Lovejoy was the first woman to make it through a Navajo presidential primary, going up against President Joe Shirley in the last presidential general election. In the general election this year, she’ll face off against current Navajo Nation Vice President Ben Shelly, who came in second in the primary. With 106 out of 110 precincts reporting,  Lovejoy had garnered 16,449 votes, while Shelley took 7,504. Both are from New Mexico.

The Navajo Nation is the largest American Indian tribe in the United States, with approximately 300,000 people and 26,000 square miles straddling Arizona, Colorado and New Mexico.

At the Window Rock Sports Center as the election results came in,  Lovejoy said that election officials “should just declare her president and save the people some money, Navajo Times reporter Marley Shebala reported.

And you likely won’t ever know.

Information about who can legally carry a concealed weapon in the state, including names, is confidential under state law (29-19-6, Subsection B).

It’s a fact that surprised Sen. George Muñoz, D-Gallup, this week. A gun-rights advocate, Munoz pushed for a state law passed during this year ’s legislative session that allows individuals with concealed-carry permits to take weapons into restaurants with beer-and-wine licenses.

“I would support opening up names,” Munoz told The Independent on Monday. “I wouldn’t support towns or addresses. I mean there may be 10 George Munoz’s in the state of New Mexico. It’d be then up to you to find them. But I don’t see anything wrong with giving out names.”

Reza went on a killing spree July 12 at Albuquerque’s Emcore Corporation that left two women dead and four others injured before he turned a semi-automatic 45-caliber handgun on himself.

Whether or not Reza had a concealed-carry license has not come up as an issue in the aftermath of last week’s shooting. It’s still unclear how Reza came to possess the gun. It’s also unclear whether Reza had applied for or received a concealed-carry license.

New Mexico is an open-carry state, meaning it doesn’t require a permit for a person purchasing a gun he intends to carry in the open.

The day after the rampage The Independent was told by the New Mexico Department of Public Safety’s Special Investigations Division, which maintains the list of concealed-carry licenses issued by the state, that all information, including the names of individuals permitted to carry concealed weapons, is confidential.

While the public can’t know the names of people carrying concealed weapons,  it can know how many people have received the right to carry concealed weapons. There are 17,298 valid licenses in New Mexico currently. Of that number, 2,552 of them were issued this year, according to the New Mexico Department of Public Safety’s Special Investigations Division.

Nevada, Colorado, California release concealed carry info; other states keep it private

While New Mexico’s decision to make information on concealed-carry applications confidential appears in line with many surrounding states, it is by no means universal.

The Nevada Supreme Court ruled earlier this month that names of people who have concealed-carry permits are public, saying that the Washoe County (Reno) sheriff couldn’t withhold the name of a permittee or “and any post-permit records of investigation, suspension, or revocation.” In the ruling Nevada’s top court said that some information contained in the records made public by its ruling could be redacted.

Meanwhile, in Colorado, there is no prohibition against making public certain information related to concealed-carry permits.

“Some sheriffs have decided to put the information out and others have not,” said Chet Ubowski of Colorado Bureau of Investigation. “The application says there is potential for the application to become public.”

And in California it appears the disclosure of such information is up to local law enforcement agencies that issue the permits. The application form used by the Sacramento  County Sheriff’s Office has this line, which must be signed by the applicant:

I understand that I am obligated to be complete and truthful in providing information on this application. I understand that all of the information disclosed by me in this application may be subject to public disclosure.

Most surrounding states, like Arizona and Texas, however, treat the identity and personal information submitted on an concealed-carry permit or license application as confidential, a review by The Independent has found. In many cases an exemption is made for law enforcement agencies conducting investigations.

Meanwhile Indiana, which once considered such information public, made it confidential this year with a law that took effect July 1, said Lt. Jerry Berkey of the Indiana State Police.

The move followed the publication last year of the state’s database of gun permit holders by two of that state’s newspapers.

Should New Mexico release names?

Some wonder if New Mexico has gone too far in making even names of those holding concealed-carry licenses confidential.

“Obviously it’s a very emotional issue and it’s caused a lot of intense debate,” Sarah Welsh of the New Mexico Foundation for Open Government said. “Typically holders of permits don’t want their names published. There are concerns about stalking victims who worry about their abusers finding out where they live if their names are published with counties.”

But “someone needs to be able to check up on the list,” she said of the state’s decision to make all information related to concealed-carry permits confidential.

At least two Western states – California and Nevada – the Supreme Courts in each state have ruled that the privacy issue is not compelling enough reason to withhold the names, Welsh said.

New Mexico and the process for receiving a concealed-carry license

People applying for a New Mexico concealed-carry license must jump through several hoops, including a background check, before they earn the right, according to state law.

