Growing number of state officials failing to file personal finance disclosures
The New Mexico Secretary of State's Office has sent a list each year for the last four years with names of hundreds of officials who failed to file financial disclosures. The lists contained 18 boards where at least one member failed to file each of those years. (Photo by Krisanapong Detraphiphat / Getty Images)
A significant and growing number of government officials in New Mexico are failing to submit paperwork disclosing their personal finances, despite a state law that opens them up to removal or lawsuits and a recent partnering of two state agencies that aimed to improve the law’s enforcement.
According to a Source New Mexico review, one or more members of 18 statewide boards and commissions did not submit annual financial disclosure information every year for the last four years. That inaction violated state requirements and prompted referrals for potential fines or lawsuits.
In total, 25 state agencies or boards had top staff or board members who consistently did not file in that four-year period.
Combined, the boards oversee billions in New Mexico taxpayer dollars, manage universities, oversee law enforcement training, and regulate hospitals, museums, gambling and near-space travel, among other important functions.
A spokesperson for the State Ethics Commission said she’s seen no evidence that non-compliant officials or board members are hiding something or deliberately trying not to disclose conflicts of interest.
The increasing lack of transparency occurs as the New Mexico budget has increased 30% over the last four years, a roughly $3 billion increase since 2019 that coincides with new state agencies and boards created to manage it. Increasingly, state lawmakers are investing budget surpluses into investments or endowments overseen by boards and commissions whose members fall under the Financial Disclosure Act.
Each spring since 2021, the New Mexico Secretary of State has submitted lists of hundreds of statewide government leaders and appointees to prominent boards who did not voluntarily comply with the Financial Disclosure Act. The number of individuals on that list has increased over time.
Growing lack of disclosure
# of officials referred by the Secretary of State to the Ethics Commission for the past 4 years:
2021: 85
2022: 154
2023: 118
2024: 176
In 2021, the Secretary of State’s Office and the newly created State Ethics Commission joined forces by striking an agreement they hoped would lead to better enforcement of the Financial Disclosure Act.
A 2019 amendment to the law requires legislative candidates and some public officials to publicly file personal financial information about themselves and their spouses, along with real estate holdings and other potential conflicts of interest. Those who fail to file the forms could face disqualification as a candidate or removal from their position, according to the act.
The agreement requires the Secretary of State to send a notice to a board member or public official who did not file their form by a January deadline, and allow for 10 days for a response. If there’s no response, the Secretary of State’s Office sends the Ethics Commission a list of all non-compliant officials, which is then tasked with seeking compliance or even filing a lawsuit against anyone that continues to flout the law.
Disclosure by the numbers
Since 2021, the Secretary of State failed to get voluntary compliance from 533 officials, according to records the office provided to Source New Mexico. In that time, the office has submitted four lists each containing between 85 and 176 names.
The four lists contained at least 345 names that appeared 533 times. Of them, 16 officials have failed to file every year for the last four years, and 20 officials failed to file three of the last four years, according to a Source New Mexico review.
On the lists are high-ranking officials at state agencies and boards, plus leaders of lesser-known statewide entities like the Miners Colfax Medical Center, the Intertribal Ceremonial Office in Gallup and the Cumbres and Toltec Scenic Railroad Commission.
The 18 New Mexico boards where at least one member didn’t file a disclosure every year since 2021*:
Bioscience Authority
Border Authority
Children’s Trust Fund
Colonias Infrastructure Board
Employers Mutual Company
Institute of Mining and Technology
Law Enforcement Academy Board
Lottery Authority
Miners Colfax Medical Center
Museum of Natural History and Science
Northern New Mexico College
Occupational Health and Safety Review Commission
Parole Board
Personnel Board
Spaceport Authority
State Land Trusts Advisory Board
Tourism Commission
Water Trust Board
*according to Source New Mexico review of Secretary of State records
‘Maybe people aren’t taking this seriously’
Jane Kirkpatrick, spokesperson for the State Ethics Commission, said Friday the commission, created in 2019 with nine full-time employees, is too short-staffed to go after everyone on the lists. So it prioritizes its enforcement efforts on state agency leaders and board members who oversee “significant amounts of state funds.”
