On May 31, 2023, the online news agency New Mexico Sun published the below 750-word Dinelli opinion guest column on dismissing the Department Justice Court Approved Settlement Agreement against the City of Albuquerque and the Albuquerque Police Department:

HEADLINE: Nine years of reform; time to close the case on Albuquerque’s police department

On November 14, 2014, the City, APD and Department of Justice (DOJ) entered into a stipulated Court Approved Settlement Agreement (CASA). The settlement was the result of an 18-month long investigation that found APD had engaged in an pattern of “excessive use of force” and “deadly force”, and  found a “culture of aggression” existed within the APD.   The settlement mandates 271 police reforms, the appointment of a Federal Monitor and the filing of Independent Audit reports (IMRs) on the reforms.  Over 9 years, 17 audit reports have been filed. 

Under the terms of the CASA, once APD achieves a 95% compliance rate in 3 identified compliance levels and maintains it for 2 consecutive years, the case can be dismissed. APD was to have come into compliance within 4 years and the case was to be dismissed in 2018, but because of delay tactics from APD and the Police Union, the case has dragged on for 5 more years.

On May 10, 2023 the 17th audit report was filed and reported APD’s compliance levels were as follows:

Primary Compliance 100%

Secondary Compliance 100% 

Operational Compliance 92% 

Now after almost 9 full years of federal court oversight, the settlement has produced results. Reforms achieved under the settlement can be identified as follows:

1.  New “use of force” and “use of deadly force” policies have been written, implemented and all APD sworn have received training on the policies.
2. All sworn police officers have received crisis management intervention training.
3. APD has created a “Use of Force Review Board” that oversees all internal affairs investigations of use of force and deadly force.
4. The Internal Affairs Unit has been divided into two sections, one dealing with general complaints and the other dealing with use of force incidents.
5. Sweeping changes ranging from APD’s SWAT team protocols, to banning choke-holds, to auditing the use of every Taser carried by officers and re-writing and implementation of new use of force and deadly force policies have been completed.
6. “Constitutional policing” practices and methods, and mandatory crisis intervention techniques an de-escalation tactics with the mentally ill have been implemented at the APD police academy with all sworn police also receiving the training.
7. APD has adopted a new system to hold officers and supervisors accountable for all use of force incidents with personnel procedures implemented detailing how use of force cases are investigated.
8. APD has revised and updated its policies on the mandatory use of lapel cameras by all sworn police officers.
9. The Repeat Offenders Project, known as ROP, has been abolished.
10. Civilian Police Oversight Agency has been created and  funded and is in the process of being fully staffed.
11. The Community Policing Counsels (CPCs) have been created in all area commands.
12. The Mental Health Advisory Committee has been implemented.
13.  The External Force Investigation Team (EFIT) was created and is training the Internal Affairs Force Division on how to investigate use-of-force cases, making sure they meet deadlines and follow standard operating procedures.
14. Millions have been spent each year on new programs and training of  new cadets and police officers on constitutional policing practices.
15. APD officers are routinely found using less force than they were before and well documented use of force investigations are now being produced in a timely manner.
16. APD has assumed the self-monitoring of at least 25% of the CASA reforms and is likely capable of assuming more.
17. The APD Compliance Bureau has been fully operational and staffed with many positions created dealing directly with all the reform efforts and all the duties and responsibilities that come with self-assessment.  

APD has fulfilled the spirit and intent of the settlement.  The city can argue “full and effective compliance” with all material requirements of the CASA and with its continuing improvement in constitutional policing as demonstrated by the agreement’s outcome measures reported in the 17th Federal Monitor’s Report. The two years of 95% compliance should be deemed as accomplished given the fact that the settlement has now gone on for over 5 years than what was originally agreed to. 

The work of the Federal Monitor can be declared a success and the case closed within the next 6 months by year’s end. The city should negotiate a stipulated dismissal of the case with DOJ by the end of the year or alternatively move to immediately to dismiss the case under the termination and suspension provisions of the CASA and force the issue with an evidentiary hearing.  

___________________________

POSTSCRIPT

ABOUT THE NEW MEXICO SUN

The New Mexico Sun is part of the Sun Publishing group which is a nonprofit. The New Mexico Sun “mission statement” states in part:

“The New Mexico Sun was established to bring fresh light to issues that matter most to New Mexicans. It will cover the people, events, and wonders of our state. … The New Mexico Sun is non-partisan and fact-based, and we don’t maintain paywalls that lead to uneven information sharing. We don’t publish quotes from anonymous sources that lead to skepticism about our intentions, and we don’t bother our readers with annoying ads about products and services from non-locals that they will never buy. … Many New Mexico media outlets minimize or justify problematic issues based on the individuals involved or the power of their positions. Often reporters fail to ask hard questions, avoid making public officials uncomfortable, and then include only one side of a story. This approach doesn’t provide everything readers need to fully understand what is happening, why it matters, and how it will impact them or their families.”

The home page link to the New Mexico Sun is here:

https://newmexicosun.com/

 

On June 6, the Albuquerque City Council at its regularly scheduled meeting and before a remarkable turn out of voters, decided to defer action on 2 of the most controversial issues pending before it.

COUNCIL DEFERS CHANGES TO INTEGRATED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE

Well over 100 people signed up to testify for and against the proposed amendments to the Integrated Development Ordinance (IDO) which is the city’s comprehensive zoning laws.  The annual update of the IDO has been pending since November of last year when Mayor Tim Keller announced that he wants “transformative changes” to the city’s zoning laws and declaring a housing crisis in affordable housing.

There have been at least 3 city council committee hearings on the changes and 5 public presentations by the Keller Administration where hundreds have attended to voice opposition.  The proposed legislation is sponsored by City Councilors Isaac Benton and Trudy Jones and is part of Mayor Tim Keller’s Housing Forward initiative. Both Benton and Jones have already announced that they are not seeking re-election to the council with the municipal election scheduled for November 7 when 4 city council positions will be on the ballot.

The most controversial amendments to the IDO  would allow for the construction of casitas and duplexes and they are part of Keller’s Housing Forward ABQ Plan. It is a “multifaceted initiative” where Keller has set the goal of adding 5,000 new housing units across the city by 2025 above and beyond what private industry normally creates each year.    The zoning code amendments would make both casitas and duplex additions “permissive uses” and not “conditional uses” as they are now and have always been historically.

According to city officials, there are 120,000 residential lots that have existing homes. With the construction of “casitas” and “two family home” additions, also known as duplexes, density could double to 240,000 with casita structures alone or triple to 360,000 with both casitas and duplex home additions.

 A “conditional use” requires an application process with the city Planning Department, notice to surrounding property owners and affected neighborhood associations and provides for appeal rights.   A “permissive use” would give the Planning Department exclusive authority to issue permits for construction without notices and hearings and with no appeal process. Objecting property owners and neighborhood associations to the permissive casita and duplex uses would be relegated to filing lawsuits to enforce covenants and restrictions.

Should the proposed changes to the Integrated Development Ordinance pass without amendment, large swaths of the city zoned for single-family houses would be opened to casita and duplex development.  Other proposed changes include eliminating building height limits for multifamily and mixed-use buildings, and reducing parking requirements for multifamily housing.

The city council decided to delay voting on the bill and the amendments until July 19.

The link to the news source is here:

https://www.abqjournal.com/2604484/proposal-zoning-overhaul-brings-out-crowds-to-albuquerque-city-council-meeting.html

 COUNCIL DEFERS CHARTER AMENDMENT CREATING CITY COUNCIL-CITY MANAGER

First term City Councilors Republican Renee Grout and Democrat Louie Sanchez are co-sponsoring a proposed City Charter amendment that that would require voter approval and that would end the “strong mayor” form of government Albuquerque adopted in 1974. The charter amendment would transfer all the mayor’s executive and city management duties to a city manager chosen by the city council.

This is what is referred to as a “weak mayor” form of government. The mayor would preside over city council meetings and vote at council meetings only in the event of a tie. The appointed city manager would assume many of the powers now held by the mayor, including the authority to appoint the police chief and other department directors. According to the proposed legislation, the council would appoint the city manager, who would “organize the executive branch of the city,” and the mayor would “be recognized as the head of the City government for all ceremonial purposes.”

During the June 6 meeting, the City Council voted 5-4 to amend the measure to make the mayor a voting member of the council and the City Council would have 10 voting members which could result in tie votes.

In the original proposal, the mayor would only have cast a vote to break a tie and would “have no administrative duties.”

In order for it to pass, it must pass with a super majority of 6 votes. The city must file the measure with Bernalillo County no later than August 29 to get it on the November 7 election ballot. The measure as proposed and if passed by voters would not take effect until after the next mayoral election which will occur in 2025.Bottom of Form

The city council voted to deferred the charter amendment until June 21.

