The final tally of murders in the city for 2021 is 117. It shattered the previous 2019 record by 36 murders.

Following is the raw data breakdown:

Total Homicides: 117
Number of “justified homicides” excluded from total: 10
Per Capita Number: 20.8 per 100,000
Number of homicides Involving guns: 97
Number of cases solve or closed: 40
Number of case solved from previous years: 10
Oldest victim: 66
Youngest victim: 2

The link to quoted source material is here:

https://www.abqjournal.com/2458296/remembering-some-of-2021s-homicide-victims-in-abq-ex-total-

The first homicide of 2021 happened on January 8 and the last occurred on December 31. Not at all surprising is that it is believed that the dramatic increase in homicides and robberies is drug related.

AUDIT REVEALS HOMICIDE CASES ASSIGNED TO DETECTIVES NO LONGER IN HOMICIDE UNIT

On Sunday, February 13, the Albuquerque Journal reported that during the summer of 2021 APD conducted an audit on open homicide investigations and found that there were 85 cases assigned to detectives who were no longer in the homicide unit. Among the 12 detectives listed, several had more than 10 unsolved cases and one had 16. In other words 73% of all the homicides that occurred last year were assigned to detectives that are no longer in the homicide unit.

The link to the full Albuquerque Journal article is here:

https://www.abqjournal.com/2469703/left-in-limbo-ex-victims-grieving-families-feel-like-their-cases-ha.html

Deputy Commander Hartsock said the homicide cases range as far back as 2014, but the majority are from 2016 to 2020. According to Hartsock:

“We operated under this idea that [homicide detectives] were still going to do it … [and the detectives were not pushed to complete cases after they left the homicide unit.] … And to the defense of the detectives, they have met the families, and they literally want to solve the case. … They want to keep it because they feel like they’re the only ones that can solve it. But the practice didn’t play out that way. They have other responsibilities, other duties.”

TRANSFERRING CASES

Quoting the pertinent portions of the Journal article:

“When a detective is working on a case, the investigative documents are kept in a brown accordion folder. When the detectives left the unit, they would take that folder with them, meaning the case files are spread throughout the police department.
…
Now, when a detective wants to transfer to another position, the move will not be allowed until the detective’s cases are completed and submitted to the unit’s leadership, according to the memo on outstanding homicide case management.

A completed case does not necessarily have to be solved, Hartsock said, it just means that all leads have been followed up on. Once there are no more so-called door knobs to try, then the case should be transferred to the cold case unit. Hartsock said they also realized detectives had for the most part stopped referring cases to the cold case unit.

After identifying the 85 cases that were no longer being worked, the Criminal Investigations Division set up a schedule to bring the detectives back to the homicide unit for a period of 30 days at a time during which they will be tasked with working a case until there are no more leads. The transfers started in November.

Although Hartsock said he didn’t know … if the detectives had solved any of the cases, some of them might have been closed because an autopsy revealed the death was a suicide, accident or overdose instead of a homicide.

“Then let’s look at other ones where we might have a suspect already identified. I use the football analogy, like it’s on the 2-yard line, let’s go and run that ball,” he said. “If it’s a crazy ‘whodunit’? Well, let’s get it up to a point that we can transfer it to cold case.”

According to Hartsock, a change he has made is directing detectives to meet with their supervisor and write up a report after 60 days on a case summarizing where they are, who they’ve talked to and the status of lab testing and cell phone data extraction. Hartsock believes this creates more accountability to track the pace of a case so it does not languish and it will allow a case to be easily transferred to another detective.

Hartsock said:

“As, hopefully, homicides slow down and staffing goes up we are going to effectively deal with these cases systematically. None of them close, none have statute limitations on them. Our biggest fear, of course, is that we don’t want anyone to repeat crimes.”

The link to quoted news source material is here:

https://www.abqjournal.com/2469703/left-in-limbo-ex-victims-grieving-families-feel-like-their-cases-ha.html

FOUR YEARS OF HISTORICAL HIGH HOMICIDE

In 2018 there were 69 homicides. In 2019, 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. 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. 2021 ended with the city shattering the all time record with 117 homicides in one year and a per capita murder rate of 20.8 per 100,000.

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

CITY’S HISTORICAL HOMICIDE CLEARANCE RATE HALF NATIONAL AVERAGE

Each year since 1995, the FBI has released annually its Crime In The United States Report. Following are the national clearance rates for 2016, 2017, 2018 and 2019 as reported by the FBI:

In 2016: 59.4%. national clearance rate for murder
In 2017: 61.6% national clearance rate for murder
In 2018: 62.3% national clearance rate for murder
In 2019: 61.4% national clearance rate for murder

https://www.fbi.gov/services/cjis/ucr/publications

From 2019 to 2020, police across the country solved 1,200 more murders, a 14% increase. But murders rose twice as quickly by 30%. As a result, the homicide clearance rate, the percentage of crimes cleared, dropped to a historic low to about 1 of every 2 murders solved or by 50%.

https://www.themarshallproject.org/2022/01/12/as-murders-spiked-police-solved-about-half-in-2020

For the years 2019 to 2021, the city’s 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, the clearance rate was 70%. In 2018, the homicide clearance rate was 56%. In 2019, the homicide clearance rate was 52.5%, the lowest clearance rate in the last decade. In 2020 APD’s clearance rate dropped to 50%. APD’ clearance rate has now dropped to 30%.

APD Deputy Commander Kyle Hartsock oversees the homicide unit. On January 20, Hartsock said APD is investigating 115 homicides from last year, including a missing persons case from Belen and of that number, only about 30% have been closed, which is an all-time record low for APD.

Links to news source material are here:

https://www.koat.com/article/abq-crime-homicide-arrests/38820745

https://www.kob.com/news/albuquerque-homicide-map-2022/6350373/

https://www.abqjournal.com/2463551/apd-investigates-death-in-sw-albuquerque.html

https://www.abqjournal.com/2460901/apd-investigating-homicide-in-southwest-albuquerque-2.html

APD’S HOMICIDE UNIT

APD’s homicide unit has 11 detectives and two sergeants for a total 13 sworn police. However, it was reported by an spokesperson that on January 20, the homicide unit has 5 vacancies.

https://www.koat.com/article/abq-crime-homicide-arrests/38820745

Last year, homicide detectives each were working anywhere from 9 to 15 cases. Because some cases are quickly resolved, the number of “active” cases for each detective varies.

APD Police Chief Harold Medina addressed the caseload of active cases by saying:

“We also understand that they go through times where they get a lot of cases that come in. … So there’s also been a time where we took all the detectives city-wide and we transferred them into homicide for a short period to help them catch up with warrants, interviews, or anything else that may be slowing down these investigations. That’s the first step that we’ve taken.”

Chief Medina was also asked how APD will handle the 2021 cases this year in 2022 as homicides continue. In response, Medina said APD is working on developing and expanding the cold case unit and said:

“We don’t want them to lose traction. We want someone to continue looking at them. I know the impact it has on families firsthand. Earlier this year we did the story on someone I knew growing up, 30 years later, we’re able to solve that case. I know the closure that brings to families so we’re still looking to see how they are going to be handed off over and how they’re going to be handled and who, what efforts are going to be put into them. There has to be a priority system on the ones that have the most solvability factors.”

The link to the quoted news source is here:

https://www.kob.com/albuquerque-news/apd-36-of-2021-homicides-solved/6349356/?cat=500

Deputy Commander Kyle Hartsock had this to say about the 30% clearance rate:

“A homicide case never closes in Albuquerque Police Department. It just never closes. We either make an arrest or the DA’s office makes a determination, or it just stays open. … We’ve seen a downward trend [in clearance rates] over the past two years, but we’re on the road to correct it now. … A lot of these things and programs that we started in the past several months, they are taking shape just specific to murder investigations, and we’re seeing higher quality murder case is being developed internally by our detectives and with our crime lab and our partners.”

Hartsock reported that in mid-January, APD made several arrests in connection to homicides. He credited that to the oversight of the day-to-day tasks for homicide detectives, adding certain milestones to a case and having more eyes looking over cases. Hartsock said this:

“Instead of just one person deciding to need a resource now, it’s a little bit more of a group deciding what resources this case needs. And then when we do review it with supervisors and people that have been doing this for a while, we’re pulling off pieces a little bit quicker.”

“WORKING ON RECIPES” TO DEAL WITH “CRUSHING” HOMICIDE CASE LOAD

Deputy Commander Hartsock said the one thing that is hindering the closure of homicide cases is the number of detectives with the number fluctuating. The homicide unit has 11 to 12 detectives and the goal is 16.

Fluctuating staffing is only part of the overall problem when it comes to homicide clearance rates. The biggest problem is the continuing rise of homicide cases. This year the department is investigating six new homicides, three of which happened in roughly 24 hours.

Hartsock had this to say:

“The average homicide detective, the research that’s been done in America for urban police departments, they seem to get more than five or six new homicide cases a year. We’ve been over that, that number for a handful of years. So it’s just it’s literally it’s just too many. That is absolutely crushing to a homicide unit because it’s not giving our primary a lot of time and space to really work that first line as far as they want to work it. They only get to work it for a day or two. And just like that, they got to work the next one. That’s not a good recipe. So we’re working on the recipes.”

Hartsock said APD has victim advocates for victims of violent crime. It includes domestic violence, sex crimes and family of homicide victims. According to Hartstock:

“We will set up an in-person meeting if they want or phone call whatever they want, and get them caught up on it. They deserve that transparency,”

https://www.koat.com/article/abq-crime-homicide-arrests/38820745

APD HOMICIDE UNIT HAS DUBIOUS HISTORY OF BOTCHED INVESTIGATIONS

The APD Homicide Unit has a dubious history of botching a number of high-profile murder investigations. The APD Homicide Unit has compiled a history of not doing complete investigations, misleading the public, feeding confessions to people with low IQs, getting investigations completely wrong and even arresting innocent people.

A listing of homicide investigations reflecting negligence include:

2005 to 2008: Robert Gonzales, a mentally retarded young man was arrested by APD and charged with the rape and murder of an 11 year old neighbor. Weeks after the arrest DNA evidence confirmed Gonzales was not the offender. The Homicide and the Bernalillo County DA never turned this evidence over to the court and defense attorneys. Only after Gonzales spent 965 days in jail for a crime he didn’t commit and and only after he was released by the judge was the DNA evidence exposed.

2007 to 2011: Michael Lee and Travis Rowley, working as a group of salesmen, were arrested and charged with the murders and rape of an elderly Korean couple. Both Lee and Rowley had below normal IQs. Lee confessed to the murders, Rowley did not. Shortly after the arrests, DNA evidence excluded both men and confirmed that Albuquerque serial killer, Clifton Bloomfield was the offender. APD and the DA kept both men locked up for over a year before they were released.

2015 to 2016: Christopher Cruz and Donovan Maez are wrongly arrested for the murder of Jaydon Chavez Silver. They spent 10 months in jail before the Bernalillo County DA reviewed the entire case sent to them by APD Homicide, finding that there was no evidence that Cruz and Maez were involved. APD Homicide is alleged to have fed witnesses information for them to repeat in interviews and threaten witnesses to provide false information.

https://www.petedinelli.com/2018/07/02/abq-report-apd-homicide-units-legacy-of-shame/

MOST EGREGIOUS NEGLIGENT MURDER INVESTIGATIONS

The most egregious negligent murder investigation is the murder investigation of 10-year-old Victoria Martens. On August 24, 2016, she was murdered, dismembered and her body was burned in a bathtub. The initial APD Homicide investigation alleged that it was Jessica Kelley that stabbed 9-year-old Victoria Martens and that Fabian Gonzales strangled her while Michelle Martens, the child’s mother, watched the murder.

Gonzales was accused of drugging, raping and killing 10-year-old Victoria. After further investigation, Bernalillo County District Attorney Raul Torrez was forced to abandon the prosecution’s theory of the case and forced to drop the rape and murder charges against Gonzales. DA Torrez then accused Gonzalez of helping his cousin dismember the body of 10-year-old Victoria Martens after the child was reportedly killed by an unidentified man who was looking for Gonzales for revenge.

It was revealed that Jessica Kelley did not murder the child. Michelle Martens falsely admitted to committing the crimes. Forensic evidence revealed she and her boyfriend Fabian Gonzales were not even in the apartment at the time of the murder, they did not participate in the murder and that there was an unidentified 4th suspect in the case who committed the murder with supposedly DNA evidence found on the child’s dead body. The unidentified 4th suspect in the case is still at large.

https://www.abqjournal.com/1393384/fabian-gonzales-released-from-mdc.html

On December 5, 2019, 17-year-old Albuquerque High School Student Gisell Estrada was arrested and charged with a murder she played no part in. She was never arrested before and had absolutely no criminal record of arrest and conviction of any crime, misdemeanor nor felony. She spent 6 full days in jail on a case of “mistaken identity.” Notwithstanding the motion for detention, Estrada was released six days later after she was arrested and the charges were dismissed.

LEADING A HORSE TO WATER

As the saying goes, you can lead a horse to water, but cannot make it drink. Same goes for the APD homicide unit.

In 2019, the firm “Law Enforcement Training and Consulting Services” were retained on a three-month, sole source contract for $75,000 to train the APD homicide unit on investigations. All APD sergeants, detectives and lieutenants, who investigate and supervise violent crime investigations the time, were given the training.

A total of 126 APD personnel went through and completed the training and instructions provided by a former retired APD homicide detective now with “Law Enforcement Training and Consulting Services”. At the time of his retirement from APD, the former APD homicide detective had a 95% clearance rate, one of the highest in the country, and has been qualified as an expert witness in high profile cases on a national level.

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

There is no getting around it. It is nothing but APD case management negligence and downright embarrassing that 85 homicide cases, or a whopping 78% of the cases from last year’s 117 cases are assigned to detectives who are no longer in the homicide unit.

The statistic without a doubt is a major red flag that the homicide unit is not a police unit any detective wants to work in. Detectives are leaving the unit as quickly as possible even after they are trained. It also indicative that homicide detectives are not “owning” the cases from start to finish because they are so overwhelmed as the body count continues to rise.

FOUR YEAR NEED IGNORED BY APD DEPUTY CHIEF AND CHIEF HAROLD MEDINA

There has been at least a 4 year need for two homicide units and far more detectives to be assigned to the homicide unit. To add insult to injury APD Chief Harold Medina was made Deputy Chief in Charge of Field Services when Mayor Keller first sworn into office 4 years ago, and Medina served in that capacity until he effectively orchestrated the termination of former Chief Michael Geier to become Chief with the help of CAO Sarita Nair .

Medina has always known how bad the homicide unit has been understaffed and has failed to perform, yet Medina did little next to nothing to increase the homicide unit. What APD Chief Medina has done in just the last year is to increase his Chief’s Office command staff from the decades normal of 3 Deputy Chiefs to a total Chief’s high command staff of 10, adding 3 new Deputy Chiefs positions and creating and hiring a whole new level of APD management by creating the positions of Assistant Commanders and hiring 14 new Assistant Commanders paying them upwards of $115,000 a year. Instead of hiring 14 Assistant Commanders at upwards of $115,000 each, Medina could just as easily hired far more APD sworn APD detectives with experience. Pay for a Master Police Officer first class with 15 years and above of service is $74,297 a year under the union contract.

The link to a related blog article is here:

https://www.petedinelli.com/2022/02/07/city-apd-union-negotiate-new-contract-keller-squanders-another-opportunity-for-apd-police-reform-hourly-pay-increased-8-longevity-pay-increased-5-new-incentive-pay-created-ov/

During an October, 2019 City Council meeting, APD management said it was working on new strategies to ease the workload on APD sworn officers and homicide detectives. During the October, 2019 City Council meeting, then APD Commander of Criminal Investigations Joe Burke had this to say:

“I would say in the long term if I was looking at a long-term solution—I believe we need two homicide units. I think the best practices around the nation normally have two homicide units. Detectives should be balancing between three to five investigations and we’re nearly double that.

