Take Aways From 3rd Day of January 6 Capitol Riot Congressional Hearinings; Der Führer Trump Lashes Out And Claims January 6 Riot “A Simple Protest That Got Out Of Hand”; Trump: The Once Future Fascist Who Wants To Be President Again

Posted on June 19, 2022 by

On June 17, the United State House Committee investigating the January 6, 2021 attack on the US Capitol held its third hearing reporting its finding. The hearing last 4 hours and was televised by the major news media outlets. The hearing began with opening statements for the committee’s chair Democrat Bennie Thompson and Republican Vice Chair Liz Cheny followed by the live testimony from witnesses accompanied by video from those who testified by deposition.

CNN REPORT

On June 17, the national news agency CNN posted on it web page an article entitled
“8 takeaways from the January 6 hearings day 3” written by CNN staff reporters Jeremy Herb, Marshall Cohen and Zachary Cohen.

Following is the unedited article in full:

(CNN)”The House select committee investigating the Capitol insurrection on Thursday detailed how former President Donald Trump tried to pressure his vice president to join in his scheme to overturn the presidential election — and how Mike Pence’s refusal put his life in danger as rioters called for his hanging on January 6, 2021.

Two witnesses testified at Thursday’s hearing who advised Pence that he did not have the authority to subvert the election, former Pence attorney Greg Jacob and retired Republican judge J. Michael Luttig.

The committee walked through how conservative Trump attorney John Eastman put forward a legal theory that Pence could unilaterally block certification of the election — a theory that was roundly rejected by Trump’s White House attorneys and Pence’s team but nevertheless embraced by the former President.

The House select committee investigating the Capitol insurrection on Thursday detailed how former President Donald Trump tried to pressure his vice president to join in his scheme to overturn the presidential election — and how Mike Pence’s refusal put his life in danger as rioters called for his hanging on January 6, 2021.

Here are the key takeaways from the committee’s third hearing this month:

TRUMP WAS TOLD EASTMAN’S PLAN WAS ILLEGAL — BUT TRIED IT ANYWAY

“There were many revelations, but the perhaps most important one: Trump was told repeatedly that his plan for Pence to overturn the election on January 6 was illegal, but he tried to do it anyway.

According to witness testimony, Pence himself and the lawyer who concocted the scheme advised Trump directly that the plan was unconstitutional and violated federal law. Committee members argued that this shows Trump’s corrupt intentions, and could lay the groundwork for a potential indictment.

In a videotaped deposition, which was played Thursday, Pence’s chief of staff Marc Short said Pence advised Trump “many times” that he didn’t have the legal or constitutional authority to overturn the results while presiding over the joint session of Congress on January 6 to count the electoral votes.

Even Eastman, who helped devise the scheme and pitched it to Trump, admitted in front of Trump that the plan would require Pence to violate federal law, according to a clip of a deposition from Jacob, Pence’s senior legal adviser, which was played at Thursday’s hearing.

Legal scholars from across the political spectrum agree that Eastman’s plan was preposterous. Luttig, the former federal judge who advised Pence during the transition, testified at Thursday’s hearing that he “would have laid my body across the road” before letting Pence illegally overturn the election.”

THE PANEL TIED THE MIKE PENCE PRESSURE CAMPAIGN TO JANUARY 6 VIOLENCE

The committee tried to connect Trump’s pressure campaign against Pence to the violence on January 6, by weaving together testimony from Pence aides, Trump’s public statements and comments from rioters at the Capitol.

Some of the most compelling evidence came from the rioters themselves.

Many of them had listened to Trump’s rallies where he claimed — inaccurately — that the election was rigged against him, and Pence had the power to do something about it while presiding over the Electoral College certification.

While the insurrection was underway, they cited Trump’s comments about Pence. And many of them saw, in real-time, Trump’s tweet criticizing Pence while the Capitol was under attack, where he said Pence “didn’t have the courage to do what should have been done.”

The point of highlighting this on Thursday was to lay the blame for the violence at Trump’s feet. And right after the attack, many top Republicans agreed with that conclusion. But over the last year and a half, many Republicans have shied away from blaming Trump, and the committee hopes to change that.

Former Trump White House attorney Eric Herschmann told the committee that Eastman told him he was willing to accept violence in order to overturn the 2020 election. The panel played video from Herschmann’s deposition where he described a conversation with Eastman about his claims that the vice president could overturn the election in Congress.

Herschmann warned Eastman that his strategy, if implemented, was “going to cause riots in the streets.”

“And he said words to the effect of, ‘There’s been violence in the history of our country in order to protect the democracy, or to protect the republic,’ ” Herschmann said.

Greg Jacob and J. Michael Luttig are sworn in before testifying during the hearing Thursday.

And the committee highlighted testimony from witnesses who described Turmp exacerbating the situation on January 6 during the riot. Deputy press secretary Sarah Matthews testified in a taped deposition that was shown that a tweet Trump sent on January 6 helped escalate the situation.

“It felt like he was pouring gasoline on the fire,” she added.

THE DANGER TO PENCE WAS REAL AS THE MOB GOT ABOUT 40 FEET FROM THE VICE PRESIDENT

“The committee underscored that Pence was in real danger on January 6, and the panel made the case that Trump was to blame.

The mob got about 40 feet from Pence — that’s a little more than a first down in football. Rioters threatened him by name, and were enraged that he didn’t overturn the election, because they believed Trump’s lie that Pence could unilaterally nullify Joe Biden’s victory in the Electoral College.
“Vice President Pence was a focus of the violent attack,” said committee member Rep. Pete Aguilar, a California Democrat.

Pence’s team evacuated and the committee showed new images of the then-vice president sheltering in a basement bunker in the US Capitol as the violence unfolded.

Pence and his wife, Karen Pence, reacted “with frustration” to the fact that Trump never called to check on them, according to Jacob’s testimony.

Pence and Trump’s relationship had soured deeply in the lead-up to the January 6 congressional session, as Pence made clear that he would not comply with the scheme to overturn the election results that Trump was pushing.

Trump then began to turn on his vice president in his public remarks, stirring up his supporters’ anger.
For his part, as he worked from a secure location in the Capitol, Pence reached out to congressional leaders, the acting defense secretary and others “to check on their safety and to address the growing crisis,” Aguilar said Thursday.”

EASTMAN WOULDN’T TAKE NO FOR AN ANSWER ON OVERTURNING THE ELECTION

“The hearing underscored how Eastman had pushed over and over for Pence to try to overturn the election, despite facing sharp resistance from White House lawyers and Pence’s team.

Even after the riot at the Capitol, Eastman was still pursuing efforts to block the election result, the committee revealed. Eastman’s actions in many ways mirrored those of Trump, who also refused to accept Pence’s rejection and lashed out at his vice president in his speech and on Twitter.

The committee played testimony from video depositions where White House officials explained how they thought Eastman’s theory was “nutty” before January 6 — and told him so. Jacob described Eastman’s plans as “certifiably crazy.”

Jacob, Pence’s chief counsel, described the meetings he’d had with Eastman on January 4 and January 5, including when Eastman directly asked him for Pence to reject electors.

“I concluded by saying, ‘John, in light of everything that we’ve discussed, can’t we just both agree that this is a terrible idea?’ ” Jacob said. “And he couldn’t quite bring himself to say yes to that. But he very clearly said, ‘Well, yeah, I see we’re not going to be able to persuade you to do this.’ And that was how the meeting concluded.”

But on the evening of January 6 — after rioters had attacked the Capitol and forced the vice president and his team to flee — Eastman tried to leverage the delay in certification by arguing there had been a minor violation of the Electoral Count Act and Pence should delay for 10 days as a result.

In a phone call with Herschmann on January 7, Eastman was still pursuing legal options to appeal the election results in Georgia.

Herschmann told the committee in a deposition: “I said to him, ‘Are you out of your effing mind? Because I only want to hear two words coming out of your mouth from now on: orderly transition.'”

EASTMAN EMAILED GIULIANI ABOUT RECEIVING A PRESIDENTIAL PARDON AFTER JANUARY 6

“Eastman emailed Rudy Giuliani a few days after January 6, 2021, and asked to be included on a list of potential recipients of a presidential pardon, the committee revealed during Thursdays hearing.

The committee said Eastman made the request to Giuliani, Trump’s former attorney, in an email.

“I’ve decided that I should be on the pardon list, if that is still in the works,” the email from Eastman to Giuliani read.

Eastman did not ultimately receive a pardon and refused to answer the committee’s questions about his role in efforts to overturn the 2020 election, repeatedly pleading the Fifth during his deposition.

The committee argued during Thursday’s hearing that Eastman’s request for a pardon, and his decision to repeatedly plead the Fifth when questioned previously by the panel, indicates Eastman knew his actions were potentially criminal.

