NMSU AD won’t be paid with state funds pending investigation
Moccia signed extension in April after turbulent 2022-23 school year
LAS CRUCES – Mario Moccia’s five-year contract extension and pay increase as the New Mexico State Athletic Director officially took effect on July 1.
However, due to concerns surrounding multiple off-court incidents last season involving the New Mexico State men’s basketball program, Moccia’s salary is being paid through athletic foundation funds rather than university funds, allocated by the state, at the demand of state leaders following a May letter from Higher Education Department Cabinet Secretary Stephanie Rodriguez.
According to the May 16 letter, addressed to the NMSU Board of Regents and Interim Chancellor Jay Gogue, “It is the position of the New Mexico Higher Education Department and Governor (Michelle) Lujan Grisham that, given the heinous nature of the incidents that occurred under Director Moccia’s tenure, state funds should not be applied toward his salary or compensation until and unless a thorough independent investigation has cleared him of any culpability or wrongdoing.”
In a letter dated June 6, Gogue wrote that effective May 16, Moccia’s salary “is being paid 100 percent by the Aggie Athletic Club (AAC). The AAC is the philanthropic arm of NMSU Athletics. All funds related to the AAC are deposited with the NMSU Foundation. Funds include private donations provided for the support of NMSU Athletics operations as well as proceeds from memberships, suite and club seat sales, and various AAC special events held throughout the year. Director Moccia’s compensation will continue to be paid by AAC pending the outcome of all investigations.”
A university spokesman last week told the Sun-News that Moccia’s contract is still being paid with AAC funds until a state attorney general investigation is completed.
The New Mexico Attorney General’s Office is investigating sexual assault allegations against former NMSU basketball players DeShawndre Washington, Doctor Bradley and Kim Aiken Jr., as well as the university’s response to the alleged assaults.
“University Athletics has funds that have been donated to provide unrestricted support for operational needs,” NMSU spokesman Justin Bannister wrote in an email. “A portion of those are being used to fund Mario Moccia’s salary at this time. This will continue until we receive word that the Attorney General’s work has been completed.”
Moccia declined to comment for this story. Moccia’s first contract extension — also a five-year deal, signed in 2019 — was set to expire next summer. Moccia’s new contract pays him $351,000 in 2023, up from $280,000 under his previous deal. The salary increases each year up to $425,000 in 2027. The contract is fully guaranteed if Moccia is fired by the University without cause.
The university did not publicly announce the contract, which was reported by the Las Cruces SunNews on April 21. The timing of an extension with a year remaining on his former deal amid a transition of university leadership, which included a pay raise in the midst of multiple investigations, immediately drew criticism from members of the faculty, who presented a letter to the Board of Regents in May.
Rodriguez cited the concerns of the Faculty Senate and thanked the university for conducting ongoing internal investigations surrounding the athletic department, but, “Unfortunately, the decision to prematurely extend current Athletic Director Mario Moccia’s contract for another five years despite failure of program leadership to identify, address, and prevent misconduct is counter-productive to achieving needed reforms within the athletic program.”
The state acknowledged that the contract was signed under the leadership of former Chancellor Dan Arvizu, on his last day of service on April 7, but questioned why the contract, “was approved for Director Moccia despite the fact that all recent incidents of hazing, sexual assault, and misconduct occurred under his leadership, including the shooting that took place at the University of New Mexico last year.”
Rodriguez closed the letter, requesting:
▪ Detailed information about the current source of Director Moccia’s compensation.
▪ Potential alternative funding sources or alternative courses of action the university may consider regarding Director Moccia’s compensation and continued employment.
In May, the University contracted Lightfoot, Franklin and White LLC, at the request of the Higher Education Department, to investigate all university-sponsored athletic programs following allegations of sexual assault within the men’s basketball program. The investigation’s scope included the current leadership, coaches and coaching staff to identify the extent of misconduct and protect any student who comes forward.
Lightfoot was the third law firm to conduct and complete an investigation surrounding New Mexico State athletics since the self-defense shooting involving former basketball player Mike Peake last year.
Lightfoot conducted interviews of head coaches of all 13 university programs, 17 assistant coaches or staff members, 42 currently enrolled athletes, seven athletic department administrators, three athletic trainers, two members from the compliance office and four individuals outside of the athletic department whose roles sometimes involve interacting with the athletic department or student-athletes.
The eight-page executive summary included six takeaways and a list of suggestions for the school moving forward.
According to the report, “Generally, Lightfoot concludes that the well documented men’s basketball misconduct during the 2022-23 season was limited to that program, was a significant departure from the norm for student-athletes and coaches at the University, and is not indicative of a systemic issue within the athletic department.”
The Lightfoot report referred to University policies on multiple occasions regarding needed improvement in educating student-athletes on where to report potential misconduct and how those investigations are handled internally.
“Student-athletes and Departmental staff expressed some concern with the level of communication on the status and resolution of reported concerns and/or the coordination among varying offices that might be involved,” the report read. “While confidentiality concerns permeate many of these issues, the University should evaluate the possibility of minimally informing involved individuals (including reporters of misconduct and witnesses) and offices of the status (e.g. ‘pending’) and/or conclusion (e.g. ‘completed’) or resulting investigations to provide assurances that reported misconduct is being addressed.”