On April 17, New Mexico Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham announced she was calling state legislators into a Special Session starting July 18 with a  focus on addressing public safety proposals. The governor said she expected the session to wrap up within several days. She decided to convene the session to allow lawmakers to finish what they started during the regular 30-day session.  The upcoming special legislative session will be the fifth special session the governor has called while in office.

The Governor’s news release at the time said in part:

“While we made some progress toward a safer New Mexico during the 30-day day session, we agree that we must do more. The special session in July will enable us to deliver additional statutory changes that reduce the danger and risk New Mexico communities face every day. The best proposals for making our state safer will be under consideration, and I welcome input from my colleagues in the legislature.”

https://www.governor.state.nm.us/2024/04/17/gov-lujan-grisham-announces-special-session-starting-july-18/

Senate Majority Leader Peter Wirth said at the time a special session would give lawmakers more time to work through details on complex public safety bills. Wirth said this in a press release:

“The Governor’s announced date for a special session gives us enough time to find consensus public safety legislation that can pass both chambers. Discussions between the Governor and legislative leadership to date have focused on bills from the recent 30-day session that required more work due to their legal complexity, namely: criminal competency, felon in possession of a firearm and panhandling. We have agreed additional gun safety and pre-trial detention bills will wait for the sixty-day session in January. In the next several months, we will also focus on finding ways to expand the critical safety net of mental health and treatment services that are vital to the success of the legislation that will be considered.”

Sen. Joe Cervantes, D-Las Cruces, who chairs the Senate Judiciary Committee, said he believes the special session should focus on the “absence of resources to enforce existing law. … The fundamental problem with crime in Albuquerque is not a lack of laws. It’s lack of accountability and enforcement of those laws.”  Cervantes said he hoped the governor would be receptive to initiatives from the Legislature before the special session “and that my colleagues will step up to consider some changes in law.  It’s hard to imagine that you can accomplish in a matter of a couple of days the work that it’s going to take to restore public trust in public safety in Albuquerque and elsewhere.”

The links to quoted news sources relied upon are here:

https://www.krqe.com/news/politics-government/governor-lujan-grisham-calls-for-special-session-in-july/

https://www.kob.com/new-mexico/new-mexico-governor-calls-special-session-on-public-safety/

https://www.koat.com/article/governor-announces-special-session-public-safety/60524385

https://www.abqjournal.com/news/special-legislative-session-on-crime-slated-for-july/article_e0033e54-fcce-11ee-a2cc-972f1ab7c84e.html

GOVERNOR ANNOUNCES FIVE PUBLIC SAFETY MEASURES FOR JULY 18 SPECIAL SESSION

On June 6, Holly Agajanian, the Governor’s Chief General Counsel, outlined the bills to the Court, Corrections and Justice Interim Committee the governor’s office will back during the upcoming special session Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham will ask lawmakers to pass 5 public-safety measures during the July 18 special session of the New Mexico legislature.

The governor’s spokeswoman, Jodi McGinnis Porter, released a “discussion draft” of  4 of the 5  bills and said the governor would “welcome input” from legislators.  Porter said in a statement:

“These five legislative proposals are designed to address the pressing public safety issues that our communities face every day, reducing danger and risk for all New Mexicans.”

The 5 public safety measures provide as follows:

The first bill  would make changes to the state’s criminal competency law. The bill, which did not make it very far in the previous legislative session, is at the top of the special session agenda. The bill would send criminal defendants who are found incompetent to stand trial to a mental health or behavioral health treatment program. Supporters say there are far too many suspects who are arrested, deemed incompetent to stand trial, and then released back on the streets only to commit more crimes. It’s a bill designed to address in part the  so-called “revolving door” where defendants are arrested only to be found incompetent to stand trial and then released. The legislation is intended to strengthen a 2016 law and a program originally signed into law by former Governor Susana Martinez that allows district judges to order involuntary treatment for people with severe mental illness who have frequent brushes with law enforcement. It involves a program called the “Assisted Outpatient Treatment” (AOT).

The second bill  would  expand a program that mandates involuntary treatment for people with mental illness. The bill involves civil mental heath commitments where there are no criminal charges involved.   The bill is an assisted out-patient treatment bill proposal that would allow a judge to mandate out-patient treatment, including involuntarily commitments. It would  allow individuals, whether first responders, family members or community members who work with mentally ill individuals on the streets to request involuntary out-patient treatment.

The third bill  would strengthen penalties for a felon convicted of possessing a firearm, making the crime a second-degree felony, punishable by a minimum of 9 years in prison.

The fourth bill  would prohibit pedestrians from occupying highway medians, on-ramps and exit ramps.  The bill is intended to address individuals loitering on street medians despite a similar bill receiving pushback in the 2024 legislature over its constitutionality. It failed to pass.  The new bill would contain language that says that in places where a speed limit is more than 30 miles per hour, individuals may not loiter on a median that is 36 inches or less. The bill is similar to a city ordinance enacted by the Albuquerque City Council last year.

The fifth bill  would require law enforcement agencies to report certain monthly crime incident reports and ballistic information.

Three of the five measures are leftovers  from the 2024 legislative session. The  3  “leftover”  measures are median safety bill that is often described as a panhandling ban, increasing penalties for felons caught with firearms, and new data collection and sharing requirements for law enforcement agencies.  It is the two new proposals on mental health commitments that are complicated and where it appears there is no consensus arrived at by legislators. One of them is reworking the state’s criminal competency laws, ideally making it easier for the courts to mandate certain suspects into behavioral health treatments. The other is an assisted outpatient treatment bill.

It costs taxpayers roughly $50,000 a day to bring lawmakers back for a special session. The goal any Special Session is to get in and out as quickly as possible. But lawmakers say the governor’s public safety agenda includes some extremely complicated proposals and they need as much time as they can get to discuss them.

HOUSE COURTS, CORRECTIONS AND JUSTICE COMMITTEE

On June 4, the AOT involuntary treatment for people program dominated the Court, Corrections and Justice Interim Committee  discussion. Holly Agajanian, the Governor’s Chief General Counsel told committee members that the law and the AOT program needs to be extended statewide and have broader eligibility. Agajanian told committee members this:

“The question then becomes, ‘How do we do this? …. How do we have AOT everywhere? Because that’s what we need. And that’s what this bill has.”

Some lawmakers questioned the need for a special session to make changes to a program originally signed into law by former Gov. Susana Martinez in 2016. Representative Alan Martinez, R-Bernalillo, asked:

“Why do we need this immediately if the AOT is already on the books and jurisdictions can implement that today? …  When we can come back in the [upcoming 2025] 60-day we can take care of whatever changes to the law we need to do.”

Agajanian said changes to the law proposed by Lujan Grisham will mandate implementation of the program and as proposed would require all of New Mexico’s thirteen  judicial districts to institute AOT program by July 1, 2026. Agajanian said this:

“Even though jurisdictions are already statutorily allowed to implement these programs, they aren’t doing it. … This is something that is going to take so long to implement.  … [By waiting until next year]  we will lose time and we will lose the lives of New Mexicans.”

In addition, the proposed bill will expand the number of people eligible for the program.  Agajanian said this:

“I think you’re going to end up being able to provide services for more folks than you had before.”

ASSISTED OUTPATIENT TREATMENT PROGRAM

The court-supervised Assisted Outpatient Treatment program is intended for those who have a history of arrests and hospitalizations and who do not or who are unlikely to voluntarily adhere to prescribed treatments.  The law passed in 2016 allows for State District Court Judges to order people into mandatory treatment programs, which includes medication, therapy or drug testing. Participants have to be at least 18 years old, have a mental illness diagnosis and have a history of not following through with treatments ordered. Under the original law passed, cities and counties have to opt into the program to participate.

Jamie Michael, the county’s Health and Human Services director, told  the committee  that  only the 3rd Judicial District in Doña Ana County has a functioning AOT program, which was initiated in 2016 under a federal grant.  The program serves about 40 people a year, she estimated.

The 2nd Judicial District in Bernalillo County also launched a pilot AOT program in November 2017. Leaders with the city, county, courts and University of New Mexico Hospital announced the program that year.  Witnesses told the House Courts, Corrections and Justice Committee lawmakers that the Bernalillo County program is no longer in effect.