… We absolutely need detectives in criminal investigations. … I was happy when I went over at the end of July and was briefed on the status of the unit that there’s a plan in place within the executive staff that when cadets are graduating from the academy that we’re going to get a certain percentage specifically for the criminal investigations bureau.”

WHAT NEEDS TO BE DONE

Given the sure number of homicides from last year and the pathetic 30% homicide clearance rate, the Homicide Investigation Unit needs to be increased to at least 25 detectives. Further, given the units low clearance rate and past performance, more needs to be done with respect to recruiting and training.

APD continues to be in a crisis mode and it needs to concentrate on recruiting seasoned homicide detectives from other departments if necessary. At the very least, APD needs to ask for temporary assignment of personnel from other agencies such as the Bernalillo County Sheriff’s Department or the New Mexico State Police to help clear out the cases.

The longer a homicide case takes to complete an investigation or is neglected because of lack of personnel, the less likely the cases will be solved and prosecuted. Adding to the crisis is the emotional toll an unsolved murder takes on the families of the victims.

People want results and want to feel safe. Victims of families of those killed also want justice. Taking years not identifying, arresting and prosecuting those that killed their loved ones only prolongs their mourning and it certainly is not justice.

During the 2022 New Mexico 30-day session that ended on Thursday, February 17, the “omnibus crime bill” was passed. House Bill 68 is a complete rewrite by the Senate Judiciary Committee. The committee took a number of individual crime bills advancing during the session and consolidated them into one “omnibus crime” bill.

House Bill 68 was passed in an effort to bring down violent crime rates. The major provisions of the bill are:

1. Enhanced penalties for brandishing a firearm in the course of committing a serious crime.
2. Eliminates the six-year statute of limitations for second-degree murder.
3. Creates a new crime of operating a chop shop.
4. Increases penalties for metal theft.
5. Sets up a fund for officer retention payments at five-year intervals.
6. Increases the death benefit for a fallen officer’s family to $1 million.
7. Enables statewide funding for violence intervention programs similar to ones in Albuquerque.
8. Requires the courts to turn over GPS monitoring data to police and prosecutors during a criminal investigation to allow better tracking of pretrial defendants on electronic monitoring in an effort to prevent a charge defendant awaiting trial from committing another crime.

NEW MEXICO DISTRICT ATTORNEYS WANT LINE-ITEM VETO

New Mexico’s 14 district attorneys, though the District Attorneys Association, are urging Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham to veto part of House Bill 68 proclaiming that even before it becomes law, it is problematic for them.

Specifically, the District Attorneys object to the section of the legislation that requires the judiciary to share defendants’ GPS data with law enforcement officers when requested for a criminal investigation. The enacted House Bill 68 provides the GPS information must be shared without a warrant if there’s a “reasonable suspicion” to believe the data would provide relevant evidence. The GPS data section was a provision contained in Senate Bill 225 sponsored by Albuquerque Democrat Senator Gerald Ortiz y Pino.

The state’s prosecutors contend the proposal will narrow their access to the location data of defendants who wear an ankle monitor before trial. The District Attorneys and law enforcement argue “reasonable suspicion” makes it too difficult for them to obtain information about suspects’ recent whereabouts.

The “reasonable suspicion” language was added to HB 68 by state senators during the Senate Judiciary Committee hearing presided over by Las Cruces Democrat State Senator Joseph Cervantes who is a highly respected and experienced trial attorney.

The “reasonable suspicion” language was added after Senators questioned Albuquerque Police Department officials, including career prosecutor and former United Sates Attorney for New Mexico Damon Martinez, who is now APD’s chief policy adviser and city lobbyist and questioning court administrators.

A LETTER TO THE GOVERNOR AS DISTRICT ATTORNEYS REACT

5th Judicial District Attorney Dianna Luce , the president of New Mexico District Attorneys Association, wrote a letter to Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham, requesting that the “reasonable suspicion” language be “line item vetoed” from the bill. She wrote that the data section of the bill was written without prosecutors’ input. Luce ignored the fact that former United Sates Attorney for New Mexico Damon Martinez testified before the Senate Committee.

District Attorney Dianna Luce wrote the Governor:

“[Reasonable suspicion will delay] law enforcement’s ability to respond to a potentially life-threatening situation, such as a pretrial defendant being at a domestic violence victim’s home. … [The bill] will make the public less safe and give pretrial defendants greater opportunities to commit crime while on release.”

Luce, whose district covers southeastern New Mexico, said the data-sharing is all the more important given the Legislature’s rejection of proposals designed to keep more criminal defendants in jail while they await trial.

DISTRICT ATTORNEY TORREZ POUTS LIKE A CHILD NOT GETTING WHAT HE WANTED

Bernalillo County’s District Attorney Raul Torrez, who is now running for Attorney General, expressed no confidence with the passage of House Bill 68. According to Torrez one of the biggest disappointments was the failure to pass the pre-trial detention bill. Torrez pouted like a child after not getting what he wanted and had this to say:

“The [legislature failed] to address the problem of the revolving door, specifically with regard to some of the most violent and dangerous defendants that we’ve got. People accused of murder, sexual assault, child abuse. Individuals who have been armed with firearms. … I’m concerned that we will once again see individuals who we have sought to have detained who have been released who will then go on to commit very serious crimes.”

Torrez had this to say about the “reasonable suspicion” provision of the bill:

“The bottom line is the provision on GPS actually makes our jobs more difficult. It narrows the categories of defendants we can seek information on and it creates a privacy right for defendants who are considered to be in custody while they’re on GPS.”

SENATE JUDICIAL COMMITTEE CHAIRMAN REACTS

It was Senator Joseph Cervantes who was instrumental and the led efforts to assemble and then enact the final version of House Bill 68. Cervantes said the District Attorneys’ interpretation of the bill is simply not accurate. Senator Cervantes pointed out that without the bill, District Attorneys have had to sue to obtain GPS records for defendants they deemed violent.

The language of the bill makes it clear that a search warrant is not required. A warrant would require evidence of “probable cause” from an affiant. The “reasonable suspicion” standard was added, during committee hearings, to ensure officers have a reason for requesting the data.

Senator Cervantes put it this way:

“[Reasonable suspicion is] about the lowest standard there is to try and obtain. … All they really have to show is that it’s in connection with an ongoing investigation. … [The legislation passed] should make the information more available to law enforcement officers. …”

On February 19, Senator Joseph Cervantes responded on TWITTER to District Attorney Dianna Luce’s accusation that the data section of the bill was written without prosecutors’ input and said:

“For prosecutors to claim they had no input ignores my invitations for their written input and opportunities to speak during committee meetings. They did neither, and sat on their hands throughout. Crickets.”

https://twitter.com/senjoecervantes/status/1495105458012495873?s=10

CITY REACTION

APD Commander for Investigative Support Aaron Jones said the enacted legislation requires turning data over to law enforcement “as soon as it’s needed” and said:

“To be sure, we did not get everything we wanted … but it is a step in the right direction.”

Both APD Commander Jones and former United Sates Attorney Damon Martinez served as expert witnesses when the bill was presented. It was after they were questioned by Judiciary Committee Senators that the “reasonable suspicion” language was added to the crime bill.

REBUTABLE PRESUMPTION OF DANGEROUSNESS FOR PRE TRIAL DETENTION REVISITED

A major contributing factor for the 14 State District Attorneys to ask the Governor to veto the reasonable suspicion language in the crime bill is their dissatisfaction with the legislature’s rejection of the “pre trial detention legislation.” For that reason, a review of the the pretrial detention legislation is in oreder.

UNM STUDY OF “PRESUMPTION OF NO BAIL” CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT

It was in July, 2019 that The University of New Mexico Institute for Social Research studied and reviewed the proposal by District Attorney Raul Torrez to change by constitutional amendment the way pretrial detention is handled in New Mexico. The final report was prepared by Paul Guerin the director of UNM’s Center for Applied Research and Analysis. The study called into serious question the effectiveness and outcomes to change the way pretrial detention is handled in New Mexico thereby discrediting the arguments made by District Attorney Raul Torrez.

The UNM study found no evidence that Torrez’s proposal would improve public safety. Based on a review of cases in which a defendant was released despite the DA’s requesting detention, Guerin found that preventive detention motions filed by the District Attorney’s office did not have “substantively” improved public safety as opposed to those cases in which no detention motions were filed.

Guerin’s study report recommends that the rebuttable presumption proposal be scaled way back by saying:

“If rebuttable presumption use is limited to cases in which defendants are charged with offenses punishable by life imprisonment, and other pretrial detention decisions are left to judges’ discretion and informed by risk assessment tools like the PSA, they can ensure reputation protection [for the criminal justice system] and align with national standards without undermining public safety. ”

Guerin cited research showing that a defendant’s current charge alone does not predict involvement in future dangerous crimes. He reported that some of the offenses or statutes the DA lists in his pretrial detention proposal “are arguably questionable indicators of dangerousness.” It was noted that many of the factors are already taken into consideration by the Arnold Venture’s Public Safety Assessment, a tool judges use when deciding to detain someone.

The UNM study looked at more than 7,000 cases filed from July 2017 to August 2018 as part of the review. There were 1,500 cases that had preventive detention motions filed by the District Attorney’s Office. Of those preventive detention motions, 46% were granted and 54% were denied.

The review found no substantial differences in failure to appear and in new criminal activity rates between defendants for whom the DA did not request detention and those who were released despite the DA’s requesting detention. In all, the study found that 17% of those denied cases picked up a new charge. Only 2.9% more of those defendants in denied motions failed to appear in court, and only 2% more picked up new charges.

The UNM Institute for Social Research Study reported that the rebuttable presumptions of detention being proposed could actually jeopardize public safety in two ways:

First, limited detention resources are used on those who could be released or supervised while more dangerous defendants are released.

Second, the report found that studies show unnecessary detention can lead to higher recidivism rates if defendants lose their jobs or their homes, or suffer other disruptions because of their detentions.

LEGISLATIVE FINANCE COMMITTEE REVIEWS “REBUTTABLE PRESUMPTION OF DANGEROUSNESS”

In preparation of the 2022 legislative session, he highly influential (LFC) released a 14-page memo analysis of the proposed “rebuttable presumption of violence” system and pretrial detention. LFC analysts found that low arrest, prosecution and conviction rates have more to do with rising violent crime rates than releasing defendants who are awaiting trial.

The LFC report called into serious question if violent crime will be brought down by using a violent criminal charge to determine whether to keep someone accused of a crime in jail pending trial. According to the LFC report, rebuttable presumption is “a values-based approach, not an evidence-based one.” The LFC report said that while crime rates have increased, arrests and convictions have not. The LFC went on to say the promise of “swift and certain” justice has a more significant impact on crime rates that rebuttable presumption does not.

A major result of the Legislative Finance Committee report was that legislators rejected all “pretrial detention” legislation which would have created a “rebuttable presumption of dangerousness” for defendants charged with certain violent crimes to be held in jail pending trial . Rebuttable presumption shifted the burden of proof from state prosecutors, who must prove a case “beyond a reasonable doubt” to convict, to the defendant who would have to show they are not a danger to the public in order to be allowed to be released pending trial. The “rebuttable presumption of being violent” legislation was substituted with legislation and then incorporated in House Bill 68 and that focuses on ankle-monitoring data of defendants released from custody as they await trial.

https://www.abqjournal.com/2471031/tax-cuts-crime-package-sent-to-governor.html

https://www.abqjournal.com/2468840/pretrial-monitoring-bill-surfaces-in-house-advances-quickly.html

NO LINE-ITEM VETO AUTHORITY ON LEGISLATION WITH NO APPROPRIATIONS

The New Mexico State Constitution grants line-item veto power to the governor for “any bill appropriating money.” It is designed to enable a Governor to specifically reject funding appropriated for projects or programs.

The problem with House Bill 68 as enacted is that it contains no appropriation of funding. The “reasonable suspicion” language also has nothing to do with funding. Senator Joseph Cervantes himself has said that it is clear that House Bill 68 cannot be line-item vetoed because it doesn’t have an appropriation. Consequently, the only option Governor Lujan Grisham likely has is signing House Bill 68 into law in its entirety or vetoing it in its entirety.

Governor Spokesperson Nora Meyers Sackett had this to say:

“[The Lujan Grisham administration] will thoroughly review passed legislation and evaluate any input from stakeholders before taking action.”

The links to quoted news source material are here:

https://www.krqe.com/news/albuquerque-metro/bernco-district-attorney-shares-frustration-over-crime-legislation/

https://www.abqjournal.com/2471738/prosecutors-oppose-key-provision-in-crime-bill-ex-da-group-wants-gov.html

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

The reaction of the District Attorneys throughout the state to the “reasonable suspicion” language contained in the enacted legislation, especially that of District Attorney Raul Torrez, can only be characterized as pathetic, perhaps even “pouting” like children over not getting what they wanted in the first place. Instead of giving any effort to try and make it work, they simply want the Governor to veto it. In a real sense, their lobbying effort is an acknowledgement that they do not know how to do their jobs. They are upset with the legislature’s refusal to enact their coveted “rebuttable presumption of violence” legislation that shifted the burden of proof to defendants.

Prosecutors like Torrez are always looking for ways to blame their failures on the courts and finding ways to allow them to ignore constitutional rights that will make their job the easiest without having to go to court. This coming from supposedly trial attorneys whose primary job is to go to court. It’s obvious that the District Attorneys want to be able to conduct “fishing expeditions” on the whereabouts of any and all defendants on ankle bracelets and on any and all types of cases not just those charged with violent crimes. They do not want any court involvement as is required with “reasonable suspicion” language in the bill.

DA Torrez’s argument that the legislation “creates a privacy right for defendants” is about as bogus as it gets. The truth is that as written, no “privacy rights” are being created. What is being created is a system where prosecutors and law enforcement must give very bare minimum reasons why they want the information in the first place.

PATHETIC ACKOWLEDMENT DO NOT WANT TO GO TO COURT

It is embarrassing and downright pathetic that the New Mexico District Attorney’s want the Governor to line-item veto the “reasonable presumption provision” of HB 68. “Reasonable suspicion” is without question the lowest burden a proof there is especially in the criminal law. Unlike “probable cause”, which is evidence that makes it more likely than not that a crime has been committed and required in search and arrest warrants, “reasonable suspicion” can be established with hearsay, even hearsay on hearsay, opinions and speculation.

District Attorneys like Torrez could not care less that the line-item veto request could easily place in jeopardy the entire HB 68 in that Governor just may decide to veto the entire bill. If the Governor does indeed line-item veto the provisions of the legislation the District Attorneys object to, it would likely wind up in court for the New Mexico Supreme Court to decide. In the past, law makers have been very successful in challenging line-item vetoes of past Governor’s. Given the fact that the “reasonable suspicion” language involves the courts, it’s likely the Courts will want the lower courts to have some degree of review and set aside the line-item veto.

FINAL COMMENTARY

The failure of the pretrial detention legislation no doubt was disappointing, but enactment of House Bill 68 was a far more realistic approach and will likely have a bigger impact on improving the criminal justice system and reducing crime.

Governor Lujan Grisham would be wise to just to ignore the whining and complaining of the District Attorneys, especially that of Raul Torrez, sign the legislation and get on with her efforts to get elected to a second term.

On February 17, the 2022 New Mexico Legislature 30 day legislative session came to an end at 12:00 noon referred to officially as “sine die.”

At it concluded, the 2022 New Mexico Legislative session approved an $8.48 billion state budget, the largest budget in state history. The budget bill boosts state spending by $1 billion, nearly 14%, over current budget levels. The enacted budget includes increases in spending for public education, raises for educators, state employees and state police as well as funds going towards initiatives for local economic development projects and housing programs for homeless people.

The enacted budget was the result of a Senate and House Conference Committee that worked out the final details of the budget. The Conference Committee report was introduced and heard in both Senate and House Chambers with the committee report adopted in both chambers. The enacted budget now goes to Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham for signature, but subject to line-item vetoes.

HIGHLIGHTS OF ENACTED BUGET

The newly enacted budget relies on the windfall in state government income from record surpluses from oil and production royalties and federal pandemic aid. The major highlights of the enacted 2022-2023 enacted budget are as follows:

Annual spending on K-12 grade public education is increased by $425 million to $3.87 billion, a 12% boost.

