Dr. Natalie Martinez-Yazzie Trial Witness-Statement to the Court-02.05.2026
Summary
AI-generated summaryIn a statement dated February 5, 2026, Dr. Natalie Martinez offers comments to the court about the need to revise the 2025 New Mexico Public Education Department Action Plan.
Page 1 · source excerpt
I, Dr. Natalie Martinez, am writing this statement to offer my comments regarding the needOpen page 1
Martinez says that, in her view, the plan does not address several issues she considers important to Native American and English Learner students.
Page 1 · source excerpt
Based on my review, the Plan is severely deficient in meeting the stipulations set forth by the Court.Open page 1
Key points
Martinez alleges that the plan does not address Native American learners or set out how English Learners will access English-language or heritage-language instruction.
Page 1 · source excerpt
nor does it include plans for how EL students will receive access to adequate English Language instruction or curriculum or bilingual instruction in their heritage languages .
Open page 1She says the plan lacks clear next steps, long-term steps, and goals tied to meaningful metrics.
Page 2 · source excerpt
Additionally, the Plan does not indicate a clear remedy in terms of specific next steps and continued long-term steps toward addressing the issues, nor setting appropriate goals aligned with meaningful metrics.
Open page 2Martinez also raises concerns about permanent funding, locally generated culturally responsive materials, and Tribal collaboration.
Page 2 · source excerpt
E qually concerning is the lack of details regarding specific and appropriate Tribal collaboration among New Mexico’s departments and agencies in coordination with NMPED.
Open page 2Page 2 · source excerpt
A key piece of guiding legislation, the New Mexico Indian Education Act (NMIEA), is left without addressing issues of continued permanent funding to support the NMIEA and its full implementation in this Plan, as well.
Open page 2Martinez concludes that the plan does not address most issues identified in the court’s findings and says she asks the court to consider her statement. These are her assertions, not findings made in this document by the court.
Page 2 · source excerpt
In conclusion, the 2025 NMPED Action Plan fails to address most of the core issues identified by the Court's Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law , therefore does not meet the stipulations set by the Court.
Open page 2Page 2 · source excerpt
I respectfully ask the court to consider this information when making its decision.
Open page 2
Questions to follow
- What specific revisions to the Action Plan does Martinez believe would address the issues she identifies?
- What goals, metrics, funding commitments, or collaboration steps does the Action Plan itself specify on these topics?
Generated Oct 21, 2026 · Citations refer to the saved original.
Original source: New Mexico Center on Law and Poverty
Help keep this archive accurate
Found an error or missing context? Send a private report to the review inbox. Reports do not automatically change or remove public content.
Commentary
AI-generated analysisBecause Martinez specifically identifies missing next steps and measurable goals, a possible implication is that those details could be central to assessing her criticism. This is an interpretation of the issues she raises, not an independent assessment of the plan.
Page 2 · source excerpt
Open page 2Her statement connects culturally responsive materials to possible effects on students, but it presents those effects as potential impacts rather than documenting that they occurred.
Page 2 · source excerpt
Open page 2