It has been reported that on January 24 a “whistleblower lawsuit” was filed against the Mayor Tim Keller Administration in State District Court by a terminated Deputy Human Resources Director. According to the lawsuit, the former employee alleges that she was repeatedly directed to hire preselected people, fabricate reasons for reassigning others and give preferential treatment to “millennial” job candidates and “friends and allies” of Keller’s executive management team.

Keller’s executive team includes Chief Administrative Officer Sarita Nair, Chief Operations Officer Lawrence Rael and Chief Financial Officer Sanjay Bhakta and all 16 Department Directors. Bhakta is named in his professional capacity in overseeing the Human Resources Department and in and individual capacity. All of the executive team are at will employees and serve at the pleasure of Keller.

A link to the full Albuquerque Journal article is here:

https://www.abqjournal.com/2353571/past-city-official-files-whistleblower-suit.html

The plaintiff in the whistleblower case is identified as Patricia Martinez. She was the Deputy Director of the city’s Human Resources Department. She was fired January 31, 2020 by Chief Financial Officer (CFO) Sanjay Bhadka, who oversees the Department of Human Resources. She is claiming that Mayor Tim Keller’s administration manipulated the city’s hiring and personnel rules and regulations, merit system ordinance, demanding that she do the Keller Administration’s bidding. According to the lawsuit, she raised concerns with City Attorney Estaban Aguilar and to the City’s Inspector General and she was fired for it.

The allegations include that the Keller Administration Human Resources Department is “driven by a mayoral administration with an agenda of “quid pro quo” practices, cronyism, racism, defiance of the state’s Inspection of Public Records Act and a general spirit of flouting established City of Albuquerque rules and regulations and best practices”.

Specific allegations in the whistle blower lawsuit include the following:

1. Members of the Keller’s executive team directed her to hire a specific person as a Human Resources Investigator with Chief Financial Officer (CFO) Sanjay Bhakta instructing her to score that candidate the highest for the position, even if a current city employee scored better. Bhakta oversees Human Resources.

2. CFO Bhakta directed Martinez to personally check on an applicant and find him a job in Human Resources because Bhakta “knew his mother.”

3. Keller’s project manager and the city’s planning director told Martinez “that Mayor Keller wanted to restructure the Planning Department in an effort to remove two employees”. According to the lawsuit, Martinez said she told Bhakta the two employees were classified positions and that they could not be removed was without cause as per the personnel rules and regulations.

4. A senior personnel officer from Municipal Development asked Martinez to lower a division manager’s salary “to assist him in double dipping on external retirement benefits,” and that Bhakta had already made that request once previously. According to the lawsuit, Martinez denied the request.

5. CFO Bhakta is alleged to have said that “blacks and Hispanics are dumb’ or words to that effect.”

6. Bhakta and City Atorney Esteban Aguilar Jr. on separate occasions gave Martinez directions meant to subvert the state’s public records law, with Bhakta telling her not to put certain information in email and Aguilar asking for documents to be hand-delivered to avoid a paper trail.

7. Bhakta told Martinez to transfer the Albuquerque Police Department’s Human Resources coordinator to the Aviation Department, “despite the fact [the Aviation Deparment] was already staffed with three other HR administrators.” That shuffling created a spot at APD that officials could use to reassign someone they wanted removed from the central Human Resources Department.

OTHER ALLEGATIONS

According to the lawsuit, “members of Keller’s executive team’ told Martinez that the mayor and others on his team wanted to replace the director and employment manager who were working in the HR Department at the time. They told Martinez — who started as Albuquerque’s deputy HR director in October 2018 after holding a similar job at the city of Rio Rancho — that she was the department’s “de facto director” which she interpreted to mean that she would get the top job if she followed their directions.”

The lawsuit goes on to allege that “… Bhakta told Martinez that high-ranking APD officials wanted to fire the department’s HR coordinator. … Bhakta further asserted to Ms. Martinez that because [the HR coordinator] was African American, the Executive team could not fire her because they did not want any problems with the ‘Black’ community as Mayor Keller was receiving pressure from the African American community due to his limited hiring of African Americans. ”

According to the complaint, the employee who moved from central Human Resources Department to APD received a “substantial” pay raise. When Martinez raised concerns with Bhakta about the transfer and raise, the lawsuit alleges: “[Bhata] stated he wanted to give her less but Lawrence Rael, the city’s Chief Operating Officers, was a friend of hers and her husband and persuaded Defendant Bhakta to increase his proposed offer to her otherwise she would not accept it and would stay in Human Resources.”

https://www.abqjournal.com/2353571/past-city-official-files-whistleblower-suit.html

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

Frankly, as disappointing as it is, the hiring of preselected people and fabricating reasons to get rid of people happens at the beginning of all Mayoral Administrations. It usually happens when you have people from the prior administration desperate to hold on to their jobs who hold “unclassified” or at will positions and who then attempt to have their positions become “classified”. It also happens when a Mayor-elect is desperate to fill city hall with supporters who worked on the campaign, who want high paying jobs and who do not have the necessary minimum qualifications to fill a job.

KELLER’S EARLY PERSONNEL HIRES

Truth be known there were very early warning signs that the Keller Administration was inept or feckless enough to abuse the city’s personnel rules and regulations and that Tim Keller had a real hang up about age.

In 2018, During Mayor Keller’s first months in office, he was initially given high marks for appointing experienced city hall people like former New Mexico Treasurer James Lewis, former City CAO Lawrence Rael and former City Attorney and CAO David Campbell to key positions. Within a year both Lewis and Campbell were gone with confidential sources saying Keller had a tendency to just ignore their advice. Keller was also given high marks for appointing woman to executive positions including Sarita Nair as Chief Administration Officer, Shelle Sanchez as Cultural Services Director, Mary Scott as Human Service Director, Ana Sanchez as Senior Affairs Director, Nyka Allen as Aviation Director and Katy Duhigg as City Clerk.

Chief Administrative Officer Sarita Nair and Chief Financial Officer Sanja Bhutka worked for Tim Keller when he was New Mexico State Auditor. Both Nair and Bhutka are viewed as within Keller’s inner circle and as political operatives at his beckon call.

As Keller’s first year in office progressed, Keller had a few vetting and appointment missteps with a City Clerk nominee and then the City Attorney appointment. The first City Clerk nominee withdrew her acceptance of her appointment because her financial problems and tax lien problems where investigated and reported upon by the Albuquerque Journal. This indicated a failed “vetting process” for political appointments.

A second appointment misstep was soliciting and appointing beyond the advertised application closing date a City Attorney who needed to be confirmed by the City Council. The soliciting and appointing a city attorney after the closure date for applications and after all applicant interviews had been conducted resulted in the charge of political cronyism against Keller’s Chief Administrative Officer who knows and went to law school with the city attorney selected. Keller also had told others he wanted a City Attorney in his 40’s.

Keller raised more than a few eyebrows and protests during his first year in office regarding the following appointments and salaries paid to them:

A. Keller created an Assistant Mayor position and hired Obama Administration Political Strategist Gary Lee at $75,000. Lee only reported to Keller and within months quite the job for undisclosed reasons.

B. Keller appointed his longtime political consultant and campaign manager Alan Packman at $75,000 to work at 311. Packman only reports to Keller and is now paid $82,000 and has absolutely no call center experience.

C. Keller hired former New Jersey State Trooper Leonard Nerbetski as the “Real Time Crime Center Director”. Nerbetski was hired even though he has a history of excessive use of force that resulted in hundreds of thousands paid in settlements. Albuquerque is under a DOJ consent decree for APD’s excessive use of force and deadly force calling into question if the new hire could be committed to constitutional policing practices.

https://www.petedinelli.com/2018/11/29/grading-mayor-tim-kellers-first-year-in-office/

MAYOR TIM KELLER’S HANG UP ABOUT AGE

What differentiates the whistle blower lawsuit from the norm is the allegation that Mayor Keller wanted to give preferential treatment to “millennial” job applicants. Keller was elected at the age of 40 and is now 43 and considers himself a millennial. He does not realize he is now middle age, but at times does not act it.

Back in October, 2017 Tim Keller said he wanted to attract and hire people within his own age group, which is understandable and can be appreciated, provided you can find qualified people. Mayor Keller was elected with huge support of the progressive wing of the Democrat Party, which has a likely majority of people in the 55+ age group.

The majority of people who voted in the 2017 election probably had 15 to 20 years on Mayor Keller, or at least a lot more gray hair than he does. Age and academic credentials should not be the overriding determining factor to be a City Hall Director, but competency and management skills should be. Just because a person is in their 50s and 60s should not exclude them from any management position.

Frankly, Mayor Keller’s hang up about age is well known by city hall insiders as well as people who worked on his campaign in 2017 and his transition team. One source that worked on Keller’s campaign reported that Keller consistently surrounded himself with younger campaign workers and would go out of his way NOT to get input from “older workers” not in his age group.

After being elected Mayor, Keller made it known to more than one person on his transition team that he wanted to surround himself with his “generation” as Department heads and people in their 40’s. Experience and knowledge of city hall and ability to do a job was not as critical to Keller as was age. Review of Keller’s list of Department Directors confirms this point.

This explains a lot, especially the fact that Mayor Tim Keller is known to hold Director’s meetings at “Kinder Care” facilities.

In 2020, Dinelli Blog Had 105,793 Total Reader Views, 70,208 Total Blog Visitors; Thanks For Viewing And Visiting; Onto A Better 2021 New Year! PLEASE WEAR THE DAMN MASK!

It was on Wednesday, January 13,Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham outlined her legislative priorities that she wants the legislature to consider and enact during the 2021 New Mexico Legislative. Included as a priority is liquor license reform efforts. Lujan Grisham wants to provide a provision that would allow alcohol home delivery and loosen up the state’s tightly controlled monopoly on liquor licenses. A bill has now been introduced by New Mexico State Representative Dayan Hochman-Vigil, a Democrat from Albuquerque that would make significant changes to New Mexico’s liquor laws.

HOUSE BILL 8

All bars in New Mexico have been closed since March under the Governor’s pandemic health care orders resulting in severe economic consequences. House Bill 8 introduced by Hochman-Vigil would allow what many consider would be a dramatic change in New Mexico’s liquor licensing laws. The legislation would allow restaurants, grocery stores, liquor stores, craft distillers, small brewers and bars to offer “home delivery” of bottled alcoholic spirits. Under the legislation, restaurant deliveries would be limited to beer and wine sales that would require a minimum food purchase of $25.00. All the other liquor sales businesses would not have a food sale restriction or a purchase quantity requirement.

HB 8 would create a new type of license that would allow restaurants to serve hard liquor, and not just wine and beer, without the purchase of an expensive dispenser license. If House Bill 8 were to pass, bars owners would be allowed to take alcohol delivery orders without opening their establishment. The argument made it would provide a stream of revenue for the struggling industry during the pandemic. The new license would allow restaurants to pay a yearly fee of $3,000 to the state to sell liquor.

JOHN STRONG GUEST COLUMN

Reforming our outdated and unfair (and possibly illegal) system of licensing liquor by the drink has been one of the hot button issues of mine for a very long time. I have written about this, lobbied for it, and spoken about it to everyone who will listen for years. Now that it finally appears that there is a real interest in reform, I wanted to revisit some of my own recommendations.

