By Etta Pettijohn

The democrat opponent for Rep. Rebecca Dow's (R-38) seat had not filed a response to a motion to dismiss the ethics charge she filed with the new state Ethics Commission by last Wednesday's deadline.

Karen Whitlock filed the ethics complaint in September, claiming Dow violated state conflict-of-interest and financial disclosure laws when seeking state grants for the non-profit Appletree Educational Center.

The complaint was filed during the Commission's blackout period, a 60-day window established in the law to prevent political candidates from filing frivolous complaints to be used as political weapons.

While the Commission is prohibited from responding to the complaint or commenting on it publicly during this period, the accuser can disclose a case, and Whitlock contacted most media in the state with the accusations the week she filed it.

The Commission was established by the legislature last year, after heated debate among lawmakers about how it could be used for political purposes.

MOTION TO DISMISS

Dow's attorney, Patrick J. Rogers, filed a motion to dismiss in September, contending the purpose of the complaint is "grossly improper, a serious misuse of the ethics process, an attempt to use the commission for cheap and false partisan pre-election publicity."

The Whitlock campaign has in recent weeks been mass mailing campaign materials to residents in District 38, stating Dow "broke laws," even though the Commission has not commented or acted upon her complaint. She also has stated this in newspaper and radio interviews.

Whitlock also wrote, on the day after she filed the complaint, on a "Friends for Karen 38," Facebook site, "But as evidence kept coming in that she had broken the law, I came to the conclusion that I had to take a stand."

By law, the Commission cannot consider complaints for actions dated prior to July 2019, and Whitlock used actions dating back to 1999 as "evidence" of her accusations, according to the motion.

"The commission cannot accept complaints alleging conduct more than two years prior to filing or complaints about conduct occurring prior to July 1, 2019. NMAC 1.8.3.9(C); § 10-16G-15A NMSA 1978," reads the motion. "The complaint includes a collection of very dated (and false) allegations, including irrelevant personal slurs against Rebecca and her family dating back to 1999. The complaint is going to be dismissed. The question is when, before or after the election."

The Grant County Beat contacted Whitlock by phone this week, who said she did not file a response to the motion to dismiss because she feels "the complaint stands on its own merits."

Whitlock also said she made a complaint to the New Mexico Attorney General's office the same day she filed the ethics complaint, but hadn't heard back from them.

She said her campaign paid "Hopkins Fachs" to distribute the mass mailings that are claiming Dow "broke laws." A look at Whitlock's expenditure report with the Secretary of State (SOS) has no listing for such a company.

Whitlock would not say who paid the opposition research firm (Grindstone Research LLP), which provided the Appletree contracts for Whitlock's campaign. The Senate Democrat Committee paid $12,000 Sept. 1 for unspecified services. The Grindstone Research webpage lists the New Mexico House Democratic Caucus and New Mexico Senate I.E. as clients. Whitlock's filing did not list any payments to Grindstone, even though her campaign manager told the "Sentinel" in September, "Apparently CYFD forwarded the IPRA requests to the General Services Division (GSD), then GSD replied to us." He later said, "We wanted to have a professional researcher, Bricken, make these IPRA requests rather than Karen or I."

Officials with the Children, Youth and Families Department also verified, via email, that Grindstone had the majority of his IPRAs answered as early as June and July, although Whitlock has told numerous media she filed (in September) as soon as she received the documents, and did not use the blackout period for political gain.

In her complaint, Whitlock alleges Dow violated the Governmental Conduct Act intended to prevent self-dealing by soliciting and entering into, as the contractor, state contracts worth millions, while she was a sitting legislator.

According to Raul Burciaga, director of the legislative council service, he advised Dow that as long as she didn't hold a 20 percent interest in AppleTree Educational Center she was not considered the "contractor." Dow did serve as the Center's CEO in the past, but resigned in 2019, and since has served as an unpaid grant writer.

Dow also said she contacted other lawyers in the Legislative Council Service as to all forms and disclosures for legislators working for non-profits to be certain that her participation and her disclosures, and her involvement with AppleTree was transparent and appropriate at all times.

No one person or entity has ownership or interest in AppleTree. If it ever dissolves, the IRS directs the assets to be transferred to another non-profit.