The link to the news source is here:

https://www.abqjournal.com/2604310/weak-mayor-proposal-sets-up-possible-10-member-city-council.html

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

The deferral of both the annual amendments to the Integrated Development Ordinance as well as the charter amendment that could dramatically change the city’s form of government is what is referred to as “political kick the can”. It’s a politcal game that is downright dangerous especially as it relates to changing dramatically our form of government and real property rights.

It’s more likely than not all 9 city councilors have already made up their mind how they intend to vote on both measures, but they continue to act coy, saying as little as possible, or nothing at all, so as not to offend. It’s a pathetic little game played by politicians with weak backs with hidden personal agendas to avoid controversy and accountability and to avoid taking votes before hostile audiences of voters. They do it in the hopes that time will provide a cooling off period hoping that the controversy will subside, the public will forget and go away and perhaps pressure will change a final vote.  It is deferrals such as these that has given politicians such as this city council such a bad reputation.

Voters need to show up in droves on June 6 to voice their opinion if the city’s form of government should change giving more power to the city council.  Voters need to show up on July 19 to voice their opinion of the zoning amendments that will have a dramatic impact and reduce real property rights.

The regular 2023 municipal election to elect city councilors for City Council Districts 2, 4, 6, and 8 will be held on November 7, 2023 along with $200 Million in bonds to be approved by city voters. The City Clerk has posted on its city  web page the election calendar and information for all candidates.

https://www.cabq.gov/vote/candidate-information/candidate-calendar-for-the-2023-regular-local-election

The 2023 Regular Local Election Calendar for candidates began on April 30 with an “exploratory period” to allow candidates to organize and collect “seed money” donations  and ended on June 4.

THE PETITION SIGNATURE NOMINATING PROCESS AND THE $5 QUALIFYING CONTRIBUTION PERIOD FOR PUBLIC FINANXING BEGAN ON JUNE 5 AND ENDS ON JULY 10, 2023.

The November 7 municipal election will remake the council and perhaps there will be a shift from the current Democrat control to a Republican controlled city council. Three of the four incumbents whose seats are on the ballot are not running for reelection and they are District 2’s Democrat Isaac Benton, District 6’s Democrat  Pat Davis and District 8’s Republican Trudy Jones. The only sitting councilor running this year is District 4’s first term Republican Brook Bassan and thus far she is running unopposed.  The city  council’s five other seats will not be decided again until 2025 and will include the Mayor’s race. Mayor Tim Keller has told at least 2  of his closest aides in the Mayor’s office that he is running for a third term. There are no term limits for city councilor nor the Mayor.

The city is facing any number of problems that are bringing it to its knees. Those problems include exceptionally high violent crime and murder rates, the city’s  increasing homeless numbers, lack of mental health  care programs and little economic development. Mayor Tim Keller is also proclaiming that the city is suffering from a low income housing crisis with the city in need of 13,000 to 30,000 new housing units as he proposes  what he calls “transformative changes” to the Integrated Development Ordinance (IDO) to allow construction of casitas and duplexes on virtually all residential property within the city to increase density and motels conversions where the city buys existing motels and converts them to low income housing.

ANNOUNCED CANDIDATES

Known candidates listed on the City Clerks web page as of June 5 include the following candidates listed:

DISTRICT 2 (DOWNTOWN, OLD TOWN, PARTS OF THE NORTH VALLEY AND WEST SIDE)

• Joaquin Baca, Democrat, a hydrologist and elected member of the Middle Rio Grande Conservancy District who intends to seek public financing and he president of the ABQCore neighborhood association.
• Loretta Naranjo Lopez, Democrat, a retired city planner and current member of the New Mexico Public Employees Retirement Association Board who intends to seek public financing.
• Moises A. Gonzalez

DISTRICT 4 (NORTHEAST HEIGHTS)

• Brook Bassan, Republican, a stay-at-home mom and incumbent councilor who intends to seek public financing
• Abby Foster  (No other information available)

DISTRICT 6 (NOB HILL, INTERNATIONAL DISTRICT)        

• Jeff Hoehn, Democrat, a nonprofit executive director who intends to seek public financing.
• Abel Otero, Democrat, a barber who intends to seek public financing.
• Joseph Pitluck Aguirre, Independent, a dentist and software development. company owner who intends to run a privately financed campaign.
• Kristin Greene (No other information immediately available)
• Jonathan Ryker Juarez (No other information immediately available)
• Nichole Rogers (No other information immediately available)
• Kristin “Raven” Greene (https://raven4d6.com/)

DISTRICT 8 (NORTHEAST HEIGHTS AND FOOTHILLS)

• Dan Champine, Republican, a retired police officer and current mortgage lender who intends to seek public financing
• Idalia Lechuga-Tena, Democrat, a consultant and former state representative who intends to seek public financing

The link to the City clerk’s website listing candidates is here:

https://www.cabq.gov/vote/candidate-information/2023-candidates-and-committees-1

QUESTIONS AND ISSUES

All too often, city council races are ignored by many voters and the campaigns do not really heat up until the very last month of the campaign. Most city council races are won with direct voter contact and candidates going “door to door” looking for support and votes.  Before signing any petitions or donating to candidates, voters should know where candidates stand on the major issues they care about and what they will do if elected.

A few questions and issues candidates for City Council  need to think about and disclose their positions on include the following:

SOCIAL ISSUES

 A.   ABORTION

BACKGROUND:  Two New Mexico County Commissions and 3 municipalities have pass ordinances restricting a woman’s right to choose by prohibiting the operation of abortion clinics. The ordinances are  based on the Comstock Act which is federal legislation from the 1870s that prohibits the mailing of “obscene material,” including medication or equipment used in abortions. The Attorney General has filed a New Mexico Supreme Court action to set aside the ordinances and declare such ordinances as unconstitutional with the litigation still pending.

1. Are you in favor of the City Council enacting similar legislation in the form of prohibiting the city from issuing licenses to do business in Albuquerque to any health care provider that provides abortion services?

2, During the last fiscal year, the city council  funded Planned Parenthood, which provides abortion services, $150,000. Do you feel the City should continue providing funding to Planned Parenthood?

 B.   GUN CONTROL

 BACKGROUND:   The exclusive authority on gun control is given to the New Mexico legislature and municipalities are barred by the New Mexico constitutions from enacting such legislation.   The 2023 New Mexico 60 day legislative began on January 17 and came to an end on March 18.  Upwards of 40 gun control measures were introduced, but only 10 were seriously considered and of those 10, only 2 made it through the session to become law. Among the laws that failed were banning the sale of AR-15-style rifles and prohibiting the sales magazines with more than 10 rounds.

CANIDADATE QUESTIONS

1. Do you feel the City should seek home rule authority to allow it to prohibit the city from issuing a yearly license to do business in Albuquerque by any retail business that sells AR-15-style rifles and prohibiting the sales magazines with more than 10 rounds?

2. What gun control measures do you support and feel the city should support in its annual legislative priorities presented to the legislature?

 C. THE HOMELESS

BACKGROUND:  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 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.

In August, the 2022 the Point In Time (PIT) homeless survey reported that the number total homeless in Albuquerque was 1,311 with 940 in emergency shelters, 197 unsheltered and 174 in transitional housing. On May 22, the New Mexico Legislative Finance Committee (LFC) released a  report on the state’s homeless and the affordable housing shortage.  The LFC report included the preliminary estimates yet to be  finalized 2023 Point In Time (PIT) annual homeless count.

The 2023 PIT preliminary data revealed  a significant 48% uptick in the state’s homeless population going from upwards of 2,600 people to nearly 4,000 people. The increase was reportedly driven primarily by an increase in the unsheltered count with 780 more people in Albuquerque and 232 more in the rest of the state. According to the LFC report, the 2023 Albuquerque unsheltered count increase by 780 more people. In otherwards Albuquerque homeless went from 1,311 in 2022 as reported by PIT  to 2,091 as reported by the LFC.