The Dayan Hochman-Vigil bill is simply going nowhere. The idea that simply allowing a restaurant to buy a license for $3000 per year instead of owning a current license that is purchased or leased makes those licenses worthless immediately. That’s about as unfair as you can get to those businesses who purchased them in the last few years. Rep. Hochman-Vigil says that businesses will replace their existing license with a new one with a yearly renewal fee, and will be able to sell their existing license to recover their investment. The problem here is who exactly will buy one of these licenses for $350,000 or so when they can simply obtain one from the state for a yearly fee? The licenses under this scenario are worthless, which makes a few other problems, namely that many owners have spent very large amounts of money on them, and many of these businesses have actually financed them at local banks. So now not only are you telling the license owners their asset is worthless, but you are telling the lenders their collateral is also worthless. That’s not a very good start. Let’s be clear. The current system is the product of inaction by our elected officials for decades. It is not the fault of the license holders at all. It’s s our states obligation to deal with this in a fair and moral manner.

HOSPITALITY INDUSTRY NEEDS LIQUOR REFORM

The hospitality industry in New Mexico is a pretty important constituency for elected officials. The pandemic has suddenly focused them on just how important that constituency is. It is not just business owners that are held back here, but also servers, bartenders, caterers and even the busboys, whom would earn more money and tips if this law were changed. You have a chance here to promote real infill and neighborhood development that is greatly needed as well. So now that the consensus is finally to do something, what are the best paths to move forward?

We must compensate the current owners of these licenses to at least some degree. Anything that does not do that will be doomed to fail, but there are a couple of approaches that will work.

Let’s consider where the problem really lies. Package store licenses are not the biggest threat to competition and economic development. Most of these are owned by big box retailers such as Walgreens, CVS, Costco, Total Wine and Allups parent company own about 120 of them. What we really want to do is to level the playing field for small by the drink dispensers such as restaurants, lounges and clubs. The goal is an environment where any qualified licensee can obtain one for even the smallest business.

This will likely result in hundreds of new businesses, lots of neighborhood redevelopment, and the creation of entertainment areas that can rival cities such as Austin, Denver, Scottsdale, Tulsa, and Oklahoma City. These are cities we are directly competing with to attract young people, and the companies they work for. Now that we are attracting investments from companies like Netflix and NBC Universal, we must make an environment that their employees want to live in.

It is a fact that redevelopment and gentrification of blighted neighborhoods through entertainment focused businesses is a great way to crowd out crime. The implications here are large particularly for Downtown Albuquerque, which should be the heartbeat of our state, but instead is a blighted area of boarded up businesses and buildings that are in disrepair.

Keep in mind that with reform, and the addition of hundreds of new bars, restaurants, lounges, comedy clubs, speakeasies, and small music venues, we can begin to reclaim some of the entertainment dollars that are lost to casinos. This is no small matter, as a large percentage of entertainment dollars are spent at the casinos that ring Albuquerque and Santa Fe, and these tax dollars are critical to paying for city services.

TWO POTENTIAL PATHS TO REFORM

There are two pretty straightforward paths to accomplish meaningful liquor reform licensing: .

1. Convert all 1, 411 licenses to package store licenses. You would essentially double the number of them, that would decrease the value of them, but likely they would still be worth $200,000 or so, and each owner could sell or lease theirs to a Walgreens or some other retailer. Couple this with a smaller payment from the state or tax credit and you’re done. Then go to a system where by the drink dispensers can pay a yearly fee for their license and there is no limit in the number. I personally feel that $3,000 per year is too much, and most of our neighbors are at around $1,000 per year.

2. Buy back all licenses and cancel them, and then go to a system of yearly license fees of about $1, 000. If you levy a supplemental tax for the sale of liquor, such as 4% in restaurants and 2% on bottles, you can bond against that tax revenue to buy back all licenses and just cancel them. The bond would likely pay off in 4 to 5 years. This would Also put much needed capital in the pockets of existing businesses that are leasing these licenses for thousands of dollars per month, or have bought them with their own money.

Texas has a supplemental tax of 6.7% on Liquor by the drink. Most states levy some form of tax. It’s hard to argue about this, as the state is not paying for it, even though they caused the problem, the public is paying for this reform, and all indications are they are wildly in favor of doing so.

FINAL THOUGHT

There is one final thought worth considering. Get rid of miniature sales or restrict their sales even further. Miniature sales are a large source of down and out calls, a public nuisance, and a big source of driving while intoxicated. Anyone can sit in front of a convenience store and watch folks go inside, buy 2 or 3 of them for .59 cents and dump them in a big gulp on the way out while tossing the plastic bottles on the roadway. Municipalities hate them, but when some have tried to restrict or ban them they are threatened with lawsuits. This needs to come from the legislature itself. One example of a solution? In Oklahoma it is illegal to sell hard liquor in the same place that sells fountain drinks or ice. It a solution that needs to be thought about.

Meaningful liquor reform is long overdue. This issue needs the full attention of the legislature this year while there is serious interest. There must be a vigorous debate and then a consensus on how to move forward. Legislators should expect to be held accountable to the public if they do nothing. The pandemic has focused these issues squarely front and center, and if we do nothing now, it will never happen.

A link to related blog article is here:

Liquor License Reform Requires More Than Home Delivery Sales; Abolish “Dispenser Licenses” That Give Property Rights; Return To State Licensing As Giving Permission And Not Giving Property Rights

“Hello, is this Jack’s Bar And Grill? … Yes, I would like to place and order for two New York steaks, medium rare, and two bottles of Jack Daniel’s with a home delivery within the hour? … Is that possible?”

As farfetched as this sounds, such a phone call could be made if legislation is passed in the 2021 New Mexico Legislative session.

It was on Wednesday, January 13,Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham outlined her legislative priorities that she wants the legislature to consider and enact during the 2021 New Mexico Legislative. Included as a priority is liquor license reform efforts. Lujan Grisham wants to provide a provision that would allow alcohol home delivery and loosen up the state’s tightly controlled monopoly on liquor licenses. A bill has now been introduced by New Mexico State Representative Dayan Hochman-Vigil, a Democrat from Albuquerque that would make significant changes to New Mexico’s liquor laws. .

HOUSE BILL 8

All bars in New Mexico have been closed since March under the Governor’s pandemic health care orders resulting in severe economic consequences. House Bill 8 introduced by Hochman-Vigil would allow what many consider would be a dramatic change in New Mexico’s liquor licensing laws. The legislation would allow restaurants, grocery stores, liquor stores, craft distillers, small brewers and bars to offer “home delivery” of bottled alcoholic spirits. Under the legislation, restaurant deliveries would be limited to beer and wine sales that would require a minimum food purchase of $25.00. All the other liquor sales businesses would not have a food sale restriction or a purchase quantity requirement.

HB 8 would create a new type of license that would allow restaurants to serve hard liquor, and not just wine and beer, without the purchase of an expensive dispenser license. If House Bill 8 were to pass, bars owners would be allowed to take alcohol delivery orders without opening their establishment. The argument made it would provide a stream of revenue for the struggling industry during the pandemic. The new license would allow restaurants to pay a yearly fee of $3,000 to the state to sell liquor.

A PANDEMIC CHANGE IN HEART

It was during the 2019 New Mexico Legislative session that Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham vetoed identical legislation that would have allowed for the sale of alcohol for home delivery. The Governor vetoed the legislation arguing that it violated the New Mexico Liquor Control Act. Lujan Grisham now supports House Bill 8.

What Lujan Grisham is now saying is that the legislation is needed to help the hospitality industry. The Governor’s Office had this to say in a news release supporting the legislation:

“The pandemic has shown what a useful tool this legislation would be, and the governor is clear that in addition to being helpful to consumers, it will be a real boon to restaurant revenues.”

NEW MEXICO’S ARCHAIC LIQUOR CONTROL ACT

Under the current liquor control laws enacted some 40 plus years ago, a “dispenser’s license” allows for the sale of package liquor sales as well as the on-premise sale and consumption of alcohol. Although beer and wine licenses are available, full scale dispenser licenses are tied to population numbers in counties and limits the number of licenses that are available.

Once issued by the state for a one-time fee the liquor license becomes the property of the purchasers. As a result, liquor dispenser licenses carry with them property rights, are limited in numbers and can be sold on the open market. Over the years, dispenser licenses have increase in value and are now known to be sold for upwards of $1 Million dollars. Consequently, only the wealthy or major corporations can purchase dispenser licenses.

Current owners of liquor dispenser licenses have strongly resisted any efforts to allow the creation of different categories of licenses. The argument made by the owners of “dispenser’s licenses” is that creating new licenses or increasing the availability of more licenses will devalue their investment purchase. The argument made by owners of full scale “dispenser licenses” is that their investments would suffer a sever devaluing making them worthless. One argument made is that the state should be required to reimburse or purchase back the licenses for what the owners have paid for them on the open market.

“MIXED LIQUOR” INDUSTRY REACTION TO HB 8

Matt Kennecott, the spokesman for the New Mexico Bar, Entertainment and Nightclub Association, said his organization does support some of the proposed HB 8 changes and that will allow for home delivery believing the change would create a new income generating source for his clients. Kennecott added that other changes for bars, including the elimination of yearly fee, should be added to the legislation.

Not surprising opposition to the bill is emerging from owners of full server dispenser’s license or those that lease them. George Gundrey leases 3 liquor licenses for two restaurants and one bar. Gundrey told the Albuquerque Journal the proposal to issue the new type of license is unfair to current licensees because it would devalue the more expensive licenses. Gundry put it this way:

“What they’re basically doing is making [our dispenser licenses] worth nothing, so obviously that’s very problematic. … The only ethical thing for [the state] … to do is somehow reimburse the owners.”

Myra Ghattas is the owner of Slate Street Cafe and Sixty-Six Acres. Slate Street Café, located in downturn Albuquerque only sells beer and wine while Sixty-Six Acres, located on tribal property, also sells liquor. Ghattas has this to say about the proposal:

“[This proposal] is huge. A lot of people in my position who own restaurants have been working to get that playing field leveled for a long time, because those old laws were really dated. … I think it would significantly help independent local restaurants, who I think have the short end of the stick when it comes to liquor licensing in New Mexico”

The link to the quoted source is here:

https://www.abqjournal.com/1538506/liquor-overhaul-bill-would-allow-home-delivery.html

GUEST COMMENTARY

Over a year and a half ago on July 24, 2019, guest commentator John B. Strong on this blog had this to say regarding state liquor control reform:

“Many people don’t quite understand how outdated and unfair our liquor licensing laws are here in New Mexico. Decades ago the legislature created a system of a set and limited number of licenses to be able to serve or sell liquor by the drink. This is not the same as wine and beer licenses. There are currently 1,411 licenses in the state for this purpose, and they trade as a commodity and can be bought and sold to the highest bidder.

The state derives no economic benefit from the purchase, sale , or leasing of these licenses at all. They simply allow the owner to then go to the State Alcohol and Gaming Commission and apply for a license that allows them to sell alcohol.

Since there are a limited quantity of these licenses there has been a constant upward push in the price to acquire them. About 10 years ago these licenses cracked the $200,000 mark. Recently the last two licenses sold were reported by the state to be $500,000 and $590,000. Originally most if not all of these licenses were owned by local small businesses scattered across the state, but over the years the increased prices began to tempt small family-owned businesses to simply sell them as they became worth much more than the actual business they were attached to.

