FIRST.

NOT YOU OBVIOUSLY, BUT THE ADMINISTRATION.

I WANT TO SEE HOW THEY'RE THINKING ABOUT THIS.

THE LEGISLATURE IN THE LAST TEN YEARS, MAYBE MORE, YOU CAN TELL ME IF I'M WRONG ABOUT THIS, BUT THEY'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT EVIDENCE-BASED LEGISLATING.

THEY NEED DATA HERE IF THEY'RE GOING TO SAY, HEY, WE LIKE TO DO THIS AND HERE'S WHY WE THINK WE CAN DO THIS.

I THINK THE PUBLIC DESERVES THE DATA.

>> LOU: IS THAT THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE GOVERNOR'S OFFICE TO PROVIDE THAT DATA TO THE PUBLIC AND ALSO LEGISLATORS WHO ARE GOING TO BE VOTING ON THIS?

>> JENNINGS: HONESTLY, IN POLITICS, I'M TALKING ABOUT THE IDEAL.

THAT DOESN'T ALWAYS HAPPEN, BUT IF YOU'RE -- AS A JOURNALIST WHOSE COVERED A LOT OF POLICY DEBATES, IF YOU'RE GOING TO TRY TO SELL THE PUBLIC YOU BETTER HAVE A GOOD ARGUMENT AND IT NEEDS TO BE BACKED UP BY DATA AND EVIDENCE.

>> WILLIAMS: IF I CAN JUMP IN REAL QUICK?

>> LOU: SURE.

>> WILLIAMS: I THINK TO TRIP'S POINT, ONE THING THE EVIDENCE DOES SHOW IS THAT THE GOLD STANDARD FOR BEHAVIORAL HEALTH TREATMENT IS VOLUNTARY, SELF-INITIATED CULTURALLY-COMPETENT, COMMUNITY-BASED CARE.

AND UNTIL WE HAVE ABSOLUTELY ENOUGH OF THAT, THAT EVERYONE CAN GET IT WHEN THEY WANT IT AND WHEN THEY NEED IT, THE IDEA OF FORCING PEOPLE INTO CARE, INTO TREATMENT THAT IS NOT VOLUNTARY, THAT IS NOT SELF-INITIATED, THAT IS NOT NECESSARILY GOING TO BE CULTURALLY COMPETENT -- ONE, THAT LEADS TO WORSE OUTCOMES THAN PEOPLE WHO SELF-INITIATE CARE.

AND TWO, ONE THING IT'S GOING TO TAKE AWAY IS ACCESS TO THAT TREATMENT.

IF A PSYCHIATRIST HAS 20 APPOINTMENTS IN A WEEK, AND 15 OF THOSE ARE BEING TAKEN UP BY PEOPLE WHO ARE COURT-ORDERED INTO THOSE APPOINTMENTS THEN ALL OF A SUDDEN THERE'S A SIGNIFICANT REDUCTION IN ACCESS TO THOSE APPOINTMENTS, TO THOSE BEDS, TO ALL OF THE CARE FOR THE FOLKS WHO ARE SELF-INITIATING THAT CARE.

AND THAT'S REALLY CONCERNING.

>> FELDMAN: WELL, FIRST OF ALL, I THINK IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE GOVERNOR AND THE LFC, THE LEGISLATURE TO COME UP WITH THE DATA AND TO COME UP WITH A GOOD RATIONALE FOR HOW THIS IS GOING TO HAPPEN.

IT'S A JOINT RESPONSIBILITY.

WE HAVE A NEW HEALTH CARE AUTHORITY NOW.

AND APPARENTLY THE NEW HEAD OF THAT AUTHORITY IS PRESENTING SOME OF THAT DATA TODAY, THURSDAY, TO THE COURTS AND CRIMINAL JUSTICE.

BUT THE BIG QUESTION IS WHO'S GOING TO BE PAYING FOR THIS?

WHO IS GOING TO BE PAYING FOR THIS?

AND FROM WHAT I'VE HEARD, THE SUPPOSITION IS MEDICAID IS GOING TO BE PAYING FOR THIS.

WELL, YOU KNOW, THIS IS WHERE WE GOT INTO TROUBLE BEFORE WITH THE BEHAVIORAL HEALTH PROVIDERS AND MEDICAID.

SO, WE NEED TO HAVE A CLEAR PLAN ABOUT WHO'S GOING TO BE PAYING FOR WHAT.

IS IT THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT?

IS IT THE STATE?

IS IT MEDICAID?

NONE OF THOSE DETAILS I THINK HAVE BEEN CLARIFIED YET.

>> LOU: I WANT TO STICK WITH YOU, DEDE, AND TALK ABOUT THIS PANHANDLING BILL THAT MR. BAKER SAID HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH PANHANDLING, IT'S A PEDESTRIAN SAFETY BILL.

THAT'S HOW THE ADMINISTRATION IS COUCHING IT.

DO YOU BUY THAT, THAT IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH PANHANDLING?

AND EVEN IF IT DID, WHAT DO YOU THINK THE PUBLIC'S PERCEPTION OF THIS WILL BE?

>> FELDMAN: WELL, I HAVE BEEN A BIG PROPONENT OF PEDESTRIAN SAFETY.

AND THE ADMINISTRATION AND THE LEGISLATURE DOES HAVE DATA THAT NEW MEXICO IS IF NOT THE WORST, ONE OF THE WORST, WHEN IT COMES TO PEDESTRIAN SAFETY.

THAT SAID, I THINK IT'S PRETTY TRANSPARENT THAT THIS BILL IS ABOUT PANHANDLING.

IT'S NOT REALLY ABOUT PEDESTRIAN SAFETY.

AND, YES, THERE MAY BE VERY UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES TO THIS BILL.

YESTERDAY, SENATOR CERVANTES BROUGHT UP TWO.

AND THAT IS IF WE ARE TO OUTLAW WALKING WITHIN A CERTAIN NUMBER OF FEET OF A HIGHWAY, AND THAT'S DEFINED VERY BROADLY, THEN WHAT ABOUT THE PILGRIMS TO CHIMAYO?

WHAT ABOUT THE STATE FAIR PARADE?

ARE THOSE ALL ILLEGAL?

ACCORDING TO THIS BILL, THEY WOULD BE.