Over the past two fiscal  years, the City Council has approved and budgeted $33,854,536 for homeless emergency shelters, support, mental health and substance abuse programs and $60,790,321 for affordable housing programs for the low-income, near homeless.  It has also approved funding for  two 24/7 homeless shelters, including purchasing the Gibson Medical Center for $15 million to convert it into a homeless shelter. The Family and Community Services approved 2023-2024 budget lists forty five (45) separate affordable housing contracts totaling $39,580,738, fifteen (15) separate emergency shelter contracts totaling $5,575,690, and twenty seven (27) separate homeless support service contracts totaling $5,104,938 for a total of $50,261,366

CANDIDATE QUESTIONS 

1. Do you feel that the city homeless numbers have reached a crisis level and do you feel the Keller Administration has been effective in handling or managing the crisis?
2. 2. Should the City continue to fund city services to the homeless or near homeless at the current levels?
3. Do you feel more or less should be spent on dealing with the homeless?
4. What more do you feel can and should be done to reduce the homeless population in Albuquerque?
5. What services should the City provide to the homeless and poor if any?
6. Should the city be more involved with the county in providing mental health care facilities and programs?
7. Would you be in favor of the City Attorney’s office participation in a mental health “civil commitment” program of the homeless suffering from mental illness and drug addiction where they would not be criminally charged or prosecuted and jailed but committed to a behavioral health and drug addiction facility or hospital  after a court of law finds that they represent a danger to themselves and/or the general public as found by a court of law relying on existing state laws for such commitment hearings where due process of law is followed and representation is required by law?

D.  SANCTUARY CITY VERSUS IMMIGRANT FRIENDLY CITY

BACKGROUND: On May 9, Title 10 referred to as the Covid-era restrictions that allowed immigration officials to quickly turn away migrants at the U.S.-Mexico border expired at ushering in tougher policies for asylum-seekers. Republican controlled state governors such as Florida and Texas are busing migrants seeking asylum to major cities such as New York and Washington DC.

CANDIDATE QUESTION

1. Should the city of Albuquerque provide housing or services to migrants seeking asylum and to what extent?

CANDIDATE QUESTIONS 

BACKGROUND: The City of Albuquerque has never been a “sanctuary city” where law enforcement is prohibited from enforcing federal laws and local government provides services to migrants seeking asylum. In 2001, the Albuquerque City Council enacted a resolution that declared Albuquerque an “immigrant-friendly” city and 10 years later the city council voted to affirm the policy. An “immigrant-friendly” city implements “welcoming city” policies and does not provide for city enforcement of federal immigration laws, and addresses only city services, including licensing and housing.

2.   Albuquerque’s “immigrant-friendly” designation welcomes immigrants to the city and is mainly symbolic. Should the city remain an immigrant friendly city as defined by city ordinance?

CITY GOVERNMENT AND SERVICES

1. Should the current Mayor-City Council form of government where the Mayor is the Chief executive officer who appoints department directors to manage the city and the City Council is the legislative policy making body be replaced with a City Council – City Manager form of government where the Mayor would be a nonvoting member of the city council with no veto authority with all the Mayor’s executive functions vested in a council appointed city manager?

2. Do you feel the position of an elected City Councilor should be a part time paid position or a full-time paid position that should prohibit outside employment as is the case with Mayor?

3. On March 24, it was reported that the Citizens Independent Salary Commission responsible for making recommendations for compensating city elected officials voted to recommend increasing the pay of city councilors by 87%.  If approved, city councilor pay would go from the present $33,600 to $62,843 a year.  Are you in favor of the pay increase or should city councilor pay remain the same?

4. Are you in favor of a state “right to work statute” that would impact or eliminate city employee unions,

5. Should city unions be prohibited from endorsing candidates for municipal office?

6. As a candidate for city council will you seek and will you accept the endorsement of any city of Albuquerque union, including the endorsement of the Albuquerque Police Officers Association and the Fire Fighters local union?

7. Are you in favor of privatizing city services or work such as public safety, the 311 call center operations, the bus system or the maintenance and repair work done at city facilities such as the Bio Park?

8. Are you in favor of the city bus transit be free at charge to the general public?

CITY PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT

BACKGROUND: On October 18, 2022 Mayor Tim Keller announced his “Housing Forward ABQ” plan. It is a “multifaceted initiative” where Mayor Keller is hoping to add 5,000 new housing units across the city by 2025 above and beyond what private industry normally creates each year. “Motel conversions” are a major component of Keller’s “Housing Forward Abq” plan and is where the City’s Family & Community Services Department  acquires and renovates existing motels to develop low-income affordable housing.  Mayor Keller wants to add as many as 1,000 housing units with motel conversions, with the city’s own estimated costs for remodeling being $100,000 per unit.

1.Are you in favor of motel conversions and if so to what extent should the city council be involved with approving the acquisitions?

BACKGROUND:  Amendments to the  Integrated Development Ordinance, which is the city’s zoning laws,  allows for the land use known as “Safe Outdoor Spaces” to deal with the homeless crisis. “Safe Outdoor Spaces” are city sanctioned homeless encampments located in open space areas that will allow upwards of 50 homeless people to camp, require hand washing stations, toilets and showers, require a management plan, 6-foot fencing and provide for social services.  The city council has voted to allow 18 Safe Outdoor Spaces, 2 in each city council district. The City Council has attempted 3 times to repeal allowing Safe Outdoor Spaces and funding with Mayor Keller vetoing the attempts.

2.   What is your position on city sanction and funded Safe Outdoor Spaces and should they be allowed at all and if so to what extent?

3.   Are you in favor of amending the Integrated Development Ordinance toallow the construction of both 750 square-foot “casitas” and “duplex” additions in the backyards of all 120,000 residential lots that have existing homes in an attempt to increase density?

4.  Should “casitas” and “duplex” additions be a “conditional use” requiring an application process with the city Planning Department, notice to surrounding property owners and affected neighborhood associations and provides for appeal rights?  Should they be a “permissive use” that would give the Planning Department exclusive authority to issue permits for construction without notices and hearings and with no appeal process?

5.   The Integrated Development Ordinance enacted by the City Council in 2017 essentially repealed all sector development plans designed to protect neighborhoods and their character to favor the development community. Are you in favor of repealing the Integrated Development Ordinance (IDO) and reverting back to the comprehensive zoning code and enacted sector development plans?

6.  To what extent should adjoining property owners and neighborhood associations have the right to contest and appeal changes in zoning permissive and conditional uses?

7.  What do you feel the Albuquerque City Council can do to promote “infill development” and would it include the City acquiring property to be sold to developers and the formation of public/private partnerships?

8.  What do you feel the City Council can do to address vacant residential and commercial properties that have been declared “substandard” by city zoning and unfit for occupancy?

9.  Should the City of Albuquerque seek the repeal by the New Mexico legislature of laws that prohibit city annexation of property without county approval?

APD AND CRIME:

BACKGROUND:  Since 2014, the city and the Albuquerque Police Department (APD)  have been working under a federal court approved settlement agreement after the Department of Justice found a “culture of aggression” and   excessive use of force and of deadly force.  Under the terms of the settlement, APD is required to implement 271 reforms with oversight by a court approved Federal Independent Monitor.  When APD reaches 95% compliance in 3 compliance levels and maintains that compliance for 2 years, the case can be dismissed.  On May 10, 2023  Federal Court Appointed Independent Monitor James Ginger filed his 17th Report on the Compliance Levels of the Albuquerque Police Department (APD) and the City of Albuquerque with Requirements of the Court-Approved Settlement Agreement. The Federal Monitor IMR-17 report which covers August 1, 2022, through January 31, 2023,  reported APD’s compliance levels were as follows:

Primary Compliance 100%

Secondary Compliance 100%

Operational Compliance 92% (95% needed to be achieved and sustained for 2 years)

CANDIDATE QUESTIONS 

1. Do you feel the city should seek immediate dismissal of the Court Approved Settlement Agreement or wait and additional 2 years after APD comes into complete compliance in all 3 of the compliance levels?

2.The Albuquerque City Council plays a crucial oversight role of the Albuquerque Police Department (APD) including approving its budget. What oversight role do you believe the Albuquerque City Council should play when it come to the Albuquerque Police Department (APD)?

3. Should the City seek to renegotiate or set aside the terms and conditions of the Court Approved Settlement Agreement (CASA) and if so why?

4. What would you do to enhance civilian oversight of APD and the implementation of the Department of Justice mandated reforms?

5. Should the APD Chief, Assistant Chief, Deputy Chiefs and APD command staff be replaced with a national search and replaced by “outsiders” to  make changes at APD with new leadership and management?

6. Should the function of Internal Affairs be removed from APD and civilianized under the city Office of Inspector General, the Internal Audit Department and the City Human Resources Department?

7. APD currently has 980 sworn police. What are your plans for increasing APD staffing levels and what should those staffing levels be?

8.  What are your plans or solutions to bringing down high property and violent crime rates in Albuquerque or your district?

9.  Should APD personnel or APD resources be used in any manner to enforce federal immigration laws and assist federal immigration authorities?

10.  Should the City Council by ordinance create a Department of Public Safety with the appointment of a Chief Public Safety Officer to assume management and control of the Albuquerque Police Department, the Albuquerque Fire Department, the Emergency Operations Center and the 911 emergency operations call center?

