Funding for New Mexico in Focus is provided by: Viewers Like You >> Nash: This week on New Mexico in Focus Allegations of sexual abuse against Chicano labor icon Cesar Chavez have forced a reckoning in our state, where the movement's roots run deep.

>> Martinez: Good doesn't outweigh the bad.

>> Caballero: It is not our job to rewrite history.

It goes down good and bad.

>> Nash: And Congresswoman Teresa Leger Fernandez is here, to talk the war in Iran and threats to public lands.

New Mexico in Focus starts now.

Thanks for joining us this week I'm Nash Jones.

It has been about a month since a New York Times investigation uncovered decades of sexual abuse allegations against Cesar Chavez, reigniting thorny conversations around the labor organizers legacy.

Well, tonight, in Focus█ Cailley Chella delves into what that has looked like here in New Mexico.

Home state to fellow labor leader Dolores Huerta, who's now disclosed her own account of Chavez raping her, and a generational divide that emerged in Cailley's reporting.

Also, New Mexico fire season is upon us, and a grim new outlook for what that might look like through the summer is dropped.

We're going to bring you that update.

We'll also have the latest on some eye-popping campaign finance numbers out this week in the race for New Mexico governor.

But first, Democratic Congresswoman Teresa Leger Fernandez dropped by the studio last Friday before heading back to D.C.

this week, We spoke about the war in Iran and the position that she and her Democratic colleagues are in as the minority party in a Congress that never formally authorized military action in the first place.

We're going to bring you that part of our conversation later in the show.

But we begin with Leger Fernandez█s objections to the Trump administration eyeing two sites of protected lands in her district for development, one around Chaco Canyon and another on the Upper Pecos River.

As the Biden administration prepared to leave office in late 2024, then Interior Secretary Deb Haaland proposed a 20 year mining ban on the Upper Pecos watershed, citing protections of both natural and cultural resources there.

That application created a two year pause on mining while the process played out well.

Last week, Doug Burgum's Interior Department canceled that application for the 20 year protection.

That move also lifts the pause.

Starting next month.

Separately, Burgum's Interior Department has proposed undoing a 20 year withdrawal that went through under Haaland's tenure.

A ten mile buffer zone for oil and gas drilling around Chaco Culture National Historical Park.

Since that one has been in effect since 2023, the feds can't simply cancel it, but they can rush the process, according to Leger Fernandez.

We asked the congresswoman about what she seeing, why she opposes the rollbacks, and where things stand.

>> Nash: Congresswoman, welcome back to the show and thanks for being here.

>> Fernández: Thank you, Nash, for having me.

I love coming out and having conversations with the people of New Mexico.

>> Nash: Well, we appreciate it.

Let's start with Chaco.

You have taken issue with how the Interior Department has gone about this.

How does it compare to how these protections were won in the first place?

>> Fernández: Well, when we did this the first time, Home Secretary Haaland first protected the ten mile buffer zone around Chaco.

There were numerous public hearings.

There was in person hearings.

There was a -- it was about 120 days before they took action.

And in this instance, Secretary Burgum and the Department of Interior have acted in seven days.

Compare that and this is -- incredibly destructive what they are proposing.

And that's why I think so many of us have opposed it, because when you destroy one of the 4,700 sites that are in that ten mile zone, it's irreplaceable.

Now, molecule of gas.

We can drill for that.

Outside of that ten mile zone.

That's lots of gas in San Juan County that we could go for, but we need to protect that which is sacred, that which is historic, that which can never be replaced.

>> Nash: And the buffer was meant to last for 20 years.

Was it always going to be threatened, though, as Washington changes hands over the years?

>> Fernández: Well, I have introduced a law to make permanent the protections around, Chaco.

I carry it in the House and Senator Lujan carries in the Senate.

I anticipate that we will be able to get that passed out of the House one more time, and then hopefully out of the Senate -- >> Nash: In this, in this -- >> Fernández: Not in this, not in this Congress.

>> Nash: If Democrats retake the House in the midterms.

>> Fernández: But I am very, very optimistic about the fact that we will retake the House and then that we will do these kinds of protections, because one of the things I'm very angry about is Secretary Burgum came before the Natural Resources Committee.

I had a conversation with him about this, and I said, Will you commit to me that you will meet with the tribes that are impacted by any Chaco decision, that they will be a decision maker meeting with them in person?

And he said, absolutely.

Have they done that?

No.

>> Nash: Well, and you mentioned tribal citizens.

There has been some disagreement over the protections between impacted pueblos and the Navajo Nation, with the latter saying that the buffer, impacted their sovereignty to be able to do as they wish with their land.

So what's your message to Navajo allottees who are maybe cheering this decision?

>> Fernández: So I met with allottees.

I've met with the Navajo Nation around this because of the legislation, and I actually changed the legislation to make sure that we recognize Navajo█s cultural ties to the area, because we need to recognize that Navajo also has cultural ties to the area.

My legislation and the withdrawal are very explicit.

It has no impact on any tribal trust land, has no impact on any allottee land, and you can continue with existing rail sites that are there.

They can continue if somebody wants to drill-- >> Nash: Just, federal lands?

>> Fernández: Just federal land.

>> Nash: The, Navajo Nation President Buu Nygren has said that that would still make it nearly impossible for allottees to be able to, lease that land because the infrastructure wouldn't exist.