Therein begins the problem. Many of these licenses began to migrate away from small locally owned businesses to large out of state corporations. Companies like Marriott and Hilton Hotels, Cheesecake Factory, Applebee’s, and other large chains. Then groups formed here to acquire licenses and lease them out rather sell them, both in anticipation of ever-increasing values for them as well as increasing lease payments.
…[In] a couple of years these licenses will likely crack $1 Million dollars! [Once that happens] … you will never again see a small family owned Mexican restaurant that can sell a Margarita, or a local Steakhouse that can sell a martini, or an ethnic restaurant that can sell beverages native to the food they prepare. Consider the International District, which is home to many great ethnic food establishments, and they are under constant pressure to compete with large chains that have this unfair advantage over them.

Replicate that scenario across the city as well as the state and you start to see the problem. Keep in mind as well that we have an interest in our small businesses, because when the large chains sell that $10 Martini, their profits go straight to a corporate bank account in New York, Chicago, or LA. When our small businesses are able to make that sale, those profits percolate through the community many times over, and that is a BIG deal.

I don’t think anyone believes that when this system was set up that it would get to this point, and periodically over the years there have been conversations about reform, but nothing ever happens. Partly because there is a lot of money at stake for the folks who own these licenses. [It’s believed] about half of them are owned by out of state corporations that probably pay little attention to their value and it’s complicated to try and change it. I am told that we have around 34 different licenses for beer, wine, and alcohol, and that is far too many.
…
[A] couple of suggestions:

The legislature could simply create a class of liquor license combined with wine and beer specifically for venues of less than 75 seats that would be affordable, say $500 per year. This would take some of the pressure off the upward increase in the large venue licenses but they would still maintain a high value, while giving small venues a chance to compete. … We could levy a tax on liquor beer and wine [could be] levied, and bond against that revenue stream to begin buying in and cancelling [dispenser] licenses. … .”

The link to the full John Strong guest column is here:

https://www.petedinelli.com/2019/07/24/a-serious-conversation-on-liquor-license-reform-in-new-mexico/

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

In general terms, licensing by a government agency means the government gives permission to an individual, business or corporation to do something or do an activity that is highly regulated for the protection of the public health, safety and welfare. Licensing usually requires minimum qualifications mandated by state regulations such as education, training and certifications and even inspections at times. Examples include licenses to drive, to do business, practice certain trades such as construction, plumbing, electrical, architecture, the practice of law, the practice medicine and even selling some goods and services. Health code inspections for restaurants and grocery stores are good examples of government licensing regulations of goods and services.

The biggest problem with the existing state liquor control laws is that they create the problem of granting a “property right” to those who were originally issued state licenses by allowing them to be sold or leased on the open market. The state did so for the sole purpose of putting a cap on the number of liquor licenses in order to avoid the proliferation of liquor businesses in a county, city or neighborhood. It was a good idea at the time and was intended to have an impact on the state’s alcohol abuse problem and DWI rates.

When George Gundrey says “… The only ethical thing for [the state] … to do is somehow reimburse the owners” what he essentially is saying is the liquor industry wants the state to buy back the “dispenser licenses” the state originally issued many years ago for a significantly reduced or nominal fee and buy back those licenses today at the tremendously inflated market value. It has absolutely nothing to do with ethics but every thing to do with economics. In other words, the dispensary license owners want the state to pay perhaps as much as $1 million dollars for a liquor license it issued for perhaps a few thousand dollars. The ones that are truly getting hurt are the taxpayers having to by back a license issued giving property rights for a state regulated industry.

It is well known in Santa Fe that the New Mexico liquor lobby is one of the strongest and wealthiest lobbying groups in New Mexico and has been so for many, many years getting involved with elections and making donation to legislators. New Mexico has an extensive history of attempting to restrict liquor licenses and at the same time dealing with some of the highest rates of drunken driving (DWI) in the country.

IMPEDIMENT TO ECONOMIC DEVELOPEMNT

To be blunt, the state’s existing liquor licensing laws impairs economic development. The dispenser licensing law works against the small business owner or entrepreneur. As the market exists now, only out of state chain stores and restaurants, which are proliferating Albuquerque and squeezing out locally owned businesses, can afford whatever it takes to buy a liquor license. Smaller, locally owned restaurants cannot compete nor afford to pay hundreds of thousands for a dispenser liquor license. Any average New Mexican who wants to open a new bar or restaurant with a full liquor license cannot do so because the cost of a liquor license is so prohibitive. Although there is a cap placed on the number of licenses that can be issued based on population numbers, there is no real evidence that fewer licenses reduce DWI rates and increase public safety in any meaningful way.

Regulation and Licensing spokeswoman Bernice Geiger had this to say:

“Currently one of the impediments to economic development in the state is the relatively high cost of a dispenser type liquor license. One of the goals of this bill is to give people who are priced out of the market the ability to get into the market, to decrease the cost of licenses across the board, but [to give] current licensees the flexibility to pivot to new business opportunities by allowing the buy-back of lost package privileges or the ability to sell the license in markets that currently are restricted.”

https://www.abqjournal.com/1538506/liquor-overhaul-bill-would-allow-home-delivery.html

Albuquerque has repeatedly tried for the last 50 years to revitalize the Downtown area. Revitalization of any downtown area always includes entertainment venues, new restaurants and bars. However locally own businesses simply cannot afford the investment in a liquor license. Laws preventing alcohol sales within 300 feet of a church or school, and preventing sales before noon on Sundays make any city in the state less attractive to businesses, while serving no real public safety function. Sunday liquor sales at one time were prohibited all day with one argument made because it is considered a day of worship for attending church and not for drinking. The 300-foot restriction is somewhat of a farce and should be eliminated.

It is likely that more liquor licenses will actually reduce DWI in New Mexico. Further, Albuquerque has an emerging arts and music community that needs supplemental income that could be enhanced.

RETURN TO TRUE MEANING OF STATE LICENSING TO PERMISSION

The sale of liquor in the state is one of the most highly regulated industries in virtually all states. Licenses usually have ongoing qualifying mandates for renewal and at times have terms as to how long the license is effective and must be renewed. There is also a liquor license revocation process in place, such as revoking a license if liquor is sold to minors. Normally, licenses issued by a state do not give vested property rights to those individuals who apply for and issued the license to be able to sell or transfer on the open market. Dispenser licenses are viewed as “speculative investments” that accure in value, and that was never the intent of the legislature.

The unintended consequence of New Mexico’s current liquor control act is that it gives property rights to the license holder to sell, transfer or lease the license. This was done for the purpose of limiting the total number of licenses the state can be issued based on population levels.

If New Mexico Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham and the New Mexico Legislature truly want to encourage economic development and help locally owned businesses, liquor license reform must be included in the equation. It is likely such reform will require sweeping changes to level the playing field for all that want to apply for liquor permits. All existing “dispenser license’s” need to be revoked, with a formula to calculate a reasonable price for buy back. An option would be for the state to grant tax credits or deductions without cash purchases.

One thing is for certain, the state needs to abolish the population caps on the number of liquor licenses, abolish dispenser licenses and refrain from ever giving property rights to a license’s it issues for permission to do a state regulated activity in the future.

Since taking office on January 1, 2015 for his first term, Bernalillo County Sheriff Manny Gonzales has consistently opposed the use of lapel cameras by his agency even while lapel camera usage has been required of APD officers for some time. Many Democrats and Republicans strongly disagree with Sheriff Gonzales’ resistance to the use of lapel cameras.

On June 18, 2020, a special legislative session was convened to deal with the state’s deficit and to adjust the state budget amid historical deficits the result of the COVID-19. Added to the special session agenda was legislation requiring all law enforcement in the state to wear body cameras, banning chokehold restraints, and making police disciplinary history a matter of public record. Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham signed the bill enacted mandating the use of body cameras. Under the enacted legislation, all law enforcement agencies were to be fully equipped with lapel cameras by September, 2020.

On July 15, Sheriff Gonzales, essentially ignoring the lapel camera mandate by the legislature, announced he was looking to partner with a private company so his deputies could put “smartphones” in their vests and record video instead of using body cameras. The suggestion to use “smart phones” was met with ridicule. Sen. Joseph Cervantes, D-Las Cruces, the sponsor of the mandatory use of lapel cameras by all New Mexico law enforcement, burst out laughing when told of the sheriff’s plan to use smart phones. Senator Cervantes had this to say:

“I’m pleased to see the sheriff is finally willing to adopt one of the tools of modern law enforcement. … We passed a law that requires body-worn cameras, so if he wants to do it by duct-taping iPhones on his officers’ chests, that’s his prerogative, although I think it creates the possibility of becoming a laughingstock.”

https://www.ctpost.com/news/article/Besieg

BCSO FINALLY PURCHASES BODY CAMERAS

It was in the fall of 2019 the Bernalillo County Commission allocated $1 million in startup money, plus $500,000 in recurring annual funds for the sheriff’s office to get dashboard cameras and lapel cameras. Sheriff Gonzales refused the County Commissions request and no equipment was ever purchased. Gonzales did not touch $1 million in startup money and $500,000 in recurring annual funds.

In late November, 2020, Bernalillo County entered into a $3.8 million, 5 year contract with “The BodyWorn Camera by Utility, Inc.” The county spent upwards of $4.3 million to cover 5 years. The contract covers the BodyWorn devices, two cameras in each BCSO vehicle with one device in the front and one in the back, hotspots for Wi-Fi in the deputy’s cruisers. The contract also includes tailoring of uniforms so they can hold the devices, and a holster that will automatically activate the cameras when a firearm is drawn.

On Friday, January 22, Bernalillo County Sheriff Manuel Gonzales held a press conference to showcase the body cameras his department purchased for all of his 310 appointed sheriff deputies. Describing the devices as “digital evidence management systems”, Sheriff Gonzales proclaimed that he picked the best cameras with the best technology. Gonzales said BCSO conducted extensive research before settling on Utility. According to Gonzales, the company had one of the fastest implementation periods once the contract was signed.

When asked about the delay since the September deadline in buying the devices Gonzales had this to say:

“The traditional camera is obsolete. … Why would I put something that I feel is not going to serve the public well or the deputies well and make them safer when we have another option? … The point is it’s the law and we’re going to follow that law and we’re going to make the most out of it. … And I think we got more bang for our buck and we’re in a better position service-wise, so everyone benefited from this.”

SOPHISICATED DEVICES

The devices have the appearance of a smart phone that is slipped into a hidden pocket on a deputy’s chest. The devices are cell phones, but they are programed into specific functions that prevent them from being used to make phone calls. In addition to recording video the devices can take photographs, upload content to the cloud, send an alert if a deputy is “down” and receive text messages or photos from dispatch. The county purchased SIM cards to make the devices run and bought the devices for 289 deputies who didn’t already have them.

According to BodyWorn Camera by Utility, Inc representative Jason Dombkowski, the devices can be activated when a deputy is dispatched on a call, when a siren is turned on, when a deputy starts to run or get into a physical fight and when a weapon is unholstered. The department can also activate “geofences” around an area that will automatically activate the camera when a deputy enters it. The device’s battery should last between 22 to 24 hours if the device is alternating between standby and activated mode.