Starting July 1, the base pay for teachers will rise to $50,000, $60,000 and $70,000 depending on the level of a teacher. According to a fiscal impact report, New Mexico’s average teacher salary was just under $55,000 a year. That’s lower than Colorado, Texas and Utah, but higher than Arizona and Oklahoma.

https://www.kob.com/albuquerque-news/nm-teacher-pay-increase-bill-heads-to-governors-desk-after-unanimous-house-vote/6393826/

On teacher pay, legislators approved a measure to allow Indigenous language teachers to be paid at the same rate as their peers, even if they don’t have an undergraduate degree. For Native American language teachers paid as teaching assistants in many districts, their salaries could triple.

Significant salary increases for judges is provided. The bill calls for a state Supreme Court justice to be paid in line with federal magistrates, or about $205,000 a year, a 33% raise of what justices makes now. Appeals and District Court judges would see similar increases because their salaries are set as percentages of what higher-ranking justices or judges make.

https://www.abqjournal.com/2470385/proposal-to-boost-judicial-pay-on-its-way-to-governor.html

Annual Medicaid spending is increase by roughly $240 million to $1.3 billion as the federal government winds down pandemic-related subsidies to the program that gives free health care to the impoverished.

The budget contains salary increases of 7% for school districts and state government staff across the state. A minimum hourly wage of $15 for public employees and higher base salaries for teachers is provided.

The salaries for state police is increased by nearly 16%.

The enacted budget extends free college tuition to most New Mexico residents pursuing two- and four-year degrees. $75 million is allocated to the “opportunity scholarship” program, providing free tuition and fees for New Mexico residents. Unlike the existing lottery scholarship, it would be open to adults long after high school graduation and could be used for part-time course loads.

The enacted budget fully funds home-based care for thousands of people who have had severe disabilities since childhood.

The budget underwrites new intervention programs aimed at curbing gun violence.

Pregnancy-related Medicaid coverage is extended for a year afterbirths, up from two months, by spending $14 million. Most births in New Mexico are covered by Medicaid.

The budget bill funds an initiative from the governor to establish a training academy for the film industry run by a consortium of existing state colleges and universities.

The new budget provides $650,000 to found a climate change bureau as the state expands the regulation of greenhouse gas emissions.

$1 Million in funding is provided to the Regulation & Licensing Department for cannabis control program operations.

$500,000 funding is provided for the crime victims reparation commission.

https://www.kob.com/new-mexico-news/new-mexico-lawmakers-hammer-out-state-budget/6395640/?cat=500

https://www.abqjournal.com/2470767/lawmakers-strike-tenuous-budget-deal-as-adjournment-looms.html

BUDGET FUNDING THAT FAILED

The final budget that made it oui of the conference committee, made up of House and Senate members, also eliminated funding. The conference committee eliminated $125 million for hydrogen hub tax credits and gave $50 million of that to broadband partnerships instead.

The unused hydrogen money will be used to increase reserves to more than 29%.

The conference committee also deleted budget language making law enforcement officer recruitment bonuses contingent on passage of a broad crime package.

Two items that also failed to make it onto the conference report include an item that would have appropriated $30 million dollars from the general fund for expansion of health care delivery systems and rural health care delivery systems in the Human Services Department as well as funding to New Mexico State University for soil and water conservation.

The links to related and quoted news sources are here:

https://www.krqe.com/news/politics-government/legislature/new-mexico-legislators-approve-1b-state-spending-increase/

$827 PUBLIC WORKS BILL PASSED

The 2022 New Mexico legislature enacted Senate Bill 212, a $827.7 million public works projects package. The capital outlay bill includes $4.5 million for improvements at the State Fairgrounds in Albuquerque and $20 million for construction of a new New Mexico Veterans’ Home in Truth or Consequences. The bill includes money for school repairs, watershed restoration efforts and the construction of a new state government building. The total dollar amount represents more than 3,600 different projects around the state.

A separate bill funds $259 million in projects for higher education institutions, senior centers and libraries.

https://www.abqjournal.com/2470579/senate-votes-30-0-to-approve-827-million-public-works-package.html

Major public works projects included in the $827.7 million public works Senat Bill 212 include:

$75 million from the public-school capital outlay fund to the public-school facilities to make a distribution to each school district in fiscal year 2023 for the maintenance and repair of public-school buildings. This is the single largest line

$20 million for new administration building for the Department of Public Safety in Albuquerque.

$20 million to update the Veterans’ Home at T or C. The Governor had originally requested $60 million.

$4.5 million for state fair improvements.

$3,280,000 to purchase and equip a helicopter for the sheriff’s office in San Juan county.

$3,000,000 to plan, design and reconstruct the Paolo Soleri Amphitheater at the Santa Fe Indian School.

$300,000 to plan, design and construct street improvements, including intersection safety improvements, pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure and traffic calming devices, throughout senate district 16 in Albuquerque represented by Democrat Senator Antoinette Sedillo Lopez.

$25,000 to plan, design and construct a memorial commemorating lives lost to the coronavirus disease pandemic in Albuquerque. Future generations will take note.

$6,000 to purchase an enclosure for an excavator for the acequia de Arriba in Taos county.

https://nmlegis.gov/Sessions/22%20Regular/bills/senate/SB0212FCS.pdf
https://www.krqe.com/news/politics-government/legislature/new-mexico-legislators-approve-1b-state-spending-increase/

CRIME PACKAGE PASSES

House Bill 68 passed and it enhances some criminal penalties and offers retention bonuses to experienced police officers at certain stages of their career. House Bill 68 calls for increased criminal penalties for violent felons found to be in possession of a firearm. It includes a sentencing enhancement for individuals convicted of possessing a gun during aggravated burglary or drug deals. The firearms in question could also be subject to seizure and forfeiture under the proposed legislation. It also creates a crime of making a threat of violence targeted at schools or other public places. It would also require the judiciary to share ankle monitor data for pretrial defendants with law enforcement if needed for an investigation, among other provisions.

House Bill 68 includes efforts to expand police training and oversight, with funding for alternatives to traditional prosecution and incarceration. New Mexico would overhaul police training and oversight, hire more state district judges, and enhance criminal penalties for threatening a judge and for certain felons in possession of a firearm.

Legislators rejected “pretrial detention bill which would have created a “rebuttable presumption of dangerousness” for defendants charged with certain violent crimes. The rebuttable presumption bill shifted the burden of proof from state prosecutors, who must prove a case “beyond a reasonable doubt” to convict, to the defendant who would have to show they are not a danger to the public in order to be allowed to be released pending trial. The crime bill instead expands surveillance of criminal defendants as they await trial, with 24-hour monitoring of ankle-bracelet tracking devices.

https://www.abqjournal.com/2471031/tax-cuts-crime-package-sent-to-governor.html

TAX PACKAGE PASSES

The tax cut legislation House Bill 163 passed both the House and Senate. The tax relief package slightly reduce gross receipts taxes on sales and services by a paultry 0.25%, eliminate taxes on Social Security income for individuals earning $100,000 or less, and provide a per-child tax credit of up to $175 to parents. More than the $400 million set aside for tax changes in the budget bill.
House Bill 163, reduces the state’s gross receipts tax rate by 0.25% and exempts Social Security retirement income from taxation up to a certain income amount.

House Bill 163 includes a $250 tax rebate for all New Mexico adults who make less than $75,000 annually. Married couples filing jointly with an adjusted gross income of less than $150,000 per year would get a $500 tax rebate. An annual income tax credit of up to $175 per child is also included.

https://www.abqjournal.com/2471031/tax-cuts-crime-package-sent-to-governor.html

“BUY NEW MEXICO” BILL 39 PASSES

Senate Bill 39 aimed at increasing New Mexico businesses’ standing for bidding preference and boosting Native American and veteran-owned businesses also passed.

The highlights of Senate Bill 39 are as follows:

Increase the bidding preference of New Mexico businesses seeking state and local government contracts from 5% to 8%.

Allow Native American businesses operating on tribal land to qualify as certified New Mexico resident businesses and receive the same bidding preference as other in-state companies.

Renew the 10% bidding preference for certified New Mexico resident veteran businesses.

Double the annual revenues cap for New Mexico veteran-owned businesses receiving the 10% bidding preference from revenues of $3 million to revenues of $6 million.

PAYDAY LOAN INTEREST RATES LOWERED

In consumer protection efforts, the 2022 Legislature enacted a bill caps annual interest rates on storefront loans at 36%, down from the very oppressive 175%. As a concession to the payday loan industry, a fee of 5% can be charged on loans of up to $500, and the maximum size of an installment loan is doubled to $10,000.

https://www.abqjournal.com/2365015/senate-approves-bill-lowering-nm-loan-interest-rate-cap.html

LEGISLATION THAT FAILED

There were 3 major legislation initiatives that Governor Lujan Grisham actively supported that failed: pretrial detention, the hydrogen development act and the voting right bill.

PRETRIAL DETENTION

The controversial “Pre Trial Detention”, with versions introduced ib both the House and Senate, failed to pass either chamber. The proposal was backed by Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham, 2nd Judicial District Attorney Raúl Torrez and Albuquerque Mayor Tim Keller leaving all 3 of them looking somewhat foolish being unable to secure passage of the bill. Both Torrez and Keller went out of their way to testify in committees supporting the bill and lobby for passage.

Supporters of the bill, including families of those killed, said the legislation would be a commonsense step toward reducing crime. They argued it would keep dangerous offenders behind bars until trial and ensure they don’t commit new offenses. Opponents of the bill, especially the New Mexico Defense bar, challenged the the constitutionality of the proposal and said it would do little to reduce New Mexico’s violent crime rates.

Links to news sources are here:

https://www.krqe.com/news/politics-government/legislature/high-profile-pretrial-detention-proposal-moving-slowly/

https://www.abqjournal.com/2468188/pretrial-detention-bill-blocked-by-senate-committee.html

The pretrial detention legislation would have created a “rebuttable presumption of dangerousness” for defendants charged with certain violent crimes. Under current state law, prosecutors are required to convince a judge in an evidentiary hearing that a charged defendant poses and immediate threat of violence to the public and to hold the defendant in jail until trial and not allow bond. The rebuttable presumption bill shifted the burden of proof from state prosecutors, who must prove a case “beyond a reasonable doubt” to convict, to the defendant who would have to show they are not a danger to the public in order to be allowed to be released pending trial. As written the bill was likely “unconstitutional” and violated the presumption of innocence until proven guilty.

On January 20, the influential Legislative Finance Committee (LFC) released a 14-page memo analysis of the proposed “rebuttable presumption of violence” system and pretrial detention. LFC analysts found that low arrest, prosecution and conviction rates have more to do with rising violent crime rates than releasing defendants who are awaiting trial. The LFC report called into serious question if violent crime will be brought down by using a violent criminal charge to determine whether to keep someone accused of a crime in jail pending trial. According to the LFC report, rebuttable presumption is “a values-based approach, not an evidence-based one.” The LFC report said that while crime rates have increased, arrests and convictions have not. The LFC went on to say the promise of “swift and certain” justice has a more significant impact on crime rates that rebuttable presumption does not.

The link to a related blog article is here:

https://www.petedinelli.com/2022/01/24/legislative-finance-committee-report-pretrial-detention-does-not-lower-crime-arrest-prosecution-and-sentencing-lowers-crime/

HYDROGEN HUB DEVELOPMENT ACT

The Hydrogen Hub Development Act failed after two separate bills went down to defeat and died in committee. The original Hydrogen Hub Development Act was tabled on a bipartisan 6-4 vote last month in the House Energy, Environment and Natural Resources Committee after aggressive opposition from environmental organizations. A second substitute bill was offered and it to was withdrawn.

The link to quoted news source material is here:

https://www.abqjournal.com/2468170/revived-nm-hydrogen-bill-pulled-back-amid-criticism.html

The Hydrogen Hub Development Act would have created a legal framework for hydrogen energy development in the state. Lujan Grisham Administration government officials and the oil and gas industry argued that the development of the state’s hydrogen can provide a tool for the transition to a clean energy economy. Supporters argued that hydrogen has many potential applications as a relatively clean-burning fuel that doesn’t emit carbon dioxide. Governor Lujan Grisham promoted the bill as a way to significantly boost efforts to lower carbon emissions in New Mexico while at the same time creating a whole new industry that offers sustainable, high-paying jobs. Environmentalists strenuously spoke out against it, citing widespread fear that promoting and accelerating hydrogen development with government incentives would hurt, rather than help, state efforts to combat climate change. Environmentalists argue that large-scale hydrogen production would do little to lower carbon emissions, perhaps make them worse, because hydrogen is made with natural gas that has a huge amount of carbon dioxide.

The link to a related blog article is here:

https://www.petedinelli.com/2022/01/26/hydrogen-hub-development-act-introduced-the-pros-and-cons-consequences-of-getting-it-wrong-are-too-dire-hold-special-session-on-environmental-issues-and-hb4-or-hold-over-until/

VOTING RIGHTS BILL DIES

Senate Bill 144, the voting right bill, failed to be enacted by the Senate after passage in the House. Der Führer Trump Republican Senator William Sharer, R-Farmington, effectively killed the measure with a filibuster on the Senate floor. In order to run out the clock on the legislative session, Sharer talked about San Juan River fly-fishing, baseball rules, Navajo Code Talkers and the celestial alignment of the sun and moon during his lengthy filler buster on the Senate floor.

The bill would have done the following:

1. Established a permanent absentee voter list.

2. Allowed voters to sign up once to receive absentee ballots for every general election, rather than having to apply for one each time.

3. Established a Native American voting rights act.

4. Directed counties to offer two secured, monitored drop boxes for absentee ballots.

5. Made it a crime to threaten or intimidate state and county election officials.

6. Restored the voting rights of people convicted of a felony upon release from incarceration, rather than after they’ve completed probation or parole.

Senate Bill 144 was sponsored by Albuquerque area Democrat Senator Katy Duhigg, a former Albuquerque city clerk in charge of elections, and Corrales Area Democrat Representative Daymon Ely. Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham a d Secretary of State Maggie Toulouse Oliver had made its passage a priority.

https://www.abqjournal.com/2471195/voting-bill-dies-as-30-day-session-comes-to-an-end.html

HOUSE SPEAKER BRIAN EGOLF ANNOUNCES RETIREMENT

In a surprise and unexpected announcement, New Mexico House Speaker Brian Egolf, D-Santa Fe, announced at the conclusion of the 2022 New Mexico Legislative Session, that he will not run for reelection this year for his District 47 seat. Speaker Egolf told the House of Representatives shortly before noon and the end of the session:

“This is the last time I will speak to you from this rostrum during the conclusion of a regular legislative session. … It’s time to put my young family first. … Neither District 47 or the [House] leadership belong to me. I will always count you as my colleagues but also, more importantly, as my friends.””

Egolf, 45, who has served as speaker since 2017, is considered one of the most influential politicians in New Mexico, as well as a vocal leader of progressive wing of the state’s Democratic Party. Speaker Egolf is an experiences and respected civil rights attorney. Members of the House stood and applauded Egolf as the session came to an end.

A new House speaker will be chosen next January.

The link to quoted news source material is here:

https://www.santafenewmexican.com/news/legislature/house-speaker-egolf-announces-retirement-as-session-closes/article_86a1355a-9024-11ec-82a8-2be089534442.html

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

Given the sure magnitude of the historic $8.48 budget enacted as well as the massive $827 public works bill enacted, the 30 day 2022 legislative session can be declared a success. The failure to pass the voting rights act was disappointing. Some would say the failure of the pretrial detention legislation was disappointing , but other anti-crime legislation passed and a more realistic approach is being taken to improve the criminal justice system. The failure of the hydrogen industry legislation should come as a shock to anyone given the complexity of the legislation and considering it in a 30 session was a bad fit from the get go.

Now on to the 2022 mid term elections.