AND I'M NOT SURE -- I THINK THAT JUST REVEALS THAT THE INTENT IS NOT REALLY PEDESTRIAN SAFETY, BUT IT IS TO REMOVE THE UNCOMFORTABLE SPECTER OF HOMELESS PEOPLE ON OUR MEDIANS ASKING FOR MONEY BECAUSE THEY DON'T HAVE THE RESOURCES, AND THEY HAVE NOT BEEN PROVIDED AN OPPORTUNITY FOR THOSE RESOURCES.

>> LOU: DANIEL, WHAT'S YOUR FEELING ON THIS CONSTITUTIONALLY AND PUBLIC POLICY?

>> WILLIAMS: YEAH, I COMPLETELY AGREE WITH THE SENATOR.

I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT WE HEARD FROM BEN BAKER JUST NOW THAT THIS BILL HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH PANHANDLING, AS YOU SAID.

HE SEEMS TO BE OUT OF STEP WITH THIS BOSS THE GOVERNOR, WHO'S BEEN PRETTY CONSISTENTLY FOR YEARS TALKING ABOUT THIS BILL IN TERMS OF PANHANDLING.

WHEN SHE WAS ON THIS SHOW JUST A COUPLE MONTHS AGO, SHE TALKED ABOUT THIS BILL IN TERMS OF PANHANDLING.

IN THE STATE OF IN THE STATE SHE TALKED ABOUT THIS BILL IN TERMS OF PANHANDLING.

IN A REELECTION DEBATE IN 2022, SHE SAID SHE WANTED TO RESTRICT PANHANDLING.

SO, IT'S ABSOLUTELY I THINK UNBELIEVABLE TO SUGGEST THAT THIS BILL DOESN'T HAVE TO DO WITH PANHANDLING.

WE KNOW THIS IS A TRICKY AREA CONSTITUTIONALLY.

PANHANDLING IS FIRST AMENDMENT PROTECTED SPEECH.

AND THAT'S NONNEGOTIABLE.

I KNOW THE GOVERNOR'S OFFICE FEELS LIKE THEY HAVE THREADED THE NEEDLE, THAT WHAT WE HAVE RIGHT NOW IS SOMETHING THAT'S GOING TO PASS CONSTITUTIONAL MUSTER.

I THINK EVEN -- HOWEVER THE COURTS COME DOWN ON THAT IF THIS PASSES, IT STILL POSES REALLY SIGNIFICANT MORAL QUESTIONS OF, AS THE SENATOR SAID, WE'RE ALL UNCOMFORTABLE, AND IT MAKES US SAD WHEN WE SEE SOMEONE ON THE STREET ASKING FOR MONEY.

I THINK THE REAL RESPONSE TO THAT IS NOT JUST TO GIVE THEM A MISDEMEANOR AND POTENTIALLY PUT THEM IN JAIL AND TRAP THEM IN THIS CYCLE MORE.

BUT IT'S TO INCREASE ACCESS TO SERVICES.

IT'S TO INCREASE HOUSING.

IT'S TO REALLY GET TO THE ROOT PROBLEM OF HOMELESSNESS AND NOT JUST THINK, OKAY, IF WE GIVE THESE PEOPLE ENOUGH CITATIONS THEY WON'T HAVE TO DEAL WITH THAT ANYMORE.

AND I THINK THAT'S WHAT THIS BILL IS ABOUT.

>> LOU: THANK YOU, ALL.

WE'LL BE RIGHT BACK TO TALK THROUGH HOW LONG THIS SPECIAL SESSION MIGHT LAST AND WHAT WE COULD EXPECT TO SEE COME OUT OF IT, RIGHT AFTER THIS.

>> RUSSETTE: THIS HAS TO STOP.

IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE ALL DON'T WANT TO HAPPEN, BUT WE JUST WANT SOMEONE WHO HAS POWER JUST TO HELP US AND TO STAND WITH US.

BECAUSE FROM WHAT I -- LIKE EVEN HAVING OUR COMMUNITY AND EVERYBODY WE COULD, BUT THEY ARE STILL LIKE, LIKE THE POOR PEOPLE ALMOST.

I FEEL LIKE REGARDLESS WE WON'T MAKE ANYTHING HAPPEN UNLESS WE HAVE SOMEONE WHO'S ABLE TO MAKE SOMETHING HAPPEN FOR US, OR THAT HAS A VOICE IN EVERYTHING.

>> LOU: WELCOME BACK TO OUR PANELISTS AS WE LOOK AHEAD TO THE UPCOMING SPECIAL SESSION.

AGAIN, JOINED BY DEMOCRATIC FORMER STATE SENATOR DEDE FELDMAN.

TRIP JENNINGS, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR AT NEW MEXICO IN DEPTH.

AND DANIEL WILLIAMS FROM THE ACLU OF NEW MEXICO.

THANK YOU, ALL.

NOW, WITH THE HANDFUL OF PROPOSALS ON THE TABLE FOR THE SPECIAL SESSION AS WE RECORD THIS IN LATE JUNE, THAT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE, A PATH FOR THE GOVERNOR TO GET SOME OF THESE MEASURES PASSED IS A BIT BLURRY.

DEDE, IS THERE A HISTORICAL PRECEDENT FOR A GOVERNOR CALLING A SESSION WHEN THERE'S SO LITTLE CONSENSUS NOW LESS THAN THREE WEEKS OUT?

>> FELDMAN: WELL, A LOT CAN HAPPEN IN THREE WEEKS.

AND A CONSENSUS COULD BE ARRIVED AT.

AND USUALLY, GOING INTO A SPECIAL SESSION, THERE'S A CLEAR AGENDA OR A CLEAR EMERGENCY, AND THE LEADERSHIP AND THE GOVERNOR HAVE WORKED OUT THE DETAILS IN ADVANCE SO THAT THE LEGISLATURE CAN COME IN -- THE FEW COMMITTEES THAT NEED TO MEET, MEET.

THE REST OF THE LEGISLATORS JUST KIND OF STAND AROUND.

AND THEN THINGS PASS, AND THEN YOU GO HOME.

IDEALLY IN A DAY, MAXIMUM THREE DAYS.

SO, YOU KNOW, THIS IS CLEARLY NOT THE CASE HERE.

THERE HAS BEEN NO MEETING OF THE MINDS BETWEEN THE LEADERSHIP AND THE GOVERNOR.

AND TO BOOT, IT'S AN ELECTION YEAR.

SO, YOU KNOW, THE MINORITY PARTY IS, YOU KNOW, RATTLING THE CAGE ABOUT HOW THIS IS GOING TO BE A WASTE OF MONEY.

AND THEIR ISSUES ARE NOT GOING TO BE CONSIDERED.