Dombkowski had this to say:

“It knows if it is horizontal or vertical. … If a deputy goes down in a line of duty it automatically activates recording. It alerts everyone that’s working that we have an officer down, it gives turn by turn directions to their location and it sends a cavalry. It also activates the camera and it live streams that video to a dispatch center to see why that deputy went down.”

BCSO Undersheriff Sid Covington said the department has policies that mandate deputies to record all law enforcement encounters with the public in line with what state law requires. Covington stated:

“The law is very specific on what we must record, so … [the devices are] programmed to be in line with the law. … When we have contact with citizens they’re activated, when we do a traffic stop, when we do an investigation, we get dispatched through call for service — that’s when they’re recording because that’s what the law requires. Same with our policy, our policy requires that.”

The link to news sources and quotes are here:

https://www.krqe.com/news/albuquerque-metro/bcso-to-launch-body-camera-program/

https://www.abqjournal.com/1539121/bcso-gets-on-body-cameras-for-its-deputies.html

A $4 MILLION DOLLAR LEASON

Sheriff Gonzales stubborn resistance to have his officers equipped with body cameras likely cost the county taxpayers in just one officer involved shooting almost as much as the county is paying for the devices. It was in July, 2019, mentally ill Elisha Lucero, 28, was shot to death in front of her RV, which was parked in front of her family’s South Valley home. Deputies had responded to the home after a relative called 911 saying Lucero had hit her uncle in the face. According to the 911 call, a relative said Lucero was mentally ill, needed help, and was a threat to herself and to everybody else. Just one month prior, Lucero had called BCSO and asked to be taken to the hospital for mental health issues.

According to the lawsuit by the Lucero family, when deputies arrived, they said Lucero initially refused to come out of the home. The 4-foot-11 Lucero, naked from the waist up, rushed out running and screaming and armed with a kitchen knife attacking the officers. The Sheriff Deputies pulled their revolvers and shot Lucero. The sheriff deputies reported that they were fearful for their lives. According to an autopsy report, Lucero was shot at least 21 times by the Sheriff Deputies. The autopsy also revealed Lucero had high levels methamphetamine in her system.

The Lucero family civil suit states:

“the deputies created a situation where they were forced to use deadly force against Ms. Lucero or have justified their unlawful use of deadly force with the falsehood that Ms. Lucero presented a deadly threat to one or all of them.”

The Lucero lawsuit filed on January 13, 2020, alleges Sheriff Gonzales has fostered a “culture of aggression” in the department and too few deputies are trained to handle people with mental health issues. The allegation of a “culture of aggression” and the use of deadly force when dealing with the mentally ill is identical to what the Department of Justice investigation found within the Albuquerque Police Department (APD) 6 years ago resulting in the DOJ federal Court Approved Settlement Agreement. Albuquerque has paid out $5 million to $6 million for it’s most high-profile officer-involved shootings, including the shooting of mentally ill homeless camper James Boyd and mentally ill Christopher Torres prior to beginning its reform effort with the Department of Justice.

https://www.abqjournal.com/1428402/family-of-mentally-ill-woman-shot-by-bcso-gets-4m-settlement.html

On March 6, 2020, it was reported that the family of a mentally ill Elisha Lucero, 28 settled their lawsuit with the county for $4 million dollars. The two Sheriff Deputies who shot and killed Elisha Lucero were not wearing lapel cameras. As a result, there is no “real time” evidence of what happened that day that led to the tragic death of Elisha Lucero at the hands of Bernalillo County Sherriff Officers. Had there been body camera footage recording of what happened showing how aggressive Lucero may have been, it would have revealed what happened and perhaps allowed a much stronger defense. Obviously, the downside of a recording of the incident may have revealed far more egregious conduct. No one knows the truth of what happened except that which is contained in offense reports, witness and officer statements, the autopsy and the unproven allegations in the lawsuit.

$4 MILLION SETTLEMENT CITED TO SUPPORT CIVIL RIGHTS ACT

The 2021 New Mexico legislature convened on January 21 for a 60 day session. One bill in particular that is moving through the legislative committees is House Bill 4 which calls for the creation of a New Mexico Civil Rights Act which would allow legal claims to be filed in State District Court over alleged infringements of free speech, freedom of religion and other constitutional rights violated by government employees, including law enforcement. Excessive use of force and deadly force against law enforcement and police misconduct would be included in such cases.

The new state law would bar the use of qualified immunity as a defense in cases filed under the Civil Rights Act meaning government employees could be held personally liable for civil rights violations. Qualified immunity offers legal protection if officials can show their conduct didn’t violate clearly established constitutional rights about which a reasonable person would know . When it comes to law enforcement, that would mean unreasonable use of force and deadly force cases. In the state of New Mexico, the overwhelming number of officer involved shooting case result in settlements and no jury trials.

On January 25, during a House Committee meeting for HB 4 creating the civil rights act, Elaine Maestas, the older sister Elisha Lucero, testified before the committee about her sister’s at the hands of Bernalillo County sheriff’s deputies in 2019 who shot her 21 times and said:

“For me, it’s unbelievable that police are entrusted to make life-and-death decisions, yet they’re held to some of the lowest standards when it comes to accountability. ”

The proposed Civil Rights Act is being opposed by police chiefs and representatives of cities, counties and schools across New Mexico. One argument made is that the proposal will raise insurance costs and do nothing to improve police training law enforcement agencies and educators across the state.

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

In the event that the New Mexico Civil Rights Act is enacted, there is no doubt that the evidence gathered by digital recording devices and lapel cameras will go a long ways to assist law enforcement to defend against cases of “excessive use of force” and “deadly force”. Real time footage of an event captured on lapel cameras will no doubt be offered as proof that an officer acted reasonably and in self defense of themselves and of others.

All too often, when the use of body cameras are required of an agency, there is an emphasis that it is to hold police officers accountable for misconduct. That, in and of itself, is a false narrative. The use of the body cameras provides “real time” evidence as to what a law enforcement officer is seeing, hearing and reacting to and it’s strictly from their prospective. It is that very type of evidence that can support and prove that a law enforcement officer has in fact acted appropriately and reasonably with use of force and deadly force when dealing with the public. In other words, the lapel camera footage can justify with little dispute that it was the suspect that was at fault and who was the aggressor and a threat to an officer or others.

https://www.abqjournal.com/2337954/nm-civil-rights-law-passes-first-hearing.html

INEXCUSABLE DELAY

Since taking office 6 years ago, Sheriff Gonzales has resisted mandating the use of body cameras for his deputies. Gonzales said there is no evidence that they work making the public or officers safer and that he had other budget priorities. Simply put, it is not about making the public or officers safer and has everything to do with “evidence gathering”, which is what law enforcement officers do when they investigate a crime.

What is disappointing is that Sheriff Gonzales should have known better and apparently learned nothing from the Elisha Lucero case that cost the County $4 Million in damages for the use of deadly force. Even after the shooting of Elisha Lucero and the $4 Million settlement, Sheriff Gonzales did not change his opposition to lapel cameras. Gonzales proclaimed his deputies did not need lapel cameras because they had audio recorders on their belts.

Sheriff Gonzales dragging his feet on mandating the use of body cameras is inexcusable. The resistance was a reflection of a law enforcement official refusing to keep up with changing times and technology in law enforcement. Even now, Gonzales refuses to acknowledge the use of cameras and describes the devices as “digital evidence management systems”. Sheriff Gonzales has taken action only because the New Mexico legislature had to step in and make the use of the digital or video recording devices mandatory for all law enforcement agencies.

Congratulations to Sheriff Manny Gonzales for bringing the Bernalillo County Sherriff’s Office into the 21st Century, even if done so very reluctantly.

Editor’s Note: This is an in-depth report of the 3 APD Chief finalists, their interviews and the 3 critical questions they need to have answered before taking the job.

On September 10, Mayor Tim Keller and APD Chief Michael Geier held a press conference to announce that Chief Geier was retiring after 2 years and 9 months as APD Chief. Keller announced a national search would be conducted to find a new chief.

Within days after the departure of Chief Geier, the city posted and advertised the position nationally. The Keller Administration hired a consultant to help search for applicants. The search resulted in 39 applicants who submitted their resumes. A screening process was initiated and applicants were sorted into 25 “qualified” candidates and 9 “unqualified” candidates. On January 1, 2021, the names of all applicants were released.

3 FINALISTS ANNOUNCED

The City of Albuquerque has narrowed its search for a new police chief to 3 candidates. On January 20, 2019, Mayor Tim Keller announced 3 finalists for Chief of Police. The finalists are:

1. Joseph Sullivan
2. Clinton Nichols
3. Interim Chief Harold Medina

A link providing Links to each of the 3 resumes can be found here:

http://www.cabq.gov/police-chief-search

1. JOSEPH SULLIVAN, FORMER DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF PATROLS OPERATION FOR PHILADELPHIA POLICE DEPARTMENT

Mr. Sullivan is a native of Philadelphia and spent 38 years with the Philadelphia Police Department and has held all positions within the department except all but two. In February 2020, Sullivan retired as the Deputy Commissioner of Patrol Operations. Sullivan elected to leave the Philadelphia Police Department as a new chief was appointed to take over the department. As the Deputy Commissioner of Patrol Operations, Sullivan oversaw a force of 4,698 sworn and civilian personnel, two and a half times than APD which employees 1,678 full time positions.

According to his resume, Sullivan led data-driven crime fighting strategies and revamped a “poorly performing” Community Relations Unit. Sullivan was appointed as the department’s liaison to the Anti-Defamation League, the Jewish Federation and was the first official liaison to the LGBTQ community. According to Sullivan, he helped craft a “nationally recognized model policy governing police interactions with trans-citizens” and established a dedicated page on the Philadelphia Police website to assist the LGBTQ community in accessing police and city services.

2. COMMWERCE CHIEF OF POLIE CLINTON NICHOLS

Clinton Nichols is the chief of police in Commerce City, Colorado, a northern suburb of Denver. Nichols served in the Marine Corps before starting his career in law enforcement in the early ’90s. Before he went to Colorado, Chief Nichols was employed by the Las Vegas Police Department in Nevada from 1992 to 2015. His last position there was police commander and he oversaw the Violent Crimes Section, the Career Criminal Section and the Robbery Section. Chief Nichols began his work with Commerce City in 2015 as a commander. He worked his way up to the position of chief in 2017.

The Commerce City Police Department has 142-employees, a relatively small department compared with APD that employs 1,678 full time positions that includes 578 civilian staff and funding for 1,100 sworn police. In 2016, at the request of city officials and before Nichols took over as chief, the Department of Justice’s Office of Community Oriented Policing Services launched a review of the Commerce City Police Department. The review, known as Collaborative Reform Initiative for Technical Assistance, was in response to “serious internal challenges and concerns pertaining to officer misconduct,” according to a Department of Justice news release.

3. APD Interim Chief Harold Medina

Interim APD Chief Harold Medina was the only named applicant for Chief from within the ranks of APD who has applied for the position. Medina has been serving as interim APD chief since his predecessor, Michael Geier, was “fired-retired” in September. Medina began his law enforcement career with APD in 1995 and work for APD for 20 years before retiring in 2014 as a Commander. In 2014, Medina went to work for the Laguna Pueblo Police Department where he became Chief. Medina was recruited to return to APD in 2017 by then APD Chief Michael Geier where he served as Deputy Chief of Field Services and six months ago he was appointed First Deputy.