Kirkpatrick said the commission has successfully brought officials into compliance without the need for a lawsuit, though she said the commission has only gone after a small minority of the hundreds of names it’s received for the last four years.
She did not know offhand the exact number of officials it deemed “targets” for enforcement, but she provided an October 2023 commission news release touting its success obtaining disclosures from unnamed officials at the Office of the State Engineer, the State Board of Finance, the State Investment Council and elsewhere.
Still, the number of officials referred by the Secretary of State has increased since 2021, as has the number of boards and commissions with members in violation.
In mid-April of this year, the office sent over a list that contained 176 names, the highest such total since the new process began four years ago.
The commission estimated in October 2023 that 675 officials and candidates statewide are required to file the disclosure forms, meaning at least a quarter of officials statewide failed to disclose in 2024.
State law requires financial disclosures every January from state agency heads and members of boards whose appointments are contingent on state Senate approval.
Statewide legislative candidates are required to file their forms when they file to run for office, typically in March of an election year.
So far, none of the names on the lists provided by the Secretary of State has belonged to a candidate or elected lawmaker. It is unclear based on a review of the Secretary of State’s website if that’s because they all complied with the law or because they somehow evaded the attention of the Secretary of State in its compliance review.
UPDATE 1:10 p.m. on May 28
Secretary of State’s Office spokesperson Alex Curtas told Source New Mexico on Tuesday that all candidates have filed Financial Disclosure Statements:
“All of those people complied with the law in order to be placed on the ballot,” he said. “We have a number of proactive measures we take throughout the year to ensure every required FDS filer does so – this involves emails, in person meetings, and other outreach efforts to ensure voluntary compliance with the law. When deadlines appear to have been missed, we reach out again to filers to pursue voluntary compliance.
I just want to make it clear that our review process is robust and ongoing.”
Kirkpatrick said, in her view, none of the officials the Ethics Commission has pursued for violations seemed to be hiding something or deliberately sought to avoid disclosure.
Instead, those the commission has reached out incorrectly thought they’d filed the disclosure form as required, or they thought they weren’t obligated to file a disclosure.
The Secretary of State’s Campaign Finance Information System (CFIS), the online portal where candidates and officials file, can be wonky or hard for filers, she said.
“CFIS has some issues, where people think they’re filing, and it’s not going through,” she said. “We’re calling these people up to get in compliance, and they completely think that they’re compliant.”
Kirkpatrick also said the commission regularly encounters officials who don’t seem to take the Financial Disclosure Act seriously, treating more as a “paperwork process” than a meaningful effort to provide the public with relevant information about the people who run the government.
“Maybe people aren’t taking this seriously, because we haven’t made them take it seriously, or we haven’t done something more stringent,” she said.
The commission has endorsed two similar bills in the 2022 and 2023 legislative session that would beef up the requirements for filers, to include additional requirements like disclosure of assets, stock holdings, outstanding debt and gifts received. It would also create criminal penalties and hefty fines.
Both bills failed.
In January of 2023, the city of Albuquerque adopted its own version of the Financial Disclosure Act, drawing heavily from the failed legislation, according to the Albuquerque Journal.
In many ways, Albuquerque adopting those principles made it a “a model in the area of financial disclosure law,” Jeremy Farris, the executive director of the state Ethics Commission, told city councilors at the time.
The current state law, while somewhat easy to ignore, is also ambiguous in some respects.
For example, candidates for district attorney are not required to file disclosures, even though their incumbent opponents are required. Also, it’s not clear who enforces disclosure rules when it comes to some state boards and commissions, including the Water Quality Control Commission, when they have additional requirements to disclose under the law.
“A lot of people are realizing that some of our statutes are not as clear as we would like them to be,” Kirkpatrick said. “And they’re not as stringent as they could be.”
The post Growing number of state officials failing to file personal finance disclosures appeared first on Source New Mexico.
