You know that there is a level of abuse of power by any police chief when they admit that something is “unlawful” but then give orders to his subordinate police officers not to make arrests for the unlawful activity. Such is the case with APD Chief Harold Medina when he issued a special order to all APD sworn entitled “PROCESS FOR RESPONDING TO AN UNLAWFUL ENCAMPMENT ON PUBLIC PROPERTY”.

APD SPECIAL ORDER SO 22-46

On April 26, 2022, very quietly and without any fanfare nor any kind of press release or press conference the Keller Administration is known for, APD Chief Harold Medina issued APD “Department Special Order 22-46” to “ALL DEPARTMENT PERSONNEL” with the subject line “PROCESS FOR RESPONDING TO AN UNLAWFUL ENCAMPMENT ON PUBLIC PROPERTY”.

The special order can be read in full in the postscript to this blog article. Commentary And Analysis on each questionable section of Special Order 22-46 is in order and is as follows:

SPECIAL ORDER 22-46 INSTRUCTION ORDERS

“Sworn personnel shall make all reasonable efforts to pursue non­ punitive, services-based approaches and shall not attempt to enforce littering, trespassing, obstruction of sidewalk, and other laws and ordinances … unless [the Family Community Services Department] FCS personnel request such enforcement and only after FCS Department personnel … determine that the individual is continuing to trespass after being given notice and an opportunity to stop.”

EDITOR’S COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

Being homeless is not a crime, but that does not mean they should be allowed to violate the law. Chief Medina is abusing his authority as APD Chief when he orders “Sworn personnel … shall not attempt to enforce littering, trespassing, … and other laws and ordinances” which is allowing the homeless to violate the law.

It is akin to ordering APD sworn not to enforce traffic laws against all citizens who own certain makes or models of cars. Chief Medina is essentially saying that he has the right to pick and choose what laws and city ordinances are to be enforced by APD sworn and against whom. This instruction undermines and destroys the basic foundation of good policing relating to the duties and responsibilities of law enforcement. Medina is also saying he decides and can order his department personnel to ignore city ordinances enacted by the elected City Council.

SPECIAL ORDER 22-46 INSTRUCTION ORDERS

“Sworn personnel shall neither damage nor remove an encampment without coordinating with [Family Community Services] … Department personnel … unless an encampment creates an immediate hazard or obstruction.

If an encampment creates an immediate hazard or obstruction, sworn personnel shall immediately contact [Family Community Services Department] personnel … to determine whether they are available to respond.

If they are unavailable, sworn personnel may remove only the items that create an immediate hazard or obstruction and coordinate with FCS Department personnel … to store any personal property that was removed … pursuant to the … Policy for Responding to Encampments on Public Property.”

“Immediate Hazard” is defined in the Special Order as follows:

“A situation in which an encampment creates an immediate and articulable risk of serious injury or death to either the residents of the encampment or others. The mere possession of illegal drugs, drug paraphernalia, or a weapon does not in and of itself constitute an immediate hazard.”

EDITOR’S COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

When a crime is being committed or has been committed, misdemeanor or felony, in the presence of a sworn police officer, or when an officer is dispatched to a crime scene, the officer has the sworn duty and responsibility to uphold the law and to investigate. This includes securing an area or suspect, making an arrest if necessary based on probable cause and gather evidence of a crime. Under the law, it is sworn police that have the sole discretion and authority to make an arrest and charge an offender or to decide not to make an arrest.

It is clear from this language of the special order that APD sworn police are reduced to mere conduits of information to other city civilian employees who have no law enforcement authority nor training. It is difficult to rationalize and understand the instruction “The mere possession of illegal drugs, drug paraphernalia, or a weapon does not in and of itself constitute an immediate hazard.” Illicite drugs are evidence of a crime and any weapon can be evidence of a crime and create an immediate threat to inflict injury or even kill. This language essentially instructs sworn police not make and arrest but to remove what may be evidence of a crime for storage, ostensibly to be returned at a later date.

SPECIAL ORDER 22-46 INSTRUCTION ORDERS

“Only FCS Department personnel … shall make the determination that an encampment must be removed. Sworn personnel shall rely on FCS Department personnel … to conduct outreach before an unlawful encampment is removed, unless the encampment creates an immediate hazard or obstruction.”
…

Sworn personnel shall not throw away or remove any personal property associated with the encampment. Sworn personnel shall not direct any other agency or person to throw away or remove any personal property.”

EDITOR’S COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

These sections are absolute nonsense. This language essentially gives the Family Community Services Department the exclusive discretion or authority to decide if an unlawful encampment should be removed and when it is removed.

Simply put encampments in city parks are illegal. The general public have the right to the peaceful use and enjoyment of the parks without fear of injury to themselves, their family and children. There should be no discussion or delay in ordering removal of unlawful encampments on city parks. Any encampment on a city park is unlawful and it should be ordered removed immediately with the unlawful campers told to leave immediately or be removed by arrest if they refuse.

SPECIAL ORDER 22-46 INSTRUCTION ORDERS

“Sworn personnel shall ensure that their on-body recording devices (OBRD) are on and shall ensure their OBRD records the entire call for service from arrival on-scene, including all interactions with other City personnel, individuals in the encampments, and the public.”

EDITOR’S COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

This is already part of APD’s standard operating procedures. Absent is any discussion or reference that FCS Department employees are required to do the same, which they are not.

SPECIAL ORDER 22-46 INSTRUCTION ORDERS

“When FCS Department personnel or designee or other designated City personnel are available on-scene, sworn personnel shall refer questions to them, unless doing so would interfere with the encounter or place those individuals at imminent risk of harm.

Sworn personnel shall defer to FCS Department personnel or a designee to give any written or verbal notice to vacate an encampment, unless FCS Department personnel are unavailable and sworn personnel are responding to an immediate hazard or obstruction.

Beyond documenting written and verbal notification to vacate the encampment issued by FCS Department personnel, sworn personnel shall assist in a scene-security role only. To the extent possible, sworn personnel shall remain clear of the encampment to avoid unnecessary escalation while monitoring the interaction between FCS Department personnel or a designee and individuals in the encampment.

Sworn personnel shall only interact with individuals who are camping if they are presenting a danger to City personnel or others on-scene or are committing a crime. At all times, sworn personnel shall comply with Department Standard Operating Procedures and Department Special Order 20-18, which explains Department policies as agreed to pursuant to the Settlement Agreement in McClendon v. City of Albuquerque …”

EDITOR’S NOTE: McClendon v. City of Albuquerque is the 20-plus year federal lawsuit filed against the City of Albuquerque and Bernalillo County by an inmate arrested for a non-violent misdemeanor. The focus of the lawsuit was the living conditions within the City/County jail. The jail had a maximum capacity of 800, but the jail was repeatedly overcrowded with as many as 1,400 inmates who were often doubled up and living conditions were abhorrent. The overcrowding became so bad that the federal court would hold weekly and monthly status conferences and order the release of none violent defendants to reduce the overcrowding.

EDITOR’S COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

It is APD Procedural Order “SOP 2-80” entitled “ARRESTS, ARREST WARRANTS AND BOOKING PROCEDURES” that outlines APD’s policies agreed to pursuant to the settlement agreement in McClendon v. City of Albuquerque.

Medina’s Special Order 22-46 undermines and conflicts with Procedural Order 2-80 giving standard operating procedures to be used dealing with misdemeanor arrests, arrest warrants and issuance of citations. SOP 2-80 provides that officers shall issue citations when appropriate in lieu of arrest on non-violent misdemeanor offenses, not to include DWIs, when there are no circumstances necessitating an arrest. In such case, APD sworn officers must follow the legal procedures required in arresting, booking, and filing charges against such violators.

SOP 2-80 makes it clear that any APD officer may make an arrest if it is necessary, but will have to include the reasons why in an incident report The misdemeanor offenses affected by SOP 2-80 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 instructions in Special Order 22-46 that states “sworn personnel shall assist in a scene-security role only” taken as a whole reduces APD sworn police officers to public safety aids or to private security guard status. The functions, activities and roles outlined for APD sworn do not require a certified law enforcement officer.

The instruction “Sworn personnel shall only interact with individuals who are camping if they are presenting a danger to City personnel or others on-scene or are committing a crime” is contradictory and problematic. Simply put, camping in city parks is committing a crime yet APD police are not to interact with the homeless and cannot make an arrest unless told to do so by civilian city personnel who have no authority to make an arrest. Ostensibly if Family Community Service personnel disagree that an individual is presenting a danger, sworn police are required to stand down and do what they are told by city civilian staff.

ALBUQUERQUE’S PARK MANAGEMENT AND ORDINANCES

Albuquerque’s Park Management Division maintains and manages more than 288 park sites in the Albuquerque area. Most if not all city parks are closed to the general public from 10:00 pm to 6:00 am the next day. Park Management’s main focus is sustaining a healthy park system to make Albuquerque a great place to live and play. As places to relax, play, learn, and come together, parks are essential to the health and well-being of city residents and enhance the quality of life.

https://www.cabq.gov/parksandrecreation/parks

Except for unusual and unforeseen emergencies, parks are open to the public every day of the year during designated hours. Those designated hours are 6:00 am to 10:00 pm with the times posted at the parks. The city’s park ordinance provides:

“No person shall remain in, occupy, or use any park in the city which is closed to public use unless that person has been authorized to be present … . “ (City ordinance § 10-1-1-10 Park Operating Policy.) Consequently, because of closure hours, overnight camping by any member of the public is prohibited.

In addition to hours the city parks are open, City Park rules prohibit the following:

No person in a park is allowed to carry or possess at any time, firearms of any description, or air rifles, spring guns, bows and arrows, slings. (City ordinance 10-1-1-7 (A).
No alcoholic beverages (ordinance 12-4-8 (A)),
No motorized vehicles are allowed (ordinance 10-1-1-4 (C),
No glass containers are allowed ( ordinance 10-1-1-4 (c),
Littering is prohibited (ordinance 10-1-1-4 and 10-1-1-7 (B) (2).

The instructions in Special Order 22-46 are clear that APD sworn officers can not enforce any of those laws listed as park rules and regulations against the homeless and unlawful encampments.