It’s common knowledge amongst APD command staff in the Chief’s Office that Chief Medina orchestrated the forced retirement of Chief Gieier with the assistance of Chief Administrative Officer Sarita Nair. Interim Chief Harold Medina has a very troubling past of police officer involved shootings with reactive decision-making and failed leadership resulting in the killing of two mentally ill people having psychotic episodes. Medina was never disciplined for his conduct relating to 2 high profile shootings proclaiming he did nothing wrong.

Links to related news coverage are here:

https://www.kob.com/albuquerque-news/keller-reveals-3-finalists-for-apd-chief-of-police-position/5984697/?cat=500

https://www.abqjournal.com/1538325/city-selects-three-finalists-for-next-apd-chief.html

WEBINAR INTERVIEW FEATURING FINALISTS

On Saturday, January 23, Albuquerque Mayor Tim Keller, along with CAO Sarita Nair and city leaders and Herb Crosby, the owner of AVTEC, Inc., the Albuquerque consulting firm hired by the city for the hiring process for Chief of Police, held a webinar featuring the 3 finalists for Chief of Police.

A link to the full hour and 18-minute webinar is here:

https://www.krqe.com/news/albuquerque-metro/city-officials-give-opportunity-to-meet-police-chief-candidates-saturday/

The webinar presentation began with Mayor Tim Keller saying he wants the next chief to focus on tackling violent crime, enhance community policing, and to be someone with extensive DOJ reform experience.

During the webinar conference all 3 finalists were given an opportunity to speak. They were asked the same line of questioning:

1. What do you feel are the top 3 crime fighting challenges facing the city?

2. Use of force is currently at the top of people’s minds and getting APD through the department of justice settlement agreement reforms. Which parts of the city’s approach to “use of force” are working, what needs to be fixed and how would you fix it?

3. How do you plan to engage with the community and provide a level of transparency between the department and the people you serve?

4. What challenges is the Department faced with in building moral?

The city official who asked the questions did not disclose if the 3 applicants were given the questions in advance. This is important because one applicant appeared to have read or regurgitated answers he had memorized, while the other two applicants appeared to have answered the questions spontaneously.

Following are highlights of what the applicants had to say in the order in which they made their presentations and were asked questions:

CHIEF CLINTON NICHOLS

Clinton Nichols had this to say about the city’s crime rates:

“Your property crime or violent crimes against persons are probably, they need some work. I will tell you, particularly in the area of homicides. One of the first things that I would do is sort of draw down the analytical into some relative data so that I could draw some inferences that will tell me where the problem areas are, and then look for ways to solve them. … It is important for any police department to take a lot of small bites of a very big apple … Crime is something that impacts everybody on a personal level and so making sure we are resolved to reducing the level that most people are impacted by is extremely important.”

Nichols had this to say about the APD reforms under the consent decree:

“I can tell you it isn’t a pretty process, but it certainly can be done. … A police leader does not need to choose between reform and crime-fighting. … Having one take a back seat to another, quite frankly, is nonsense in my opinion. … [The hard work of writing policy and making it operational] is already done and the next step is compliance.”

Nichols added he would be guided by his experience going through U.S. Department of Justice reform efforts first in Law Vegas, Nevada and then in Commerce City, Colorado. According to Nichols, both citys reached a more than 90% compliance rate under consent decrees.

The major take away from Chief’s Nichols interview is that he is very personable, exhibits a confidence of what he has done in the past and what he intends to do with APD taking it forward.

FORMER DEPUTY POLICE COMMISSIONER JOSEPH SULLIVAN

Sullivan identified gun violence as the “top of the list” of issues in Albuquerque and he had this to say:

“I have a passion for policing and I would love to bring that to Albuquerque if I was invited to do so. … Gun violence has to be at the top of the list. I place a heavy emphasis on making the arrests, getting people who are carrying guns illegally off the streets. … If you focus on that you take away the opportunity for gun violence to occur. … I would want to have a meeting with all command staff after every shooting incident to determine the cause and prevent any further violence.”

Sullivan said he believes the APD reform effort was sidetracked by the pandemic and getting it back on track is “critically important.” If appointed Chief, he would temporarily have Internal Affairs review all use-of-force cases until supervisors better learned the review process. Sullivan said he would also personally oversee all discipline and regularly reach out to the monitor to talk and get advice.

Sullivan emphasized his experience in Philadelphia during last year’s Black Lives Matter protests and said he would handle similar demonstrations in Albuquerque the same way. According to Sullivan, it comes down to defusing tensions with police by having police working in plainclothes or basic uniform and being open and honest with the demonstrators. Sullivan summarized it this way:

“We were willing to walk all night long as long as there was no violence and no damage to our city. … We never used gas, we never had to use impact rounds, we used patience. … If you come dressed for a fight, you’re likely to get a fight.”

The major take away from Sullivan’s interview is that he has a clear understanding of the 12 Federal Monitors reports, is aware of the obstacles that are getting in the way of implementing the reforms and understands what needs to be done within the department and how to address the city’s crime rates.

INTERIM APD CHIEF HAROLD MEDINA

Interim chief Harold Medina for his part said he has the “hindsight” to take the department forward, to get it where it needs to be and to reduce crime in Albuquerque and complete the reform effort. Medina stated his biggest priorities with the department are to continue to increase the department’s resources, adding more sworn police to the force, build up and add to the departments investigation capacity and stop “the revolving door” when it comes to arresting and releasing criminals.

Highlights of what Interim Chief Medina had to say include:

“We know we have to increase the quality of our investigations. … The three areas that we will focus on improving is the increase in resources. … We simply need more officers. … The challenge is you have to build the capacity of our investigative units. … We are on track to have our first batch of investigators go to their specific training to through the mid-part of the year.”

Medina emphasized his years of experience with APD and what he is doing now had this to say:

“How can you change a culture if you had not lived and been a part of that culture? … I have already begun the transformation process for the Albuquerque Police Department, and I am asking for the time to complete it. … We will continue to reach out to make sure that all segments of the community have their voice heard with APD. … The success of these relationships will rest on the department being transparent with the public.”

Medina added that there needs to be measures taken to boost the quality of use-of-force investigations while making sure those who break policy are held accountable and he said:

“The narrative has to change. … The focus cannot be that we are disciplining officers but rather we are protecting the integrity of all the great officers of this department.”

One very uncomfortable take away from Interim Chief Medina’s presentation is that he either read or regurgitated answers he had memorize, while the other two applicants clearly answered the questions spontaneously.

In addition to quoting the webinar presentation of the applicants, links to related and quoted news sources are here:

https://www.kob.com/albuquerque-news/finalists-for-apd-chief-position-address-crime-problem-use-of-force-policy-during-public-webinar/5987647/?cat=500

https://www.krqe.com/news/albuquerque-metro/city-officials-give-opportunity-to-meet-police-chief-candidates-saturday/

https://www.abqjournal.com/2336776/3-apd-chief-candidates-meet-the-public-online.html

APD IN A NUTSHELL

Whoever becomes the new APD Chief, that person will be taking control of a law enforcement bureaucracy that is para military organization and under federal court consent decree for the first time in the city’s history.

The Albuquerque Police Department (APD) has an annual budget of $212 Million. APD is the largest budget department in the city out of a $1.1 Billion dollar general fund budget. APD has funding for 1,678 full time positions that includes 578 civilian staff and funding for 1,100 sworn police. As of January 9, 2021, APD payroll shows that there are 953 sworn officers and 48 cadets in the academy. The Albuquerque Police Department (APD ) has five major bureaus with each bureau having a Deputy Chief:

1. The Field Services Bureau
2. Investigative Bureau
3. The Compliance Bureau
4. The Administrative Support Bureau
5. The Support Services Bureau

APD divides the city into six geographical areas called “area commands.” Each area command is managed by an APD Commander (formerly called Captains) and staffed with between 82 and 119 officers, depending on size of the area command and level of calls for service. All officers are dispatched through the police communications operators by calling (505) 242-COPS for non-emergency calls or 911 in an emergency.

APD has 7 Detective Units: Violent Crime Unit (Armed Robbery, Homicide, Sex Crimes, Crimes Against Children), Property Crime Unit (Burglary, Auto Theft, White Collar Crimes) , Special Investigations Unit (Narcotics, Vice and Gangs), Crime Scene Investigations, Traffic Investigations (Motor Unit, DWI, Air Support), Tactical Unit (SWAT, K-9,, Mounted Horse Patrol, Bomb Squad) Training (Basic Training, Advance Training, Recruiting and Background)

https://www.cabq.gov/police/contact-the-police/area-commands

TWO MAJOR CRISES THAT WILL MAKE OR BREAK NEW CHIEF

Without any doubt, there are two on going crises that the next APD Chief will need to address that could easily set that Chief up for failure, and in turn, Mayor Keller’s desire for a second term. Those 2 issues are:

1. The city’s out of control crime rates

2. The Department of Justice Reforms under the Court Approved Settlement Agreement (CASA).

Following is a discussion of both issues:

1. THE CITY’S OUT OF CONTROL CRIME RATES

In August, 2017, New Mexico State Auditor Tim Keller and candidate for Albuquerque Mayor had this to say about the city’s high crime rates:

“It’s unfortunate, but crime is absolutely out of control. It’s the mayor’s job to actually address crime in Albuquerque, and that’s what I want to do as the next mayor.”

The crime statistics released for 2018 and 2019 make it clear that despite all of Mayor Tim Keller’s promises to bring down skyrocketing violent crime, he has failed. In 2019, Keller implemented 4 new programs to address violent crime, increased APD personnel by 116, and spent millions. Violent crime is still “absolutely out of control”.

Without any question, the city’s crime rates have become worse during the last 3 years and are still out of control. For that reason, a review of the statistics in in order to give a better picture of what a new APD Chief must confront to be successful

Homicides spike during the last 3 years

In 2018, during Mayor Tim Keller’s first full year in office, there were 69 homicides. In 2019, during Mayor Keller’s second full year in office, there were 82 homicides. Albuquerque had more homicides in 2019 than in any other year in the city’s history. The previous high was in 2017 when 72 homicides were reported in Mayor Berry’s last year in office. The previous high mark was in 1996, when the city had 70 homicides. The year 2020 ended with 76 homicides, the second-highest count since 1996. The decline dropped the homicide rate from 14.64 per 100,000 people in 2019 to about 13.5 in 2020. As of January 18, 2021, there have been 7 homicides recorded in the city, close to one every other day. Only one of the 7 cases has resulted in an arrest. As of January 27, there have been 13 homicides in the city.

https://www.abqjournal.com/1534762/homicide-numbers-high-despite-pandemic.html?amp=1

Historically Low Homicide Clearance Rates

For the past three years during Mayor Keller’s tenure, the homicide clearance percentage rate has been in the 50%-60% range. According to the proposed 2018-2019 APD City Budget, in 2016 the APD homicide clearance rate was 80%. In 2017, under Mayor Berry the clearance rate was 70%. In 2018, the first year of Keller’s term, the homicide clearance rate was 56%. In 2019, the second year of Keller’s term, the homicide clearance rate was 52.5%, the lowest clearance rate in the last decade. In 2020 the clearance rate has dropped to 50%. Of the 75 homicides thus far in 2020, half remain unsolved. There are only a dozen homicide detectives each with caseloads high above the national average.

