Funding for New Mexico in Focus is provided by: Viewers Like You >>Nash: This week on New Mexico in Focus revisiting the big stories in 2025.

From local elections to public media funding and police reform.

>>Reneta: We all want to have a community where we feel safe.

>>Medina: We're not going back to where we were.

We've built a strong department that has accountability, that believes in constitutional policing, >>Nash: Plus a few other big headlines from the year that was including Trump 2.0's impact on our state.

New Mexico in Focus starts now Thanks for joining us and a very happy New Year.

I'm Nash Jones.

This week we are going to run you back through some of the major stories we covered last year, and how we did things a little bit differently than other news orgs.

It's been a busy one for us, and there is no way that we could get all of it into the space of an hour or so.

As always, we want you to understand why we chose the segments we did for this week's show.

This is a pretty simple formula.

We looked at some of the analytics from the PBS app to see which stories you watched most.

And then our team came up with a list of our own.

And.

Well, there you have it.

One story that hit especially hard for us was the push from national Republicans to strip federal funding from public radio and television stations, including our own.

It worked.

And President Trump signed something called a Rescission Package, making it official.

A lot has happened since.

For example, state lawmakers backfilled one of the two years of funding that got stripped away.

But tonight, we are going to take you back to how we covered this story that was so personal for us, which is always a tricky assignment.

In the debate that led to the defunding in the first place.

Speaking of the president, his second time in the white House has, as expected, had some far reaching impacts on New Mexico, whether it's Snap funding, oil and gas drilling and immigration.

Trump has left his mark.

But tonight we will rewind to a story from NMIF reporter Cailey Chella about a nonprofit that's trying to bring some humanity to Trump's massive deportation machine.

Also, we couldn't have put the show together without looking back on the end of a decade long, federally mandated effort to reform the Albuquerque Police Department's legacy of using excessive force on city residents.

The news came in May, and we dedicated two full episodes to the story you'll hear tonight from the family of a man who APD officers killed nearly 15 years ago and who fought hard for those federal reforms.

Plus, Police Chief Harold Medina, who saw the Department of Justice oversight to its end.

But we begin with the biggest local politics story of the year, the Albuquerque mayoral election.

By now, most of you probably know Tim Keller handily won the race and began an unprecedented third consecutive term just yesterday.

To help make sense of the runoff race, just a few weeks ago, we brought in former Democratic City Councilor Eric Griego and former Republican Councilor Greg Payne.

Greg, Eric, thanks so much for joining us on New Mexico.

in Focus.

I want to start with you, Eric.

It was, a pretty significant showing by Keller.

About 16 percentage points over white.

Was that a more significant win than you were expecting?

>> Griego: Yes, absolutely.

I mean, I, I, I'm not, I don't claim to be a pundit, but I thought it was going to be, you know, a big win, but a single digit win.

But I think, my own take on it was, it was kind of a referendum on Trump more than anything.

And I think the, the messaging that, that Darren White sort of came out with sounded too much like Trump.

And, you know, this is a this is a pretty blue city.

You know, Kamala Harris won it overwhelmingly.

And I just think that, I actually think that if white had sort of gone more sort of moderate in his positions, as opposed to sort of coming out with the guns blazing, you know, he might.

Yeah.

And, you know, he was sort of an avatar for Trump.

And I think that's that's what a lot of people showed up.

You know, they did want a local version of Trump I think so.

>> Nash: And Greg, you you predicted this outcome.

What gave you that idea that it was going to be this spread out >> Payne: Actually, and first of all, thanks for having me, Nash, and thanks to you and Jeff.

And it's really good to see my friend Eric Griego.

We used to do battle back in the day, but, I'm looking forward to hopefully, you know, an enlightening and, maybe sometimes feisty, but definitely friendly conversation.

But back to your question Nash.

That wasn't tough to get.

I mean, it wasn't, you know, I don't practice Santeria.

I don't have a crystal ball.

I looked at the numbers on the early vote, and it was 51% Democrat, 36% Republican, with about 13% independent.

Based on that, I had to make an assumption.

And the assumption was, is the Democrat vote an anti Keller vote?

Or, as Eric said, an anti-Trump vote?

Well, it was definitely an anti-Trump vote the Democrats are going to vote for Keller, the Republicans were going to vote for, for white.

And then the Independence.

The question was, what did they do?

And I felt because of how weak he was in the initial sander off, poll, meaning Keller.

And I don't think he did very well.

In the initial, runoff, 64% of the voters voted for someone who wasn't named Keller in the initial election.

>> Nash: In the initial election >> Payne: Thanks, Nash.

No, you're absolutely right.

But with the independents, I felt like they would cut a little bit more for Darren.

So I just gave him, you know, seven percentage points the other six over to Tim.

So 57-43 and it just happened to go my way.

>> Nash: Yeah.

>> Payne: This time it doesn't always go that way.

>> Nash: Well Eric when you were on before the regular local election or rather after you were talking about the Uballez vote and whether or not the folks who showed up for that specific candidate, a progressive candidate, would show up for Keller in the runoff, or, if they really just wanted Alex.

What did you see in that regard in terms of what we saw with the runoff?

>> Griego: You know, I think most of them kind of said, like, you know, worst two evils for a lot of folks who just weren't crazy about Keller.

And but they thought that there was no way that they were going to be able to either stay home or support white.

Right?

I mean, so, I don't think he got all of them.

I don't think all it because was a lot of young folks, it was a lot of first time voters.

I don't know that they all got pushed to the polls like they did because there was some, you know, there's some pretty significant effort to push these younger first time voters to the polls.

So I think there were some drop off there.

And, but I think for the most part, the ones who did vote, I think, you know, may have done it reluctantly, but said, you know, they were convinced that Keller was the guy and also a lot of a lot of folks who had been supporting Uballez if not Uballez himself, sort of said, like, you know, this is what we this is where we got to go.