>> Fernández: And the legislation's withdrawal says you can put in infrastructure.

So I think that what you're having is you're having misinformation provided to the allottees about what the legislation and the withdrawal actually does, because I wanted to make sure I was going to be protective of tribal allottees and tribal trust land because they get to decide what they do on that land.

But on federal land, we can have these kinds of protections because once again, you can drill outside that ten mile zone anywhere on federal lands.

>> Nash: Well, so, public comment, the seven days of public comment that you mentioned has closed.

So is that it for New Mexicans who want to have their voice heard around this?

>> Fernández: No, because there needs to be some further environmental impact analysis.

Now, they've said, though, that they're going to rush that too.

They've already told us what they're going to do.

We are rushing through all of this.

We're going to make a decision by June.

And, you know, even given that there's going to be additional, input required -- >> Nash: Because after the environmental review, there's an additional, a public comment that's available, is that right?

>> Fernández: In the environment review process.

So they had a seven day comment which is the scoping, and they're going to go in the next phase.

And I also would not be surprised if we don't see litigation.

But on my end, and I think in the public's end, New Mexicans need to make sure that their voices are heard.

I love hearing from my constituents.

Is this important to you?

Do you care of what you want to do?

But we also recognize that this landscape, it's not like it's something old and it's a Unesco World Heritage site.

And that that's oh, it's something from a long time ago.

This landscape is still used for cultural purposes today.

So it's religious importance carries through from the time it was first built to today.

And so when you listen to the tribal leaders, the tribal members speak about its importance they will tell you that it's an unbroken chain, and we don't want to break that history.

>> Nash: Now, Chaco isn't the only public land in New Mexico that the Trump administration is eyeing for development.

The administration just canceled the proposed 20 year withdraw on the Upper Pecos watershed as well.

That also brings to an end next month a two year pause that, Deb Haaland█s Interior Department put into place while this longer process, played out.

What does the cancellation of this withdrawal mean for New Mexicans?

>> Fernández: Well, we know that there are foreign mining corporations that want to mine in the upper Pecos.

We also remember what it was like the last time they mined in the upper Pecos.

>> Nash: And in the early 90s, there was a mine spill that contaminated the river.

I think a lot of New Mexicans will remember what that looked like.

>> Fernández: Yeah.

Do you remember the dead fish?

Do you remember the fact that you couldn█t go fishing up there do you remember how much pain and suffering there was for the people who lived there?

The farmers that Pecos River runs all the way down through Texas it runs through my family land and in the Vian River Valley.

It is such an important source.

It is so.

It is that, it is the source of all the water that flows down through the Pecos.

Think about all those villages.

We don't want that to happen again.

>> Nash: So those villagers, what can they do at this point now that this has been canceled?

>> Fernández: The same thing that we're all doing is like, we need to raise our voices.

We need to talk about it coming on programs like this to make sure that New Mexicans know what's going on.

Because let's follow the money, right?

The only reason they're doing all of this is because the Trump administration, Republicans are just going to drill, baby, drill online, baby mine.

They don't care about the economic consequences.

They're not giving voice to the communities who are from the ground up from here saying, don't do this.

And it is unanimous in Pecos, you have business owners, ranchers, farmers, county, city, tribal people because that land is also of significance to, for tribal heritage.

So they're dictating from DC, to local communities what should be done.

And once again, I always remind everybody that these foreign corporations are not going to pay a dime in royalties, at least when you have oil and gas drilling.

Right?

We get some more royalties, we get some tax.

These foreign corporations and no mining corporations, they don't pay a dime and those resources belong to the public.

>> Nash: Well, speaking of dictating things to for New Mexicans from DC, there's, a new New Mexican in DC in, former Republican Congressman Steve Pearce.

He's awaiting confirmation by the full Senate as the next director of the Bureau of Land Management.

With these two big New Mexico rollbacks happening right now, do you have any sense of of what role, if any, Pearce has played in these?

>> Fernández: So I don't know whether he's played any role in the existing rollbacks, but he will play a role on all these issues with regards to land tenure.

You know, we're looking out what kind of protections do we do for the Caja del Rio, which has a lot of BLM land.

There's BLM land in all of these areas.

Some of it's forest land.

I would hope that he would remember what it looks like, in New Mexico, the beauty of New Mexico and the fragility of New Mexico.

Like our landscape is gorgeous.

Like, don't we love, we are constantly in on wonder of how how lucky can we get when we are hiking and fishing and hunting and grazing and working our land of how beautiful it is.

But we also know how fragile it is.

And I'm hoping he would remember that.

And even as he may want to continue with oil and gas development, which we have, I have a lot of oil and gas development.

Where can you do it and how can you do it?

In a way, those environmental responsible that makes sure that workers are protected and honored.

And there is a way to do that.

And New Mexico has shown the way in many areas.

You know, we have better environmental protections for our oil and gas development than they do in Texas.

Why doesn█t he take some of those lessons of how you can do it better?

It's not perfect yet, in New Mexico and apply them nationwide.

>> Nash: Have you spoken to him?

>> Fernández: I have not spoken to him since he's been named.

>> Nash: Do you plan to?

>> Fernández: Yes, I will, and he will have to come before my committee at the House Natural Resources.

Once he's named, you know, we don't get to confirm.

And we'll see what our Senators are concerned and new Mexicans are concerned because we've seen what he's done with regards to, as a politician.