CNN previously reported that Giuliani and other Trump associates had raised the idea of receiving preemptive pardons in the weeks leading up to January 6 but the US Capitol riot had complicated his desire to pardon himself, his kids and personal lawyer. At the time, several of Trump’s closest advisers also urged him not to grant clemency to anyone involved in the January 6 attack, despite Trump’s initial stance that those involved had done nothing wrong.”

THE STAR OF THURSDAY’S HEARING WAS NOT IN THE ROOM

One person noticeably absent on Thursday was the star of the hearing himself: the former vice president.

The committee cast Pence as the hero — making the case that American democracy would have slipped into a state of chaos had he succumbed to Trump’s pressure campaign.

But as the committee touted Pence’s commitment to the Constitution and bravery on January 6, it was impossible to ignore the fact that the former vice president was not in the room.

Instead, the committee relied on live witness testimony from the two former Pence advisers who appeared to speak on his behalf.

Earlier this year, the committee’s chairman, Democratic Rep. Bennie Thompson of Mississippi, had suggested the committee would seek testimony from Pence. Still, the prospect of Pence appearing before the committee, particularly in public, has always been viewed as a long shot — to say the least.

Asked Wednesday if the committee is still interested in hearing from Pence, committee aides demurred, telling reporters the investigation is ongoing and therefore they cannot provide details about any engagement with a particular witness.

“Nothing new to share on that, other than we continue to search for facts and if there is more to share, we’ll share it in the future,” one of the aides said.

The fact that two of Pence’s former advisers appeared Thursday, and Short testified on camera behind closed doors, indicates that Pence was not actively seeking to block those around him from sharing information with the committee in his stead.

LUTTIG TURNS PARTS OF THE HEARING INTO A LENGTHY CONSTITUTIONAL SEMINAR

“The January 6 committee’s hearings to date have been briskly produced affairs, with emotional, violent video interspersed with testimony from depositions — and minimal live witness testimony.

On Thursday, Luttig, a retired judge, had other ideas.

Luttig gave lengthy, meandering answers with a halting approach that stretched on while he dove into issues like the history of the Electoral Count Act.

Luttig’s comments were basically the opposite of “must-see TV,” the prime-time hearings that committee has signaled it’s holding to try to connect with the American public about the significance of the January 6 attack on the Capitol and on democracy.

At the same time, the points Luttig made — about how the legal schemes Eastman and Trump pushed were baseless and Trump was told as much before January 6 — were essential to the committee’s case trying to connect Trump’s efforts to overturn the election to the violence. But his delivery got in the way of his message.”

AMERICAN DEMOCRACY IS ON THE LINE

“The investigation is about the 2020 election, but committee members went to great lengths to reframe the conversation about the future threats to democracy, with an eye toward 2024.

And it’s not just the Democrats who run the committee who are raising the alarm about Trump’s increasingly anti-democratic behavior, and what it means for future elections.

Jacob said Trump’s plan was “antithetical to everything in our democracy” and would’ve thrown the nation into an unprecedented constitutional crisis.”

Luttig said Trump poses a “clear and present danger to American democracy.” The conservative Republican said he had reached this conclusion because Trump and his allies are still lying about the 2020 election, endorsing candidates who are promoting these lies and showing no signs of backing down.

The committee says it will put forward legislative proposals to clarify old election laws, close the loopholes that Trump and Eastman tried to exploit, and safeguard the transition of power. There is bipartisan interest in passing some of these proposals, but it’s not clear yet if there is enough support to send any bills to Biden’s desk. With the midterm elections looming, time may be running out.”

The link to the CNN article is here:

https://www.cnn.com/2022/06/16/politics/january-6-hearing-day-3-takeaways/index.html

NBC NEWS REPORT

On June 16, NBC news reported its own key takeaways from the third Jan. 6 committee public hearing in a report written by NBC news staff reporter Scott Wong entitled. Five major takeaways were reported:

EASTMAN WAS AIDING TRUMP’S PRESSURE CAMPAIGN

“On Jan. 4, 2021, two days before the deadly Capitol riot, Eastman acknowledged to Trump, Pence counsel Greg Jacob and others in the Oval Office that his strategy violated the Electoral Count Act and was illegal, Jacob testified.

A day later, Eastman had reversed course and was again pushing the Pence team to pursue the most aggressive option: reject electors from contested states in a bid to overturn the election.

“I was surprised because I viewed it as one of the key concessions the night before,” Jacob told the Jan. 6 panel Thursday.

Even after Pence and congressional lawmakers had to flee for their safety, multiple people had died in the attack, Eastman — late on the night of Jan. 6 — emailed a furious Jacob and asked the Pence team to “consider one more relatively minor violation” and delay certification for 10 days to allow states to investigate unfounded allegations of widespread fraud.”

JAN. 6 COMMITTEE FOCUSED ON TRUMP’S PRESSURE ON PENCE TO OVERTURN ELECTION

“So even after the attack on the Capitol had been quelled, Dr. Eastman requested — in writing no less — that the vice president violate the law by delaying the certification and sending the question back to the states?” asked John Wood, a senior investigative counsel for the committee. “Is that correct?”
“It is,” Jacob replied.

Finally, the committee presented an email where Eastman informs Rudy Guiliani, then Trump’s personal attorney, days after the deadly riot: “Third, I’ve decided that I should be on the pardon list, if that is still in the works.”

“The request of a constitutional pardon … indicates some consciousness of guilt or at least fear of guilt,” one committee member, Rep. Jamie Raskin, D-Md., said after the hearing. “He’s entitled to the presumption of innocence like everyone else.”

While Eastman is a relatively unknown figure in national politics, the Jan. 6 panel sought to elevate him to highlight the dangers of his unconstitutional legal theory and how there remains an ongoing threat to democracy.”

TRUMP KNEW HE WAS PUTTING PENCE’S LIFE AT RISK

From previous leaks and reporting, the public already knew the general timeline of events on Jan. 6. But the committee Thursday offered details and testimony proving that Trump was aware of violence at the Capitol when he tweeted at 2:24 p.m. that day that Pence lacked the “courage” to overturn the election.

Trump’s chief of staff at the time, Mark Meadows, has refused to testify before the Jan. 6 panel, but Meadows aide Ben Williamson and White House press aide Sarah Matthews testified previously that they were concerned about the riot at the Capitol, conferred and hoped the president could quell the violence.

Williamson, a former House aide, walked over to Meadows and informed him of the situation, then followed his boss down the hallway: “It looked like he was headed in the direction of the Oval Office.”

“Mr. Meadows went to the Dining Room near the Oval Office to tell the President about the violence at the Capitol before the president’s 2:24 p.m. tweet,” said Rep. Pete Aguilar, D-Calif., a Jan. 6 committee member, who added that future hearings will more details about what was happening at the White House that afternoon.

After Trump’s tweet, “the crowds both outside the Capitol and inside the Capitol surged,” Aguilar said. “The crowds inside the Capitol were able to overwhelm the law enforcement presence and the vice president was quickly evacuated from his Ceremonial Senate Office to a secure location within the Capitol complex.”

PENCE’S TEAM WAS UNIFIED AGAINST TRUMP’S PLAN

Much has been made about Pence’s bravery on Jan. 6, standing firm against Trump’s pressure campaign even as Trump belittled him and a mob of his supporters hunted him in the Capitol that day looking to hang him.

But the committee showed Thursday that Pence was backed by a team of aides and political allies who repeatedly made the case to the vice president that he had no authority to interfere in the election process and block Biden’s victory.

“There was a unified front,” Olivia Troye, a former Pence aide who attended Thursday’s hearing, told NBC News.

Pence personally had received legal advice from the two witnesses who testified on Thursday: Jacob and Luttig, a former Justice Department official and federal judge appointed by George H.W. Bush. He called up a fellow GOP vice president and Hoosier, Dan Quayle, who told him he had no role other than to certify. Pence took a phone call from former Speaker Paul Ryan, R-Wis., his old House colleague, who urged him to stand firm.

And on the morning of Jan. 6, before his drive to the Capitol, Pence huddled at his residence with his top aides — Marc Short, Jacob and Chris Hodgson — and they prayed together.

At the end of that violent and historic day, Short texted Pence a Bible verse: 2 Timothy 4: 7.
“I have fought the good fight, I have finished the race, I have kept the faith.”

Chairman Bennie Thompson, D-Miss., heaped praise on his GOP witnesses Thursday: “In the weeks leading up to Jan. 6th, many people failed this test when they had to choose between their oath to the country or the demands of Donald Trump.

“But there were others who like you stood tall in the face of intimidation and put our democracy first.”

ALL THE PRESIDENT’S MEN

During the past three hearings, nearly all of the witnesses testifying before the Jan. 6 panel — both in recorded depositions and live testimony — have been Republican and male.