ALBUQUERQUE COMMUNITY SAFETY DEPARTMENT

In 2021, the Keller Administration created the Albuquerque Community Safety Department (ACS) with an initial budget of $2.5 million. The ACS consists of social workers and mental health care workers to deal with those suffering from a mental health crisis or drug addiction crisis and they are dispatched in lieu of sworn police or fire emergency medical paramedics.

The fiscal year 2022 budget for ACS was $7.7 million and the fiscal year 2023 proposed budget doubles the amount to $15.5 million to continue the service of responding to calls for service and perform outreach for inebriation, homelessness, addiction, and other issues that do not require police or EMT response.

The Albuquerque Community Safety Department (ACS) dispatches trained and unarmed professionals to respond to 9-1-1 calls that do not require a police or paramedic response. ACS is taking hundreds of calls per month, easing the burden on police and paramedics and improving outcomes on behavioral health calls.

The Fiscal Year 2023 proposed budget was for $15 million to provide funding to add 74 new positions to make it a 24/7 round-the-clock operation across the city.

EXPECT CORONADO PARKS ALL OVER THE CITY

Coronado Park has been an unlawful homeless encampment that the city has allowed to fester for upwards of 10 years refusing to close it down. Coronado Park is considered by many as the heart of Albuquerque’s homeless crisis. Coronado Park has essentially become the “de facto” city sanctioned homeless encampment with the city not enforcing its ordinances and repeatedly cleaning it up only for the homeless to return the next day.

At any given time, Coronado Park has 70 to 80 tents crammed into the park with homeless wondering the area. It comes with and extensive history lawlessness including drug use, violence, murder, rape and mental health issues. In 2020, there were 3 homicides at Coronado Park. In 2019, a disabled woman was raped, and in 2018 there was a murder.

Police 911 logs reveal a variety of other issues. In February 2019, police investigated a stabbing after a fight broke out at the park. One month before the stabbing, police responded to a call after a woman said she was suicidal, telling police on lapel camera video that she had previously made attempts to overdose on meth.

City officials have said Coronado Park is the subject of daily responses from the encampment team because of the number of tent’s set up there. They say the encampment team, along with Parks and Recreation Department , and Solid Waste go out every morning, during the week, to give campers notice and clean up the park. They also work on getting them connected to resources and services they may need.

Chief Medina’s Special Order 22-46 will essentially allow all city parks to become unlawful homeless encampments or no man’s lands in every quadrant of the city. The result will be the city having Coronado parks all over the city.

Links to news sources are here:

https://www.kob.com/albuquerque-news/police-records-depict-pattern-of-problems-violence-at-coronado-park/5891961/

https://www.krqe.com/news/politics-government/the-process-behind-removing-homeless-camps-from-public-places/

CLEANING BILL FOR CORANDO PARK

The debate on how to address Albuquerque’s homelessness crisis was raised during the recently concluded 2023 city budget process. Questions were asked by city councilors about the cost of the city’s efforts to help the homeless. Questions were also asked about clean up costs.

When it comes to Coronado park, the city every other Wednesday dispatches a crew to temporarily clear it of people and clean out the debris. The team involves several departments, including Police, Family and Community Services, Solid Waste, and Parks and Recreation.

During one council budget hearing, Democrat City Councilor Klarissa Peña asked the Keller administration officials how much it spends on the biweekly cleanup at Coronado Park. The answer came as shock.

City budget officials said it is costing the city $27,154 ever two weeks or $54,308 a month to clean up the park only to allow the homeless encampment to return.

Acting Chief Administrative Officer Lawrence Rael cautioned that the amount includes staff time built into the city budget for homeless outreach that occurs throughout the city. Rael had this to say:

“There is no question that monitoring a park of that size with that many folks does cost some dollars to make sure we keep it clean. … I want [to point out] a portion of that $27,000 is already day-to-day operating costs we assume anyway.”

https://www.abqjournal.com/2501616/lewis-moves-to-correct-planned-parenthood-vote.html

CITY GIVES HOMELESS 72 HOURS TO VACATE UNLAWFUL ENCAMPMENTS

APD Chief Medina’s Department Special Order Special Order 22-46 is an attempt to try and clarify APD’s role in the process the city has in place to deal with unlawful homeless encampments. It is a long and drawn out process from when the city gets a complaint about a homeless camp to when it gets cleared out, if it ever gets cleared out.

There are multiple steps the city follows when there are no law enforcement sweep actions or tactical plans. When an encampment is reported and a complaint filed, the Family and Community Services Department and Albuquerque Community Safety Department sends outreach providers to speak to the people to see what services they might want and what services can be offered.

After the assessment, written “notices to vacate” are issued and the homeless people are given a full 72 hours to clear the area of their personal property and belongings. The camps are then cleared by the city, but it does not always stay that way. Neighbors, and area property owners and the homeless population are stuck in a vicious cycle of filing 311 reports and calling APD and filing complaints and getting camps cleared out, then the homeless campers simply move back in.

https://www.kob.com/albuquerque-news/city-official-answers-questions-on-homeless-encampments-in-albuquerque/6317454/

The city has one “encampment team” made up of seven people. Their job is to respond to reported encampments set up on public property, and give the people living there the written “notices to vacate.” Once their time is up, the encampment team checks in to make sure the people have in fact moved. Once the encampment has been vacated, the city cleans up whatever is left behind at the camp which includes many times trash and needles for elicit drug use.

https://www.krqe.com/news/politics-government/the-process-behind-removing-homeless-camps-from-public-places/

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

APD Chief Medina needs to withdraw SPECIAL ORDER 22-46 immediately. Unlawful encampments at city parks demand immediate orders to vacate city parks by APD sworn to protect the public that use the parks, their families and children. The general public have the right to demand an expect the peaceful use and enjoyment of all parks in a safe manner, especially where there are playgrounds and children, without interference from the homeless.

It is totally unacceptable to give the homeless 72 hours written “notices to vacate”to clear the area of their personal property and belongings when it comes to city parks. It is creating a “no man’s land” in city parks. The Family and Community Services Department and Albuquerque Community Safety Department should be requiring the immediate removal of unlawful encampments at city parks.

The city claims the only time the city can immediately clear out a camp is if it is putting the campers or community members in danger. That is not true. The city can rely on its nuisance abatement laws and declare encampments on city property nuisances.

Mayor Keller for his part can use the inherent authority of his office and issue executive orders to clean up and remove unlawful encampments. Ostensibly Mayor Keller is reluctant to do just that out of fear of being accused of being insensitive to the plight of the homeless as his administration spends $40 million in 2022 and upwards $60 million in 2023 to provide assistance to the homeless.

The city does have options. The city has the west side 24-7 homeless shelter which is located 20 miles outside the city that can be offered and where the homeless can go and camp. Other options include the Gateway Shelter Center. The city has on contract up to 10 services providers and locations that need to do more.

PICKING AND CHOOSING WHAT LAWS TO BE ENFORCED

When it comes to unlawful encampments at city parks, Mayor Keller and Chief Medina cannot and must not ignore enforcing the city’s anti-camping ordinances, vagrancy laws, civil nuisance abatement laws and criminal laws nor pretend they simply do not exist simply to accommodate the homeless at city parks.

APD Chief of Police Harold Medina’s special order is nothing more than Mayor Tim Keller and Chief Medina trying to pick and choose what laws are to be enforced by APD against the homeless when it comes to city parks. It eviscerates sworn police officers’ authority to enforce the laws by removing all discretionary authority when it comes to the homeless who camp at city parks.

If Mayor Keller and Chief Medina do not want law enforcement involved with the enforcing the laws when it comes to the homeless, then APD should not be dispatched to deal with the homeless. That responsibility should be assumed 100% by the Albuquerque Community Safety Department, which is one of the reasons the department was created in the first place.

Homeless unlawful encampment Squatters who have no interest in any offers of shelter, beds, motel vouchers from the city or alternatives to living on the street and want to camp at city parks really give the city no choice but to make it totally inconvenient for them to “squat” and forcing them to move on or be arrested by APD.

_________________

POSTSCRIPT

Following is the unedited Special Order 22-46

April 26, 2022

DEPARTMENT SPECIAL ORDER – SO 22-46
TO: ALL DEPARTMENT PERSONNEL
SUBJECT:PROCESS FOR RESPONDING TO AN UNLAWFUL ENCAMPMENT ON PUBLIC PROPERTY

The purpose of this Special Order is to establish the responsibilities of all Albuquerque Police Department (Department) sworn personnel when responding to a call for service to address unlawful encampments. This Special Order does not create policies governing other City of Albuquerque (City) departments or personnel. APD officials shall meet regularly with personnel from other City departments to determine whether revisions to this Special Order are necessary.

A. Definitions

1. Camp or Camping

The construction of, erection of, residing or dwelling within, or maintaining of tents or other simple, improvised dwellings for temporary shelter or residence.

2. Encampment

One or more tents, a structure composed of any type of material, or assembly of equipment or personal property located upon an identifiable area of public property within the City, which appears to a reasonable person as being used as a dwelling.

3. Immediate Hazard

A situation in which an encampment creates an immediate and articulable risk of serious injury or death to either the residents of the encampment or others. The mere possession of illegal drugs, drug paraphernalia, or a weapon does not in and of itself constitute an immediate hazard.

4. Non-Punitive, Services-Based Approaches

Practices that de-criminalize poverty and that give communities ways to manage homelessness without arresting people or punishing them for sleeping outside. Such practices include connection to services, including housing services, discretionary non-enforcement, diversion programs, and verbal warnings.

5. Obstruction

People, tents, personal property, garbage, debris or other objects related to an encampment that interfere with areas that are necessary for, or essential to the intended use of a public property or facility.

6. Personal Property

An item that: is reasonably recognizable as belonging to a person; has apparent utility in its present condition and circumstances; is not an empty plastic or paper bag or other trash; is not hazardous; or is identified by an owner as personal property. Examples of personal property include but are not limited to identification, personal papers and documents, tents, bicycles, radios and other electronic equipment, eyeglasses, prescription medications, photographs, jewelry, crutches, and wheelchairs. Personal property does not include shopping carts, large furniture items and building materials such as wood products, metal, pallets, or rigid plastic except those the owner intends to recycle for money. The relevant City employee or contracted entity shall determine whether an item is personal property, and in cases in which the status of an item cannot be reasonably determined under the totality of the circumstances, the item shall be treated and handled as personal property.