For a third year in a row, over half of the top 250 wages earners at Albuquerque City Hall are APD sworn police officers in the ranks of police officer first class, senior police officer 1st class, master police officer 1st class, sergeant and lieutenant. All earn between $113,126.08 to $199,414.69 a year, all are paid hourly wages for 40-hour work week and all are paid time and a half for overtime pay. Police officers first class, senior police officers 1st class, master police officers 1st class, sergeants and lieutenant are all members of the APD police union, they are classified employees and can only be terminated for cause. The amounts paid are two and a half times and at times 3 times more than their base yearly hourly pay primarily because of overtime pay which has been the subject of abuse and scandal in the past, including time card fraud.

This blog article is a deep dive analysis of the top 250 wage earners at city hall and the extent of the wages paid to APD top personnel.

APD BUDGET AND PERSONNEL

The Albuquerque Police Department (APD) is the largest budget department in the city. APD’s approved general fund operating 2022 budget is upwards of $222 million, or roughly 4.5% higher than fiscal year 2021 existing levels. Ultimately, the City Council approved nearly all the APD funding the Keller Administration requested in the budget proposal submitted on April 1, 2021.

APD’s funding is for 1,100 sworn positions and 592 civilian support positions for a total of 1,692 full-time positions. It also includes funding for new positions, including 11 investigators to support internal affairs and the department’s reform obligations under the Federal Court Approved Settlement Agreement and two communications staffers. Notwithstanding being fully funded for 1,100 full time sworn police, APD has only 917 full time sworn officers.

On December 12, during a federal court hearing on the Department of Justice consent decree, APD reported that as of December 6, 2021 APD’s staffing levels are as follows:

Full Sworn Officer Count: 917

1 APD Chief
1 Superintendent Of Police Reform
1 Deputy Superintendent Of Police Reform
6 Deputy Chiefs
1 Chief of Staff
12 Commanders
14 Deputy Commanders
44 Lieutenants
113 Sergeants
731 Patrol Officers
2 Sworn CSA’s

The positions of 44 Lieutenants, 113 Sergeants and 731 Patrol Officers, for a total of 888 staffing are all covered by the police union contract.

NEW APD CONTRACT NEGOTIATED

On February 7, it was reported that the Mayor Tim Keller’s administration negotiated a new police union contract making APD the best paid law enforcement agency in the region by increasing hourly wages and longevity pay and creating a whole new category of “incentive pay”. Under the new contract, APD’s starting wage is well above cities and law enforcement agencies of comparable size including Tucson, Arizona, $54,517, and El Paso, Texas, $47,011. The new APD contract keeps APD starting wages slightly higher than the New Mexico State Police.

On February 9, APOA police union attorney Fred Mower told Federal Judge James Browning that the contract signed contains the identical terms and conditions of the contract that expired on June 30, 2020. According to Mower, the only terms that changed were the negotiated hourly pay for sworn police officers that are in the collective bargaining unit.

The police union contract containing the pay increases was signed on December 30, 2021. The 48-page APOA police “Collective Bargaining Agreement” (CBA) is for 1 year and 6 months period. It is effective January 1, 2022 through June 30, 2023.

The new CBA can be down loaded as a PDF file at this link:

https://www.cabq.gov/humanresources/documents/apoa-jul-9-2016.pdf/view

RANK AND FILE PAY UNDER NEW UNION CONTRACT

“Rank and File” police officers are generally recognized as sworn police officers under the rank of sergeant. These are the sworn police officers that do the heavy lifting of police work responding to 911 calls for service and who patrol the streets of the city.

Under the new police union contract, following is what rank and file sworn officers will paid:

Police Officer 1/C (first class) with 2 TO 4 YEAR SERVICE under new contract goes from $60,320 TO $68,411.20 a year.

Pay for Senior Police Officer 1/c (first class) with 5 To 14 YEAR SERVICE under new contract goes from $62,400 to $70,761 a year.

Pay for a Master Police Officer 1/c (first class) with 15 years and above of service goes FROM $65,520 TO $74,297 A YEAR.

SARGEANT AND LIEUTENANT PAID HOURLY

Under the APD collective bargaining contract, the management positions of sergeants and lieutenant are allowed to join the police union in violation of state law. For that reason, the union has the authority to negotiate with the city hourly wages for sergeants and lieutenant. Following are the hourly wage increases negotiated under the new contract:

SARGEANT PAY UNDER THE NEW UNION CONTRACT GOING FROM $72,800 TO $82,533 A YEAR

From January 1, 2022 to June 30, 2022 hourly pay for APD Sergeants under the new contract goes from $35 an hour or $72,800 a year to $37.80 an hour or $78,624 until June 30, 2022, the end of the fiscal year. Pay for APD Sergeants under the new contract then increases from July 1, 2022 to June 30, 2023 to $39.69 an hour or $82,555.20 a year until the expiration of the union contract on June 30, 2023.

LIEUTENANT PAY UNDER NEW UNION CONTRACT GOING FROM $83,200 TO $94,348 A YEAR

Hourly pay for Lieutenants goes under the new contract from $40 an hour or $83,200 yearly from January 1, 2022 to June 30, 2022 to $43.20 an hour or $89,866 yearly until June 30, 2022, the end of the fiscal year. From July 1, 2022 to June 30, 2023 Lieutenants pay under the new contract will be increased to $45.36 an hour or $94,348.60 a year until the expiration of the contract on June 30, 2023.

OVERTIME PAY

Under the union contract, sworn police are entitled to overtime compensation at the rate of time-and-one-half of their regular straight-time rate when they perform work in excess of forty (40) hours in any one workweek. Time worked over 40 hours per week is compensated at time and a half of the officer’s regular rate of pay, or in the form of “compensatory time.”

There is no contract provision placing a cap on the amount of overtime any officer can be paid. Compensatory time is the award of hours as already worked to be paid and is calculated at the rate of 1-1/2 times the hours actually worked. The maximum accrual of comp time for any officer is 150 hours.

During the last 10 years, the Albuquerque Police Department has consistently gone over its overtime budgets by millions. In fiscal year 2016, APD was funded for $9 million for over time but APD actually spent $13 million. A March, 2017 city internal audit of APD’s overtime spending found police officers “gaming the system” that allows them to accumulate excessive overtime at the expense of other city departments. A city internal audit report released in March, 2017 revealed that the Albuquerque Police Department spent over $3.9 million over its $9 million “overtime” budget.

https://www.petedinelli.com/2018/03/30/apd-overtime-pay-abuse-and-recruitment-tool/

LISTING OF 250 TOP PAID CITY HALL EMPLOYEES

At the beginning of each calendar year, City Hall releases the top 250 wage earners for the previous year. The list of 250 top city hall wages earners is what is paid for the full calendar year of January 1, to December 31 of any given year. The 2019, 2020 and 2021 city hall 250 highest paid wage earnings reveals the extent of the staggering amount of overtime paid to APD Sergeants and Lieutenants. All sworn police officers from patrol officer first class up and through the rank of lieutenanat are classified employees, can only be terminated for cause, are paid time and a half for overtime in excess of 40 hours a week worked and and are union members.

For both the years of 2019 and 2020, 160 of 250 top paid city hall employees were police who were paid between $107,885.47 to $199,666.40.

For the calendar year of 2021, 126 of the top 250 city hall wage earners were sworn police officers ranging from the rank of patrol officer 1st class to the rank of Lieutenant.

In 2019, there were 70 APD patrol officers in the list of 250 top paid employees earning pay ranging from $108,167 to $188,844. There were 32 APD lieutenants and 32 APD sergeants in the list of 250 top paid employees earning pay ranging from $108,031 to $164,722 because of overtime.

In 2020, there were 69 patrol officers paid between $110,680 to $176,709. There were 28 APD Lieutenants and 32 APD Sergeants who were paid between $110,698 to $199,001 in the list of the 250 top paid city hall employees paid between.

https://www.petedinelli.com/2021/08/16/state-auditor-brian-colon-foolish-saying-his-audit-on-apd-overtime-abuse-will-result-in-100-compliance-160-police-union-members-made-between-110000-to-200000-in-2019-and-2020-because-of-overt/

The lopsided number of APD sworn police officers listed in the top 250 paid city hall employees is directly attributed to the excessive amount of overtime paid to sworn police officers. A comparison of pay between APD sworn, pay to APD Chief Executive Staff and pay to the Mayor’s Executive Staff and Department Director’s for the year 2021 reveals a tremendous disparity.

APD CHIEF EXECUTIVE COMMAND STAFF

Eight of 10 APD Chief executive command staff are listed in the top 250 city wage earners. All 8 of the positions are considered “at will employees” and serve at the pleasure of Mayor Keller and are not paid overtime. All 8 are reported to have a received a pay increase upwards of 8% beginning January 1, 2022.

Following are the 8 with pay listed for the full 2021 calendar year:

Medina, Harold, Police Chief Of Police, $177,562.68
Smathers, Michael Jay, 1st Deputy Chief, $149,881.56
Garcia, Eric, 2nd Deputy Chief, $147,444.20
Barker, Cecily, Deputy Chief, $147,201.70
Griego, Jon J , Deputy Chief $144,228.47
Brown, Joshua Deputy Chief, $134,608.38
Lowe, Cori Deputy Chief, $128,409.85
Stanley, Sylvester, Superintendent of Police Reform/DCAO , $123,219.28 (8 months with city and retired and the end of 2021)

APD SWORN PERSONNEL PAID BETWEEN $130,000 TO OVER $199,000 in 2021

There are a total 109 sworn police officers on the list up through the rank of Lieutenant. This does not include sworn officers who are on the list and who have retired. There are a total of 27 Sergeants and 30 Lieutenants listed in the top 250 city wage earners for 2021 still working for APD. There are a total 52 sworn police officers in the ranks of Police Officer First Class, Senior Police Officer and Master Police Officer in the listing of the top 250 top city wage earners for 2021 who are still working for APD.

All 109 sworn police officers on the list up through the rank of Lieutenant have now received 8% or more hourly pay raises under the new contract terms starting January 1, 2022, This means with the new pay and with overtime they will likely be paid even more in 2023 if they continue with working the same level of overtime.

The listing of APD sworn personnel between the ranks of Senior Police Officer and Lieutenant paid by the hour between $130,000 to over $199,000 in 2021 are as follows:

Johnson,Brian APD-Police Sergeant, $199,414.69
Hernandez,Michael, Police Sergeant, $185,941.82
Hernandez,Armando F., PD-Police Sergeant, $162,236.73
Martinez,Dominic , Police Sergeant, $160,268.28
Richards,Joshua R., Police Sergeant, $160,237.57
Price,Bryan HPD-Police Lieutenant, $159,692.06
Greco,Raymond , Police Lieutenant, $157,161.06
Pearson,Nicholas, Police Master Police Officer 1C, $152,957.36
Lopez,Daniel, Police Sergeant, $152,758.37
Hunt,Justin, Police Sergeant, $151,470.59
Arnold,Jerry, Senior Police Officer 1C, $151,123.03
Molina,SonnyPD- Police Sergeant, $149,771.53
Martinez,Marisa, Senior Police Officer 1C, $149,488.84
Feist,Andrew, Master Police Officer 1C, $148,884.44
Deyapp,Lena, Police Lieutenant, $147,563.29
Edison,Jim APD-Police Lieutenant, $147,315.91
Pholphiboun,Phetamphone, Police Sergeant, $147,155.35
Rico,Michael, Police Sergeant, $146,470.80
Solis,Brenda, Senior Police Officer 1C, $145,882.69
Ruiz,Luis, Police Officer 1C, $142,431.13
Saladin,David , Police Lieutenant, $141,845.27
McCarson,Timothy, Police Senior Police Officer 1C, $139,571.76
Champine,Daniel, Master Police Officer 1C, $139,238.67
Shook,Michael B., 1Senior Police Officer 1C, $138,802.93
Frick,Sean, Police Lieutenant, $136,920.10
Apodaca,Timothy, Police Lieutenant, $136,227.46
Kimminau,Randall, Police Officer 1C, $135,920.62
Chavez,Matthew, Police Lieutenant, $135,858.78
Valentino,Gregory Allen, Police Officer, 1C, $135,246.58
Breeden,Charles , Master Police Officer 1C, $134,647.93
Schmidt,Matthew , Police Sergeant, $133,854.45
Rogillio,Justin, Senior Police Officer 1C, $132,497.53
Nicko,Troy, Police Sergeant, $132,170.74
Keeling,Christopher, Senior Police Officer 1C, $131,485.32
Juarez,Terra, PoliceSergeant, $130,638.78
Trebitowski,Justin, Police Lieutenant, $130,280.30
Moore,Douglas , Police Sergeant, $130,193.67
Martinez,Herman, Master Police Officer 1C, $129,987.36
Nelson,Ryan, Police Sergeant, $129,942.70
Porlas,Dwight , Master Police Officer 1C, $129,753.10
Duda,Christopher, Police Officer 1C, $129,693.17
Swessel,Robert, Master Police Officer 1C, $128,817.64
Patterson,Christopher APD-Police Lieutenant, $128,483.46
Herbst,Zachary, Senior Police Officer 1C, $128,341.36
Meyer,Jesse, Master Police Officer 1C, $128,321.49
Walsh,Stephen, Master Police Officer 1C, $127,826.29
Meisinger,Michael, Police Lieutenant, $ 127,404.60
Legendre,Roger, Police Lieutenant, $127,259.76
Sanchez,Jason, Police Lieutenant, $127,107.37
McElroy,Matthew, Police Lieutenant, $126,731.47
Landavazo,Mark, Police Lieutenant, $126,294.15
Franklin,Daniel, Master Police Officer 1C, $126,289.76

The full listing of all APD Sworn Police Officers paid between $113,126.08 to $125,856.93 and appearing in the top paid 250 city hall employees can be found in the postscript below.

CITY HALL EXECUTIVE STAFF AND DEPARMENT DIRECTORS LISTED IN TOP 250 WAGE EARNERS

According to the 2021 enacted budget, the City of Albuquerque employs 6,259 full time employees with an annual budget of $1.2 Billion dollars. The link to the enacted 2021-2022 budget is here:

https://www.cabq.gov/dfa/documents/fy22-approved-budget-numbered-w-hyperlinks-final.pdf

Mayor Tim Keller is paid $125,278.72 a year and Albuquerque City Councilors are paid $35,860 a year with their salaries determined by the Citizens’ Independent Salary Commission.

City Executives and Department Directors are considered “at will” employees and serve at the pleasure of Mayor Keller. There are 26 city departments. There are 30 City Hall Executive Positions and Department Directors identified in the top 250 wage earners for the 2021 calendar year. Each are paid a set salary they can negotiate or they take whatever is offered by the mayor. When Keller was first elected 4 years ago, beginning pay for Department Directors was approximately $116,000 but over the last 4 years, the pay has increase to roughly $130,000 a year.

These executives are not eligible for time and a half overtime pay and are required to work whatever hours deem necessary during the week to carry out their duties. Department Director’s duties and responsibilities include management of all personnel assigned to the department and managing budgets usually in the millions.

