N.M. school board members found guilty of violating open-meetings law
By The Associated Press
08.30.02
ALAMOGORDO, N.M. — Five former Las Cruces school board members have been found guilty and fined $500 each for violating the state Open Meetings Act.
The trial in state district court in Alamogordo was the first time the attorney general's office brought criminal charges against people accused of violating the Open Meetings Act.
"People need to understand that when you have the public trust, you need to operate in the sunshine," spokeswoman Sam Thompson said yesterday.
"We've always said a lawsuit by the attorney general would send a powerful message throughout the state that these laws mean what they say, so that's good," said Bob Johnson, executive director of the New Mexico Foundation for Open Government.
A jury found Ruben Alvarado, Clarence Fielder, Jeannette Dickerson and Mary Tucker guilty of two counts of violating the Open Meetings Act, Thompson said.
William Soules was found guilty on one count of violating the state law. Thompson said the jury found he did not attend one of the meetings in which illegal actions were taken.
All five former board members received $500 fines. Johnson said they could have been fined $500 on each count.
Larry Pickett, an attorney for Alvarado and Fielder, and Michael Lilley, an attorney for Soules, both said it's too early to decide whether to appeal. Lilley said he would decide within about a month whether to appeal.
Pickett said: "I think at this stage everybody wants to go home and think about it. I'll meet with clients in a couple of weeks to see if they have any serious thoughts of appealing it."
Alvarado, Fielder and Soules had testified Aug. 28 that brief references to the then-superintendent's contract extensions in school board minutes provided adequate public notification.
The board members were accused of trying to hide lucrative financial bonuses for former school superintendent Jesse Gonzales in February 2000 and 2001.
"We had a hard time with this because we felt they were servants of the community," the foreman of the jury told the court after the verdicts were read. He also said the jury felt the defendants had no intention of violating the Open Meetings Act, but had not followed it exactly as they should have.
The act requires that elected and appointed boards take formal action in public, that the public be notified of planned action in agendas and that printed minutes of meetings reflect board actions.
Alvarado testified before Judge Frank K. Wilson and the jury Aug. 28 that a June 6, 2001, three-year contract, as well as a Feb. 6, 2001, "supplemental" contract were both given proper notice by a handwritten line on a Jan. 9, 2001, meeting agenda.
The line read: "closed session and action — sup't evaluation."
The resulting minutes of that meeting said the board voted to extend Gonzales' contract.
Alvarado said he believed the board was required to announce whether it hired or fired the superintendent and not the terms and conditions of employment.
Alvarado also said he had attended 16 legal seminars — some of which covered the Open Meetings Act — over the years he served as a board member.
After the trial, Alvarado gave a statement on behalf of the group.
"No one can take away all the good we did for the district," Alvarado said, surrounded by his former colleagues. "We were trying to do the best that we knew how."