In taped testimony, there was Short; former Attorney General William Barr and his successor, Jeffrey Rosen; and Trump White House lawyer Eric Herschmann.

At Monday’s hearing, the committee heard from a trio of Republicans — election attorney Benjamin Ginsberg, former U.S. Attorney BJay Pak, and former Philadelphia City Commissioner Al Schmidt — as well as from Chris Stirewalt, a former Fox News journalist.

Two other Pence associates, Jacob and J. Michael Luttig testified in person Thursday.

Committee members said it makes sense for Republicans to be testifying in these hearings because they were the ones who had a front-row seat to Trump’s efforts to stay in power; they witnessed the events.

But by having Republicans tell the story of what happened to the American public, Democrats who lead the Jan. 6 panel are further insulating themselves from GOP attacks that the yearlong investigation is an election-year political witch hunt, designed to prevent Trump from ever ascending to the White House again.

In this hyper-partisan political environment, the Jan. 6 committee is letting Republicans — specifically those in the Trump White House and administration — build the case against Donald Trump.

The link to the NBC news report is here:

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/takeaways-day-3-jan-6-hearings-lawyer-eastman-told-trump-election-plot-rcna34034

DER FÜHRER TRUMP REACTS

On June 17, the Los Angles times reported on Der Führer Trump making his first public appearance since the House committee investigating the January 6 insurrection hearing that have revealed his desperate attempts to subvert democracy and remain in power. In doing so, he lashed out as he continued to tease his plans for a third presidential run.

Speaking to religious conservative group Faith and Freedom Coalition’s “Road to Majority” conference at a resort near the Grand Ole Opry, Der Führer Trump blasted the committee’s efforts as a “theatrical production of partisan political fiction” and insisted he had done nothing wrong. Der Führer Trump told the group:

“What you’re seeing is a complete and total lie. It’s a complete and total fraud.”

Trump dismissed the video footage and searing testimony presented by the committee, including first-hand accounts from senior aides and family members, as having been selectively edited. And he downplayed the insurrection as “a simple protest that got out hand.” Trump also said only one person died, an innocent woman who was killed by a cop, and that the protesters were not armed. The truth is 9 people were killed and the rioters were heavily armed including the “Proud Boys”.

Trump’s appearance at the event long known as a testing ground for presidential hopefuls comes as he has been actively weighing when he might formally launch another White House campaign. The debate, according to people familiar with the discussions, centers on whether to make an announcement this summer or early fall or, in accordance with tradition, to wait until after the November midterm elections.

While allies insist he has yet to make a decision, Trump for months has been broadcasting his intentions and continued to tease them Friday.

Der Führer Trump told the crowd:

“One of the most urgent tasks facing the next Republican president — I wonder who that will be. … “Would anybody like me to run for president?”

His comments unleashed cheers from the crowd.

While Trump denied ever calling Pence a “wimp,” he did railed against his former vice president, saying:

“Mike did not have the courage to act.” That drew applause from a crowd before which Pence, an Evangelical Christian, has spoken numerous times.

One witness at the congressional hearing said Trump called Pence “a pussy”.

Trump has spent the last year and a half holding rallies, delivering speeches and using his endorsements to exact revenge and further shape the party in his image.

The link to the full unedited quoted news article is here:

https://www.latimes.com/world-nation/story/2022-06-17/trump-lashes-out-at-jan-6-committee-as-he-teases-2024-run

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

Any and all doubts that Donald Trump is a fascist should be laid to rest by the evidence presented on at the June 17 hearing by the United State House Committee investigating the January 6, 2021 attack on the US Capitol.

There is little doubt that the testimony presented by member’s of Trump’s own administration revealed a man so desperate to hold onto power that he attempted to interfere with the peaceful transition of power and to overthrow the United States democracy. It is could and will happen again if Der Führer Trump runs for President again, unless of course he is indicted and convicted for the crimes he committed with his failed attempt to overthrow our democracy.

A link to a related blog article is here:

Trump: The Once And Future Fascist Who Wants To Be President Again; US Military Loyalty To Democracy Has Saved It

City Councilor Brook Bassan At Worst Lies, At Best Misleads, Constituents By Making Guarantees She Can’t Keep On Location Of “Safe Outdoor Spaces” And North Domingo Park

Posted on June 17, 2022 by

On June 16, KOB Channel 4 reported on a neighborhood association meeting held in the far North East Heights City Council District 4 represented by first term Republican City Councilor Brook Bassan. In 2017 Republican Brook Bassan was elected to replace retiring 4 term Republican City Councilor Brad Winter. The major borders of District 4 are generally Montano/Montgomery on the South, Tramway on the North, Academy/Ventura/Holbrook on the East and Edith on the West.

The June 16 neighborhood association meeting was a regularly scheduled meeting that Bassan agreed to speak to discuss efforts to combat crime. The meeting degenerated into a heated discussion of Bassan’s support of “Safe Outdoor Spaces” which are city sanctioned homeless encampments that will be allowed in all 9-council district and that she voted to support.

THE KOB 4 REPORT

Following is the transcribed KOB Channel 4 report:

A post on the Nextdoor app prompted a record turnout at a northeast Albuquerque neighborhood association meeting Thursday night. It named a potential location for the recently passed “safe outdoor space” as North Domingo Baca Park.

“This is the biggest turnout I’ve ever seen in a meeting,” said Amie Norman, who lives in the northeast heights. “There are probably 150 people that all have something to say, opinions one way or another. I am definitely not for it. I don’t know what the solution is but this isn’t it.”

Albuquerque City Councilor Brook Bassan had no problem reading the room. She was there with APD’s northeast commander for a scheduled neighborhood association meeting about an uptick in crime in northeast Albuquerque businesses. However, dozens of concerned neighbors had questions for Bassan about the possibility of a homeless camp moving into the nearby lot.

“Hello everybody I know you’re all angry at me,” Bassan started. “Let me explain.”

She says this is a case of miscommunication.

“It’s not going to happen two in every single district, it’s not going to happen overnight and I can guarantee you it was never going to happen near residential properties, at businesses in Albuquerque that are nearby here and certainly not south of North Domingo Baca Park. It was never, ever, ever a proposal,” Bassan iterated.

Councilors showed a map of potential locations based on zoning at a meeting earlier this month, including the lot in question near the park, but nothing is set in stone.

“‘The zoning here would technically allow that,” Bassan said. “Technically allow that. The City of Albuquerque would be able to choose which properties if we decided to do it.”

The meeting at least provided a glimpse into some neighbors’ thoughts and other local leaders’ thoughts, like those of Bernalillo County Commissioner Walt Benson, on the possibility.

“We’re enabling and incentivizing homelessness and crime,” Benson said. “The real winners to these sanctioned encampments are drug dealers and human traffickers. I’m absolutely opposed to it. Setting up a permanent tent where they can just do drugs all day long that’s not the solution.”

The city hopes to start with one camp and go from there. Representatives from the Family and Community Services Department, which is funding these spaces, announced recently that they have two interested church congregations.

The link to the KOB 4 report is here:

https://www.kob.com/new-mexico/neighbors-question-safe-outdoor-space-location/

SAFE OUTDOOR SPACE WILL ABUT AND AFFECT NEIGHBORHOODS

On June 6, the Albuquerque City Council enacted upwards of 100 amendments updating the Integrated Development Ordinance. The legislation passed on a 5 to 4. One of the amendments was for city sanctioned homeless encampments called “Safe Outdoor “Spaces”.

“Safe outdoor spaces” will permit 2 homeless encampments in all 9 city council disitricts with 40 designated spaces for tents, they will allow upwards of 50 people, require hand washing stations, toilets and showers, require a management plan, 6 foot fencing and social services offered. Although the Integrated Development Ordinance amendment sets a limit of two in each of the city’s 9 council districts, the cap would not apply to those hosted by religious institutions.

A map prepared by the city detailing where “safe outdoor space” zoning would be allowed for encampments revealed numerous areas in each of the 9 City Council districts that are abut to or in walking distance to many residential areas. Upwards of 15% of the city would allow for “safe outdoor” spaces as a “permissive use” or “conditional use”.

Under the law, once such permissive uses are granted, they become vested property rights and cannot be rescinded by the city council. Also, there is no requirement of land ownership, meaning someone could seek a special use for a safe outdoor space and then turn around and lease their undeveloped open space property to who ever can afford to pay.

The map reveals a large concentration of eligible open space area that lies between San Pedro and the railroad tracks, north of Menaul to the city’s northern boundary. The map does not account for religious institutions that may want to use their properties for living lots or safe outdoor spaces.

