New Mexico in Focus; 248; Golden Apple Awards Part 2

You And a plus for excellence. I had this week meet three more of New Mexico's golden apple award winning teachers. Then the line panelists weigh in on Albuquerque's irrigation ditches, implications of the newest propate ruling and reactions to the outsourcing of New Mexico's famous Nabeware. All this and more on a show that is informed, involved and in depth. New Mexico and focus starts right now. New members of the Middle Rio Grande Conservancy District Board could mean a new look for Albuquerque area irrigation ditches. This week, managing the water in Albuquerque and the city's more rural neighbors.

Also coming up the New Mexico Supreme Court and the death penalty, the California Supreme Court and Prop 8 and President Obama's pick for the highest court in the land. But at first, an apple for the teacher. Each year, the Golden Apple Foundation recognizes seven outstanding educators from around the state with the Excellence in Teaching Award. Last week, you met three of the winners. This week, you'll meet three more. But before that, we sit down with two leaders of the foundation to tell us more about its goals and purpose. The Golden Apple Foundation has a mission to recognize excellent teachers and improve the quality of teaching. Joining me in the studio to talk about it is Celia Merrill. She's the executive director of the Golden Apple Foundation of New Mexico. Joining us by phone in Chicago is Martin J. Mike Koldike. He's the founder of the Golden Apple Foundation. Welcome and thanks to both of you. Thank you, David. Thank you. Maybe Celia, beginning with you, we'll meet later in the program three more of this year's award-winning teachers we met last week, three of the seven previously. But before we meet them, can you just tell us what's the main idea behind this award?

Well, the award for our Golden Apple teachers is clearly excellence in the classroom and these are amazing teachers and their ability to engage students and really inspire them as learners. But it's also about their passion for the profession of education because in their schools, these teachers are also teacher leaders. They're helping new teachers, they're mentoring student teachers, they're helping their colleagues. They just are not only about helping their own students, but they're also about helping their colleagues. And this year it is middle school teachers who were the award winners and rotates each year, right? Right. This year middle school next year elementary. Mike, as I understand it, this program started many years ago in the 1980s. I'm curious if you can tell us a little bit of the background of what gave you this idea to have this award? Well, the time-honored story, and I think if accurate, was that 25 years ago, this is the 24th year of the Golden Apple Awards. And so about 25 years ago watching the Oscar awards from Hollywood, Pat said, you know, there really ought to be something like this for teachers.

And this was at a time when the situation in Chicago was particularly bleak. There was labor strife, teachers were on strike. The performance of the Chicago schools was very poor. And so I went to Arnie Weber, who was the president of Northwestern University, and to Bill McCarter at your counterpart at WTGW Channel 11 in Chicago, and pleading the case to have a prime time, wonderful awards program for Golden Apple teachers. And McCarter said he would do it, and Arnie Weber said that he would take the recipients, the winners on a sabbatical tuition free. So that was the beginning, and it's now the gold standard for teacher excellence in the five counties around Chicago.

And so Mike's sticking with you, basically the idea here is to recognize teachers, and it sounds like the problem was that many teachers would not get recognized otherwise. If that's a good synopsis, why do you think it is that more teachers don't get recognized for excellence? Well, I think that we're pleased that we've seen a remarkable change over the last quarter century. And I think that at least in New Mexico and in Chicago, we're seeing the President of the United States and the Secretary of Education, Arnie Duncan, are saying that there's nobody more important than the teacher to success in the classroom. The student now comes helping kids, and I think that that message is caring loud and clear.

So I think that things are not only improving in the classroom, but I think there's a high degree of recognition now through organizations like Teach for America and our work in Chicago and New Mexico, that the recognition that things get better in the classroom when you've got a great teacher, and that this is really vital. Now, Celia, we're talking about recognition. I imagine another word that we might be able to use as rewards. Now for the Golden Apple Award winning teachers, there's I think $1,500 prize, there's $4,000 in professional development that they can then use. But the salaries for most teachers in this state, there's thousands of teachers here, tend to be awfully low. They've gone up recently, but they tend to be pretty low relative to other states. And your eyes, is that part of the problem? I think that the three-tiered licensure, the education reform in 2003, that really brought that recognition to the importance of the teacher that Mike is describing, helped New Mexico tremendously in the pay for teachers, because it put them at a minimum salary that was more regionally equitable. And it also ensured minimum salary gains for their progress through the levels of licensure.

So I would say that that really made a difference for teachers in New Mexico. You have to stay, you have to keep up with the crowd, but I think our salaries now are closer to being equitable within the region and not as poor in the national comparison as it used to be. So we don't have the teacher shortages that we had prior to that reform. Can you walk us through the process by which teachers are nominated and then ultimately wind up at this table, like they did last week and now this week too? How does that process work? Well, it begins with a nomination that can come from anyone in that teacher's world. It can come from a student, it can come from a parent, it can come from the principal. Our colleagues or even community members, past students oftentimes nominate their teachers. And so given that nomination, we then invite the teacher to fill out an application. The application asks them to really reflect on their practice. We want to see inside their classroom as best as we can. And then we go through two rounds of reading and it culminates with a visit by three educators to the school of each finalist.

They spend the full day, they watch the teacher in the classroom, they interview folks. So it's a very comprehensive process. And many amazing and wonderful teachers that are become finalists, but we're only able to recognize seven. So there are many good teachers out there. And Mike, this is a program that you started there in Chicago and it has obviously spread to New Mexico. I believe to other states. Do you know how far it has spread? Is it in all 50 states? Is it in half of the states? It's a good question. I've had friends who said that we should have taken it national years ago. We really felt that we were really wanted to focus on adding programs to what the Golden Apple teachers can do. And that's why we have the Golden Apple Scholars, both in New Mexico and in Chicago, where the award-winning teachers use their great talent to coach and mentor kids in college who are on their way to the classroom.