A lot of the folks who were behind him, including most of the groups, by the way, they ended up endorsing Keller.

And so I think it kind of gave everybody the green light to move.

>> Nash: But at the same time, Darren White was courting those voters, right.

Kind of positioning himself as a change candidate.

Greg, how do you assess his, job of doing that?

>> Payne: Yeah, I think he, I know Darren and Darren can be a very charming guy, and I was a little surprised that we didn't see that side of the campaign.

Who was very angry.

White guy was a lot of, you know, thumping the thumb on the pulpit and pointing and that kind of thing.

I think the success for Tim Keller is presenting himself as a very positive, very upbeat.

He's a very smooth politician.

I haven't seen anyone that good, but Daren came across as unnecessarily angry.

I think that the people of Albuquerque were open to a change.

I think they want the city to move in a different direction.

But, Darren just he was not the vehicle for that in his presentation and in his message.

But I do want to say this Eric is absolutely right.

This wasn't necessarily a pro Tim Keller vote.

This was an anti-Trump vote this past election.

>> Nash: Okay.

Do you think that there were there were other issues at hand as well, or that this really feels like a referendum on Trump?

>> Griego: I think it was.

I think if you even look at the messaging that came from the Keller campaign, it was primarily about, you know what, Darren, the Darren was going to be sort of, you know, going to was going to bring ICE in and it was going to be sort of inhumane with him.

And sadly, that's what he said.

I think Darren said he could have come out and said, look, listen, we need to go in a different direction.

We need to have be thoughtful about these sort of these crime issues and these and these homelessness issues.

But this on day one, I'm cleaning up the camps.

On day one we're going to going to get back to, hardcore policing and arresting people.

And, and so when it was just like that was that was red meat for his base and he was but that's not he needed another 10 or 15 points to Greg's point, and he just didn't really appeal to those sort of moderate Democrats and sort of, you know, maybe disaffected Republicans >> Nash: somewhat of an anti ice vote then.

>> Griego: Yeah.

Well, I was anti I think his anti fascist vote.

Some people would say like the way things are going under Trump, I think a lot of again we're we're a blue city.

I mean we're not a I wouldn't say we're progressive city.

We're definitely a hardcore blue city.

>> Nash: And so in in that regard, Eric, you left the Democratic Party.

Greg, you're no longer a registered Republican either.

Are things too polarized at this point for a progressive voter, a moderate Democratic voter, to vote for someone like Darren White?

>> Payne: Yeah, I think they are I think they are so polarized.

And maybe I'm not making the point that I want to make as well as I'd like to make it, but I think the national dynamic and I see this up in Santa Fe, Democrats are so enraged at Trump that any opportunity they have be at a protest, be it some sort of a rally, be it a vote in the Albuquerque city, election, they want to do something to mark their disagreement with this administration.

I get that, and I also I'm going to agree with this part of your statement.

Eric Albuquerque's a blue city and a Republican needs to be aware of that when they run.

Well, and Keller was, quite unpopular and overcame that.

Some polling before the election had his approval rating ranging from 33 to 53%.

Eric, how did he overcome that to, to win in such a big way?

>> Griego: He tacked right.

I mean, everybody said like, you know, we got to appeal to that Uballez, that left Vote.

I mean, he tried to hold them up, but at the Albuquerque Police Officers Association, they were not fans of Keller.

The fact that he was willing to sort of re-embrace, Sean Willoughby, who if you've listened to some of the things he said, I mean, are >> Nash: He endorsed him?

>> Griego: Yeah, The police officers Association who like, thought he was, you know, maybe not as pro cop as eight like him to be.

They did they came out and so he actually tried to sort of build, make some inroads on the, on the, on the right as well.

I would say the right sort of more on the conservative side of the political spectrum while trying to hold as much of the left as possible.

It's exactly the opposite of what Darren Darren Darren doubled down on, sort of holding his sort of much more conservative, base.

So I think he, you know, having the police officers association, that was huge, Keller getting them endorsement because I sort of gave them a like, oh, maybe he is the best guy on crime.

>> Nash: I mean, the Albuquerque Journal poll in September said crime is the top issue for voters.

Darren White was a former top cop at the state and at the city.

So why did Keller get the vote, or the endorsement of the police, as well as the vote of maybe people who are concerned heavily about crime in Albuquerque?

>> Payne: Eric said it, and I've said it, too.

I mean, it really was the lesser of two evil elections.

People felt like Tim has not done the job.

And I'd like to talk to you.

The fact that at some point there's a different Tim Keller, the candidate, versus Tim Keller, the mayor.

>> Nash: Yeah.

Well, so, Alex, Uballez came on this program and basically made that criticism, saying, that Tim Keller talks the right talk on the campaign trail, but his actions don't line up.

Do you see that?

>> Nash: No, absolutely.

I think he is one.

Like I said, he's one of the smoothest politicians I've seen.

Going back to that debate where Darren's upset and thumping the podium, there were times when if you're watching kind of off camera, Tim is off to the side.

He's smiling, he's confident.

He knew he's going to win that debate.

The problem is he's been mayor of Albuquerque for eight years.

What has he done and what's he going to do with another four years?

I think the voters thought about that.

The problem was taking it all the way back to the lesser of two evils.

They felt like Tim was someone they could live with.

Darren was too much of a wild card and a wild card with a bit of a history.

>> Nash: So you're saying he's a stronger candidate than he is?

a govenor >> Payne: Absolutely.

>> Nash: In terms of a mayor, somebody who governs.

>> Payne: Yeah, no, listen.

I mean, he's never lost an election.

He's good.

But it's almost like Robert Redford in The Candidate.

What do I do now?

And the question we have, we've had eight years of what would Tim Keller do as mayor?

And the answer is he looks good as mayor, but does he get the job done?

And that's why so many people were undecided or looking for someone else to vote for.

Problem is, lesser of two evils.