The link to the map prepared by the City entitled “Map 1 Council Districts Selected IDO Zoning” is here:

https://documents.cabq.gov/planning/IDO/2021_IDO_AnnualUpdate/Council/Map1_SafeOutdoorSpaces-A12-Option3.pdf

After the vote to adopt the amendment to the Integrated Development Ordinance, including the “Safe Outdoor Spaces“ amendment, the council voted to defer to the June 22 meeting the Safe Outdoor Space amendment to the Keller administration to draft procedures for safe outdoor spaces. Mayor Tim Keller’s office has been instructed to look at locations and come up with the details of what resources would be available.

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

You know a city councilor is in serious political trouble and has lost credibility with their constituents when they begin a meeting by saying:

“Hello everybody I know you’re all angry at me. … Let me explain.”

It is downright laughable when City Council Brook Bassan says this is a case of “miscommunication”. At one point she also said “social media” is responsible for the miscommunication. The truth is, there was absolutely no communication on her part and the City Council to have any meaningful dialogue with city residents on their feelings about Safe Outdoor Spaces, albeit because they know damn well that property and home owners would strenuously oppose them, as they should.

City Council Brook Bassan at worse lied and at best mislead her constituents when she said:

“It’s not going to happen two in every single district, it’s not going to happen overnight and I can guarantee you it was never going to happen near residential properties, at businesses in Albuquerque that are nearby here and certainly not south of North Domingo Baca Park. It was never, ever, ever a proposal.”

These comments are false or misleading. The Safe Outdoor Spaces amendment specifically allows for 2 in every single city council district for a total of 18. When she says it’s not going to happen overnight, the city’s goal is to have the first “Safe Outdoor Space” up and running within a few months at the end of the Summer. There are also 2 religious organizations that have already said they plan on establishing Safe Outdoor Spaces on their properties.

It is false when Bassan says “I can guarantee you it was never going to happen near residential properties”. Basaan cannot make such a guarantee that the city nor private property owners will be prevented from establishing safe open spaces on property owned nor apply for a special use. The map prepared by the city of where Safe Outdoor spaces will be allowed reveals upwards of 15% of the city will allow for “safe outdoor” spaces as a “permissive use” or “conditional use” on property that abut residential areas.

NORTH DOMINGO BACA PARK CAN BECOME ANOTHER CORONDO PARK

Brook Bassan cannot guarantee that North Domingo Baca Park will not be used by the City as a homeless encampment. Bassan admitted “‘The zoning here would technically allow that [safe outdoor space] ” which means it could very easily become a reality and North Domingo Baca Park could become a city sanction “homeless encampment” with or without her approval or the city council approval. If Basaan thinks otherwise, she is a fool because the city has already made a city park a de facto city sanctioned homeless encampment without city council approval.

Coronado Park, located at third and Interstate 40, is considered by many as the epicenter of Albuquerque’s homeless crisis. Over the last 10 years, Coronado Park has essentially become the “de facto” city sanctioned homeless encampment with the city repeatedly cleaning it up only for the homeless to return the next day. Residents and businesses located near the park have complained to the city repeatedly about the city’s unwritten policy to allow the park to be used as an encampment and its use as a drop off by law enforcement for those who are transported from the westside jail.

At any given time, Coronado Park will have 70 to 80 tents crammed into the park with homeless wondering the area. It comes with and extensive history lawlessness including drug use, violence, murder, rape and mental health issues. In 2020, there were 3 homicides at Coronado Park. On June 14, another murder was reported. In 2019, a disabled woman was raped, and in 2018 there was a murder. Police 911 logs reveal a variety of other issues. In February 2019, police investigated a stabbing after a fight broke out at the park. One month before the stabbing, police responded to a call after a woman said she was suicidal, telling police on lapel camera

A FAILURE TO LEARN FROM YOUR MISTAKES

What Mayor Tim Keller and the City Council should have learned from Coronado Park, and all the violent crime that has occurred there, is that government sanctioned homeless encampments that “Safe Outdoor Spaces” embody simply do not work. They are magnets for crime and will likely become a public nuisance that injurious to public health, safety and welfare and will interferes with the exercise and enjoyment of public rights, including the right to use public property. The practical effect of the “Safe Outdoor Spaces” amendment will be to create “mini” Coronado Parks in all 9 city council districts.

The National Law Center on Homelessness & Poverty research clearly shows that housing is the most effective approach to end homelessness with a much larger return on investment than offering government sanctioned encampments and “tent cities”.

There is nothing temporary about “city sanctioned” encampments with “safe outdoor spaces”. If the City Council and the Mayor persist in going down the road of allowing 18 “safe outdoor spaces”, it will be a major setback for the city and its current policy of seeking permanent shelter and housing as the solution to the homeless crisis.

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

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

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

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

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

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

Given the millions the city is spending each year, it needs to continue with the approach of offering programs, building shelter space and making beds available for its homeless population.

CONCLUSION

On June 22, the City Council has the option to reconsider their vote on the Integrated Development Ordinance and vote on the Safe Outdoor Space resolution being prepared by the Family and Community Services Department. Reconsideration of the Integrated Development Ordinance would require at least one city councilor who voted for the IDO to change their vote. This means Republicans Trudy Jones or Brook Bassan, and Democrats Isaac Benton, Pat Davis and Tammy Fiebelkorn would have to move to reconsider and change their vote on the Integrated Development Ordinance and the amendments.

The public needs to make their opinions known and tell Mayor Keller and the City council to reject Safe Outdoor Spaces at the June 22 city council meeting. The email address to contact Mayor Keller and Interim Chief Administrative Officer Lawrence Rael and each City Councilor and the Director of Counsel services are as follows:

tkeller@cabq.gov
lrael@cabq.gov
lesanchez@cabq.gov
louiesanchez@allstate.com
ibenton@cabq.gov
kpena@cabq.gov
bbassan@cabq.gov
danlewis@cabq.gov
LEWISABQ@GMAIL.COM
patdavis@cabq.gov
tfiebelkorn@cabq.gov
trudyjones@cabq.gov
rgrout@cabq.gov
cmelendrez@cabq.gov

Mayor Tim Keller Supports City Sanctioned “Safe Outdoor Space” Homeless Encampments Contrary To His Own Policy Of Shelter And Housing; Contact City Counselors To Reverse Adoption Of Safe Outdoor Spaces Amendment

Posted on June 16, 2022 by

A map prepared by the city detailing where “safe outdoor space” zoning would be allowed for encampments revealed numerous areas in each of the 9 City Council districts that are adjacent to or in walking distance to many residential areas. Upwards of 15% of the city would allow for “safe outdoor” spaces as a “permissive use” or “conditional use”.

The link to the map prepared by the City entitled “Map 1 Council Districts Selected IDO Zoning” is here:

https://documents.cabq.gov/planning/IDO/2021_IDO_AnnualUpdate/Council/Map1_SafeOutdoorSpaces-A12-Option3.pdf

After the vote to adopt the amendment to the Integrated Development Ordinance, including the “Safe Outdoor Spaces“ amendment, the council voted to defer to the June 22 meeting the Safe Outdoor Space amendment to the Keller administration to draft procedures for safe outdoor spaces. Mayor Tim Keller’s office has been instructed to look at locations and come up with the details of what resources would be available.

CITY COUNCIL CAN STILL REJECT SAFE OUTDOOR SPACES

On June 22, the City Council has the option to reconsider their vote on the Integrated Development Ordinance and the Safe Outdoor Spaces amendment. That would require at least one city councilor who voted for the Integrated Development Ordinance and Safe Outdoor spaces to change their vote. Meaning one or more of the city councilors of Trudy Jones, Brook Bassan, Isaac Benton, Pat Davis and Tammy Fiebelkorn would have to move to reconsider and change their vote on the Integrated Development Ordinance and the amendments.

The links to quoted news sources are here:

https://www.abqjournal.com/2506358/council-votes-to-allow-safe-outdoor-spaces.html

https://www.kob.com/new-mexico/albuquerque-city-council-passes-safe-outdoor-spaces-legislation/

SHELTERED VERSUS UNSHELDTERED

Rachel Biggs is the chief strategy officer with Albuquerque Healthcare for the Homeless. She has said the homeless population experiences violence at a rate 25 times higher than the general population. According to Biggs, in New Mexico, unsheltered homelessness has higher rates of early mortality, dying 20 to 30 years sooner than those who are housed.

Biggs had this to say:

“Everyone in the community] can agree that people should not be forced to live outside. … I know we are all coming at this from different viewpoints but when we talk about folks living unsheltered in our community, we look at it as an issue of human rights, social justice and health for everyone in a community. … [Albuquerque Healthcare for the Homeless invests resources] into solutions that we know hold up to ending homelessness and that is housing.”

