SANTA FE, N.M. — Internal state emails shown in a video by independent journalist, Elias Sisneros, show former Albuquerque Mayor Marty Chavez personally revised the terms of a proposed $64,575 consulting contract for Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham’s State Fair redevelopment initiative, raising questions about his involvement in negotiating an agreement with the state.
The correspondence shows Chavez communicating directly with General Services Department officials in December 2024 about compensation, contract language and required disclosures.
The proposed six-month agreement, identified as Professional Services Contract No. 25-350-0090-00026, named Martin J. Chavez LLC as the contractor and the General Services Department’s Facilities Management Division as the contracting agency.
It provided $15,000 for the first month, followed by $9,000 monthly for five additional months, plus $4,575 in gross receipts taxes.
In a Dec. 20 email, Chavez acknowledged making changes to the proposed agreement.
“I’ve appended the contract with changes,” Chavez wrote, explaining that the first month’s larger payment was intended to cover startup expenses.
He said he and another official had agreed on the total compensation and monthly payment structure, and welcomed revisions necessary to comply with state law.
A separate Dec. 19 email shows Chavez outlining the payment schedule, directing that invoices go to GSD and reports be submitted to the governor and her chief of staff.
Chavez signed the correspondence as senior adviser to Lujan Grisham.
However, an October 2023 announcement from the governor’s office stated that Chavez’s last day as infrastructure adviser would be Dec. 31, 2023. The emails do not establish whether he subsequently held another state employment position.
That distinction matters under New Mexico’s Governmental Conduct Act, which imposes restrictions on state contracts involving current and former government employees.
Section 10-16-7 requires public disclosure and competitive procurement for certain contracts involving current employees. Section 10-16-8 separately restricts agreements involving former employees whose official actions directly resulted in the contracts.
The screenshots show GSD officials requesting a completed and notarized former-employee affidavit, agency certification, tax documentation and additional information before processing the agreement.
A state contract reviewer also questioned the proposed monthly compensation and requested documentation explaining how the amounts were calculated. The reviewer indicated the payment arrangement could require additional legal review.
On Dec. 30, Chavez emailed officials an affidavit he said he intended to sign and notarize.
The proposed contract’s Article 12 contains another relevant provision, stating that the contractor had not directly participated in preparing specifications, qualifications or evaluation criteria for the agreement or related procurement.
That language reflects Section 10-16-13, which prohibits agencies from accepting competitive bids or proposals from individuals who directly participated in developing the criteria governing those procurements.
The contract also tasked Chavez with coordinating redevelopment efforts, engaging stakeholders, advising the administration on legislative strategies and reporting weekly to the governor.
The emails establish his involvement in revising the proposed agreement but do not independently establish that his actions violated procurement law.
The screenshots do not include the final executed contract, signed affidavit, complete approval records or payment documentation.
Questions remain about Chavez’s employment status during negotiations, the procurement method used and whether the agreement received the required conflict-of-interest review.
The documents shown in the video have not been independently authenticated, and no official determination of wrongdoing has been established by the materials reviewed.