THOSE BEING THE BORDER, AND GIVING EVERY FENTANYL DEALER THE DEATH PENALTY, PRACTICALLY.

ALTHOUGH, WE HAVE NO DEATH PENALTY HERE.

THERE ARE SOME RED FLAGS HERE.

I'M HOPING THAT THINGS CAN GET WORKED OUT IN THE NEXT FEW WEEKS, AND THINGS ARE HAPPENING IN THE COURTS AND CRIMINAL JUSTICE COMMITTEE MEETINGS.

THEY ARE GETTING TO THE ISSUES, THRASHING OUT SOME OF THE ROUGH POINTS THAT FOR WHICH THERE MIGHT BE A LOT OF OPPOSITION.

THE GOVERNOR IS RESPONDING.

SHE'S WITHDRAWN ONE BILL ALREADY.

SHE'S GOING TO MODIFY SOME OF THE OTHERS.

AND YOU KNOW, WHO KNOWS?

WE MIGHT COME UP WITH SOMETHING GOOD.

WE SHOULDN'T DISCOUNT THAT POSSIBILITY.

BECAUSE IT'S GOOD TO GET EVERYBODY TALKING ABOUT PUBLIC SAFETY.

AND WE MAY BE ABLE TO COME UP WITH A NEW AND CREATIVE IDEA THROUGH THIS PROCESS.

>> LOU: THE GOVERNOR MADE THAT POINT, TRIP, ABOUT GETTING THE CONVERSATION STARTED WHEN SHE ISSUED THAT EXECUTIVE ORDER ON GUNS.

THE HEALTH ORDER.

BUT, ALSO TO DEDE'S POINT, THE COST, $50,000 A DAY.

USUALLY, YOU TRY TO KEEP THEM TO ABOUT A FEW DAYS.

IN AN ELECTION YEAR, YOU'VE COVERED THIS FOR DECADES, HOW LIKELY IS THAT TO HAPPEN THAT IT COULD LAST ONLY A FEW DAYS?

IS THREE WEEKS ENOUGH TIME FOR THESE COMMITTEES TO PARSE THINGS OUT?

>> JENNINGS: I MEAN, AT THIS POINT, ANYTHING CAN HAPPEN IN THE NEXT THREE WEEKS.

I WANT TO SAY THAT THE FORMER SENATOR IS CORRECT HERE.

THERE COULD BE CONVERSATIONS RIGHT NOW THAT ARE HAPPENING ABOUT THIS IDEA OVER HERE THAT WE'RE NOT HEARING ABOUT THAT MIGHT COME UP.

AND IT GETS -- SHE CALLS A SPECIAL SESSION, THIS IS PART OF MY AGENDA AND INCLUDES THINGS THAT WE'RE NOT EVEN TALKING ABOUT RIGHT NOW.

WHO KNOWS?

AS FAR AS THE BILLS THAT ARE BEFORE -- YOU KNOW, THAT WE HAVE DRAFTS OF RIGHT NOW, SOME OF THESE ARE GOING TO BE REALLY TOUGH.

BECAUSE RIGHT NOW THERE'S NOT A CONSENSUS.

AND I WANT TO GO BACK TO THE POLITICS OF THIS STUFF.

THIS IS AN ELECTION YEAR.

WHAT HAPPENS HERE, AND YOU KNOW, THREE DAYS, FIVE DAYS, WHATEVER IT IS, DURING THIS PERIOD THEY CANNOT -- LEGISLATORS CAN ACCEPT DONATIONS TO THEIR REELECTION OR ELECTION CAMPAIGNS, OR WHATEVER, THEY CANNOT SOLICIT.

THIS IS AN ELECTION YEAR.

THEY JUST GOT THROUGH THE PRIMARY.

THIS MAY SOUND MINOR TO US, BUT TO FOLKS WHO ARE ACTUALLY CAMPAIGNING AND MIGHT BE IN TOUGH RACES, THEY'RE NOT HAPPY ABOUT THIS.

AND FRANKLY, THE OTHER THING IS THIS WILL INVOLVE THE CERTAIN COMMITTEES AND MOST OF THE LEGISLATURE WILL BE TWIDDLING THEIR THUMBS WHILE THEY'RE WAITING FOR THESE COMMITTEES TO PASS SOMETHING OUT.

THAT'S GOING TO CREATE A RESTIVE SITUATION, ACTUALLY, TO BE HONEST WITH YOU.

>> LOU: I WANT TO ACKNOWLEDGE ONE MORE TIME THAT IN BETWEEN THE TIME THAT PEOPLE SEE THIS CONVERSATION THAT WE'RE HAVING AND THE SPECIAL SESSION, THINGS MIGHT CHANGE DRAMATICALLY, AS THEY HAVE WEEK TO WEEK AS YOU KNOW, DANIEL.

DO YOU HAVE A SENSE OF HOW ANY OF THESE PROPOSALS THAT WE KNOW OF RIGHT NOW, WHAT'S THE LIKELIHOOD THEY COULD PASS?

>> WILLIAMS: THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION, LOU.

IT'S CONFOUNDED BY THE POINT YOU JUST MADE THAT I'VE SEEN A DIFFERENT DRAFT OF SOME OF THESE BILLS EVERY WEEK FOR THE LAST MONTH.

SO, WHO KNOWS WHAT WE'RE GOING TO SEE ON JULY 18TH, AND TO TRIP'S POINT THEY MIGHT BE ABLE TO GET THAT TO SOMETHING THAT EVERYONE HAS AGREED ON AND THEY CAN JUST GO IN AND PASS IT.

I THINK THAT, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE THIS CRIME DATA BILL, WHICH IS CERTAINLY AN POINT THING.

WE ALL WANT BETTER DATA.

I DON'T THINK THAT ONE IS GOING TO BE CONTROVERSIAL.

I THINK THAT IS A PRETTY EASY LIFT.

IS IT A LIFT THAT REQUIRES A SPECIAL SESSION?

I DON'T THINK SO, BUT I COULD BE WRONG.

YOU KNOW, WE HAVE THIS PANHANDLING BILL THAT WAS KILLED WITH A UNANIMOUS BIPARTISAN VOTE WITH PRETTY MINIMAL DEBATE IN THE REGULAR SESSION.

IT'S CHANGED SOME SINCE THEN, SO WE'LL SEE.

I DON'T FEEL -- IF I WERE THE GOVERNOR I WOULDN'T FEEL OPTIMISTIC ABOUT THAT ONE.