You know, he's rallied against protecting our air, land, and water.

But maybe I'm hopeful that he will remember what it's like here and he will remember the beauty of New Mexico and try to protect it.

>> Nash: Congresswoman.

Thank you.

I'm gonna ask you to stick around.

We're going to speak a little bit further, next about that Iran war.

>> Fernández: Thank you.

>> Fernadez: The moral degradation of our politics.

When you have a president who wants an entire civilization to die.

Now, he hasn't carried out that, but he called for something that is so morally outrageous and also a war crime.

So they want bar has been a catastrophe.

Americans don't like it.

And they realize that when you're paying attention to a war in Iran, you're not paying attention to what Americans need here.

>> Nash: Representative Leger Fernandez will join us again in about half an hour to talk about the war in Iran and what Congress can do to claw back even a shred of control over our country's actions there.

The National Interagency Fire Center is out with a new fire season prediction, and it's well, bleak.

Only one fire is burning in the state this week, according to the latest interagency info.

But here's where the potential danger stands now in April.

You can see that much of New Mexico is among a few areas at above normal fire risk.

Basically, all of the state except for the Rio Grande Valley and far northwest, According to the fire center, that is due to a dry, hot month of March.

That's continued now into April.

The outlook calls the early season heat wave unprecedented, citing Albuquerque breaking a record set in 1947 for when it hit 90 degrees on March 21st.

On top of that, precipitation is less than a quarter of what's normal for this time of year across much of the southwest.

And the center calls the snowpack, negligible.

In fact, the San Juan River basin in the Four Corners has no snow, and its monitoring station, according to the outlook, having melted off weeks ahead of the previous record.

Almost all of New Mexico is in at least a moderate drought, with more severe conditions across both the north and west.

Here's the drought outlook till July.

And as you can see, it'll either persist or develop anew until it covers the whole state.

Now let's look at the fire potential for next month when we move into peak fire season.

While it eases up across eastern New Mexico, it rises in the Rio Grande Valley in northwest.

Fuels for wildfires, trees and grasses and the like were as dry as they have ever been in March across the southwest, according to the outlook.

With the amount of combustible material continuing to grow in eastern New Mexico, where little of the grasslands have turned green.

And here's June, which maintains that same pattern that month, the center anticipates the eastern plains to green up a little more, which would help lower the risk out there.

And by July, look at that.

The potential for fire should be normal statewide, as the monsoons are expected to really kick in.

In response to this heightened risk for wildfires, the New Mexico State forester enacted statewide restrictions last week, including a ban on burning, smoking and oil and gas flaring.

That does not apply to federal, tribal or municipal land.

Learn more about the outlook from the National Interagency Fire Center at NIFC.gov.

Following a New York Times investigation detailing decades of alleged sexual assaults and child rape by Chicano Movement leader and labor organizer Cesar Chavez.

And a heartbreaking confirmation from his partner in the struggle, Dolores Huerta, who was born here in New Mexico.

The Latino community is grappling with a painful accounting.

Across the state, the very people the labor icon once fought for are now scrutinizing him and debating what his legacy should be.

Tonight, in Focus reporter Cailley Chella explores the generational divide over how to remember Chavez and a warning that this story includes a racial slur used against Mexican immigrants.

It comes from a UNM student and farm worker, referencing the many times Chavez himself used the word in public.

We've confirmed that Chavez did, in fact, use the slur.

Here's Cailley.

>> Cailley: A splash of paint in downtown Albuquerque, a literal Black Stain across the face of a Latino hero.

It appeared overnight a silent reaction to the newly public allegations of sexual assault.

But the aftermath is anything but quiet, rippling through every corner of New Mexico.

Shortly after the story broke, the community was humming with reactions.

>> Trujillo: This isn't about tearing someone down.

It's about deciding who we choose to honor in our public spaces.

A street name is not neutral.

It is a statement of values.

It is who we lift up.

>> Galetti: There was some kids that were so adamant about changing that street immediately and I asked them to write about it.

And I'm going to read to you what one of my students wrote.

“Just because you can lead and be inspirational, does not mean you can do whatever you want.” >> Cailley: But, even in the wreckage, voices rise to defend him.

>> Marquez: Cesar Chavez, deserve our respect and admiration.

And I here today, have to say -- today, he continues to earn our respect and our admiration.

I'm here to stand up for Cesar Chavez.

Because a lot of people have not and a lot of people have abandoned him.

The cause to remove his name from the school streets, community centers is not only an unwarranted rush to judgment, but shameful.

>> Caballero: We never named anything important to Hispanic or Chicano folks.

Never.

But we're easy to name streets or schools for people that were bad in history.

Cesar Chavez, the farmworker movement, are one and we have to keep it that way, because that is history.

Don█t erase what happened in the past.

That's our past and our viento was very real and there's still farmworkers struggling, it is not over, thank you.

[applause] >> Cailley: The city of Albuquerque has launched a campaign to let residents know what it would take to rename the City Street, Park, Community Center, and statue named in Chavez's honor.

Under fluorescent lights and the heavy hush of reckoning, residents gathered at the National Hispanic Cultural Center to decide whether the name Cesar Chavez should endure, though some choices have already been made.

His name pried off the wall in front of the local community center.

You can still see the glue that once held the letters in place.