State Representative Christine Chandler, who Chairs  the House Courts, Corrections and Justice Committee said this:

“I think maybe we should try to get the Bernalillo County people in for the next meeting, because I want to know why it fell apart in Bernalillo County.”

https://www.abqjournal.com/news/special-session-will-focus-on-mental-health-treatment/article_87510b56-246a-11ef-8f8b-67d64ab06e18.html#tncms-source=home-featured-7-block

PUSHBACK FROM LEGISLATORS

Both Democrats and Republicans asked why a special session was needed to be called for legislation that they believed could or should be addressed during a regular session of the legislature. Even some Democrats had harsh  words for Governor Lujan Grisham’s proposal.

Mesilla Democrat State Representative Micaela Lara Cadena said it was hard for her not to feel that the Governor’s proposals are more about “political wins.”  Cadena said this:

“I was part of tabling or not passing bills my good friend Representative (Bill) Rehm brought. We put them in the dumpster and now we’re slapping some Democrat’s names on them and plagiarizing Representative Rehm here….Folks have been trying to have these conversations for a long time now and very quickly in a short summer we have to go because New Mexico is in crisis?”

Espanola Republican Representative Alan Martinez asked why the state must spend thousands of dollars a day for a special session. Martinez asked:

“Why not say, you work on a pilot project, we come back in January?”

Holly Agajanian, the Governor’s Chief General Counsel said the reason for a special session now is because New Mexico is in a crisis in terms of both mental health and violent crime. She said recent reports show that the state has higher than average mental health problems and that New Mexico  ranks 43^rd  in the nation for beds available for individuals with mental health issues. She said New Mexico led the nation for violent crime in 2022. Agajanian said this:

“Against this backdrop the governor has called this special session to deal with this crisis that has come to grip our state.” 

Several members of the committee expressed concern about the portion of the assisted out-patient treatment program proposal that would allow individuals who have a relationship with the individual suffering mental health problems to seek a process by which the individual could be placed into treatment involuntarily.

Albuquerque Democrat State Senator Antoinette Sedillo Lopez, a licensed New Mexico attorney, said she was worried the mandatory mental health commitment law changes could violate an individual’s constitutional rights.

Albuquerque Democrat State Senator Katy Duhigg  said she didn’t feel she had been presented with “great data that this is a solution that solves this problem and that is data I’d want to see before passing this legislation.” Duhigg said she found data from other countries with a quick online search that suggests that involuntary mental health treatment could lead to worse outcomes, rather than better ones. Duhigg asked why the state needed legislative changes in order to establish the assisted outpatient treatment program in every county. In response The Governor’s Chief General Counsel Holly Agajanian said this in response:

“I have to go back to the fact that I don’t suggest that they don’t have the authority to do it on their own. I’m suggesting, it hasn’t been done. We need to require it.”

Courts, Corrections and Justice Chair Christine Chandler, D-Los Alamos, said she was confused over the logistics. She asked if the legislature would be mandating that the judicial branch set up these assisted outpatient treatment programs.  Agajanian said the proposal breaks up the areas for the treatment programs based on the judicial boundaries of the state court system because those are smaller than regional boundaries and that would make it easier for an officer to take an individual suffering mental health problems to treatment rather than to jail. Agajanian also said the court would have a memorandum of understanding with the county and either Medicaid, private insurance or indigent funds would pay for the treatment.

Milan Democrat State Representative Eliseo Lee Alcon expressed support for holding a special session and said this:

“Nobody wants to get something done. The sky is falling if we go into special session…Who knows what’s happening in Santa Fe or Las Vegas or Grant or Milan. We have no idea if anybody is getting treated or helped. I honestly do not think the sky is going to fall if we do something about this problem,”

Albuquerque area Republican State Representative Bill Rehm said he has introduced a bill for 15 years prohibiting a felon in possession of a firearm. He said during this past session, that bill passed the House but never made it through the Senate Judiciary Committee. Rehm also said he is an expert witness in traffic crash reintroduction and that he’d like to work with the governor’s office on both the bill prohibiting a felon in possession of a firearm and on the no loitering on a median proposed legislation. Rehm retires at the end of this term.

Duhigg asked if Lujan Grisham would consider adding “serious sanctions” to managed care organizations to provide mental health treatment. Agajanian responded by saying  that was “music to my ears” and said she thought Lujan Grisham would be amenable to such a proposal.

The link to quoted and relied upon news source material is here:

https://nmpoliticalreport.com/nmleg/both-republicans-and-democrats-skeptical-of-guvs-proposals-for-special-session/

NO TREATMENT FACILITIES  MAKES IT COMPLICATED

New Mexico State Representative Christine Chandler, District 23 represents Los Alamos, Sandoval & Santa Fe counties. She chairs the House Courts, Corrections and Justice Committee. Representative Chandler said this about the Special Session:

“I wouldn’t call it optimism, I think maybe you might say people are hopeful we’ll have a productive session. …. You’ll see from our agenda that we’re definitely putting in the work. I am approaching it, and I think my colleagues are approaching it in good faith, and with a willingness to try to resolve the issues.”

Chandler said the Assisted Outpatient Treatment measure expanding the program and allowing involuntary treatment for people with mental illness is by far the most complex measure.  She noted the original law took three years to pass, and now Governor Lujan Grishma is asking state lawmakers to make significant changes to the law in just a few weeks.  She noted there is also the looming issue when it comes to behavioral health treatment in New Mexico itself.

Representative Chandler said this:

“[The legislation] is aimed at providing an avenue for people who are concerned about individuals with serious mental illness. … I believe the governor is interested in maybe loosening it up a little bit, so that it will be easier to encourage them and require them to get treatment. It’s not a voluntary program, it is requiring these individuals who meet the criteria to get treatment. … The concern of many of us, me included, is that we can set up these laws, you know, we can work very hard to make the best possible law that we can. But if there aren’t the behavioral health resources and professionals to assist these people, it’s all for naught.”

Chandler said state lawmakers seems to understand the governor’s motivations to expand behavioral health resources, and they are giving it their best effort, but she’s not fully confident it’ll get done during the special session. She said this:

“I would hate to think there would be no bills, but there certainly is that possibility. …  I don’t think it will be, you know, all the time will be wasted, because I think we’ll have some good discussions that will lay the groundwork for the 60 day.”

Chandler said the committee will meet again at least twice before the special session begins.

https://www.kob.com/new-mexico/legislators-prepare-to-tackle-complex-public-safety-proposals-during-special-session/

MENTAL HEALTH COURT

It was in 2007 that the Second Judicial Court located in Bernalillo County established the states only specialized Mental Health Court (MHC).  It is a state-certified specialty treatment court program specifically for individuals whose involvement with the legal system is directly related to an untreated or unstabilized mental health disorder, indicating a clear need for intervention, treatment and support. The program serves individuals charged and/or convicted of felony level charges within Bernalillo County.

Mission And Goal Of Mental Health Court 

The Mission and Goal of the Mental Health Court are very straight forward:

Engage individuals with serious mental health diagnosis who are involved in the criminal system. The program strives to improve one’s quality of life through treatment, linkage to community resources, specialized supervision and extensive supportive measures.

The overall goal of the MHC program is to minimize and/or eliminate involvement with the criminal justice system while improving one’s overall mental health and quality of living.

Focus of Mental Health Court

The Mental Health Court has an overall focus on assisting with improving participants’ quality of life, appropriate treatment services and discontinuing involvement with the criminal justice system.  The program includes both pre and post plea tracks. The program serves individuals at high levels of risk and need, as assessed. The program duration typically ranges from 18-24 credit earned months. Time in the program is dependent on the severity of risk and need, level of participation and overall progression through the program.

The Mental Health Court (MHC) team members take into special consideration that participants typically have extensive trauma histories, limited support systems and a history of substance abuse, mental health and co-occurring disorders. In addition, participants often lack basic resources such as housing, education and/or employment.  In an effort to meet the individualized needs of each participant, MHC provides intensive clinical case management, individual, group, and family treatment services, housing, academic and vocational support through community service providers.

The services provided are unique to the person and are identified through individualized assessments and treatment planning. Each participant is given ample opportunity to receive the needed services to develop the life skills needed to live a life that is substance and criminal justice free.

The program is 100% voluntary, and is an alternative to the standard judicial process. The courts current capacity is 35.  The recidivism rate from September 1, 9/1/2017 to 1/1/2023 is  5.5% with a success rate of 94.5%

Pre-Adjudication, Post-Adjudication

Program referrals are accepted from attorneys, judges, treatment providers, community agencies, family members and from individuals involved in the justice system that are interested in participating in jail diversion programs, as an alternative to traditional court processes.