The link to the quoted source material is here:

https://www.abqjournal.com/2508302/man-fatally-shot-at-abq-park.html

FOUR MURDERS AT CORONADO PARK IN 2 YEARS

Coronado Park, located at third and Interstate 40, is considered by many as the epicenter of Albuquerque’s homeless crisis. On June 14, it was reported that the Albuquerque Police Department was called out to Coronado Park investigate a shooting that left a man dead. The Albuquerque Fire Rescue (AFR) was contacted around 2:40 a.m. Tuesday morning about a man who was “down and out” at Coronado Park. Police say AFR went to check on the man and discovered he had suffered from a gunshot wound.

Over the last 10 years, Coronado Park has essentially become the “de facto” city sanctioned homeless encampment with the city repeatedly cleaning it up only for the homeless to return the next day. Residents and businesses located near the park have complained to the city repeatedly about the city’s unwritten policy to allow the park to be used as an encampment and its use as a drop off by law enforcement for those who are transported from the westside jail.

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

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

MAYOR TIM KELLER SUPPORTS SAFE OUTDOOR SPACES

During an unrelated news conference on the city’s expansion of its speed camera system, Mayor Keller was asked about the latest killing at Coronado Park and why something is not being done about it being used as a homeless encampment.

In response to the questioning, Keller said he and the city has plans for addressing homelessness. Those plans include the long-awaited Gateway Center shelter and services center at the old Lovelace hospital. Keller said the Gateway Center project has been delayed due to neighborhood opposition and a “never-ending purgatory of policy”. Mayor Keller also noted that the city plans include “safe outdoor spaces” as part of its plans to deal with the homeless.

During the news conference, Mayor Keller admitted that he and his Administration condoned and supported Coronado Park being used as a “de facto” city sanctioned homeless encampment. Keller said this:

“[The federal courts] will not allow us to just walk in and arrest someone because they’re homeless and the current situation beats the alternative. … It is not lost on me that we created Coronado Park because Wells Park said, ‘We don’t want these folks in our neighborhood,’ and we agree with them. And that’s why they were all grouped to one area. … So you also got to remember the alternative. You can’t have it both ways — you want to close Coronado Park, you are going to open all of Wells Park neighborhood to something none of us want to see.”

Link to quoted news source material:

https://www.abqjournal.com/2508302/man-fatally-shot-at-abq-park.html

“TENT CITY, USA”

Research shows that housing is the most effective approach to end homelessness with a much larger return on investment than offering government sanctioned encampments and “tent cities”. The National Law Center on Homelessness & Poverty is a national legal group dedicated to ending and preventing homelessness. It works to expand access to affordable housing, meet the immediate and long-term needs of those who are homeless or at risk, and strengthen the social safety-net through policy advocacy, public education, impact litigation, and advocacy training and support.

The National Law Center on Homelessness & Poverty has released two studies relating to “safe outdoor spaces” and tent citys with titles and links here:

“TENT CITY, USA The Growth of America’s Homeless Encampments and How Communities are Responding”

https://homelesslaw.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/Tent_City_USA_2017.pdf

“Welcome The Rise of Tent Cities in the United States”

https://homelesslaw.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/WelcomeHome_TentCities.pdf

The following is gleaned from the studies prepared the National Law Center on Homelessness & Poverty:

Tent cities have been reported in the majority of states, 46 of 51 jurisdictions (including the District of Columbia). Of all of these, only 8 encampments had a legalized status. Three more were moving in that direction, meaning that through municipal ordinance or formal agreement, the tent city had been sanctioned by the community and was either allowed to self-govern or was created by service providers working with the city. Ten tent cities had at least a semi-sanctioned status, meaning that although not formally recognized, public officials were aware of the encampments and were not taking active steps to have them evicted.

https://homelesslaw.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/WelcomeHome_TentCities.pdf

“In the past decade, documented homeless encampments have dramatically increased across the country. Research showed a 1,342 percent increase in the number of unique homeless encampments reported in the media, from 19 reported encampments in 2007 to a high of 274 reported encampments in 2016 [the last full year for data], and with 255 already reported by mid 2017, the trend appears to be continuing upward. Two thirds of this growth comes after the Great Recession of 2007-2012 was declared over, suggesting that many are still feeling the long-term effects.

Unique homeless encampments were reported in every state and the District of Columbia. California had the highest number of reported encampments by far, but states as diverse as Iowa, Indiana, Louisiana, Michigan, Oregon, and Virginia each tallied significant numbers of reported encampments.

Half the reports that recorded the size of the encampments showed a size of 11-50 residents, and 17% of encampments had more than 100 residents.

Close to two-thirds of reports which recorded the time in existence of the encampments showed they had been there for more than one year, and more than one-quarter had been there for more than five years.
Three-quarters of reports which recorded the legal status of the encampments showed they were illegal; 4% were reported to be legal, 20% were reported to be semi-legal (tacitly sanctioned)

This increase in encampments reflects the growth in homelessness overall, and provides evidence of the inadequacy (and sometimes inaccessibility) of the U.S. shelter system. The growth of homelessness is largely explained by rising housing costs and stagnant wages.

Municipalities often face pressure to “do something” about the problem of visible homelessness. For many cities, the response has been an increase in laws prohibiting encampments and an increase in enforcement.

[A survey of ] the laws and policies in place in 187 cities across the country … found:
33% of cities prohibit camping city-wide, and 50 percent prohibit camping in particular public places, increases of 69% and 48% from 2006-16, respectively.

50% have either a formal or informal procedure for clearing or allowing encampments. Many more use trespass or disorderly conduct statutes in order to evict residents of encampments.
Only five cities (2.7% ) have some requirement that alternative housing or shelter be offered when a sweep of an encampment is conducted.

Only 20 (11%) had ordinances or formal policies requiring notice prior to clearing encampments. Of those, five can require as little as 24 hours’ notice before encampments are evicted, though five require at least a week, and three provide for two weeks or more. An additional 26 cities provided some notice informally, including two providing more than a month.

Only 20 cities (11 percent) require storage be provided for possessions of persons residing in encampments if the encampment is evicted. The length of storage required is typically between 30 and 90 days, but ranged from 14 to 120 days.

Regional analysis found western cities have more formal policies than any other region of the country, and are more likely to provide notice and storage.

Using the criminal justice system and other municipal resources to move people who have nowhere else to go is costly and counter-productive, for both communities and individuals. …

Research shows that housing is the most effective approach to end homelessness with a larger return on investment.

Other cities spend thousands of dollars on fences, bars, rocks, spikes, and other “hostile” or “aggressive” architecture, deliberately making certain areas of their community inaccessible to homeless persons without shelter.

Many communities state they need criminalization ordinances to provide law enforcement with a “tool” to push people to accept services, such as shelter. Conducting outreach backed with resources for real alternatives, however, is the approach that has shown the best, evidence-based results.

The 100,000 Homes Campaign found permanent housing for more than 100,000 of the most “service-resistant” chronically homeless individuals across America by listening to their needs and providing appropriate alternatives that actually meet their needs.

Most cities in the United States have insufficient shelter beds for the number of people experiencing homelessness; in some cities, the shortage is stark.

So when law enforcement tells residents of encampments to go to a shelter, they risk finding the shelter full. Even where shelter beds are open, they are not always appropriate, or even adequate, for all people.

Many shelters are available only to men or only to women; some require children, others do not allow children. Some do not ensure more than one night’s stay, requiring daily long waits in line- sometimes far from other alternatives.

The survey of 187 cities found only 10 of these cities have explicitly permitted some form of legalized camping. Encampments are not an appropriate long term solution to homelessness or the nation’s affordable housing crisis.

In order to be successful, legalized encampments require a tremendous amount of planning, consultation, and collaboration with all stakeholders, most especially the homeless residents of the encampment. In many cases, this time and effort may be better spent developing other interim or permanent housing solutions.”

https://homelesslaw.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/Tent_City_USA_2017.pdf

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

If the City Council and the Mayor persist in going down the road of allowing 18 “safe outdoor spaces”, it will be a major setback for the city and its current policy of seeking permanent shelter and housing as the solution to the homeless crisis. Given the millions the city is spending each year, it needs to continue with the approach of offering programs, building shelter space and making beds available for its homeless population.

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

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

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

Given the millions the city is spending each year, it needs to continue with the approach of offering programs, building shelter space and making beds available for its homeless population.

CONCLUSION

The public needs to make their opinions known and tell Mayor Keller and the City council to reject Safe Outdoor Spaces at the June 22 city council meeting. The email address to contact Mayor Keller and Interim Chief Administrative Officer Lawrence Rael and each City Councilor and the Director of Counsel services are as follows:

Another Murder At Coronado Park; Park Is Symbol Of Tim Keller’s Failure To Deal With Homeless Crisis; City Council Should Declare Coronado Park A Public Nuisance, Enact Resolution Calling For Permanent Closure And Fencing Off With A Rededication Of Purpose

Posted on June 15, 2022 by

On June 14, it was reported that the Albuquerque Police Department was called out to Coronado Park investigate a shooting that left a man dead. The Albuquerque Fire Rescue (AFR) was contacted around 2:40 a.m. Tuesday morning about a man who was “down and out” at Coronado Park. Police say AFR went to check on the man and discovered he had suffered from a gunshot wound.