Violent Crime

In 2018 during Mayor Keller’ first full year in office, there were 6,789 violent crimes, 3,885 Aggravated Assaults and 491 Non-Fatal Shootings.

In 2019, the category of “Violent Crimes” was replaced with the category of “Crimes Against Persons” and the category includes homicide, human trafficking, kidnapping and assault. In 2019 during Keller’s second full year in office, Crimes Against Persons increased from 14,845 to 14,971, or a 1% increase. The Crimes Against Person category had the biggest rises in Aggravated Assaults increasing from 5,179 to 5,397.
2020 Violent Crime Stats

On Monday, September 21, 2020, the Albuquerque Police Department (APD) released statistics that revealed that overall crime in the city is down slightly across all categories in the first six months of 2020 as compared with the first six months of 2019. Crimes against persons are all violent crimes combined and include murder, deadly weapons assault and injury and rape. The decreases in “violent crime” from 2019 to 2020 was a decrease by only 21 crimes or a 0.28%. Over a two year, it decreased 4%. According to the FBI statistics released, there were 7,362 crimes against persons reported in the first six months of 2020 and there were 152 more in the second quarter than in the first.

Drug Offenses

“Crimes Against Society” include drug offenses, prostitution and animal cruelty. In 2018 During Keller’s first full year in office, total Crimes Against Society were 3,365. In 2019 during Keller’s second full year in office, total Crimes Against Society increased to 3,711 for a total increase of 346 more crimes or a 9% increase.

Auto Thefts

On June 26, 2019 the National Insurance Crime Bureau (NICB) released its annual list of cities with the most stolen vehicles reported. Despite a 28% reduction in auto thefts over a two-year period, Albuquerque ranked No. 1 in the nation for vehicle thefts per capita for the third year in a row.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/jimgorzelany/2019/06/27/these-are-the-cities-with-the-highest-car-theft-rates/#7c42e7d35146

911 Emergency Response Times

In 2009, under Mayor Martin Chavez, the average 911 emergency response time to calls, whether it was a life or death emergency or a minor traffic crash,was 8 minutes 50 seconds.

In 2011, under Mayor RJ Berry the average response times to 911 emergency calls was 25 minutes.

In 2018 and 2019, under Mayor Tim Keller, the average response times to 911 emergency calls spiked to 48 minutes.

2. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE MANDATED REFORMS

Whoever is appointed permanent APD Chief will be taking over a law enforcement agency still in crisis after 6 years and after spending millions of dollars to implement the 271 mandated reforms under a Department of Justice Court Approved Settlement Agreement (CASA).

In 2017, Tim Keller aggressively campaigned to be elected mayor by vowing to implement the Department of Justice (DOJ) mandated reforms agreed to after the DOJ found a “culture of aggression” within APD. Also found was repeated unconstitutional “excessive use of force” and “deadly force” cases. Keller vowed to implement the DOJ mandated reforms even as he received the endorsement of the APD Union who opposed the reforms and that continues with obstructionist tactics.

Upon being sworn in as Mayor, one of the very first appointments Keller made was appointing Chief Michael Geier, first as interim chief and a few months making Geier permanent chief. At the time of the appointment, Keller proclaimed Gieir was the best man for the job and was committed to all the DOJ reforms. Less than 3 years as Chief, Geier was terminated by Keller for his failure to make progress with implementing the reforms.

Keller has spent 3 full years trying to implement the consent decree reforms, the exact same amount of time his predecessor used, for a total of 6 years combined. The difference is that Keller has also spent millions more on the reforms to no avail. Both Mayor Berry and Mayor Keller failed miserably to implement the DOJ reforms. The federal court action has not been dismissed even though the consent decree was to be fully implemented by November 16, 2020.

The number one priority of the APD Chief, and in a real sense, the biggest crisis that Chief faces from day one will be implementation of the DOJ mandated reforms. The crisis is very real when the Federal Monitor told the court on October 6, 2020:

“We are on the brink of a catastrophic failure at APD. … [The department] has failed miserably in its ability to police itself. … If this were simply a question of leadership, I would be less concerned. But it’s not. It’s a question of leadership. It’s a question of command. It’s a question of supervision. And it’s a question of performance on the street. So as a monitor with significant amount of experience – I’ve been doing this since the ’90s – I would have to be candid with the Court and say we’re in more trouble here right now today than I’ve ever seen.”

On November 2, 2020, the Federal Court Appointed Monitor James Ginger filed with the Federal Court his 12th Compliance Audit Report. The 12th Federal Monitors report provides the following scathing overall assessment of APD management, all upper command staff appointed by Tim Keller 3 years ago:

“We have no doubt that many of the instances of non-compliance we see currently in the field are a matter of “will not,” instead of “cannot”! … issues we continue to see transcend innocent errors and instead speak to issues of cultural norms yet to be addressed and changed by APD leadership.”

“… The monitoring team has been critical of the Force Review Board (FRB), citing its past ineffectiveness and its failing to provide meaningful oversight for APD’s use of force system. The consequences are that APD’s FRB, and by extension APD itself, endorses questionable, and sometimes unlawful, conduct by its officers.
…
“During the reporting period … virtually all of these failures can be traced back to leadership failures at the top of the organization.
…
“[The federal monitor] identified strong under currents of [resistance to APD reforms] in some critical units on APD’s critical path related to CASA compliance. These include supervision at the field level; mid-level command in both operational and administrative functions, [including] patrol operations, internal affairs practices, disciplinary practices, training, and force review). Supervision, [the] sergeants and lieutenants, and mid-level command, [the commanders] remain one of the most critical weak links in APD’s compliance efforts.”

A FEDERAL MONITOR NOWHERE TO BE SEEN, NO WHERE TO BE FOUND

Ostensibly Federal Monitor James Ginger was not at all involved in the selection process for a new Chief nor has he interviewed any of the applicants. Given what Federal Monitor James Ginger has had to say about APD and its management, and the fact he will have to work and interact with the new Chief, Ginger should have been intricately involved with the application process.

Dr. Ginger has a greedy little habit of taking millions in taxpayer money saying it’s not his job to manage APD but then he blames most of APD’s problems on APD leadership and management. Ginger could very easily give his opinion on all the applicants and even help find and recruit a new chief, but he has very little or no interest in doing so no doubt saying “it’s not my job” as he is paid millions in taxpayer money, $4.5 million and counting to be precise over the last 6 years.

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

Any person who is involved with human resources and the hiring process knows damn well that the application process must be a two-way street to be successful. The employer obviously is looking to find someone who can do a job. Just as important, an applicant seeking the job wants to know if they are compatible with the employer and must know if they can do the job and make sure they are not being set up for failure with restrictions on their duties.

Absent from the resumes and the interview process was any in depth questioning or discussion on what conditions the 3 applicants want for themselves before they will take the position of APD Chief. Three areas in particular that need to be asked of the 3 applicants are:

1. SHOULD APD MANAGEMENT POSITIONS OF SERGEANTS AND LIEUTENANTS BE ALLOWED TO BE MEMBERS OF THE POLICE UNION OR BE “AT WILL” EMPLOYEES?

It was on September 10, 2018, at a status telephone conference call held with the US District Court Judge that Federal Monitor Dr. James Ginger first told the federal court that a group of “high-ranking APD officers” within APD were trying to thwart the reform efforts.

The Federal Monitor revealed that the group of “high-ranking APD officers” were APD sergeants and lieutenants.

In his 10th report Federal Monitor Ginger referred to the group as the “Counter-CASA effect” and stated:

“Sergeants and lieutenants, at times, go to extreme lengths to excuse officer behaviors that clearly violate established and trained APD policy, using excuses, deflective verbiage, de minimis comments and unsupported assertions to avoid calling out subordinates’ failures to adhere to established policies and expected practice. Supervisors (sergeants) and mid-level managers (lieutenants) routinely ignore serious violations, fail to note minor infractions, and instead, consider a given case “complete”.

“Some members of APD continue to resist actively APD’s reform efforts, including using deliberate counter-CASA processes. For example … Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) disciplinary timelines, appear at times to be manipulated by supervisory, management and command levels at the area commands, letting known violations lie dormant until timelines for discipline cannot be met.”

The 2-year, city contract negotiated by the Mayor Tim Keller Administration with the Albuquerque Police Officers Association (APOA) was for the time period of July 7, 2018 to June 30, 2020 and therefor expired on July 1, 2020. All police union contract negotiations have been put on hold amidst the pandemic. As a result, the terms and conditions of the expired contract, including who is in the bargaining unit and hourly pay, remain in effect until negotiations can take place at an undetermined date in the future. It’s likely the contract negotiations will not commence until the pandemic is over. If the city and Mayor Keller has learned anything at all over the 3 years it should be just how destructive the union has been to the reforms process because of their resistance.

New Mexico statutory law is clear that management cannot be members of public employee unions. Section 10-7E-5 provides for the rights of public employees:

“Public employees, other than management employees and confidential employees, may form, join or assist a labor organization for the purpose of collective bargaining through representatives chosen by public employees without interference, restraint or coercion and shall have the right to refuse any such activities.”

The statute is very clear that “management employees” are prohibited from joining the police union, yet the City has allowed APD Lieutenants and Sergeants to be part of the collective bargaining unit in violation of state law.

A link to related blog article is here:

https://www.petedinelli.com/2020/12/15/apd-police-union-contract-violates-state-law-by-allowing-management-positions-of-lieutenants-and-sergeants-into-bargaining-unit-empower-apd-chief-to-immediately-terminate-cops-for-cause/

The Chief, the 5 Deputy Chiefs, Assistant Deputy Chiefs and all APD Area Commanders are “unclassified” positions and they can be terminated “without cause” at any time. They are prohibited from being members of the police union and are management. The Chief serves at the pleasure of the Mayor and Deputy Chiefs and Area Commanders serve at the pleasure of the Mayor and Chief and can be terminated without cause.

APD Lieutenants and Sergeants, Detectives and Patrol Officers are all are “classified” positions and can only be terminated for cause. APD Lieutenants and Sergeants are included in the police collective bargaining unit . Any and all disciplinary actions taken against APD Lieutenants and Sergeants, Detectives and Patrol Officers are governed by the union contract. APD Lieutenants and Sergeants are management positions but are classified positions and can only be terminated with cause. They have due process rights including progressive disciplinary actions and rights of appeal.

EDITOR’S NOTE:

Interim Chief Harold Medina has already answered this question during the last hearing on the consent decree before Judge Federal Judge James Browning. Medina has said he has been “pro union” all of his life, he had no problem with sergeants and lieutenants being members of the union and he said he was and could work with the union.

2. SHOULD THE APD CHIEF BE GIVEN DISCRETIONARY AUTHORITY TO IMMEDIATELY TERMINATE A POLICE OFFICER AT ANY LEVEL FOR EXCESSIVE USE OF FORCE OR DEADLY FORCE OR OTHER DEFINED CIRCUMSTANCES?

The APD Chief has no discretionary authority to fire police officers immediately and a termination process is mandated by union contract. The APD Chief cannot fire a police officer immediately for any clear or obvious police misconduct that is found or reported upon. The only option the Chief has under such circumstance is to refer such charges to the Internal Affairs Unit for what is termed as “progressive” discipline. The APD Chief cannot fire union members without cause. Any and all disciplinary action against any member of the police union is governed by the collective bargaining unit contract. The police union contract outlines police officers’ personnel rights and remedies, provides for personnel hearings, provides for internal affairs investigations, and provides for progressive discipline and the use of a matrix for discipline available.