>> Nash: Thanks to Eric Griego and Greg Payne for helping us break down the Albuquerque mayor's race, we will be watching as Tim Keller embarks on his third consecutive term in the mayor's office.

Unlike in Albuquerque, Santa Fe voters, you didn't have to wait an extra month to find out who your next mayor would be.

And that is because the capital city uses ranked choice voting.

The sort of instant runoff system that's also used in Las Cruces.

Alan Weber chose not to run for a third term in a crowded field lined up to try and replace him, city councilor and labor critic Michael Garcia came out on top with about 36% of the vote in the first round, >> and Michael Garcia won.

Yeah.

Oh, wow.

>> Nash: I was in Santa Fe for Garcia's watch party.

The mood was upbeat after polls closed, either due to the towering churro bar or because Garcia was up by double digits.

Likely both, but counting the election Day votes took hours, and some of Garcia's supporters, who included friends, family and even current and former city officials, began to trickle out a little.

After 10 p.m., one voter told me that she planned to set an alarm and check the final result from bed.

But moments later, the county clerk's office went live on YouTube to begin the ranked choice voting process, projected onto a big screen for the dozens remaining to gather around.

One supporter frantically searched for Garcia, who was doing a live radio interview.

In the other room, County Clerk Katherine Clark began clicking a button that knocked the last place contender out and redistributed their voters second choices to those candidates.

After seven quick rounds of ranked choice voting, she announced Garcia the winner to cheers and hugs around the room.

I caught up with Garcia for an interview after he thanked supporters.

Mayor Elect, how do you feel?

>> Garcia: I'm feeling amazing, feeling amazing, excited and ready to get to work.

And, what do you say to your supporters?

I'm just beyond thankful for having the confidence in me and ultimately, giving me the trust and confidence.

And, and ultimately the responsibility to be their Mayor.

I mean, it means a lot to have somebody to lead the city.

And, I think it's one of those things I'm going to wake up tomorrow, a different person tomorrow, being the mayor elect.

It's going to be a whole new role for myself.

So I'm excited.

I'm ready and and truly, tomorrow I'm going to be reaching out to the Weber administration saying, let's get to work.

Let's begin this transition.

Because ultimately, I do want a successful, smooth transition.

>> Nash: The you said during your speech, the theme of your campaign is unity.

What do you say to those who did not vote for you?

>> Garcia: I'm still going to be your mayor, and I'm going to work just as hard for those folks.

Yeah, it's one of those things, whether you voted for me, or you didn't even cast a vote for me, or you didn't even vote in the election, I am going to be working my tail off for you.

>> Nash: And now you are going to be shifting from serving on the city council, the legislative branch, to the executive branch.

What's your message to City Council as you take the mayor's office?

>> Garcia: So it's going to be the same as always.

Work collaboratively together.

I mean, I've always been a councilor who wanted to work with others in regards to finding common ground and getting work done.

Now, as a mayor, I get to do that even more so and really want to empower the councilors to get their work done.

And and in trying to get their agendas completed on behalf of their constituents.

>> Nash: What's day one?

As the mayor of Santa Fe.

>> Garcia: day one begins.

We, January, January, day one, we really begin to reshape our budget that will ultimately provide resources that work for the residents of Santa Fe.

That means working to ensure we have more police officers, to have a safer community working to ensure we have more resources for affordable and workforce housing development.

I want to begin to develop a plan to actually build housing.

That is my priority.

We've been getting it.

We've, in the past allocated resources.

Now I want to develop the actual homes where people can live in.

>> Nash: Thanks to our crew for getting us up to Santa Fe on Election Night.

As we showed you in last week's episode, we were able to get a lot closer to the action in 2025, and we plan to do plenty more of it this year.

For 11 years, the US Justice Department was in and out of courtrooms as part of a sweeping effort to reform the Albuquerque Police Department.

City leaders and the DOJ signed a settlement agreement in 2014 after a Federal Investigation found an unconstitutional pattern of excessive force by APD.

In May, a federal judge dismissed that agreement after determining that city police had complied.

The investigation followed a long string of fatal police shootings and community outcry.

Among the most persistent voices were those of Steve and Renata Torres, whose son Christopher APD officers shot in the back while he was unarmed in 2011.

To take stock of the end of the DOJ era at APD, The Torres' came into our studio back in May for a conversation with executive producer Jeff Proctor.

>> Jeff: Renata, Steve, it is so good to see you both.

It's been a long time and welcome to New Mexico in Focus.

>> Reneta: It's great to see you too and thank you.

>> Steve: It's good to see you.

>> Jeff: Okay.

In April 2011, Steve, I'd like to ask you this question.

Albuquerque Police Detective C.J.

Brown and Richard Pilger fatally shot your son, Christopher, in the backyard of your family home.

What do you remember about that day?

>> Steve: You know, it's funny, I think because I can my memory as I get older is fading, and I don't remember a lot of the things that I can't- that I should remember, but but my memory of that day is still pretty- Very vivid, very clear.

I can remember almost everything.

Who was there, what they said.

The memories are still there.

Burned into my- burned into my memory banks and uh- You know, it started out as a as a plain, ordinary day.

I left to work.

I still remember the last- The last thing Christopher said to me was that his wrist hurt And I said, “well take it easy when you go to work.” Just- and- and then a few hours later, all hell breaks loose.

>> Jeff: Renetta, as you're sitting here almost 15 years later now, it's been a long time since we've had this conversation.

But what is missing from your family?

>> Reneta: Well, I think you know, the stark reminder, I think, for all families who lose, a member and it's- all members, not just a child, is there- Is this vacant- There's this hole where this beautiful person had once been an integral part of your family.

And I think certainly that's how we feel.

And it isn't just on major holidays.

As some people would like to imagine.

It's every day.

I think there's something that occurs every day that brings Christopher back to mind.

What we've tried as a family, Steven and I and our sons and their families, is just to honor Christopher's memory and to figure out how we can- make a meaningful contribution at whatever level it is by our activities, our- the organizations we belong to, etc.. And so how can- how can we one: and primarily, honor his memory?