11.  Should APD and the Bernalillo County Sherriff’s Office be abolished and consolidated to form one regional law enforcement agency, combining resources with the appointment of a governing civilian authority and the appointment of a Superintendent of Public Safety?

THE ECONOMY:

1.What strategy would you implement to bring new industries, corporations and jobs to Albuquerque?

2. Albuquerque’s major growth industries include health care, transportation, manufacturing, retail and tourism with an emerging film industry. What programs would you propose to help or enhance these industries?

3. To what extent should tax increment districts, industrial revenue bonds and income bonds be used to spur Albuquerque’s economy?

4.  What financial incentives do you feel the city can or should offer and provide to the private sector to attract new industry and jobs to Albuquerque, and should that include start-up grants or loans with “claw back” provisions?

5. What sort of private/public partnership agreements or programs should be implemented to spur economic development?

6.  What sort of programs or major projects or facilities, if any, should the city partner with the State or County to spur economic development?

7.  What programs can the city implement to better coordinate its economic development with the University of New Mexico and the Community College of New Mexico (CNM) to insure an adequately trained workforce for new employers locating to Albuquerque?

8.  Are you in favor of the enactment of a gross receipt tax or property tax dedicated strictly to economic development, programs or construction projects to revitalize Albuquerque that would be enacted by the City Council or be voter approved?

9.  What programs can Albuquerque implement to insure better cooperation with Sandia Labs and the transfer of technology information for economic development.

BACKGROUND:  The Economic Development Department provides services intended to bring long term economic vitality to the City. Included in the department are the economic development division, the film and music offices, the international trade division, the management of contracts for tourism and the program for economic development investments.  The mission of the department is to  develop a more diversified and equitable economy that works for everyone by growing and retaining local businesses and jobs; eliminating barriers to success in underserved communities; recruiting businesses in key industries; increasing Albuquerque’s competitiveness in the global market; and fostering a healthful built environment.  The proposed FY/24 General Fund budget for the Economic Development Department  is $3.8 million, a decrease of 62.1% or $6.2 million below the FY/23 original budget.

10.  Do you feel Economic Development Department department is adequately funded and if not what funding levels and personnel staff do you feel is needed?

EDUCATION:

1.Should the city continue to fund and provide full time APD police officers, known as school resource officers, to the Albuquerque Public School System or should the Albuquerque Public Schools expand and provide more funding to its own APS School Police and reassign APD Officers to patrol the city?

2. Should the City of Albuquerque have representation or be included on the Albuquerque School board, the University of New Mexico Board of Regents and the Community College of New Mexico Board?

3. What should the City do to help reduce high school dropout rates?

4.  What education resources should or can the City make available to the Albuquerque school system?

TAXATION AND PROJECT FINANCING:

1.Do you feel that all increases in gross receipts taxes should be voter approved or should tax increases  be the exclusive prerogative of the city council as it is now?

2. Are you in favor of constructing an outdoor soccer stadium at the Balloon Fiesta Park?

3.  Are you in favor of constructing a multipurpose arena funded by use of voter approved bonding and if so where should it be built?

MISCELANEOUS ISSUES

1. Do you feel Mayor Tim Keller has done a good job, do you support his agenda as Mayor and has he endorsed your candidacy?

2. If you qualify to be a public finance candidate, will you truly be a public finance candidate or do you intend to rely upon measured finance committee’s set up to promote your candidacy?

3. Should major capital improvement projects such as the Albuquerque Rapid Transit (ART) project or the building of a soccer stadium be placed on the ballot for voter approval or should major capital improvement projects be up to the city council?

CONCLUSION

The city cannot afford city councilors who makes promises and offers only eternal hope for better times that result in broken campaign promises. What is needed are city elected officials who actually know what they are doing, who will make the hard decisions without an eye on their next election, not make decisions only to placate their base and please only those who voted for them. What’s needed is a healthy debate on solutions and new ideas to solve our mutual problems, a debate that can happen only with a contested election. A highly contested races reveal solutions to our problems.

Voters are entitled to and should expect more from candidates than fake smiles, slick commercials, and no solutions and no ideas. Our city needs more than promises of better economic times and lower crime rates for Albuquerque and voters need to demand answers and hold elected officials accountable.

_________________________________

POSTSCRIPT

CANDIDATE INFORMATION

The City Clerk has already posted on its city web page the election calendar and information for all candidates. The 2023 Regular Local Election Calendar for candidates begins on April 30 with an “exploratory period” to allow candidates to organize and collect “seed money” donations and  ends on June 4. The petition for signatures  and qualifying contribution period begins on June 5 and ends on July 10, 2023.

https://www.cabq.gov/vote/candidate-information/candidate-calendar-for-the-2023-regular-local-election

ELIGIBILITY: In order to become a candidate, a person must be registered to vote in, and physically reside in, the district they seek to represent by August 9, 2023. Any changes to voter registration must be effective on August 9, 2023. How a name appears on ballots cannot be changed at the time of candidate filing.

NOMINATING PETTIONS: A candidate for City Council must collect 500 signatures from registered voters within the district the candidate wishes to represent. The City Clerk’s Office encourages candidates to collect more petitions signatures than required. Though signatures collected on the website will be validated as registered voters, signatures collected on paper forms will need to be verified as registered voters in the candidate’s district by the City Clerk’s Office once you submit them. Because individuals don’t always know their registration status, it’s possible that a number of the signatures you collect may not count towards the total required. A Council Candidate may collect petition signatures from 8:00am on June 5 through 5:00pm on July 10.

Candidates for City Council can be either publicly financed or privately financed.

PUBLIC FINANCING: Candidates can qualify city public financing by securing $5 qualifying donations from registered who live in the district. The public finance candidate must agree to a cap and agree that is all they can spend. Candidates are required to collect qualifying contributions from 1% of the registered voters in the district they wish to represent. The number changes based on the district a candidate is running in. City public financing can be between $40,000 to $50,000 depending on the 1% of registered voters in the District. City Council candidates may collect qualifying contributions from 8:00am on June 5 through 5:00pm on July 10.

PRIVATE FINANCING: There is no cap on what a privately finance candidate can spend on their campaigns.  A privately financed candidate may give themselves  an unlimited amount of money to spend on their campaigns. However, another individual may only donate up to a certain amount. For a City Council candidate, an individual may only donate up to $1,683.00.

MEASURE FINANCE COMMITTEE: A Measure Finance Committee is a political committee, person or group that supports or opposes a candidate or ballot measure within the City of Albuquerque.  Measure Finance Committees must register with the City Clerk, regardless of the group’s registration as a PAC with another governmental entity. Measure Finance Committees must also file financial statements at the same times that candidates report. Measure Finance Committees are not bound by the individual contribution limits and business bans like candidates. However, a Measure Finance Committee that supports or opposes a measure and receives aggregate contributions in excess of 30% of the Mayor’s salary from one individual or entity, must incorporate the donor’s name into the name of the committee. For 2023 Measure Finance Committees, that threshold number is: $39,750.00.

The links to the city clerk’s web pages are here:

https://www.cabq.gov/vote/candidate-information/faqs

https://www.cabq.gov/vote/candidate-information

 

On June 5, the Albuquerque City Council is scheduled  to hear and perhaps vote  on a City Charter amendment that would integrate the Mayor into the City Council, and the Council would appoint a city manager. The measure would be placed on the November 7 municipal ballot for voter approval and is sponsored first term City Councilors Democrat Louie Sanchez and Republican Renee Grout.   The city’s existing Mayor-Council form of government has existed for over 50 years and was implemented by voters in 1972 by enacting a new city charter to replace the city commission/city manager form of government.

https://www.kob.com/new-mexico/albuquerque-city-councilors-to-discuss-change-to-city-charter/

The charter amendment would transfer all the mayor’s executive and city management duties to a city manager chosen by the city council. The mayor would preside over city council meetings and vote at council meetings only in the event of a tie. The appointed city manager would assume many of the powers now held by the mayor, including the authority to appoint the police chief and other department directors. According to the proposed legislation, the mayor would “be recognized as the head of the City government for all ceremonial purposes.”

At least 6 of the 9 city councilors must agree to put the measure on the November 7 municipal election ballot where City Council Districts 2, 4, 6, and 8, and $200 million bond will be on the ballot. City Clerk Ethan Watson said that he must file the measure with Bernalillo County no later than August  29 to get it on the ballot. The Charter Amendment would then require a majority vote from city voters. If approved by voters, the changes would not take effect until after the next mayoral election in 2025. As such, the measure would not affect Mayor Tim Keller unless he seeks reelection.