7. Removal

a. The requirement that camping individuals remove personal items;

b. The disposal of refuse or hazardous items that cannot be stored by the City; or

c. Family and Community Services (FCS) Department personnel or a designee taking temporary possession of an item when its owner cannot be located for the purpose of returning it to its owner, consistent with the City of Albuquerque Policy for Responding to Encampments on Public Property.

B. Response to Unlawful Encampments on Public Property

1. Sworn personnel shall neither damage nor remove an encampment without coordinating with FCS Department personnel or a designee, unless an encampment creates an immediate hazard or obstruction. If an encampment creates an immediate hazard or obstruction, sworn personnel shall immediately contact FCS Department personnel or a designee to determine whether they are available to respond. If they are unavailable, sworn personnel may remove only the items that create an immediate hazard or obstruction and coordinate with FCS Department personnel or a designee to store any personal property that was removed, pursuant to the City of Albuquerque Policy for Responding to Encampments on Public Property.

2. When responding to calls to assist FCS Department personnel or a designee to require the removal of an unlawful encampment:

a. Only FCS Department personnel or a designee shall make the determination that an encampment must be removed. Sworn personnel shall rely on FCS Department personnel or a designee to conduct outreach before an unlawful encampment is removed, unless the encampment creates an immediate hazard or obstruction.

b. When FCS Department personnel or a designee or other designated City personnel are available on-scene, sworn personnel shall refer questions to them, unless doing so would interfere with the encounter or place those individuals at imminent risk of harm.

c. Sworn personnel shall not throw away or remove any personal property associated with the encampment. Sworn personnel shall not direct any other agency or person to throw away or remove any personal property.

d. Sworn personnel shall ensure that their on-body recording devices (OBRD) are on and shall ensure their OBRD records the entire call for service from arrival on-scene, including all interactions with other City personnel, individuals in the encampments, and the public.

e. Sworn personnel shall confirm with an FCS Department representative that FCS Department personnel or a designee provided notification to vacate the encampment, when and how that notification was provided, and what efforts to provide outreach have been conducted. If sworn personnel have also conducted outreach, such information shall be shared with FCS Department personnel or a designee. Sworn personnel shall ensure that they record this information using their OBRDs.

f. Sworn personnel shall defer to FCS Department personnel or a designee to give any written or verbal notice to vacate an encampment, unless FCS Department personnel or a designee are unavailable and sworn personnel are responding to an immediate hazard or obstruction. Sworn personnel shall document, using their OBRDs, any verbal or written notice to vacate the encampment, as well as the basis for determining that an encampment is an immediate hazard or obstruction, if that decision is made, in the Computer-Aided Dispatch (CAD) System and by way of OBRD.

g. Beyond documenting written and verbal notification to vacate the encampment issued by FCS Department personnel or a designee, sworn personnel shall assist in a scene-security role only. To the extent possible, sworn personnel shall remain clear of the encampment to avoid unnecessary escalation while monitoring the interaction between FCS Department personnel or a designee and individuals in the encampment. Unless responding to a situation involving an immediate hazard or obstruction without the presence of FCS Department personnel or a designee:

i. Sworn personnel shall only interact with individuals who are camping if they are presenting a danger to City personnel or others on-scene or are committing a crime. At all times, sworn personnel shall comply with Department Standard Operating Procedures and Department Special Order 20-18, which explains Department policies as agreed to pursuant to the Settlement Agreement in McClendon v. City of Albuquerque, 95-cv-00024 (Doc. 1320, September 11, 2017).

ii. Sworn personnel shall make all reasonable efforts to pursue non­ punitive, services-based approaches and shall not attempt to enforce littering, trespassing, obstruction of sidewalk, and other laws and ordinances relating to quality of life unless FCS Department personnel or a designee request such enforcement and only after FCS Department personnel or a designee determine that the individual is continuing to trespass after being given notice and an opportunity to stop.

h. Sworn personnel shall neither request identification from an individual who is camping nor check an individual who is camping for warrants unless there is reasonable suspicion to believe the individual has an outstanding warrant or is committing a crime.

i. Sworn personnel shall confirm with FCS Department personnel or a designee whether available emergency shelter beds exist prior to any enforcement action requested by FCS Department personnel or a designee, including removal of an encampment or issuance of a citation. If no available emergency shelter beds exist, no enforcement actions shall be taken, including removal of an encampment or issuance of a citation, unless the encampment is an immediate hazard or obstruction.

j. Nothing in this Special Order shall be interpreted to restrict sworn personnel from removing encampments or investigating crimes committed on private property.

C. Grievance Procedure

1. Any grievance filed pursuant to the City of Albuquerque’s Policy for Responding to Encampments on Public Property shall be handled consistent with SOP Complaints Involving Department Personnel.

This Special Order shall expire within one (1) year of it being published.

Any questions regarding this Special Order should be directed to Field Services Bureau Deputy Chief of Police Joshua Brown.

BY ORDER OF:

HAROLD J. MEDINA
Chief of Police

Each Memorial Day, I am compelled to pay tribute to members of my family who have given so much and sacrificed so much to protect our freedoms and to protect this great country of ours. All these family members were born and lived in New Mexico, two were born in Chacon, New Mexico and the rest born and raised and educated in Albuquerque.

One gave the ultimate sacrifice during time of war.

My father Paul Dinelli and my Uncle Pete Dinelli, for whom I was named after, both served in the US Army during World War II when the United States went to war with Italy, Germany and Japan.

My father and uncle were first generation born Americans and the sons of Italian immigrants who settled in Albuquerque in the year 1900 to live the American dream. My Uncle Pete Dinelli was killed in action when he stepped on a land mine. My father Paul Dinelli was a disabled American Veteran when he returned to Albuquerque after World War II and was honorably discharged because of a service connected disability. Years after the war, my father met my mother Rose Fresques at the Alvarado Hotel where she had worked as a Harvey girl. After the couple married, my father went to barber school in Denver, Colorado, returned to Albuquerque and opened “Paul’s Barber Shop” which was located at Third and Lomas.

My uncles Fred Fresques and Alex Fresques, my mother’s two brothers, also served in World War II. My Uncle Alex Fresques served in England and was in the Air Force.

My uncle Fred Fresques saw extensive action in the US Army infantry during World War II and was awarded 2 Bronze Star medals and a purple heart for his service. The Bronze Star medal is awarded to individuals who, while serving with the Armed Forces of the United States in combat, distinguish themselves by heroism, outstanding achievement, or by meritorious service. The purple heart is awarded for being injured in combat or dying in combat. My Uncle Fred would never talk to anyone about what he saw. After the war, my Uncle Fred returned to Albuquerque and raised a family in Barelas. Over many years, my Uncle Fred was active in the Barelas Community Center and was a trainer for the “Golden Gloves” competition teaching young adults the sport of boxing.

My father-in-law, George W. Case, who passed away at the age 93, served in the United States Navy during World War II and saw action while serving on a destroyer. My father-in-law George Case was so proud of his service that he wore a World War II Veterans cap every day the last few years of his life. After the war, my father-in-law George Case returned to Albuquerque was married to my mother-in-law Laurel Del Castillo for 50 years, raised a family of 4 girls. George eventually owned a liquor store for a few years and then went on to build, own and operate the Old Town Car wash, which still stands today, and he was in the car wash industry for a number of years.

My nephew Dante Dinelli, was born and raised in Albuquerque and joined the service a few years after graduating from Cibola High School. Dante served 20 + years in the US Navy, retired as a Chief Petty Officer and worked in a civilian capacity for the Navy.

My two nephews, Matthew Barnes and Brandon Barnes, the sons of my younger sister, Pauline were born and raised in Albuquerque and went to Bosque Prep. My nephew Brandon Barnes is a graduate of the US Naval Academy. My nephew Major Matthew Barnes graduated from UNM with honors and served a tour in Afghanistan. Both Mathew and Brandon are Majors in the United States Marine Corps and both continue to climb the promotion ladder in the Marine Corps.

To all the wonderful and courageous men and women who have served and continue to serve our country to protect and secure the promise of freedom and the ideals upon which the United States was founded upon, and to those who made the ultimate sacrifice, I thank you for your service to our Country.

Your service and sacrifices to this great country of ours will never be forgotten. God bless you all and God Bless this great country of ours!

With 10 days before the June 7 primary, and with early voting having already begun, both Raúl Torrez and Brian Colón are airing negative campaign ads against each other as they run to be the next New Mexico Attorney General. It’s a sprint to the finish line.

RAÚL TORREZ

In early April, and before Brian Colón began his TV Ads, Raúl Torrez began an aggressive TV media campaign that repeatedly faulted Colón as a “career politician” who lacks “experience in public safety.” Torrez secured the endorsement of Democrat Senator Martin Heinrich who went so far as to do a TV commercial for Torrez saying that Torrez had his vote. Torrez has run an advertising campaign running at least 6 sperate commercials featuring him alone, one featuring Heinrich and negative ads against Colón.

On May 24, Raúl Torrez began to run his most negative campaign ad of the election thus far. The ad is very dramatic and emotional and it is as misleading as it is emotional. It is a 30 second commercial. It has the mother of UNM baseball player Jackson Weller, who was killed Darian Bashir outside a Nob Hill bar in 2019, appearing and looking directly into the camera telling Brian Colón to stop lying about the record of Raúl Torrez and that Torrez convicted Brashir who was sentenced to life in prison. The truth is, Torrez did not try the case himself but took credit for the conviction. What is not disclosed in the ad is that two years before the murder of Jackson Weller, Darian Bashir was arrested for the shooting of another man outside a downtown bar. Although Bashir was charged with the first murder, he never went to trial in that case and was released. A District Court Judge found that the office of District Attorney Raúl Torrez failed to comply with court ordered deadlines, did not interview witnesses on time, did not respond to motions as required by court orders with an unlicensed attorney appointed by Torrez handling the case. The first case was dismissed, Brashire was released and Brashire then killed Jackson Weller.