The MHC program accepts both pre-adjudication and post-adjudication referrals:

Pre-Adjudication: Participants can screen for the program pre-adjudication upon a referral to determine eligibility.

Post-Adjudication: Participants enter the program upon the filing of a formal plea agreement or upon a trial conviction. Sentencing is completed upon graduation of the program. Participants are advised appropriately of the possible sentence and penalties they may face, should termination or a voluntary withdrawal occur.

Eligibility For Mental Health Court

There are 4 major eligibility criteria to for the court:

1. MHC accepts individuals with a Serious Mental Health Illness (SMI) as a primary diagnosis.
2. Participants must have current felony charges-pending in Bernalillo County.
3. Participants must have identifiable substance abuse, mental health and/or social service needs, and be willing to participate in treatment for the duration of the program. Treatment services may include psychiatric evaluation, medication management, substance abuse individual and/or group counseling, and other behavioral treatment services as recommended.
4. Participants are not excluded from participation in MHC due to lack of residence and/ or stable residence.

All referrals are reviewed and considered on a case-by-case basis and a decision is made if a person is disqualified.

Disqualification Criteria For Mental Health Court 

There are 5 areas where a person can be disqualified from court participation:

1. Individuals who have pending charges or who have been convicted of capital offenses and/or sex offenses are disqualified.
2. Individuals who have been found incompetent, or competency is pending and/or do not have the cognitive capacity to participate in the program are disqualified.
3. Individuals who do not engage in completing clinical assessments and who stop showing up for program requirements are disqualified.
4. Individuals unwilling to follow treatment recommendations (e.g. medication management, counseling, case management services), are disqualified.
5. Individuals with cognitive impairment or learning disabilities that prohibit the ability to advance through the program are disqualified.

Service Delivery For Mental Health Court 

Community treatment and case management is provided by many entities in the community. Referrals for clients are based on need and agency availability. Participants complete a therapeutic assessment and develop an individualized treatment plan that focuses on identifying strengths and addressing needs. Services are strength-based and client centered for individuals who are challenged by substance abuse and co-occurring disorders and/or are deemed high-risk to reoffend in the community. Clients are ideally engaged in MHC for a period of 18 to 24 (credit-earned) months by transitioning through four phases, with an ongoing relationship of care in the areas of treatment, case management, housing, medication, stability, job readiness, parenting, and educational referrals.

The link to the quoted source is here:

https://seconddistrictcourt.nmcourts.gov/home/programs-specialty-courts/pre-trial-services/jsdp-programs/mental-health-court/

CIVIL MENTAL HEALTH COMMITMENT HEARINGS

The are laws on that books that deal with when and under what circumstances formal civil commitment hearings can be initiated for 3-day, 7-day and even 30-day observation and diagnostic evaluations for the mentally ill and the drug addicted. These time frames to allow treatment must expanded to allow for far more time, perhaps 6 month to a year of two years and could be made mandatory.  The civil commitment deals with  those who are a danger to themselves and others and provides that the District Attorney can initiate civil mental health commitment actions for evaluations and treatment.

The link to review the applicable New Mexico state statutes NM Statute §43-1-1 (2019), NM Stat § 43-1-1 (2019), NM Stat § 43-1-11 (2020) on civil mental health commitments is here:

https://law.justia.com/codes/new-mexico/2020/chapter-43/article-1/section-43-1-11/#:~:text=An%20interested%20person%20who%20reasonably,grounds%20exist%20to%20commit%2

NEW MEXICO’S CRIMINAL JUSTICE COURT SYSTEM

There are 13 Judicial District Courts in the State of New Mexico that are courts of general jurisdictions that handle both civil and criminal matters for the 33 counties in the State of New Mexico. Each of the 13 Judicial District Courts have primary jurisdiction over one or more counties based on population.

State District Courts are primary courts of jurisdiction over criminal cases, including felonies and misdemeanor cases. State District Courts have jurisdictions over civil matters with disputes of more than $10,000, domestic relations, mental health and civil commitment cases, appeals from administrative agencies, disputes over real estate, contract disputes, tort actions for personal injury.  District Court criminal convictions and criminal matters are appealable to the one New Mexico Court of Appeals and/or the New Mexico Supreme Court.

New Mexico also has a small claims court or Magistrate Court and Metropolitan Court System that are courts of limited jurisdiction that handle civil disputes of up to $10,000 and misdemeanor criminal matters and appeals are to the State District Courts.

An Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC) has been established and is funded by the New Mexico legislature to enable the courts to accomplish their mission by ensuring that the courts have adequate, equitable distributed resources. The AOC ensures that the courts have and use current technology and it provides a statewide human resources system. The AOC is responsible for developing and implementing improved court processes and supporting the courts in their  use.  The AOC ensures sound financial, budgeting and procurement practices in the management of court resources.

https://www.nmcourts.gov/court-administration/administrative-office-of-the-courts-aoc/

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

It’s very disappointing that the Governor has failed to reach any real consensus with legislative leaders on what needs to be done and what measures should be enacted before  the special session she has called.   All five measures Governor Lujan Grisham is proposing for the Special Session are a good start, but in no way come even close to what is actually needed.  Warehousing the mentally ill or drug addicted in jails for crimes committed is not the answer and does not address treatment and the court’s must be looked to as part of the solution.

Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham and the New Mexico Legislature need to proceed with  the  Special Session of the legislature for public safety, but the primary emphasis should  be the creation of a new 14^th Judicial District Court designated as a  Mental Health Court  with 3 separate regional divisions one located in Albuquerque, one in Las Cruces and one in Las Vegas, New Mexico with the creation of at least 3 District Court Judge positions with 6 year terms appointed by the New Mexico Supreme Court.  Appointment by the Supreme Court would ensure rapid filling of the new positions and take the elective partisan politics out of the process.  The Administrative Offices of the Courts must play  a pivotal role in setting up the new court process, including locating the new Mental Health Treatment Court in existing court houses in all 3 locations.

Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham and the legislature should seek to designate the 14^th Judicial District Court a specialty “Mental Health Treatment Court” functioning as outreach and treatment court for the drug addicted and the mentally ill in mandatory  hospital or counseling settings and not involving jail incarceration.

As has been  pointed out by New Mexico State Representative Christine Chandler, there is a major  need for the construction and staffing of a mental health facilities or hospitals to provide the services needed to the mentally ill or drug addicted. As it stands now, there exists less than adequate facilities where patients can be referred to for civil mental health commitments and treatment.  In other words there is nowhere for people to go or be placed to get the mental health and drug treatment needed. There is glaring need for a behavioral health hospital and drug rehabilitation treatment facilities.  The Bernalillo County Behavioral Health Center and the Las Vegas Mental Health hospital could be expanded to accommodate for court referrals and a new behavioral health facility could be constructed in Las Cruces to handle mental health commitment and treatment.

New Mexico is currently experiencing historical surplus revenues and this past legislative session the legislature had an astonishing $3.6 Billion in surplus revenue. Now is the time to create a statewide Mental Health Court and dedicate funding for the construction of behavioral health hospital and drug rehabilitation treatment facilities the courts can rely upon for referrals.

Creation of a new court system must include funding for District Attorneys and Public Defenders with dedicated personnel resources for the filing and defending of civil mental health commitments as prescribed by law.

A statewide mental health court with mandatory civil commitments will get treatment to those who need it the most, help get the unhoused off the streets and help families with loved ones who resist any mental health treatment.