But then what do we do to help improve the community that we live in so that it is a better place?

>> Jeff: Renetta.

After those two officers killed Christopher, you two joined with a number of other families who lost loved ones to police violence and other interested members of the community to form sort of a coalition to demand reform at APD.

Take me back to the beginning of when that formed and what the plan was to try to get something done.

>> Reneta: Well, actually, I think the grassroots group was formed, shortly after Alan Gomez was killed, his dad, Mike Gomez, gathered- he made contact with all of the family members and brought us together at his home to talk about just what kind of action could we take to bring attention, but I mean full attention to this situation with the police officers at APD.

And I think to a certain degree we were a little bit naive.

We actually thought that if we shared our stories with the mayor, with the city council, that there would be- An honest reception of what was going on in our community.

And instead we were met with resistance.

And I'll use resistance because there's probably a stronger word.

But we met resistance, and I don't know how anyone could any reasonable person could believe that.

After these numerous presentations at numerous city Council meetings in different formats, to tell the stories of these individuals that were killed by Albuquerque Police Department, how they could not feel something.

How can you be so cold and unable to even just sympathize?

Maybe not empathize, but sympathize?

So with that said, we went months and months trying to get the attention of the city council, of the mayor.

But I think our biggest problem with that was they didn't think there was a problem.

So if you don't think there's a problem, you're not going to address it.

You're just going to hope that all of us go away.

And I think that's what they thought we were going to do.

Eventually, if they ignored us long enough, we would go away.

Well, you know, you don't suffer that kind of a loss and go away.

Not if you think there's something else that could be done.

So what we saw across the country were other cities that the Department of Justice had come into to do these kind of investigations and imposed consent decrees.

So our hope was that we could get the Department of Justice to come in and do a comprehensive investigation of the police department here in Albuquerque.

So hours and hours, untold hours of work collecting information that went back decades on the Albuquerque Police Department and our hope in doing that was if we could capture what it looked like historically, but also, more importantly, what it was looking like as we were facing, you know, 2009 forward and the outrageous number of killings that we could really paint a compelling picture that would say, yes, you've got a problem, and we're coming in to take a look and we- finally we're able to get the Department of Justice here to look at the police department.

>> Jeff: Steve, let's fast forward.

We are now 11 years later, that consent decree, of course, has been dismissed.

The big phrase that we used to hear all the time back then was police culture.

That's what needed to be fixed.

So as you look back now on this 11 year reform effort, do you feel like there has been progress in changing the culture of the Albuquerque Police Department?

>> Steve: I think so- I think so, and Renetta and I differ on this because I think I'm a little bit more optimistic than she is.

But I have had the benefit of in my work, I've had the benefit of being able to see what good policeman's with, with proper crisis intervention training, what they can do with- Mental health situations that have the potential of blowing up and becoming violent.

But but a good properly trained CIT officer knows how to de-escalate the situation, calm everything down and prevent prevent violent outcomes.

But but I want to go back just for a second, Jeff, if I may.

Renetta mentioned how naive we were when we first started this process, and I- and that was certainly me.

I mean, because I used to know Chief Shultz I mean, we weren't we weren't good friends, but we were- we were acquaintances.

And I can remember thinking, well, I'll just go talk to the chief, go talk to the chief, and we'll be able to work something out.

Well, that that certainly didn't work.

And then, as you said, the police culture.

Because- the more the more we dug, the more we investigated, the worse it became.

But I think there has been some change.

I hope there has been some change.

But yet again, I- I mean I saw when after the consent decree had been dismissed and one of the local TV stations goes and interview Sean Willoughby.

Sean is the president of the police union and they go in the interview Sean Willoughby and Sean is just ecstatic.

This thing's finally over with.

Now we can get back to policing the way we used to.

And I'm thinking to myself, to this is he's saying now we can go back and continue doing things the way we were before.

I mean, that's what it sounded like to me.

And I I hope that the majority of police officers don't share that opinion.

I'm hoping I mean, what else can we do if we can't hope?

>> Nash: We really appreciate the Torres' coming in last year to talk about what they lost back in 2011 and why they fought so hard for so long for change.

Well, Police Chief Harold Medina wasn't in charge when the DOJ began overseeing the department.

He was a commander with nearly 20 years on the force.

Soon after the feds came to town, he retired.

Then he went to run the Laguna Pueblo Police Department.

He was back at APD as a deputy chief a few years later, though, and Mayor Tim Keller tapped him for the top job in 2020.

The city had blown the settlement agreement's initial timeline by years at that point, but it was under Medina's leadership that APD finally got out from under federal oversight.

I sat down with Medina to hear his take on the permanence of the reforms and issues that persist in the department.

Chief Medina, welcome back.

>> Medina: Thank you.

>> Nash: In a statement, the Justice Department's assistant attorney general for civil rights, Harmeet Dhillon, stated, quote, “The Albuquerque police operates constitutionally, it is now appropriate to end federal oversight and return full control of local law enforcement to the city.” What is step one for you as you take back full control of your department?

>>Medina: You know, the first thing is to assure the public, we're not going back to where we were in 2009, 10, 11 12, before that.

We've built a strong department that has accountability, that believes in constitutional policing, and that is lowering crime.

And that's the thing to remember is we have a good combination of success right there.

May we modify processes and streamline processes to make it easier for officers?

Absolutely.

We may look at policies to see how they make more sense for Albuquerque.

Absolutely.

But the core fundamentals of us constitutionally policing using force only when necessary and enforcing that when and ensuring that when we do use force, that we have a strong investigation that gets out.

The facts are going to be the the pillar of what we'll keep the Albuquerque Police Department moving forward successfully.

>> Nash: So no seismic shifts anticipated?

>> Medina: No seismic shifts anticipated.