A search for a link to the campaign ad yielded no results for a link.

BRIAN COLÓN

Brian Colón has had 7 campaign commercials. The first was an emotional one where Colón describes his personal struggles, being raised in poverty and having to hock his dad’s wedding ring. In the second ad, Colón talks about a “shield and sword” approach to prosecutions and protecting the general public. Colón’s 3rd, 4th, 5th and 6ht ads are far more effective TV ads. Other ads go into great detail about Torrez’s “failed prosecution rates” as Bernalillo County District Attorney and his failure to keep the public safe. Statistics prepared by the District Court reveal the Bernalillo County District Attorney’s Office under Raúl Torrez has a 65% combined dismissal, acquittal and mistrial rate with cases charge by grand juries. A recent ad features Colón going into great deal about why his diverse experience make him the most qualified.

On May 27, Brian Colón began to run a TV ad challenging the ethics of Raúl Torrez and alleging prosecutorial misconduct when he was an Assistant United States Attorney for New Mexico. In 2012, United States Federal Judge Cristina Armijo accused then Assistant United States Attorney Raúl Torrez prosecuting a drug case and trying to “unfairly alter” a transcript of a recorded encounter between drug agents and an Amtrak train passenger suspected of carrying a large quantity of crack cocaine. At the center of the controversy was Raúl Torrez asking 2 Federal law enforcement agents to make changes to a transcript. Torrez then had a new transcript prepared with the changes and informed the judge during the hearing that he wasn’t offering it as evidence but an “aid” for listening to the recording. Defense counsel objected, telling the judge “They’re trying to make an illegal search legal by making changes in the transcript.” The court agreed with the defense and entered an order. The United State Attorney filed a motion asking Judge Armijo to withdraw her findings about Torrez and requested that the original order and the language be deleted. Armijo honored the request. The day after Judge Armijo filed her amended order, the United States Attorney office dismissed the felony drug possession case against the Defendant. A few months later, Torrez resigned and it has never been revealed if Torrez was asked to resign.

Below is a link to review the Colón ad:

https://vimeo.com/713787421/7434bd6a83

CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS

As is the case with any political campaign ad, no matter how effective, it absolutely useless unless the candidate has enough campaign contributions to air it on TV. For that reason BRIAN COLÓN has the upper hand to get his message out the last few days of the campaign.

According to the latest campaign finance reports, Colón has collected more than $1 million in campaign funds between April and October of last year. Colón has been given sizeable financial support from out-of-state law firms and attorneys in national firms. The political campaign committee of current Attorney General Hector Balderas, who is term limited, contributed a total of $10,000 to Colón. Colón had $911,546 cash on hand at the end of the May 9 reporting period. As of May 9, Colón reported spending $589,242. Most of the spending has gone to political consultants and to make media buys.

The link to the most recent Campaign Finance Report for Brian Colón is here:

https://login.cfis.sos.state.nm.us//Files/ReportsOutput//103/9cdc8f33-a7c2-4d02-b820-fed384501751.pdf

Raúl Torrez has attracted significant contributions from in-state lawyers. Torrez reported contributions of $636,772 between April and October of last year. As of May 9, Torrez’s expenditures totaled $694,511. Most of the spending was to pay political consultants and make media buys. As of May 9, the Torrez’s campaign reported having $382,305.

The link to the most recent Campaign Finance Report for Raúl Torrez is here:

https://login.cfis.sos.state.nm.us//Files/ReportsOutput//103/9be8522e-f6b5-47ea-8503-8cfb1f143895.pdf

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

The race between both Colón and Torrez was bound to be hard fought in that both have expressed they are interested in eventually becoming Governor or going on to serve in congress. Both State Auditor Brian Colón and District Attorney Raúl Torrez are well-funded and their personal attacks on each other will continue until election day.

Given the back-and-forth poll numbers, the margin of error of the polls, the high number of “undecideds”, the amount of money being raised and spent, the race for Attorney General is still very fluid. Anything can happen that could change the dynamics of the race, including a negative ad, and have a major impact on the number of undecides.

It is likely whoever wins the Democratic Primary on June 7, 2022 will likely become the next Attorney General.

The Albuquerque City Council is proposing to create two new “land use” zoning areas to allow 2 separate types of city sanctioned homeless encampments in all 9 city council districts for a total of 18 city sanctioned homeless encampments. Both are amendments updating the city’s 2017 Integrated Development Ordinance (IDO) that regulates residential and commercial zoning development and land use throughout the city.

One is called “living lots” and the other “safe outdoor spaces”. City sanctioned homeless encampments will be permitted in both areas. The “safe outdoor spaces” calls for the creation of government sanctioned homeless campsites where the homeless will be able to sleep and tend to personal hygiene. Under living lots zoning, open space areas would be designated where people would be allowed to sleep overnight in tents, cars or RVs. Empty parking lots and other unused space could be used.

Judy Young and Valere Mcfarland have submitted a guest column for publication. They have not been compensated for their article and have given their permission to publish on www.PeteDinelli.com.

JUDY YOUNG, MA, LMFT, LCDC

Judy Young is a longtime resident of Albuquerque and was born in Gallup, New Mexico. She moved from Albuquerque to Houston, Texas where her parents then resided to assist them in their elder years. When they achieved their dream of returning to Albuquerque, she retired from her position as an educator in Houston and moved to Albuquerque to be their caretaker in their final years.

While in Houston, Texas, she was a teacher and counselor for at-risk youth, many of whom were gang members. She was successful in mentoring many of these students to leave the gang lifestyle. She developed and administered the first prison rehabilitation program in a high security prison in Houston, Texas at the South Texas Intermediate Sanction Facility. The rehabilitation program Judy Young designed and implemented is still used today in Houston and in other prisons in throughout Texas.

Judy Young has a master’s degree in Community Program Development from Columbia University in New York City. Judy holds licenses as a Licensed Marriage and Family Therapist (LMFT); and Licensed Chemical Dependency Counsellor (LCDC).While at Columbia, she worked on three very successful strategic projects that were a part of cleaning up NYC. After securing her master’s degree from Columbia, she returned to Albuquerque.

Soon after arriving in Albuquerque, she wrote the $92 million grant that started the Cancer Research and Treatment Center.She has been involved with community affairs for some time and she worked with Phil Chacon and Judy Anderson to fiercely lobby for the first publicly funded domestic violence program in the country. This domestic violence program was considered the flagship for the rest of the country to follow suit of revamping laws and provide protection for victims of domestic violence. Judy Young worked with New Mexico’s first promoter, Frank Crosby, who was widely known for promoting the Unser’s of New Mexico racing fame and representing businesses in the first Home and Sports Shows in New Mexico.

Judy has been actively engaged in the community with East Gateway Coalition, Singing Arrow Neighborhood Association, Women Taking Back Our Neighborhood, Homeless Task Force, Sheriff’s Citizens Academy, Foothills Community Policing Council. She has initiated recommendations that, when followed, significantly reversed the rise in crime. Judy Young is a candidate for Bernalillo County Commission, District 5.

www.youngbernco.com

VALERE MCFARLAND, PH.D.

Valere McFarland, Ph.D., is a former resident of Echo Ridge neighborhood located in in the Northeast heights City Council District 4 represented by City Councilor Brook Bassan. Although currently not a resident of New Mexico, she plans on returning soon and has a very strong interest in crime in Albuquerque because of contacts she still has here. She is a very active member of “Women Taking Back Our Neighborhoods” (WTBON), a group founded in 2018 in Southeast Albuquerque to inform the public and demand greater accountability from elected and other civic leaders for preventing crime on Central Ave., in neighborhoods, and in public parks.

Dr. McFarland holds degrees in gerontology, anthropology, and sociology. Her master’s degree is in education foundations, and political science. Her PhD is in education policy that overlaps to business, medicine, politics. She spent an extra year in her PhD program to gain a certificate in disability studies. She has have worked with the homeless, including disadvantaged youths her entire career. When she was doing her gerontology degree, she worked in a homeless shelter. She has worked for most of her career in education in a Research One university with high at risk of achieving, indigenous populations. During her career she has dealt with issues of poverty and homelessness and has spent a lifetime challenging and confronting unequal treatment of disadvantaged individuals, groups, and populations, through providing access to an equality-based education. She has been an officer and director of for-profit and not-for-profit boards. She is a small business owner and has deep concerns about the impact of crime in Albuquerque, Bernalillo County, and all of New Mexico.

JUDY YOUNG AND VALERE MCFARLAND GUEST COLUMN

THE CAMPUS MODEL – A VIABLE ALTERNATIVE TO ENCAMPMENTS AND SAFE OUTDOOR SPACES

As members of Women Taking Back Our Neighborhoods and the Albuquerque community, we are voicing our strong opposition to the Amendments to the city’s zoning ordinances that are scheduled for vote at the City Council meeting on June 6, 2022. These amendments update the city’s 2017 Integrated Development Ordinance to create ‘living lots’ that allow sleeping overnight in tents, cars or RVs, and the other is called ‘safe outdoor spaces’ which are commonly known as ‘encampments.’ These proposed amendments will be voted on at the June 6, 2022, City Council meeting and if approved will alter the lifestyles and property values of Albuquerque residents for decades to come.

BACKGROUND

In preparing this article, we conducted a review of the literature for city sanctioned encampments in four western U.S. cities (results are listed on our complete report attached to this abstract). Cities have learned that this kind of tolerance does not allow them to perform their fiduciary, which is to first protect physical and fiscal safety of their citizenry.

The amendment proposed by Councilor Basson that would allow criminal elements to inhabit our residential neighborhoods raises the questions of:

(a) whether Councilor Basson and the majority council members are honoring their fiduciary to protect the citizens of Albuquerque; and,

(b) whether Councilor Basson and the majority council members recognize that mixing a criminal element with other unsuspecting and unprotected encampment residents would cause an inhumane condition with threats of bodily and psychic damage.

Our review of four western cities (Denver, Honolulu, Salt Lake City and Honolulu) that have implemented sanctioned encampments, with huge levels of support and services that Albuquerque cannot begin to match, has shown that irreparable damage has been sustained by these cities: not just to residents and neighborhoods where sanctioned encampments are placed, but to innocent encampment residents who have been raped, murdered, beaten, robbed and experienced what can only be described as “inhumane treatment” (while being promised safety as residents by city employees as Outreach Workers).