COUNCILORS REACT

City Councilors Democrat Louie Sanchez and Republican Renee Grout and supporters say cities with a council/city manager form of government function more efficiently with a “council-manager” form of government. They say electing a new mayor every four-to-eight years disrupts progress in Albuquerque.  The much smaller cities of  Rio Rancho and Las Cruces have such governments.

Both Sanchez and Grout said this in a Journal guest opinion column:

“It’s time for Albuquerque residents to consider whether their city government is structurally capable of responding to their pressing challenges in the most effective, efficient and transparent way. We believe it’s time to consider an alternative to the mayor-council form of government, one that will give our city responsive leadership that balances diverse interests, rather than the interests of a select few, and prioritizes sound management over political power.” 

https://www.abqjournal.com/2596610/council-city-manager-structure.html

Democrat City Councilor Louie Sanchez blamed the strong-mayor form of government for Albuquerque’s lack of progress over the past half century. He  cited Phoenix as having  a council-manager system that makes the government more efficient and better able to attract business.  Sanchez said this:

“We’ve suffered because of this system for many, many years … If we look back to the late ’60s, early ’70s, Albuquerque was in a friendly competition with Phoenix to see which city was going to be the economic driver of the Southwest   … Albuquerque should have won that friendly competition …  And it’s time that we work together as a city and move our city forward. If the voters tell us that we need to change the government, we change it.”

Republican City Councilor Renee Grout had this to say:

“It’s not about politics for me — it’s about growing in the right direction. … When you look at the cities around us, they are thriving. … I want to take politics out of what we are doing.”

First term Democrat City Councilor Tammy Fiebelkorn signaled her support of the measure by saying this:

“This is not a referendum on the current mayor. … This is a referendum about what is the best form of government.”

City Council President Pat Davis said this:

“I personally bounce back and forth on this … I think it’s something that really needs to be considered, but I’m anxious that making a big structural change in the city, and with three weeks of notice, might have some unintended consequences.”

Links to quoted news sources are here:

https://www.abqjournal.com/2599155/albuquerque-city-council-takes-up-weak-mayor-proposal.html

https://www.abqjournal.com/2603965/raucous-meeting-in-1973-may-have-been-tipping-point-to-create-albuquerq.html

MAYOR AND 3 FORMER MAYORS OPPOSE CHANGE

Mayor Tim Keller opposes the measure and Keller’s office issued the following statement:

“We are committed to working with Council and taking a hard look at how we can work more efficiently, but an extreme change to our form of government is not the answer.  This proposal would drastically alter Albuquerque’s local government, eliminating individual accountability and checks and balances, placing all city power into a committee and an unelected city manager.”

https://www.abqjournal.com/2599155/albuquerque-city-council-takes-up-weak-mayor-proposal.html

Former Mayor David Rusk (1977 to 1981), was the city’s second Mayor. Rusk gave a history of creating the existing Mayor/Council form of government and said essentially said the city had “outgrown” a weak-mayor form of government. Rusk said this:

“The city needed strong executive leadership, and yet the city manager was in effect a hired hand and couldn’t appropriately provide that kind of leadership in terms of helping shape public opinion.”

Former three-term Mayor Martin Chávez (1993 to 1997 and 2001 to 2009) said passage would result in an absence of leadership in the city and set off a power scramble among business groups, labor and other interest groups angling for position in the new government, Chavez said.

“A whole lot of dynamics will come into play that I don’t think [City Councilor] Louie Sanchez is thinking about. …  You’re going to have the City Council running the city. … You are going to have a city manager who is beholden to that council.  And there will be no unified, centralization of authority to do stuff.”

Former Mayor Jim Baca (1997 to 2001) said this:

“It was hard to get decisions made with a council-manager form of government  … Things just took forever because there was nobody actually in charge. The manager was always trying to second guess – would he get fired if he made this one small decision.”

https://www.abqjournal.com/2603965/raucous-meeting-in-1973-may-have-been-tipping-point-to-create-albuquerq.html

REMBERING ALBUQUERQUE’S HISTORY

On Sunday, June 6, the Albuquerque Journal published a front-page story, below the fold story entitled “When ABQ went from a ‘weak’ to ‘strong’ mayor”  written by staff reporter Oliver Osterbrock.  The article featured former Mayor’s David Rusk, Jim Baca and Marty Chavez, with all 3 in opposition to going back and creating a City Council-City Manager form if government. The short history given in the article is worth noting:

“The beginning of the end of Albuquerque’s now-defunct City Commission came during a raucous meeting in December 1973, when commissioners voted 3-2 to fire the city manager.

Accusations flew back and forth for five hours at a packed Convention Center Auditorium with an estimated 500 in attendance.

“The City Commission has lost control,” then-Commissioner Bob Poole said. “Policy has gravitated to the city manager.”

…

At the Dec. 10, 1973, City Commission meeting, three of the five commissioners berated then-City Manager Herb Smith for hours, accusing him of involving himself in politics and assuming too much policy-making authority, the Albuquerque Journal reported.

Some speakers demanded a change in government, calling for a mayor and city councilors elected by district.

David Rusk, Albuquerque’s mayor from 1977 to 1981, said the city’s previous form of government “fell apart in very controversial circumstances” at that meeting.

A strong mayoral form of government had already been in the discussion stages for a few years, but the meeting appears to have been the tipping point.

The three commissioners who voted to fire Smith “expressed the view that perhaps Albuquerque had outgrown” the weak-mayor form of government, said Rusk, the city’s second mayor under the current system.

“The city needed strong executive leadership, and yet the city manager was in effect a hired hand and couldn’t appropriately provide that kind of leadership in terms of helping shape public opinion,” Rusk said.

Albuquerque was growing rapidly at the time, he said. Smith “was trying to establish an environment of more managed growth for the city, and that was at odds with some of the important interests” of the city, Rusk said.

A majority of commissioners found it inappropriate for Smith to exercise that kind of public leadership, he said.

Less than three months after that contentious meeting, Albuquerque voters approved a new form of government by a nearly 4-to-1 margin.

Voter approval of Proposition 3 on Feb. 27, 1974, gave Albuquerque a “strong mayor” with authority to “organize the executive branch of the city.”

The amendment to the city charter also gave the city a nine-member City Council elected by district, creating Albuquerque’s existing “strong mayor-council” system of government.

The change ended the five-member at-large city commission that had governed the city since 1917.

Once the results were tallied, then-Commissioner Ray Baca remarked that “the controversy over former City Manager Herb Smith pointed up the inadequacies of the commission-manager system” and created the impetus for the change of government.

But Proposition 3 emerged after years of discussion about the city’s appropriate form of government.

The strong-mayor system was first recommended in 1971 by a study group headed by the late Sen. Pete Domenici, who from 1967 to 1970s served as chairman of the City Commission – a post referred to as “mayor.” Domenici went on to serve as a U.S. senator from 1973 to 2009.

Additional details emerged from a working committee that met for 18 months following the initial recommendation  …  .

In adopting the strong-mayor system, Albuquerque followed a path taken by most large U.S. cities.”

https://www.abqjournal.com/2603965/raucous-meeting-in-1973-may-have-been-tipping-point-to-create-albuquerq.html

ABQ JOURNAL GUEST OPINION COLUMN

On May 18, the Albuquerque Journal published a guest opinion column by UNM Professor Timothy Krebs with the University of New Mexico Department of Political Science.  Below is the opinion column followed by the link: 

HEADLINE: “Council-manager system would weaken democracy in ABQ”

City Councilors Renée Grout and Louie Sanchez are proposing to change Albuquerque’s current strong mayor-council system to a council-manager system. This would be a mistake, mainly because it would harm our local democracy.

In council-manager systems, voters elect the city council and a mayor, who serves as a member of the council. The mayor is expected to provide policy leadership and preside at council meetings. And like all councilors, the mayor can introduce and vote on legislation.

The mayor in this system, however, lacks executive power, which is given to an unelected city manager appointed by the council. The manager administers the day-to-day affairs of city government, appoints department heads, prepares the budget, and hires and manages city employees. Managers can be fired if they lose favor with a council majority.

By contrast, Albuquerque’s strong-mayor council system is rooted in a separation of powers arrangement. The city council is the legislative branch, while the mayor is a strong executive with the power to appoint officials – including a chief administrative officer approved by the council, craft a budget, veto council ordinances, execute city policy, and run the government.

