Both Gov. Bill Richardson's office and the state Attorney General's Office have declined to specify what led the governor to veto "double-dipping" legislation last month. The bill would have clamped down on retired government employees who return to work and collect both a salary and pension.

At the time, a spokesman for the attorney general cited attorney-client privilege, and would only say that Attorney General Gary King had conveyed to the governor concerns from an unspecified group.

It turned out those concerns belonged to dozens of double-dippers who considered the bill unconstitutional, according to correspondence The New Mexican received through a public records request. They argued in an April 6 letter to the governor that their constitutional rights would be violated by passage of HB616, which was sponsored by state Rep. Lucky Varela, D-Santa Fe, and had easily cleared both chambers at the Roundhouse.

That letter was sent four days before Richardson's veto, though e-mail exchanges show one double-dipping employee who spearheaded resistance to the bill began approaching the Attorney General's Office in late March. That same worker claimed of having a longtime friendship with King, and campaign-contribution records showed he gave small contributions to Richardson's re-election campaign.

"We believe that this bill will be overturned by the courts if enacted into law," the letter from the worker says. "We also believe that this bill works an injustice toward dedicated state employees who made decisions based on existing law and legitimately returned to work."

It goes on to say that at the very least, any new law should not affect existing double-dipping workers, who receive pensions through the Public Employees Retirement Association.

A union lobbyist who pushed for the bill called that argument bogus, saying many other states have similar laws.

"I don't know what went into the governor's thinking, but I think that these are flimsy legal arguments at best," said Carter Bundy, political director for the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees.

The letter addressed to Richardson — and copied to King — was signed by 41 retired workers who have returned to state employment. Most worked in either the Department of Transportation or the Children, Youth and Families Department.

The first signature is that of Danny Sandoval, budget director for the state Department of Human Services. Sandoval, who worked for the CYFD before retirement, also exchanged e-mails with the Attorney General's Office prior to the governor's veto. Sandoval's name appears in the subject line of a March 24 e-mail to King from one of the attorney general's staffers.

"(Sandoval) said he was a friend. He wants to talk about HB 616 that passed. He has some concerns about it," the e-mail said.

In an interview, Sandoval said he and King have known each other since their days of growing up in Stanley. Additionally, Sandoval said he "might have" contributed $150 to Richardson's gubernatorial campaign — $100 in 2005 and $50 in 2006. Those contributions appear at the campaign-funding Web site, www.followthemoney.org.

Sandoval said the letter was a group effort and that one of the signers, Daniel Pearlman, is an attorney and did the legal citations. Double-dipping was villanized during the legislative session. Several double-dippers wanted to get in their viewpoint, though Sandoval said he and others did not speak up at committee hearings.

"If you want to stop (double-dipping), you can make it stop," Sandoval said, "but you can't take away people's property rights in the process. And we want to make sure the 2,000 people that took advantage of the law, that did things legally, that their rights aren't trampled."

He said the group might get its own lobbyist for the next legislative session.

The group's April 6 letter says the bill would violate rights to employment and to receive a pension, and that it would constitute age discrimination.

Carter, in response, said the bill never sought to take away anyone's right to work or receive a pension — just not simultaneously for an endless amount of time. The law that allows double-dipping has been in place a few years.

"The argument is completely absurd, unless you want to say the state had been violating workers' rights for 100 years, or at least since the inception of PERA," he said.

"No one's being fired, no one's being denied a pension," Carter added.

Varela said he sponsored the bill to help boost the morale of younger employees trying to rise through the ranks, and for fiscal reasons. Double-dippers no longer have to contribute to PERA, which has solvency problems and has lost millions of dollars from its investments, he said.

"I would have taken more seriously the AG's concerns if he did not have all these employees double-dipping over there also," Varela said. "He should have stepped up when we were going through the committee process and said, 'Look, there's a constitutional problem here.' They waited until the bill passed, and then the governor inquired about the legality."

After vetoing the bill, Richardson announced he would form a task force to discuss refining a double-dipper bill. "I'm not optimistic it will do any good," Varela said.

An effort to reach the Attorney General's Office for comment was unsuccessful.

Contact Doug Mattson at 986-3087 or dmattson@sfnewmexican.com.