A DISASTER IN THE MAKING

Councilor Basson and council members showing support for her proposal are exhibiting zero accountability to put forth what our review has shown to be a disaster in the making. We reviewed the outcomes of sanctioned encampments in Seattle, Salt Lake City, Denver, and Honolulu, including their new policy directives for transitional housing such as the Gibson Model, tiny home communities (done the right way); and a community/campus model. The review also includes policies of some 65 cities across the United States who, having recognized the destruction to their citizens from the encroachment of encampments, are implementing ordinances to remove all encampments.

To comply with the 2018 Boise, Idaho federal court decision Martin v. City of Boise 2018 cities must have services that include shelters and beds to accommodate the homeless population. Increasing accommodations and services for homeless bring cities closer toward compliance with Martin v. City of Boise 2018. These programs bring physical and fiscal safety to communities while reducing crime.

Thus, we request that the proposal to sanction dangerous and crime inducing encampments within the City of Albuquerque be withdrawn. If this proposal for zoning changes comes to a vote, we are asking ALL City Councilors to vote ‘NO.’

There is an alternative to this bad idea, and we have outlined it below.

THE CAMPUS MODEL

Albuquerque City’s purchase of the Gibson Medical Center (GMC) with its Gateway Hub has been a significant STEP ONE toward the City’s commitment to comply with the 2018 federal court decision known as Martin v. City of Boise, Idaho that said, ‘cities cannot make it illegal for people to sleep or rest outside without providing sufficient indoor alternatives.’ Albuquerque City is moving toward finding beds for those homeless individuals who are currently residing in unsanctioned encampments.

While Gateway Hub at GMC will be a step in the right direction, it will not be large enough to serve the needs of the homeless population in unsanctioned encampments. The Campus Model provides an additional step as an adjunct to the Gateway Hub at Gibson Medical Center for transitioning to permanent housing. This establishes it as a Viable Alternative to Encampments.

The Campus Model recognizes that there are two categories of homeless individuals: the transit homeless and the local or ‘real’ homeless. The Campus Model is geared to serve the local homeless population. The Campus Model works effectively because it separates the truly local homeless population from the non-local transient population.

The truly homeless are a local population that benefits from services and wishes to better themselves. The transient homeless is a population that travels from city to city, takes advantage of handouts, and has no desire to better themselves. This population consists of those who panhandle and/or commit crimes to feed their drug and/or alcohol addiction. They indeed welcome a handout, but they have no desire to better themselves. Thus, they can destroy a local community.

FIRST STEP: GATEWAY HUB AT GIBSON MEDICAL CENTER.

“The Gibson Medical Center (GMC) is to be an anchor facility to fill healthcare and social service gaps to Albuquerque’s homeless population. The Gateway Center will comprise a portion of the facility to provide a point of entry shelter and services to the homeless. The mission of the Gateway Center will be to “provide a safe and welcoming place that provides a low-barrier, trauma-informed shelter along with services to the homeless using a client-centered approach.”

SECOND STEP: CAMPUS MODEL

This is a viable researched based alternative that has worked in other cities and can serve as an adjunct to the city’s long-range plan to provide services to the homeless by offering a community centered approach to transition individuals who represent the local homeless population to permanent homes.

LOCATION

The CAMPUS MODEL should be located outside the city where larger tracts of land at cheaper prices can be purchased. Two possible locations are: (a) The existing Westside Emergency Housing Center. It is a county/city operated facility, but the city owns the land. The existing building will need to be razed but there is land to utilize while this is being done. (b) A second site may be the Double Eagle II airport where the city also owns large areas of land.

KEY COMPONENTS

The key components to the Campus Model would be as follows:

1. Temporary housing can be expanded to include dormitory style units with community kitchens and bathrooms for singles. Small apartments with separate bedrooms, kitchens and bathrooms with accommodations for families or individuals with service animals can be built in a later stage as well.

2. Meals: Provided cafeteria style with volunteers assisting.

3. Medical care will be needed for physical and mental health care, substance abuse treatment and police drop-off. Cost-effective ways to handle some of this can include nurses or physicians assistants staffed seven days, 24-hours. Coordination with Gateway Hub (GMC) can be made for more intensive medical care.

4. Education and job training: Non-profit, education and other providers would be able to work together to deliver comprehensive care services.

5. Community center: Includes a central meeting place for activities such as self-care and community gardening.

NEED

It is clear that the Albuquerque City Council is searching for placements that involve more numbers of homeless individuals than can be accommodated in the planned Gateway Hub at the Gibson Medical Center. The Campus Model will supplement services offered at the Gateway Hub at the GMC, easing a significant gap in available space and services. The proposed sanctioned encampments with a change in zoning to create ‘living lots’ that allow sleeping overnight in tents, cars or RVs, and ‘safe outdoor spaces are destined to fail options and threaten physical and fiscal safety to residences, citizens, and businesses.

BENEFIT

The Campus Model seeks to rehabilitate local homeless and prepare them to reintegrate into society with the dignity of being able to support themselves through employment. The Campus Model supports individuals who choose to work, pay taxes, and participate in a stable civic life. Note: Several cities have directly benefitted from the Campus Model. For example, Houston used an integrative model. San Antonio used the Campus Model.

The benefits of the campus model are identified as follow:

1. Cleans up our parks and recreational sites built for family recreational purposes.

2. Supports businesses within the local economy (where they currently incur the adverse economic impact from homeless and transients).

3. Provides public safety with policies against public intoxication, drugs or alcohol, and where all residents are held accountable. The Campus Model effectively separates the truly local homeless population from non-local transients.

RECOMMENDATIONS

We offer the following four recommendations:

1. The City of Albuquerque needs to conduct and update its own point in time survey.

EDITOR’S NOTE: Each year the “Point in Time” (PIT) survey is conducted to determine how many people experience homelessness on a given night in Albuquerque, and to learn more about their specific needs. The PIT count is done in communities across the country. The PIT count is the official number of homeless reported by communities to the federal Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to help understand the extent of homelessness at the city, state, regional and national levels. HUD requires that any community receiving federal funding from homeless assistance grant programs conduct an annual count. In even numbered years, only sheltered homeless are surveyed. In odd numbered years, both sheltered and unsheltered homeless are surveyed. Only those homeless people who can be located and who agree to participate in the survey are counted. The PIT count is viewed as a single night snapshot of homeless people and it is understood to be an undercount. The City of Albuquerque contracts with The New Mexico Coalition to End Homelessness to conduct the annual “Point in Time” (PIT). In even-numbered years, only homeless people who stay in shelters are counted. The PIT count represents the number of homeless people who are counted on one particular night. This year’s count occurred from January 26 to February 1.

https://www.cabq.gov/family/documents/2019-albuquerque-pit-count-final.pdf

There exists a strong rationale and fiscal support for a PIT survey to be conducted by the city. Any survey of need must first address the target population. The target population for all of the current piecemeal projects is local homeless. To miss the target population is to miss the mark with devastating results. The city needs to do its own ‘Point in Time’ survey and get an accurate count of homeless living on the street and camping. The new Albuquerque Community Safety department could do the survey. This could start with Coronado Park and the downtown areas of concentration and come up with numbers in each city council district.

In fiscal year 2021, the Keller Administration created the Department (ACS) with an initial budget of $2.5 million. The ACS consists of social workers and mental health care workers to deal with those suffering from a mental health crisis or drug addiction crisis and they are dispatched in lieu of sworn police or fire emergency medical paramedics. The Albuquerque Community Safety Department (ACS) dispatches trained and unarmed professionals to respond to 9-1-1 calls that do not require a police or paramedic response. ACS is taking hundreds of calls per month, easing the burden on police and paramedics and improving outcomes on behavioral health calls. The Fiscal Year 2023 enacted budget for ACS is for $15 million to provide funding to add 74 new positions to make it a 24/7 round-the-clock operation across the city. Thus, PIT funding and staff support are available.

2. All city council members must either vote ‘no’ or withdraw the proposed amendments to the city’s Integrated Development Ordinance that would create ‘living lots’ and ‘safe outdoor spaces.’ note: the meeting for the scheduled vote has been set for June 6, 2022.

3. City council approval of resolution calling for the implementation of the campus model at the westside emergency housing center, double eagle ii airport, or another suitable location conducive to campus model location requirements (outside the city parameters to prevent access to prior influences).

4. Use the $950,000 amount that was budgeted may 16, 2002 for unapproved ‘living lots’ and ‘safe outdoor spaces’ to begin campus model site prep and construction

5. Appoint a professionally mediated emergency homelessness task force to include citizens who have worked directly ‘on-the-ground with the Albuquerque homeless population.

SUMMARY

Albuquerque is at a critical crossroads. The City can either choose to instill a program of harm for decades and generations to come, or it can choose one of ‘short term pain for long term gain.’ The latter entails carefully building a comprehensive Campus Model with an integrative program for the real homeless. Instead of following a path that will lead to certain harm to residents and neighborhoods, we offer a working alternative with the Campus Model. Recommendations and working solutions to homelessness are multi-layered.

We recognize that there is a population that has barriers to obtaining services and housing. However, the priority of government leaders in Albuquerque – as it is in any city – is the physical and fiscal safety of the residents, including those locals who are homeless. This is called a ‘fiduciary’ and is inherent in a representative democracy.

We want to trust that it is a given that our safety is paramount to our elected officials. We cannot nor should we have to examine our leaders in the way they make decisions. But with the proposal to amend zoning to accommodate encampments within our neighborhoods and the lineup of votes supporting the proposal, what are we to think about these elected officials’ view of our safety?

The City Council has approved some $950,000 in the May 16, 2022 budget for the not yet approved Amendments for encampments and safe places. This money can be transferred to the Campus Model program to begin construction. We say ‘STOP’ now and put on the brakes to an idea that has been proven to not work. Encampments are a danger to our community and are unwanted!