Among those who spoke at the public Q&A was Ricardo Cardenas Caballero, who served on Chavez's security detail in the early 1970s.

>> Caballero: Sometimes he came to my house, unannounced.

I was a safe house.

I got to know him.

He was a real person that was fighting for the worker.

There's no way to separate -- the labor, farmworker -- labor movement from Cesar Chavez.

And if what was alleged is true.

Okay, bring that out.

But, I beg of you, don't recreate my history >> Cailley: within the same household perspectives diverge.

Caballero's wife, state rep Patricia Roybal Caballero, also works directly with Cesar Chavez and Dolores Huerta.

Her activism, shaped by years of training and organizing with the duo, Roybal Caballero says her respect for Chavez remains, as does her friendship with Huerta, the New Mexico native and longtime Chicana co-organizer, who last month accused him of rape.

>> Caballero: I stand with Dolores Huerta, I stand with Dolores Huerta, I stand with the Dolores Huerta.

Se vida Dolores Huerta He is our living icon, he is the defender of our farmworkers, it is not our responsibility, our right to even question her legitimacy or her statements that she brought forth in a very -- painful way.

>> Cailley: Having survived sexual assault herself, though not by Chavez.

She refuses to let his legacy supersede the voices of the women who have come forward.

>> Caballero: When Dolores Huerta came forward, when the other women came forward without hesitancy, I believed them.

My immediate reaction was to believe the women and then feel -- very conflicted.

>> Cailley: Conflicted because even now, she remembers, Chavez fondly.

>> Caballero: Cesar did most of the traveling so when he would move, and go to speaking engagements or organizing engagements around the country, he would stay with us and -- Cesar was very charismatic.

He had a very soft spoken way about him.

It was kind of a magnetism.

It would attract young people, older people, babies, you know, everyone, to him, it was just his charisma.

And, so it was always nice to see him amongst children.

>> Cailley: Her proximity and personal history with Chavez complicates her opinion about the New York Times investigation that revealed allegations of child rape.

I asked her how she makes sense of that conflict.

You were talking earlier about Cesar█s -- He was charismatic, the way that he would talk and around kids, he was great, and I found myself smiling, but with this new context, it's almost disturbing.

What's your take on the New York Times report on these new sexual assault revelations?

>> Caballero: In all those personal exchanges and interactions that I had with Cesar throughout those years.

I never witnessed, any of -- of these types of transgressions, it didn't happen to me, I was around him all the time, I didn't see it happening, and that's where it's a little bit conflictive.

Because -- I'm not sure that women felt comfortable enough to even have brought it up, especially during the 60s and 70s, which is a period that I came up with when a woman would say, that they would step forward and say that they had been molested or raped.

They were questioned.

“Well, you were wearing a miniskirt.” You know.

“What do you expect?” >> Cailley: It's this nuance that makes the call to remove Chavez from public view difficult for Roybal Caballero.

She doesn't want to see his name erased entirely.

>> Caballero: Well, it's very problematic for me because -- as I've mentioned, I don't think it's our job to rewrite history.

>> Cailley: Some people would argue that keeping his name on buildings and on streets is a celebration of him instead of -- you know, putting it in a museum where you learn about or in history books where you learn about it.

So I wonder what your take is on that.

>> Caballero: Well, I think it's the community, the communities, and so >> Cailley: But you would prefer it not be pulled?

>> Caballero: Well, not necessarily from the buildings.

I think we have to again put it into context.

So in the context that I'd like for it to, to be in would be we went through generations of trying to get our history into textbooks, our history to be taught, to grade school students starting in grade school all the way through.

It took generations of effort to do that, to place importance on the leaders that we proclaimed to be our leaders.

I don't see it as a celebration of a person.

I see it as commemorating that person within the context of the history.

>> Cailley: Javier Marrufo, a historian and New Mexico state director of LULAC the League of United Latin American Citizens, says thorny conversations about Chavez's legacy are playing out at kitchen tables across the state.

>> Marrufo: So a lot of times in Chicano communities, in Latino communities, our families and especially our households is super intergenerational.

It's just the way we do things, you know?

So there is a lot of space for all of these ideologies that different generations have, to come together and I think sometimes that does lead to a little bit of tension within households.

And it's really weird feeling because partly it feels like it's totally unpressed, you know, because Chavez was this person in our community who was celebrated for decades.

But at the same time, I guess it's not really surprising that a man in power ended up being a predator, which is really sad >> Cailley: While the original organizers and older generations grapple with the complexity of a man that either knew personally or revered as an important leader of their time, for others, his idolized image faded years ago.

>> Martinez: Well, in elementary they teach you that he's this amazing guy who fought for our rights and stood up to, the bad guys in the farm working industry.

He was basically like, idol for us to look up to and that we should be grateful for his actions.

My freshman year, I found out that, he started saying that we were wetbacks and calling us slurs.

I was like, this guy is, like, actually really evil.

Like, they idolized him.

So much.

>> Cailley: Decades before the child rape and sexual assault allegations surfaced in The New York Times.

Chavez often publicly used slurs to refer to the Mexican workers brought in to replace striking Chicanos.

>> Martinez: He, like, changed our lives.

He changed the way that we work.

We're like, well, don't try to like.

Good doesn't outweigh the bad.

>> Cailley: Behind what's known as the casita on the University of New Mexico campus, El Centro de la Raza members plant seeds of support during Farmworkers Awareness Week.