3. WILL THE NEW CHIEF BE ALLOWED TO REPLACE AND APPOINT HIS OWN DEPUTY CHIEFS OR ORDERED BY MAYOR KELLER AND CAO NAIR TO KEEP THOSE ALREADY APPOINTED?

Many years ago, the Mayor Jim Baca upon being elected made the commitment to recruit and hire an out of state Chief of Police and not hire someone within APD’s ranks. At the time, APD was again riddled with scandal. Mayor Baca, after a national search appointed APD Chief Gerry Galvin, a career law enforcement Chief of Police from Cleveland, Ohio. When Galvin was appointed Chief, he was order by Mayor Baca to retain all the appointed Deputy Chiefs. Galvin’s appointment by Mayor Baca resulted in extensive bitter infighting amongst Deputy Chiefs who felt that they deserved to be and earned the right to be Chief. One Deputy Chief in particular announce after a Chief’s meeting after Galvin left the room, that he would never support the efforts of Galvin nor Galvin’s changes in policy. In hindsight, Galvin was essentially set up for failure. The same scenario has played out once again with what Harold Medina did to Chief Geier, and it will happen again if Medina is not named Chief and kept as a Deputy Chief by whoever is appointed.

When Mayor Keller was sworn into Office on December 1 ,2017 he immediately appointed Chief Michael Geier and appointed as Deputy Chiefs officers who represent the “old guard” of APD style of management. The “new” command staff was a reflection of APD’s past. The “new” command staff of Deputy Chiefs were not outsiders at all but had been with APD for some time.

The Deputy Chiefs of Police appointed by Mayor Keller included Harold Medina who retired from APD as commander after serving 20 years, Rogelio Banez who was the area commander in southwest Albuquerque, and Eric Garcia who was a Deputy Chief under APD Chief Gordon Eden. Deputy Chief Eric Garcia did receivee high marks for his work on the DOJ reforms, but he was part of the previous administration’s management team and eligible to retire. The new command staff appointed by Mayor Keller did not reflect a new generation of police officer fully committed and trained in constitutional policing.

In the event Keller does indeed appoint someone from outside the agency, that new Chief needs to ask if they will be allowed to replace the Deputy Chiefs and bring in their own management team, otherwise they are being set up for failure.

HAROLD MEDINA ADMITS HE IS PART OF THE PROBLEM

Interim Chief Harold Medina during his interview said:

“How can you change a culture if you had not lived and been a part of that culture? … I have already begun the transformation process for the Albuquerque Police Department, and I am asking for the time to complete it.”

With those words, Interim Chief Harold Medina admitted he was and still is part of the problem with APD. Medina has a history of reactive decision-making and failed leadership resulting in the killing of two mentally ill people having psychotic episodes. Interim Chief Harold Medina spins the two tragedies as a positive credential to run the APD saying because of the shootings he now understands the DOJ reforms, their need and can implement them. Medina’s conduct in the two shootings is the very type of conduct that resulted in the Department of Justice investigation in the first place.

With two separate fatalities involving the mentally ill, Interim Chief Harold Medina represents the total opposite of what a large majority of survey respondents want in a police Chief. Survey respondents said it was “very important” to have a chief with “experience with reducing use of force”, “crisis management”, “protecting civil rights” and able “to tackle issues such as mental illness. ” Further, Harold Medina, as a Deputy Chief, was part of the very management for the past 3 years that has failed to implement the DOJ reforms.

Any one in APD command staff who assisted, contributed or who did not stop the “culture of aggression” found by the Department of Justice and who has resisted the reform process has no business being APD Chief or Deputy for that matter and that includes Interim Chief Harold Medina.

JUST ANOTHER SHAM PUBLIC RELATION NATIONAL SEARCH BY MAYOR KELLER

In announcing the 3 finalist, Mayor Tim Keller had this to say:

“I think we have three good finalists, and I think that’s a great thing for the city of Albuquerque. … The goal for our search is that we need to find the leadership for the city of Albuquerque in terms of public safety.”

It is more likely than not Keller has already decided he will appoint Harold Medina permanent chief. What Keller is doing now with Harold Medina is exactly what he did when he appointed Chief Michael Geier almost 3 years ago. First, he appoints an Interim Chief who he intends to appoint as permanent. Keller then has people go through the motions of getting public input. Keller then turns around and appoints who he wanted all along saying “ Gee Wiz folks, the most qualified person has been amongst us all the time”.

Experience with a law enforcement department both in crisis and under a DOJ consent decree must be an absolute requirement. If Mayor Tim Keller is truly committed in conducting a national search to find someone who will change the culture within APD, he should order AVTEC, Inc., the Albuquerque consulting firm he hired, to find far more than just two qualified law enforcement professionals who have the experience to manage a department in crisis. Both applicants Chief Clinton Nichols and former Deputy Commissioner John Sullivan should be considered with others, but not Harold Medina.

Another option is to put on hold the selection of a permanent chief until after the November election for Mayor. Otherwise, Mayor Tim Keller has engaged in just another pathetic, public relations sham of a national search only to appoint and make Harold Medina the permanent chief as Keller seeks a second term.

In 2020, Dinelli Blog Had 105,793 Total Reader Views, 70,208 Total Blog Visitors; Thanks For Viewing And Visiting; Onto A Better 2021 New Year! PLEASE WEAR THE DAMN MASK!

EDITOR’S NOTE: The opinions expressed in these two articles are those of Dan Klein and do not necessarily reflect those of the political blog www.petedinelli.com blog. No compensation has been paid. Links to the original articles can be found at the end of the articles.

Dan Klein is a retired Albuquerque Police Sergeant after 20 years of public service. He has been a small business owner in the private sector now for 16 years. Mr. Klein has been a reporter for both on line news outlets the ALB Free Press and ABQ Reports. On Tuesday, January 12, and Friday, January 14, the following articles written by Dan Klein and published on line news ABQ Reports:

ABQ REPORTS HEADLINE: Keller’s APD lies, unkept promises

“— Three years after Keller became mayor APD is still a mess. Albuquerque is still overrun with crime.

— It is clear from Keller’s 2020 speech that he would rather fudge facts and numbers to appease Albuquerque instead of taking ownership of this mess.

I have a calendar on my desk, like most of you have, where I make notes for future reference. One of those notes said, “Tim Keller State of the City speech January 11, 2020”. You can watch it here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-93RRmjiGZU

The reason I marked this date is because Keller made several announcements one year ago, that I wanted to fact check a year later. I do this because of past lies (false APD crime stats and Geier’s so-called retirement jumps to mind) whenever Keller and his management team at APD speak. Unlike most local media outlets, I refuse to simply regurgitate press releases and canned statements from politicians.

Readers deserve better reporting.

Tim Keller is all about visual charisma and charmingly good looks. Studies have shown that people support those they believe are handsome and good looking. Elections are not about policy, ideas and ability, they are a popularity contest like a high school prom and plain-looking candidates need not apply. Which is why I decided to listen and not watch Kellers’ state of the city speech. I recommend that you do the same.

At 51 minutes Keller talks about the Albuquerque Police Department and the Department of Justice monitoring. Keller stated:

“When it comes to APD we need to talk about the DOJ settlement. I will tell you there are 276 requirements that APD has to develop policies for, train officers on, implement and then show the monitor that he can trust us to do it on our own. Only after we do all of those 276 requirements will the DOJ actually end their oversight. We decided to make a compliance bureau to work with the DOJ instead of against them. Because of the hard work of that bureau and every single police officer at APD we are announcing that next month we are walking into court and asking to end the outside monitoring of nearly one-quarter of all those requirements”

Every person in the audience applauds enthusiastically, but did it happen? NO.

February 2020 came and went without the city asking the court to end the monitoring. In the summer of 2020, the city filed and then withdrew the request to end some of the monitoring. Why?

“The Albuquerque Police Department has failed miserably in its ability to police itself…. I would have to be candid with the court and say we’re in more trouble here right now today than I’ve ever seen.”

A link to a related blog article on the 12th Federal Monitor’s Report entitled “12th Federal Monitor’s Report: APD “On The Brink Of Catastrophic Failure”; “Failing Miserably To Police Itself”; Police Union Obstructs Reforms; COMMENTARY: Remove Sergeants And Lieutenants From Union; Abolish APD Internal Affairs” is here

https://www.petedinelli.com/2020/11/09/12th-federal-monitors-report-apd-on-the-brink-of-catastrophic-failure-failing-miserably-to-police-itself-police-union-obstructs-reforms-commentary-rem/

If APD was failing so miserably why did Keller tell us differently? Why indeed.

Keller then makes the following statement about APD:

“We set an ambitious goal to hire 100 officers per year for the next four years and we got our first batch on the streets just a few months ago. I am so proud to announce the next 100 are on the way. They are in the academy right now and in 2020, for the first time in years, our department (APD) is going to be at 1,000 officers strong.”

Once again this is met with applause from the audience, but a year later does APD have 1,000 officers? NO.

At the same time Keller was giving his January 2020 State of the City speech, APD spokesman Gilbert Gallegos reported to the ABQREPORT that APD had about 950 sworn officers. On January 3, 2021, the Albuquerque Journal reported that APD had 974 sworn officers (with another 55 cadets slated to graduate in March of 2021). Keller has hired more officers since he took over, but it seems that APD is now stuck, unable to stay above 1,000 officers (the number Keller promised). The reason APD is stagnant is because APD is losing veteran officers at a rate that does not allow it to grow.

I researched the entire police payroll for the first pay period in 2021. As of January 9, 2021, APD payroll shows that there are 953 sworn officers and now only 48 cadets in the academy. Why the discrepancy from January 3 to January 9?

I am sure APD and Keller knew that the end of the year brings a lot of retirements for APD. Why did Keller / APD give the Journal the end of 2020 numbers instead of the reality of the real 2021 numbers? Because 2020 would make Keller look better.

If APD payroll records are correct, and why wouldn’t they be, APD has only the slimmest chance of getting to Keller’s 1,000-officer goal in March 2021, a year later than he promised. Keller would have to pray that no cadets nor officers leave the department in the next three months. Based upon past performance that certainly does not seem likely. Knowing the number of officers that APD continues to lose on a yearly basis to retirements, terminations and resignations, my hunch is APD will still hover around 950 officers when January of 2022 comes around.

Mayor Keller promised us a year ago that his police department would attain 1,000 cops in 2020, it didn’t happen. Keller promised that APD was doing great with the DOJ consent decree when they weren’t. Keller clearly mislead the public in these two issues during his 2020 speech, it makes me wonder what else has he mislead us on?

Three years after Keller became mayor APD is still a mess. Albuquerque is still overrun with crime. It is clear from Keller’s 2020 speech that he would rather fudge facts and numbers to appease Albuquerque instead of taking ownership of this mess. 2021 is an election year, I hope Albuquerque is fed up with smiling untruths and elects a mayor who will fix this mess.”

