Veterans Don’t Matter? According to NM SB 103 & HB 108 they don’t


The New Mexico Legislature ignores Veterans again. Politicians love to use us during their campaign, but abandon us when we really need them. SB 103 & HB 108 are both silent on Veterans issues concerning the transfers of college credit gained from military experience. As a matter of fact, the proposed changes in the definitions of the Act may make it more difficult for Veterans to transfer credits.
SB 103 & HB 108 are identical bills that seek to amend the Post-Secondary Education Articulation Act. This Act is designed to create a unified method of transferring credits between New Mexico Institutions of Higher Education. Arguments exist for and against certain aspects of the bills, but both sides seem to miss the impact the measure will have on Veterans.
Currently, there is no unified system of determining how many credits a Veteran will be awarded for military training. According to the Legislative Education Study Committee (LESC) Bill Analysis for 2016 SB 153, military credit is transferred “solely at the discretion of the college or university.”
That may not seem like a big deal to most people, but for Veterans it is a headache. My wife & I can attest to that first hand. We are not new to college life as military Veterans.*

We have experienced the difficulties of transferring military credits between universities. Despite the fact that my wife had completed multiple years in the military and had an associate degree, UNM did not recognize all of her military education that was included in her Associate Degree. They only awarded her 3 credits for physical education. She had to take more credits to finish her BA than she should have needed. It was a waste of time and money, which could have been easily avoided.
Last year Senator Craig W. Brandt sponsored SB 153, which required the New Mexico Higher Education Department to “work in coordination with institutions of higher education to study, create and implement a policy and single articulation agreement regarding the award of academic college credit based on military training and experience.” Unfortunately, it was only a temporary provision that required HED to present a report to the Military and Veterans Affair Committee (MVAC) and the LESC on November 1, 2016.
The official minutes of the November 1, 2016 MVAC meeting are not available, but the November 16, 2016 LESC minutes are. At that meeting the HED Financial Aid Director, Dr. Harrison Rommel indicated that the department wants “military credits to apply towards a degree”, but as my wife and I both experienced, “the department has not seen that happen in the past.”
The changes to the Post-Secondary Education Articulation Act may make implementing a unified military credit policy more difficult. The bills both propose changing the definition of “articulation” from “the transfer of course credit from one institution to another” to “the transfer of courses that fulfill a graduation requirement for a student’s chosen degree program.”
HED admitted that they have not seen institutions apply military credits towards a degree. This means that even if one institution grants military credits there is no guarantee that another institution will accept them unless they “fulfill a graduation requirement.”
In addition to this change, the HED was quoted in the LESC Bill Analysis stating that “the development of a comprehensive, statewide transfer policy for military credit reflected on JST could be developed in parallel with the department’s existing work on articulation, transfer, and common course numbering.” The key word here is “could.” Why didn’t they use a word such as “will?” They used “could” because that gives them an out and leaves them uncommitted to the plan.
SB 153 did not have any substantive requirements for HED, nor did it have any implementation timeline. If our legislature truly cared about Veterans, they would require SB 103 and HB 108 to include language that requires HED to develop a “comprehensive, statewide transfer policy for military credit reflected on JST that will be developed in parallel with the department’s existing work on articulation, transfer, and common course numbering.”
They should also change the definition of “articulation” back to its original meaning or include another provision that excludes military transfer credits from these requirements.
The legislature is rushing HB 108 and SB 103 through without taking into consideration so many variables, including Veterans issues. I ask that you call your representatives and ask for them to vote “no” on HB 108 and SB 103.

* I served 15 years in the military and my wife served 12 years. We both gave up our careers to use of G.I. Bills and get an education. I was able to complete an Associate Degree in General Studies from Central Texas Community College, a BA in Business and Management from St. Martin’s University, start a MBA at UNM and get my Juris Doctor from UNM School of Law. My wife completed her Associate Degree in General Studies from University of Maryland University College, was the first student in UNM history to earn a BA in Chicano Studies, is in the process of finishing her MA in American Studies at UNM, and has started her PhD in Visual & Cultural Studies at the University of Rochester.

UNM is Dreaming of a White Male Administration…Just Like the Administrations They Used To Know


***Current UNM Board of Regents and President Frank***

Yesterday, Governor Susana Martinez announced her picks for three new Regents at the University of New Mexico. As per usual, none of the Regent selections were people of color.

