Plaintiffs Criticize Remedial Draft Plan In Yazzie/Martinez Case As Too ‘Vague’

By Leah Romero, Source New Mexico

Posted October 9, 2025

A draft remedial plan submitted last week by the New Mexico Public Education Department in the long-running Yazzie/Martinez education equity case is too “vague,” stakeholders and education advocates claim.

The PED submitted a 70-page remedial plan for providing at-risk New Mexico students with an equitable education over the next three years to the First Judicial District Court, meeting the Oct. 1 deadline set by District Court Judge Matthew Wilson earlier this year. The court previously identified at-risk students at those with disabilities, from low-income families, English language learners and Native American students.

However, plaintiffs in the case and other advocacy organizations state they are disappointed in the draft, claiming the wording is too vague and doesn’t include enough details and metrics. The New Mexico Center on Law and Poverty, which represents the lead plaintiffs in the case, also said in a news release it is concerned that comments from stakeholders and members of the public are not adequately represented in the plan.

“A lot of effort went into providing very specific stakeholder input. Not just in this last round of stakeholder input, but over some years of trying to assist the state with this task,” Laurel Nesbitt, senior attorney for Disability Rights New Mexico, told Source NM. “The elements of the plan, they are so generally worded that the only way to make real sense of them and to get anything meaningful out of these elements is to try to fill in the blanks with one’s own hopes about what the language could mean.”

Nesbitt pointed to one component of the plan addressing “high-quality, inclusive education with sufficient supports” for students with disabilities. The plan first highlights the need for the state Legislature to permanently establish the Office of Special Education within the PED. The office was created in 2023 through an executive order signed by Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham. The first step also states that training, resources and accountability are needed for special education. Nesbitt questioned who would receive the training and what the training and resources would look like.

“That is just making official an office that already exists,” Nesbitt said. “And there’s no indication in there about what that would mean in terms of the office…Is there going to be greater capacity? Is there going to be greater expertise within the office? Is there anything substantive about that that’s going to lead to positive change for students with disabilities?”

The plan goes on to state that between July 1, 2026 and June 30, 2027, the PED and the Early Childhood Education and Care Department will expand efforts to comply with the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act by quickly identifying and evaluating students with disabilities; providing adequate services; reducing restraint and seclusion and disciplinary removals; increasing parent participation in the Individualized Education Program (IEP) process and college or career transitions.

“In and of itself, that is not a comprehensive list, but that list includes general thoughts, general ideas that were contributed,” Nesbitt said. “It’s a list that includes elements that are important, but each one of those elements in that list should have its own plan.”

She told Source that the draft plan is riddled with such examples of components that need further expansion, details of action and metrics, not only for students with disabilities, but for all at-risk students.

“It’s disappointing, but it kind of goes beyond disappointing to being kind of offensive that students with disabilities would need to wait, first, for an entire year for the passage of legislation, which may or may not pass,” Nesbitt told Source. “Not to mention the fact that these are already activities that are required by IDEA for the state to do…whether the [Office of Special Education] exists or not.”

She told Source that she only sees stakeholder input included in the draft in a general sense, such as identifying areas of action, but she said the plan does not include “concrete” steps to address or improve these areas. She said there are not enough details about training, for example, to see if they were heard by the PED.

It’s disappointing, but it kind of goes beyond disappointing to being kind of offensive that students with disabilities would need to wait, first, for an entire year for the passage of legislation, which may or may not pass.”
Laurel Nesbitt, Disability Rights New Mexico

Nesbitt added that stakeholder engagement has been happening for many years, not just over the summer since the court ordered the remedial plan. “And it’s not clear that any of that is really captured in the plan,” she said.

Source reached out several times to the PED for comment, but did not receive a response.

Wilhelmina Yazzie (Diné), one of the lead plaintiffs in the case, who has been involved for over 10 years, told Source that she was disappointed that the PED’s draft plan did not include the nine components her legal team outlined earlier this year.

“I just feel like it’s just the same…old process that has been taking place over and over,” Yazzie told Source. She said she and other advocates promoted the community input session that were held over the summer months, assuring people that their voices mattered. “They take time out, they drive out here to these sessions and…it’s so disappointing that I just feel like those still have been dismissed.”

The PED is asking for the public to provide feedback on the draft plan online through Oct. 17. The department then has until Nov. 3 to provide a final draft to the court, after which the plaintiffs can file formal objections to the plan.

Leah Romero is a freelance writer based in southern New Mexico. This

article is republished from Source New Mexico under a Creative Commons license.