The link to Abq Reports is here:

https://www.abqreport.com/single-post/keller-s-apd-lies-unkept-promises

JANUARY 15, the following article also written by Dan Klein was published on ABQ Report

ABQ REPORTS HEADLINE: TIM KELLER’S VILE ATTEMPT TO DECEIVE US

What would you tell your kid if he came home from school with all Ds on his report card and when you questioned him about it, his response was, “You should be happy with me because my classmate, Jimmy, got all Fs.” Would you be happy? Well, you aren’t little Jimmy’s parent so you could care less about the grades Jimmy received and so you yell at your kid and tell him he needs to get his butt in gear, study and work harder and get better grades, or else.

That’s the way the real, normal and responsible world works. If you fail you acknowledge it and work harder to fix the problem and to get better. You don’t try to hide and explain away your miserable performance by saying someone is worse at it than you. Because saying that someone is worse than you at something is really low and sick, and it shows defeatism, a willingness to accept failure and a totally reprehensible attempt to deceive oneself and everyone else. In short, it’s ugly debasement.

Well, guess what, Albuquerque. Your mayor, Tim Keller, is that sick little kid who is getting Ds when it comes to fighting crime and who is trying to deceive you, his bosses, by saying that his failure is OK because other cities are doing worse than Albuquerque. Yes, welcome to the crime-fighting world of little Timmy Keller, who is failing miserably at his job. This is exactly what Failing Timmy did this week to cloak the fact that Albuquerque is just as crime-ridden under his leadership as it was under R.J. Berry.

Albuquerque has already had our fourth homicide since the start of 2021! At this rate we will eclipse the record high homicide rates of the last three years of Mayor Tim Keller’s administration.

So how does smiling Tim Keller respond to the tsunami that is the Albuquerque crime wave?

In 2019 Keller told Albuquerque residents that crime was going down, and he produced stats to support his statement. The crime stats were subsequently found to be a lie—fake, false and simply not true. Keller later apologized for the “mistake,” and soon enough real crime stats confirmed what everyone living in Albuquerque knew: crime here is really bad.

In 2020 Keller praised APD Chief Mike Geier for doing a great job (state of the city address) only to get rid of Geier months later. In what could only be described as cowardly behavior, Keller didn’t act like a strong mayor by calling Geier into his office and telling him he was done. Instead, Keller had Geier meet him, incognito, at a park on the Labor Day Holiday weekend. As Geier described it Keller was in disguise when he sat down with Geier on a park bench and asked him to resign. Weird. And cowardly.

How did this Forrest Gump, err Tim Keller park bench meeting turnout? Scandalous and embarrassing for all of Albuquerque. It’s worse than a soap opera, with Geier accusing Keller and Interim Chief Medina of plotting against him. In response Keller and Medina now say Geier was the worse chief ever (weird how Keller praised Geier just months earlier). While Keller was diverted into this stupid tit-for-tat with Geier, Albuquerque crime continued to grow unabated.

The year 2020 got worse for Keller and his police department as Attorney General Hector Balderas and State Auditor Brian Colón announced investigations and audits into APD overtime and spending. Balderas got involved when Colón requested that his office investigate potential criminal activity related to APD overtime. Once again, Albuquerque’s crime wave took a back seat to a profoundly serious issue within APD.

Again, I ask where was Tim Keller? APD overtime issues were well reported by ABQReport and other media outlets for years, so why didn’t Keller address them when the Albuquerque Police Oversight Board investigated and recommended termination for one of the officers involved? (A recommendation ignored by Keller and Geier.) Just where is Tim Keller when it comes to doing something about crime in our city?

As Albuquerque is reporting its fourth murder since the start of 2021, Keller and APD come to the citizens with one of the worse PR spins I have ever seen. Instead of focusing on Albuquerque and fixing our crime epidemic, Keller holds a press conference where he tells Albuquerque citizens that it’s worse in other cities. You heard me right. Keller is so lost when it comes to fighting crime in Albuquerque that he wants us to divert our attention to other crime-ridden cities.

Keller is telling us that the next time you get robbed at gunpoint, know that in Baltimore you could have gotten shot. Oh boy, that certainly will make everyone feel better. I can see it now, Keller and Medina will begin ordering APD officers to tell every crime victim that they should stop complaining because they could live in Detroit where crime is so much worse.

APD dispatcher: “911 what’s your emergency?”
Caller: “Help! I have been robbed!”
APD dispatcher: “Sir, do you know how lucky you are to live in Tim Keller’s Albuquerque? In Memphis you would probably have gotten shot. Thank God for Tim Keller.”
Caller: “You are right, it would be worse if I lived in Memphis. Thank God I live in Albuquerque where I am warmed and comforted by Tim Keller’s smile. I am sorry to take your time. Disregard”

Note to Mayor Keller: You are the mayor of Albuquerque and it’s pretty clear you have no idea what you are doing when it comes to stopping the crime crisis and managing APD. Stop feeding us citizens with PR bullcrap about how it’s worse in other places or that you have a 20th crime initiative that looks like the 1st failed crime initiative. Victims of crime in Albuquerque don’t care about other cities and their problems; we only care about Albuquerque. I wish Keller would care more about Albuquerque than he cares about re-election and his PR spin.

Tim Keller you need to know you are the mayor of Albuquerque, and citizens here don’t give two-shits about Baltimore or any other city. We care about the job you’re doing, and right now your failing. Timmy, you’re coming home with Fs on your report card. And when you try to explain away your failures by saying that other cities are more dangerous we see it for what it really is: a pathetic attempt to hide your incompetence and an attempt to debase this entire community.

So Timmy, stop the PR crap and just do your job of making us safe. If you can’t do this, then we’ll have to find a mayor who can do the job better than you.

And Timmy, stop your pathetic and sickening game of trying to hide your incompetence and to deceive us. It’s vile.

The link to the January 15 ABQ Report column is here:

https://www.abqreport.com/single-post/tim-keller-s-vile-attempt-to-deceive-us

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

Dan Klein in his second article states “In 2019 Keller told Albuquerque residents that crime was going down, and he produced stats to support his statement. The crime stats were subsequently found to be a lie—fake, false and simply not true”. With the one sentence, Klein glossed over just how bad Keller mislead the public.

KELLER’S FALSE CLAIMS OF REDUCING CRIME

When Keller took office on December 1, 2017, every quarter when APD released the city’s crime statistics, Mayor Keller would do a press conference to proclaim and to some extent take credit for crime going down in all categories. He did so on July 1, 2019. Mayor Keller reported that crime was down substantially, with double-digit drops, in nearly every category.

https://www.abqjournal.com/1335502/crime-declining-in-albuquerque-new-numbers-show.html

On Sunday, December 1, 2019 the Albuquerque Journal reported that all the crime rate reductions Keller reported in his July 1, 2019 press conference were in fact seriously flawed by big percentages. Both the 2019 mid-year statistics and the statistics released at the end of 2018 were revised dramatically to include hundreds, and in some cases thousands, more incidents than were initially reported. The final numbers for all of 2018 showed violent crime actually increased.

At an October meeting of the City Council, APD provided the revised statistics but failed to disclose to the council that the numbers had changed drastically. Mayor Keller also did not hold any kind of a press conference to correct nor announce the corrected statistics. The Keller Administration blamed the false numbers on antiquated software programs, but only after the Keller Administration had essentially been caught by the Albuquerque Journal. Mayor Keller for his part has never issued his own personal apology for misleading the public and trying to take credit for bringing down crime rates by using false statistics.

The corrected crime statistics from those announced by Keller are:

Auto burglaries decreased 16%, not 38% as previously announced by Keller
Auto theft decreased 22%, not 39% as Keller reported
Commercial burglary decreased 3%, not the 27% Keller reported
Residential burglary decreased 16%, not 39% as Keller reported
Homicide decreased 2.5%, not 18%, but homicides have since increased substantially and the city has tied the all-time record of 71.
Rape decreased 3%, not the 29% Keller reported
Robbery decreased 30%, not 47% reported by Keller
Aggravated assault decreased 7.5%, not 33% reported by Keller

The link to the full December 1, 2029 Journal article is here:

https://www.abqjournal.com/1396782/flaws-discovered-in-apds-crime-statistics.html

Given the references to the city’s crime rates in both Dan Klein’s articles, a review of crime statistics under Mayor Tim Keller is in order.

HOMICIDES SPIKE DURING THE LAST 3 YEARS

In 2018, during Mayor Tim Keller’s first full year in office, there were 69 homicides. In 2019, during Mayor Keller’s second full year in office, there were 82 homicides. Albuquerque had more homicides in 2019 than in any other year in the city’s history. The previous high was in 2017 when 72 homicides were reported in Mayor Berry’s last year in office. The previous high mark was in 1996, when the city had 70 homicides. The year 2020 ended with 76 homicides, the second-highest count since 1996. The decline dropped the homicide rate from 14.64 per 100,000 people in 2019 to about 13.5 in 2020.

https://www.abqjournal.com/1534762/homicide-numbers-high-despite-pandemic.html?amp=1

HISTORICALLY LOW HOMICIDE CLEARANCE RATES

For the past three years during Mayor Keller’s tenure, the homicide clearance percentage rate has been in the 50%-60% range. According to the proposed 2018-2019 APD City Budget, in 2016 the APD homicide clearance rate was 80%. In 2017, under Mayor Berry the clearance rate was 70%. In 2018, the first year of Keller’s term, the homicide clearance rate was 56%. In 2019, the second year of Keller’s term, the homicide clearance rate was 52.5%, the lowest clearance rate in the last decade. In 2020 the clearance rate has dropped to 50%. Of the 75 homicides thus far in 2020, half remain unsolved. There are only a dozen homicide detectives each with caseloads high above the national average.

ARRESTS

The number of arrests for the four years of 2016-2019 are as follows:

2016: 14,022 total arrests made
2017: 13,582 total arrests made
2018: 15,471 total arrests made
2019: 15,151 total arrests made

FOUR YEAR TOTAL OF ARREST MADE BY APD: 58,226

Editor’s Note: Statistics for 2020 unavailable

VIOLENT CRIME

In 2018 during Mayor Keller’ first full year in office, there were 6,789 violent crimes, 3,885 Aggravated Assaults and 491 Non-Fatal Shootings.

In 2019, the category of “Violent Crimes” was replaced with the category of “Crimes Against Persons” and the category includes homicide, human trafficking, kidnapping and assault. In 2019 during Keller’s second full year in office, Crimes Against Persons increased from 14,845 to 14,971, or a 1% increase. The Crimes Against Person category had the biggest rises in Aggravated Assaults increasing from 5,179 to 5,397.

2020 VIOLENT CRIME STATS

On Monday, September 21, 2020, the Albuquerque Police Department (APD) released statistics that revealed that overall crime in the city is down slightly across all categories in the first six months of 2020 as compared with the first six months of 2019. Crimes against persons are all violent crimes combined and include murder, deadly weapons assault and injury and rape. The decreases in “violent crime” from 2019 to 2020 was a decrease by only 21 crimes or a 0.28%. Over a two year, it decreased 4%. According to the FBI statistics released, there were 7,362 crimes against persons reported in the first six months of 2020 and there were 152 more in the second quarter than in the first.

Links to related Dinelli Blog articles are here:

Mayor Tim Keller’s Record Of Broken Promises, Failures And High Murder Rates As He Seeks A Second Term

Anemic Opposition And Incumbency Gives Mayor Tim Keller Upper Hand As He Seeks A Second Term; Expect Another $1.3 Million Race From Keller