There a noticeable lack of dedication to any one figure.

The event focusing instead on the farmworkers themselves.

I asked students to reflect on Chavez's legacy.

>> Nevarez: My grandpa was in the Bracero program, and I know that he talked about stories about how like, they really treated him, really badly with that program.

And I think when Cesar Chavez and the government came in with the migrant program, it really just shifted a lot of that perspective.

And that program in itself.

And so, like, for me, it was I really did look up to me as an activist, as a person that spoke for the community, for the Hispanic in the migrant community.

When Dolores came out with that, it was kind of just shocking, a bit like, wow, like the hero that we once saw.

It was like really disappointing, really heartbreaking.

>> Cailley: While younger genera increasingly argue that social movements should be defined by the collective and not by individuals, many remain deeply anchored by the strength and determination of Dolores Huerta.

The way they are portrayed, her resolve.

It really depicts that we don't really know who a person is until we actually know them.

And so, though it's a very saddening, investigation that the Hispanic and the farmworker community has to do with, I think Dolores worth is a bravery and, determination.

Is actually something to I aspire because I know coming out as a victim can be very, really, really scary.

So I think it has mixed feelings for sure.

>> Cailley: At 96, Huerta is more than just a historical figure, for New Mexicans, she's a neighbor and a living hero who many have seen a local events.

>> Huerta: This is a power that you have.

>> Martinez: Dolores Huerta was a really strong woman.

To be holding in so much pain and losing a child is a really hard thing.

I think that she's just a strong, strong, strong woman, just hiding everything in order to continue a movement so that they she wouldn't ruin it or she wouldn't.

I would like to say that she wouldn't be believed either.

>> Marrufo: Growing up those two always went hand in hand, you know, with the movement and with human rights and advocacy and to think that one person, one of those people did that to the other, it's just, it's despicable.

It's like a knife in the heart.

You know?

But I think for the younger generations, the further removed you are from a movement or a personality like this, the more demystified that movement or the person becomes.

So a lot of the times I feel like they're able to see those people in those movements for what they are.

Cesar Chavez, the first time I found out that he was canceled, you know, we were I work with the university down here sometimes, Western New Mexico university.

And there's a couple people who are asking all of the the MEChA students, “hey, do you want to do something for, like, Hispanic Heritage Month?

What can we get going on?” And somebody said, “hey, why don't we do, like, a Cesar Chavez celebration?” And those students were pretty against it.

And I remember one of them said something to the effect of, like, “Cesar Chavez, na that guy█s canceled.” So I think all of his policies surrounding immigrants and immigrant farmworkers had been pretty well known.

I mean, even during this life, I'm pretty sure they all were really proud of it.

Certainly when I was growing up, there was always a caveat that you kind of heard about.

>> Cailley: But Roybal Caballero argues that labeling Chavez as anti-immigrant misrepresents his labor tactics.

>> Caballero: I don't think it c from a standpoint of being, A bigot in the farmworker movement, there was a, strong protest against the Bracero program, for example, where the government relaxed immigration laws in order to be able to bring in, more farm laborers.

And it was an attempt to break the union >> Cailley: Because they were br laborers from Mexico.

>> Caballero: Right.

And so they were used in a way, they were being viewed as scab workers.

>> Marrufo: For the older generation, there's this added baggage.

You know, of he's a guy who walked amongst them and they saw him speak.

Yeah.

That's people who, you talked to who stayed with him, you know, or that's the reason they got into advocacy.

So it's really hard to see somebody like that who's an actual living person that you knew commits something like this.

So I think those older generations maybe are a little, little quicker to forgive, maybe not forgive, but try to add a little bit of complexity to the situation so I can understand sometimes where they're coming from.

But as somebody who was born in the 1990s, I kind of feel like those arguments don't hold a lot of weight if it stands for so anti scab, why was he using all of these racial slurs towards them?

Doesn't really make sense in my mind.

>> Cailley: The community is now navigating difficult questions.

How do we honor this movement and history while confronting the harm inflicted by one of its leaders?

And how do we move forward?

>> speaker: It is about movement and it's not about individuals.

So we also need to figure out our role in our complicity in developing icons, no?

>> Cailley: It's a conversation echoing across the nation here, most recently regarding the obelisk on the Santa Fe Plaza, built in 1867 to honor Union soldiers killed in the Civil War.

It featured a plaque inscribed with the words Savage Indians.

Someone chiseled that off decades ago, but its pain lingered.

And on Indigenous Peoples Day in 2020, protesters toppled it.

It's been nearly six years, and the city is still wrestling with its legacy.

Torn between rebuilding it or consigning it to the past behind museum glass.

>> speaker: We've considered this issue to death and wasted our tax dollars on an outside Truth and reconciliation contractor to resolve it.

Yet here we are again.

>> Cailley: Meanwhile, the public school board in Santa Fe is overseeing the name of Cesar Chavez Elementary School.

In a recent unanimous vote, they opted for a temporary change to White Tiger Elementary after its mascot.

>> council member: All those in favor say aye any opposed or otherwise.

Okay.

>> Cailley: But these processes move slowly.

The school board wants to give the community enough time to weigh in before choosing a permanent name.

And in Albuquerque.

There are specific rules for name changes of city property, including a maze of red tape for street names.

>> Hall: The criteria that has to be, addressed here is under B-1.