That makes a Board of Regents at UNM that is completely lacking in diversity and does not accurately represent the student body. (Oh yeah… Regent Koch resigned, but was reappointed to fill Regent James position. Let’s not forget that 482 out of 492 faculty member’s voted no confidence in Regent Koch in 2010)

This should not come as a surprise to anybody. Just a few months ago, UNM’s first InnovateABQ board was selected and…you guessed it…none of the members were people of color or women. They were a bunch of older white males.

The public was outraged and UNM was forced to “expand” the board from 6 members to 11 members. One of the old white guys on the original board was furious and actually resigned his position. (He claimed that an 11-person board would be ineffective)

Now, you need to understand the process of getting selected for the InnovateABQ Board to understand why white males were selected in the first place. The Board of Regents reviews applications and makes the selections. So is it any surprise that a non-diverse Board of Regents selected a non-diverse InnovateABQ Board?

The University’s old, white, male President Frank is so excited about the expansion of the Board (maybe it has something to do with the city threatening to withhold $2 million unless the Board is expanded). He stated, “This makes up for our lack of diversity the first time…” Wow…I guess we should be grateful that they considered diversity after they were forced to do so.

This is just the tip of the non-diverse iceberg. There has never been a Hispanic, Black, or Native American Student Regent (in 20 plus years) and there are very few people of color in faculty positions. This total lack of diversity is sickening when you realize that 56% of New Mexico’s population is people of color and over 50% of the student body is people of color.

The sad fact is that the old white guard continues to control the establishments of America. They are not going to give up control easily. Racism, sexism, exploitation of the poor, and brutality (by the police and military) will continue as a means to retain power.

New Mexicans Unite Across the State to Protest Police Brutality & Racism on 12-13-14

Protest Uptown

***ABQ Uptown Mall***

The Movement has begun. Today, all across the country, tens of thousands of people marched against police brutality and racism. The time to dismantle the unjust system and create something better has arrived.

em121214eProtest Santa Fe

***UNM Medical students hold die-in***People unite in Santa Fe***

In New Mexico, over 60 UNM Medical students held a die-in on UNM North Campus today; 50-100 people gathered in Santa Fe and marched down Cerrillos road; and roughly 30 people “shut down” the ABQ Uptown Mall in Albuquerque.

The numbers of people answering the call for action in New Mexico may not be as overwhelming as some other places, but that does not matter. Any action is better than no action at all.

It is disheartening to hear people say hateful/ignorant comments. It is disheartening to know that the police will mobilize in force to protect consumers and property. It is disheartening to think that people love “flash mobs” in a mall when they sing and dance, but become angry when a group of people attempt to bring awareness of injustice to the public.

At the ABQ Uptown Mall, consumer’s yelled comments like:

“Get a life”

“You are breaking the law…this is private property”

“If Black lives mattered so much, why aren’t there any black people with you?”

“All lives matter…not just black ones”

“All of the shootings were justified”

“Get a job and get out of my way”

“Go protest at the police department, not here”

These comments are typical. They show how little the general public seems to care about racism or injustice. They believe that nothing is wrong with the system. It shows how much they buy into the belief that property rights are more important than human lives. They are more concerned about a few minutes of their commute rather than showing solidarity for a few minutes.

Come on People, get your heads out of your asses. Do I have to be black to believe that black lives matter? Am I only supposed to care about my own race? I know that all lives matter, but the reality is that our system is designed to prey on people of color. It is a fact, not just a fun talking point. Educate yourselves.

protest commute

 “Inconveniencing” consumers by blocking traffic for 5-10 minutes is not done to punish anybody. It is done to force people to take time out of their day to reflect on issues that are important. Does anybody remember the bus boycotts or a woman named Rosa Parks? I will bet people were pissed off at them for “inconveniencing” their commute as well.


***APD is deployed against peaceful protestors to serve as a private Army for Corporate America***

 The action at the ABQ Uptown Mall was originally supposed to be a die-in at Coronado Mall. Unfortunately the police were tipped off and were surrounding the meeting area. They were ready to arrest anybody who disrupted the capitalistic monster from consuming. Public tax dollars were used to stop people from lying down on the floor for a little while. There were multiple APD officers and cars all around the Mall.


