As different as they are, the five announced candidates for governor in 2010 agree on one thing when it comes to helping New Mexico out of its budget crisis: no tax increases.

And while they concur on a few other things, the candidates — Democrat Lt. Gov. Diane Denish and Republicans Janice Arnold-Jones, Susana Martinez, Doug Turner and Allen Weh — have different approaches to straightening out the state's pocketbook.

All four Republicans surveyed by The New Mexican took jabs at the administration of Gov. Bill Richardson, a Democrat, for its spending habits.

Turner and Arnold-Jones gave the most specific examples among the Republicans of how they would handle the budget.

Among their ideas, Turner, a consulting firm owner, said he would slim down the state's education bureaucracy while Arnold-Jones, a state representative who works in systems analysis, would review all capital-outlay projects on which ground hasn't been broken.

Denish, meanwhile, said that if elected she would eliminate the practice known as "double dipping," in which state employees retire then return to work and collect both a paycheck and retirement benefits. She also would eliminate 60 exempt employee positions that are vacant but still funded.

Martinez, the Doña Ana County district attorney, and Weh, the former head of the state Republican Party, gave fewer details on improving the state's finances.

Weh said all options for balancing the budget are on the table and he wouldn't cut public safety or raise taxes. Martinez said she would cut wasteful spending and build a spending plan that doesn't rely on "politically expedient budget gimmicks that do little to solve our long-term budget problems."

On taxes, Arnold-Jones said tax increases aren't warranted.

"It is hard to justify raising taxes if the problem is overspending on the part of the state," she said.

Turner agreed that the state needs to look at its expenses before thinking about raising taxes.

"We should neither raise taxes nor dip into existing cash reserves but begin to take a serious look at our reckless spending habits," he said.

Denish agreed this isn't the time to raise taxes on families.

"There is room, however, to close the special-interest loopholes that give breaks to wealthy out-of-state corporations at the expense of New Mexico families and businesses," she said, referring to a measure sponsored by Sen. Peter Wirth, D-Santa Fe, that would have prohibited companies that do business in multiple states from shifting their profits to states that don't charge corporate taxes.

The measure on Tuesday was ruled not relevant to the special session and won't be considered, although it is likely to come up again during the regular session that begins in January.

As for creative measures to help the state through the crunch, Arnold-Jones and Turner agreed that the state shouldn't use so-called "sponge bonds" to help itself this year. The bonds are short-term severance tax bond notes that in the past have been used for projects such as schools, not to cover state operating expenses, as Richardson is suggesting.

"Sponge bonds and other short-term borrowing is another way of avoiding the real problem, Arnold-Jones said, "and that is overspending."

Denish said she supports using the bonds this year, but she wouldn't support using them on a permanent basis.

"While proceeds from these notes are not typically used for recurring operating expenses," she said, "the magnitude of our current budget challenges probably justifies this kind of use this year."

Lawmakers in the special session that started Saturday must overcome a $650 million shortfall for this fiscal year. So far, they have made little progress agreeing on what should be cut.

One of the key battles has concerned education spending, which amounts to about half of the state's $5.5 billion annual budget.

Richardson originally said he wouldn't accept any cuts to school spending, but now is supporting a 1.5 percent cut. Some lawmakers, however, say the cuts needs to be larger, given the magnitude of the projected shortfall.

On education spending, the candidates to succeed Richardson mostly agreed that cuts are unavoidable, and several said they'd first support cuts that don't affect students.

Turner said he'd eliminate what he called a loophole that allows school bureaucrats to serve as elected officials.

"Not only does this demonstrate that these districts have a surplus of bureaucrats that they can spare for sessions and interim activities, it creates a situation where the proverbial inmates run the asylum," he said.

Arnold-Jones said she favors cutting teachers and classroom support last. The steps she would take include limiting testing requirements to federal standards, paring back administration and requiring more efficient bus service.

Among other things, Denish would work to cut the utility bills for the state's 89 school districts, which she said amounts to $60 million a year. She later this week will ask districts to reduce energy use by 10 percent.

The primary election will be held in June and the general election is Nov. 2, 2010.

Contact Kate Nash at 986-3036 or knash@sfnewmexican.com. Read her blog at www.greenchilechatter.com.