Respectfully,

Judy Young, MA, LMFT, LCDC
Valere McFarland, Ph.D

DINELLI COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

Research shows that housing is the most effective approach to end homelessness with a much larger return on investment than offering government sanctioned encampments and “tent cities”. Given the millions the city is spending each year, it needs to continue with the approach of offering programs, building shelter space and making beds available for its homeless population.

CITY MEETING MORAL OBLIGATION TO HELP HOMELESS

The city has a moral obligation to help the homeless, especially those who suffer from mental illness and drug addiction. The city is in fact meeting that moral obligation with the city spending upwards of $114 Million with housing assistance vouchers, mental health care services and shelter for the homeless.

Albuquerque is making a huge financial commitment to help the homeless. Last year, it spent upwards of $40 million to benefit the homeless in housing and services. The 2023 proposed budget significantly increases funding for the homeless by going from $35,145,851 to $59,498,915. The city contracts with 10 separate homeless service providers throughout the city and it funds the Westside 24-7 homeless shelter.

The city has bought the 572,000-square-foot Lovelace Hospital Complex on Gibson for $15 million that currently has space of 200 beds or more and transforming it into the Gateway Center Homeless shelter. City officials have said that the city is expected to launch multiple services on the property this winter, including a 50-bed women’s shelter, a sobering center and a space designed to deliver “medical respite” care for individuals who would have no place other than a hospital to recover from illnesses and injury.

The massive facility could be remodeled even further to house the homeless and convert offices, treating rooms, operating rooms and treatment rooms into temporary housing accommodations. The onsite auditorium and cafeteria could also be utilized for counseling and feeding programs from service providers.

ENFORCE THE LAW

Government officials who want to establish government sanction encampments have a hard time dealing with the facts that many homeless adults simply want to live their life as they choose, where they want to camp for as long as they can get away with it, without any government nor family interference and especially no government rules and no regulations.

The city cannot just ignore and not enforce its anti-camping ordinances, vagrancy laws, civil nuisance laws and criminal laws nor pretend they simply do not exist. Squatters who have no interest in any offers of shelter, beds, motel vouchers or alternatives to living on the street really give the city no choice but to make it totally inconvenient for them to “squat” anywhere they want and force them to move on. After repeated attempts to force them to move on and citations arrests are in order.

CRISIS MANAGEMENT

The homeless crisis will not be solved by the city, but it can and must be managed. Providing a very temporary place to pitch a tent, relieve themselves, bathe and sleep at night with rules they do not want nor will likely follow is not the answer to the homeless crisis. The answer is to provide the support services, including food and lodging, and mental health care needed to allow the homeless to turn their lives around, become productive self-sufficient citizens, no longer dependent on relatives or others.

TELL COUNCIL TO VOTE NO

“Safe outdoor spaces” and “living lots” will be a disaster for the city as a whole. Both will destroy neighborhoods, make the city a magnet for the homeless and destroy the city efforts to manage the homeless through housing. The public needs to make their opinions known and tell the city council to reject both zoning allowances.

The public needs to voice their opinions and tell the city council to reject both zoning allowances.
The email address to contact each city councilor and the Director of Counsel services are as follows:

lesanchez@cabq.gov

louiesanchez@allstate.com

ibenton@cabq.gov

kpena@cabq.gov

bbassan@cabq.gov

danlewis@cabq.gov

LEWISABQ@GMAIL.COM

patdavis@cabq.gov

tfiebelkorn@cabq.gov

trudyjones@cabq.gov

rgrout@cabq.gov

lrummler@cabq.gov

On May 16, the Albuquerque City Council voted 7 to 2 to approve the 2022-2023 city budget. The overall budget approved by the Albuquerque City council is for $1.4 Billion and with $857 million in general fund Appropriations. The budget approved by the council was increased by 20% over the current year’s budget which ends June 10, 2022.

The council approved the budget on a 7-2 vote with Democrat City Councilors Pat Davis, Isaac Benton, Klarisa Pena, Tammy Fiebelkorn and Louie Sanchez and Republicans Brook Basaan and Trudy Jones voting YES and Republicans Dan Lewis and Renee Grout voting NO. The fiscal year begins on July 1, 2022 and will end on June 30, 2023.

LEWIS CHANGES A VOTE

Initially, the city council had voted 8 to 1 to approve the $857 million General Fund budget that was part of the entire $1.4 billion budget. When the initial vote to approve the budget was taken, the City Council adjourned for a short recess for its customary “dinner break”.

Upon reconvening after the dinner break, City Councilor Dan Lewis announced that although he did not want to change his “NO” vote on the entire budget, he wanted to change his vote to correct his vote allocating $250,000 to a Planned Parenthood of New Mexico sponsorship that was sponsored by City Councilor Tammy Fiebelkorn.

Under parliamentary procedure rules followed by the City Council, only a counselor who voted in favor of the passage of a measure can move for consideration of that measure, in this case the entire budget. Republican Councilor Renee Grout, having initially voted for the budget, moved to reconsider the budget vote to allow Lewis to correct and vote NO for allocating $250,000 to a Planned Parenthood of New Mexico sponsorship.

Ostensibly, during the City Council dinner break, Dan Lewis was able to convince Republican Renee Grout to move to reconsider the vote on the budget, which she did once the council reconvened. Dan Lewis did not change his NO vote on the budget but rather correct his vote for allocating $250,000 to Planned Parenthood of New Mexico. Lewis was among the six councilors who had approved Democrat Councilor Tammy Fiebelkorn’s amendment to include the Planned Parenthood funding in the budget.

Dan Lewis offered an explanation for his seeking to reconsider the vote on the Planned Parenthood of New Mexico sponsorship and said this:

“I was honestly looking at another amendment when we voted on this and just want to change my vote on the record.”

The budget amendment passed again on a 6 to 3 vote with Republican City Councilor Trudy Jones, who had initially voted against it, supporting its passage when it was voted upon again. The budget also repassed on a 7 to 2 vote, with Republican Renee Grout joining Lewes in opposing the passage of the budget. in the do-over.

Fiebelkorn celebrated the approval of the funding of Planned Parenthood and had this to say in a written statement:

“These funds support our local Planned Parenthood clinic to ensure that all Albuquerque women have access to family planning, abortion, and other reproductive health services. ”

The link to the quoted news source is here:

https://www.abqjournal.com/2501616/lewis-moves-to-correct-planned-parenthood-vote.html

LEWIS COMPLAINS ABOUT BUDGET ENACTEMENT

After the May 16 City Council meeting approving the $1.4 billion dollar budget, City Councilor Dan Lewis said in an interview that he could not support appropriating $100 million in additional revenues and that was the reason for voting NO on the budget, Lewis had this to say:

“I just disagree with the entire budget. … I think it could have been done a lot better.”

Dan Lewis failed to provide specific examples of departments or programs he felt should not be funded or that were given too much money in the approved budget.

The only appropriation Lewis singled out and objected to was the $250,000 council sponsorship of Planned Parenthood, no doubt because he is “prolife” and is opposed to Plan Parenthood and a woman’s right to choose.

Republican City Councilor Dan Lewis mouthing off and saying “I just disagree with the entire budget. … I think it could have been done a lot better” amounts to nothing more than meritless, self-righteous indignation and laziness on his part.

If Dan Lewis had a problem with the city budget, he should have offered amendments to voice his concerns and make cuts or require further approval from the City Council, but no, he just wanted to complain for the sake of complaining and for publicity.

Lewis is no neophyte to the City Council. He has just begun his third term on the city council after a 4-year absence caused by him losing his run for Mayor in 2017 in a landslide to Tim Keller.

Lewis has served as the City Council Budget Chair in the past and knows full well that he could have just as easily instructed the council to draft a proposed “substitute budget” to his liking, or sponsored amendments to the proposed budget, but that would have required effort and some work on his part.

The blunt truth is Dan Lewis could have NOT have done a better job with the budget and he just wants to complain for publicity’s sake.

Dan Lewis has already made it known privately to supporters he is running for Mayor again in 2025. His voting NO on the budget amounts to nothing more than his continuing obstructionists’ tactics he is known for since assuming office on January 1 to carry out his personal vendetta against Tim Keller.

REPEAL OF 1969 ABORTION BAN

On Friday, February 26, 2021 Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham signed a bill repealing the 1969 abortion ban. The 1969 law criminalized abortion to end a woman’s pregnancy except in certain circumstances, such as rape and incest. The 1969 state statute was not enforced in the state due to the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Roe v Wade in the 1970s, which legalized abortion nationwide.

The repeal of the 1969 law was necessitated by the fact repeated attempts have been made over the years to have the United States Supreme Court reverse the decision of Roe v Wade. With the appointment of 3 very conservative supreme justices over the last 4 years, the reversal of Roe v. Wade is became more and more likely by the Supreme Court, in which case New Mexico’s 1969 law would again become law in the state.

In a statement, Governor Lujan Grisham had this to say:

“A woman has the right to make decisions about her own body. Anyone who seeks to violate bodily integrity, or to criminalize womanhood, is in the business of dehumanization. New Mexico is not in that business – not anymore. Our state statutes now reflect this inviolable recognition of humanity and dignity. I am incredibly grateful to the tireless advocates and legislators who fought through relentless misinformation and fear-mongering to make this day a reality. Equality for all, equal justice and equal treatment – that’s the standard. And I’m proud to lead a state that today moved one step closer to that standard.”

https://www.koat.com/article/gov-lujan-grisham-signs-abortion-bill-repealing-decades-old-ban/35651457

REPEAL CRITICIZED AND DEFENDED

Republican State Senator Crystal Diamond, R-Elephant Butte, said the bill’s passage was not a win for women, but for abortion providers and said:

“With the stroke of her pen, the governor has weakened standards of care for women, stripped conscience protections for medical professionals and given the abortion industry unchecked power to operate under the radar in our state. ”

Supporters of the repeal pushed back hard on the claim arguing other medical conscience protections in state and federal law will remain in place. In addition, advocates for the repeal of the 1969 law criminalizing abortion was statute of a highly sexist era.

https://www.abqjournal.com/2363746/governor-signs-bill-repealing-abortion-ban-into-law.html

LEAKED UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT DECISION REVERSING ROE V. WADE

On May 3, 2022 the on line publication POLITICAL reported that the United Supreme Court has voted to strike down the landmark Roe v. Wade decision, according to an initial draft majority opinion written by Justice Samuel Alito circulated inside the court and obtained by POLITICO. The draft opinion is a full-throttled, unflinching repudiation of the 1973 decision which guaranteed federal constitutional protections of abortion rights and a subsequent 1992 decision of Planned Parenthood v. Casey that largely maintained the right.