The original versions of both systems had their flaws. Because part-time, volunteer city councils often defer to professional managers, and because managers can be fired by councils, council-manager systems often experienced crises of leadership. At the same time, strong mayor-council systems envisioned mayors who would be both savvy political leaders and effective administrators, but this rarely worked out. Recognizing this, council-manager cities started to directly elect their mayors in citywide contests to raise expectations for political leadership, while strong mayor-council cities steadily added chief administrative officers to enhance managerial competence and allow mayors to focus on politics and policy

https://www.abqjournal.com/2599698/council-manager-system-strong-mayor-council-system.html

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

Winston Churchill famously said:

“Those that fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it.”

It appears that Democrat City Councilors Louis Sanchez and Tammy Fiebelkorn and Republican Renee Grout are hell bent and choose to ignore history and want to repeat it because of their own personal dislike of Mayor Tim Keller.

 When Democrat City Councilor Louie Sanchez said “If the voters tell us that we need to change the government, we change it”, he shows his ignorance not knowing that is exactly what happened over 50 years ago. From 1917 until 1974 (56 years), Albuquerque had a City Commission and City Manager  form of Government.  Albuquerque has had a mayor-council government since 1974 when on Feb. 26, 1974, voters in a landslide voted 19,458-to-5,246 to establish a full-time paid mayor as the city’s chief executive, and a part-time 9 member City Council as the city’s legislative body. The proposition, which passed in all 63 precincts, was endorsed by a wide range of organizations and community leaders.

https://www.abqjournal.com/2600440/albuquerque-mayoral-powers.html

 Democrat City Councilors Louis Sanchez and Tammy Fiebelkorn and Republican Renee Grout were elected on November 2, 2021 having never been elected nor served before in any other elective office. They have served a mere 16 months as city councilor having been sworn into office on January 1, 2022.

Sanchez,  Fiebelkorn and  Grout now proclaim the city needs a complete and dramatic restructuring of city government with a 50-year throwback to the past city commission-city manager form of government without offering any substantive evidence that the current Mayor-Council form of government is failing or not working.  All they offer is self-righteous political rhetoric. They  prefer legislation amending the Charter without the convening of the Charter Review Task Force which is a permeant standing task force  was created in part to prevent this sort of nefarious conduct by city councilors.

WHAT MOTVATES THE THROW BACK THREE

There is very little doubt what is motivating Sanchez, Fiebelkorn and Grout. It is their sure personal dislike for Mayor Tim Keller and many of  his policies. Keller has repeatedly out maneuvered the City Council with his veto.  In the last 16 months, Sanchez and Grout have tried and have failed to override at least 5 Keller vetoes.  Thus far they have failed to stop Keller’s “Housing Forward ABQ Plan” which will allow 750 square foot casitas and duplexes in all residential back yards.  They have failed to hold Mayor Keller accountable for impropriety, such as the violation of the anti-donation clause with the $236,622 purchase of artificial turf for the Rio Rancho Events Center for the benefit of the privately owned New Mexico Gladiators.

Fiebelkorn is especially disingenuous when she says “This is not a referendum on the current mayor. … This is a referendum about what is the best form of government.” If that were the case, why would she even bother to mention the Mayor. Informed city hall sources are saying Fiebelkorn and Mayor Keller are not on the best of terms and that the extreme progressive  councilor has felt snubbed by Keller on more than one occasion by not giving her support she has demanded and expected. Fiebelkorn knew what she was being elected to when she ran and now flippantly says “This is a referendum about what is the best form of government.”

Their solution is get rid of Keller’s power as Mayor in case he runs again, which is very likely in that he is privately making it known he is running, for another term, and wins, which is highly questionable.  Sanchez, Fiebelkorn and Grout knew exactly what they were getting into when they ran. If they do not like the existing form of government nor willing to work with Mayor Tim Keller, they should do us all a favor and just resign.  Instead, they promote a rues that they are searching for the best form of government and promoting  a 50 plus year failed throwback city council – city manager.

COUNCIL SHOULD VOTE NO

The city must file the measure with Bernalillo County no later than August  29 to place  it on the November  7 election ballot. The council should vote NO rejecting the Charter Amendment that is ill advised.

On May 22, the Legislative Finance Committee  (LFC) held one of its regularly scheduled meetings. A  report on the state’s homeless and the affordable housing shortage was delivered to the committee for review and discussion.  The report included the preliminary estimates yet to be  finalized 2023 Point In Time (PIT) annual homeless count. It expected the final report will be released in August. This is the first of two separate reports on the LFC’s Report on Homelessness and Affordable Housing.

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 including New Mexico. 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.

NEW MEXICO HOMELESS INCREASE

According to the LFC  Report on Homelessness and Affordable Housing,  New Mexico’s homeless has increased 48% in 2023 compared with last year. The LFC report found New Mexico’s emergency homeless shelter capacity has more than doubled since 2016, especially in the Albuquerque area, as the supply of affordable housing across the state has dropped.

This year Legislative Finance Committee staff accompanied volunteers on the annual Point In Time (PIT) counts of the homeless across the state that occurred in January.  What they found was that in 2023, about half the emergency shelter beds available were used the night of the PIT count taken in January, indicating overall adequate bed numbers statewide for those individuals who wish to use them.

However, shelter accessibility was reported as a challenge for some people, potentially lowering shelter utilization rates because some individual emergency shelters are full, and others are hard to reach. For example, the largest emergency shelter in Albuquerque, the Westside Emergency Housing Center, is 18.5 miles from downtown Albuquerque. The round trip by shuttle takes up to four hours, leaving people experiencing homelessness less time to seek services or employment.

According to HUD, in the decade between 2012 and 2022, homelessness on a given night in January declined by 28% in New Mexico.  The 2023 PIT preliminary  data indicated a significant 48% uptick in the state’s homeless population going from upwards of 2,600 people to nearly 4,000 people. The increase was reportedly driven primarily by an increase in the unsheltered count with 780 more people in Albuquerque and 232 more in the rest of the state. 

According to the National Institutes of Health, estimating the magnitude of New Mexicans experiencing homelessness is challenging, due to a lack of consistent definitions, the mobility of the population, and the potential changing status of those experiencing homelessness. Nevertheless, HUD provides guidance for annual point-in-time (PIT) and housing inventory (HIC) counts.

HUD tracks the number of emergency shelter beds in New Mexico and how many are used on the night of the PIT count in January, when the weather is cold and emergency shelter use is generally at its peak. Through the housing inventory count (HIC), HUD creates an annual inventory of provider programs that provide beds and units dedicated to serving people experiencing homelessness.

The 2023 New Mexico Legislature appropriated $84 million for housing and homeless programs, but the LFC report found the amount may not be enough and some market-driven forces will  be difficult to reverse.

During the May 22 LFC hearing, LFC program analyst Kathleen Gygi and others presented the findings. The new data presented to the committee revealed the state’s emergency shelter capacity has more than doubled since 2016, while the supply of affordable rental units has declined by 50% since 2020.  Gygi said this:

“Homelessness is visible. It’s tragic and it’s increasing. … The state as a whole is doing very well in providing emergency shelter for those most at need and at risk. … However, we’re not doing such a good job at moving people into permanent housing. … We do not have enough affordable housing to systematically move people out of homelessness.  …  Poverty rates are high, labor participation is low. There is high substance abuse rates. These are all things that compound the problems.” 

The May 22 LFC report found the state lacks enough transitional and permanent housing to help people exit homelessness and found the need for an estimated 859 additional housing units for the state’s homeless population. The estimated cost would be $11.4 million annually to accomplish.  According to the LFC report, the state stands to lose an estimated 5% of its roughly 29,000 publicly assisted rental units over the next five years due to expiring affordability commitments or deterioration.

Senator Siah Correa Hemphill, D-Silver City, asked if the proliferation of vacation rentals in some New Mexico cities and towns is contributing to the affordable housing shortage. Siah said this:

“As soon as a house comes on the market, someone from California will come and buy it and convert it into a vacation rental.”

In response, state housing officials said the issue does appear to be contributing to the state’s housing problem, but is not the sole factor.

Links to quoted sources are here:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1gXYy4y9ILSImXApZh__ZZfcs4xhTk-kh/view

https://www.sfreporter.com/news/morningword/2023/05/24/homelessness-rises-48-in-new-mexico/

https://www.abqjournal.com/2601214/homeless-surge-new-mexico-affordable-housing-tough-to-find.html

HIGHLIGHTS OF LFC REPORT ON HOMELESSNESS

The LFC  Report on Homelessness and Affordable Housing is 31 pages long and contains numerous graphs and charts.  The major take aways  that can be gleaned from review of the report on the homeless are as follows:

RISK FACTORS FOR HOMELESSNESS AND HOUSING INSECURITY IN NEW MEXICO PERFORMANCE

According to the LFC report the causes of homelessness points to many risk factors representative of vulnerable situations and populations. These risk factors include disconnection from formal employment; lower educational achievement; involvement with the criminal justice system; and physical, mental, and behavioral health challenges, including substance use disorder.