So that has resulted in literally hundreds and hundreds of college graduates who have had the benefit of exposure to these prize-winning teachers. It's been terrific. In answering your question, I don't have a good read. We know there's a program similar to Chicago's in the West Coast of Florida in Seattle in Salt Lake City in Iowa. So there are scores of communities where the Golden Apple Awards have been knocked off and we encourage that. We have made no effort to to maintain to set up standards and to tell them how to do it. We're busy in both in New Mexico and I know Cecilia, people have done a first-rate job and of course in Chicago. No, Mike, I should have mentioned this maybe at the start. There are viewers out there who may say to themselves, God, that name sounds familiar.

You, of course, are the co-owner of the isotopes here in Albuquerque and I believe you have a home here in New Mexico. Did those New Mexico connections have any influence on the fact that we have a Golden Apple Foundation here in New Mexico? You might say that. Yeah, I think that the fact that we had the opportunity to work with Governor Richardson and some of his predecessors and with friends like Duffy Swan and others that we're willing to step up and help start the program in New Mexico. Obviously, we couldn't do it from Chicago. We had to have friends in Albuquerque and Santa Fe that were willing to step up and make this a reality. I think the Cecilia and her colleagues have done a first-rate job and it's really important. I think starting with the Golden Apple Awards, which sets a tone, the recognition of excellence in teaching, then the teachers that are so honored can begin to step up and take leadership roles in professional development in training Golden Apple scholars of college kids to have a brighter future.

And that's probably a great segue, Cecilia, to talk about these scholars. As I understand it, this has been going on for almost a decade and it began with college students, but now it's actually involving high school students. Yes, yes. We started, and I want to back up just a little bit and say that we've learned a great deal from the Golden Apple Foundation of Chicago, even though they have not become a national organization. They certainly are very helpful to us. But we started with college students, very near licensure, ready to go into the classroom. But in 2007, we recruited students right out of high school who wanted to become teachers, wanted to teach in New Mexico plan to go to school in New Mexico to prepare to be teachers. So we are now, those students are back for their third summer institute with us. We recruited a larger group last year and we've got 50 starting this summer right out of high school 2009 graduates.

If there are some of those college students or high school students even in our audience tonight, Cecilia, would you have anything to say to them if they are considering teaching as a career? Oh, I think if any student that might be thinking of teaching as a career really should be in touch with us because by the time these students graduate, we're confident that they're going to step into the classroom very ready to be outstanding in their own teaching practice. And they're going to be part of a community that's been built of novice aspiring and master teachers over several years time. So the support that they're going to have is going to be extraordinary. So absolutely any student that wants to be a teacher should become a Golden Apple Scholar. Now Mike, we only have about 30 seconds left. As I understand it, you were a third grade teacher once upon a time, but you decided to go into business instead. I imagine though you still think very highly of teachers.

Oh, absolutely. And you know, my only actual teaching experience was while I was in the United States Army and the Conner Intelligence Corps. And I was a substitute teacher in Chicago. And even that brief experience taught me just how really difficult it was. Even in the third grade, this is no place for amateur. You really have to have the kind of coaching that Golden Apple scholars receive from the teachers in New Mexico. I mean, this is a tough and intricate profession. And it's grossly underestimated as to the degree of difficulty that and the kind of elaborate training that one must have to succeed with kids. Well, we're going to have to end it there. It's, it's truly an impressive program. Mike Coldike, Celi Merrill. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. This year the Golden Apple Foundation in Mexico honored middle school and junior high teachers, as we mentioned earlier, who were making a difference in April. We had a chance to sit down with several of this year's award winners. We introduced you to three of them last week.

And now this week we get to meet three more and hear their stories. Our remaining three winners who are here with us, there were four, but we have three with us are Cindy Lee. She's a seventh grade science teacher at CCSnow Middle School in Bayard. Across the table is Brita Townsend Judd. She's a special education instructor at Wilson Middle School here in Albuquerque. And also with us is Laura Greer. She's a seventh grade science teacher at Houston, junior high school in Hobbs, New Mexico. Thank you for joining us. Maybe very first question, Brita, to you. I'm curious, you've won this award. I should say congratulations. I guess at the very start. What in your view makes your classroom different? My classroom is a place where kids can come and be appreciated for their differences and their strengths and their accomplishments. And we're kind of like a family in that classroom. And these are special kids that you teach, right?

Yes, my students have developmental disabilities. And they're with me for most of the day. And so I teach all subjects to them. And is there any difference in how you approach these kids that maybe other teachers here in New Mexico who have the same sort of students? Maybe could learn something or would see a different approach in your classroom? Well, I'm not sure that it's that different, but I teach my students skills that will last them a lifetime. For instance, in math, we'll learn to count money and handle money by having a classroom-based business where the kids make and sell items that they've produced in the classroom. Also, we do a lot of cooking and baking. We go out in the community quite a bit, so they're learning to write the bus and access the community. That sounds great. Same question. Cindy, what makes your classroom unique? I teach a science classroom, and I sometimes say science is a verb. It's an action.

So the big part of my class, students work as scientists every day. They come to class, and at the beginning of class, they have jobs. One day of the week, they're doing zoology, one day horticulture, one day meteorology, doing the weather report. One day, they're doing an assessment, which is interpreting graphs and charts. That's not their favorite one in one day. They're doing physics explorations on a physics table. They fill out a job application at the beginning of the school year. They have to have references, science experience, and they get hired to put on a crew. We have a lot of plants and animals, and a lot of things in the classroom. Students have stewardship of those things, so they take care of it. They fill out their time sheet, and their grade is based on that for the beginning of class. We're doing other things later in the class, but everything tries to focus on possible careers. Try to get them to realize that they don't have to choose a science career, but at least they'll know that there's things available that may be of interest to them related to science. Laura's same question to you. What makes your classroom unique? Well, my classroom is also a science teacher in Hobbes, and I have an inquiry-based classroom where there's always a question, or there's something that they have to find the solution.