Executive salaries and Department Directors individuals and what they were paid in 2021 are as follows:

MAYOR’S SENIOR STAFF

Nair,SaritaCA-Chief Administrative Office Chief Admin Officer, $196,773.12
Rael,Lawrence DCA-Chief Administrative Office Chief Operations Officer, $191,600.30
Aguilar Jr,Esteban , City Attorney, $150,724.32
Bhakta,SanjayFA-Finance Admin Svc Chief Financial Officer, $150,224.31
Sourisseau,Kevin JCA-Chief Administrative Office Associate CAO, $130,261.91
Puelle,Michael Chief Administrative Office Chief of Staff, $139,445.91

DEPARTMENT DIRECTORS AND DEPUTY DIRECTORS

Osterloh,Brian ATI-Technology and Innovation Director, $144,118.55
DiMenna,Mark, Environmental Health, Deputy Director, $132,786.87
Leech,Mark TTI-Technology and Innovation Deputy Director, $135,419.97
Simon,David, Parks and Recreation Director, $135,204.31
Ortega,Carolyn, Animal Welfare Director, $130,549.91
Martinez,Jennifer Renee, Finance Admin Svc Director, $130,041.12
Pierce,Carol MFC-Family Community Services Director, $130,041.12
Martinez,Jennifer Renee, -Finance Admin Svc Director, $130,041.12
Montoya,Charles PMD-Municipal Development Director, $130,041.11
Daniel,Christopher Finance Admin., Chief Investment Officer, $128,545.11
Whelan,Matthew Solid Waste Director, $124,877.92
Watson,Ethan , City Clerk, $124,877.91
VanEtten de Sanchez,MaryCS, Cultural Services Director, $124,877.91
Romero,Anthony RHR-Human Resources Director, $122,747.91
Sandoval,Donna, City Controller, $125,989.90
Sanchez,Anna, Senior Affairs Director, $124,877.90
Rogers,Paul JMD-Municipal Development Deputy Director/DMD, $123,362.71
Varela,Alan, Municipal Development Deputy Director, $123,180.37
Stowell,StephanieCS-Cultural ServicesE20BioPark Administrator, $122,468.86
Flores,David MPR-Parks and Recreation Deputy Director-Parks & Rec, $118,959.95
McCurley,RichardAV-Aviation Deputy Director Aviation, $118,005.92
Smith,Dean PCS-Cultural ServicesE19Assoc Director Library, $116,776.07
Davis,Lawrence LFA-Finance Admin SvcE20City Budget Officer, $116,733.91
Truong,Loc THR-Human ResourcesE20Deputy Director/HR, $113,739.92

SPECIAL AUDIT RESULTS RECALLED

Over 6 months ago, on August 6, 2021, New Mexico State Auditor Brian Colon released a long-awaited special audit report on overtime abuse by the Albuquerque Police Department (APD). The 64-page audit was performed by the Albuquerque accounting firm Porch & Associates LLC. The audit covers the time period of January 1, 2018 to June 30, 2020. The link to the entire 64-page audit report is here:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1sIsbWAGpIC2mDFs8bsbQ1BhYDOSXH8Ig/view

The audit was the 7th audit performed on APD overtime practices since 2014. The audit includes the second term of previous Republican Richard Berry and the first 2 ½ years of Democrat Mayor Tim Keller’s 4-year term. The 6 prior audits resulted in 17 findings and recommendation made. There was an absolute failure by APD command staff to carry out and implement the changes needed to solve the overtime problem. The released audit identified that certain APD police union contract terms and conditions are in violations of the Federal Labor Fair Standards act and that the police union contract has contributed significantly to the overtime pay abuse by rank-and-file police officers.

The links to quoted news source material are here:

https://www.krqe.com/news/politics-government/audit-makes-recommendations-for-apd-overtime-policies-practices/

https://www.koat.com/article/albuquerque-police-department-audited-for-overtime-pay-for-7th-time/37248257

https://www.kob.com/albuquerque-news/audit-apd-continues-to-abuse-overtime/6199260/?cat=500

SPECIAL AUDIT REPORT HIGHLIGHTS FAILURES TO DEAL WITH OVERTIME ABUSE

The Porch & Associates Audit identifies the major failures of APD dealing with overtime abuse. Those failures are:

1. The failure of APD supervisors to properly monitor and pre-approve officer overtime. There is a lack of internal controls for leave requests. The special audit specifically named now-former police officer and APD Spokesman Simon Drobik. Last year a separate APD Internal Affairs investigation found he had committed rampant fraud.

2. As examples of fraud committed, the review of leave requests found that there was no record of leave request forms for one officer. In another instance an APD employee utilized system software to approve their own time resulting in over $8,000 dollars in overtime. Whether the time claimed was actually worked is unknown. In another instance, an officer submitted and was compensated for being “On call Status” 581 times in 2018. During those 51 weeks the officer worked 207 Chief’s Overtime Assignments.

3. The overtime practice where officers who are on vacation or paid time off can use those hours as the basis for claiming overtime pay. The audit was clear that “parts of the APOA collective bargaining agreement (CBA) that allow for excess overtime compensation” are not allowed and violate the federal Fair Labor Standards Act. In particular, there is a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) called a “12 Hour MOU” that deals with overtime, compensation time, work shift designation policy and what is referred to as a “comp time bucket”. According to one audit, the MOU is “scarcely followed”. Additionally, there is no clear indication or definition of the Department’s minimum staffing levels for shifts worked.

4. APD standard operating procedures are not being updated to in include changing and conflicting overtime policies. Several Department policies, including Standard Operating Procedures for overtime, compensatory time, and work shift designations, have not been reviewed or updated since March 10, 2016. Many rank and file officers as well as their supervisors, which are the Lieutenants and Sergeants who approve overtime, are confused as to what the overtime policies actually are and what they mean. Instead of getting any clarification or definitive answers from the Human Resources Department, they simply developed their own interpretations and allowed questionable overtime pay.

5. APD Officers were allowed to work “Chief’s Overtime”, which is working for a private company paying for security at the same time they are on on-call status with APD. The practice is a clear violation of APD personnel rules and regulations. The SOP policies are simply ignored and the overtime is allowed by supervisors to happen. The Porch & Associates Audit found a lack of internal controls and deficiencies for Chief’s Overtime. The Department’s policy does not list or define the eligibility requirements for officers working Chief’s Overtime. Although supervisory approval is required for other types of overtime, it is not required for Chief’s Overtime. Sworn police officers are allowed to cancel their regular shifts in order to work Chief’s Overtime which is more lucrative for the officer.

6. There is automatic award of two-hour overtime award, which pays time and a half per hour, for officers who have to appear in court for Driving While Intoxicating (DWI) arraignment and trials and traffic ticket violations they write. Even though a court appearance may take only 15 minutes, the officer is allowed to claim and be paid a full 2 hours of overtime at time and a half pay as mandated by the union contract. The system encourages officers to settle cases quickly so they can go home and collect 2 hours of overtime and not work the hours of overtime paid.

7. APD doesn’t monitor officer overtime for irregular activity. The Department does not have a policy or procedure in place that prevents and detects overlapping or incorrect reported time. APD does not reconcile its overtime transactions between its timekeeping and payroll systems thereby contributing to inappropriate and prohibited overtime pay at time and a half.

CITY RESPONSE

When the Porch & Associates Audit Report was released on August 6, the Keller Administration, including Mayor Tim Keller, Chief Harold Medina and APD Spokesperson Gilbert Gallegos, placed all the blame on former Chief of Police Michael Geier for failure to address the APD overtime abuses and giving preferential treatment to a select few. The Keller Administration issued a harsh statement blaming Mayor Tim Keller’s appointed former APD Police Chief Michael Geier for all the overtime abuse problems. The statement said in part:

“The former chief knowingly covered up overtime abuses and helped his favored employees’ game the system to enrich themselves. … The report makes it clear that the ‘tone at the top’ of APD was a major driver of the abuse and the failure to make needed changes. We didn’t hesitate to take bold action to remove the top cop and get the department back on track.”

Chief Geier for his part issued a press release denying the accusation saying he came up with a plan to prevent the overtime abuse, including a 25 hour weekly overtime cap, and saying it was Mayor Tim Keller who interfered with him making changes to the overtime.

Chief Harold Medina had this to say:

“The overtime problems with APD have occurred since I can remember coming on this department. … So there’s been a lot of people who could have taken action quicker than they did … I do know that it was a priority of ours. We did make the decision to put up a special order as quickly as possible. And we’re also working on auditing ourselves and creating a system where we try to catch things earlier. We encourage that type of oversight within the department.”

The link to the quoted source material is here:

https://www.abqjournal.com/2419877/seventh-audit-cites-apd-overtime-problems.html

STATE AUDITOR BRIAN COLÓN

In an interview after the audit was release, State Auditor Colón said he thought his office’s latest audit would make a difference. He said an annual audit for the city will look at this issue next year and added:

“I think the city has articulated that they’re committed to addressing these findings and to embracing these recommendations … I’ve met with the chief of police, and he has indicated that some of these 22 recommendations have already been implemented. We’re optimistic that as we continue to keep the pressure on we’ll get into a situation where we have 100% compliance.”

The link to the quoted source material is here:

https://www.abqjournal.com/2419877/seventh-audit-cites-apd-overtime-problems.html

POLICE UNION CONTRACT VIOLATES FEDERAL AND STATE LABOR LAWS

One of the most dramatic findings in the Porch & Associates Audit is that the APD police union contract violates the Federal Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). Specifically, the Fair Labor Standards Act provides:

“Paid leave is not considered time worked for the purposes of computing overtime”.

The audit goes as far as saying terms of the union contract need to be negotiated and that the City can save thousands of dollars in overtime by insisting that the APOA police union and APD follow the Fair Labor Standards Act. The audit also said the City should not bargain away what is established by law.

The audit recommended that the City negotiate with the police union to remove the guaranteed overtime and replace it with actual time. Actual time would start when the officer leaves their home, or work assignment if after a normal shift, through the time they get home.

NO MENTION OF UNION CONTRACT VIOLATING STATE LAW

The Porch & Associates Audit downplayed and essentially ignored the role of the APD Union membership of Sergeants and Lieutenants and the union contract in the entire overtime abuse scandal.

The New Mexico Public Employees Bargaining Act, Sections 10-7E-1 to 10-7E-26 H (NMSA 1978), governs the enforcement of the city’s collective bargaining agreement with the APD police union. Section 10-7E-5 provides for the rights of public employees and states in part:

“Public employees, other than management employees and confidential employees, may form, join or assist a labor organization for the purpose of collective bargaining … .”

The link to the statute is here:

https://www.pelrb.state.nm.us/statute.php

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

When State Auditor Brian Colon released his special audit of APD’s overtime pay abuse, he had this to say:

“I think the city has articulated that they’re committed to addressing these findings and to embracing these recommendations.”

It would appear that State Auditor Brian Colon’s was way too optimistic and the audit has accomplished absolutely nothing to bring down excessive overtime pay and that overtime pay abuse is still continuing at APD.

A full 6 months after his audit was released, the top 250 wage earner list shows nothing has really changed and the audit had no impact on making a change in performance and APD overtime pays is still out of control .

https://www.petedinelli.com/2021/08/16/state-auditor-brian-colon-foolish-saying-his-audit-on-apd-overtime-abuse-will-result-in-100-compliance-160-police-union-members-made-between-110000-to-200000-in-2019-and-2020-because-of-overt/

The extreme disproportionate pay between sworn police officers and City Executives and Department Directors is the result of mandated overtime provisions of the police union contract. The contract provisions have not be changes The union contract allows sworn police to be paid twice or three times as much in base pay and well over $100,000 and upwards of $200,000 a year.

NEW APD CONTRACT AGAIN ALLOWS SARGEANTS AND LIEUTENANTS TO JOIN UNION

On February 9, Police Union lawyer Fred Mower told Judge James Browning in a status conference hearing on the Court Approved Settlement that the current union contract is identical to previous contract that has expired and that only hourly pay rates were negotiated.

It is Section 1.3., page 3, of the new police union contract that allows the management positions of APD sergeants and lieutenants to join the union as follows:

“The APOA is recognized as the Exclusive Representative for regular full time, non-probationary police officers through the rank of Lieutenants in the APD … .”

This is the identical provision in the expired contract that the Police Union ostensibly refused to negotiate with the Keller Administration. Confidential sources have confirmed that the Keller Administration and the Police Union have come to a mutual understanding that sergeants and lieutenants are not management positions but rather “co-workers of supervising collegues”who are part of a unit that give commands and that provide leadership support functions. The understanding is not embodied in the contract and contrary to basic management principals and best practices under labor law. The fact is sergeants and lieutenants are management responsible for oversight and disciplinary action of subordinates.

The New Mexico Public Employees Bargaining Act, Sections 10-7E-1 to 10-7E-26 H (NMSA 1978), governs the enforcement of the city’s collective bargaining agreement with the APD police union. The link to the statute is here:

https://www.pelrb.state.nm.us/statute.php

As the union contract is written, it is in violation of New Mexico Public Employees Bargaining Act. Section 10-7E-5 entitled Rights of public employees provides as follows:

A. 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 those activities. (Capitalization added for emphasis)

The plain language of the statute makes it clear management are prohibited from joining unions. The new police union contract allowing the APD management positions of sergeants and lieutenants to be police union members clearly violates state law and is therefore void from the beginning and therefor unenforceable. Sergeants and lieutenants should be removed from the police union, paid salaries without being paid overtime and made at will employees.

ACTION THAT NEEDS TO BE TAKEN

No effort was made during the most recent police union contract negotiations to reduce the number of hours allowed for overtime a sworn officer can be paid nor limiting it to rank and file and not management who are at will. From a personnel management standpoint, excessive overtime can lead to serious burn out, reduce the alertness of an officer and endanger public safety.

There are 4 major initiative that need to be undertaken

1.Remove Lieutenants and Sergeants from the police bargaining unit and make them at will employees in order to conform with state law and federal law that prohibits management from joining the union.
When the Porch & Associates Audits said that there was a failure of APD supervisors to properly monitor and pre-approve officer overtime, what it failed to disclose is those supervisors are the management positions of lieutenants and sergeants who are allowed to join the APD police union despite being management. Instead of enforcing limitations on overtime and preventing the overtime abuse, many sergeants and lieutenants are simply participating in excessive overtime pay practices themselves. They are likely approving all overtime submitted by their subordinates to keep them happy and to maintain a working relationship with them and to garner favor with them.

2. Negotiate a union contract term that makes it clear that “paid leave is not considered time worked for the purposes of computing overtime” in order to comply with the Federal Fair Labor Standard Act (FLSA).

3. Negotiate a union contract term that whenever it is determined that overtime was paid in violation of APD standard operating procedures and overtime policy, the overtime pay must be refunded to the city either in single lump sum or garnishment of wages.

4. The Albuquerque City Council needs to enact as part of the city’s personnel rules and regulations prohibitions to remove the guaranteed overtime and replace it with actual time. Actual time would start when the officer leaves their home, or work assignment if after a normal shift, through the time they get home.