In the leaked draft of the decision Justice Alito writes

“We hold that Roe and Casey must be overruled. … It is time to heed the Constitution and return the issue of abortion to the people’s elected representatives.”

Quoting the POLITICAL report:

“The immediate impact of the ruling as drafted would be to end a half-century guarantee of federal constitutional protection of abortion rights and allow each state to decide whether to restrict or ban abortion. It’s unclear if there have been subsequent changes to the draft.

No draft decision in the modern history of the court has been disclosed publicly while a case was still pending. The unprecedented revelation is bound to intensify the debate over what was already the most controversial case on the docket this term.

A person familiar with the court’s deliberations said that four of the other Republican-appointed justices — Clarence Thomas, Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett — had voted with Alito in the conference held among the justices after hearing oral arguments in December.

The three Democratic-appointed justices — Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan — are working on one or more dissents, according to the person. How Chief Justice John Roberts will ultimately vote, and whether he will join an already written opinion or draft his own, is unclear.

The document, labeled as a first draft of the majority opinion, includes a notation that it was circulated among the justices on Feb. 10. If the Alito draft is adopted, it would rule in favor of Mississippi in the closely watched case over that state’s attempt to ban most abortions after 15 weeks of pregnancy.”

https://www.politico.com/news/2022/05/02/supreme-court-abortion-draft-opinion-00029473

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

If the United States Supreme Court does in fact reverse Roe v. Wade as is anticipated sometime soon and makes abortion an issue and a right for states to decide, no one should be surprised if Dan Lewis introduces a city council resolution that would prohibit abortions from being conducted within the city limits. It is also likely other communities in the state will do the same.

City Council and County Commission resolutions could call for prohibiting the issuance of licenses to do business to any health care provider that provide abortions. Failure to have a business license would allow government action to shut them down.

As it stands, abortions in New Mexico are now legal with the repeal of 1969 criminal law. However, abortion is already an issue in the Governor’s race with one Republican candidate running on outlawing abortion as her sole platform.

Once the final Supreme Court ruling is issued that in fact reverses Roe v. Wade, the Governor and the New Mexico legislature need to convene a special session and enact a Woman’s Health Care Act codifying Roe v. Wade confirming a woman’s right to choose and prohibiting any government within the state placing any limitations on a woman’s right to choose.

You know a race is tight when candidates for office raise millions, exchange negative ads, different polls show a different leader and the candidates get highly personal in debates. Such is the status of the race for attorney general between Democrats State Auditor Brian Colón and Bernalillo County District Attorney Raúl Torrez. The primary election is on June 7, 2022 and early voting has already begun.

FLIP FLOPPING POLLS

On March 5, nearly 1,000 Democrats attended the Democratic Pre-Primary Convention and cast their voted for the office of Attorney General of New Mexico and the vote was as follows:

Brian Colón – 61.46%
Raúl Torrez – 38.54%

https://nmdemocrats.org/news/dpnm-releases-results-of-2022-pre-primary-convention-voting/

After the March 5 Democratic convention, Colón was considered to be the clear front runner in the race for the Democratic nomination for Attorney General. The race for Attorney General was considered Colón’s race to lose. That is no longer the case and the race now appears to be a tossup with two polls showing different results and reflecting a 10 point spread. .

KOB CHANNEL 4 POLL

On May 12, KOB Channel 4 released a poll it commissioned with Survey USA in the Democratic primary race for Attorney General. SurveyUSA conducts market research for corporations and interest groups, but is best known for conducting opinion polls for various political offices and questions for television stations.

The SurveyUSA poll was conducted from April 29 to May The state wide survey was conducted of 583 likely registered Democratic voters and has a plus or minus margin of error of 5.7%. The results of the poll did not come as a surprise to many political observers given the negative advertising by Raúl Torrez.

The SurveyUSA poll results were as follows:

Undecided: 38%
Raúl Torrez: 34%
Brian Colón: 28%

The link to the quoted KOB news story is here:

https://www.kob.com/new-mexico/many-voters-yet-to-take-sides-for-ag-as-torrez-holds-narrow-lead-over-colon/

The link to the Survey USA poll is here:

https://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollReport.aspx?g=cab29a11-f2f6-4985-9cfa-6f437e314c34

LAKE RESEARCH POLL

On May 25, it was revealed that the Brian Colón campaign had commissioned a poll by Lake Research Partners. Lake Research Partners is a national public opinion and political strategy research firm founded in 1995. The polling firm is considered “progressive” and consistently accurate. It prides itself in being a woman-owned small business with a commitment to diversity working only for pro-choice candidates. For three consecutive cycles, fivethirtyeight.com rated Lake Research at the top of all Democratic polling firms in terms of accuracy. In New Mexico, Lake Research Partners is very well known and has been heavily relied upon in election cycles because of its accuracy.

https://www.lakeresearch.com/

The Lake Research poll was taken May 12 to 15 and has a margin of error of plus or minus 4.4%. The poll used in-person phone calls to 500 likely voters. The Lake Research poll finds Colón is leading in all geographic areas including Bernalillo County, where both Colón and Torrez call home.

The Lake Research Poll results are as follows:

Undecided: 28%
Brian Colón: 35%
Raúl Torrez: 31%

NEGATIVE TV ADS BY BOTH CANIDATES

With less than 2 weeks before the June 7 primary, both Raúl Torrez and Brian Colón have commenced negative campaign ads against each other.

RAÚL TORREZ

In early April, and before Brian Colón began his TV Ads, Raúl Torrez began a relentless and aggressive TV media campaign that repeatedly hammered and faulted Colón as a “career politician” who lacks “experience in public safety.” Torrez was able to secure the endorsement of Democrat Senator Martin Heinrich who went so far as to do a TV commercial for Torrez saying we need an experienced prosecutor and that Torrez had his vote. Torrez has run a slick advertising campaign running at least 4 sperate commercials featuring him alone and negative ads against Colón. The TV stations first ran Torrez campaign ads then ran unrelated commercials followed with commercials featuring Senator Martin Heinrich endorsing Torres.

THE HEINRICH FACTOR

Historically, United Senators stay out of party contested races, but not Martin Heinrich who has now made it a habit of endorsing as many Democrats in contested races as he can. It is well known that Heinrich is said to be planning on running for Governor in 4 years. Heinrich has in fact moved his family back to New Mexico enrolling his two sons in the Albuquerque Public Schools and his wife securing a job working in Santa Fe for Meow Wolf. Heinrich likely views Colón as running for Governor in 4 years after serving as Attorney General and he likely feels that it is better to defeat Colón’ now to end Colón’s political career than to deal with him in 4 years. One thing is for certain, Martin Heinrich has done himself no favors getting involved with so many contested Democratic races to the point there is now talk that he may find himself on the receiving end of a Democrat opposing him in the 2024 election cycle.

Both Torrez and Heinrich are being disingenuous when they say being a criminal prosecutor is a qualification to be Attorney General. Ostensibly they are ignorant to the fact that former Democrat New Mexico Attorney Generals Tony Anaya, Jeff Bingaman, Paul Bardacke, Gary King and Republican Hal Stratton were never criminal prosecutors or for that matter elected District Attorneys with all being in the private practice of law as civil trial attorneys before becoming Attorney General. Attorney General Patricia Madrid was in private practice and was a District Judge before being elected Attorney General.

On May 24, Raúl Torrez began to run the most negative campaign ad of the election thus far. The ad is as dramatic as it is very misleading. It is a 30 second commercial and has the mother of UNM baseball player Jackson Weller, who was killed Darian Bashir outside a Nob Hill bar in 2019, appearing on camera telling Brian Colon to stop lying about the record of Raul Torrez and that Torrez convicted Brashir and who was sentenced to life in prison. Two years before the murder of Jackson Weller, Bashir was arrested for killing another man outside a downtown bar. Although Bashir was charged with the first murder, he never went to trial in that case. A District Court Judge found that the office of District Attorney Raúl Torrez failed to comply with court ordered deadlines, did not interview witnesses on time, and did not respond to motions and the case was dismissed and has since been refiled with Brashire awaiting trial on the first case.

BRIAN COLÓN

Brian Colón thus far has had 5 separate campaign commercials. The first was an emotional one where Colón describes his personal struggles, being raised in poverty and having to hock his dad’s wedding ring. In the second ad, Colón talks about a “shield and sword” approach to prosecutions and protecting the general public. Although well produced, both of Colón’s ads were considered by political observers as weak and ineffective with the “shield and sword” ad bordering on juvenile.

Colón’s 3rd, 4th and 5th ads are far more effective TV ads. Colón goes negative for the first time and goes into great detail about Torrez’s “failed prosecution rates” as Bernalillo County District Attorney. The ads use images of UNM baseball player Jackson Weller and 10 year old Victoria Martins. Statistics prepared by the District Court reveal the Bernalillo County District Attorney’s Office under Raúl Torrez has a 65% combined dismissal, acquittal and mistrial rate with cases charge by grand juries.

At least 2 political campaign mailers have been produced by a political action committee (PAC) that opposes Raúl Torrez and that takes Torrez to task for his historically low conviction rates and botching criminal violent crimes cases. The flyers use images of 10 year old Victoria Martens. Brian Colón for his part has distanced himself from the PAC and has gone so far as to condemn it.

THINGS TO COME

Confidential sources are saying that the Colón campaign is producing a TV ad challenging the ethics of Raúl Torrez and alleging prosecutorial misconduct when he was an Assistant United States Attorney for New Mexico. In 2012, United States Federal Judge Cristina Armijo accused then Assistant United States Attorney Raúl Torrez prosecuting a drug case and trying to “unfairly alter” a transcript of a recorded encounter between drug agents and an Amtrak train passenger suspected of carrying a large quantity of crack cocaine.