>> Nash: Looking again at the culture of APD, I want to show viewers, a lapel camera recording from last April, captured immediately after an officer shot and killed a man named Mark Benavidez outside of Walmart.

We'll go ahead and play that clip.

>> Unknown: I like violent encounters with violent people.

That's why I became a cop.

>> Unknown: I didn't come to (Expletive) help Old ladies who can't cross the (Expletive) road.

>> Unknown: If I want to take actual (Expletive) heads that are actually doing stuff off the streets And if that means you shoot some of em, so be it.

My only concern coming over here was that he was black.

Literally.

Just because the optics of it.

>> Unknown: Oh I know, especially right now.

>> Unknown: You know what I mean If it wasn't that (Expletive) honkey out here, shooting people.

With his weird ass accent.

>> Unknown: They never turned my (Expletive) camera off.

>> Nash: So, chief, the officers used racial slurs.

They insult a person they just killed.

They say they like violent encounters.

What do you say to a public who sees that and remains concerned about APD's culture?

>> Medina: You know, I would loo at how the situation was handled Number one, they also read discouraging comments towards Native Americans, and we have positioned ourself as a police department through our strong leadership and our commitment to the community, that I was able to make phone calls to most tribal leaders and ensure them that this would be handled.

In 2014, when we had a horrible incident on the side of a mountain.

What did we see?

Protests in the streets of Albuquerque.

>> Nash: Are you talking about James Boyd case?

>> Medina: Yes, protests in the city of Albuquerque.

And many times we've seen those same protests.

We see any protests over this incident?

No, because we had strong relationships with the tribal communities, because each month, I believe in including everybody from this state in Albuquerque's mission and offering our support.

And each month we have a tribal chiefs meeting, and each tribal chief is invited each month to come to Albuquerque so we can work together.

So we handled it with public backlash.

We were able to communicate because of strong relationships, and that was part of the consent decree, community engagement.

We talked about that earlier.

So let's break that into one piece.

We had a strong relationship with the community.

We worked with them.

We communicated to them that there would be what?

Accountability.

And we did an internal investigation.

We hold people accountable.

They were held accountable.

But not only that, we took a next step.

That entire division went through a cultural awareness training through the Native American community, and they learned it.

This- >> Nash: Have you been in touch with the coalition, to Stop Violence Against Native Women.

I know they expressed concern that you hadn't called them back.

>> Medina: We've met with several groups.

If there's one group that we haven't met with in somewhere along the line, somewhere- somebody missed a communication, we can.

But I've met with countless groups.

I've spoke to leadership from the specific tribes and other tribal agency, and I assured them, and there will always possibly be that one group that is upset with us, or we didn't handle the situation, but as a whole, as anybody heard the tribe itself in this situation?

>> Nash: Well what you were talking to the tribes about was how the situation was handled.

So how was a handled?

What did discipline look like for these officers and and who were they?

>> Medina: Obviously we couldn't go into- We can't go into details of discipline in this, in this matter.

And I don't have the exact case file.

>> Nash: I mean, It's been the policy the city and APD since the very administration in to disclose discipline issues- >> Medina: They were disciplined I wasn't prepared to come here and I don't know the exact amount of discipline they received, but they did receive suspensions.

>> Nash: Suspensions?

>> Medina: Yes.

>> Nash: But they still work for the department?

>> Medina: Yes.

Because as I explained in the past, to other entities, is we have a collective bargaining agreement, part of the DOJ process that we spoke about so much earlier.

You remember when I talked about fair, consistent discipline?

These policy violations fell within a certain guideline, and we must follow our guidelines established and ensure that there's fair, consistent discipline.

And although I'm heartbroken over the comments, let's not forget Chief Commander Medina retired from APD and had a wonderful career as the Chief of Police at the Pueblo of Laguna.

Love- Met one of their tribal members.

Yesterday evening we had a conversation.

I was heartbroken over the comments that were made.

I didn't agree with the comments that were made, but what did we do?

We continued our strong relationship and communication with the Native American community.

>> Nash: Absent those union restrictions, would you have fired them?

through the heartbreak that you felt around their behavior?

>> Medina: Quite possibly yes.

>> Nash: You can watch our two part special on the end of the APD Consent Decree right now on the PBS app.

Among the stories we spent the most time on last year was how President Trump's second term has impacted New Mexico.

We looked at cuts to food assistance, Medicare in rural hospitals.

We also homed in on immigration, an issue where Trump has taken a hard line as a border state that's also home to three private immigrant prisons, enforcement lands heavy in our state.

Many undocumented immigrants and asylum seekers are spending their days in one of New Mexico's three lockups.

Just as with anyone behind bars, it can be easy for those of us on the outside to overlook them, to forget they're here after they're taken away.

In this story that first aired in August, we meet a few of the men locked up in Cibola County and a group of local volunteers working to make sure they feel seen.

Here's New Mexico in Focus reporter, Cailley Chella.

>> Cailley: In a remote corner of New Mexico, behind layers of barbed wire fences and locked doors, moments of human connection are hard to come by.

This is the Cibola County Correctional Center in Milan, one of three prisons in New Mexico that hold immigrant for ICE or US Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

On a recent Saturday, a group of volunteers pulled up outside with a unique mission not to investigate or expose, but to connect.

>> Figueroa: It's really cool to see how excited they are just to get out of their routine and see new people talk to people.

>> Dollmeyer: They're very thankful for what we're doing and grateful for the time that we spend -- and just that human connection that they don't get when they're there.

>> Cailley: Nine volunteers from a group called Vida spent about two hours inside the lockup.

The visits are simple; talk play games, share stories.

But for both the men inside and the volunteers, they're anything but routine.

>> Figureroa: So we do some introductions so that we're not total strangers, >> Dollmeyer: And we have the maps so that they're able to point out on the map where they're actually from.

>> Figueroa: We just play some games, you get to know each other.

We talk about our favorite things.

We talk about, you know, good food, things like that, just things that kind of try to distract them -- And then we also celebrate birthdays.