I'm not the answer person. They work on teams. They have challenges. We do our junk bag wars, which is kind of like junk yard wars, where they are given supplies and told that they have to create something or build something in these stipulations, work as a group. They know the guidelines, but there's more than one answer, and that's what a lot of things in science is. It's not just that there's just a black and white answer to everything, and I get them to not be afraid to try, and every day there's something that they don't know what to expect, really. That keeps an excitement, I think, towards science. I feel the same way that I know that I've got to encourage them to go into some careers that not all of them are going to be scientists, but they'll have to know how the world works. Now, the career that each of you went into is education. I'm curious, maybe beginning Laura with you, you're the person here at this table who's got the most experience, I think, 17 years in the classroom. Why did you decide to get into this business, and has it been everything that you thought it would be?

Well, I went to school, I wasn't an education major, I was a biology major, and Mary the petroleum engineer went to Hobbes, looked around, and a friend of mine said, you ought to be a teacher, they need biology teachers, they need science teachers. Went back to school, picked up the education hours, walked into that classroom, and ninth grade students, and was hooked from day one. I mean, the challenge is the interactions every day, there's something different. Some of them are low points, but overall, you're going to have a different challenge every single day. You're going to have different students every single year, you start over. You have many opportunities to bring some success to a wide range of students. Now Cindy, you've been a teacher for 16 years, I believe. What hooked you? My story is actually similar to hers. My first degree, my bachelor's degree was in botany. I got hooked on science when I was in junior high because of a teacher, and so I was just driven to do science. Here in New Mexico?

As I finished that degree, and then I had children along the way, so I was not working full time as a scientist, doing a few different things, but with the focus on my family, my husband, and I started a business, he was doing taxidermy, and I was subbing because that was something that was flexible that I could do with my children, and be still be involved with them at school, and realized what people had told me for a long time that I should be a teacher. And so then I thought, okay, we'll look at it, and I come to realize that I can inspire others to be interested in science. I think maybe because I was got hooked in middle school, I was junior high then, I kind of see it's like, well, I can do the same thing, I can get kids hooked on science the same way. Now, Brita, it sounds like both Cindy and Laura had others who said, you know, you should really think about being a teacher, is that part of your story too? Well, it happened later on, I was not a great student, but I often thought about ways that school could be a better place, and how it could be more meaningful. I didn't decide to go into teaching until my late 30s, and between jobs of family and friends said, why don't you come and be an educational assistant?

Well, I was hooked, and three years later, my colleagues and family really encouraged me to go to teaching. And what exactly hooked you? It was working with the kids, and just the reward of seeing them get it, and see just how much they could really do. Now, Brita, maybe sticking with you on the opposite end of this sort of spectrum, you know, kind of how you got involved. What's the biggest challenge you face? I imagine there's probably a ton from discipline to no child left behind, and maybe the worry that your school might be labeled a, quote unquote, failing school. Oh, we already are. What would you say is the number one challenge you face at your school? I think it's the things that happen outside of school that are just beyond our control, so it could be poverty or parents that don't value school. Just many things like that, and I try to address those in the classroom by having it be a safe place for the kids to come and develop relationships with them, and I do have my students for three years.

So that's a really great thing to be able to develop a relationship with each of those young people, and provide something that maybe they're not getting outside of school. All right. Cindy, what do you see as the number one challenge that you face? In my classroom, the biggest challenge is lack of support for the students when they're outside of the class, whether that support from parents to encourage them to get homework assignments done, to get things back. Maybe it's lack of support. I sometimes have students who come to school. Our school has 100% free lunch and free breakfast, but there are still students who come who have not had breakfast or who have not gotten up on time or maybe even just the influence of media or whatever the social pressure that it's okay to not be cool to not do your schoolwork. My biggest challenge is getting students to do their assignments. I can do everything I can to get them excited about science while they're in the classroom. That's not enough time.

So when I give them an assignment to do outside, it doesn't come back a lot, and that's the biggest challenge that I have to get my students to feel that success is the things when I can't be with them that they need more support from family, from community, and we have some. You know, you're going to see it across the board, but there are a lot of students that don't have that support, and they come to us, and we teach them with what they come with, and we try to make up the difference, but sometimes you can't make up all the difference. Not easy. Laura, down there in Hobbes, would you cite different challenges than the ones that have been mentioned already? I could agree with what they say, and also the diversity of the students that walk through the door. You have, we're a wide-ranged community with different economics going on with the oil field and ups and downs of that. We have the uranium enrichment plant that moved in, so we have people from different parts of the world. I have a student from India, I have a student from England, and then we have the students that have lived and never been out of Hobbes. So the diversity of what you face each class period, and trying to find things that they can all be successful at, and change up the curriculum enough, and the instruction enough to keep their intention, keep their focus, get them to come in early to do a project, to finish a PowerPoint, or to finish up a lab, and have them talk about it outside the classroom, and build it up.

These are things that the support at home, you're always going to face some challenges there, but the diversity of the backgrounds, and you can't do anything about what's going on when they're not in your classroom, but when they're in my classroom, I can make a difference. Now, each of you are clearly making a difference. You've been recognized by this Golden Apple Award. One issue that I wanted to ask you each about that comes up a lot when education policy is in the news is merit pay. Now, each of you has been recognized as doing a great job in the classroom. What do you make? Maybe a beginning laurel with you of this notion that maybe we should move toward merit pay so that all teachers, I guess in some sense, are rewarded for performance in the classroom. What do you make of that? Well, the problem with merit pay that I've always had is who's going to decide, and what are the criteria, and what's going to be the thing that you're judged on, and the group of students varies every single, we don't have a pick, we're not picking our classes, we might pick a baseball team or something, so that changes every single year.