 The simple fact that the police were there is screwed up and amplifies the distorted truth of our injustice system. The Mall is “private” property; the police are supposed to serve and protect the “public”. They were deployed to the Mall like a private Army for the elite. The “militarization” of the police continues and must be stopped. They should not be at the beckon call of those who have money.

The struggle must continue. The People must have the attention span to keep building this Movement. Although protests are important for creating social awareness, the Movement will be created through organizing, educating the public, and time. People need to know the truth and be educated on why this is important. It has gone on for way too long!

Today was a just the ripple of a social wave that is growing. It doesn’t matter how many People participated today, it matters how many People participate tomorrow and every day after that.


Injustice is Inevitable


                          *New Mexico State Police wait in riot gear on Central & Girard

It is time for me to admit it; some things in life are just inevitable. This morning I woke and was mesmerized by the golden rays of the sun penetrating the New Mexico horizon. The colors of the New Mexico sky can be one of the most beautiful experiences in the world. It made me think about the natives and how they saw the same colors in the sky since time immemorial. The sun rising and setting has happened since the beginning of the earth and will continue to its end. It is inevitable.


The fact that Officer Wilson will not be indicted was also inevitable. Really…how many people really believed that he would stand before his peers in a court of law? A grand jury is not a trial; it is a process that determines if there should be a trial. There is no way that the state (who is the prosecution and is the only side that gets to present a case in a grand jury proceeding) will give a 100% effort when presenting its case against a cop. The system is flawed.

I was even more disturbed when I read comments about the marches that occurred around the country in response to the announcement. I read comments like:


“Those who think that an injustice was done do not know the facts or evidence of the case”


“The liberals had their feel good moment, now they can go back home and sleep safely in their beds knowing that they are protected”


There were hundreds of comments similar to these. I could not believe the hatred and anger that these commenters directed at their fellow citizens who were exercising their 1st Amendment rights. I could not understand how they could be so blind as to believe that the system is not broken.


The protests were not about the Ferguson case alone. They were a response to uncontrolled police brutality across the country, racist sentencing guidelines in our one-sided court system, the militarization of the police force, prison systems that are overcrowded with people of color, and a court system that sends innocent people to jail.

I will agree with the commenter who states that people do not know the facts or evidence in the Mike Brown case. That is why this should have gone to trial. That is where both sides will present the facts and evidence to a jury of Officer Wilson’s peers. Let them decide his guilt or innocence, not the commenters on Facebook who think that they know everything somehow.

No matter what an individual thinks about the Ferguson case, they have to admit that our system is broken and needs to be fixed. The decision not to indict a cop should not be the inevitable outcome every time.

****I would also like to apologize to my readers for the long delay between posts. It will not happen again****

WTF? Is UNM President Frank Really Considering These 2 Stupid Ideas?


Yosemite Frank


How many stupid ideas can the UNM administration come up with this year? Here are 2 absolutely moronic ideas that top the list for 2014. I know that President Frank may not be responsible for all of them…but our story needs a villain and he is it. (PLUS, #WhatTheFrank sounds really cool)

STUPID IDEA #1: Hurting underrepresented & low income students

Recently, NMSU decided that raising admission standards to a 2.75 GPA is a good idea. For some stupid reason, UNM is considering making the exact same change to its admission standards.

Don’t get me wrong, I realize that there must be some type of admission standards in place at major universities. But, by utilizing both a higher GPA and standardized test scores, many minorities/ lower-income students will not be able to attend UNM.

In 2009, UNM admitted that GPA’s alone are sufficient in determining academic ability. In a report to the LESC, UNM testified:

“The high school GPA increase is the preferred choice for improving preparation as opposed to utilizing a minimum score on a standardized college entrance exam such as ACT or SAT. Not only is the high school GPA considered more predictive of college success but the de-emphasis of test scores in favor of curriculum and GPA assists the University in maintaining a strong commitment to access and diversity since this approach has less of an impact on underrepresented populations.

So…if they want to increase GPA requirements, they MUST get rid of ACT or SAT score requirements. In the same report, they brag:

“The University of New Mexico has admirably resisted implementing a minimum test score requirement to be admitted.”

It’s funny how bureaucrats change their tune so quickly. How was a bad idea a few years ago now considered a good idea? I know…Money talks.