>> Cailley: Avenida Cesar Chavez is one of the major East-West thoroughfares in the city.

It turns into Avenida Dolores Huerta at the northwest intersection of the National Hispanic Cultural Center.

A name change would mean working with residents and the US Postal Service to avoid mail disruptions.

>> Hall: A street name shall be changed only if the decision maker finds that there will be a public benefit, which clearly outweighs public confusion and cost would be created by the name change.

So while there may be sentiment to change a street name for whatever reason, there has to be some balance of what kind of confusion comes about from that.

>> Cailley: Within the spectrum of opinions is one unshakable consensus.

The cult of personality may be crumbling, but the people power is permanent.

Because for those who still labor in the sun, the struggle is not just history.

It's a daily reality.

>> Caballero: So as long as communities and communities of color and poor communities, in general, face these types of discriminations, disenfranchisement, racism, exclusions, the movement will continue, the struggle continues.

And that's what keeps the movement alive.

So it's not related to a person.

It's related to these, our, what are we going to do to correct these injustices.

How are we going to pick up and continue the fight for social justice?

And within the context of our current conditions.

We have a big job ahead of us.

>> Cailley: Whether Cesar Chavez█s name and face remains on buildings, streets and murals.

The black stain has forced a deeper conversation about what it means to be a hero.

For New Mexico in Focus I'm Cailley Chella, reporting.

>> Nash: The Santa Fe Public Schools Board is seeking community input before choosing a permanent name for the school.

The board wants that name in place before the start of the next school year.

In Las Cruces, the majority of attendees at a school board meeting there didn't want Chavez's name pulled.

And in Albuquerque, the Cesar Chavez Community Center and Park have already seen their signage removed.

Formal name changes have yet to be approved.

More meetings are planned to decide the fate of Albuquerque's Avenida Cesar Chavez.

As we close in on the primary elections for our next governor, we're getting a better idea of the money behind each candidate.

And one is raising a ton more than the others.

According to campaign finance reports released this week, Democrat Deb Haaland has raised more than $4 million in the last six months.

That's nearly four times the 1.2 million her Democratic opponent Sam Bregman, collected.

Haaland also holds a significant financial advantage over Bregman in available cash.

The reports, filed Monday with the New Mexico Secretary of State's Office, show Bregman has less than $900,000 on hand, after spending more than $1.8 million over these last six months.

And despite Haaland spending more than $2.6 million in that same period, her campaign still has nearly 4.4 million in the bank.

As for the three Republican hopefuls in the race, the candidate who won his party supported the GOP pre-primary convention, trails his two opponents by pretty big margin.

Gregg Hull secured the support of 55% of Republican delegates last month.

But over the last six months trails both Doug Turner and Duke Rodriguez in fundraising by hundreds of thousands of dollars.

The secretary of state reports.

Hull, the former mayor of Rio Rancho, raised $145,000 since October.

Public relations professional: Turner pulled in more than $500,000 in that time.

Former state cabinet secretary and cannabis mogul Rodriguez also reported more than $500,000 in contributions, with nearly all of it coming out of his own pocket.

Since the war with Iran began nearly seven weeks ago, clarity around its objectives, progress and potential ending has been basically impossible to come by during that time through press briefings and social media posts.

White House officials and President Trump himself have continually contradicted themselves and each other.

The lack of reliable public information has muddied attempts to understand what's going on.

Well, with Congresswoman Leger Fernandez in our studio last Friday, we wanted to ask if she, as a member of Congress, is having the same difficulties the rest of us and what she can do to help clear things up.

We also wanted to know where she stands on the war and how she and the rest of our country's congressional leaders might be able to wrestle back any control over the international crisis.

>> Nash: Representative, welcome back, and thanks for sticking with us.

So House Republicans have blocked your caucus's resolution on war powers, by unanimous consent.

What did that resolution call for?

>> Fernández: So the Democrats have been calling through various resolutions to offer an end to the Iran bar, because we know that there has been no real purpose for the Iran war.

And we can talk about how it began, but its impacts on New Mexicans, Americans in the world are disastrous.

We are spending about $2 billion a day on the war.

We are making Americans less safe.

The Strait of Hormuz was closed.

We don't know if it's going to be entirely opened again.

They said it was going to be open, but it's not.

And just the moral degradation of our politics.

When you have a president who want an entire civilization to die.

Now, he hasn't carried out that, but he called for something that is so morally outrageous and also a war crime.

So the Iran war has been a catastrophe.

Americans don't like it.

And they realize that when you're paying attention to a war in Iran, you're not paying attention to what Americans need here.

>> Nash: And to be clear, do you oppose the war in Iran or simply how the Trump administration has waged it?

>> Fernández: Both.

I oppose both.

Now, I criticize Iran.

We need to prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon.

And there was a process set up to do that.

We had a treaty that was signed by Obama to prevent Iran from getting a nuclear weapon.

We had Los Alamos has the tools to prevent nuclear proliferation.

They would have had the tools to help monitor to see whether Iran was moving forward.

Trump pulled us out of that treaty.

Trump then said he obliterated Iran's nuclear capable city several months ago, and now he's back saying, oh, we didn't.

And so not only has he pursued a war that doesn't seem to make sense.

He failed to do what the Constitution requires, which come to Congress and ask for a war powers resolution, ask authority >> Nash: I want to talk more about war powers.