I THINK WHAT WE'VE HEARD FROM SOME OF THE MOST CONSERVATIVE MEMBERS ALL THE WAY TO SOME OF THE MOST PROGRESSIVE MEMBERS IS THAT ALL THE STUFF AROUND COMPETENCY, AROUND CIVIL COMMITMENT, AROUND THOSE INTERSECTIONS OF MENTAL HEALTH AND THE CRIMINAL LEGAL SYSTEM, ALL OF THAT IS REALLY, REALLY COMPLICATED AND HEAVY AND NUANCED.

AND I THINK WHAT WE'VE HEARD IS A LOT OF RESISTANCE TO THOSE COMING HALF-BAKED AND NOT READY.

AND I THINK THAT'S WHERE A LOT OF FOLKS FEEL LIKE THEY ARE RIGHT NOW.

>> FELDMAN: WHICH LEAVES US WITH THE FELONS AND FIREARMS BILL.

AND THAT'S A BILL WHICH WOULD ENHANCE THE PENALTY FOR FELONS WHO HAVE FIREARMS TO 12 YEARS.

>> LOU: MANDATORY MINIMUM SENTENCE AT THE STATE LEVEL.

>> FELDMAN: RIGHT.

AND NINE YEARS FOR OTHER CRIMES.

I THINK -- AND THEY WOULD BE CONVICTED FOR THAT.

THERE WOULD BE NO GOOD TIME IN PRISON.

SO, THIS IS A MANDATORY MINIMUM.

IT'S A PRETTY HARSH THING.

IT WAS KILLED IN THE PAST SESSION.

IT WAS -- I DON'T HAVE THE VOTE COUNT ON HOW IT WAS KILLED.

BUT REMEMBER, WHEN A GOVERNOR GOES INTO A SPECIAL SESSION TRYING TO RESURRECT BILLS THAT HAVE BEEN KILLED IN THE PAST SESSION, YOU KNOW, SPARKS ARE GOING TO FLY THERE.

NOW, THAT MIGHT BE AN AREA WHERE THERE COULD BE SOME COMPROMISE, ON THE NUMBER OF YEARS, GOING INTO THIS SESSION, THAT A FELON IN POSSESSION OF A FIREARM WOULD GET.

YESTERDAY, I THINK THE RECEPTION WAS RATHER FROSTY AT THE COURTS AND CRIMINAL JUSTICE COMMITTEE MEETING.

AND IT WAS CONSIDERED TO BE BAD PUBLIC POLICY TO DO THAT.

ALTHOUGH, THE GOVERNOR'S OFFICE PUT UP A VERY GOOD CASE, I THOUGHT, FOR THE NUMBER OF CRIMES COMMITTED WITH FIREARMS POSSESSED BY FELONS.

>> WILLIAMS: I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE ABOUT THAT BILL THAT THE LEGISLATURE HAS RAISED THE PENALTY FOR A PERSON WITH A PAST FELONY CONVICTION POSSESSING A FIREARM FOUR TIMES IN THE LAST FIVE YEARS.

WE HEARD SOME CONVERSATIONS IN CCJ THIS WEEK ABOUT THE REALITY, THE STATISTICALLY BACKED UP REALITY, THAT INCREASED SENTENCES ARE NOT A DETERRENT.

WE'RE SEEING THAT PLAY OUT HERE.

THIS WENT FROM A FOURTH-DEGREE FELONY TO A THIRD-DEGREE FELONY TO A THIRD-DEGREE FELONY WITH SOME EXTRA SENTENCING STUFF IN THERE.

WE HEARD FROM BEN BAKER THAT HASN'T BEEN DETERRING.

THIS IDEA OF MAKING IT A SECOND-DEGREE FELONY, TO YOUR POINT, SENATOR, I THINK IS QUITE WRONGHEADED.

AND YOU MENTIONED THAT IT WOULD BE A MANDATORY MINIMUM.

WE CURRENTLY HAVE NO SECOND-DEGREE FELONIES THAT HAVE MANDATORY MINIMUMS IN NEW MEXICO.

THIS WOULD STAND ALONE IN THAT CATEGORY.

IT WOULD STAND ALONE AS THE ONLY NON-VIOLENT OFFENSE FOR WHICH GOOD TIME OR MERITORIOUS DEDUCTION WOULDN'T APPLY.

NORMALLY, THE ONLY TIMES WE DON'T APPLY GOOD TIME, WHICH IS A PRISON MANAGEMENT TECHNIQUE.

IT'S A WAY OF KEEPING THE PRISON SAFER.

IT'S A WAY OF ENCOURAGING REHABILITATION WITHIN THE PRISONS WHICH IS OSTENSIBLY THE GOAL OF THE CARCERAL SYSTEM.

THIS WOULD BE THE ONLY NON-VIOLENT OFFENSE THAT WOULDN'T QUALIFY FOR THAT GOOD TIME.

IT'S HUGELY PROBLEMATIC.

>> FELDMAN: YES, BUT I THINK IT WOULD BE POPULAR WITH THE PUBLIC.

THERE WERE TWO POLICE OFFICERS THAT WERE KILLED IN RECENT MEMORY BY FELONS WITH FIREARMS.

YOU KNOW, THERE IS, I THINK, PUBLIC PUSH BEHIND THIS.

SO, WE SHOULDN'T DISCOUNT IT COMPLETELY.

BUT, ALSO, YOU HAVE TO ASK WITH ALL THESE CHANGES IN SENTENCING AND IN ONE'S A FIRST-DEGREE FELONY, ONE'S A SECOND-DEGREE, ONE'S A THIRD-DEGREE, THE COURT PEOPLE, THE POLICE THAT MIGHT ALLOW SOME PEOPLE TO DROP BETWEEN THE CRACKS BECAUSE OF THE RAPID CHANGE THAT HAS OCCURRED HERE.

AND JUST ADMINISTRATIVELY HOW DIFFICULT IT IS FOR FOLKS ENFORCING THESE THINGS TO KEEP UP.

>> LOU: TRIP, I WANT TO GO TO YOU.

IF LAWMAKERS DRIVE AWAY FROM SANTA FE AT THE END OF THIS, WHEN THIS IS ALL OVER IN JULY, HAVING PASSED LITTLE OR NO LEGISLATION, ARE THERE ANY NEGATIVE POLITICAL RAMIFICATIONS FOR THE GOVERNOR IF THAT HAPPENS?

>> JENNINGS: YOU KNOW, I THINK OF THIS IN THE CONTEXT OF -- TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, IT'S LIKE A SESSION OR TWO AGO.