King Frank

STUPID IDEA #2: Making it difficult for the AVERAGE New Mexico child to be admitted

In the report, UNM testified that:

No New Mexico beginning freshman will be denied admission to UNM”

To begin with…that is absolutely hilarious! According to the PED and a complaint filed by the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund (MALDEF) the average ACT score in New Mexico is 17 as opposed to the national average of 25.

On top of that, the test adversely impacts minorities: 78% of New Mexican Caucasians met the college readiness benchmarks in English while only 49% of Latino, 28% of Native Americans, and 53% of African American students did.

Currently, UNM “requires” students that are accepted who score below 17 to enroll in the Early Start Program. The students are required to take 6 credit hours the summer before Freshman semester starts. If they do not complete the 6 hours, they will not officially be admitted into UNM.

The program is not covered by the Lottery scholarship and is not fully funded. Many of the students go into debt to take the classes.

UNM plans to require students who score a 19 or lower on the ACT to enroll in Early Start beginning in 2015.

Therefore, the “AVERAGE” New Mexico student will only be conditionally admitted to UNM if they get a slot in Early Start (which has limited slots available).

So…it seems that almost ALL “average” New Mexico students will be denied admission to UNM!

Dumb,Dumber & Dumbest

These 2 ideas are stupid and we need to speak up. How can the “average” students in New Mexico be held responsible for a failing educational system?

As UNM admitted, the ACT/SAT tests adversely impact minorities and low-income students. Yet they have gone back on their word and decided that they are important for some reason. Do they care about New Mexico students or are they more concerned about their US News College ranking?

They need to focus on what is important to our children…not their paycheck size. If you have any other stupid ideas that you know about concerning any of New Mexico’s Institutions of Higher Education, Tweet them to @DailyLoco or use #WhatTheFrank



Why Does UNM Love Drunk Drivers and Money?


Does the screwed up moral compass of UNM bother anybody else? UNM President Bob Frank was “saddened” when the UNM lobbyist, Marc Saavedra, who has endangered the lives of multiple people by getting behind the wheel of a car drunk, was arrested and charged with his 3rd DWI. On flip side, he believes that a faculty member, Prof. David Correia, who stands up for the rights of people facing abuse by the Albuquerque Police Department, is not in line with the high standards expected of UNM faculty.

What is wrong with this world? President Frank was so upset by Prof. Correia’s actions that he said the university will “monitor” the situation. Maybe he should have monitored the high paid lobbyist ($156,000 per year) who promised to seek help and quit drinking after his 2nd arrest in 2006. Maybe he should have monitored that same lobbyist after he ran away after he refused to pay $28 for a taxi ride for him and a lady friend.

So why would President Frank speak so highly about Marc Saavedra and be “truly sorry” to see him resign? Probably because he was effective at bringing in big money from the state legislature. UNM Regent Jamie Koch said that Saavedra would be “hard to replace” because he knew more about state finance and how the legislature works than anybody. I guess “high standards” are not expected of UNM lobbyists if they know how to get money for the university.

This situation highlights the degraded mission of higher education. A professor who walks the walk is frowned upon for being “radical” and not worthy of praise. That is because he does not bring in the money that Saavedra does. Prof. Correia gets news coverage that corporations and state legislators are afraid to associate with. Although he was doing something honorable and respectable, it threatened the money supply of the beast. On the other hand, drunk driving and stiffing a taxi driver out of $28 is acceptable as long as Saavedra keeps the money flowing.

In the end, Marc Saavedra resigned from his position while Prof. Correia received tenure. The outcomes were both exactly the way they should have been, but the fact remains that UNM has some really screwed up morals and is guided by greed.

Why New Mexicans Should Fear Conrad James

Conrad James

The battle for the New Mexico House of Representatives is shaping up to be a battle for the ages. Republicans have an opportunity to take control of the House for the first time in decades. They are foaming at the mouth and throwing money around the state in rapid-fire fashion. House District 24 pits Democrat incumbent Elizabeth Thomson against Republican Challenger Conrad James. Conrad James must not win the election.

Conrad James was the state representative for District 24 from 2011-2012. He lost his re-election bid to Rep. Thomson by less than 300 votes. During his time in office, Conrad James waged a war against state workers, women, and undocumented immigrants. He believes that social programs should not be funded by income redistribution and that industry should be deregulated.

War on Children and Women

In 2011, Mr. James irresponsibly sponsored HB 380, No School Health Center Reproductive Services. This bill would have prohibited all advice or health care related to contraception, abortion, sexually transmitted diseases or reproductive process and functions!