But with the Republicans ignoring your caucus's resolution, is that it for what the Democrats can do or will do?

>> Fernández: No, because we went and we presented that during a pro forma session.

So we're going to go back and present, a War Powers resolution where we're all back in session and we have, it was a very close vote last time.

And four of the people who voted against the War Powers Resolution before Easter have now said they would vote for it.

And we also had a couple more Republicans who did not like, Trump saying, I'm going to have an entire civilization wiped out.

>> Nash: Now, you've called for Trump's removal from office after he posted a whole civilization will die on social media.

In this political landscape.

That seems farfetched.

Why say it, then?

>> Fernández: Because impeachment is something that the founders gave to Congress.

They gave to Congress the right to prosecute and impeach a president for treason, high crimes and misdemeanors and bribery.

And for president Trump has done since he began office.

There is a series of actions he has done that are impeachable.

And at a certain point in time, you have to say, this is enough and you have to call it out.

And it's not just the war crimes.

and calling for wiping out millions of civilians, which is not what we do.

We are better than that as Americans.

It's the bribery.

It's the money.

It's the ignoring.

Court orders define court orders and telling his people to defy the courts.

>> Nash: Do you believe he's committed war crimes or simply threatened them?

>> Fernández: I believe that he may have actually committed war crimes when you look at what they've done, not just in Iran, but targeting, boats in the Pacific, once again, we want to stop, drugs coming into the country.

He pardons a convicted drug dealer and then blows up boats where we can't even get the evidence.

And we don't know if they are drug dealers, if they're civilians.

He has engaged in numerous impeachable offenses.

And at some point in time, we have to say we are going to proceed with impeachment.

We're going to lay out these claims against you, and we're going to show how these are negatively impacting Americans, like the war impacting our ability to afford groceries, and whether or not we get any Republicans to join us.

It's our job to ask them to join us.

>> Nash: So that's your job.

In addition to declaring war being Congress's authority.

So are you aware of any interest among your GOP colleagues to create any sort of friction for President Trump, who has, waged a unilateral war?

>> Fernández: Well, part of what we have in Congress right now is Republicans are terrified of Trump.

They won't stand up to him.

Some of them have told me I would stand up to him, and I don't like what he's doing here.

I don't like what he's doing there.

But he's got a $1.2 billion war chest to use against me in the primary.

Well, our job isn't to worry about your whether you're going to primary to respond to your constituents and do what's right by our country.

The other reason I'm calling for impeachment.

My constituents asked me to do this.

This is not something I am doing without contacting the people who I represent, and they want us to take action.

>> Nash: Are there any Republican representatives who are not scared in the way that you're describing?

>> Fernández: You know, we have represent Massie, who's not scared.

We now have an independent, up in California because he's worried about losing his job in the next election, who has, came out and criticized Trump.

We had another Republican come out and criticize Trump around this.

So you're starting to see some cracks.

And listen, when Biden was in, I was willing to criticize him.

I pushed him on all kinds of stuff.

And that's what you need.

You need a party for.

You're willing to criticize the top of your ticket and you're willing to criticize here.

They need to engage in that.

Well, you are a co-equal branch.

>> Nash: Well, you are a co-equal branch.

>> Fernández: actually, you know, we are article one.

So I was just elected today.

Are we not co-equal?

We're article one and we're the ones who have impeachment.

We're the ones who, can declare war.

We're the ones who come up with the budget.

He is supposed to carry out the president is supposed to carry out what Congress, authorizes.

And what we have had for too long in the United States is we are letting the executive get more and more power compared what we're doing now to what Washington did.

Right.

Washington did not want to have the presidency have that much power.

Read his farewell address.

There was a recognition that the president should not have that power.

Why?

Because I have to stand for election every two years.

My job.

And this was, John Adams said the House of Representatives need to be a miniature of the people at large.

We need to look, feel and think like them.

And I come back and I have to talk to them.

They they tell me what they want, where the executive stands for office once, and then he may feel like he's above it all.

And this president thinks he's above the law, and I'm not going to let that stand.

>> Nash: Now, according to reporting for The New York Times, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu made a presentation to Trump in the Situation room that was pivotal in prompting this war, half of which U.S.

officials called detached from reality.

With that, along with how Israel has waged war in Gaza, is congressional support for Israel something that you would like to see taken up and questioned?

>> Fernández: So what we found that reporting was that Israel, pitched it, they oversold it.

Trump bought it.

And the American people are paying the price.

And we saw that Trump can't figure out what the real purpose of the war.

He kept changing his mind.

Right.

And this is this is a problem.

We should be making decisions about our national security based on our needs, not being led by another country.

And, you know, with regards to Israel, I have taken fairly strong stances against what they did in Gaza.

And I think that it is important that we look and we judge them on standards that that are internationally recognized with regards to how do you engage in conflict?

How do you what do you do and which they have not done in Gaza?

It's been outrageous.

And and and the rubble, you know, the children who are buried in that rubble should make all of us cry.

But we do need to always question >>Nash: cry, as review the material support that this country gives to Israel?

>> Fernández: Yeah, I think we need to look at that and look at you know, what I have, been supportive of is funding for things like the Iron Dome, but not funding for, offensive weapons that could be used.