YOU KNOW, SHE NEGOTIATED A REALLY LARGE TAX PACKAGE AND LIKE GUTTED IT, BASICALLY.

AND REALLY CREATED SOME HARD FEELINGS IN THE LEGISLATURE.

IF SHE BRINGS THESE GUYS MID-YEAR IN AN ELECTION YEAR, AND FORCES THEM INTO A TOUGH SITUATION, AND REMEMBER THAT THE HOUSE HAS A MORE PROGRESSIVE BENT THAN IT DID TEN YEARS AGO.

YOU KNOW, IN SOME WAYS IT'S LIKE A SECOND-TERM GOVERNOR.

RELATIONS, YOU KNOW, A DEMOCRAT WITH A DEMOCRAT OR REPUBLICAN WITH REPUBLICAN, THEY SOMETIMES SOUR.

WE'RE KIND OF WATCHING THAT WITH HER RIGHT NOW.

AND HER NEXT TWO SESSIONS ARE GOING TO BE REALLY TOUGH, I THINK.

THEY'RE ALREADY GOING TO BE TOUGH.

>> LOU: CAN YOU SPEAK TO THAT?

>> FELDMAN: SHE NEEDS SOME COVER.

IN THE PAST WHEN IT APPEARS AS IF A SPECIAL SESSION IS GOING TO ACCOMPLISH NOTHING, OR VERY LITTLE, THEN THERE'S ANOTHER BILL INTRODUCED TO ADDRESS A RISING GAS PRICES FOR EXAMPLE.

OR THE CRISIS WITH THE FIRES DOWN IN RUIDOSO, OR IN ONE SPECIAL SESSION IT WAS IT HAD TO BE THE PURCHASE OF THE EAGLE'S NEST LAKE.

I DON'T KNOW WHY THAT WAS A CRISIS.

BUT WE DID IT.

AND THAT WAS ONE OF THE KEY ACCOMPLISHMENTS OF THE SESSION.

>> JENNINGS: YES, THAT'S WHY THESE CONVERSATIONS BEHIND CLOSED DOORS MIGHT PRODUCE SOMETHING LIKE THAT.

EXACTLY.

WE JUST DON'T KNOW.

FORMER SENATOR IS CORRECT.

SHE NEEDS SOME COVER ON THIS.

>> LOU: FROM WHERE YOU SIT, DANIEL, AWARE OF THESE CONVERSATIONS, WHAT DOES THE GOVERNOR NEED TO DO TO GAIN SUPPORT WITHIN HER PARTY AND MAYBE A LITTLE BIT ACROSS THE AISLE, IF THAT'S EVEN POSSIBLE, TO GET A FEW OF THESE THINGS PASSED?

>> WILLIAMS: THE ACLU DOESN'T SUPPORT ANY OF THESE BILLS.

I'M NOT GOING TO GIVE THE GOVERNOR ADVICE ON HOW TO PASS THESE BILLS THAT ARE GOING TO BE HARMFUL TO THE COMMUNITY.

I THINK THE BEST THING THE GOVERNOR COULD DO IS TO TAKE A SIGNIFICANT LOOK AT WHAT ACTUALLY NEEDS TO BE DONE TO CREATE PUBLIC SAFETY.

AND INTRODUCE A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT SUITE OF BILLS PROBABLY IN THE 60-DAY SESSION BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE TIME TO DO THAT IN THE NEXT THREE WEEKS.

NONE OF THESE BILLS ARE GOING TO CREATE PUBLIC SAFETY.

NONE OF THESE BILLS ARE GOING TO IMPROVE LIFE FOR OUR COMMUNITIES.

THEY'RE GOING TO HARM OUR COMMUNITIES.

AND SO I THINK THE BEST THING THE GOVERNMENT CAN DO IS DRASTICALLY CHANGE COURSE.

>> LOU: UNDERSTOOD.

DANIEL WILLIAMS FROM THE ACLU OF NEW MEXICO, TRIP JENNINGS, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR AT NEW MEXICO IN DEPTH, AND DEMOCRATIC FORMER STATE SENATOR DEDE FELDMAN, THANK YOU SO MUCH.

THANKS TO OUR PANELISTS FOR THAT DISCUSSION.

THE SPECIAL SESSION BEGINS ON THURSDAY, JULY 18TH.

EARLIER THIS YEAR 10TH GRADERS FROM THOREAU HIGH SCHOOL WROTE TO MEDIA OUTLETS AND OFFICIALS ACROSS THE STATE DRAWING ATTENTION TO A RECOMMENDED CLEANUP PLAN FROM THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT.

ACROSS THE NAVAJO NATION, CONTAMINATED URANIUM MINES HAVE BEEN POLLUTING THE AIR AND WATER AND MAKING PEOPLE SICK FOR GENERATIONS.

AS PART OF A PLAN TO FINALLY CLEAN UP MORE THAN A MILLION CUBIC YARDS OF CONTAMINATED URANIUM AND RADIUM WASTE AT JUST ONE OF THOSE SITES, THE U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY HAS PROPOSED RELOCATING THE WASTE TO PRIVATE LAND WITHIN THE TOWN OF THOREAU.

RELOCATING IT TO THE RED ROCKS DISPOSAL FACILITY WOULD MOVE THE URANIUM OFF THE LANDS OF THE NAVAJO NATION, BUT AS THE STUDENTS POINT OUT THE TOWN OF THOREAU IS PREDOMINATELY NAVAJO.

THIS SPRING, A REPRESENTATIVE FROM THE EPA MET WITH THE STUDENTS WHO LISTENED A PRESENTATION AND ALSO INTERVIEWED HIM FOR THEIR PODCAST.

OUR LAND'S SENIOR PRODUCER LAURA PASKUS VISITED THOREAU HIGH SCHOOL IN MAY AND INVITED THE TEENS ON TO THE SHOW HERE IN ALBUQUERQUE TO TALK ABOUT WHAT THEIR LEARNING AND WHO THEY'RE HOPING WILL LISTEN.

HERE'S LAURA, ALONG WITH THOREAU HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS REAGAN RUSSETTE, MIABELLA BURROLA, AND EZEKIEL GONZALES.

>> LAURA: HI, EVERYONE.

THANKS FOR JOINING US.

I'M HERE TODAY WITH EZEKIEL GONZALES, REAGAN RUSSETTE, AND MIABELLA BUROLLA.

THANKS FOR BEING HERE, Y'ALL.

SO THE EPA DID SEND A REPRESENTATIVE TO YOUR SCHOOL TO TALK ABOUT THE PLANS.