I think that the idea is popular to pay people that produce more and do more, but it's very difficult in what we face each year. Cindy, do you think there's a way to construct? I saw you nodding your head. Is there a way to construct merit pay that does it in a fair, reasonable way? We haven't seen it if they're basing merit pay mostly on, well, what, the test scores of the students' performance, that's student merit, not teacher merit. We just today saw seven teachers who received Golden Apple Awards who were very good teachers, but that doesn't mean that, and that was a rigorous process with people coming and interviewing, once we're nominated, and then finalists, people who came and observed, people who know what they're looking for, and have found us to be worthy teachers of this prestigious award. If there was something similar to that to determine merit pay, but if merit pay is only based on, if your students are making AYP, because as I said, we only have them for that short time that they're in our class, and we can work as hard as we want, but you can't base how hard we work on just student performance, we don't have control over all of that.

Breeder, you are not in your head as well. Yes, again, what is the criteria? And if it's based on test scores, many of us wouldn't have a paycheck if we're based on merit pay, so I don't see how that could be a good idea. One question I wanted to ask each of you, we mentioned that there's a $1,500 award that goes with this prestigious award that you've each been given, there's also $4,000 in professional development. How are you guys going to spend those paths of change maybe beginning with you, Laura? Well, I'm still researching what I want to do with the grant money, or if I want to bring something in the classroom, I've looked at everything from a trip to the Galapagos, and we've been talking about this. And you're right, or studying sharks, these coasts, I mean the possibilities, and to have this opportunity, every time I go in one direction, something else pulls me, and I know we have 18 months to decide, so I'm still looking at my options.

Cindy, what are you thinking? Well, the $1,500 probably couldn't come in a better time. My husband has returned to school and is working on a nursing degree, so finances are a little short in our household. Our son is graduating next week from Brigham Young University in Provo, and in May, our daughter is graduating in Austin with a nursing degree, and this money is going to make it much easier to go to those two graduations, which what could be better for an educator than to be able to see, you know, children's graduations without the financial stress, and the $4,000 you know, we're just, have just met and we have similar interests. I want to do something that's a science experience that I can come back, whether it's, I teach a unit on sea turtles, I would love to go to Costa Rica and do some help with some research on sea turtles, or go to the Galapagos, or something that's a science experience that I can come back and bring back as much as I can to my students and say, this is what it's like. I want to go to, by the way, Rita, briefly, what are your plans for these funds?

Well, I'm sure that most of the $1,500 is going to go back into my classroom. We are very high needs school, we have very little funding, and so I'd like to buy supplies for it and take my kids out in the community some more. As to the $4,000 professional development grant, I'm considering going to New Zealand, which has one of the highest literacy rates in the world, and see what they're doing there that works with students, not only regular students, but students with disabilities, and also how they're doing bilingual education. Well, again, congratulations, all three, Rita Townsend, Cindy Lee, Laura Greer, thanks for joining us. As we mentioned, there is one more Golden Apple Award winner this year. He wasn't able to join us in studio, but we definitely want to honor him, Richard Walker. He's a history teacher at Estancia Middle School. Our congratulations go out to him, of course. You can learn much more about the Golden Apple winners and the Golden Apple Foundation. By heading to our website at umexconfocus.org, while you're there, leave us a message about what you think are the characteristics of a good teacher, or maybe tell us about a teacher that has made an impact in your life.

We'll share some of those thoughts in the weeks to come. Congratulations to all the winners of the Golden Apple Awards for this year. Last week, the line panels weighed in on what they thought made a good teacher. You can watch that discussion and see all of last week's episode by going to New Mexico and focus.org and clicking on View Past Episodes. Now, let's introduce the panel for this week, starting with the regulars. Whitney Waitchess Shire. She's a political consultant, long time's strategic re-ist. I just made up that word. Jim Skerentino, a radio host, an Albuquerque journal columnist. Teresa Cordova. She's with us again, former Bernalio County Commissioner and Director of Community and Regional Planning. In the School of Architecture at UNM, she does a great job there. She's filling in this semester for Margaret Montoya. She'll be returning soon from her sabbatical, very, very soon, in fact. And our guest panelist, my Facebook buddy, Dave Moss, a reporter with the Santa Fe reporter in general, Bon Vivon. Welcome to you all. Now, let's get started. The middle of Rio Grande Conservancy District or the MRGCD.

The organization that controls irrigation ditches from Cochity Reservoir all the way down to Boscadella Pache near Sacoro, of course. A farming community we were when the district was founded in 1800s, but the majority of the district's funding now comes from densely populated Bernalio County to the tune of about $7.2 million. And that includes Albuquerque right here. Now, property owners are owners around the ditch. We'll be voting for new board members so they could determine whether or not the Albuquerque area gets a formalized system of recreation trails along these irrigation ditches or asickrias, depending on your choice of boards. Let me start with you on this. There's a try that's been had with us led by D.D. Feldman in years past. It got shot down resoundingly by the board, but we have some board member voting coming up. In fact, the polls close on the 30th with the full vote early voting on the 30th full vote in a second. What is the problem with doing what we've all been doing in this city since forever, taking a nice walk in the ditch, riding a horse. How can the board be so opposed to this? What's the issue here?