We buy them some drinks and candy from the vending machines.

>> Dollmeyer: And we always end with a poem.

It's always a poem that's kind of uplifting and telling them to not give up.

[Reading in Spanish] >> Cailley: 11 men from inside the detention center joined them They came from all over Venezuela, Peru, Cuba, Turkey and Cameroon.

Most of the men spoke Spanish, but a few spoke English.

Some told jokes, others opened up about their journeys to the US and the isolation they feel behind bars.

[Speaking Spanish] [English translation] means a moment of inspiration, [English translation] encouragement, strength, [English translation] things that distract us a lot.

[English translation] We leave the confines of this [English translation] prison at that time.

[English translation] And they are very kind, humble, [English translation] big hearted people who cheer [English translation] us up, brighten our day [English translation] to encourage us [English translation] and give us the strength [English translation] to keep fighting, to be well.

>>Cailley: I had the opportunity to speak with several men detained in Cibola after Vida's visit.

They told me what it meant to be seen, not as numbers or case files, but as human beings.

[Speaking Spanish] [English translation] And even though we are not [English translation] related, they are not our family [English translation] They make arrangements with us.

[English translation] They care about us.

>>Cailley: Victor, who asked us not to use his last name out of fear for his life, is from Peru.

[Cailley speaking Spanish] This is a little difficult, [Cailley speaking Spanish] isn't it?

>>Victor: Sí >>Cailley: He traveled by foot for months to reach the US border, where he did what the law requires.

He presented himself to immigration officials to begin the legal process of seeking asylum.

He's been in prison now for eight months, and he hasn't seen his family or his 14 year old son, since.

[Speaking Spanish] [English translation] I feel imprisoned.

[English translation] I feel like my wings [English translation] have been clipped [English translation] because unfortunately, [English translation] I haven't done anything [English translation] to deserve being locked up here.

>>Cailley: He showed me his not particularly appetizing-looking lunch plate of bread, rice and beans and shared with me what it was like inside.

[Victor speaking Spanish] [English translation] In Cibola -- [English translation] I'm afraid the confinement [English translation] has already driven me crazy.

[English translation] God willing, [English translation] I'm a healthy person [English translation] and right now [English translation] there would be medication [English translation] for depression [English translation] because I can barely sleep.

>>Cailley: Cibola County Correctional Center has faced public scrutiny for years.

In 2020, the facility came under fire for locking people in medical segregation for up to 23 hours a day.

The prison and CoreCivic one of the nation's largest private prison operators that run Cibola under a contract with local and federal officials, have been the targets of numerous lawsuits over conditions inside.

Last year, the New Mexico Immigrant Law Center asks the Homeland Security Department's Office of Inspector General to investigate allegations of medical neglect.

They never heard back.

>>Kelly: The food is terrible.

They don't get enough medical treatment.

It's not adequate.

And they're suffering.

And the sewage situation and just like plumbing and things like that, basic things like water, the temperature of the water is consistently bad.

Access to going outside is really difficult.

So they say the same things in every single visit and every single testimonial, every single letter.

It's very, very clear.

>>Cailley: Vida doesn't just visit detention centers in New Mexico.

Volunteers also write letters to people who are locked up across the country.

>>Kelley: There are letters that come in all the time, >>Cailley: Reminders, that someone, somewhere is paying attention.

[Kelly reading in Spanish] >>Cailley: The goal, they say, is simple; to restore a little dignity and humanity to people in a system not built to offer much of either.

>>Kelly: VIDA stands for Volunteers for Immigrants in Detention Albuquerque.

And our mission is to -- end isolation for those who are detained at Torrance County Detention Facility and Cibola County Correctional Center while fighting to get those centers shut down and fighting against immigrant detention in general.

The purpose of our program is to give hope and I don't -- you know, it's a very hopeless situation.

So we can at least try.

And I feel that we do succeed in doing that during our visit.

It's very emotional and intense.

It's beautiful.

It's beautiful, and it's so hard to leave.

I hate leaving, I feel like we kind of have to rip ourselves away.

>>Cailley: One of the volunteers told me about her interaction with a Guatemalan man named Abel.

>>Dollmeyer: I met him the last two times we were there and he revealed to me that his asylum has not been granted.

So he's going back to Guatemala, and he's being separated from his family because he has a daughter who is in Boston.

>>Cailley: I messaged back and forth with Abel on Saturday to arrange an interview on Monday, but when I logged in for the call less than 48 hours later, his profile said “Released” in other words, “Deported.” It's a reality VIDA volunteers know well, forming a brief but meaningful connection with someone inside, only to lose all contact without warning.

>>Kelly: So typical of all the men that we see there, they just don't have any idea, How long are they going to be there?

Will they be deported?

>>Cailley: Salcedo was recently his asylum case as well.

He has until August 22nd to appeal.

[English translation] I don't know how to file [English translation] an appeal to see the [English translation] documents here.

[English translation] I don't have a lawyer.

[English translation] I don't have anything [English translation] like that available to me.

[Cailley speaking Spanish] [English translation] Fifty-fifty [English translation] Between sadness and desolation, >>Cailley: According to the most recent data from Syracuse University's Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse, which gets its information from ICE records requests, there are currently over 56,000 people -- about the population of Carson City, Nevada, imprisoned in detention centers across the United States.

That's up from just over 37,000 at this time last year.

I sent multiple requests to the prison, to CoreCivic, and eventually to ICE to get access to Cibola.

But ICE never responded.

And cameras, even phones, aren't allowed inside during VIDA visit Still, stories find their way out through letters, voices and memories of a shared afternoon for New Mexico in Focus, I'm Cailley Chella, reporting.

>>Nash: Cailley joined our team just last summer and she has already made a huge difference.

You can watch all of her reports from out in the field on our YouTube page.

So, Trump's scissors didn't stop at Snap and health care benefits in 2025.