Links to related blog article are here:

Convening Special Session Of NM Legislator For Public Safety Must Include Expanding Existing Mental Health Court; Create New 14th Judicial District Court With 3 Regional Divisions For Mental Health Commitment Hearings; Build Regional Treatment Facilities And Hospitals For Mandatory Treatment Ordered

 

ABQ Journal Dinelli Guest Opinion Column: “Lawmakers should set up statewide mental health court”; Related Column: Laws, Statistics, and Resources Needed To Create 14th Judicial District Court For Mental Health Commitment Court

https://www.petedinelli.com/2024/04/17/gov-mlg-to-call-special-session-on-july-18-focus-to-be-public-safety-special-session-should-include-creating-state-wide-mental-health-court-for-civil-mental-health-commitments-to-assist-mentally-il/

 

On May 13, 2024 Federal Court Appointed Monitor James Ginger filed his 19th Independent Federal Monitor’s report. The 19th Monitor’s Report covers the time period of August 1, 2023, through January 31, 2024.  The report is 115-pages long.  It is the shortest report filed to date with the previous reports averaging about 300 pages.  The link to review the entire 19^th report is here:

https://www.cabq.gov/police/documents/final-imr-19.pdf/view

The Court Approved Settlement Agreement mandates 271 police reforms, the appointment of a Federal Monitor and the filing of Independent Monitor’s reports (IMRs) on APD’s compliance with the reforms. There are 276 paragraphs in 10 sections within the CASA with measurable requirements that the monitor reports on. The ultimate goal of the settlement was to implement constitutional policing practices.  Its aim is to make sure APD police officers follow policy and don’t use excessive force or deadly force. The U.S. Department of Justice investigation a decade ago found a disturbing pattern and practice of the use of unconstitutional excessive force by Albuquerque Police officers, particularly with the mentally ill or those in crisis as the victims.  The link to the 118-page CASA is here:

https://documents.cabq.gov/justice-department/settlement-agreement.pdf

The 19^th Federal Monitor’s report finds that APD has reached 100% Primary Compliance,  100% Secondary Compliance and 96% Operational Compliance.  Under the terms and conditions of the CASA, once APD achieves a 95% compliance rate in all 3 identified compliance levels and maintains it for 2 consecutive years, the case can be dismissed. Originally, APD was to have come into compliance within 4 years and the case was to be dismissed in 2018. However, because of delay and obstruction tactics by both APD management and the police union to implement in full the reforms, a 5 year delay resulted.

The 3 compliance levels are explained as follows:

PRIMARY COMPLIANCE

Primary compliance is the “policy” part of compliance. To attain primary compliance, APD must have in place operational policies and procedures designed to guide officers, supervisors and managers in the performance of the tasks outlined in the CASA. As a matter of course, the policies must be reflective of the requirements of the CASA; must comply with national standards for effective policing policy; and must demonstrate trainable and evaluable policy components.

SECONDARY COMPLIANCE

Secondary compliance is attained by implementing supervisory, managerial and executive practices designed to and be effective in implementing the policy as written, e.g., sergeants routinely enforce the policies among field personnel and are held accountable by managerial and executive levels of the department for doing so. By definition, there should be operational artifacts such as reports, disciplinary records, remands to retraining, follow-up, and even revisions to policies if necessary, indicating that the policies developed in the first stage of compliance are known to, followed by, and important to supervisory and managerial levels of the department.

OPERATIONAL COMPLIANCE

Operational compliance is attained at the point that the adherence to policies is apparent in the day-to-day operation of the agency e.g., line personnel are routinely held accountable for compliance, not by the monitoring staff, but by their sergeants, and sergeants are routinely held accountable for compliance by their lieutenants and command staff. In other words, the APD “owns” and enforces its policies.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The 19^th Federal Monitors report contains the following succinct summary of the 115 page report:

“APD and CPOA  [Civilian Police Oversight Agency] have made significant progress during the IMR-19 reporting period. The monitor acknowledges that progress has taken a significant effort from APD, CPOA, and the City. The number of APD self-monitored paragraphs is at the highest point in the history of the CASA compliance efforts. This is a significant achievement, indicating that APD is now capable of assuming responsibility for oversight of CASA requirements and is not reliant on the monitoring team to do so.

We note that all the CASA paragraphs relating to discipline are compliant. This represents another milestone for APD’s compliance efforts. As of the 19th reporting period, APD is effectively self-monitoring 191 paragraphs.

Perhaps more importantly, we found all force investigation processes compliant during the 19th reporting period. Level 2 and Level 3 use of force incidents were down 16 percent from the last reporting period. We consider this strong evidence that APD’s policies, supervisory oversight, and disciplinary systems are working as designed.

We note that the External Force Investigation Team (EFIT) is no longer providing oversight to the Internal Affairs Force Division (IAFD). Similar progress is evident at CPOA during this reporting period. All the CPOA investigations reviewed by the monitoring team this reporting period were compliant with the CASA requirements. The CPOA Board has been fully reconstituted and are currently working to complete training and other requirements of the CASA.

We would be remiss, however, if we did not note some remaining areas that are still in need of improvement. These include:

• CPOA issues related to timelines and staffing;
• Completing the implementation of effective training for the CPOA Board members; and
• Continuing improvement of supervisory oversight of in-field activities such as use of force.

Frequent readers of the monitor’s reports will note that this “to-do list” is markedly shorter than in the past. This is reflective of the significant progress APD has made over the last six months.”

The link to review the entire 19^th report is here:

https://www.cabq.gov/police/documents/final-imr-19.pdf/view

STATUS HEARING ON 19^TH FEDERAL MONITORS REPORT

On June 4, Federal U.S. District Judge James Browning, the presiding Judge over the Court Approved Settlement Agreement (CASA) held a status conference to go over the 19^th Federal Monitor’s report and listened to testimony from the parties. During the five-hour hearing before Judge Browning, he asked a number of questions of city officials, the party’s to the lawsuit and the Federal Monitor ranging from APD’s staffing to whether Albuquerque is number 1 in the country for violent crime per capita.

Federal Monitor James Ginger and Department Of Justice (DOJ) officials reported that APD is now at fully compliant with the court-approved settlement agreement known as the CASA.   The significance of APD being in compliance is that APD has now entered into  a new “sustainment” phase to last until the end of 2025. If there’s no backsliding, which has occurred in the past,  the DOJ consent decree can be dismissed as mandated by the settlement.

The DOJ officials applauded APD leadership for increasing transparency in the department and praised the quality and thoroughness of its Internal Affairs investigations of police misconduct.   Federal Monitor James Ginger and Department Of Justice (DOJ) officials reported a significant improvement and turnaround in the operations of the Albuquerque Police Department (APD).  DOJ officials told Judge Browning the improvement is due in part to the creation of a new city agency to handle calls from those in distress and the overhaul of police excessive force policies and training, and improvements in supervisory oversight and evaluation.

CIVILIAN POLICE OVERSIGHT AGENCY PROBLEMATIC AS TO ACHIEVING COMPLIANCE

Paul Killebrew, the Deputy Chief of the U.S. Department of Justice Civil Rights Division said the city is at 96% Operational Compliance with several hundred reforms set out in the Court Approved Settlement  Agreement:

“This is a victory we’ve long wanted to see.”

While APD achieved compliance in all 3 areas, the remaining 4% of the  Operational Compliance noncompliance pertains to the city’s Civilian Police Oversight Agency. According to the DOJ, Compliance failure was reported primarily due to lack of staffing and timeliness of its investigations of complaints.  Paul Killebrew, the Deputy Chief of the U.S. Department of Justice Civil Rights Division, told Judge Browing  that the civilian agency is improving its operations, and increased staffing is expected to help.

As for the APD, Killebrew said this:

“For two years, we want to see compliance be maintained and that can persuade us the reforms are durable. … We’ve learned over time these institutional reform cases can be complicated. We need to see systems implemented that will prevent a recurrence in the future.”

Killebrew told the court that the police agencies in  Portland, Seattle and the Virgin Islands have  achieved compliance with DOJ consent decrees but could not sustain that compliance for the 2 years that followed.  Killebrew said it was premature to say what would happen if APD  failed to sustain compliance over the next two years. Killebrew said this:

“We would have to see what noncompliance looks like.”

OTHERS REPORT

Independent Monitor James Ginger, whose monitoring team of experts is expected to stay on through the next two years, said this:

“Overall, I’m optimistic.”

Richard Necelis, associate monitor on Ginger’s team for his part said this:

“What I’ve seen is more than box-checking.  I’ve been looking at the disciplinary system since 2015. There really has been deep-rooted change.”

U.S. Attorney for New Mexico Alexander Uballez for his part told the court this:

“We do have a reason to celebrate a milestone.  … [but] much remains to be done. … The coming years offer hope. … This change is about taking our city back. This milestone belongs to our city, and to all of us.”

APD POLICE OFFICER INVOLVED SHOOTINGS STILL “TROUBLING”

It was reported that despite the improvement and gains made by APD to implement the reforms, APD Police Officer involved shootings are still occurring at “deeply troubling” rate.  Judge Browning said he has been asked how APD can be in compliance with the CASA given that the level of police shootings is “at the same level as it was when you started this process. We are still having, I would say, troubling police shootings.”

In response to Judge Browning, Killebrew said this:

“The number of police shootings is deeply troubling. It’s not what we anticipated. In 2024, we’re still watching what’s going on.”

