HB 208 — HAZARDOUS OFFICER STATEMENT UPON COURT ORDER
Last action — Signed
-
✓Introduced
-
✓In Committee
-
✓Passed House
-
✓Passed Senate
-
✓To Executive
-
6Enacted
This bill has been enacted into law. Introduced January 10, 2019. Enacted.
Prognosis
Where this bill stands today.
Odds of enactment
HighHow often bills like it became law.
-
Enacted
Current position in the legislative process.
-
1 sponsor
1 primary, 0 co-sponsors signed on.
-
Single-party support
Sponsorship is currently within one party (1 D).
-
Cleared a recorded vote
Passed 1 recorded vote so far.
Prognosis reads this bill's own signals — stage, sponsorship breadth, committee status, recorded votes and cross-state momentum. Odds come from a model trained on which bills have become law.
Bill Text
What changed in the latest version
110 added · 184 removedPlain-language change summary
The recent amendment to Bill HB 208 clarifies that statements made by officers, when compelled to speak under threat of dismissal, will only be released if a court orders it. This change is significant because it helps protect the privacy of officers and ensures that sensitive information shared in potentially high-pressure situations is not easily accessible to the public. By restricting the release of these statements, the amendment aims to promote a fairer environment for officers and protect their rights during employer-employee interactions.
HOUSEAN BILLACT 208RELATING 54THTO LEGISLATUREPUBLIC -EMPLOYEES; STATEOFNEWMEXICO- FIRST SESSION, 2019 INTRODUCED BY Nathan P.
SmallAMENDING 6THE 8HAZARDOUS 10DUTY ANOFFICERS' ACTEMPLOYER-EMPLOYEE RELATINGRELATIONS ACT TO PUBLICCLARIFY EMPLOYEES;THAT THE COMPELLED STATEMENT OF AN OFFICER SHALL NOT BE RELEASED EXCEPT UPON COURT ORDER.
AMENDING7 THEBE HAZARDOUSIT DUTYENACTED OFFICERS'BY EMPLOYER-EMPLOYEETHE RELATIONSLEGISLATURE ACTOF TO CLARIFY THAT THE COMPELLEDSTATE STATEMENT OF ANNEW OFFICERMEXICO: SHALL NOT BE RELEASED EXCEPT 14 UPON COURT ORDER.
16SECTION BE1. IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO:
eSection t10-7F-1 17NMSA SECTION1978 1.(being Laws 2010, Chapter 62, Section 1) is amended to read:
Section"10-7F-1. 10-7F-1 NMSA 1978 (being Laws 2010, w l n d 18 Chapter 62, Section 1) is amended to read:
=SHORT =TITLE.--Chapter 1910, "10-7F-1.Article 7F NMSA 1978 may be cited as the "Hazardous Duty Officers' Employer- Employee Relations Act"." SECTION 2.
SHORTSection TITLE.--[This10-7F-2 act ] Chapter 10, Article 7F a l i a e r 20 NMSA 1978 may(being beLaws cited2010, asChapter the62, "HazardousSection Duty2) Officers'is aamended tto mread: m 21 Employer-Employee Relations Act"." d r e 22 SECTION 2.
Section"10-7F-2. 10-7F-2 NMSA 1978 (being Laws 2010, c e s k 23 Chapter 62, Section 2) is amended to read:
eDEFINITIONS.--As aused nin bthe 24Hazardous "10-7F-2.Duty Officers' Employer-Employee Relations Act:
DEFINITIONS.--AsA. used in the Hazardous Duty u [ Officers' Employer-Employee Relations Act:
.212333.1 A.
[A.] B.
"emergency medical technician" means an 6 individual who has been licensed by the department of health as an emergency medical technician;
[B.] C.
"firefighter" means an individual who is employed as a non-volunteer firefighter and who has taken the HB 208 Page 1 oath prescribed for firefighters;
[C.] D.
"hazardous duty officer" or "officer" means an individual who is employed full time by the state or a political subdivision of the state as a firefighter, emergency medical technician or paramedic, provided that "hazardous duty officer" does not include an individual who has not completed the probationary period established by the individual's e e 17 employer as a condition of employment;
and e e n d 18 [D.] E.