Lt. Ray Del Greco of the Albuquerque Police Department said officers responded to a shooting at Coronado Park at Third and Interstate 40 around 2:30 a.m. He said a man who lived in the park, which has become a campsite for the homeless, had walked up to a nearby fire station to report a man had been shot.

City Officials says the man was declared dead on scene. APD said a full violent crimes callout has been initiated and APD homicide detectives went to the park investigate the incident.

Links to news sources:

https://www.krqe.com/news/crime/apd-man-dead-after-coronado-park-shooting/?utm_source=facebook.com&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=socialflow&fbclid=IwAR1oETVJuIwdpb0pfMVxFbAH2gWY26NRPdXbcOrhCtByZEMwXbVSUerBhAE

https://www.abqjournal.com/2508302/man-fatally-shot-at-abq-park.html

MAYOR TIM KELLER’S REACTION

Link to quoted news source:

https://www.abqjournal.com/2508302/man-fatally-shot-at-abq-park.html

CORONADO PARK

The link to the news source is here:

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

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

HIGH COST OF CLEAN UP

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

STATE LAW AND CITY ORDINANCE DEFINING A PUBLIC NUISANCE

Both New Mexico state law and city ordinance define a public nuisance.

Under state law, a public nuisance is define as follows:

30-8-1 Public Nuisance (Defined)

A. public nuisance consists of knowingly creating, performing or maintaining anything affecting any number of citizens without lawful authority which is either:

A. injurious to public health, safety and welfare; or

B. Interferes with the exercise and enjoyment of public rights, including the right
to use public property.

Whoever commits a public nuisance for which the act or penalty is not otherwise prescribed by law is guilty of a petty misdemeanor.

Under City ordinance, a public nuisance is defined in terms of use of property as follows:

11-1-1-10 PUBLIC NUISANCES PROHIBITED

“(A) It shall be unlawful for any owner, manager, tenant, lessee, occupant, or other person having any legal or equitable interest or right of possession in real property …or other personal property to intentionally, knowingly, recklessly, or negligently commit, conduct , promote, facilitate, permit, fail to prevent, or otherwise let happen, any public nuisance in, on or using any property in which they hold any legal or equitable interest or right of possession.

(B) … .”

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

It was an astonishing admission of failure when Mayor Tim Keller said this about Coronado Park:

Grouping the homeless, as Keller says, in a city park should not be an alternative given all the resources the city is spending to help the homeless. This so called “grouping” coming from a Mayor who for his entire first term made dealing with the homeless crisis a corner stone of his administration. A Mayor whose administration spent $40 million in 2022 and will spend $60 million in 2023 to provide assistance to the homeless. A Mayor who saw to it that the City purchased the 529,000 square-foot Lovelace Hospital facility on Gibson for $15 million to have it converted into a Gateway Shelter and who made the westside shelter a 24-7 facility.

No, Mayor Keller, the current situation does not beat the alternative. It was disingenuous for Keller to say “[The federal courts] will not allow us to just walk in and arrest someone because they’re homeless and the current situation beats the alternative. … .“ The current situation does not beat the alternative of having a zero tolerance of allowing illegal encampments and allowing the homeless to squat all over the city and enforcing the law.

Keller knows damn well that being homeless is not a crime. His attempt to blame the federal courts was pathetic if not downright misleading. Being homeless is not a crime, but that does not mean the homeless are allowed to violate the law. The are no state or federal laws nor court rulings that say if you are homeless, you are given immunity to break the law and you cannot be arrested for violating the law.

It is a dereliction of his duty for Mayor Keller to allow APD to ignore the city’s anti-camping ordinances, vagrancy laws, civil nuisance abatement laws and criminal laws, and for him to pretend those laws do not exist to accommodate the homeless.

CORANDO PARK KELLER’S SYMBOL OF FAILURE

With the June 14 homicide, there have now been 4 homicides at Coronado Park since 2020. How many more killings, rapes, aggravated assaults and how many more crimes have to be committed at Corondao Park before the Mayor Keller and the City realize the mistake made to allow the park to become overrun with the homeless and allow them to camp illegally?

The city has allowed a once beautiful and pristine park dedicated to public use to become a festering blight on the community. Simply put, it has become an embarrassment with the city violating its own ordinances and nuisance laws by allowing overnight camping and criminal conduct in the park thus creating a public nuisance both under state law and city ordinance. Coronado Park has now become a symbol of Keller’s failure as Mayor to deal with the homeless crisis.

Mayor Tim Keller could use the inherent authority of his office and issue executive orders to clean up and remove unlawful encampments and permanently close Coronado Park. After a full term in office, Keller is reluctant to do just that out of fear of being accused of being insensitive to the plight of the homeless. What Keller has now shown is that he has been a failure dealing with the homeless crisis and he is being insensitive to the needs of the general public and to public safety.

CORONDO PARK IS A PUBLIC NUISANCE

It is clear from the plain meaning of the state statute and the city ordinance defining a public nuisance that Coronado Park operated as a unlawful encampment is “injurious to public health, safety and welfare … and interferes with the exercise and enjoyment of public rights, including the right to use public property. The city is violating its own public nuisance law when it comes to Corondo Park by “intentionally, knowingly, recklessly, or negligently commit, conduct, promote, facilitate, permit, fail to prevent, or otherwise let happen, any public nuisance in, on or using any property in which they hold any legal or equitable interest or right of possession. ”

Now that Mayor Keller has ignored and condoned a festering problem that is known as Coronado Park for 4 years affecting a public facility, the City Council needs to fill the leadership gap. The city council needs to enact forthwith a resolution calling for the immediate and permanent closure of Coronado Park, order its cleanup and “decommission” the open space as a public park and order the fencing off of the park. The city council resolution needs to order the Parks and Recreation Department to conduct a study as to how the open space can be better utilized within the city’s park system.

KRQE News 13 Reveals Feckless Keller Administration And APD Leaving Property Owners and Homeowners To Fend For Themselves To Deal With Homeless Encampments On Their Property; 72 Hour Notice To Vacate “Made Up” Subjective Policy

Posted on June 14, 2022 by

On June 13, KRQE News 13 published the following news report:

“Some downtown Albuquerque residents are asking the city for help after a group of homeless people moved in and set up an encampment right next to their homes off 7th Street near Lomas Blvd. Neighbors say their problem began two weeks ago when one homeless person moved into a residential alleyway between Marble Avenue and Granite Avenue.

“I honestly didn’t know this alley existed until I started seeing them wandering in and out,” said Damian Montoya whose home is on 7th street near the encampment. Montoya says the alleyway is perfectly tucked away for anyone looking to set up camp… and for the past two weeks, neighbors say what started as a single person living there, has now quickly grown. “There was one and then there were three and the last time I counted I think it’s up to nine people that are living back there,” Montoya said.

According to Montoya, he’s been told residents are responsible for keeping the alleyway clear, but as their newfound problem grows… Montoya says they need help.

EDITOR’S NOTE: The alleyways described were originally intended to be used by the city for garbage pick up, emergency access and to afford rear access to property and is private property which is why property owners have the responsibility for cleanup and maintenance of the alleyways. “No Trespassing Signs” and “No Camping Signs” need to be posted in the alleyways.

Hoping to address the problem, Montoya and other neighbors say they’ve reached out to the city, but to no avail. “I called 911 and everybody else has been calling 311, 242 cops and nothing has happened,” said Montoya. Montoya says at one point he even tried taking matters into his own hands by confronting one of the men living in the alleyway. “When any neighbor confronts them about getting out of the alley they threaten you. A guy brandished a knife when I asked him to leave the premises,” said Montoya.

Montoya says he did call the police about the incident, but says he was told unless this was a life-or-death situation, the Albuquerque Police Department wouldn’t send out an officer. Now, Montoya and neighbors say they’re concerned about living with the encampment so close to their homes. They say they hope something can be done about the growing problem. “It just seems like the homeless problem gets worse and worse every year, it’s a mental health issue but they need to provide these people with some sort of service to get them out of whatever situation they’re in, but being in a residential street is not cool,” Montoya said.

Montoya says he’s also seen people living in the encampment dealing drugs, he says he hopes the city will clear out and block off the area to prevent any future encampments from popping up. KRQE News 13 has reached out to the city for comment. APD says in situations like these, unless the people are trespassing all they can do is ask them to leave.