He also accomplished a long term Republican goal of eliminating federal funding for public radio and TV stations, including ours.

New Mexico lawmakers and Democratic Governor, Michelle Lujan Grisham have since backfilled one of those two years worth of federal dollars that Congress took away.

But many stations around the state still face an uncertain future.

What we were really interested in was not so much that the money was gone, but why?

The claim from Trump and Republicans was that PBS, NPR, and their member stations including us, are biased against them.

This was a difficult story for us to cover because we're right at the center of it.

So we brought in Tripp Jennings, Executive Director of the of the nonprofit Newsroom New Mexico In-Depth, to explore the issues.

Back in July, Tripp sat down with Albuquerque Journal opinion columnist Jeff Tucker, who's written several times in favor of defunding public media.

And Inez Russell Gomez, opinion page editor for the Santa Fe New Mexican, who takes the opposite view.

One note, before we show you part of this interview, we did not write or see in advance any of Tripp's questions, and our team didn't produce the segment either.

UNM journalism professor and NMiF contract correspondent Gwyneth Dolan, did.

>>Tripp: Thank you both for joining us today.

Inez, thank you, Jeff, thank you.

We are here to talk about, I think, an important subject, because I think the nation, the country is having a debate on the importance of -- the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, what they fund?

Public Media.

Jeff, I know a few weeks ago, you wrote a column saying, why you thought it should be defunded.

And I would like you to actually talk about the points.

>>Tucker: Sure.

I have another column coming up this Sunday.

Kind of, part two.

And I'll focus a little bit more on New Mexico PBS, specifically.

But basically, I believe if you're a tax funded media organization, you've got a very, very high bar for political balance, something you wouldn't expect from Mark Ronchetti's podcast or Joe Monahan's blog, or even our own independent pages that were privately owned and privately funded.

But if you receive public funding, the bar is very high to -- maintain a political balance.

And frankly, I believe, National Public Radio, the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, and New Mexico Public -- [New Mexico] PBS have failed to meet that standard.

>>Tripp: Actually, I just maybe if you'd like to make a, kind of thesis statement, on why you think this was not a good idea, and then we can have a conversation about this.

>>Inez: Okay.

You know basically I'm a journalist.

So I think that the more journalists you have doing their job, which is reporting news, telling stories, you know, bringing to light things that we otherwise don't know, that's really important.

And with the defunding of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, many small states across the country, including here in New Mexico, will not have the money they need to do their jobs.

So we can look at, you know, supposed bias at NPR, PBS, and forget about those stations in South Dakota or Alaska or in New Mexico.

And that's really my focus, is that if you're going to defund something and break it, what is your replacement strategy?

And these are towns where there's not a market solution, where you have lots of businesses who could buy ads, and it's the only news source because we're losing newspapers across the country.

So I think this is a move that makes us weaker as well as is based on emotion.

Because there's no study, there's no report, there's no proof that there's bias at all of these levels of reporting, there's your opinion after watching it, you know?

But that's not proof.

So, reform it, if you think there's a problem.

But don't just slice the budget.

>>Tripp: I do want to say that this decision to defund, Corporation for Public Broadcasting does take place in a larger kind of journalism conversation right now, which is, you know, the latest study has shown that, from Rebuild Local News and Muck rock, that the US has lost 75% of its local journalism in the last 20 years.

And then, we also have -- that's complement something out of Northwestern University at Medill School that shows that 3300 newspapers have actually disappeared in the last, you know, 20 years around the same time.

So the question does become -- I do think that this is a big question because there are going to be rural areas -- this is not just New Mexico and tribal areas that lose coverage.

They maybe have minimal staffing at these -- >>Inez: It's their only resource >>Tripp: So what is the solution for this?

Because it does seem to be sort of like you move, you make a decision and the outcome is not really deliberated.

>>Tucker: Absolutely.

And I think, NMPBS and NPR and PBS are at a pivotal point, and they're that mid-century -- of which way they're going to go, they're going to go the donor base route.

Are they going to go with public funding because you really can't worship both of those gods because your donor base may not want -- what all your taxpayers want?

And that's kind of my point is that when you're a state run media, essentially when you're getting public funding, your whole constituency is taxpayers, every corner of the state, one way or another, pays into this station and others.

In terms of solution, I kind of, you know, I've been a fan and a viewer and a consumer of PBS, and I watch New Mexico in Focus all the time, and I don't want to see it go away.

I think it has a place in the ecosystem.

Absolutely.

I think it does need to, be more politically balanced, in my opinion.

And maybe at some point it can regain that funding.

But I don't want to see it eliminated.

I'd like to see it improved.

And, that's throughout the whole system of PBS.

>>Tripp: So, you know, I want to say that when we say more balance, I always struggle with -- not on a, conservative, liberal, continuum.

It's more because I've been reporting policy making at, you know, statehouses for 25 years.

When we talk about political balance, we have multiple constituencies in any conversation, including public media, which is not necessarily state run media, like maybe in Russia or whatnot.

This is a little different because it was created in 1967.

The public owns it.

They do have editorial kind of independence.

My question is, you know -- this is almost like one constituency it seems like, to me, because this has been a long sought goal of the conservative movement since the 70s.

>>Tucker: Well, it's the constituency is -- the metro, that's fine New Mexico [PBS] can continue doing what it's doing.

But if it wants the whole state to get behind it and to watch it and to support it, I think a geographic needs to do a much better job.

And, I think it needs to ask itself after every segment, did we do a good job, conveying the sentiments of the 47% of Republicans who voted for Trump?

I know that's very contentious and divisive, but you've got to appeal to all constituencies if you want to continue public funding.

>>Inez: I think the point of local reporting, as what I've seen at the station here is that they cover stories that other media might miss.

So for someone who's really interested in environmental issues, who's interested in tribal issues, indigenous issues, I see stories there that I don't see anywhere else.

So it's not to me about Partizan politics or left or right.

It's about who is covering stories that we might otherwise miss.