I'M CURIOUS, EZEKIEL, WE'LL START WITH YOU.

WHAT WERE YOUR TAKEAWAYS FROM THAT VISIT FROM THAT REPRESENTATIVE?

KENYON LARSEN I THINK WAS THE NAME.

>> GONZALES: HE WAS A GREAT GUY.

GREAT GUY.

I REALLY JUST GOT ALONG WITH HIM, I GUESS YOU COULD SAY.

I AM GLAD THAT THEY DID AT LEAST GIVE US THE TIME AND THE TIME OUT OF THEIR DAYS TO COME DOWN.

SOME STUFF IS A LITTLE HARD TO BELIEVE.

LIKE WHAT THEY'RE DOING, THEY THINK THEY'RE IN THE RIGHT, BUT THEY'RE WRONG.

THEY'RE THINK THEY'RE DOING IT RIGHT JUST BECAUSE THEY THINK THEY CAN JUST 80 YEARS LATER COME AND HELP.

BUT YOU KNOW, THEY'RE STILL WRONG AND THEY STILL MADE THAT MISTAKE.

BUT I FEEL LIKE IT WAS AT LEAST EDUCATIONAL AND HELPED US THAT THEY CAME DOWN, BUT AT THE SAME TIME I'M STILL FIRM ON I DON'T WANT WASTE IN MY TOWN IN THOREAU.

>> LAURA: MIABELLA, WHAT WAS YOUR TAKEAWAY FROM THAT VISIT FROM THE EPA?

>> BURROLA: I JUST FELT LIKE THEY WERE LIKE THIS IS WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO.

IT'S GOING TO HAPPEN AND YOU CAN'T DO NOTHING ABOUT IT.

IT'S LIKE IT'S SET IN STONE.

LIKE NOTHING WE CAN DO IS GOING TO CHANGE THEIR MINDS.

SO IT'S LIKE WHAT'S THE POINT OF THEM COMING OVER HERE IF THEY'RE SAYING THAT THIS IS WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN.

AND WHEN WE LIKE INTERVIEWED HIM, I GUESS YOU COULD SAY, HIS ANSWERS TO SOME QUESTIONS HE KIND OF LIKE SLIPPED UP AND IT WAS REALLY -- LIKE IS WHAT YOU'RE SAYING TRUE?

OR IS IT JUST TO EASE OUR PAIN TO WHAT WE'RE GOING TO GO THROUGH?

>> LAURA: REAGAN, YOUR TAKEAWAY FROM THAT VISIT?

>> RUSSETTE: I THINK IT'S JUST THE SAME AS THESE GUYS.

IT'S JUST I THINK IT'S POINTLESS TO SAY IT WILL BE A PUBLIC DISCUSSION OR LIKE GETTING THE OPINION FROM OTHER -- LIKE THE PEOPLE IN THE THOREAU COMMUNITY.

AND SAYING THAT OUR -- WHAT SEE SAY OR WHAT WE WANT IS LIKE VALUED IN THEIR EYES, BUT I FEEL LIKE THEY JUST TOOK EVERYTHING WE SAID LIKE AS STATEMENTS.

AND JUST LIKE ME AND BELLA SAID, IT'S GOING TO BE -- NOTHING'S GOING TO CHANGE IF -- LIKE REGARDLESS OF WHAT WE WANT OR WHAT THE COMMUNITY HAS TO SAY, NOTHING'S GOING TO CHANGE.

BUT I FEEL LIKE WITH WHAT WE'RE DOING NOW, AND LIKE WHERE WE ARE, I FEEL LIKE WE'LL MAKE A DIFFERENCE, BUT NOT AS MUCH IF WE DON'T HAVE LIKE A LOT OF PEOPLE WITH US.

BUT MY INITIAL THOUGHT TO KENYON WAS HE PUT A NICE -- LIKE A NICE FACE ON FROM WHAT HE REALLY WAS BECAUSE THE PODCAST, MOST QUESTIONS THAT THEY ASKED, HE WOULDN'T REALLY ANSWER THEM.

HE JUST KIND OF PASSED THEM OFF.

OR DURING THE MEETING WHEN OUR NAVAJO TEACHER ASKED QUESTIONS, OR ANOTHER TEACHER WOULD, THEY WOULD PASS IT OFF TO THE NAVAJO NATION EPA WHICH IS A NAVAJO WOMAN.

SO HE WOULDN'T ANSWER IT COMING FROM US.

>> LAURA: SO YOU GUYS HAVE A PODCAST, IS THAT RIGHT?

SO YOU INTERVIEWED HIM FOR YOUR PODCAST?

>> RUSSETTE: YEAH.

>> LAURA: YOU KNOW, THAT'S KIND OF AN EXPERIENCE REPORTERS SOMETIMES HAVE TOO WITH GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS.

WHERE THEY WANT TO GIVE US A PRESENTATION, BUT THEY'RE NOT ALWAYS GREAT AT ANSWERING QUESTIONS.

DID YOU FEEL LIKE YOU -- LIKE THEY HAD THEIR TALKING POINTS?

OR WAS IT A CONVERSATION YOU COULD HAVE?

>> RUSSETTE: IT'S JUST TALKING POINTS.

THERE WASN'T LIKE ANY SPACE FOR -- LIKE THEY MADE IT SEEM LIKE THERE WAS NO SPACE FOR US TO TALK.

WELL, FROM WHAT I FELT LIKE.

LIKE, ANY TIME WE SAID SOMETHING THAT I THINK WOULD HAVE BEEN LIKE A GREAT WAY -- A GREAT CONVERSATION TO HAVE TO GET MORE OF AN UNDERSTANDING BECAUSE WHEN THEY CAME I FEEL LIKE I LEARNED A FEW THINGS.

AND I GOT TO SEE ON THE SIDE OF THE FENCE JUST TO SEE MAYBE I'LL UNDERSTAND WHY THEY'RE PUTTING IT HERE.

BUT I'M STILL 100% NOT ALLOWING IT TO COME HERE.

BUT I THINK IT WAS JUST TALKING POINTS.

THEY DIDN'T REALLY CARE TO GET WHAT WE WANTED OR OUR TAKE FROM IT.

>> LAURA: WHEN I VISITED YOUR CLASSROOM IN MAY, THERE WERE LIKE MAYBE TEN OR FIFTEEN OF YOU WHO WERE HELPING ME UNDERSTAND THE ISSUES.