The link to the KRQE news story is here:

Homeless camp pops up in downtown Albuquerque neighborhood (krqe.com)

https://www.krqe.com/news/albuquerque-metro/downtown-residents-fed-up-as-homeless-camp-appears-in-neighborhood/

CITY PROCESS IN PLACE TOP DEAL WITH HOMELESS ENCAMPMENTS

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

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

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

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

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

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

This news story is so very wrong on so many levels. It reveals just how feckless the Keller Administration has become when dealing with the city’s homeless crisis. It is also a disturbing element revealing APD’s unwillingness to protect the public. When APD says in situations as described in the news story, unless the people are trespassing, all they can do is ask them to leave is false and it reveals APD’s unwillingness to do its part in enforcing the existing laws. When a person brandishes a knife as was described, that constitutes a 4th degree felony. When people living in the encampment are seen dealing drugs in the encampments, it become a law enforcement issue.

Unlawful encampments anywhere in the city demand immediate orders to vacate to protect the general public. The city’s policy to deal with homeless encampments is to give 72 hour “Notice to Vacate.” The city’s 72 hour “Notice To Vacate” Policy is a made up and subjective policy. Such 72 Hour Notices to Vacate are not required under any city ordinance nor state law with any person who is not a lawful tenant.

Ostensibly, the 72 hour “Notice to Vacate” has some origins under the New Mexico Uniform Owner-Resident Relations Act which outlines the rights, duties and responsibilities of both landlords and tenants. A link to read the act is here: https://www.aanm.org/new-mexico-uniform-owner-resident-relations-act
Squatters do not pay rent and have no property rights.

The Uniform Owner-Resident Relations Act does have notice to terminate and vacate provisions and a 72 hour nonpayment of rent provision but unlawful squatters have no leases or rental rights under the Act. Giving unlawful squatters 72 hours to vacate an unlawful encampment is giving squatters the right to violate the law for a 72-hour period which is absolutely insane. The 72 hour “Notice to Vacate” is unacceptable and should be suspended immediately.

The city claims the only time it can immediately clear out a camp is if it is putting the campers or community members in danger. That is simply not true. The city can rely on its nuisance abatement laws and declare encampments a public nuisance. Civil enforcement and code actions can also be taken.

Keller can use the inherent authority of his office and issue executive orders to clean up and remove unlawful encampments. Ostensibly Keller is reluctant to do just that out of fear of being accused of being insensitive to the plight of the homeless as his administration spent $40 million in 2022 and will spend $60 million in 2023 to provide assistance to the homeless. What Keller now risks is being insensitive to the needs of the general public and to public safety.

Being homeless is not a crime, but that does not mean they should be allowed to violate the law. APD must not ignore enforcing the city’s anti-camping ordinances, vagrancy laws, civil nuisance abatement laws and criminal laws, nor pretend they do not exist to accommodate the homeless.

If Mayor Keller and for that matter Chief Harold Medina do not want law enforcement involved with enforcing the laws when it comes to the homeless, then that responsibility should be assumed 100% by the Albuquerque Community Safety Department, which should issue immediate orders to vacate to any person who is unlawfully camping. Any refusals to immediately vacate should be met with swift law enforcement action and arrests by APD if necessary.

The city does offer options. The city has the West Side 24-7 homeless shelter that can be offered where the homeless can be taken to and camp. Another option is the new Gibson Gateway Center. The city also has on contract up to 10 service providers that need to do more.

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

Highlights From First Two January 6 US Capitol Riot Congressional Hearings

Posted on June 13, 2022 by

On June 10 and June 13, the United State House Committee investigating the January 6, 2021 attack on the US Capitol held its two first hearings reporting its finding. Each hearing last 4 hours and was televised by the major stations and CNN. The hearings began with opening statements for the committee’s chair Democrat Bennie Thompson and Republican Vice Chair Liz Cheny followed by the live testimony from witnesses accompanied by video from those who testified by deposition.

FIRST DAY HEARING HIGHLIGHTS

On June 10, the national news agency NPR filed a report on line written by Domenico Montanaro who reported that the following news facts and information were revealed:

** Not previously publicly seen video footage from police body cameras, Capitol hallway and office footage, as well as police radio communication;

** Trump Attorney General Bill Barr told investigators in his on-camera deposition that he told Trump his allegations of election fraud were BULLSHIT. Barr revealed this in his book, but it carries different weight with him telling it to a congressional committee;

** Ivanka Trump, the former president’s daughter and a former senior adviser in his White House, said she accepted what Barr had to say and she said this:

“I respect Attorney General Barr. … so I accepted what he was saying.”

** Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Mark Milley saying Vice President Mike Pence was being direct and wanting the military’s help at the Capitol. The response from the White House, on the other hand, was very different. Chief of Staff Mark Meadows, Milley said, wanted instead to shape a “narrative” that Trump was in control. Milley said that reeked of “politics, politics, politics,” and it was a “red flag”;

** Cheney said Rep. Scott Perry of Pennsylvania and “multiple other Republican congressmen” sought “presidential pardons for their roles in attempting to overturn the 2020 election”;

** New texts between Fox News host Sean Hannity and then-White House press secretary Kayleigh McEnany;

** Former campaign adviser Jason Miller saying on camera that he told Trump in “pretty blunt terms that he was going to lose;”

** Trump lawyer Alex Cannon affirming there was no evidence of widespread election fraud or the election being stolen.

** Proud Boys and Oath Keepers on camera saying they went to the Capitol that day because they believed that’s what Trump wanted done, they felt he’d asked them to do it, and that after Trump’s “stand back and standby” remark in a debate, membership in the Proud Boys tripled.

The link to the entire and unedited NPR news report is here:

https://www.npr.org/2022/06/10/1104103404/new-revelations-and-other-takeaways-from-first-jan-6-committee-hearing

SECOND DAY HEARING HIGHLIGHTS

CNN telecasted live the entire June 13 House committee hearing investigating the January 6, 2021, attack on the US Capitol. During this hearing it was revealed how those around then-President Donald Trump told him he lost the 2020 election but he refused to listen, turning instead to his attorney Rudy Giuliani to embrace false claims that the election was stolen.

CNN filed the following summary on line entitled 7 takeaways from Monday’s January 6 hearing, written by CNN staff reporters Zachary Cohen, Jeremy Herb and Marshall Cohen:

“The hearing was one witness short from what was planned, but the panel heard testimony from a former Fox News digital politics editor, a conservative lawyer, a US attorney and a Republican election official who all said it was clear President Joe Biden won the election and Trump’s claims of fraud were nonsense.

Here are the key takeaways from the panel’s second hearing this month about Trump’s efforts to overturn the 2020 election and the violence in the Capitol on January 6.”

STEPIEN SURPRISE SETS OFF A SCRAMBLE; COMMITTEE QUICKLY ADAPTS

The committee surprised many observers Sunday when it announced that Trump campaign manager Bill Stepien would be testifying in-person at Monday’s hearing. But Stepien had a surprise of his own on Monday morning, when he found out that his wife went into labor, so he pulled out of the hearing. This whirlwind of events forced the committee to scramble [and rely on recorded portions of Stepien’s deposition.]

Takeaways from the prime-time January 6 committee hearing are as follows:

Lawmakers and committee staff were obviously prepared with video clips from Stepien’s private deposition. And they played a lot of footage from his testimony Monday, which revealed new details about his conversations with Trump and how he advised the President not to prematurely declare victory on election night.

In some ways, the outcome gave the Democratic-run committee more power to control what the public heard from Stepien. He wasn’t in the room to say his piece, which could have included some defenses of Trump and some pushback against the committee. Instead, the panel could pick and choose which deposition clips it played, and they focused like a laser on the most damaging material for Trump.

LENGTHY DEPOSITIONS TAKE PLACE OF WITNESS TESTIMONY

“Stepien’s testimony wasn’t the committee’s only use of depositions on Monday. The panel played lengthy portions of former Attorney General William Barr’s deposition with the committee, where he described in detail why Trump’s fraud claims were “bogus” and why he has seen nothing since to convince him there was fraud.

“There was never an indication of interest in what the actual facts were,” Barr said in video of his deposition played Monday. “I was somewhat demoralized, because I thought, ‘Boy, if he really believes this stuff, he has lost contact with — he’s become detached from reality if he really believes this stuff.’ ”

The committee did not invite Barr to testify publicly for Monday’s hearing, but the minutes of his deposition that played made it feel at times as though he was there.

The video depositions have also given the committee the chance to show testimony from others in Trump’s inner circle — including Trump’s daughter Ivanka Trump and son-in-law Jared Kushner — without having to bring them in to testify. And by just showing video depositions, the committee controls which soundbites are aired.

The hearing is illustrating they key role played by Barr in setting the tone for “Team Normal,” the group of campaign and White House officials who were trying to advise Trump the fraud claims were bogus.