"paramedic" means an individual who has = = l ] 19 been licensed by the department of health as a paramedic." a l r i 20 SECTION 3.
Section 10-7F-3 NMSA 1978 (being Laws 2010, t e a t Chapter 62, Section 3) is amended to read:
m m 21 e d r e 22 "10-7F-3.
INVESTIGATIONS OF HAZARDOUS DUTY OFFICERS-- c e r c 23 REQUIREMENTS--LIMITATION.-- e a n b 24 A.
When a hazardous duty officer is under u [ investigation by the officer's employer for alleged actions .212333.1 - 2 - that could result in administrative sanctions being levied against the officer, any [interrogation ] investigative interview of the officer shall be conducted only:
6 [(1)] (2) when the officer is on duty or during the officer's normal waking hours, unless the urgency of the investigation requires otherwise;
and [(2)] (3) at the employer's facility, unless the HB 208 Page 2 urgency of the investigation requires otherwise.
Prior to commencement of an [interrogation session] investigative interview:
(1) the officer shall be informed of the name and rank of the person in charge of the [interrogation ] investigative interview and all other persons who will be ]present during the investigative interview;
present during the [interrogation e e 17 (2) the officer shall be informed of the e e n d 18 nature of the investigation, and the names of all known = = l ] 19 complainants shall be disclosed to the officer unless the chief a l r i 20 administrator of the officer's employer determines that the t e a t identification of the complainant shall not be disclosed m m 21 e d r e 22 because it is necessary for the protection of an informant or c e r c 23 because disclosure would jeopardize or compromise the integrity e a n b 24 or security of the investigation;
and u [ (3) a reasonable attempt shall be made to .212333.1 - 3 - notify the officer's immediate superior of the pending [interrogation ] investigative interview.
During an [interrogation session ] investigative interview, the following requirements shall be adhered to:
[(1)] (2) each [interrogation] investigative interview session HB 208 Page 3 shall not exceed two hours unless the parties mutually consent to continuation of the session;
[(2)] (3) there shall not be more than one [interrogation ] investigative interview session within a twenty-four-hour period, unless the parties mutually consent to additional sessions, provided that there shall be at least a one-hour rest period between the sessions;
e e 17 [(3)] (4) there shall not be more than two e e n d 18 [interrogators ] investigators at any given time;
= = l ] 19 [(4)] (5) the officer shall be allowed to a l r i 20 attend to physical necessities as they occur in the course of t e a t an [interrogation session ] investigative interview;
and m m 21 e d r e 22 [(5)] (6) the officer shall not be subjected c e r c 23 to offensive language or illegal coercion by [the officer's e a n b 24 interrogator] an investigator in the course of an u [ [interrogation session ] investigative interview.
.212333.1 - 4 - D.
An [interrogation ] investigative interview of an officer shall be recorded, and the complete [interrogation ] investigative interview shall be published as a transcript;
provided that any recesses called during the [interrogationinvestigative ]interview shall be noted in the transcript.
An investigative interview accurate copy of the transcript or tape shall be provided to the officer, upon written request, no later than fifteen working days after the investigation has been completed.
Show all 41 changed lines (1 more)
The compelled statement of an officer shall not be released by the employer except upon court order." -HB 5208 -Page 134 15 e e 17 e e n d 18 = = l ] 19 a l r i 20 t e a t m m 21 e d r e 22 c e r c 23 e a n b 24 u [ .212333.1
Show all 41 changed rows (1 more)
View plain text versions (2)
- Final Version View text Current pdf
- Introduced introduced version pdf
Action History
-
Signed
-
passed Senate
-
DO PASS committee report adopted
-
Sent to Senate Judiciary Committee
-
passed House
-
DO PASS committee report adopted
-
DO PASS committee report adopted
-
Sent to House Labor, Veterans & Military Affairs Committee & House Judiciary Committee
-
Sent to House Pre-file
Sponsors
- Nathan P. Small · Primary
Sponsorship breakdown
Export CSV (upgrade) →1 sponsors · 0 co-sponsors · 111 not signed on
Sponsors (1)
- Nathan P. Small Democrat
Co-sponsors (0)
None.
