AG BELIEVES PRC IS A STATE AGENCY…FEDS SHOULD RULE ON HATCH ACT QUESTION.

States News Service February 19, 2010 SANTA FE, NM — The following information was released by the office of the New Mexico Attorney General:

Attorney General Gary King says the Public Regulation Commission’s declaration that it is not an Executive Branch agency is erroneous and its request to him for an opinion about application of the Hatch Act is a question for the federal government.

In response to a request from the commission chairman for an opinion on whether the Hatch Act applies to PRC Chief of Staff Daniel Mayfield, the AG’s office responded in a letter: [excerpts from letter] Thank you for your February 4, 2010 request to the Office of Attorney General for an opinion on whether NMSA 1978 Section 10-9-21 (the “State Hatch Act” ) or the federal Hatch Act , 5 U. S.C. Sections 1501 to 1508 applies or will apply to Mr. Daniel Mayfield, the Commission’s Chief of Staff. As explained in further detail below, we are unable at this time to offer a legal opinion on the applicability of the prohibitions contained in the federal Hatch Act to Mr. Mayfield’s position. We do not agree however, that exempt employees of the Commission like Mr. Mayfield are uniformly exempted from coverage under federal law based upon declarations that the Commission is not part of the Executive branch of State Government. website act question of the day website act question of the day

…Mr. Mayfield’s political activities are not governed by the State Hatch Act and are not restricted by federal law unless, based on an analysis of his duties and responsibilities as Chief of Staff, he is principally employed in connection with federally funded activities of the Commission. 5 U.S.C. Sections 1501-1508.

Since we do not know whether Mr. Mayfield performs activities that are federally funded, we cannot offer an opinion in this regard. In addition, it is important to note that determinations of Hatch Act coverage are within the purview of the federal government, and are not matters generally influenced by an interpretation of state law. We suggest that the Commission seek guidance from the federal government to resolve this question.

###