Was he out of his mind? New Mexico has the highest rate of teen pregnancy in the country. According to a Legislative Finance Committee report, teen pregnancy costs New Mexico $590 million per year. Children born due to teen pregnancy have an increased likelihood to be incarcerated or live in poverty.

Here are some startling statistics from

  • 68% of teenage parents in New Mexico are Hispanic
  • 5% of New Mexico girls have had sexual intercourse before the age of 13
  • 11% of New Mexico girls have been physically forced to have sexual intercourse
  • 87% of teenage pregnancies occur out of wedlock
  • The teenage abortion rate in New Mexico is 17 per 1000, which is lower than the national average of 18 per 1000
  • 11% of female and 18% of male high school students have had sexual intercourse with 4 or more partners
  • 15% of New Mexico teenagers chose not to use protection during their last sexual intercourse

Many of these children do not have anybody to turn to for help or advice concerning sexual intercourse. Their only option to get help is at school. If Mr. James believes that sexual education and advice is evil or immoral, he needs to wake up! New Mexico has been ranked as the worst state to raise a child even under the best of circumstances.

War on State Workers

State workers are the only people Mr. James seems to hate more than teenagers, immigrants, and the poor. In 2011, Mr. James sponsored a bill to prohibit payment for accumulated sick leave for state workers.

Wow! This would save the state of New Mexico millions of dollars right? Wrong! Most state workers are authorized paid sick leave every year. To reward workers for attending work, the state passed legislation that would allow workers to cash in sick leave if it was unused. It was an incentive to come to work and be productive.

By taking away the cash-in option, Mr. James’ bill would force state workers to use all of their sick leave and miss work. This would dramatically reduce the already pathetic efficiency of state government. Why should a state worker let the sick leave accumulate if there is no incentive to do so? The bill was idiotic and shows a lack of understanding of state government.

On top of that, he voted for a bill to increase the retirement age of state workers. Apparently, he believes that people should be forced to work until they die to get any type of benefit.

Undocumented Immigrants

Obviously, a man who grew up in Ohio, lives in a predominantly white district, and makes ridiculous amounts of money has very little sympathy for immigrants who risk their lives to make a better future for their families.

He voted to restrict driver’s licenses for undocumented immigrants. It seems strange that a man of African-American decent would vote to restrict the rights of a people who are marginalized, discriminated against, and treated as outcasts of society.

On top of that, he is a member of the Board of Regents at the University of New Mexico. He is in control of the academic future of many undocumented immigrants and students who have family members that are undocumented.

War on the Poor

Mr. James believes that “Tax policy should not be used to redistribute wealth, choose economic winners and losers, or to engineer society. Taxes should be kept low, simple, broad, and predictable.” That should be translated to say that state- run social programs to help the poor should not be funded! This is a typical economic ideal of someone who resides amongst the societal elite. Their rallying cry should be “Don’t take our money to pay those lazy bums in the South Valley and rural New Mexico.”

It is nice that Mr. James has money to put food on his table, hire a nanny, send his children to elite private schools, and live the life of his dreams. Unfortunately, the majority of New Mexicans cannot. People need food stamps, subsidized child care, school funding, and other programs to survive. How does Mr. James propose that we pay for these programs? My guess is that he does not have a plan to help the poor.

The status quo of the elite and powerful will be safe as long as he gets elected. It is unfortunate that somebody like this is on the Board of Regents at UNM. Many of his students come from families who are poor and rely on social programs.

Environmental Assassin

The title of this category is a little harsh, but not unwarranted. Although Mr. James has not directly passed or sponsored any environmentally dangerous bills, his record shows that he favors deregulation. His official stance is:

“Regulation policies should be focused on protecting citizens and the environment and not used to punish/reward particular industries or micromanage the private market. I will continue to work to ensure that more energy is safely produced in New Mexico.”

It is funny to read that he wants to “protect citizens and the environment.” Mr. James is funded by multiple out-of-state oil and energy companies who are salivating at a chance to cash-in on New Mexico. On top of that, he received a $1000 campaign contribution from Monsanto! I will not go into an in-depth analysis of how wrong it is to accept money from Monsanto and still claim that you want to protect people and the environment.

Just Say No!!!