Not signed on (111)
111 members have not signed on to this bill.
Show all 111 →"Not signed on" means a member has not sponsored or co-sponsored this bill — it does not imply opposition. Members flagged Voted No have a recorded No vote on this bill.
Votes
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 30 | 0 | 0 | 4 |
| Republican | 11 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Democrat | 23 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Total | 64 | 0 | 0 | 6 |
| % of votes cast | 91% | 0% | 0% | 9% |
How each member voted (70)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Akhil | — | Yea |
| Allison | — | Yea |
| Madrid | — | Yea |
| Martmnez, Javier | — | Yea |
| Bash | — | Yea |
| Black | — | Yea |
| Pratt | — | Yea |
| Rehm | — | Yea |
| Salazar, Tomás | — | Yea |
| Sanchez | — | Yea |
| Stansbury | — | Yea |
| Gonzales | — | Yea |
| Hochman | — | Yea |
| Garcma, M.P. | — | Not Voting |
| Alcon | — | Yea |
| Anderson | — | Yea |
| Baldonado | — | Yea |
| Bandy | — | Yea |
| Chasey | — | Yea |
| Cook | — | Not Voting |
| Crowder | — | Yea |
| Egolf | — | Yea |
| Ely | — | Yea |
| Fajardo | — | Yea |
| Harper | — | Not Voting |
| Lewis | — | Yea |
| Louis | — | Not Voting |
| Nibert | — | Yea |
| Powdrell-Culbert | — | Yea |
| Ruiloba | — | Yea |
| Schmedes | — | Yea |
| Stapleton | — | Yea |
| Strickler | — | Yea |
| Sweetser | — | Yea |
| Andrea Romero | Democrat | Yea |
| Angelica Rubio | Democrat | Yea |
| Antonio Maestas | Democrat | Yea |
| Christine Chandler | Democrat | Yea |
| D. Wonda Johnson | Democrat | Yea |
| Debra M. Sariñana | Democrat | Yea |
| Derrick J. Lente | Democrat | Yea |
| Doreen Y. Gallegos | Democrat | Yea |
| Elizabeth "Liz" Thomson | Democrat | Yea |
| G. Andrés Romero | Democrat | Yea |
| Joanne J. Ferrary | Democrat | Yea |
| Joy Garratt | Democrat | Yea |
| Linda M. Trujillo | Democrat | Yea |
| Linda M. Trujillo | Democrat | Yea |
| Linda M. Trujillo | Democrat | Yea |
| Martha Garcia | Democrat | Yea |
| Matthew McQueen | Democrat | Yea |
| Micaela Lara Cadena | Democrat | Yea |
| Natalie Figueroa | Democrat | Yea |
| Nathan P. Small | Democrat | Yea |
| Patricia A. Lundstrom | Democrat | Yea |
| Patricia Roybal Caballero | Democrat | Yea |
| Raymundo Lara | Democrat | Yea |
| Susan K. Herrera | Democrat | Not Voting |
| Alan T. Martinez | Republican | Yea |
| Candy Spence Ezzell | Republican | Yea |
| Cathrynn N. Brown | Republican | Yea |
| David M. Gallegos | Republican | Yea |
| Gail Armstrong | Republican | Yea |
| Gail Armstrong | Republican | Not Voting |
| Jack Chatfield | Republican | Yea |
| James G. Townsend | Republican | Yea |
| Larry R. Scott | Republican | Yea |
| Martin R. Zamora | Republican | Yea |
| Rebecca Dow | Republican | Yea |
| Rod Montoya | Republican | Yea |
Subjects
Frequently asked questions
- Who sponsors HB 208?
- HB 208 is sponsored by Nathan P. Small (Democrat).
- What is the current status of HB 208?
- This bill has been enacted into law. Introduced January 10, 2019. Enacted.
- Where can I track HB 208?
- Track HB 208 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.
Make your voice heard on HB 208
Find the representatives who decide this bill and tell them where you stand — for yourself, or mobilize your whole list in one click with One Click Politics advocacy software.
Stay ahead of HB 208
Last checked for changes 2 months ago · updated continuously
One Click Politics tracks every bill in Congress and all 50 states.
Track this bill →