In the past, the DOJ investigation concluded, there was a high number of “unlawful” shootings followed by little to no accountability of officers who violated the Fourth Amendment.  Killebrew said in the DOJ’s evaluation of 2022 and 2023 individual incidents and the internal systems used by the APD to evaluate them, “we did not see the pattern continuing.” Killebrew added that with training and de-escalation skills, police officers are using a different approach to handling difficult encounters. Killebrew said this:

“All of these things help to ensure officers use force when necessary and only the amount of force necessary.”

According to DOJ officials, it is monitoring those incidents.  Notwithstanding, DOJ officials testified and told Judge Browning that serious use of force incidents are down.  DOJ officials testified the shootings generally have been found to be constitutionally sound.

Taylor Rahn, an Albuquerque attorney representing the city of Albuquerque, told Judge Browning that in 2023, in every APD officer-involved shooting, the suspect was armed and only one didn’t involve a firearm and that incident involved a knife.

A trend reported to the court was that much of the past “use of deadly force” was directed at people who were “in crisis.”  However, in 2023, none of the officer-involved shootings stemmed from calls initiated as behavioral health calls. Rahns said each started as an actual crime in process.

Killebrew said serious force incidents “continue to decline” and there is progress the city has made outside of the court-approved settlement agreement, such as the creation of the Albuquerque Community Services agency that has diverted calls involving potentially mentally ill or distressed people away from an initial police response.

APD RANKS #1 IN CIVILIAN KILLINGS OUT OF THE 50 LARGEST CITY POLICE DEPARTMENTS IN THE COUNTRY

During the June 4 status conference, Judge Browning asked Chief Medina whether Albuquerque is number one in the country for violent crime per capita as reported by the media. Chief Medina told the Judge Browning that contrary to some news reports, it is the state of New Mexico that is highest in the country per capita for violent crime. What was not discussed during the June 4 hearing was the extent of killings of civilians by APD.

On April 10, the on line news publication Searchlight New Mexico published a remarkable story researched and written by its  staff reporter Josh Bowling.  The article is entitled “Can the Albuquerque Police Department ever be reformed?”  The article goes into great detail explaining the Court Approved Settlement Agreement, what has been done to reform APD and the the role of the Federal Monitor. The link to read the full, unedited Searchlight New Mexico article with photos and graphs is here:

https://searchlightnm.org/can-the-albuquerque-police-department-ever-be-reformed/?utm_source=Searchlight+New+Mexico&utm_campaign=ca4e266790-4%2F10%2F2024+-+Albuquerque+Police+Department+Reform&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_8e05fb0467-ca4e266790-362667516&mc_cid=ca4e266790&mc_eid=ccd9412715

The Search Light New Mexico article reported that  last year, the Albuquerque Police Department killed 10.6 people per million residents,  more than any other sizable police department in the nation, according to data tracked by the national nonprofit Mapping Police Violence.

Following are the relevant excerpts from the Search Light New Mexico article

In 2022, the department set a record for police shootings with 18, 10 of which were fatal. That year, a Searchlight analysis found, only the police departments in Los Angeles, New York and Houston killed more people than APD.

Law enforcement officials, including police leaders and district attorneys, say such figures are nuanced. They point to the acute dearth of mental health resources in New Mexico and, anecdotally, stories of people who draw guns on police officers as explanations for why the problem of police violence is so outsized locally.”

…

“In the past four years, Albuquerque police repeatedly shot people who were suffering visible mental health crises. They shot 26-year-old Max Mitnik in the head during a “schizoaffective episode” in which he asked officers to fire their weapons at him; they shot and killed 52-year-old Valente Acosta-Bustillos who swung a shovel at officers and told them to shoot him; they shot and killed 33-year-old Collin Neztsosie while he was on his cell phone, pleading for help with a 911 dispatcher.

These grim numbers have led reform advocates, critics and law enforcement leaders themselves to question what it means to be “in compliance.”

“You can improve things on paper or comply with the terms of a consent decree and still have these things happening. … Albuquerque is a prime place to be asking the questions…about what impact consent decrees have. The city should be ground zero for the national conversation on police reform” said UCLA law professor Joanna Schwartz, author of the 2023 book “Shielded: How the Police Became Untouchable.”

This is not to say that the consent decree has been without merit. The 2014 Court-Approved Settlement Agreement between the DOJ and Albuquerque laid out nearly 300 mandated reforms: Since its launch, APD has fulfilled hundreds of reform requirements, including overhauling scores of policies and training procedures.”

The Search Light New Mexico article contains a horizontal graph listing the 50 largest cities in the United States. According to the graph, among the 50 largest cities, Albuquerque Police killed people at the highest rate than all the other city police departments in 2023  at the rate of  10.6 per 1 Million population. It is worth comparing Albuquerque’s 10.6 kill rate to the largest cities in the surrounding border states of Texas, Colorado, Arizona and also including Oklahoma and Nevada:

• Albuquerque, NM: 10.6
• San Antonio, Texas:  9.8
• Phoenix, Arizona: 8.7
• Austin, Texas: 7.3
• Denver, Colorado: 5.6
• Tucson, Arizona: 5.5
• Fort Worth, Texas: 5.4
• Houston, Texas: 5.2
• Colorado Springs, Colorado: 4.2
• Dallas, Texas: 3.1
• El Paso, Texas: 2.9
• Las Vegas, Nevada: 2.6
• Oklahoma City, Oklahoma: 2.0

APD PERSONNEL LEVELS

APD Chief Harold Medina gave Judge Browning a report on APD personnel levels. Medina told Judge Browning the current  number of APD sworn police officers currently is at 950, but that is questionable.  Chief Medina did not report that for the last 15 years, APD has had a consistent meltdown and decline in overall number of APD sworn officers.

On December 1, 2009 when Mayor Richard Berry was sworn into office succeeding Mayor Marty Chavez, the Albuquerque Police Department (APD) was the best trained, best equipped, best funded police department in its history. In 2009, APD was fully staffed with 1,100 sworn police officers.  APD response times had been brought down below the national average and violent and property crime rates in Albuquerque were hitting historical lows.

During the 8 years Mayor Richard Berry was in office, the city’s violent crime and property crime rates hit historical highs and APD went into a personnel meltdown going from 1,100 sworn police officers to 853 sworn police, a loss of 247 sworn police. Since taking office on December 1, 2017 Mayor Tim Keller has made Public Safety his number one priority over the last 7 years because of the city’s spiking violent crime rates.

Notwithstanding all of APD’s efforts to recruit and expand APD, the department is still seriously short staffed. This is despite the millions being spent on salary increases, sign on bonuses and being the best paid law enforcement agency in the state and the region.

According to the 2024-2025 proposed budget, by mid-fiscal year 2024, APD had 856 sworn officers which is only 3 more sworn police than the day Keller took office in 2017.  Given the volume of arrests and cases, APD is critically understaffed to complete its mission.

The link to a quoted and relied upon news source  is here:

https://www.abqjournal.com/news/doj-outside-experts-praise-apds-compliance-with-use-of-force-reforms/article_79c2735a-22b0-11ef-a007-23c3b4e2a3d7.html

APD BRIBERY AND CONSPRACY SCANDAL TO DISMISS DWI CASES

It was on Friday January 19, 2024 that the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) executed search warrants and raided the homes of 3 Albuquerque Police officers and the home and law office of prominent DWI criminal defense attorney Thomas Clear, III.  All 6 are allegedly involved in a bribery and conspiracy scheme spanning a decade to dismiss DWI cases. Bernalillo County District Attorney Sam Bregman ordered the dismissed 196 DWI cases because of the scandal due to the main witnesses’ credibility being called into question which in all the cases are APD officers. All 6 of the APD officers have since resigned.  The Albuquerque Police Department has opened its own Internal Affairs investigation of the 6 APD officers and the FBI Investigation is continuing and no one has yet to be charged.

The ongoing FBI criminal investigation of APD’s bribery and conspiracy scandal was a topic of discussion during the June 4 status conference on the Court Approved Settlement Agreement. During the hearing, U.S. District Judge James Browning brought up the criminal investigation of the DWI unit and asked, “If what I read in the paper might be occurring, would that violate any of the terms of [the agreement]? If the police department was unable to discover such a large problem, would that cause any concern [related to the consent decree compliance]?”

Paul Killebrew, deputy chief of the U.S. Department of Justice’s Civil Rights Division, responded that he wasn’t privy to the investigation by the DOJ’s criminal division. He said it would be premature to draw any conclusions. Killebrew told Judge Browning this:

“… APD can’t solve its force problem if it doesn’t solve its accountability function. … I don’t know what’s going on or how far-reaching things are [with the DWI dismissal investigation], but with any large organization, you have to expect there will be some people who violate the law. We don’t know if it’s a systems breakdown or individual violations.”