An application requires an applicant to list his or her current address, date of birth, place of birth, social security number, height, weight, gender, hair color, eye color and driver’s license number or other state-issued identification number, according to state law.

The applicant also must submit two full sets of fingerprints, a certified copy of a certificate of completion for a department-approved firearms training course, a birth certificate or proof of United States citizenship and proof that they reside in New Mexico.

The state then must make a “reasonable effort to determine if an applicant is qualified to receive a concealed handgun license,” including an appropriate check of available records, the law says. New Mexico also must “forward the applicant’s fingerprints to the federal bureau of investigation for a national criminal background check,” according to the statute.

South Carolina, Utah and Oklahoma are viewed as the most likely to pass similar legislation when their legislatures convene in 2011, according to the paper.

The Post reports that:

Lawmakers in Oklahoma, South Carolina and Utah, which have already taken steps against illegal immigration, say that Arizona-style measures have a realistic chance of passing when their legislatures reconvene in 2011.

Those states already have passed strict measures to combat illegal immigration, and an Arizona-style law would have momentum. If that happens, we could have more showdowns between the federal government and states, along with more pressure for Congress to address the issue.

The study showed that New Mexico saw only 14 cents in returns for every dollar it spent on film production tax credits.

According to a state review of SIC data, there were 52 film tax credits worth $46 million in 2008 and 78 credits worth $76 million in 2009, The Independent reported in March.

The value of the state’s film tax credit program, particularly in terms of its economic benefits, is a hotly debated topic in New Mexico and has been for years.

A competing report issued in January 2009 by the New Mexico Film Office found a much more positive economic impact than the report cited by Hiltzik. Conducted by Ernst & Young, the study concluded that the program had earned $0.94 in additional tax revenue for each $1.00 paid out in incentives based on the 2007 value of present and future year tax receipts and the 2007 value of state film production tax credits.

But Hiltzik counts himself among the skeptical when talk turns to reports such as the one performed by Ernst & Young.

“The rationale for this welfare program is to keep productions from fleeing to other states, taking … jobs with them,” Hiltzik reported. “But you could go blind looking for an independent study, as opposed to studies funded by the state film commissions handing out the dough, showing that such programs produce more in overall benefits than they cost.”

SIC members have raised separate concerns about the value of New Mexico’s no-interest loans for film productions, The Independent reported in March. New Mexico has given Hollywood $273 million in no-interest loans for 26 films since 2003, including $15 million for the Denzel Washington film Book of Eli, The Independent reported.

New Mexico legislators have called for Gov. Bill Richardson to curtail state subsidies for Hollywood productions.

It was reported in March that the Motion Picture Association of America was considering Richardson as the organization’s new director, a position with a salary exceeding $1 million a year.

There were a few that we didn’t have room for on the page, but which deserve a look regardless.

The first concerns Advantage Asphalt, a company that is under investigation by the Santa Fe County Sheriff’s office in a convoluted money-and-influence scheme reportedly involving several local politicians, including state House Speaker Ben Luján, Santa Fe City Councilor Matt Ortiz and County Development Review Committee chairman Jon Paul Romero.

On June 14, the Journal Santa Fe reported that Santa Fe County officials had cited Advantage “for illegally storing heavy machinery and other equipment on a residential La Cienega property.”

[County Development Review Division Director Shelley] Cobau said that [Advantage owner Joe Anthony] Montoya has a “home occupation” business license for the property. The license allows for small-scale operations, “something that doesn’t affect the residential characteristics of the neighborhood,” Cobau said.

SFR’s photographer visited Advantage’s Los Estrellas Road address last week. Does this like a “small scale operation?”

This appears to the house for which Montoya was initially denied a permit last October—a decision that was reversed without clear explanation by County Manager Roman Abeyta, per the Journal.

County officials told the Journal they weren’t sure when the most recent complaint had come in about Advantage’s property on Las Estrellas. But the records obtained by SFR show an anonymous complaint referred to inspector Rick Lovato by Permits and Inspections Division Director Wayne Dalton on April 14.

The caller “believes there is an unpermitted structure going up at 57B Las Estrellas,” the complaint says. “Neighbor believes that they are running illegal business. They start big machinery up at 6:00 A.M. The business is Advantage Asphalt.”

–

Another complaint concerned a property at 6 Jennifer Way, owned by James S Ramsey, whom SFR was unable to reach. The complaint concerns “[a]nother RV lived in with no hook ups” and “debris and junk” on the property.

It still looked that way when SFR’s photographer visited last week, although the complaint was recorded March 2, and Cobau says property owners are usually given 30 days to clean up after a code inspector’s visit.

One thing the complaint didn’t mention: These animals.

Thanks to SFR photo intern Ana Goni-Lessan for traipsing all over the place.