The following  7 risk factors for homelessness and housing insecurity were identified:

“POVERTY: Nearly 1-in-5 New Mexicans live below the federal poverty line. New Mexico ranks 3^rd in the country in poverty

LABOR FORCE PARTICIPATION: In 2022, the labor force participation rate in New Mexico was 55%, compared to 62% nationally. New Mexico ranks 4^th in labor force participation.

BEHAVIORAL HEALTH:  Over 1-in-5 adults in New Mexico have a mental illness. Nearly 1 in 5 youths had a major depressive episode in the last year.  New Mexico ranks 29th for adult mental health disorders and 17th youth mental health disorders in the country.

PHYSICAL HEALTH:  Nearly 1-in-10 adults in New Mexico have multiple chronic health conditions.

SUBSTANCE ABUSE:  On average, every day five New Mexicans die of alcohol-related causes, and nearly three die from a drug overdose. New Mexico ranks 1st alcohol-related deaths and 2nd  in drug overdose deaths in the country.

DOMESTIC VIOLENCE:  In New Mexico, over 1-in-3 women experience domestic violence in their lifetime. Nearly 6,000 children suffered maltreatment in New Mexico in 2021. New Mexico ranks 26th in the country for domestic violence and 8th for child maltreatment.

INCARCERATION:  New Mexico has a relatively low incarceration rate, with 203 individuals incarcerated per population of 100,000.”

Quoting the report:

“People experiencing unsheltered homelessness are more likely to exhibit multiple risk factors. These individuals also tend to have higher service needs and, as a result, tend to be more frequent users of community services, such as emergency room visits and inpatient and outpatient treatments, and require more acute care.

In New Mexico and nationwide, African Americans and Native Americans are overrepresented among individuals experiencing homelessness. While African Americans made up 2.7 percent of the state’s population in 2021, they accounted for 8.6 percent of individuals experiencing homelessness according to HUD.

Native Americans made up 11 percent of the state’s population in 2021, but HUD reports they represented 17 percent of individuals experiencing homelessness. Unlike on-the-street homelessness, in tribal areas, homelessness often translates into overcrowding: 16 percent of households experience overcrowding compared with 2 percent of all U.S. households, according to the New Mexico Housing Strategy report commissioned by the New Mexico Mortgage Finance Authority (MFA).”

HOMELESSNESS CARRIES SIGNIFICANT IMMEDIATE AND LONG-TERM COSTS TO TAXPAYERS

“Homelessness carries significant immediate and long-term costs to taxpayers. The U.S. Interagency Council on Homelessness reports that an individual experiencing homelessness can cost taxpayers between $30 thousand and $50 thousand per year in hospitalization, medical treatment, emergency shelters, and incarceration.”

“In 2023, the cost to New Mexico taxpayers, based on an estimated population of 3,842 individuals experiencing homelessness recorded in the annual point-in-time counts, would be $98.5 million to $192 million. Society also faces long-term costs from the effects of homelessness on youth. New Mexico has consistently had a higher rate of homeless students than the nation, with an estimated 3%  of students facing housing insecurity during the 2022 school year (or 10.6 thousand students).”

PERFORMANCE LAGS IN TRANSITIONING PEOPLE TO PERMANENT HOUSING

“People in New Mexico remain in emergency shelters or transitional housing for half the time of the national average, but governments and providers are less successful at moving people from temporary shelters to permanent housing. For example, in Albuquerque, about 1 in 5 people in shelters or other temporary housing transition to permanent housing each year. This is about half the rate in the rest of the state and nationally … . This low transition rate to permanent housing reflects the relatively high rate of return to an emergency shelter within two years in Albuquerque … . Potential reasons for this performance in Albuquerque could include a more vulnerable homeless population, insufficient social services, insufficient subsidies, or a tight housing market.”

“HUD does not report  this data for Las Cruces or Santa Fe, which are included in the rest of the state  continuum of care reporting. These issues are common in urban versus rural areas in Western states. For example, Phoenix and Tucson have similarly high return-to-shelter rates compared with the rest of Arizona at 26% percent, 23% and 18%, respectively. However, Arizona has higher rates of transitioning to permanent housing at 40%, 54%, and 32% for the two cities and the rest of the state.”

NEW MEXICO’S PERMANENT SUPPORTIVE HOUSING PROGRAM FILLS A NEED FOR HIGH-RISK INDIVIDUALS WITH A SERIOUS MENTAL ILLNESS

[The Linkages Program is a]  state-funded permanent supportive housing program designed to provide rental subsidies, utility assistance, and supportive services to extremely low-income adults who are homeless or at risk of homelessness and diagnosed with severe mental illness. The Behavioral Health Services Division at the Human Services Department administers the Linkages Program.

While most existing supportive housing in New Mexico (over 2,450 housing units) is federally or locally funded, the state’s Linkages Program plays an important role in reaching individuals who may fail to meet narrow federal voucher eligibility requirements, or need housing more immediately than can otherwise be provided. Linkages sites require a support service agency to provide case management, managed by the Behavioral Health Services Division of the Human Services Department, and a housing administrator to identify housing units and distribute vouchers, managed by the Mortgage Finance Authority.”

NEW MEXICO LACKS SUFFICIENT TRANSITIONAL AND PERMANENT SUPPORTIVE HOUSING TO HELP PEOPLE SUCCESSFULLY EXIT HOMELESSNESS

“A 2022 New Mexico Housing Strategy report commissioned by the New Mexico Mortgage Finance Authority estimated transitional housing only accounts for 1%  of the $123 million public allocations to rental assistance in 2022 and 7% of the $123 million that went to permanent supportive housing. The report noted several estimates ranging from 6,500 to 8,400 units needed for populations, including the chronically homeless, people on the state’s developmental disabilities waiting list, and people exiting prison or mental health institutions.”

“Considering only homeless populations, LFC staff estimate New Mexico could benefit from another 859 permanent supportive housing units based on cost estimates from the state’s Linkages program and a methodology from the Corporation for Supportive Housing … . Using an existing cost estimate from Linkages, which spends about $13,300 per client annually, state and local governments could fund such housing at an annual cost of approximately $11.4 million annually. However, more recurring funding will not be the only barrier to increasing supportive housing. The New Mexico Housing Strategy report  also noted that existing supportive housing providers are oversubscribed, and there is a shortage of providers to take on any expanded work. Further, the general lack of affordable housing units also impacts availability of units to house supportive housing clients.”

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1gXYy4y9ILSImXApZh__ZZfcs4xhTk-kh/view

THE “POINT IN TIME” SURVEY

Each year the “Point in Time” (PIT) survey is conducted to determine how many people experience homelessness on a given night and to learn more about their specific needs. 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.

PIT follows the HUD definition of homelessness and counts only people who are sleeping in a shelter, in a transitional housing program, or outside in places not meant for human habitation. Those people who are not counted are those who do not want to participate in the survey, who are sleeping in motels that they pay for themselves, or who are doubled up with family or friends.

The PIT count includes “Sheltered Count”, “Unsheltered Count” and a “Transitional Housing Count.”

The Sheltered Count is the count of people experiencing homelessness who are sheltered in emergency shelter and transitional housing on a single night.  Sheltered homeless also include homeless “residing in an emergency a motel paid through a provider or in a transitional housing program.” It does not include people who are doubled up with family or friends.

The Unsheltered are defined as those who encamp in neighborhood open space areas, alleys, parks, high-traffic areas and points of congregation, meal service sites, and general service sites.   The Unsheltered Count uses surveys and street outreach to account for individuals and families experiencing unsheltered homelessness on the night of the count.

“Transitional Housing Count” is exactly what the category implies and consists of homeless who have received government housing assistance and will eventually moved into permanent housing of their own.

Through the PIT counts, HUD annually tracks the number of people and families that experience homelessness, but only reports data for the two continuum of care organizations it funds: the city of Albuquerque and the New Mexico Coalition to End Homelessness (NMCEH) for all other locations in the state. Each year about half of the state’s individuals experiencing homelessness are in Albuquerque.  HUD does not report how the other half are dispersed throughout the state.

2022 NEW MEXICO’S HOMELESS NUMBERS RECALLED

Comparing this years PIT numbers of homeless to past numbers is essential to understanding the extent of the increase.   The 2022 Point in Time Survey was released last year in August, 2022.  The 2022 survey included the total estimated number of people counted during the Balance of State Point-in-Time counts for every other year from 2009 – 2022 with a measurable decline over the years.   New Mexico’s numbers for the last 13 calculated ever 2 years are as follows:

2009:  1,471

2011:  1,962

2013:  1,648

2015:  1,342

2017:  1,164

2019:  1,717

2021:  1,180

2022:  1,283

EDITOR’S NOTE: These numbers do not include homeless counted in Albuquerque.