These are just a few of the reasons to make sure that Conrad James loses his election bid. They even call into question his position as a Board of Regent member at UNM. He is supported by the NRA and is a prototype Koch Brother clone. He must be stopped! Take some time to look at his campaign contributions and his legislative history. It should shock you. He has clearly demonstrated that he is out of touch with the realities of New Mexico and does not understand those who are not amongst the elite. His ignorance should not be a complete surprise considering the fact that District 24 is 60% Caucasian. He should stick to what he is good at…working for Sandia Labs.

The UNM Video Proposal for the New College of Social Transformation!

#OurUNM holds symbolic Die-In to give students a voice

OurUNM Die In Group 5

The #OurUNM Student movement held a symbolic Die-In in front of Zimmerman Library on Wednesday, May 7th. The event was designed to allow students to express how the system has failed them. Students outlined each others silhouette with chalk and then placed a message inside to represent their symbolic death. The Die-In last for almost 2 hours and hundreds of students either witnessed or participated in it.

The messages covered a wide variety of concerns and many of the onlookers were inspired to ask questions. They did not know that so many systematic problems existed. No matter how many people actually chalked, the reality is that the event sparked conversations that may have never been brought up to some students.

OurUNM Die In IgnoredOurUNM Die In law student ratio

Some of the messages directly addressed racial inequality and bias on campus. One student wrote that they are the only black student in their class and they feel like they are ignored. It is difficult for a young person to have nobody else in a class that looks like them. Another student pointed out that there are only 4 African-American students in the UNM School of Law (out of 330). It makes me wonder how we can have a fair system of justice if the only law school in the entire state of New Mexico only has 4 African-American students.

OurUNM Die In HomelessOurUNM Die In FoodOurUNM Die In housing

One student pointed out that he was homeless while another was concerned the they did not have enough money to buy food. Last year there were over 400 homeless students at CNM and many more at UNM. These students do not have a permanent place to live while they attempt to better their lives. That is unacceptable. To make matters worse, full time students are not eligible for many public benefits. Students cannot get SNAP (food stamps) or commodities.

OurUNM Die in Police Brutality

Students discussed mounting debt and sky high tuition rates. Others were worried about the Bridge and Lottery Scholarship, poor academic advising due to a 800:1 student to advisor ratio, and police brutality. The list goes on and on. It is clear that the system is broken. Students do not know who to turn to for help. They are hungry for change and will force the system to react.

UNM President’s Lies Exposed

Recently President Frank announced that the Student Fee Review Board is no longer allowed to allocate athletic or library student fees. Combined, he removed almost $5 million away from the SFRB’s recommendation authority. He wanted to make sure the athletic teams are competitive in the Mountain West Conference so Governor Martinez will attend games.

What exactly does that mean and why did it happen?

 The SFRB is a student led group that was created to make recommendations about how student activity fee dollars should be split amongst various organizations on campus. They make a recommendation to the Strategic Budget Leadership Team. The SBLT ultimately makes the final recommendation for the President’s approval.

Currently 50% of the total student fees are taken out of the SFRB recommendation process for debt obligations. By removing the Athletic and Library fees, the SFRB only has allocation authority over roughly 20% of the total student fees. The remaining 20% is all that is left for every student organization on campus!

The GPSA and ASUNM were startled by this new policy and asked President Frank to wait until November to propose the new policy. They needed time to prepare comments and come up with alternate proposals. President Frank agreed to wait and said “he would not propose something like this during the summer when students were not around to make comments.”

Well… he didn’t do it in the summer! Last month he made a statement that he was removing the fees from the SFRB. No comments would be accepted. He even had the audacity to claim that he never made any type of promise to GPSA or ASUNM!!!

I ask you, how do 2 elected and intelligent members of the student body remember his promise, yet he seems to want us to believe that they are lying? Why would he go back on his promise so quickly and lie to everybody?

Here is a brief timeline of events:

  1. February 2014- The Board of Regents state that they believe that the “SFRB is not to be involved in the allocation of athletic or library fees” They should only have jurisdiction over student activities and student government.
  2. President Frank says that there is confusion in the SFRB policy and he will work with the GPSA and ASUNM to make a proposal to the Board of Regents in March.
  3. March 7- President Frank, GPSA, and ASUNM compose a joint memo to the board of regents stating that they agree to wait until November to make changes in the SFRB process.
  4. March 7- VP Krebbs addresses the Board of Regents. He states that student fees make up 13% of the athletic budget. He talks about how important athletics are and that UNM athletic receives the lowest amount of student fee support in the Mountain West Conference. President Frank echo’s his comments and brags that Governor Martinez attended a basketball game.
  5. In a letter dated March 28th, but delivered April 24th President Frank declares that he is removing the Athletic and Library Fees from the SFRB immediately.

