My business, Haussamen Publications, is trying to force the release of subpoenas received by state agency in pay-to-play probe
I’m a passionate believer in open government. That’s why my business, Haussamen Publications, filed a petition today seeking a court order to force the New Mexico Finance Authority (NMFA) to release copies of subpoenas it has received in the federal probe of allegations of pay to play in the Richardson administration.
In January, I requested copies of subpoenas received by the governor’s office and NMFA in the investigation. While the governor’s office provided a copy of the subpoena it received, the NMFA denied my request.
The petition contends that any subpoenas NMFA has received in the federal probe should be public and notes that the governor’s office released such a document in response to an identical request. It seeks a court order for the release of the subpoena or subpoenas NMFA has received in the investigation and the awarding of costs and attorney fees.
The petition, which names the NMFA’s custodian of public records Connie Marquez-Valencia as the respondent, was filed in the Third Judicial District Court in Las Cruces. Click here to read the petition.
The attorney representing Haussamen Publications, the publisher of this site, is David P. Lutz of Las Cruces.
In a February letter informing me of the denial of my records request, Reynold Romero, the NMFA’s general counsel, wrote that “release of the requested documents could compromise or impede an ongoing federal investigation.”
In an interview, Romero told me his denial wasn’t based on any of the specific exemptions to the state’s Inspection of Public Records Act. He instead cited the provision that allows exemptions “as otherwise provided by law.”
At the time, I sought guidance from the New Mexico Foundation for Open Government. The group sent a letter to the NMFA asking the state agency to justify denying my request. Romero responded by citing a passage from a letter that accompanied a subpoena the grand jury sent to NMFA:
“Subpoenas issued in connection with proceedings before a grand jury are specifically exempt from the customer notification requirements of the Right to Financial Privacy Act… and disclosure under certain circumstances is prohibited…” the letter states. “Premature disclosure of this subpoena for records might impede the investigation in this case. Therefore, you are requested to not disclose the existence of this subpoena.”
The petition filed today contends that, “The asserted basis for denial does not fall under any of the enumerated exceptions to required disclosure under the Inspection of Public Records Act.”
I’ll let you know how the court case progresses.
– Heath Haussamen