And I really appreciate the public media in New Mexico doing that.

I also know that there are news deserts in our state and also emergency deserts.

So if there's a big flood or fire, the emergency signal comes through some of these PBS or not PBS, but public stations.

So what happens -- do we have a plan to replace those?

I don't like a system where you just take all the money away and say, you're on your own, guys, go fix it.

I think that the deal to me with PBS and the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, if you look back at its founding, the idea was that TV was a vast wasteland, and we're going to do something better, something that a market might not support, but that is needed.

And you think about the signature programs, whether it's, you know, finding big Bird or, you know, when my kid was little, it was Caillou, the different shows that people saw and the introduction to all the British programs, just the way we grew up, you know, seeing something outside of our sitcom world, I really feel enriched because of that.

And I hate to see that go away for the next generation.

>>Tucker: And I think that's niche programing, which has its place.

Absolutely.

Not publicly funded for someone like me.

When I watch New Mexico in Focus, it feels like required viewing for a course at UNM, I just don't -- >>Inez: You're educating people, how awesome!

>>Tripp: Well, that's part of the mission of, a corporation in public broadcasting.

And I mean, when you say that, I do want to say that my background in journalism, I mean, it started in the 80s, and I worked at several newspapers and my first newspaper, this is just by way of example, covered the white community extraordinarily well and a lot of nuance.

Black community; just crime.

And so, I mean, there is -- as far as diversified, you know, programing and stuff.

I mean, this is something that that we have been dealing with, as a nation for many, many years.

So, I mean, that's -- >>Tucker: Sure, but if you want to get into deep environmental reporting or, or environmental justice reporting or things like that, that's fine.

People can do what they want to do.

But does that merit public funding?

>>Inez: Well, I think the idea to me is that some of these stories wouldn't be covered otherwise.

And why shouldn't we?

You know, we fund lots of things through the through taxpayer dollars.

And I think all -- >>Tucker: May I get back to my very high bar?

>>Inez: Yeah.

>>Tucker: Of complete political balance -- >>Tripp: So let me say this.

We're about to end the session and we'll have a second session.

But Jeff, what would you need to see?

From, you know, Corporation for Public Broadcasting, NPR, PBS, for, you know, to support some kind of reinstatement of funding?

>>Tucker: Well, I think, New Mexico PBS I'll mentioned this in my column next week.

They had, State Senator Jim Townsend on last week I wouldn't argue that he's the best Republican they've had on this show, because he's getting up there and he's, you know, not necessarily a back and forth wonky guy -- >>Inez: Get John Block.

>>Tucker: But that's a step in the right direction.

Exactly.

John Block, bring on Rebecca Dow or Nicole Tobiassen or Mark Moores or others.

So I think that's what my answer would be.

Let's have half conservative guest and half liberal guest.

>>Tripp: Well, Mark Moore's was just on the show a few weeks ago.

>>Inez: Yeah.

>>Tucker: I missed that one.

>>Inez: And the old format, which was the roundtable did have a right -- you know, did have a right-left balance, always.

>>Nash: Thanks again to Tripp Jennings and Gwyneth Dolan for helping us cover a story that was so close to home.

You can see the full interview with Inez Russell Gomez and Jeff Tucker on our YouTube page, but we end tonight with a story connected to a long awaited and meaningful change in federal law for some Southern New Mexicans, one that came in the form of Trump's so-called Big Beautiful Bill, the expansion of the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act or RECA, to Downwinders in our state.

The change coincided last year with the 80th Anniversary of the Trinity Test, the world's first nuclear explosion, as the Tularosa Basin Downwinders Consortium gathered at the Trinity site in July to commemorate the blast.

As they do every year, the event struck a bit more of a celebratory tone, not only because of the hard fought changes to RECA, but also because of the state's dedication of a sign acknowledging the human toll of the bomb and the generation or suffering of New Mexicans who live downwind of the fallout.

[Organizer] On three.

[Altogether] One.

Two.

Three.

[Altogether] We won!

[Crowd cheering] [Organizer] And we've just begun.

[Crowd laughing] >>Cordova: Well, first of all -- I am tremendously overwhelmed.

We don't always have days like this as advocates, but today we do.

And I'm ever grateful.

And I want to welcome every one of you here, [Crowd noise] >>Coghlan: This is 80 years today.

And, you know, really there's very few events that you can say radically changed history.

This is one of them 80 years ago.

>>Cordova: Many times when we come together like this.

We come together in sorrow around someone's hospital bed or to comfort a family during a funeral.

And we've cried.

I remember Gloria Herrera saying this, “oceans of tears.” But today we come together in joy, in gladness.

To reflect upon all that we've lost since they detonated that bomb here 80 years ago, when they chose not to evacuate us, not to warn us, not to do anything, to take care of our health.

We've been paying the price ever since, and now we will have a permanent marker that recognizes the price that we paid.

>>Park: This new sign recognizes that 80 years ago, on this very morning, in this sacred place, the US government, before it dropped nuclear bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, bombed its own people, its own soil.

The world's very first victims of nuclear weapons, were American.

>>White: Many, many, many, many, many members of my family, many members of Bernice's family, all of our families have suffered these harrowing cancers.

They are real.

They are painful.

No one wants this.

So we must keep fighting.

>>Park: The Downwinders, uranium workers, and communities exposed to nuclear waste have faced generations of cancers illnesses and government silence.

Yours are the stories that did not feature in the film, Oppenheimer.

>>Cordova: Someday, my great great grandchildren will drive by and see the sign and stop, maybe, and read the history of the people of New Mexico that heretofore has not been told.

And maybe one of them, just maybe one of them will say, I think my great grandmother had something to do with that.

[Crowd cheers and applause] >>Nash: Thanks to everyone who contributed to the show.

Happy New Year!

And we will see you next week with an all new episode of New Mexico in Focus, for NMPBS, I'm Nash Jones, until then, stay focused.

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