It is clear that broken promises are permitted as long as it gets the Governor to attend a basketball game. Pressure to compete in the Mountain West Conference is an acceptable reason to take away student control of their own money! The Board of Regents and President Frank used the excuse that Athletic and Library fees are mixed with university dollars and therefore are not under the control of the SFRB. The only reason that the Library fees were included was to hide the true reason behind their deceit. They want tailgaters to actually attend the football games.

President Frank needs to acknowledge his lies! He must uphold his original promise and delay the decision until November. He should publicly apologize to the student body.


Finance & Facilities Committee Minutes February 7, 2014

2) Role of the student fee review board and student fees in the UNM budget presentations. Regent Hosmer made the presentation. Regents’ approval was requested for the role of the student fee review board and student fees in the UNM budget presentations. The proposal on student fees endorses the current policy as it is written, although not always practiced. The request is that when the budget is presented to the Board of Regents, any item to which student fees contribute be presented by the University and not from the students. If the Regents determine that an adjustment to those numbers is appropriate, it is up to the University to decide how that increase is portioned between student fees and University funding. The Library is an example of a unit that is funded with both University funding and student fees. This resolution will also state that it be certain that whatever decisions the SFRB makes about items which are student funded only, such as student government, that they are not touched and that their recommendation stands and flows into the budget appropriately. In response to Regent inquiry regarding the effect on Athletic fees, Regent Hosmer stated that they would hear from the University their recommendation for Athletics fees. When the University brings the budget forward, it would show the funding stream coming from both University funds and student fees into the Athletics stream. If the Regents decided to adjust that, it is then up to the University to determine how that adjustment is applied towards University funding and student fees. Priscila Poliana stated that she believes what Regent Hosmer is proposing is what has been happening. She does believe that Policy 1310 needs to be ratified, and she believes the decisions made by SFRB have historically been accepted with very few differences. Student Government understands the process and is fully aware of it. Regent Gallegos stated that there may be some misunderstanding because procedure has been different from the policy. The only jurisdiction, as far as the SFRB is concerned, will be the matters that are student activities and student government. For entities such as Athletics and Libraries, the SFRB is not to be involved. The administration will recommend to the Regents the funding, whether it be from I&G or student fees, it is to be clear that it is understood what the intent and the result in this proposal is. Isaac Romero stated that the SFRB makes recommendations on all of the student activity fees including Athletics, Libraries, IT, and SHAC. The SFRB recommendation goes to the SBLT, to the President, and the finally the SBLT presents the recommendations to the Regents. That is the process and how it has been. EVP Harris stated that Regents Hosmer’s intent is to clarify that it is the President’s responsibility to bring recommendations forward to the Regents. Regent Gallegos and Regent James expressed confusion with the proposal as there is ambiguity in what the proposal is trying to accomplish. It was originally thought that it was going to reinsure University Administrative Policy 1310 and Regent’s Policy 4.7 that gave the Student Fee Review Board only the ability to make recommendations on student activities and student government, not for Libraries and Athletics. Regent Koch stated that the SFRB review process is rigorous and some areas should not be under the SFRB for budget recommendations. Beverly Kloeppel from Student Health & Counseling stated that she is supportive of the SFRB review process, and that getting feedback from students is important and necessary to keep departments and organizations accountable. Regent Hosmer stated that there is unintended ambiguity in the language of the proposal and did not involve the policy of authority by the SFRB. President Frank stated that this may be a policy issue because there seems to be a source of contention and disappointment around this every year if the SFRB recommendation is not fully accepted. The students put in a vast amount of hours and energy in crafting these recommendations. The process is disproportionate to the SFRB’s ability to influence. There needs to be a review of the current policies and good discussions between the Administration and Student Government. It was also recommended that Elsa Cole from University Counsel review the current policies. The President and the student leaders will review this issue and bring back a new proposal to F&F committee next month. Link to original document:­‐meetings/minutes/minutes-­‐2014/feb-­‐7.pdf