It's a change. It would be a little different. It's an idea coming from outside this rather insular little-known sub-government agency called MRGCD. The taxes people, people don't even know they're being taxed, but I think what you have is just this resistance to ideas from outside. But they do have one legitimate concern. Now, there's more than that. I think from the position of the authority, they have concern over losing control over the ditches. They do more than irrigate. It's flood control as well. And the ditches do serve that function. They have to be maintained. That's an enormous job. And there is some fear that if there's power sharing that will complicate things, there'll be liability issues for this and that. On the other side of it, the people who proposed this may not have done their homework very well in laying the groundwork. They might have pushed a little too hard because it is change and people don't accept change very easily. But you're right. We already have this network of trails. You can bike, you can ride horses, you jog on them right now. I don't know how much the world would be different if this is ever formalized.

Well, it'd be interesting to see what happens on this election because I do think there's being more life shed now in the MRGCD. If I screwed up those letters, excuse me, they're never before. And it's interesting to see that the conservation voters of New Mexico are endorsing in that race because they're seeing a little local government agency that has enormous powers where there may be some opportunity for change if they want if you see. But at the same time, to rest, we've got a situation where money talks and almost 70% of their funding through the taxes, Jim's mentioning, comes from Bernalio County from this dense area. And, layer on top of that, a poll at the Conservancy District did themselves showing clearly a majority of people want to have these trails. It just seems like there's an inevitability here. Like, if you want to keep your job as on the board, it would seem pretty clear. You better get with the program here. So what is in it for people to resist this? I ask again. Well, first of all, I'm not sure that it's 70%. I think there are a lot of, there are mixed feelings about it. For one thing, there are a lot of people that don't necessarily want strangers, if you will, walking along through the back end of their properties. You can see in their backyards, you can see in their back windows.

So I think there has to be some sort of sensitivity around that. And I know that it varies depending on which part of the, along the ditches that your property lies. So there are some mixed views around that. Generally speaking, Jim's point, the fact that people are currently using the ditches for various forms of recreation, that is true. So part of the question becomes, and how do you balance expanding that use with what its major function is, which is to provide the irrigation? And I think that's where a lot of this lies. I mean, if you're going to put concrete along these trails, is that really a good way to spend the money? How does that impact the use of the ditches for irrigation, for example? And I think that Jim's point also about maybe perhaps not having done the homework. Any time a legislator obtains money from the legislature, it becomes, and it involves going through a local government agency, it really becomes important that you coordinate with that local government agency. Otherwise, there are a lot of bureaucratic, legal, financial, various other kinds of details that need to be, that they need to take into account. It's their sort of judiciary or legal responsibility to make sure they're taken into account. And sometimes, if you haven't done that beforehand, then there is, then there is that conflict.

And then even though it may be some of you might want to support, you can't support it. But I think also it's important to note that the conservancy in recent years actually the taxes have been brought under control. They've actually gone down. I know there has been issues with the executive director in the double dipping, and there's arguments about how, you know, just how, you know, it's his competence worth the amount of money that he pays. But if you look at their reserves, for example, they have, they have tremendous reserves and also the NRA. Tremendous to the point of almost 20 million. And so that enables them to then to do all kinds of other things. Let me swing these guys in. Let's start to cut you up there. Just a little bit of time. What need again, you know, I'm a former butter. I live in the North Valley, the east side of Anderson field is a special thing. But it's always interesting to me how my neighbors were this idea of ditch rights, just using as much water as, I mean, I had a neighbor hell bent on replicating Versailles. It seemed like it was unbelievable how much water this guy used. No sensitivity to what was needed downstream.

And so that's an issue that this board has to wrestle with as well. It's a very complicated situation. People, the entire thing is complicated. I mean, we're just scratching the surface on the issue of trails. I mean, you want to talk about bridges. What about all the people who want access on horses and bicycles? Water rights is really at the heart of all of this. What happens in dry years if you have everybody that has rights to that water and it's too dry to provide it for everybody. So, I mean, what the, what the conservancy district has to deal with is so complex. And most people have absolutely no idea about it. And that's kind of where I'm thinking it. I mean, I live in the North Valley and I can see both sides of this. I can see that there are areas along those ditches that could be improved for safety reasons. You have kids that use them, bikes that use them. So, you know, the improvements in a lot of ways would be pretty good. But I suspect what happened with D.D. Feldman and then the group that was pushing for these trails, they had the one plan that they wanted. They pushed it through and that's what they, you know, the conservancy district said, no way, you know, we're still in charge of this. There's going to have to be a happy medium that they get found. But I will say this, like we were talking about earlier, this is like the APS board elections. It's so important and nobody pays any attention to them and a lot of the reason is because they're the special election campaigns.

Most people, I live in the North Valley and I couldn't tell you the names of the people who are running if we didn't even look at it for doing this segment. And that is exactly the problem. Very important stuff, not nearly enough exposure. I think that if I just throw one last point here, I think the point you make is extremely important and people do need to be paying a lot more attention with going on with the conservancy because of this control of water and its impact. And I think for those of us who are really pro agriculture, I think it becomes really important also that we really focus on these ditches. The other thing I think has become important is we move into this election because maybe it's something that maybe don't people don't know a lot of detail about. For example, some of the incumbents together, I mean there's a lot of issues for example around Bill Turner because of the conflicts of interest. He makes money off of Lionsgate, he's sort of doing, you know there's a lot of sort of issues. But he's made some good calls and a lot of other ways. A lot of other issues. But to lump him in with Jim Roberts for example, I think is really problematic. I know in our case for example, Jim has been great in helping his open up ditches and he's been a real supporter of cultural issues.