It’s not for a lack of trying to find fraud. Barr had issued a controversial memo weeks earlier that allows prosecutors to look at election crime claims even before certification of the vote. Barr’s move had prompted a top public integrity official at the Justice Department to resign. Barr looked for fraud and didn’t find it.”

BARR BECOMES DEBUNKER-IN-CHIEF

“Democrats reviled Barr when he was in office — accusing him of wielding the powers of the Justice Department to do Trump’s bidding, undermining the Russia investigation, and pushing right-wing conspiracy theories. But over the last two weeks, Barr has become a new hero of sorts for liberals, for aggressively debunking and condemning Trump’s lies about the 2020 election.

The Democratic-run committee has featured clips from Barr’s deposition more than any other witness so far, and they interviewed more than 1,000 people as part of their yearlong investigation. These clips have established Barr as the highest-ranking Trump administration official to affirm the legitimacy of the election results and disavow Trump’s relentless effort to claim that the election was tainted by fraud.

During Monday’s hearing, Barr dismantled specific Trump-backed claims about illegal “vote dumps” in Detroit, nationwide vote-rigging by Dominion with its election machines, and other conspiracy theories.

Unprompted, Barr even went out of his way to criticize “2,000 Mules,” the film created by right-wing activist Dinesh D’Souza, a convicted felon who claims that the 2020 election was stolen. (In a deposition clip played Monday, Barr laughed off the film and said it was “completely lacking” in evidence.)

Barr said the theories Trump supported were “idiotic” and “amateurish” and “detached from reality.” This rhetoric is strikingly close to what top Democrats have said all along about Trump’s fraud claims.

To be clear, Barr is still a hardline conservative. Just a few weeks ago, he made several false claims in a Fox News interview about the Trump-Russia investigation, and backed up Trump’s baseless assertions that the entire probe was a fabricated “hoax” perpetrated by Democratic operatives and the FBI.”

COMMITTEE ARGUES TRUMP PEDDLED FRAUD CLAIMS IN BAD FAITH AFTER HE WAS PERSONALLY TOLD WERE NOT LEGITIMATE

“One of the primary areas of focus of Monday’s hearing was to underscore the idea that Trump and some of his allies continued to peddle false claims of election fraud after they were personally told those claims were not legitimate.

The committee made the argument that Trump was repeatedly told by his own top officials, including Barr and Stepien, that the myriad of fraud claims he was pushing were groundless and were certainly not evidence that the election was stolen.

“I specifically raised the Dominion voting machines, which I found to be among the most disturbing allegations — disturbing in the sense that I saw absolutely zero basis for the allegations, but they were made in such a sensational way that they obviously were influencing a lot of people, members of the public,” Barr said during his deposition, according to a video played Monday.

Yet, Trump and some of his allies continued to push these false claims all the way through January in what the committee attempted to show was a bad faith effort to overturn the election despite consistently being told those claims were not valid.

During their December 2020 Oval Office confrontation, Barr said that Trump gave him a report that claimed “absolute proof” the Dominion voting machines had been rigged. Barr said that the report “looked very amateurish to me,” and he “didn’t see any supporting information” for the fraud claims.

Barr would resign in December 2020 shortly after his last meeting with Trump and was replaced by acting Attorney General Jeffrey Rosen, who also faced a similar barrage of pressure from the former President to investigate the same unfounded election fraud claims that Barr had warned him were baseless.

Ultimately, Trump considered replacing Rosen with a relatively obscure environmental lawyer, Jeffrey Clark, who had demonstrated a willingness to pursue the fraud claims that other senior DOJ officials would not.

Clark drafted a “Proof of Concept memo” for overturning the 2020 election and sent it to top Justice Department officials on December 28, 2020, two weeks after Barr’s resignation. That memo relied heavily on many of the same debunked fraud claims that Trump had already been told had no merit.

At the same time, Trump’s allies were pushing the Justice Department to take Trump’s false stolen election claims to the Supreme Court in an effort to prevent the outcome from several key swing states from being counted. The brief sent to Rosen and other top DOJ officials by Trump’s personal assistant at the White House cited the same report on Michigan voting machine irregularities Barr had told Trump was “amateurish” and failed to include any supporting information.

COMMITTEE FOCUSES ON ‘TEAM NORMAL’ VS RUDY STANDOFF

The committee focused on testimony Monday that distinguished between two groups advising Trump in the days after the election: “Team Normal” and those who were with Rudy Giuliani pushing baseless claims of voter fraud.

“We called them kind of my team and Rudy’s team,” Stepien said in deposition video played by the committee. “I didn’t mind being characterized as being part of Team Normal.”

The committee traced back the divide to election night, when Stepien and others were telling Trump it was too early to call the race, while Giuliani told him to declare victory.

“The President disagreed with that. I don’t recall the particular words. He thought I was wrong. He told me so,” Stepien said of a conversation with Trump on election night. “And that he was going to go in a different direction.”

The committee worked to undercut the wild claims Giuliani and Sidney Powell were making about votes being changed and foreign countries being involved — all of which were untrue. They showed video from depositions Giuliani and Powell juxtaposed with officials like Barr and Stepien saying the claims were simply nonsense.

The committee even took a dig at Giuliani and his state of mind on Election Night, playing video from Trump campaign spokesman Jason Miller’s deposition where he said that Giuliani “had too much to drink.”
“I mean, the mayor was definitely intoxicated,” Miller said. “But I did not know his level of toxic intoxication when he spoke with the President, for example.”

COMMITTEE REVEALS DETAILS OF INVESTIGATION INTO CAMPAIGN’S FINANCES

“One of the key details the January 6 committee revealed during Monday’s hearing was how Trump’s lies about the election turned into millions of dollars in fundraising for Trump’s campaign and the political action committee he created after the election.

The panel made the case that Trump’s false claims about voter fraud dovetailed with his campaign’s fundraising effort — resulting in $250 million being donated to Trump and his allies, including solicited requests for an “official election defense fund,” that did not exist.

“The ‘Big Lie’ was also a big rip-off,” Rep. Zoe Lofgren, a California Democrat, said during Monday’s hearing.

During the committee’s investigation, went to court to try to pry loose financial documents like bank records that were connected to January 6. Monday’s hearing was the first indication of how the panel plans to use those records in its hearings.

Still, the committee didn’t show a ton of detail about what financial documents it had obtained, and more could be unveiled in the hearings to come.”

COMMITTEE CONNECTS FRAUD TO THE VIOLENCE

“After a two-hour hearing focused on debunking Trump’s lies about the election, the committee ended its second hearing by returning to the violence that occurred at the Capitol on January 6.

Committee Chairman Bennie Thompson introduced a video showing that those who went to Washington on January 6 and breached the Capitol did so believing the election lies.

“We know they were there because of Donald Trump. Now we hear some of the things they believed,” Thompson, a Democrat from Mississippi, said.

In the video, Trump’s supporters said they believed that the baseless claims about Dominion software and about how Trump’s votes were not counted.

“I voted early, it went well except for you can’t really trust the software, Dominion software all over,” one person said.

The return to the violence at the Capitol is a theme that’s likely to continue through the opening series of hearings detailing how Trump tried to overturn his election loss in the lead-up to January 6, including hearings planned for this week about Trump’s pressure campaign against the Justice Department and his Vice President Mike Pence.”

The link to the entire quoted CNN report is here:

https://www.cnn.com/2022/06/13/politics/jan-6-hearing-takeaways-monday/index.html

NEWS AND COMMENTARY

Category Archives: Opinions

Take Aways From 3rd Day of January 6 Capitol Riot Congressional Hearinings; Der Führer Trump Lashes Out And Claims January 6 Riot “A Simple Protest That Got Out Of Hand”; Trump: The Once Future Fascist Who Wants To Be President Again

City Councilor Brook Bassan At Worst Lies, At Best Misleads, Constituents By Making Guarantees She Can’t Keep On Location Of “Safe Outdoor Spaces” And North Domingo Park

Mayor Tim Keller Supports City Sanctioned “Safe Outdoor Space” Homeless Encampments Contrary To His Own Policy Of Shelter And Housing; Contact City Counselors To Reverse Adoption Of Safe Outdoor Spaces Amendment

Another Murder At Coronado Park; Park Is Symbol Of Tim Keller’s Failure To Deal With Homeless Crisis; City Council Should Declare Coronado Park A Public Nuisance, Enact Resolution Calling For Permanent Closure And Fencing Off With A Rededication Of Purpose

KRQE News 13 Reveals Feckless Keller Administration And APD Leaving Property Owners and Homeowners To Fend For Themselves To Deal With Homeless Encampments On Their Property; 72 Hour Notice To Vacate “Made Up” Subjective Policy

Highlights From First Two January 6 US Capitol Riot Congressional Hearings