Joint Memo from President Frank, GPSA, and ASUNM with November promise

To: Board of Regents

CC: EVP David Harris, Provost Chaouki T. Abdallah From: Dr. Robert Frank, UNM President, Priscila Poliana, GPSA President, & Isaac Romero, ASUNM President

Date: March 5th, 2014

Subject: Timeline on Policy 1310

At the last Finance & Facilities meeting, on February 7th, 2014, Regents expressed their concerns with respect to the process through which students make recommendations on the allocation of student fees, underlined in Administrative Policy 1310. After that meeting, student leaders spoke to President Frank and asked approval to make recommendations on 1310. Once approval was granted, they called for a special meeting and brainstormed with a diverse group of stakeholders as a means of identifying possible areas of improvement to Policy 1310. The group concluded that a reasonable solution is dependent on (1) clarifying the scope of student input and (2) enhancing the role/participation of our advisors as our mentors throughout this process. With these objectives in mind, the working group produced a revised version of 1310 and presented it to President Frank on February 20th. The core changes proposed are the substitution of the Student Fee Review Board (SFRB) name to Student Fee Advisory Committee (SFAC) and the inclusion of our advisers as voting members in final recommendations. Dr. Frank met with student leaders in several occasions to discuss these proposed changes and look into the best path forward for the student fee recommendation. Both parties agree that any changes on 1310 ought to preserve community input, promote efficiency and advance our University’s mission. As such, our recommendation is that a collaborative working group – with representation from administration, student leaders, and community – be formed to engage in the student fee recommendation process and analyze areas of improvement. As to the timeframe, we concluded that changes during Summer and early Fall would not allow enough time for meaningful input. Consequently, both parties are confident that the collaborative working group can present a thoughtful recommendation to the Board of Regents by November, 2014. As we continue this dialogue, it is worthwhile to remember ASUNM President Mark Hartman (1986-1987) who, in collaboration with administration, in founding the Board described, “The purpose of the Student Fee Advisory Board is to improve communication between the University administration and the student body on issues involving fees. The Board should be used as a means of providing an avenue of student input to the board of Regents, on the collection and uses of student fees.” Attached you’ll find the original Policy.


President, Robert Frank

GPSA President, Priscila Poliana

ASUNM President, Isaac Romero

Finance & Facilities Committee Minutes, March 7, 2014

8. Presentation of FY15 Athletics Department Budget.Paul Krebs made the presentation. Information was provided to the Regents’ on the FY15 Athletics Department Budget. The mission, core values, and goals were discussed. The graduation rate for Athletics is at 55%, which is higher than the UNM average. When VP Krebs started, there were major issues with academics, and since then they have greatly improved. Student athletes had a record GPA of 3.25 and there are 38 student athletes that have a cumulative GPA of 4.0 or better. Athletics has also had 3 national finishes in Women’s Cross Country, Men’s Cross Country, and Men’s Soccer. UNM is ranked 17th in Learfield Sports. The revenues and expenditures for the Athletics program were discussed. They are good stewards of the money they receive, much of which is donations and gifts in kind. Student fees make up 13% and State funding makes up 8% of the Athletics budget. UNM receives less state funding for athletics than NMSU and we continually try to request a number that is equal to

their state funding, some progress has been made. Regent Koch commented that people don’t realize that Athletics is the largest, except for HSC, in raising private funds from the community. Corporate sponsors are close to $5 million, fundraising is a little over $3 million, gifts in kind are $1.6 million, and we may have another large gift coming in of $1.5 million. On the ticket sales the budgeted revenue it represents 4 components including Men’s and Women’s Basketball at $5 million, Football at $1.9, and $100K for all other sports. The two biggest expenses for Athletics include personnel and grant in aid. Regarding the Mountain West Conference, UNM receives the lowest amount of support from student fees and state funding. Athletics continue to receive support from community because the value of athletics is that they engage the community. Marc Saavedra stated that the money we receive for Athletics comes from individual Legislators Capital Outlay and Severance Tax Bond, and each House member this year received roughly about $800K. UNM Athletics received funding for the weight room, soccer complex, a new van for the ski team, and a few other small projects. The total was close to $2 million for state funding for Athletics. Governor Martinez has been attending games, which is great support for our University and allows for people to engage with the Governor.

Link to original document:

Memo from President Frank to GPSA and ASUNM that ignores the November promise made earlier

Please work!!