ONE OF THE THINGS THAT SOMEONE MENTIONED WAS THAT THE REPRESENTATIVE FROM THE EPA REASSURED YOU THAT YOU WOULDN'T HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT GETTING SICK IN YOUR LIFETIME, IF YOU WERE EXPOSED TO THIS WASTE.

YOU KNOW, THERE'S A LOT OF CONVERSATIONS AMONG ADULTS ALL THE TIME, KIND OF LIKE THIS SORT OF WHAT ABOUT THE CHILDREN KIND OF LINE OF CONVERSATION.

Y'ALL REALLY SURPRISED ME.

BECAUSE AS TEENAGERS YOU WERE KIND OF SAYING WE'RE NOT CONCERNED ABOUT OUR LIFETIME, WE'RE CONCERNED ABOUT THE FUTURE.

CAN YOU TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT KIND OF THE TIMELINE YOU'RE LOOKING AT, AND WHO YOU'RE THINKING ABOUT?

WE'LL START WITH YOU, REAGAN.

>> RUSSETTE: SO, FOR ME, I THINK HAVING THIS WASTE HERE IT WILL BE HARMFUL TO MYSELF, OF COURSE.

BUT I MAINLY CARE ABOUT MY SIBLINGS AND THEIR LIVES AND MY PARENTS LIVES.

BASICALLY, EVERYONE ELSE IN THAT COMMUNITY.

LIKE THE LITTLE KIDS THAT LIVE THERE.

IF THIS COMES HERE AND SOMETHING -- LIKE SOMETHING BAD TO WERE TO HAPPEN, OR LIKE THE WHOLE TOWN GET WIPED OUT, AND WHERE'S THE FUTURE GENERATION GOING TO COME FROM?

THERE WON'T BE ANYBODY THERE.

LIKE THE LAND IS GOING TO DIE.

NOTHING'S GOING TO STAY ONCE CONTAMINATION HAPPENS.

IT'S JUST GOING TO BE LIKE EVERY OTHER PLACE.

LIKE AMBROSIA.

LIKE NOBODY GOES THERE.

IT'S ISOLATED AND EVERYTHING.

I MAINLY CARE ABOUT THE SAFETY GOOD HEALTH FOR MY FAMILY AND EVERYBODY ELSE.

>> LAURA: EZEKIEL, WHAT DO YOU WANT PEOPLE TO UNDERSTAND ABOUT WHERE YOU LIVE AND WHY WE SHOULD ALL CARE ABOUT PROTECTING IT?

LIKE ANYBODY WATCHING THIS SHOW ANYWHERE IN NEW MEXICO.

>> GONZALES: BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY, THINK ABOUT IT.

IF SOMEONE -- IF IT WAS YOU, OBVIOUSLY, YOU WOULD CARE AND YOU WOULD WANT PEOPLE TO CARE FOR YOUR SITUATION THAT YOU'RE GOING THROUGH.

OBVIOUSLY, WE CAN'T MAKE PEOPLE CARE, BUT WE WOULD LIKE THEM TO AND WE WOULD ASK THEM TO CARE AND FOR THEIR HELP.

AND THE LAND IS BEAUTIFUL.

YOU KNOW, WHAT I COULD TELL YOU IS IF YOU COULD GO TO THOREAU AND SEE THE SUNSETS, AND THE HORIZON AND THE MOUNTAINS, YOU WOULD PROBABLY UNDERSTAND A LITTLE BIT ABOUT WHY WE WANT TO SAVE THAT LAND.

AND OBVIOUSLY, THOREAU THE PEOPLE THAT LIVE THERE, A POPULATION OF AROUND 2500, POSSIBLY.

OBVIOUSLY, YOU DON'T WANT TO PUT URANIUM THERE AND THEN HAVE ALL THOSE PEOPLE LEAVE.

IT'S A PLACE THAT'S UNCONTAMINATED.

IT'S BEAUTIFUL.

WHY DESTROY IT?

JUST SAVE IT AND PRESERVE IT.

>> LAURA: WHAT ABOUT YOU, MIABELLA, WHY DO YOU WANT PEOPLE TO CARE?

>> BURROLA: I WANT PEOPLE TO CARE BECAUSE IT'S LIKE MY HOMETOWN.

IT MEANS SO MUCH TO ME.

BECAUSE IF IT WAS THEIR HOMETOWN THEY WOULD REALLY DEEPLY CARE ABOUT IT.

I DON'T WANT IT TO BE CONTAMINATED WITH NUCLEAR WASTES.

>> LAURA: SO, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT ONE OF THE OTHER STUDENTS WHEN I WAS VISITING SAID, AND I'VE NOT BEEN ABLE TO REALLY STOP THINKING ABOUT THIS SINCE THEN, AND I THINK HE WAS TALKING ABOUT NOT JUST YOUR COMMUNITY, BUT I THINK NAVAJO PEOPLE AND NATIVE PEOPLE WHO'VE BEEN AFFECTED BY URANIUM MINING.

AND HE SAID, MAYBE THE GOVERNMENT IS TRYING TO KILL US.

AND I'M CURIOUS, LIKE, WHAT YOU THINK ABOUT THAT, AND IF THAT KIND OF SENTIMENT RESONATES WITH YOU AT ALL?

>> RUSSETTE: WELL, SHOUT OUT TO AUSTIN BECAUSE HE'S THE ONE THAT GAVE THAT RESPONSE.

I COULD UNDERSTAND WHAT HE'S SAYING.

AND I WAS THINKING ABOUT THAT, BUT I DON'T REALLY THINK SO.

I GUESS IT'S JUST -- IT'S JUST MONEY.

LIKE THEY WANT TO SAVE MONEY.

THEY WANT TO GET MONEY.

SO, JUST MOVING IT TO OUR LITTLE TOWN, IT'S NOT AS EXPENSIVE AS MOST PEOPLE WOULD THINK IT WOULD BE.

BUT I THINK IT'S JUST MONEY, AND LIKE I SAID, I COULD UNDERSTAND WHERE HE'S COMING FROM.

I JUST DON'T REALLY SEE IT.

>> BURROLA: I THINK IT'S LIKE A LITTLE BIT OF COLONIALISM AND A LITTLE BIT OF IMPERIALISM.

IT'S JUST LIKE SO -- THERE'S A LOT OF URANIUM MINES AND DUMPS ON THE NAVAJO NATION COMPARED TO OTHER SPOTS, IT'S ALL ON NATIVE LAND.

IT'S LIKE WE GOT ALL KINDS OF POWER AND YOU GUYS ARE JUST THE POOR BROWN PEOPLE THAT WE COULD JUST DUMP OUR WASTE ON.