Browning pressed Killebrew and asked: “Is that an area that could be a problem with continued compliance over the next two years?”  Killebrew responded “Oh, yes. [If a widespread problem is uncovered by the FBI criminal investigation that implicates the accountability of the APD] that would raise some serious questions about the efficacy of reform.”

U.S. Attorney Uballez told Judge Browning that there was much he and Medina could nor  divulge about the FBI inquiry, but Uballez added that the investigation has proceeded in full partnership with APD and he said  “People will be held to account.”

The link to the quoted and relied upon news source is here:

https://www.abqjournal.com/news/how-the-dwi-unit-probe-nearly-got-derailed/article_05863e82-24e9-11ef-af2e-f39f8b82dfee.html#tncms-source=home-featured-7-block

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

The announcement that APD,  after over 9 years,  is now in full compliance with the Court Approved Settlement and implementation of the reforms is indeed a historic milestone.  APD is commended for at last getting the job done.  The 19^th report from the monitor essentially says APD is “effectively self-monitoring” and that APD’s uses of force have decreased. The monitor’s report notes that APD still needs to improve supervisory oversight of in-field activities. The monitor also has said  the Civilian Police Oversight Agency, which focuses on police accountability, needs to address timeliness and staffing issues.

The resulting settlement agreement with the DOJ led to an overhaul of APD use of force policies, recruitment, training, internal affairs procedures and field supervision of officers.  The implementation of all the reforms took over twice as long as was originally agreed and required the expenditure of millions of dollars and oversight by an outside independent monitor. The Federal Monitor and his team have been paid upwards of $11 Million for their services and reports. The city has also spent over $40 million to implement the reforms.

The Court Approved Settlement Agreement requires 95% Operational Compliance by APD. Operational compliance tracks whether officers follow policies and whether they’re corrected when they don’t. According to this latest report  APD is  at 96% Operational Compliance.

Since October 2019, APD has been and has remained at 100% Primary Compliance, meaning all required policies and procedures are in place. APD is also at 100% Secondary Compliance regarding the training of officers.

The achievement of 96% of Operational Compliance now allows APD to enter a new phase of implementation directed towards the  dismissal of the case. What the 19^th report means is that APD can move toward self-monitoring with all of its remaining sections that have not already been dismissed by the court. If compliance can be sustained at 95% or more in all 3 compliance levels for two years, the case can be dismissed.

PEOPLE IN MENTAL CRISIS

The Court Approved Settlement Agreement was the result of an 18-month long investigation by the Department of Justice (DOJ) that found that the Albuquerque Police Department engaged in a pattern of “excessive use of force” and “deadly force”, especially when dealing with the mentally ill and the homeless.  The 19^th Federal Monitor’s report states in part as follows:

“[In evaluating APD’s  and the city’s current response to] individuals in crisis and people who are unsheltered, we note that APD has met, and in many cases, far exceeded, the requirements of the CASA as it relates to mental health response planning, crisis intervention, training development and delivery, and services delivery. … We remain highly concerned about the sheer number of officer-involved shooting of people in crisis or people with mental illness. We appreciate the CIU’s efforts to continuously review officer behavior in the field and take appropriate corrective actions when necessary. Still, APD leadership and accountability structures must also effectively address these issues.”

FLY IN THE OINTMENT

The only fly in the ointment at this point continues to be the Civilian Police Oversight Agency. Issues found with the Civilian Police Oversight Agency include inadequate staffing and late completion of investigations, due to excessive caseloads the report said.

The 19^th Federal Monitor’s report put it this way:

“From the monitor’s perspective, CPOA remains in crisis. … The change in compliance levels does not effectively demonstrate the progress made by APD and the CPOA (Civilian Police Oversight Agency) during this reporting period. … In this report, APD has demonstrated its commitment to policies, supervisory oversight, and importantly, a disciplinary process that holds officers accountable when necessary.”

It was the 18^th  Federal Monitor’s Report that identified the failures of civilian oversight as  representing  the largest remaining roadblock to the city in ending the consent decree with the U.S. Department of Justice.  Twelve of the remaining 15 paragraphs of the Court Approved Settlement Agreement involve failures with the Civilian Police Oversight Agency (CPOA) which is appointed and overseen by the Albuquerque City Council.  The Civilian Police Oversight Advisory Board (CPOA) was formed in January, 2023 after the City Council abolished the previous Civilian Police Oversight Board.

The 18th Federal Monitor’s Report found that the civilian oversight mandated by the CASA is “in crisis” with understaffing and excessive caseloads leading to inadequate investigations by the external board tasked with everything from evaluating civilian complaints to weighing in on police shootings.  The report also showed that 12 of the remaining 15 sections of the settlement that are noncompliant revolve around the operations of the Civilian Police Oversight Advisory Board. The monitor found that since the change made in January, 2023, the CPOA had not been able to properly function.

The 18^th Monitor’s  Report states:

“From the monitor’s perspective, CPOA is in crisis. This crisis was birthed by understaffing, the need for the City to fill supervisory and oversight positions, and the need to improve the organizational structure of the agency.”

The CPOA’s problems led the city to fall behind on Secondary Compliance which had reached 100% compliance in the 17th report but dropped by 1% and is  now at 99%  in the 18^th IME Report due to a drop in CPOA training.

Then City Council President Pat Davis  said in a letter to Mayor Tim Keller that changes to “key leadership” within the City Council and the administration “slowed things down” over the summer, but they have since interviewed more than a dozen applicants for the vacant board positions.  Davis said the council expected to reach its initial goal of having those positions filled, as well as filling a crucial leadership role, by the end of the year.

Davis said the board was  expected to be fully staffed and hire a contract compliance officer, who would make sure the CPOA abides by the settlement agreement and would be in charge of staffing, by the end of December. Davis said this:

“We’re on track. … This is the last big-ticket item, the administration wants it done fast, the monitor wants it done fast, we want it done well — and fast.”

On January 1, 2024  a new city council was  sworn in.  During a November 8 news conference announcing the 18^th Federal Monitors Report, Mayor Keller emphasized the CPOA is the responsibility of the City Council, but said his administration is “here to help.”

When asked if the city could reach full compliance without the CPOA portions of the CASA fulfilled, city and police officials replied, “Just barely.”  Keller said if the City Council doesn’t get the CPOA into compliance with the CASA, one option would be to split the CASA into two, calling the CPOA half “a little casita.”

REFORMS ACHIEVED UNDER THE CASA

On November 16, 2023, it was a full 9 years that has expired since the city entered into the CASA with the DOJ. It was originally agreed that implementation of all the settlement terms would be completed within 4 years, but because of previous delay and obstruction tactics  by APD management and the police officers’ union found by the Federal Monitor as well as APD backsliding in implementing the reforms, it has taken another 5 years to get the job done.

After 9 full years, the federal oversight and the CASA have produced results. Reforms achieved under the CASA can be identified and are 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, funded, fully staffed and a director was hired.
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 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.
18. APD has attained a 100% Primary Compliance rate, a 100% Secondary Compliance rate and a 96% Operational Compliance rate.

CITY SHOULD SEEK DISMISSAL OF CASE AND NOT WAITE ANOTHER 2 YEARS

Simply put, the Court Approved Settlement Agreement was never designed to guarantee or completely stop nor prevent police officer involved shootings, but it was  designed to implement constitutional policing practices, especially when dealing with the mentally ill.  There never was a guarantee that police officer shootings of civilians would simply never occur again even with training.  What the CASA reforms ensure is that police officers are being held accountable when they violate constitutional policing practices and peoples civil rights.  All that really can be done is to train and  implement constitutional policing practices in the hopes that it will bring down police officer shootings of civilians. 

Over the last 9 years, APD has devoted thousands of manhours and the city has spent millions of dollars on the reform process, creating and staffing entire divisions and roles and rewriting policies and procedures.  APD has implemented oversight outside of the CASA requirements, implementing 6-month reviews of police shootings to identify shortcomings and possible solutions.

Despite the fact that the Court Approved Settlement Agreement mandates 2 years of sustained compliance of all 3 levels, it can be said that the spirit and intent of the CASA have now been fully achieved.  Given the extent of the compliance levels, the work of the Federal Monitor is done. The purpose and intent of the settlement has been achieved and it should now be dismissed.