It really is now a cookie jewel, David. We're not shutting it down. I'm very fine. I'm very fine. That's fine. That's fine. As far as you're concerned. But it's going to be interesting and this could be, it seems to me the last cycle, the last go around with the agency actually jumps into the modern world so to speak. And we'll see what happens with this because a lot of money, a lot of issues that stick. Now, just this week the California Supreme Court upheld Proposition 8. I'm sure you heard about this. The gay marriage ban enacted by voters last November. But said that the 18,000 same-sex couples married before the ban took effect will remain legally wed under the state law. That paradox gives rights to 18,000 couples that others won't be able to benefit from. David, this is kind of odd. It's like this is half life if you're one of the couples. But then again, it just seems to me that the court was saying, well, we want to protect the will of the voter but at the same time the legalities of the language. It gets very complicated and they try to satisfy both and no one's happy here. Oh, what do I think?

Are you happy with this? I don't know if happy or unhappy is the way to come with it. It kind of sounds like when we abolish the death penalty here but we still got guys on the row. Good enough. Well, thinking about it, I guess the sort of question is whether this is going to have an impact in New Mexico and it's not going to have any kind of real legal impact. It's a different state. The question is whether this is going to get people here, the LGBT community, riled up enough to really make a concerted effort to, you know, pass domestic partnerships. One of these days or actually just start going after game marriage straight on, taking it on rather than civil unions or partnerships or whatever. That's a good point. I mean, we've got some momentum if one chooses to see it this way. The New England state certainly now. Iowa and New Mexico is in sort of this interesting fuzzy middle where we're not really for or against necessarily. But the question begs that Dave brings up. Is there anything for activists here to take away from with this prop aid situation in California to work with? I don't know that the ruling would have helped or hindered any of their efforts here.

I think that they just basically made a ruling on retroactivity, which is I was thinking the exact same thing when we were talking about the Supreme Court decision. They didn't want to wait into the retroactive discussion, which is what I'm curious to see if we do here on the death row issue. I suspect what is going to happen with what happened in California. I think eventually they are going to overthrow it. I think that the way I see this issue is that there is the general society and its acceptance of homosexuality. And then there's the voters. It's an entirely different group. And I think among voters, there's still a majority of people who are opposed to same-sex marriage. And in most cases, domestic partnerships as well. It's why I've said that it's a bad position for the Democrats to take in their platform. But in society in general, I mean, you can't argue that you go to a movie now that homosexuality isn't very accepted in mainstream media in a way that it never ever was before, particularly between women. I mean, I've seen 3 PG-13 movies in the last month that openly have homosexual activity among women. And it's largely accepted. So, I mean, I think that what's going to happen in California, they've already said that they're going to come back and try to get rid of the proposition eight and overturn it.

I think that eventually that will happen if it's not the next year, eventually. 52-48 is not an overwhelming vote, which is what California had last time around. So maybe when he's running, it just needs another cycle. 52-48, the other way around, would not be an overwhelming vote. I think the court, it is the largest state in the union. The other state courts do sort of look to California in many respects. I mean, it's not binding precedent, but if the California court had intervened and overturned this and had gone out of the Toyota overturn it, you would have had this continuing momentum building across the country that we've seen with the various court decision. It sort of ended a little bit with California. I think we're on reset button here in California and New Mexico, because the same-sex marriage activists here in New Mexico ran into the fact that we still remain socially conservative state, and they don't even have the support within the Democratic Party that they had expected. This weakened the hand of the activists somewhat.

I think they're reconvening. They've also ran into a roadblock in New Hampshire, where the bill would have gone through, except that the Democrats refused to pass a bill that would protect churches from the discriminatory claims if the minister refused to officiate a same-sex wedding in the church. And I think what you're getting a little bit to and as part of the reset is a little bit of pushback from some people. I think there's acceptance of like, you know, to each his own. If you want to get married, fine, that's your thing. But there's also this sense that some of the activists have been pushing a little too far in trying to actually change people and going from tolerance to forced acceptance. And that's why I think you see rising acceptance for, you know, homosexuality, particularly among younger generations, but you're seeing that same level opposition to marriage. Well, there is the acceptance for marriage. No, there is not. And I think it's because people are reading it now is saying it's not just about your rights anymore. There's this perception now that it's about something more. And I think the activists may have hurt themselves a little bit with the eruption, the meanness, the vile outrage after the vote and propositionate,

where people who just said, this is my religion, this is my belief or viciously attacked. And I do think there's a little bit of pushback. And I think the activists are going to withdraw a little and they're reassessing right now. Well, one of the issues, I think, first of all, it was a California State Supreme Court that made a decision. And part of the legal issue here is that first of all, you had a law that was passed that the claim is, or the potential is, that it was banned what is fundamentally a civil rights. And so now the question, the legal question was, can the electoral, through the electoral process, can a law be passed that violates civil rights of the Constitution from the State of California? And that became the legal issue. And the part of the concern is, does that set a legal precedent to say that civil rights can be taken away by an act of an electoral process? The Missouri Browns position, if I remember correctly, that is the idea of natural law would supersede the legalities of how we currently view marriage, David. That there's got to be a way to accommodate both.

And the Supreme Court seemed to just not go with that or again. All right, so on the sixth, the June, there's going to be a summit in Albuquerque of the LGBT community where they're going to be talking about specific issues, like this, whether to pursue a legislative means, whether to go litigate this and see what happens. And I guess that doesn't directly answer your question, but I mean, it seems to me, a lot of this has been very legislative based, not necessarily community outreach, not dealing with the average citizen saying, hey, there's a gay population that you're in your family, there are people you know. It hasn't been that there's just been this weird domestic partnership phrase, which to a lot of people just sounds underhanded. I mean, to me, we're talking gay marriage and I'm perfectly happy saying, yes, gay marriage, you know, that doesn't seem to be coming up. But you're not helping their efforts because they're trying to call it domestic partnership, because I don't know if that's actually convincing anybody. But I think that they figured it out, that that's like banging their head against a brick wall that they're not going to get through right now. So the discussion, at least in New Mexico, has been focused on domestic partnership.