BECAUSE NOBODY CARES ABOUT YOU.

AND IF YOU LOOK AT IT, THEY STILL CALL US INDIANS.

INJUNS, INDIANS, AND IT'S REALLY HURTFUL BECAUSE IT'S LIKE NO, WE'RE NOT.

LIKE WE'RE LIVING PEOPLE LIKE YOU TOO.

WE DON'T CALL YOU GUYS BY LIKE THE COLOR OF YOUR SKIN OR YOUR NATIONALITY.

WE'RE HUMAN.

IT'S LIKE SINCE YOU'RE NATIVE WE'RE GOING TO DO THIS TO YOU BECAUSE WE HAVE THE POWER AND WE'RE SUPERIOR TO YOU.

>> LAURA: I FEEL LIKE YOU ALL HAVE A LOT TO SAY ABOUT THIS ISSUE, BUT PROBABLY LOTS OF OTHER THINGS TOO.

WE'RE TALKING ABOUT COLONIALISM AND IMPERIALISM, AND MONEY, AND CAPITALISM.

I'M CURIOUS, WHO DO YOU FEEL LIKE IS LISTENING TO WHAT YOU ALL HAVE TO SAY RIGHT NOW?

DO YOU FEEL LISTENED TO?

AND WHO IS LISTENING?

>> GONZALES: FIRST OFF, OBVIOUSLY, YOU GUYS LISTENED.

OBVIOUSLY, THE WHITE PEOPLE LISTENED.

I DON'T WANT TO BE TOO -- AND OUR OWN PEOPLE SAY NATIVE AMERICANS.

LIKE OUR PRESIDENT BUU NYGREN, HE HASN'T EVEN LISTENED.

NATIVE AMERICAN HASN'T LISTENED AND RESPONDED.

>> RUSSETTE: LIKE MULTIPLE LETTERS, AND TRIED TO GET IN CONTACT WITH HIM.

HE KNOWS WHAT'S GOING ON AND EVERYTHING.

BUT I FEEL LIKE HE JUST CHOOSES NOT TO GET INVOLVED WITH HOW HIS SOCIAL STANDARD IS.

LIKE HE'S ON TOP WHEN IT COMES TO NATIVE AMERICANS AND RESERVATIONS.

I FEEL HE PROBABLY DOESN'T WANT TO GET INVOLVED.

>> LAURA: WHO ELSE DO YOU WANT TO BE LISTENING RIGHT NOW?

LIKE CONGRESSIONAL DELEGATION.

WHO DO YOU WANT TO BE PAYING CLOSER ATTENTION TO WHAT YOU ALL HAVE TO SAY?

>> BURROLA: THE PRESIDENT, JOE BIDEN.

BECAUSE WE HAVE A LOT TO SAY.

>> GONZALES: OBVIOUSLY, PEOPLE WITH POWER.

YEAH.

>> RUSSETTE: JUST PEOPLE THAT ARE WILLING TO HELP US.

AND LIKE YOU SAID, PEOPLE WITH POWER.

PEOPLE THAT COULD HELP US MAKE CHANGE BECAUSE THIS HAS TO STOP.

IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE ALL DON'T WANT TO HAPPEN, BUT WE JUST WANT SOMEONE WHO'S -- LIKE WHO HAS POWER JUST TO HELP US AND TO STAND WITH US.

BECAUSE FROM WHAT I SEE IT -- EVEN HAVING OUR COMMUNITY AND EVERYBODY WE COULD, BUT THEY ARE STILL LIKE -- LIKE THE POOR PEOPLE, ALMOST.

I FEEL LIKE REGARDLESS WE WON'T MAKE ANYTHING HAPPEN UNLESS WE HAVE SOMEONE WHO IS ABLE TO MAKE SOMETHING HAPPEN FOR US, OR THAT HAS A VOICE IN EVERYTHING.

>> LAURA: WELL, THANK YOU ALL SO MUCH FOR BEING HERE, FOR MAKING THE TRIP TO ALBUQUERQUE, FOR TALKING WITH ME.

I APPRECIATE THAT YOU CARE SO MUCH ABOUT YOUR COMMUNITY.

AND I WISH YOU ALL THE BEST OF LUCK.

>> RUSSETTE: THANK YOU FOR HAVING US.

>> GONZALES: THANK YOU FOR HAVING US.

>> LOU: THANK YOU TO LAURA.

WE WANT TO END THE SHOW THIS WEEK WITH SOME EXCITING NEWS FOR NEW MEXICO IN FOCUS.

AFTER MORE THAN A YEAR OF SHUFFLING ME, JEFF, AND LAURA IN AND OUT OF THE HOST SEAT WE'VE OFFICIALLY HIRED A NEW FULL-TIME HOST FOR THE SHOW.

VIC VELA, A FIVE-TIME EDWARD R. MURROW AWARD-WINNING JOURNALIST WILL START AT NMPBS ON AUGUST 1ST.

VIC HAS WORKED IN TELEVISION, NEWSPAPERS, AND PUBLIC RADIO IN A JOURNALISM CAREER SPANNING THREE DECADES.

MOST RECENTLY SPENDING NEARLY TEN YEARS AS A NEWS AND PODCAST HOST AND REPORTER FOR DENVER'S NPR AFFILIATE, COLORADO PUBLIC RADIO.

VIC'S PODCAST BACK FROM BROKEN FEATURES COMEBACK STORIES FROM PEOPLE WHO HAVE OVERCOME THE BIGGEST CHALLENGES IN THEIR LIVES.

THINGS LIKE DRUG ADDICTION, ALCOHOLISM, AND MENTAL HEALTH ISSUES.

VIC HIMSELF SPEAKS OPENLY ABOUT HIS JOURNEY AS A RECOVERING CRACK COCAINE ADDICT LIVING WITH HIV.

BACK FROM BROKEN HAS WON SEVERAL AWARDS INCLUDING BACK-TO-BACK WINS FOR BEST PODCAST BY THE COLORADO BROADCASTER'S ASSOCIATION.

WE COULDN'T BE HAPPIER TO WELCOME VIC TO OUR TEAM AT NMPBS AND NEW MEXICO IN FOCUS.

YOU CAN READ MORE ABOUT HIM ON OUR WEBSITE, JUST GO TO NEWMEXICOPBS.ORG AND CLICK ON NEW MEXICO IN FOCUS AT THE TOP OF THE PAGE.

THANKS FOR WATCHING.

WE'LL SEE YOU NEXT WEEK.

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