At the center of the controversy was Raúl Torrez asking 2 Federal law enforcement agents to review a transcript of a recording that was found “inaudible”. Instead of calling them as witnesses to testify under oath, Torrez asked the federal agents to make changes to the transcript based on their recollection of what was said and what occurred. Torrez then had a new transcript prepared that combined their changes and informed the judge during the hearing that he wasn’t offering it as evidence but an “aid” for listening to the recording. Defense counsel objected, telling the judge “They’re trying to make an illegal search legal by making changes in the transcript.” The court agreed with the defense and entered an order.

Judge Armijo wrote in her original order:

“Based on the foregoing, the Court finds that the Government attempted to unfairly alter the content of the official transcript and thus the substance of what is purported to be represented on the audio recording in the case. Specifically, the Court finds that the Government attempted to take advantage of the obviously poor quality of the audio recording and the chaotic environment in the train car by having its witnesses … make substantive changes to the official transcription of the recording in a manner that favored the government’s case.”

After entry of the order, the United State Attorney filed a motion asking Judge Armijo to withdraw her findings about Torrez and requested that the original order and the language be deleted. Armijo honored the request and also deleted other language that faulted the testimony of the 2 drug agents during the suppression hearing as being “colored or influenced by the government’s efforts.” The day after Judge Armijo filed her amended ruling, the United States Attorney office dismissed the felony drug possession case against the Defendant.

FOLLOW THE MONEY

Raúl Torrez and Brian Colón have raised more than $2.5 million combined in there race to become Attorney General. The race is now clearly one of the most expensive races for Attorney General in the state’s history.

According to campaign finance reports filed with the New Mexico Secretary of State’s Office, both Raúl Torrez and Brian Colón have been given big contributions from attorneys and law firms throughout the State and country. Colón has reported contributions of over $1.5 million, while Torrez has raised over $1.07 million.

Both have each contributed more than $300,000 left over from campaign committees associated with their current elected positions. Torrez contributed $323,238 from his DA’s political committee to his AG race. Colón transferred $379,938 from his auditor’s race funds to his current campaign.

The links to quoted source material are here:

https://login.cfis.sos.state.nm.us//Files/ReportsOutput//103/9cdc8f33-a7c2-4d02-b820-fed384501751.pdf

https://login.cfis.sos.state.nm.us//Files/ReportsOutput//103/9be8522e-f6b5-47ea-8503-8cfb1f143895.pdf

https://www.abqjournal.com/2501721/ag-campaigns-rake-in-big-bucks.html

COLÓN CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS

According to the latest campaign finance reports, Colón has collected more than $1 million in campaign funds between April and October of last year. Colón has been given sizeable financial support from out-of-state law firms and attorneys in national firms. The political campaign committee of current Attorney General Hector Balderas, who is term limited, contributed a total of $10,000 to Colón.

Colón’s top contributors include national firms that have represented or are currently representing the Attorney General’s Office in complex civil litigation. The Colón’ campaign reported receiving a total of $23,333 from five attorneys with the national firm of DiCello Levitt Gutzler, which is representing New Mexico in a state district court case against pharmaceutical company AbbVie Inc. and its affiliates, which are accused of deceptive marketing of a testosterone replacement drug.

Other out-of-state contributors to Colón include the Delaware-headquartered law firm of Grant & Eisenhofer, which contributed $5,000, with three of its attorneys contributing $20,000. The national firm, Robins Cloud, contributed $10,400, with partner Bill Robins of Houston adding $10,400.

Energy company Chevron contributed $10,400 to Brian Colón’s campaign and Santa Fe attorney Dan Perry contributed $10,000. Colorado attorneys Franklin and Margeaux Azar contributed a total of $20,000.

Colón had $911,546 cash on hand at the end of the May 9 reporting period. As of May 9, Colón reported spending $589,242. Most of the spending has gone to political consultants and to make media buys.

The link to the most recent Campaign Finance Reports for Brian Colón is here:

https://login.cfis.sos.state.nm.us//Files/ReportsOutput//103/9cdc8f33-a7c2-4d02-b820-fed384501751.pdf

TORREZ CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS

Torrez has attracted significant contributions from in-state lawyers. Torrez reported contributions of $636,772 between April and October of last year.

Torrez’s top contributors includ the following:

Sector Solutions LLC, of Santa Fe, $10,400; Marrs Griebel Law and attorney Patrick Griebel, for a total of $10,400; James and Emily Pluhar, $10,000; and Bob Pitre, $5,200. SSIG LLC, an investment company in Washington state, contributed $10,400, according to finance reports. Torrez has received campaign donations from criminal defense attorneys who have pending cases with Torrez’s office.

As of May 9, Torrez’s expenditures totaled $694,511. Most of the spending was to pay political consultants and make media buys. As of May 9, the Torrez’s campaign reported having $382,305.

The link to the most recent Campaign Finance Reports for Raúl Torrez is here:

https://login.cfis.sos.state.nm.us//Files/ReportsOutput//103/9be8522e-f6b5-47ea-8503-8cfb1f143895.pdf

KRQE-TV 13 HEATED DEBATE

On May 9, a one-hour debate occurred on KRQE-TV. The debate was spirited. Both candidates engaged in highly personal attacks.

Torrez faulted Colón as a “career politician” who lacks “experience in public safety.” Torrez said of Colon:

“One of the things that defines this race is whether you want a career prosecutor or a career politician. … He has not prosecuted a single case, not even a parking ticket. … You know I saw Mr. Colon at the round house taking selfies with his friends, taking selfies with the Speaker [of the House]. I never heard him speak up, I never heard him step out and support publicly our fight and the governor’s fight for “rebuttable presumption”. That’s the difference between a career prosecutor and somebody who lives and dies with politics.”

The “Reputable presumption” legislation was where a defendant who is charged with a violent crime is presumed to be a threat to the public and should be jailed until pending trial without bond or any conditions of release.

Brian Colón for his part call out Torrez for his “failed prosecution rates” and said this about Torrez:

“What my opponent has is a failed track record of prosecution. A lifelong career as a prosecutor, yet at the end of the day, the numbers are abysmal. Our community is less safe than it has ever been before. … The best way to get Torrez to the office is to have a T.V. camera present. … At some point you gotta quite pointing fingers, ya gotta take responsibility. … I’ve got a failed prosecutor standing beside me. … At the end of the day, we’re not safe.”

EDITOR’S NOTE: In 2017, District Attorney Raul Torrez and Albuquerque Mayor Tim Keller wrote a joint letter to the New Mexico Supreme Court requesting it to intervene and stop the plans of 2nd Judicial District Court to shift away from the use of grand jury system to a preliminary hearing system. Torrez accused the District Court of being the cause of the city’s high crime rates by dismissing cases. The District Court responded by providing an extensive amount of statistics, bar graphs and pie charts to the New Mexico Supreme Court. The statistics prepared by the District Court revealed the Bernalillo County District Attorney’s Office under Raul Torrez has a 65% combined dismissal, acquittal and mistrial rate with cases charge by grand juries.

A link to a related blog article on the KRQE debate is here:

https://www.petedinelli.com/2022/05/11/democrat-attorney-general-candidates-get-personal-and-pummeled-each-other-in-krqe-debate-debate-revealed-one-angry-self-righteous-politician-the-other-a-dedicated-public-servant-at-end/

NOT SO HEATED KOAT TV-7 DEBATE

On Wednesday, May 25 KOAT TV, Channel 7 sponsored a 30 minute live debate debate between Brian Colón And Raúl Torrez. The debate was a low key affair with neither candidate making any major mistakes.

No at all surprising, the mass shooting of the 19 children and two teachers that occurred at the Texas elementary school in Uvalde, Texas on May 24 and gun control was the first topic of discussion. Both candidates said New Mexico needs new gun control legislation, more enforcement resources for gun safety, or both. Brian Colón said he supports legislation to ensure safe gun storage proposed by legislators including state Rep. Pamelya Herndon of Albuquerque. Raúl Torrez said law enforcement agencies need greater funding and training to harness New Mexico’s 2020 “red flag” law that allows police or sheriff’s deputies to ask a court to temporarily take away guns from people who might hurt themselves or others.

Raúl Torrez continued his assault on Colón as having never prosecuted a criminal cases with at least one cheap shot referencing Colón saying he prosecuted a case in the law school clinical program. Colón brushed the criticism aside saying his experience as a civil attorney with 21 years experience is the type of diversified expierence the office demands and needs something Torrez lacks. Both candidates went into the weeds when the need for out of state contracts for specialized attorneys was discussed. Torrez called it “pay to play” and said the work should be done “in-house” while Colón pointing out it’s a practice embraced by prior Attorney Generals. The only saving grace of the debate was that it lasted for only 30 minutes and not the customary hour for such debates. The link to watch the full debate is here:

https://www.koat.com/article/new-mexico-attorney-general-primary-debate/40109873

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

The Office of New Mexico Attorney General historically is considered by many as the “people’s attorney.” Elected Attorney Generals have gone onto higher office including Toney Anaya who was later elected Governor, Jeff Bingaman who was later elected United States Senator and Tom Udall who was also later elected United States Senator.

Brian Colón has more at stake given that his term is ending as State Auditor while Raúl Torrez will have two years left of his term as District Attorney should he lose the Attorney General’s race. Elected Attorney Generals have gone onto higher office including Toney Anaya who was later elected Governor, Jeff Bingaman who was later elected United States Senator and Tom Udall who was later elected United States Senator.

The race between both Colón and Torrez was bound to be hard fought in that both have expressed they are interested in eventually becoming Governor or going on to serve in congress. Both State Auditor Brian Colón and District Attorney Raúl Torrez are well-funded and their personal attacks on each other will likely continue until election day.

Given the back-and-forth poll numbers, the margin of error of both polls, the high number of “undecideds”, the amount of money being raised and spent, the race for Attorney General is considered by political observers as a “toss up”. Anything can happen that could change the dynamics of the race and have a major impact on the number of undecides. The May 25 debate could easily change the dynamics of the race.

Only 4 Republicans have been elected Attorney General in New Mexico’s 110-year history. In the 2022 election, Republican Jeremy Gay, a Gallup Attorney has no primary opposition.

It is likely whoever wins the Democratic Primary on June 7, 2022 will likely become the next Attorney General.