I mean, I mean, the federal law is one of the questions, because, you know, we can go back to this. With this sitting president we have now, he's been pretty proud of it. Look at civil rights legislation, for example, if it had been done state by state, we may not, we still may not, you know, there's still states that may not have civil rights legislation. So that's why the marriage, we're going to federal law. So that's one of the things that we're looking at the problem with Don't Ask Don't Tell right now. I mean, I don't, I think, you know, federal dealing with gay marriage on a federal level is so far off that we can't even deal with Don't Ask Don't Tell. I mean, if you believe that marriage is a fundamental right, it's part of the question, right, to get marriages. Is that, is that, are people entitled to that right now? And that was part of what Gallup was asking in this latest poll as a matter of fact. It's interesting that the numbers, to what he's point about, or David's point, I'm sorry, just made, you know, folks about Don't Ask Don't Tell, people are sick of it. They're ready to walk away from it, but however, folks are still a little squishy when it comes to gay marriage. Yeah, and then talk to the people who actually show up and cast a vote on election day. And a lot of times when the Democrats and the progressive groups push gay marriage with domestic partnerships, all they're doing is exciting, they're conservative base, it may not have shown up to vote anyways.

So it continues to be a very polarizing issue. But again, I still think that because mainstream media has really embraced homosexuality in so many ways that it's only a matter of time before domestic partnerships and eventually same sex marriage passes in all places. There you go. All right, on Tuesday, May 26th, President Barack Obama chose federal appeals court judge Sonia Sotomayor. To be the first Hispanic justice on the Supreme Court, he called her a compassionate seasoned jurist with, quote, a depth of experience and a breadth of perspective that will be invaluable as a Supreme Court justice end quote. Next week on to Mexico and focus, we will explore her nomination in depth with a panel discussion and then a further discussion right here at this table. Right now, let's take a couple of sneak peek minutes about next week's discussion of Whitney. Some of the battle lines are forming. Give us a sense of where you're seeing the opposition coming from. Well, I keep looking at it in terms of what the Republicans are doing because it's so fun to watch, you know, everything from, you know, state level to federal level right now. Watch if you can't bridge the way. Well, it is because the debate that's going on in our party right now is extremely important and because there isn't, we don't have a Republican president, people are finding their voices in lots of different ways that they didn't really have before.

One in particular was John Borrella, who is the APS school board member who's talking about forming an exploratory committee to run for Congress against Martin Heinrich. And he immediately took issue with, you know, Republicans in DC and, you know, and, you know, and, you know, brushlin' on everybody else for saying, you know, why are you attacking this? I mean, we knew that we were going to be get basically, beginning a liberal, you know, judge appointed. But we should be celebrating the fact that she is the first Hispanic to be appointed to the Supreme Court. And I like that he did that. I completely agreed with him. I think it was a good nomination. I think that in terms of, you know, what her beliefs are towards the Constitution, we knew what we were going to get with this president. We should celebrate the fact that he picked, you know, not only a Hispanic but a Hispanic female. What do you, you mentioned Mr. Gingrich and his twittering about for being a racist? Some harsh language is starting to put up there. It is. I mean, something was going to emerge, you know, there had to be anything. I mean, you know, as a journalist, I'd be, it'd be fantastic if there was a sex scandal that emerged out of this. I'm not hopeful because it seems like it seems like, you know, Obama just sort of picked the only possible candidate.

Maybe not. I'm not in the Supreme Court. I'm not on this team. But, but, you know, I think that there actually, you know, is a bit of a fair point on this, on this, I mean, people have been bringing up this reverse race to miss you for years. And having, you know, reported in San Antonio, having reported in Santa Fe, I can say I can see people's points on that. I mean, if you look at, say, like the Jerome Block race, I mean, you have, you know, a Latino versus a Caucasian and, you know, for Michigan or something. And, you know, in letters to the editor and comments on the blogs all over the place, there was straight up racism. And it wasn't, you know, you know, against Latinos, per se. I mean, it was strictly against Rick Glass, the white candidate. And that stuff is coming up. And maybe it is time to let us go. No, real fast. She's going to be confirmed, but there are serious questions raised by her 2001 lecture at the University of California, Berkeley, which I pulled because this allegation has been made that she's been taken out of context. Well, in fact, this is a rather troubling speech she gave. And what she said, quote, I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that long.

And that's the problem. I'm going to cut you off, because you're going to have a chance next week and first get to rest is not. So I want to give her the last word on this. Well, first of all, I sat and watched Obama's announcement of her and then her speech. And I want to say, as a Latina, it was extremely moving. It was a very, it was just, it was deeply moving and deeply profound. And I think that is really an important point for so many of us who really had that emotion. I mean, she had a standing ovation for three times in that room. And you could just see the deep emotion. So then when I looked at the journal the next morning and looked for the above the fold front, you know, top news that would read, you know, first Hispanic Obama nominate first Hispanic Supreme Court, it wasn't there. There was a sex scandal on, you know, from the jail. And I, you know, away in the bottom of corners that some new Mexicans react. And so it was very, I thought very disrespectful.

Who's above the fold in the New Mexican now? Not in, not in the journal. So I think it was very disrespectful to the people, to the Latino community in the state not to have done that. Yet the New York Times, of course, had that. Then I opened that up and there was that headline as well. So here's the other thing though. These, she's clearly, clearly qualified, eminently qualified. And we could, you know, next week you'll get a chance to talk about just how qualified she is. And you can talk also about sort of, you know, about this speech and what the, what the meeting is of that speech I understand was she was trying to convey. And I think we're disingenuous to pretend that we don't. Here's what really bothers me. When you look at Rush Limbaugh, for example, right? Rush Limbaugh, Nuke Enrich, Hannity, all these folks, the hate, the ugliness that they are spewing. I mean, you know, the way in which they speak about her, the way in which they speak, I think people need to be very disturbed about. This man just got a $400 million contract renewal with Clear Channel for eight years. He's bringing in close to a million dollars a month to spew bigotry, hatred, and ignorance. And if you listen to him, he's not giving the facts. He's just spewing hatred.