The city should seek to negotiate a stipulated dismissal of the case with the Department of Justice (DOJ) sooner rather than later.  Should the DOJ refuse, the City Attorney should move to immediately to dismiss the case under the termination and suspension provisions of the CASA by filing a Motion to Dismiss the case and force the issue with an evidentiary hearing and let the assigned federal judge decide the issue of dismissal.

Search Light New Mexico Article: “Can The Albuquerque Police Department ever be reformed?”; APD Ranks #1 In Civilian Killings Out Of The 50 Largest City Police Departments In The Country; APD Killing More People Than Ever Despite Implementation Of Reforms

On June 4, the 2024 election primary occurred.

Following are the primary election results for Bernalillo County

BERNALILLO COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY  (DEMOCRATIC PRIMARY) 

SAM BREGMAN            25,997                 56.34%  (INCUMBENT)

DAMON MARTINEZ        20,142                43.66%

District Attorney Sam Bregman has no Republican opponent in the November general election and therefore will be elected to a full 4 year term.

https://www.abqjournal.com/election/bregman-looks-to-second-term-after-victory/article_ec9322d2-2

BERNALILLO COUNTY COMMISSION DIST. 2  (DEMOCRATIC PRIMARY)

FRANK BACA                  4,045      73.37%

WILLIAM WALKER          1,468      26.63%

Frank Baca will face in the November general election Republican Kay Ingham who ran unopposed  in the Republican primary.

BERNALILLO COUNTY COMMISSION DIST. 3 (DEMOCRATIC PRIMARY)  

ADRIANN BARBOA         5,293    53.25%  (INCUMBENT)

ROBERT PADILLA           2,981    29.99%

LAURA NASARIA CHAVEZ     1,665    16.75%

 Incumbent County Commissioner Adriann Barboa will face in the November general election Republican Rene Coronado who ran unopposed Republican primary.

BERNALILLO COUNTY CLERK (DEMOCRATIC PRIMARY)

MICHELLE KAVANAUGH   26,688            60.21%

KAREN MONTOYA              17,901           39.99%

https://www.abqjournal.com/election/new-faces-looking-to-take-legislative-seats-following-primary-wins/article_5baff5b0-22f4-11ef-a9c1-7bd674cd2504.html

BERNALILLO COUNTY CLERK (REPUBLICAN PRIMARY)

CLAY PRYOR                     14,166                 67,21%

ROBERT KWASNY               6,911                32.79%

Democrat Michelle Kavanaugh  will face Republican Clay Pryor in the November General Election .

https://www.abqjournal.com/news/democrat-kavanaugh-and-gops-pryor-take-leads-in-clerks-race/article_6fb36ab8-22ba-11ef-bc5e-97bd5f0a197a.html

BERNALILLO COUNTY TREASURER (DEMOCRATIC PRIMARY) 

TIM EICHENBERG ENBERG    29,622                 66.88%

KENNETH SCOTT JR.               14,666                33.12%

Tim Eichenberg will face Republican Lelan Morrison in the November general election.

The link to relied upon news source is here:  https://results.bernco.gov/

SANTA FE COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY 

The Santa Fe County District Attorney race was one of the most contentious races in the state.  Following are the results of that race:

SANTA FE COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY (DEMOCRATIC PRIMARY)  

MARY CARMACK-ALTWIES          16,145                 61.61%  (INCUMBENT)

MARCO SERNA                                 10,060               38.29%

NEW MEXICO STATE SENATE

Following are the results in the contested state senate races:

STATE SENATE DISTRICT 3  (DEMOCRATIC PRIMARY)

SHANNON PINTO                 2,290                      62.68%  (INCUMBENT)

SHERYLENE YAZZIE              1,352                    37.12%

STATE SENATE DISTRICT 4  (DEMOCRATIC PRIMARY)

GEORGE MUNOZ                    3, 289                   78.27%  (INCUMBENT)

KEITH HILLOCK                     913                         21.73%

STATE SENATE DISTRICT 8  (DEMOCRATIC PRIMARY)

PETE CAMPOS                      3,540      54.65%  (INCUMBENT)

MICHAEL LOPEZ                     2,938     45.35%

STATE SENATE DISTRICT 9  (DEMOCRATIC PRIMARY)

CINDY NAVA                    2,638      54.59%

HEATHER BALAS             2,194    45.41%

STATE SENATE DISTRICT 9  (REPUBLICAN PRIMARY)

Frida Suasana Vasquez    748    41.99%

Audrey Trujillo                   853    58.01%

STATE SENATE DISTRICT  11  (DEMOCRATIC PRIMARY)

LINDA LOPEZ                    1,445    81.45%  (INCUMBENT)

RICHARD CARRION           329    18.55%

THERE IS NO REPUBLICAN RUNNING IN THE GENERAL ELECTION.

STATE SENATE DISTRICT  12  (REPUBLICAN PRIMARY)

JAY BLOCK                                 1,917      67.91%

CANDACE GOULD                      906     32.09%

Jay Block will face Democrat Phillip Perez in the November general election.

STATE SENATE DISTRICT  13  (DEMOCRATIC PRIMARY)

DEBBIE O’MALLEY         2,297    52.03%

BILL O’NEILL                   2,118    47.97%  (INCUMBENT)

THERE IS NO REPUBLICAN RUNNING IN THE GENERAL ELECTION.

STATE SENATE DISTRICT 15 (DEMOCRATIC PRIMARY)

HEATHER BERGHMANS     2,826      76.09%

DANIEL IVEY-SOTO              888        23.91% (INCUMBENT)

Heather Berghams will face Republican Craig Degenhart in the November general election.

STATE SENATE DISTRICT 21  (DEMOCRATIC PRIMARY) 

ATHENA CHRISTODOULOUN            2,826      76.09%

PHILIP SNEDEKER                               888        23.91%

STATE SENATE DISTRICT 21  (REPUBLICAN PRIMARY)

NICOLE TOBIASSEN       1,832      43.96%

MICHAEL WIENER          1,269     30.45%

JOHN MORTON               1,066    25.58%

STATE SENATE DISTRICT  23  (REPUBLICAN PRIMARY)

TERRY ARAGON                   1,014      58.11%

MANNY GONZALES               731        41.89%

Republican TERRY ARAGON will face Democrat Incumbent State Senator harold Pope  in the November general election.            

STATE SENATE DISTRICT  24 (DEMOCRATIC PRIMARY) 

LINDA TRUJILLO           3,612                      62.00%

ANNA HANSEN                1,314                   22.55%

VERONICA KRUPNICK     900                    15.45%

THERE IS NO REPUBLICAN RUNNING IN THE GENERAL ELECTION.

STATE SENATE DISTRICT  26  (DEMOCRATIC PRIMARY)

ANTONIO MAESTAS            2,014      59.24%  (INCUMBENT)

JULIE RADOSLOVICH            1,386    40.76%

THERE IS NO REPUBLICAN RUNNING IN THE GENERAL ELECTION

STATE SENATE DISTRICT  27  (REPUBLICAN PRIMARY)

PATRICK BOONE                2,442    43.20%

GREG NIBERT                    2,341    41.41%

LARRY MARKER                 870   15.39%

STATE SENATE DISTRICT  30 (DEMOCRATIC PRIMARY) 

ANGEL CHARLEY           1,929      63.31%

CLEMENTE SANCHEZ   1,118    36.69%

STATE SENATE DISTRICT  32  (REPUBLICAN PRIMARY)

CANDY SPENCE EZZELL     1,930      57.89%

CHAD HAMILL                        1,404     42.11%

STATE SENATE DISTRICT  33  (REPUBLICAN PRIMARY)

NICHOLAS PAUL                  2,639      50.31%

LYNN CRAWFORD                1,555     29.65%

RHONDA ROMACK                1,051    20.04%

STATE SENATE DISTRICT  42  (REPUBLICAN PRIMARY)

LARRY SCOTT                               3,226     61.05%

STEVEN MCCUTCHEON                2,058    38.95%

STATE HOUSE RACES

Following are the results in the contested House races:

STATE HOUSE DISTRICT 1  (REPUBLICAN PRIMARY)

RODNEY MONTOYA       1,829    65.53%

KEITH NEIL                         962   34.47%

STATE HOUSE DISTRICT 4 (DEMOCRATIC PRIMARY)

JOSEPH HERNANDEZ   549        50.79%

CHRISTINA  ASPAAS      318        33.12%

CHERYL GEORGE            174       16.10%

STATE HOUSE DISTRICT 6  (DEMOCRATIC PRIMARY)

ELISEO ALCON                 1,051    45.96%

PRISCILLA BENALLY          763     33.36%

DANIEL TORREZ                 473     20.68%

STATE HOUSE DISTRICT  9 (DEMOCRATIC PRIMARY)

PATRICIA LUNDSTROM                   1,429         61.92% (INCUMBENT)

CHRISTOPHER HUDSON                   679        29.42%

ARVAL MCCABE                                   200        8.67%

STATE HOUSE DISTRICT  13  (DEMOCRATIC PRIMARY)

PATRICIA ROYBAL CABALLERO                     513        57.77%  (INCUMBENT)

TERESA GARCIA                                              375        42.23%

THERE IS NO REPUBLICAN RUNNING IN THE GENERAL ELECTION

STATE HOUSE DISTRICT 16  (DEMOCRATIC PRIMARY)

YANIRA GURROLA VALENZUELA                 1,629      63.78%

MARSELLA DUARTE                                      925        36.22%

Democrat YANIRA GURROLA VALENZUELA will face Republican Leland Benwood Bohannnon  in the November general election.