Until major terms and provisions of the union contract are negotiated to bring in into compliance with both Federal and State Law, the list of the top 250 waged earners in the city will have an excessive number of sworn police benefiting from overtime at the expense of other city hall employees.
______________________

POSTSCRIPT

Below is the listing of all APD Sworn Police Officers paid between $113,126.08 to $125,856.93 and appearing in the top paid 250 city hall employees:

Alba Jr,HonorioPD-PolicePE1Senior Police Officer 1C, $125,856.93
Anderson,Hollie LPD-PolicePF0Sergeant, $125,552.20
Barnard,Jeffery R.PD-PolicePG0Lieutenant, $125,401.06
Jones III,JimmiePD-PolicePE1Senior Police Officer 1C, $124,663.79
Carter,Jessie W.PD-PolicePE1Senior Police Officer 1C, $124,601.47
Sedler,Amy JPD-PolicePG0Lieutenant, $124,529.93
Barraza,RenePD-PolicePG0Lieutenant, $124,201.10
Anaya,AdamPD-PolicePG0Lieutenant, $124,160.63
Haugh,PaulPD-PolicePG0Lieutenant, $124,082.93
Babcock,Tod SPD-PolicePE2Master Police Officer 1C, $123,983.98
Montano,JoshuaPD-PolicePE1Senior Police Officer 1C, $123,949.86
Mondragon,Gregory APD-PoliceATSAPD Prisoner Trans Sergeant, $123,890.14
Brito,ChristopherPD-PolicePE1Senior Police Officer 1C, $123,759.48
Avila,Michael APD-PolicePE2Master Police Officer 1C, $123,617.39
Wild,AmandaPD-PolicePF0Sergeant, $123,520.56
Arreola,Joshua APD-PolicePE0Police Officer 1C, $123,336.11
Martinez,Melvin JFD-FireRL2Para Lieutenant, $123,317.59
Luna,Michael APD-PolicePE2Master Police Officer 1C, $123,047.76
Nakamura,RachelPD-PolicePE0Police Officer 1C, $123,040.54
Brown,JasonPD-PolicePE1Senior Police Officer 1C, $122,445.75
Lujan,Damian MPD-PolicePE1Senior Police Officer 1C, $122,093.10
Sandoval,AlbertPD-PolicePF0Sergeant, $122,025.42
Morales,Daniel JPD-PolicePE2Master Police Officer 1C, $121,770.54
Romero,Christopher MPD-PolicePF0Sergeant, $121,602.61
Wheeler,NicholasPD-PolicePG0Lieutenant, $121,451.85
Barela,Victor DPD-PolicePE1Senior Police Officer 1C, $121,077.88
Sedillo,Richard EPD-PolicePE2Master Police Officer 1C, $120,833.46
Brown,EricPD-PolicePF0Sergeant, $120,494.70
Sanders,Nicholas MPD-PolicePG0Lieutenant, $120,253.49
Hotle,Timothy LPD-PolicePE1Senior Police Officer 1C, $ 120,207.58
Languit,Luke CPD-PolicePH0Commander, $120,194.93
Lee,Arlys MPD-PolicePE1Senior Police Officer 1C, $120,151.78
Chacon,Jennifer MPD-PolicePG0Lieutenant, $120,058.44
Armijo,Louis JPD-PolicePF0Sergeant, $119,988.46
Altman,Steve APD-PolicePG0Lieutenant, $119,948.56
Pelot,Jerrod C.PD-PolicePE1Senior Police Officer 1C, $119,356.16
Sanchez,Robert SPD-PolicePE0Police Officer 1C, 118,506.46
Baca,Alycia NPD-PolicePE0Police Officer 1C, $ 118,375.37
Jewell,ChasePD-PolicePE0Police Officer 1C, $118,339.84
Valdez,Ruben EPD-PolicePG0Lieutenant, $118,276.38
Hernandez,Pablo HPD-PolicePE0Police Officer, 1C $118,122.89
Gomez,Gustavo A.PD-PolicePG0Lieutenant $117,962.21
DeAguero,Daren JPD-PolicePE1Senior Police Officer 1C, $117,640.55
Martinez,Vicente MPD-PolicePF0Sergeant, $117,622.64
Rael,Miguel MPD-PolicePE2Master Police Officer 1C, $117,527.04
Bell Garcia,Jennifer LPD-PolicePG0Lieutenant, $117,136.82
Otzenberger,Deanne DPD-PolicePG0Lieutenant, $117,134.49
Kesner,Zachary L.PD-PolicePF0Sergeant, $117,126.21
Martinez,Steve TPD-PolicePF0Sergeant, $117,026.80
Perez,Mario EPD-PolicePE2Master Police Officer 1C, $116,995.44
Oates,Michael APD-PolicePE2Master Police Officer 1C, $116,235.31
Acata,Mel LPD-PolicePE2Master Police Officer 1C, $116,030.72
Zambrano,AnthonyPD-PolicePE2Master Police Officer 1C, $115,887.16
Suarez,Anthony R.PD-PolicePE1Senior Police Officer 1C, $115,618.18
Accilien,Marc-HenryPD-PolicePE1Senior Police Officer 1C, $115,525.46
Vigil Jr,Thomas CPD-PolicePE1Senior Police Officer 1C, $115,274.87
Burt,Tyler CPD-PolicePE1Senior Police Officer 1C, $115,245.40
Burton,Whitney N.PD-PolicePE1Senior Police Officer 1C, $115,161.54
Chavez,Jason DPD-PolicePE0Police Officer 1C, $115,023.71
Duren,Robert LPD-PolicePE2Master Police Officer 1C, $115,002.34
Taylor,David MPD-PolicePE2Master Police Officer 1C, $114,723.12
Solis,EmmanuelPD-PolicePE1Senior Police Officer 1C, $114,694.17
Casados,CarlosPD-PolicePE0Police Officer 1C, $114,495.52
Gomez,Geno Virgil EPD-PolicePE2Master Police Officer 1C, $114,381.38
Jones,Luke HPD-PolicePE0Police Officer 1C, $114,193.02
DeHerrera,Justin GeorgePD-PolicePE1Senior Police Officer 1C, $113,774.71
Higdon,SeanPD-PolicePF0Sergeant, $113,373.72
Napoleone,Kevin JPD-PolicePG0Lieutenant, $113,225.62
Ollquist,Renee APD-PolicePF0Sergeant $113,135.62
Dietzel,Matt CPD-PolicePG0Lieutenant, $113,126.08

The link to the entire listing of the top 250 wage earners is here:

https://publicreports.cabq.gov/ibmcognos/bi/?perspective=classicviewer&pathRef=.public_folders%2FTransparency%2FTop%20Earners%20of%20the%20City%20of%20Albuquerque%20List&id=i5AAD1EA752BA417099BA819E482F6642&objRef=i5AAD1EA752BA417099BA819E482F6642&action=run&format=HTML&cmPropStr=%7B%22id%22%3A%22i5AAD1EA752BA417099BA819E482F6642%22%2C%22type%22%3A%22report%22%2C%22defaultName%22%3A%22Top%20Earners%20of%20the%20City%20of%20Albuquerque%20List%22%2C%22permissions%22%3A%5B%22execute%22%2C%22traverse%22%5D%7D

On February 15, 2022, in almost 4-minute interview on FOX News, Albuquerque Police Officer Association President Shaun Willoughby rambled on for almost 4 minutes, without interruption, and did what only can be described as a full throttle take down of the Federal Court Approved Settlement Agreement (CASA), the mandated reforms under the settlement and the Department of Justice. The interview was nothing more than Willougby and the police union spreading their big lies about the settlement in an effort to undercut and to undermine the APD reforms. The link to view the full story and the video interview is here:

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/murder-spike-in-new-mexico-cops-blame-department-of-justice-probe-weak-leadership

Following is a very short transcript of the news story that does not contain all the comments of the Willoughby interview:

“ALUQUERQUE, NM. Police in Albuquerque, New Mexico, told Fox News crime is surging in their city because cops are not allowed to do their jobs.

“You have high crime, you have high substance abuse, you have a weak on crime approach at the state legislature—we have since the beginning of time,” Detective Shaun Willougby, president of the Albuquerque Police Association, told Fox News in an exclusive interview.

“Couple that with a completely handcuffed police department and eight years into a consent decree … and this is what you get,” Willoughby continued.

The Albuquerque Police Department entered into a settlement agreement with the U.S. Department of Justice in November 2014 after an investigation concluded the local agency “engaged in a pattern or practice of use of excessive force.”

“That opened the door for the Department of Justice in Washington, D.C., to basically almost govern and be intricately involved in everything this police department does,” Willoughby said.

Albuquerque officers involved in use of force incidents are required to go through a rigorous investigation, according to the terms of the agreement.

For example, if an officer puts a resisting suspect into handcuffs during an arrest, it could be considered use of force, Willoughby said. He told Fox News an investigation could take officers off the street for four to six hours and that it happens regularly.

“I have seen entire area commands where 50,000 people live – because of two uses of force, just two weeks ago – the whole area command was shut down,” Willoughby said. “All officers available, to include chain of command, were investigating uses of force.”

“We’re already significantly understaffed,” Willoughby continued. “Now, because of the policies that we’ve created – and some of them are really ridiculous – we have less officers on the streets protecting and serving this community simply because they’re following the policy that exists.”

In 2021, Albuquerque broke its annual homicide record with 117 killings. The city’s yearly homicide count has averaged about 45 homicides per year over the last 35 years, according to local media reports.

Consent decrees came under harsh criticism from former President Trump’s DOJ, which said they were overused and a harmful federal intrusion on law enforcement.

Then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions issued a memo in 2018 directing the agency to sharply limit their use.

Attorney General Merrick Garland rescinded the Trump-era memo last April, making it easier for the Biden DOJ to use consent decrees as an enforcement tool.

“The whole part of the conversation is like an open loop,” Willoughby said. “We have a bunch of politicians that think in election cycles, and they’re going to say the right talking points because they poll well.”

“They’re going to manipulate people to vote for them, but when push comes to shove, they’re not investing in the actual problem,” he added.

“We need politicians who invest in the problem, they think outside the box and not just in their four-year election cycle,” Willoughby told Fox News. “I think the whole country is plagued with that same problem.”

The Albuquerque Police Department lost more than 250 officers over the last two years due to people leaving the profession, retirement and officers going to other departments, according to the Albuquerque Police Association.”

The link to the FOX news story is here:

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/murder-spike-in-new-mexico-cops-blame-department-of-justice-probe-weak-leadership

A summary of the DOJ investigation and the contents of the Court Approved Settlement Agreement can be found in the postscript to this blog article.

THAT LITTLE CARD LISTING MISDEMEANORS

During the FOX News interview, Willoughby made reference and exhibited a card listing misdemeanors saying APD police cannot arrest people on. His claim is a lie that APD cannot make arrests on the offenses listed. They can make arrests but simply do not want to write an offense report. Willoughby said APD cops do not want to make arrests because they must then write an offense report articulating reasons why and the circumstance why the arrest was made.

SHOOTING OF 4 POLICE OFFICERS

It was on Thursday, August 19, after four Albuquerque Police Officers were seriously injured following a shooting in northeast Albuquerque that Willougby first lied that police cannot make arrests of misdemeanors. The shooting happened as officers responded to a felony robbery by the Dutch Bros. near Mountain and Juan Tabo. He also lied saying violent crime has increased because APD has been de-policed ostensibly referring to the DOJ mandated reforms. Willoughby said this:

“We’ve been telling this community that this was going to happen. … I believe that the violent crime and the uptick of violent crime is directly related to this police department being de-policed and having policies where they are not able to do their job. … We have de-policed the city of Albuquerque to the extent where officers carry around a little card with a list of misdemeanors that they can’t even arrest people on. … It’s officers that are hesitating to do their job because they don’t want to get in trouble … It’s the brazen acts of criminals that know that Albuquerque police officers are handcuffed … We have stepped away and de-policed this city. From the very beginning our officers are carrying a card of misdemeanors that they’re not supposed to arrest on.”

The links to the quoted news source material is here:

https://www.abqjournal.com/2421142/california-man-charged-in-shooting-of-apd-officers.html

https://www.kob.com/albuquerque-news/police-officers-association-demands-change-following-shooting-that-left-4-officers-injured/6213550/?fbclid=IwAR0sXEzSZcF0KVwlVL3o1Fa4KjXfNcV15yEgC4IxYJ-N67TvAwlDz_X-aQE#.YSALBrgluvs.facebook

ARRESTS VERSUS CITATIONS

It was on May 10, 2018 in a memo addressed to all sworn APD personnel by then APD Chief Gorden Eden issued Department Special Order 17-53. The Special Order states that “all officers shall issue citations when appropriate in lieu of arrests on non-violent misdemeanor offenses.” Special Order 17-53 was then made SOP 2-80 that deals with arrests on misdemeanor cases. The link is here:

https://documents.cabq.gov/police/standard-operating-procedures/2-80-arrests-arrest-warrants-and-booking-procedures.pdf

The new Special Order 17-53 directive was a result of the 20-plus year McClendon Lawsuit that was settled by a federal judge. That lawsuit, filed against the city and Bernalillo County by an inmate arrested for a non-violent misdemeanor, primarily focused on the conditions within the county lockup. At the time the lawsuit was filed, the then Bernalillo County detention center had a maximum capacity of 800, but the jail was repeatedly overcrowded with as much as twice that capacity. The misdemeanor offenses affected by the special order include criminal trespass, criminal damage to property under $1,000, shoplifting under $500, shoplifting under $250, prostitution, and receiving or possessing stolen property under $100. The policy remains in place to this day.

The memo makes it clear that officers may make an arrest if it is necessary, but will have to include the reasons why in an incident report. The letter states that officers have the opportunity to take offenders wanted for non-violent misdemeanor offenses to Metropolitan Court to resolve warrants or fines instead of hauling them off to jail. However, the arrested individual must have the full amount of the fine or bond in cash. Those arrested also cannot go through a bonding agency.

At the time the Special Order was issued, City and police officials pointed out that it made no changes to police policy. APD Chief Jerry Galvin in 2001 issued a similar order, and since then department policy has been to advise officers to issue citations for such crimes where appropriate, and officers have discretion in deciding when to arrest someone. According to then City Attorney Jessica Hernandez:

“If there is any part of a situation that makes an officer think an arrest is warranted, they’ll make the arrest.”

At the time the special order was issued, then Assistant Chief Robert Huntsman also issuing a statement:

“This order in no way restricts officers’ discretion to make arrests when necessary to protect the public. Citations have always been an available option for certain non-violent misdemeanor offenses. This special order and video remind officers to issue citations ‘when appropriate’ and ‘when there are no circumstances necessitating an arrest.’ We are still aggressively pursuing repeat offenders, and this order does not change an officer’s ability to arrest.”

TWO OTHER WILLOUGHBY LIES

Another lie that Willoughby told the national FOX News is that the Department of Justice in Washington, D.C., “basically [and] almost governs and [is] intricately involved in everything this police department does”. Simply put, that could only happen if APD was placed into receivership and APD has not been placed into receivership.

The Court Approved Settlement Agreement does require the appointment of a federal monitor, but the settlement provisions are very clear that the Federal Monitor has no management, nor control over APD personnel, nor over the day to day operations of APD. The Federal Monitor cannot hire or discipline APD personnel. The only authority the monitor has is to audit APD’s compliance levels and report to the court.

Paragraph 295 of the Court approved settlement agreement provides as follows:

“The Monitor shall only have the duties, responsibilities, and authority conferred by this Agreement. The Monitor shall not, and is not intended to, replace or assume the role and duties of APD, including the Chief or any other City official. The Monitor shall be subject to the supervision and orders of the Court, consistent with this Agreement and applicable law.”

It is APD management and the Mayor’s Office that is in full control of the department. The DOJ consent decree mandates the implementation of 271 reforms agreed to by the city and it is the city and APD that are required to draft policy and implement the reforms.

Another lie Willoughby has promoted is that APD has somehow been “depoliced” or “defunded”. The truth is APD is the largest budgeted department in the city’s history. APD’s approved general fund operating 2022 budget is upwards of $222 million. The City Council has approved all the APD funding the Keller Administration has ever requested over the last 4 years. In 2018, the city council enacted a tax increase without voter approval where 70% of the $55 million raise annually went to the benefit of APD and to public safety. APD Chief Harold Medina for his part has doubled the number of Deputy Chiefs, increased the Chief’s office command staff from 3 to 10 and has added a new level of management of 14 assistant commanders. The new negotiated police union contract makes APD the best-paid law enforcement agency in the region by increasing hourly pay by 8% and longevity pay by 5%, and creating a whole new category of incentive pay.

NOT THE FIRST TIME FOR WILLOUGHBY AND THE UNION TO MOUTH OFF

Willoughby’s February 15 FOX News interview is not the first time that the police union has attempted to discredit the Court Approved Settlement Agreement, the mandated reforms, the monitor and the Department of Justice. Such efforts have been a pattern and practice for the union.

On April 27, 2021, it was widely reported by local news media that the Albuquerque Police Officers Association (APOA) launched a $70,000 political ad campaign to discredit the Department of Justice (DOJ) mandated reforms saying the police reforms are preventing police officers from doing their jobs and combating crime.

POLICE UNION POLITICAL PUBLIC RELATONS CAMPAIGN

The Police Union political ad campaign consisted of billboards around the city and testimonials on TV, radio and social media from former Albuquerque Police Department officers. The public relations campaign is urging the public to tell city leaders that crime matters more than the Police reforms mandated by the settlement.

The public relations campaign included providing an email template for people to use and contact civic leaders. The template says APD has made progress with the reforms and says we are “tired of living in a city filled with murder, theft and violence. … I’m urging you to fight for this city, stand up to the DOJ, and help us save the city we love, before it’s too late. ”

APOA Police Union President Shaun Willoughby described the need for the public relations campaign this way:

“You can either have compliance with DOJ reforms or you can have lower crime. You can’t have both. We think it’s time that our city leaders hear from the public that crime matters more because it does. … They want to focus on the growing crime problem, instead of wasting millions of dollars on endless Department of Justice oversight. … This conversation of reform needs to come back to common sense. … Right now, the City of Albuquerque capitulates to everything the DOJ wants and that might not necessarily be the right direction for the City of Albuquerque. … You don’t need enemies when you have friends like the city attorney. … We believe that our community deserves better from this police department. … We believe our community deserves better from this consent decree process.