It's interesting. I'm sorry. We're not going to have you next week for this because it's going to be a fascinating discussion. And probably when we get out of here, we're going to talk to you more about this. So, but next week's going to be okay. So be sure to tune in tonight now. Time to put these guys on the clock. Putting them to the test. No, it works. They have one minute as a group to tackle each of the following topics. So the name of the game is brevity. First up, New Mexico, iconic name brand, Numbay has been associated with the state for decades. The favorite gift item is a symbol of New Mexico's heritage, Indian pueblo, just oh my god for what its name. But for the past year, Numbay Sound Santa Fe Foundry has been closed production of those silver dishes and housewares and all that stuff is being made in India and China gym. And my sister in Michigan is fit to be tied because when she visited and bought a boatload of Numbay, she made an assumption. The part of the reason she bought it was it was made up the street for where we bought it. The Pueblos are very upset about imitation Native American art being sold in Santa Fe.

And yet here we're getting imitation Native American art from India. I'd like to know if they've dropped the price. Right. Commence her to the drop. No, they probably haven't dropped the price. They're probably just trying to stay in business. If ever there was a sad example of what happens in a state when you over tax, over regulate, require too much for labor, what you do is you drive business away. It's probably the only thing that they could do to survive. Why else would they go to China? I'll just find in Santa Fe. No, I'll just find in Santa Fe. Well, no. All right, so I have a piece this week in the reporter. Santa Fe, China crazy at the moment. We've got, we've had the Chamber of Commerce go to China in April. We have them going again in October. This week is focused on China week with the Santa Fe Council on International Relations. Mayors been there. It's just China, China, China. And I think as this new ambassador has been appointed from a Western state, people are generally hoping that some sort of partnerships with China as it becomes a wealthier nation may work out. Now, as far as non-bay movement and stuff over, everybody's been doing that in Santa Fe.

I don't think it's, they manufacture Santa Fe doesn't. I think all my sister tonight told her. We need to maintain a local manufacturing base. There you go. The absolute. In addition now, New Mexico is $3 billion share of the federal stimulus money. Our state may also be in line. Receive some portion of the money left over when other states reject funds because of these strings attached. Let me start with two things here, I guess. Using the money we've got wisely, I mean, this is like a bag of gold out of the sky. This is amazing. Well, the first thing we did, we used it back during the budget time, the state legislature. That saved a lot of budget cuts, including budget cuts related education. Second thing, we're using it for a lot of roads. And there were a lot of road projects that were up in the shovel ready, right, which meant they had done the federal regulations, the NEPA, they had all their designs and they were ready to go. So we're seeing a lot of roads built in places that might not have gotten that money any time soon. The various Indian tribes are getting a lot of the direct direct money also from the stimulus money. So I think Tony and I in his office is doing a good job of being that money circulated.

We're wasting this chance. The largest portion of the money is going to Medicare. The second largest portion is going to quote-a-quote environmental projects. Infrastructure is way down on the list. The money is not being spent on stimulating the economy. We're not in this hole because our social programs were lacking money. 10 seconds. Can we put more of it into films? You know, when I see it, I'll say something about it. You know, my co-writer at the paper actually put in one of those little forms that Bill Richardson's office asking for a newspaper bailout. I don't think he's got much of a response. Yeah, I may throw it on that too. All right, House Bill 285 signing the law by Governor Bill Richardson speaking to which. On March 18th was titled abolish the death penalty. David, let me stay with you. You say in your reporting coming up soon, this law is a misnomer. The law actually applies to crimes committed before July 4th or after July 1st. Anything after July 1st? Death penalty is not on the table. But we have crimes.

Two guys on death row, several cases that are people are still pursuing the death penalty. If 10 years from now they find, you know, a murderer of a police officer or something that did it 10 years ago, his death penalty still up. I get really annoyed every time I, you know, Richardson gets his meeting with the Pope. Last week he got celebrated by Hollywood for being humanitarian at the year. He didn't make the brave decision of going and commuting those last few sentences. It's in his power to do it. Now it's maybe the Supreme Court's power to do it. They've got a real tricky decision ahead of them too. And the district attorney here is having some heartburn. What are you saying? This is a causing backlog. Yeah. Well, you got Paul Astorger, the cop killer that's sitting there on death row. Michael Astor, I'm sorry. I'm sorry. Thank you. But the bigger issue here is whether or not the state Supreme Court is going to dive into the issue of retroactivity. We deal with retroactive issues on criminal penalties all the time. We did it with Megan's law. The legislature clearly passed a bill that was not retroactive. If the Supreme Court changes that, then they're stepping on what the law was at the legislature passed. Interesting. She says that retroactivity was an option. She stands by that. Well, no, she said that it was out of their purview.

Can I take a moment by the way to, for the viewers in the panel and everybody that works here, I'd like to thank you to us a court of a, for the amazing stuff you did, stepping in from a market monitorial like this and just getting right to it. You're not going anywhere, but I just want to make this. I've just never had a chance to say it to say thank you. I just wanted to take the time while I had 10 quick seconds. Now, do you have a topic you'd like us to tackle here on the line? Do you want to send a note to Carissa? You can send us an email at infocusatcantemy.org or drop us a line on our blog in New Mexico and focus.org. And we'll see you soon. All right. Don't forget to tune in next week for our in-depth discussion on the nomination of Sonia Sotomayor to the US Supreme Court. That topic and other important news of the day will be up for in-depth discussion next week. So until then, thanks for watching and we'll see you next time. Thank you. You

You You You