I have been very critical of, what they've been doing with the settlers and West Bank, where Israel will not do anything, to rein in and hold those who are killing and massacring and pushing, the West Bank, villagers out.

Those settlers.

So I have been very critical of that.

And I think we do need to review all of that.

>> Nash: Okay.

Now, what's your take on the fragility of the two week ceasefire?

And if we can take that even more broadly, ceasefire agreements under the Trump administration, because we've seen them strain and even fall apart in Gaza as well, right.

>> Fernández: So, you know, Trump often, he brags a lot and he says things that are exaggerated.

And sometimes, let's face it, just plain old lies.

Now in this instance, you have a cease fire based on a ten point plan.

And you look at those ten points, and if those are accepted, we're worse off than before we started those war, right?

That's nothing they said nothing about nuclear weapons.

And we saw in the first days after the cease fire announced it didn't work, and that the Straits of Hormuz were still not open.

And so, you know, we do want to bring an end to this war.

And so I'm hopeful that we get to that point, and how we get to it, whether it's because we finally get the Republicans to join us.

Enough Republicans, we only need a few, to join us in a war powers resolution or through this ceasefire.

We need to bring an end to this war.

And we need to start rebuilding the consequences of rebuilding, our infrastructure of what the world relies on for oil, farmers, for farming, diesel and fertilizer.

It's going to take forever.

So we need to bring an end to it, or we'll see what happens with the cease fire.

And, you know, I'll be monitoring it.

I get lots of security briefings and other stuff.

>> Nash: well, we will be monitoring it, too.

Congresswoman, thank you so much for your time for coming by.

>> Fernández: Thank you for asking these really important questions I think people want answers to.

Thanks to Representative Leger Fernandez, the congresswoman and I had one final conversation we couldn't fit into this week's show about the expansion of the radiation exposure compensation Act, or RECA.

She explains who in New Mexico is eligible and how you can apply.

You can watch that right now on our YouTube page.

Last week, we delve deep on the new leadership at the Albuquerque Police Department.

In addition to one on one interviews with Chief Cecily Barker and Public Safety Director Raul Bujanda, we also caught up with Daniel Williams, the policy advocate with the ACLU of New Mexico.

He and executive producer Jeff Proctor had a civil rights focused conversation about the police department's new top brass.

Well, this week we picked back up with Williams and Proctor chatting about privacy concerns surrounding police use of technology and surveillance tools.

Here's Jeff.

>> Jeff: Daniel Williams of the ACLU of New Mexico.

Thanks for sticking around with me for a little something extra.

>> Williams: Thank you.

>> Jeff: We spent a bunch of time talking about the new rules at the top of the Albuquerque public safety apparatus.

Another issue that I know has been important to you and your organization has been the use of technology and law enforcement and public safety.

I'm interested in how open the Keller administration has been to the ACLU's concerns about surveillance tools and those kinds of things, and what you'll be watching out for in terms of the future of the use of those tools.

As Chief Barker and Director Honda, find their way into their new roles.

>> Williams: Absolutely.

So I think if you listen to the way Mayor Keller has been talking about public safety for the last couple of years, technology is always at the top of his list.

We've made huge investments in technology in Albuquerque.

And the truth is, some of this technology is really helpful for public safety.

The other truth is that a lot of this technology also poses significant concerns about privacy and mass surveillance, and fueling policies from out of state actors like the feds and other states who want to criminalize New Mexicans.

And we have been engaged in active dialog with APD and the Keller administration for several years now about their use of technology.

We certainly don't see everything the same.

We have a lot of concerns about things like data retention and coverage and how much data is being collected on every day.

New Mexicans who aren't suspected and will likely never be suspected of crimes.

We're not on the same page with APD about that yet.

And still we were able to work really closely with them during this last legislative session to support and ultimately get passed the Driver Privacy and Safety Act, which matches what a lot of their policies have already been, which prevents the sharing of automatic license plate reader with third parties who are going to use it.

For example, for immigration enforcement, or to prosecute people for protected healthcare activities.

That's really good.

And there's more conversation still to be had.

I think one of the things we're going to be looking for is, is APD under Chief Barker and director behind US, leadership, going to continue to invest huge amounts of money in public safety technology, some of which is very effective, not all of which is necessarily very effective.

And are they going to be building in privacy safeguards as features of their use of technology, or is that something that we're going to continue to have to be sort of gadfly with them about?

And I would love to be optimistic that that these new leaders are really going to take seriously privacy and make those foundational questions that they ask before they adopt a new technology.

>> Jeff: We will certainly be watching to.

Daniel, it is one thing to support a law not to share data.

It's another entirely to not be open to what retention looks like, because it's awfully easy for the feds to come in and just grab that stuff, even if you're not sharing with them willingly.

Anyway, I appreciate you sticking around to talk about this.

>> Williams: Thank you.

Thanks to Jeff and Daniel Williams for that conversation on policing and surveillance technology.

And speaking of police tech, the Santa Fe County Sheriff's Office wants to ink a contract with the controversial New York based company Clearview AI for facial recognition software.

County commissioners have raised ethical questions about how the agency would use the face scanning tools, and how Clearview would use the department's data.

Commissioners directed the sheriff's office to create an internal policy to guide how deputies would use this tech before signing off on the deal.

Thanks to everyone who contributed to this week's show, and thank you for watching.

For New Mexico PBS, I'm Nash Jones.

Until next week.

Stay focused.

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