[We are asking] for the city of Albuquerque to stand up and support Albuquerque police officers and support common sense reforms that allow our officers to succeed. … . We’re talking about the bureaucracy of police officers being taken off the street because somebody that was not used force on said “ow”. And how that impacts this community, our ability to respond to the community and this community’s ability to control crime. Your Albuquerque police officers are terrified that they will lose their job for simply doing their job and it’s not fair.”

The APOA also used its FACEBOOK page to get the word out with one post saying:

“Are you tired of the growing crime problems facing the city of Albuquerque? Are you tired of break-ins, stolen cars, vandalism, theft and murder being part of everyday living in our community? Then do something! If you don’t speak up and get involved right now, things will get worse. Tell your City leaders that you care more about fighting crime then than wasting millions on endless Department of Justice oversight. Share and make your voices heard because crime matters more.”

In a February 11, 2021 Target 7 news report Shaun Willoughby had this to say:

“The whole [reform effort] system is set up to fail and the taxpayers and the people that live in this community like me and my family are the ones that are taking the brunt of [violent crime]. … Really look at this process. … It is absolutely out of control. … The entire department and the processes within it are out of control. Your officers are running out the door. Really look at every single state or agency that’s been involved in this process. … What is happening? Did it bring harmony and trust with the community? I don’t think so.”

Links to news sources quotes are here:

https://www.abqjournal.com/2384284/apd-union-launches-campaign-against-doj-oversight.html

https://www.kob.com/new-mexico-news/albuquerque-police-union-starts-campaign-to-push-back-against-doj-requirements/6087348/

https://www.koat.com/article/as-murder-rate-climbs-apd-union-launches-campaign/36257496

https://news.yahoo.com/apd-union-launches-campaign-against-040100177.html

https://www.petedinelli.com/2021/04/27/police-union-spends-70000-to-discredit-federal-court-order-after-impeding-and-resisting-apd-reforms-for-6-years-tactic-likely-grounds-for-contempt-of-court-by-a-party-for-interfering-with-court/

JUNE 9 STATUS CONFERENCE HEARING

After the police union political ad campaign, APD Police reform Advocates requested that the City and the DOJ seek to have the union held in contempt of court for interfering with the consent decree.

During the June 9, 2021 status conference hearing, presiding Federal Judge James Browning asked the Plaintiff Department of Justice (DOJ) and the Defendant City of Albuquerque if they had the “appetite” to seek and to have the Intervenor Party the Albuquerque Police Officers Association held in contempt of court and be removed as a party to the litigation. Judge Browning has previously said he would not take any action in the case unless requested by both of the parties.

During the hearing, both the City and the DOJ declined to ask for the police union to be held in contempt of court, essentially ignoring the wishes of the 3 advocacy groups that were instrumental in bringing the DOJ here in the first place. Both the DOJ and the city arrived at the conclusion that the Unions political ad campaign was protected free speech.

DOJ Assistant Attorney General Paul Killebrew said in part:

“The Albuquerque Police Officers’ Association, and indeed, the officers of the APD who are its members, have a First Amendment right to speak on a matter of public concern, and they are exercising those rights. I will say that it was not a surprise to me personally to know that the APOA would like the city to renegotiate some terms of the CASA. That has been a flavor of their position from the outset, and so I don’t take that as a surprise. I will say that at any time we are willing to hear out anyone’s proposals for how the CASA can better achieve its aims and whether modifications may be necessary.”

The DOJ essentially made all the arguments why the union should not be held in contempt of court and just ignored the Counter CASA effect and the unions activities to undermine the reforms. What should be nonnegotiable is to require accountability from the union for its obstructionist’s activities to undermine the consent decree.

When DOJ Attorney Paul Killebrew told Judge Browning “… the officers of the APD who are its members, have a First Amendment right to speak on a matter of public concern, and they are exercising those rights” Killebrew totally ignored what the union has been doing in private to undermine the reforms for the previous 6 years such as objecting to the use of deadly force and delaying the rewrite of the policy for a full year by repeatedly demanding changes. What is NOT protected free speech is the unions conduct of undermining the reforms through its membership of Sergeants and Lieutenants.

FEDERAL MONITOR’S RESPONSE TO UNION POLITICAL AD CAMPAIGN

Federal Monitor Ginger has repeatedly said that the Sergeants and Lieutenants are the “counter casa effect”. Ginger said it again in reference to the police ad campaign which is worth repeating:

“[The ad campaign is] a union canard. We’ve talked about the counter-CASA effect in Albuquerque for years and years, and it is still alive and well. This latest process from the union is just another piece of counter-CASA. The union would like us out of town, I’m sure, and remember this monitoring team – as much as we love Albuquerque – would be glad to be done with the job. But we’re not going to give passing scores unless passing scores are earned. … [if the city] will actually focus on compliance” [it could be done with the CASA in 2 to 3 years]. … We’re constantly making the same recommendations over and over and over again,” Just like this time – 190-plus recommendations. It’s a get-out-of-the-CASA-free card, those 190 recommendations. What’s dragging this out, quite frankly, your honor, is a police department not focusing its resources on complying with the CASA.”

UNION’S RESPONSE TO ALLEGATION IT WANTS TO END SETTLEMENT

During the June 9 hearing, APOA president Shaun Willoughby was asked to respond to the allegation that the goal of the union ad campaign was to end the settlement agreement or that they are “counter-CASA.”

In response to questions from Judge Browning, Willoughby gave what can only be described as an emotional and unhinged statement to the court. Willoughby freely acknowledged that he does not believe that the city can be in compliance with the CASA and simultaneously lower crime rates.

With respect to the Court Approved Settlement Agreement, Willoughby had this to say:

“Is it the No. 1 reason for the crime in Albuquerque? No, but it’s a contributing factor.”

Willoughby also told Judge Browning he stood by his comments he made to the media when he said:

“You can either have compliance with DOJ reforms or you can have lower crime. You can’t have both.”

https://www.abqjournal.com/2398400/police-union-wont-be-held-in-contempt.html

The rest of the comments made by Willoughby to the media were:

“We think it’s time that our city leaders hear from the public that crime matters more because it does. … They want to focus on the growing crime problem, instead of wasting millions of dollars on endless Department of Justice oversight. … This conversation of reform needs to come back to common sense. … Right now, the City of Albuquerque capitulates to everything the DOJ wants and that might not necessarily be the right direction for the City of Albuquerque. … You don’t need enemies when you have friends like the city attorney. … We believe that our community deserves better from this police department. … We believe our community deserves better from this consent decree process.”

UNION DEMANDS IMMEDIATE CHANGE TO USE OF FORCE POLICY

On November 12, 2021 the Federal Court Appointed Monitor James Ginger filed with the Federal Court his 14th “Compliance Levels of the Albuquerque Police Department and the City of Albuquerque with Requirements of the Court Approved Settlement Agreement” (CASA). The report was one of the most critical and scathing to date as to the city’s intentional noncompliance and failure to investigate hundreds of police use of force cases. The report covers the time frame of February 1, 2021 to July 31, 2021. The link to review the entire 331-page report is here:

https://documents.cabq.gov/police/reports/department-of-justice/independent-monitors-fourteenth-report-nov-2021.pdf

On January 22, 2022, in a Channel 4 news story, Shaun Willoughby, had this to say about the 14th Federal Monitor’s Report:

“Dr. Ginger is pointing the finger at APD, saying that they’re doing this intentionally. That’s an absolute absurd joke. It’s a lie. … The monitor was supposed to be here in Albuquerque, helping with technical assistance. He’s doing that over Zoom and over phone calls from a different state. … This needs to come down to action. … That use of force policy needs to be changed immediately. The City of Albuquerque is the plaintiff and they have the right to run this city and run this police department.”

The link to the Court Approved Settlement Agreement is here:

https://documents.cabq.gov/police/reports/department-of-justice/465-second-amended-restated-casa.pdf

Willoughby’s demand that the “use of force policy needs to be changed immediately” is hypocritical seeing as he sat at the bargaining table to negotiate the policy and he contributed to the full one year delay in drafting the use of force policy. In the past, the Federal Monitor noted the reason for the one year delay was upwards of 50 amendments and changes demanded by the union. Simply put, the police union does not want any kind of a “use of force” or “deadly force policy” and wants sworn officers to have 100% total discretion to decide when to use force or deadly force and under what circumstances. The union reviews such policies as handcuffing its membership from being able to do their job and not what the policies are which is “constitutional policing practices.”

The monitor did live here for a while and it is not just him doing all the work. The monitor and his team of 10 on a regular basis, met with city officials by zoom or have come to the city. For the last 2 years, the pandemic has forced changes to the way business is done. For the last 2 years, the Federal Court has held hearings in the case by zoom and Willoughby has not complained. Ginger is an officer of the court and works for the court and should be able to do the auditing remotely. The federal monitor’s reports and the data being collected is done by a team who review data and work with APD to give them guidance. The Federal Monitor himself has met with community leaders privately and in the past attended public meetings and has made presentations to the city council on his reports.

https://www.koat.com/article/albuquerque-police-department-responds-to-doj-monitor-report/38285085

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

According to police officers, they are afraid to do their jobs for fear of being investigated, fired or disciplined. They claim their hands are tied. The police union for 7 years has obstructed the reforms.

It is clear the police union wants the DOJ gone and wants to dictate policy for the department by saying they have a right to identify things that are not working with the DOJ reforms and fix them. The police union also has considerable influence and thus control over its membership, especially sergeants and lieutenants, who are management. Yet sergeants and lieutenants allowed to join the union, and they undercut or interfere with implementation of the reforms.

What the police union feels is interfering with APD sworn from doing their jobs are the following mandated reforms:

The “use of force” and “deadly use of force” policies. The police union does not want any kind of a “use of force” or “deadly force policy” and wants sworn officers to have 100% total discretion to decide when to use force or deadly force can be used and under what circumstances.

The mandatory use of lapel cameras by APD.

APD police can no longer shoot at fleeing cars.

APD police can no longer use “choke holds” to subdue suspects.

APD police need to use less lethal force and not rely on the SWAT unit.

APD police must use de-escalating tactics.

All APD officers must be trained in crisis intervention.

APD management must now hold all subordinate police officers accountable for all levels of violations of standard operating procedures.

APD Police officers are required to intervene when they witness and are concerned about other officers use of force. “Old guard” police officers view it as a “snitch” program where officers turn on fellow officers.

Sworn police officers believing that many standard operating procedures should not be enforced as being too petty or serving no useful function.

The mandatory “paper work” associated with any degree of use of force is too cumbersome.

Mandatory notification to superiors for investigation by police officers who witness another officer’s “excessive use of force” or violations of CASA reforms.

CONCLUSION

Police reform advocacy in communities tends to ebb and flow as officer involved shooting spike, followed by public outrage only to subside after time. The elapse of time is the biggest threat to police reforms and police reform requires vigilance and aggressive enforcement.

The DOJ likely feels that the FOX News story is protected free speech. It is not at all likely the Department of Justice sees the problem with the FOX News interview and what is happening with the police union public relations antics that have gone virtually unchallenged for the last few years. The DOJ will never seek to hold the APD union responsible for undercutting, interfering and obstructing the implementation of the DOJ consent decree reforms and that is why the Department of Justice is failing in its mission to reform APD.

The DOJ lives in a vacuum not at all concerned that the public relations antics of the union has gone along way to undercut public support to reform APD where it found a culture of aggression 7 years ago.

____________________________________

POSTSCRIPT

Below is a nutshell explanation of the DOJ Investigation of APD as well as the Consent dcree.

THE DOJ INVESTGATION

On April 10, 2014, the United States Department of Justice (DOJ), Civil Rights Division, submitted a scathing 46-page investigation report on an 18-month civil rights investigation of the Albuquerque Police Department (APD). You can read the entire report here:

https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/usao-nm/legacy/2015/01/20/140410%20DOJ-APD%20Findings%20Letter.pdf

Based on the investigation and the review of excessive use of force and deadly force cases, the DOJ found “reasonable cause to believe that APD engage[d] in a pattern or practice of use of excessive force, including deadly force, in violation of the Fourth Amendment … . and [the] investigation included a comprehensive review of APD’s operations and the City’s oversight systems.”

The investigative report found a pattern or practice of use of “deadly force” or “excessive use of force” in 4 major areas:

1. The DOJ reviewed all fatal shootings by officers between 2009 and 2012 and found that officers were not justified under federal law in using deadly force in the majority of those incidents. Albuquerque police officers too often used deadly force in an unconstitutional manner in their use of firearms. Officers used deadly force against people who posed a minimal threat, including individuals who posed a threat only to themselves or who were unarmed. Officers also used deadly force in situations where the conduct of the officers heightened the danger and contributed to the need to use force.

2. Albuquerque police officers often used less lethal force in an unconstitutional manner, often used unreasonable physical force without regard for the subject’s safety or the level of threat encountered. The investigation found APD Officers frequently used take-down procedures in ways that unnecessarily increased the harm to the person. Finally, APD officers escalated situations in which force could have been avoided had they instead used de-escalation measures.

3. A significant number of the use of force cases reviewed involved persons suffering from acute mental illness and who were in crisis. The investigation found APD’s policies, training, and supervision were insufficient to ensure that officers encountering people with mental illness or in distress do so in a manner that respected their rights and in a manner that was safe for all involved.

4. The investigation found the use of excessive force by APD officers was not isolated or sporadic. The pattern or practice of excessive force stemmed from systemic deficiencies in oversight, training, and policy. Chief among these deficiencies was the department’s failure to implement an objective and rigorous internal accountability system. Force incidents were not properly investigated, documented, or addressed with corrective measures by the command staff.

What differentiates the DOJ’s investigation of APD from the other federal investigations of police departments and consent decrees is that the other consent decrees involve in one form or another the finding of “racial profiling” and use of excessive force or deadly force against minorities. The DOJ’s finding of a “culture of aggression” within APD dealt with APD’s interactions and responses to suspects that were mentally ill and that were having psychotic episodes.

THE COURT APPROVED SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT

After a full year of negotiations, the 106-page negotiated CASA agreement was filed on November 10, 2014. Under the CASA, the assigned Federal Judge is given the power to enforce terms of the agreement and issue orders for compliance and issue sanctions for noncompliance. The CASA also mandated the hiring of a Federal Court Approved Monitor to audit and prepare compliance reports. The Federal Monitor has no management not control over APD in the day to day operations of the department.
Major reform mandates under the settlement include:

1. Sweeping changes ranging from APD’s SWAT team protocols, to banning choke-holds, to auditing the use of every Taser carried by officers and re writing and implement new use of force and deadly force policies.

2. The CASA mandates the teaching of “constitutional policing” practices and methods as well as mandatory crisis intervention techniques and de-escalation tactics with the mentally ill.

3. The City agreed that APD would overhaul and rewrite all of its “use of force policies” and “deadly force” policies, recruitment procedures, training, internal affairs procedures and implement field supervision of officers.

4. Stricter training and restrictions on the use of nonlethal force is required under the CASA, and it requires more training and controls over the use of Tasers by officers along with quarterly audits of their use.

5. The city agreed to the creation of a Police Oversight Board (POB) as a civilian review agency that independently reviews citizen complaints, serious uses of force and officer-involved shootings by APD. The civilian agency also monitors, reviews and make recommended changes to APD policy on use of force.

6. Under the CASA, the city agreed to the creation of Police Civilian Advisory Councils (CPCs), one in each of the 6 APD area commands, designed to increase community interaction.

7. The CASA broadens and removes obstacles to the types of civilian complaints Internal Affairs and the civilian oversight agency can review.