Page  18, Point in Time Survey,

https://www.nmceh.org/_files/ugd/6737c5_4ecb9ab7114a45dcb25f648c6e0b0a30.pdf

The total estimated number of households experiencing homelessness in Balance of State on January 31, 2022 were reported are as follows:

Totals of HOUSEHOLDS with one child, without children and with only children:

Emergency Shelters:  574

Transitional Housing: 70

Unsheltered: 366

TOTAL: 1,010

Page 17, Point in Time Survey

https://www.nmceh.org/_files/ugd/6737c5_4ecb9ab7114a45dcb25f648c6e0b0a30.pdf

The total estimated number of INDIVIDUALS with one child, without children and with only children experiencing homelessness in the Balance of State on January 31, 2022 :

Emergency Shelters:  785

Transitional Housing: 107

Unsheltered: 391

TOTAL: 1,283

Page 17, Point in Time Survey

https://www.nmceh.org/_files/ugd/6737c5_4ecb9ab7114a45dcb25f648c6e0b0a30.pdf

 ALBUQUERQUE’S HOMELESS

In August, the 2022 the Point In Time (PIT) homeless survey reported that the number total homeless in Albuquerque was 1,311 with 940 in emergency shelters, 197 unsheltered and 174 in transitional housing. Surprisingly, the survey found that there were 256 fewer homeless in 2022 than in 2021 which was 1,567.  In 2019, the PIT found 1,524 homeless.

The 2022 PIT report provides the odd number years of shelter and unsheltered homeless in Albuquerque for 8 years from 2009 to 2019 and including 2022.  During the last 12 years, PIT yearly surveys have counted between 1,300 to 1,600 homeless a year.  Those numbers are:  2011: 1,639, 2013: 1,171, 2015:1,287, 2017: 1,318, 2019: 1,524, 2021: 1,567 and 2022: 1,311.

The 1,311 figures in the 2022 PIT report is the lowest number of unsheltered reported for the last 5 years. According to the 2022 PIT report there were 256 fewer homeless in January 2022 than in January 2021, yet the public perception is that the city is overrun by the homeless likely because they have become far more aggressive, more assertive  and more visible.

According to the LFC report, the 2023 Albuquerque unsheltered count increase by 780 more people. In otherwards Albuquerque homeless went from 1,311 in 2022 as reported by PIT  to 2,091 as reported by the LFC.

The link to review the entire 2022 PIT is here:

https://www.nmceh.org/_files/ugd/6737c5_4ecb9ab7114a45dcb25f648c6e0b0a30.pdf

HOMELESSNESS IN AMERICA

A national data compilation organization reports that in 2022,  there were 582,500 individuals experiencing homelessness on a single night across the nation as was found by the Point In Time (PIT) survey. There are 10 states that stand out for their particularly high homeless populations. These states are:

1. California (171,521)
2. New York (74,178)
3. Florida (25,959)
4. Washington (25,211)
5. Texas (24,432)
6. Oregon (17,959)
7. Massachusetts (15,507)
8. Arizona (13,553)
9. Pennsylvania (12,691)
10. Georgia (10,689)

The link to the quoted source material is here:

https://www.datapandas.org/ranking/homeless-population-by-state

DRUG ADDICTION AND MENTAL ILLNESS

According to last year’s 2022 PIT annual report, there were 1,567 sheltered and unsheltered homeless people living in Albuquerque. Of the 1,567 homeless in Albuquerque, 30.19% of the homeless self-reported as having a serious mental illness and 25.5% self-reported as substance abusers. There is an overlap with homeless suffering both mental illness and substance abuse.  In other words, a whopping 55.69% combined total of those surveyed self-reported as having a serious mental illness or were substance abusers.

The 2022 Point In Time Report provides what it referred to “balance of the state” statistics where the Albuquerque’s homeless numbers were excluded. The total estimated number of households experiencing homelessness in balance of state on January 31, 2022 were reported are as follows:

Totals of HOUSEHOLDS with one child, without children and with only children:

Emergency Shelters:  574

Transitional Housing: 70

Unsheltered: 366

TOTAL: 1,010

Of the 366 unsheltered, 43% were identified as adults with serious mental illness and 40% were identified as adults with substance use disorders or a staggering 83% combined figure.

The PIT report is 40 pages long and includes graphs and pie charts outlining the statistics reported.  You can review the entire report at this link:

https://www.nmceh.org/_files/ugd/6737c5_4ecb9ab7114a45dcb25f648c6e0b0a30.pdf

https://www.abqjournal.com/2402560/homeless-numbers-see-little-change.htm

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

New Mexico’s increase in the homeless numbers are serious and need to be addressed. However, the 4,000 figure found by the Point In Time survey  in no way comes close to the homeless crisis in the neighboring states of Arizona (13,553) and Texas (24,432). The blunt truth is that the homeless crisis is not as bad in New Mexico as it is in other areas of the country and neighboring states.

It’s not as if government is not doing nothing to address the homeless crisis. Over the last two years in Albuquerque alone, the Keller Administration has spent upwards of $100,000,000  to provide services and shelter to the homeless. It will now be spending another $50 million in fiscal year 2023-2024. The 2023 New Mexico Legislature appropriated $84 million for housing and homeless programs, but the LFC report found the amount may not be enough, yet the state had a $3.6 Billion surplus.

Being homeless is not a crime and government has a moral obligation to help the homeless. It’s not at all likely we will ever be free of the homeless but it must and can be managed and can be reduced.  To reduce the numbers of the homeless, the root causes of homelessness must be addressed and not just by housing and shelter. Those root causes include poverty, economic disparity, mental illness and drug addiction.

It is in the area treatment of mental illness and drug addiction that significant efforts need to be made when dealing with the homeless and that will have an immediate impact. Then there is the matter of the homeless who simply refuse any and all services, including housing, emergency shelter, mental illness treatment and drug addiction treatment and counselling.

The 2022 PIT data breakdown for the unsheltered for the years 2009 to 2022 reports that 46% of the unsheltered suffer from serious mental illness and that 44% of the unsheltered suffer from substance abuse for a staggering 89% combined total. It is these homeless who refuse government services, who do not want to be housed in shelters and who essentially want to be left alone, to do what they want, when they want and how they want, including illegal activities and illegal camping.

When it comes to the  homeless in Albuquerque, 30.19% of the homeless  self-reported as having a serious mental illness and  25.5% self-reported as substance abusers. There is an overlap with homeless suffering both mental illness and substance abuse.  In other words, a whopping 55.69% combined total of those surveyed self-reported as having a serious mental illness or were substance abusers. When it comes to the balance of the state homeless numbers,  43% were identified as adults with serious mental illness and 40% were identified as adults with substance use disorders or a staggering 83% combined figure.

CREATE “BEHAVIORAL HEALTH TREATMENT COURT” AND BUILD HOSPITAL FOR REFERRALS

Absent from the May 22  LFC report is that mental getting mental health and drug counseling to the homeless is just as critical as housing, temporary shelter and transitional housing.  A glaring reality is that much more must be done with the initiation of civil commitment hearings to deal with the mentally ill and the drug addicted who are homeless and a serious danger to themselves and to others to ensure that they get the medical and mental health treatment and counselling services they desperately need before they can be transitioned into gainful employment and housing . A greater emphasis must be made to get those who are homeless and the drug addicted who may or may not be in the criminal justice system the medical care and assistance they need without criminal prosecution and warehousing in the county jail.

There is a critical need for a civil mental health commitment court for the homeless suffering from mental illness or drug addiction and who pose a threat to themselves, their family and the general public. There is an even bigger need for the construction and staffing of a mental health facility or hospital to provide the services.

Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham and the legislature should seek to create one single specialty “Behavioral Health Treatment Court” under the direct supervision of the New Mexico Supreme Court that would be an outreach and treatment court for the drug addicted and the mentally ill with an emphasis on the homeless.   As it stands now, there exists less than adequate facilities where patients can be referred to for civil mental health commitments and treatment. There is glaring and absolute need for a behavioral health hospital and drug rehabilitation treatment facility.

New Mexico is currently experiencing historical surplus revenues and this past legislative session the legislature had an astonishing $3.6 Billion in surplus revenue. It likely the state will continue to see historic surpluses. Now is the time to create a “Behavioral Health Treatment Court and dedicate funding for the construction of behavioral health hospital and drug rehabilitation treatment facility the courts can rely upon for referrals.