STATE HOUSE DISTRICT  18 (DEMOCRATIC PRIMARY)

MARIANNA   ANAYA        2,246      48.95%

ANJALI TANEJA              1,891    42.21%

GLORIA DOHERTY          342        7.45%

JUAN LARRANAGA        110        2.40%

https://www.abqjournal.com/news/state/anaya-wins-competitive-four-way-primary/article_abc2e558-3eff-596e-8690-f5e7a99564ec.html

STATE HOUSE DISTRICT  27 (DEMOCRATIC PRIMARY)

MARIAN MATTHEWS         1,441      55.77% (INCUMBENT)

GREG SEELEY                   1,143    44.23%

Democrat Incumbent Marian Mathews will face Republican Gregory R. Gallegos in the November general election.

STATE HOUSE DISTRICT 30 (REPUBLICAN PRIMARY)

JARED SECRET               734        54.29%

VICTORIA DORE              618        45.71%

Republican JARED SECRET will face Democrat Elixabeth Torrez-Velasquez in the November general election.

STATE HOUSE DISTRICT  31  (REPUBLICAN PRIMARY)

NICOLE CHAVEZ            1,550    57.41%

SARAH JANE ALLEN      804        29.78%

PATRICK HUESTED        346        12.81%

Republican Nicole Chavez will face Democrat Vicky Estrada-Bustillo the November general election.

STATE HOUSE DISTRICT 32  (DEMOCRATIC PRIMARY)

LINDA ALVAREZ              725        56.82%

ANDREW HERNANDEZ   551      41.18%

STATE HOUSE DISTRICT  35  (DEMOCRATIC PRIMARY)

ANGELICA RUBIO           1,089      61.35%

GABRIEL DURAN                686     38.65%

STATE HOUSE DISTRICT 39  (DEMOCRATIC PRIMARY) 

GABRIELLE BEGAY             2,297      80.23%

GILBERT GUADIANA              566     19.77%

STATE HOUSE DISTRICT  50  (REPUBLICAN PRIMARY)

KENNETH BRENNAN           985         59.73%

WENDY Ann LOSSING          664        40.27%

Republican WENDY Ann LOSSING will face Democrat  Matthew McQueen in the November general election.

STATE HOUSE DISTRICT 41  (DEMOCRATIC PRIMARY) 

SUSAN HERRERA           2,390      63.48%

MARGARET CAMPOS     1,375     36.52%

STATE HOUSE DISTRICT 53  (DEMOCRATIC PRIMARY)  

JON HILL                          630        58.06%

WILLIE MADRID              455        41.94%

STATE HOUSE DISTRICT 55  (REPUBLICAN PRIMARY)

CATHRYNN BROWN            2,143      71.74%

JACK VOLPATO                     844       28.26%

STATE HOUSE DISTRICT  57  (REPUBLICAN PRIMARY)

CATHERINE CULLEN     522        37.50%

JOHN D’ANTONIO          458        32.90%

CORRINE RIOS                 412      29.60%

Republican CATHERINE CULLEN will face Democrat  MICHELLE SANDOVAL in the November general election.

STATE HOUSE DISTRICT 59  (REPUBLICAN PRIMARY)

JARED HEMBREE            2,495    74.84%

TRACY DE LA ROSA        839        25.16%

STATE HOUSE DISTRICT 62  (REPUBLICAN PRIMARY)

ELAINE CORTEZ                              1,131    40.38%

DEBRA HICKS                                   1,082    38.63%

D’NAE ROBINETT MILLS                  568    20.99%

STATE HOUSE DISTRICT 68  (REPUBLICAN PRIMARY)

NATHAN BROOKS                         710        58.53

VIRGINIA GONZALES                    503        41.97%

Republican Nathan Brooks will face Democrat  CHARLOTT LITTLE  in the November general election.

STATE HOUSE DISTRICT  69  (DEMOCRATIC PRIMARY)  

MICHELLE ABEYTA             1,340                      56.76%

HARRY GARCIA                   825                        34.94%

STANLEY MICHAEL             1,969                     44.76%

DEMOCRAT MICHELLE ABEYTA FACES NO OPPOSITION IN THE NOVEMBER ELECTION

STATE HOUSE DISTRICT  70 (DEMOCRATIC PRIMARY)  

ANITA GONZALES                       2,430               55.24%

AMBROSE CASTELLANO            1, 969              44.76

The links to quoted news sources are here:

https://www.krqe.com/election-results/?ipid=promo-link-block1

https://electionresults.sos.nm.gov/Default.aspx?

LOW VOTER TURNOUT

“Little more than 1 in 5 eligible voters turned out Tuesday in Bernalillo County,  a tally slightly lower than the 2022 primary contest.  Low turnout also marked the statewide results where  225,000 New Mexicans voted in the primary election, or about 22% of the state’s 1,011,000 eligible voters.

Excluded from voting Tuesday were the state’s approximately 326,000 registered voters who did not declare as Democrats, Republicans or Libertarians. In Bernalillo County, 71,733 votes were cast in the primaries, or about 22.6% of eligible voters, according to unofficial results.

Democrats turned out in greater numbers than Republicans in Bernalillo County.  About 47,500 Democrats cast primary votes, or about 66% of the total votes cast in the county. Republican voters cast 23,972 votes and Libertarians, 259 votes.

In total, Bernalillo County has about 199,209 registered Democratic voters, 117,889 Republican voters and 5,173 Libertarians, according to the New Mexico Secretary of State’s Office.

Turnout  …  was little different from the 2022 primary election, when 23% of eligible voters made their voices heard.”

The link to the quoted news source is here:

https://www.abqjournal.com/election/turnout-just-over-22-in-bernalillo-county-primary-elections/article_d29dd3a8-22f5-11ef-9252-0f90c0540bab.html

COMMENTARY ANALYSIS

Despite being a very low voter turn out, election night  in the Democratic primary was clearly a major victory for Progressives within the party. It  saw progressives defeating incumbent State Senator Daniel Ivey-Soto  and ousting conservative House Democrats Ambrose Castellano, Willie Madrid and Harry Garcia, all while bolstering turnout among women voters.  Ambrose Castellano  was defeated 55% to 45%  by Governor Lujan Grisham  endorsed Anita Gonzales in District 70 in the Las Vegas area, and in House District 69  incumbent  Representative Harry Garcia was beaten  in a 3 way race to Michelle Abeyta, a lawyer and Navajo nation member. Representative Willie Madrid of House District 53 near Las Cruces was  defeated by progressive Democrat Dr. Jon Hill, a lifelong educator. Long time State  Senator  Bill O’Neill was unable to fend off and aggressive campaign and lost to progressive and former Bernalillo County  Commissioner Debbie O’Malley 52% to 48%.

https://www.abqjournal.com/election/new-faces-looking-to-take-legislative-seats-following-primary-wins/article_5baff5b0-22f4-11ef-a9c1-7bd674cd2504.html

There were two major  losses for progressive Democrats. Albuquerque Democrat State Representative Marian Matthews came under severe attack from Progressive Greg Seeley for voting against the family medical leave act but Matthews defended her vote and defended her seat by defeating Seeley with 56% of the vote.  Although Matthews represents a conservative leaning district, she does  stick with the Democratic party on most votes.   Another defeat for progressives was  State Senator Moe Maestas who successfully beat an aggressive challenge  by  JULIE RADOSLOVICH beating her 59.24%  to  40.76%.

Congratulations to all the victors and on to the November general election.