8. The CASA provides for the appointment of a Federal Court Monitor selected by agreement of the parties with the City to pay for the auditing services of the federal monitor. The primary duties and responsibilities of the federal monitor is to report directly to the federal judge on APD’s compliance with the mandatory reforms.

9. The agreement mandates that APD adopt a new system to hold officers and supervisors accountable for all use of force incidents with personnel procedures implemented and outlining details how use of force cases would be investigated. It requires far more reporting by officers and field supervisors and also requires detailed reviews of those reports up the chain of command within the department. Sergeants and lieutenants are required to be much more involved in field supervision and review of use of force by officers.

10. Under the agreement, officers who point their firearms at a person, but don’t fire, must fill out a use of force report that will be reviewed by field supervisors. That review is separate from a city civilian police oversight agency that will be independent of the department and will review police use of force incidents as well as civilian complaints.

11. The City agreed to create a new “Use of Force Review Board” to oversee all internal affairs investigations of use of force and deadly force. A new chain of command for the review of Internal Affairs reports of officer-involved shootings was created that reviews the Internal Affairs Reports and makes recommendations on discipline or asks for further investigation of an incident, and the board makes recommendations on discipline to the APD Chief. The Use of Force Board is required to make quarterly reports after reviewing all use of force reports to identify trends and policy changes.

12. APD agreed to revise and update its policies on the mandatory use of lapel cameras by all police officers.

13. Under the CASA, the City agreed to abolish the Repeat Offenders Project, known as ROP, within three months of signing the agreement for the reason that members of the unit were involved in a number of the controversial shootings investigated by the DOJ.

14. The agreement provides that if the city fails to implement the reforms or shows bad faith in the implementation of the CASA, the DOJ has the option of filing a federal lawsuit against the city over the city’s unconstitutional policing practices found by the DOJ investigation.

15. Certain types of hand-to-hand techniques are barred under the CASA unless the officer is in a situation that require the use of lethal force if it were available. Neck holds, sometimes called choke-holds, are explicitly forbidden to be used by officers except in situations where lethal force would be authorized.

16. A major change in the CASA bans APD officers from firing their weapons at moving vehicles in all but life-threatening situations.

The CASA provides that it is “designed to ensure police integrity, protect officer safety, and prevent use of excessive force, including unreasonable use of deadly force, by APD.” The settlement agreement requires APD to strive and use its best efforts to come in compliance with all requirements within four years, and if that were to occur, the case would be dismissed.

https://www.cabq.gov/mental-health-response-advisory-committee/documents/court-approved-settlement-agreement-final.pdf

All documents related to APD’s settlement agreement can be downloaded and reviewed at this city web site link:

https://www.cabq.gov/police/documents-related-to-apds-settlement-agreement

The documents include:

The Settlement Agreement between City and the DOJ
APD Progress Reports
Independent Monitor’s Reports
Compliance Reports
Use of Force Annual Reports
Use of Force Reports
Studies
Audits

Early Monday morning February 14, Albuquerque Democrat State Rep. Georgene Louis was booked into a Santa Fe jail on charges of aggravated drunken driving after she was pulled over for speeding late Sunday evening February 13. Representative Louis is an attorney and five-term lawmaker.

According to criminal complaint filed in Santa Fe Municipal Court, she was pulled over by a Santa Fe police officer who clocked her driving her car 17 miles per hour over the speed limit on St. Francis Drive. In the criminal complaint, the arresting officer reported that Louis said she had consumed 2 or 3 vodka drinks. When the officer asked why she was driving so fast, she was reported to have responded “that she just wanted to get home.”

According to the criminal complaint filed, there was a strong odor of alcohol coming from inside the car and the arresting officer noted that Louis’ eyes were bloodshot and watery. Louis allegedly acknowledged her vehicle registration certificate had expired and was not able to provide valid proof of insurance.

The criminal complaint alleges that during a field sobriety test, she swayed and struggled to keep her balance. Two tests revealed a 0.17% blood alcohol content which is more than twice New Mexico’s legal limit. Representive Louis was arrested at 11:55 p.m.

REPRESENTATIVE LOUIS TAKES RESPONSIBILITY

In a statementreleased, Representative louis took responsibility for the incident and said:

“I am sorry and I deeply regret my lapse in judgment. … I know I let so many people down. I am accepting responsibility for my mistake. … I am prioritizing my health, and I will work hard to regain the trust of my constituents, my community and my family.”

Louis is an enrolled member of Acoma Pueblo. She ran unsuccessfully for the Democratic Party’s nomination last year for the open Albuquerque-area congressional seat vacated by Debra Haaland that was eventually won by Melanie Stansbury.

DEMOCRATS SUBDUED REACTION

Not at all surprising, Democrat Speaker of the House Brian Egolf was very subdued in reacting to the arrest and said:

“Georgene is a dear friend and a truly excellent legislator. … Until I have more information about the facts of this incident or the opportunity to speak to her directly, I cannot make any further comment.”

Speaker Egolf, House Majority Leader Javier Martinez of Albuquerque, House Majority Whip Doreen Gallegos of Las Cruces and caucus chairwoman Wonda Johnson of Church Rock issued a short statement that said:

“We are aware of this developing situation and it is important that we let the judicial process take its course. In the meantime, the legislature will continue its critical work over the next 4 days. As friends and colleagues, we are equally concerned about the wellbeing of Representative Louis and her family in this difficult time.”

DER FÜHRER TRUMP REPUBLICAN PARTYCAHIRMAN PIERCE REACTS

Hypocrite Republicans went into a feeding frenzy over the arrest of Representative Louis demanding her resignation. New Mexico Republican Party Chairman Steve Pearce called on Louis to “do the right thing” and resign and issued the following statement:

“Rep. Louis should do the right thing and resign from her House seat. She faces criminal charges, and this kind of behavior does not coincide with that of a responsible public servant. Rep. Louis has violated the public trust, let down her constituents and endangered the lives of innocents. New Mexico deserves better. Aggravated drunken driving is a serious offense, and Rep. Louis must step down.”

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

Republican State Chairman Steve Pierce is nothing but a hypocrite demanding her immediate resignation. Least anyone forget, Der Führer Trump Republican Chairman Steve Pierce and 2018 candidate for Governor refused to demand the resignation of then rising Republican Star Representative Monica Youngblood when she was arrested in 2018 for aggravated DWI. No one Republican then demanded Youngblood to resign.

Links to quoted news sources are here:

https://www.krqe.com/news/new-mexico/albuquerque-state-rep-arrested-for-dwi/

https://www.kob.com/albuquerque-news/new-mexico-legislator-arrested-for-suspected-dwi-/6392827/?cat=500

https://www.abqjournal.com/2469979/state-rep-georgene-louis-arrested-on-drunken-driving-charges.html

https://nmpoliticalreport.com/2022/02/14/albuquerque-democratic-lawmaker-booked-into-jail-on-charge-of-aggravated-dwi/

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

It is not at all likely that Louise will resign before the end of the 2022 session on Thursday, February 17. The big question that remains is if she will resign soon thereafter. Louise is running for another term and may well have ended her career in the legislature.

CRIME BILLS ON FAST TRACK

On Monday February 14, Law Las Cruces Democrat Joseph Cervantes, Chairman of the New Mexico Senate Judiciary Committee, unveiled during a joint meeting of the Senate Finance and Senate Judiciary committees Senate Bill 231 that focuses on the courts, law enforcement retention, training and hiring practices in an effort to deal with New Mexico’s as high rate of violent crime. The fact that there was a joint meeting of the two powerful committees is indicative of the urgency to pass crime legislation with a mere 3 full days left in the 2022 New Mexico 30 legislative session. The proposal cleared the judiciary panel without opposition after two hours of debate and testimony.

Senate Bill 231 contains an array of measures that combined will likely have a far better chance at reducing crime than the pretrial detention measure that was voted. The pretrial detention measure was voted down and substituted with a pretrial monitoring bill.

Senate Bill 231 is a consolidation of measures from some bills passed by the state House and adding new measures. Legislators are also considering proposals to stiffen criminal penalties, but the changes are not part of Bill 231.

Cervantes, a prominent trial attorney, downplayed the measure acknowledging is not the big bold change many wanted in the criminal justice system. However it a far more realistic approach that will have more of an impact in the long run given the complexity of the criminal justice system. He said this about the bill:

“This is not a big bold change where big bold change is needed, but it does some important things.”
Senate Finance Committee Chairman George Muñoz, D-Gallup, had this to say about the bill:

“It’s got to be a balanced approach that we deal with crime.”

SENATE BILL 231 PROVISIONS

Important Senate Bill 231 provisions are as follows:

1. It establishes a statewide violence intervention program modeled on a pilot program in Albuquerque. It would call for intervening with victims of violence who are likely to retaliate with their own violence.

2. It adds a District Court judge in the Albuquerque area and 2 others elsewhere in the state.

3. It provides for grants for strengthening the supervision of criminal defendants who are released while they await trial.

4. It provides for retention bonuses of 5% for law enforcement officers every five years they stay on the job through 20 years of service.

5. It splits the Law Enforcement Academy Board into two panels, one focusing on training and the other on officer misconduct.

6. It Establishes a statewide database on officer’s use of force, termination and civil judgments related to their work. Law enforcement agencies would be required to consult the database when making hiring decisions.

7. It expands the scope of what state crime reduction grants can be used for.
Senate Bill 231 would work in conjunction with House Bill 2 which is the State Budget legislation. The state budget includes raises of almost 16% for State Police officers and increased funding for pretrial services.

PRETRIAL MONITORING VERSUS PRETRIAL DETENTION

On February 7, Senate Bill 189 on “Pre Trial Detention”” was voted down and killed in committee. The bill would have created a “rebuttable presumption of dangerousness” for defendants charged with certain violent crimes. The rebuttable presumption bill shifted the burden of proof from state prosecutors, who must prove a case “beyond a reasonable doubt” to convict, to the defendant who would have to show they are not a danger to the public in order to be allowed to be released pending trial.

On January 20, the influential Legislative Finance Committee (LFC) released a 14-page memo analysis of the proposed “rebuttable presumption of violence” system and pretrial detention. LFC analysts found that low arrest, prosecution and conviction rates have more to do with rising violent crime rates than releasing defendants who are awaiting trial. The LFC report called into serious question if violent crime will be brought down by using a violent criminal charge to determine whether to keep someone accused of a crime in jail pending trial. According to the LFC report, rebuttable presumption is “a values-based approach, not an evidence-based one.” The LFC report said that while crime rates have increased, arrests and convictions have not. The LFC went on to say the promise of “swift and certain” justice has a more significant impact on crime rates that rebuttable presumption does not.

On February 9, it was reported that the “ the rebuttable presumption of being violent” legislation was substituted with legislation that focuses on ankle-monitoring data of defendants released from custody as they await trial. An amended version of House Bill 5 would require the pretrial division of the judiciary to provide around-the-clock monitoring of the locations of people who have been charged with a felony and released before trial. The legislation would require the courts to alert law enforcement if the defendant removes the monitoring unit or visits a prohibited location, such as the home of an alleged victim.

House Bill 5 will require the judiciary to provide the location data to law enforcement officers, prosecutors or public defenders, upon request. During a February 9 House Judiciary Committee hearing, Albuquerque area Democratic Representative Marian Mathews, a sponsor of the bill, said the bill “recognizes the importance of giving our law enforcement agencies the tools they need to effectively combat crime and improve public safety. ” HB 5 cleared the House Judiciary Committee on a 10-2 vote and was forwarded to the full House for consideration where it will likely pass. If the Houses passes , it will also have to make it through the Senate by noon Feb. 17 to reach the desk of Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham. The current budget proposal includes much-needed extra funding for pretrial services.

https://www.abqjournal.com/2468840/pretrial-monitoring-bill-surfaces-in-house-advances-quickly.html

COURTS MOVING QUICKLY TO ACT

On February 14, New Mexico Supreme Court Justice Michael Vigil also addressed the joint meeting of the Senate Finance and Senate Judiciary committees . Justice Vigil said the judiciary plans its own changes intended to streamline court hearings for defendants and ensure law enforcement is alerted immediately if someone cuts off an ankle monitor or enters a prohibited zone.

Justice Vigil said the judiciary is hoping to expand around-the-clock monitoring of pretrial defendants who wear an ankle monitor and issue immediate law-enforcement alerts when needed. He also said the court plans to consider rule changes that would consolidate pretrial detention hearings and preliminary hearings to determine probable cause “so the same resources don’t have to be coming in twice.”
Even though there are only 3 days left in the session, it is likely the bill will move quickly and pass both the Senate and the House.

The link to quoted source material is here:

https://www.abqjournal.com/2470017/new-crime-law-enforcement-package-emerges-in-senate.html

OTHER CRIME BILL MEASURES PASSED

HOUSE BILL 79

On February 11, House Bill 79 unanimously passed House Bill 79 and was forwarded to the Senate for consideration. HB 79 if passed by the Senate would do 3 things:

1. Raise the maximum sentence for someone convicted of second-degree murder from 15 to 18 years
2. Remove the statute of limitation for the crime
3. Raise the maximum sentence for attempted second-degree murder from three to nine years

State Rep. Antonio “Moe” Maestas, D-Albuquerque, a former Assistant District Attorney and a sponsor of Bill 79 said that under current state law, a person can do more time for other crimes than second-degree murder had this to say:

“Murder one and murder two should be the two stiffest penalties on the books, and then everything else should be relative to that, so this will put it as the second stiffest penalty in New Mexico. … A drug trafficker can do 18 years, a murderer – if you can’t prove first-degree – only does 15.”

The bill was forwarded to the Senate for consideration.

https://www.kob.com/albuquerque-news/house-passes-bill-to-increase-penalties-for-second-degree-murder/6389848/

HOUSE BILL 68

On February 12, the House voted 50-17 and passed House Bill 68 bill increasing penalties for crimes involving firearms, advancing the proposal on to the Senate for action. The vote on HB 68 did not break down along party lines. Nine Republicans and eight Democrats cast “no” votes on the proposal. The bill is sponsored by Reps. Meredith Dixon and Pamelya Herndon, both Albuquerque Democrats. Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham quickly applauded enactment of HB 68 bill which also creates a crime of making a threat of violence targeted at schools or other public places.

https://www.abqjournal.com/2469702/house-approves-bill-increasing-criminal-penalties.html

HOUSE BILL FIRST TABLED THEN AMENDED

House Bill 68 calls for increased criminal penalties for violent felons found to be in possession of a firearm. It includes a sentencing enhancement for individuals convicted of possessing a gun during aggravated burglary or drug deals. The firearms in question could also be subject to seizure and forfeiture under the proposed legislation. It also creates a crime of making a threat of violence targeted at schools or other public places.

House Bill 68 was initially aimed at keeping firearms out of the hands of minors by making adults who fail to secure them subject to criminal charges was first tabled in a House committee. The legislation was then approved on February 12 after it was amended before reaching the House floor, with a provision dealing with deadly weapons in school zones being stripped out.

In its current form, the bill calls for increased criminal penalties for violent felons found to be in possession of a firearm. It also includes a sentencing enhancement for individuals convicted of possessing a gun during aggravated burglary or drug deals. The firearms in question could also be subject to seizure and forfeiture under the proposed legislation.

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

Since the opening of the 2022 legislative session, and even before it convened, Governor Lujan Grisham has made it a priority for lawmakers to pass crime-related bills to address the state’s increasing violent crime rates. However, most of the Governor’s crime legislation has been defeated primarily because of a failure to get genuine consensus from legislators and relying on news conferences and public relations.

Although the anti-crime legislation moving through the 2022 session may not be as flashy as “pre-trial detention”, all the legislation, along with changes being proposed by the courts, have a far better chance of reducing crime rates. The actions dove tale into what the LFC analysts found which is that low arrest, prosecution and conviction rates have more to do with rising violent crime rates than releasing defendants who are awaiting trial.

The legislation now pending is an approach that should have been taken from the get go, but flashy solutions like “rebuttable presumption of being violent” always waste time, especially when it’s an election year for a Governor who wants to look “tough on crime”.

The 2020 session ends Thursday, February 17 at noon.