Official Notification And Findings Of Environmental Planning Commission Decision To Eliminate “Safe Outdoors Spaces” from the Integrated Development Ordinance; Decision Forwarded To City Council To Decide Fate Of “Safe Outdoor Spaces”

Posted on September 23, 2022 by

It was on June 22 that legislation was introduced by city Councilor Brook Bassan at city council to repeal and to eliminate Safe Outdoor Spaces from the city’s Indegrated Development Ordinance. The repeal legislation was referred to the Environmental Planning Commission (EPC) for review and hearing and to make recommendations to the City Council. On Thursday, September 15, the City’s Environmental Planning Commission (EPC) held a hearing and voted to Eliminate “Safe Outdoor Spaces”.

OFFICIAL NOTIFICATION OF DECISION WITH FINDINGS

The city of Albuquerque has sent to all parties participating in the September 15 hearing the EPS’s official notification of its decision and the specific findings. Following is an edited version of the decision and the findings deleting legal jargon and highlighting in bold findings in order to assist the reader in understanding the decision and in particular the findings:

“PLANNING DEPARTMENT URBAN DESIGN & DEVELOPMENT DIVISION

OFFICIAL NOTIFICATION OF DECISION

The City of Albuquerque City Council requests various text amendments to the Integrated Development Ordinance (IDO) to remove all references to Safe Outdoor Spaces (SOSs) … .

On September 15, 2022, the Environmental Planning Commission (EPC) voted to forward a recommendation of APPROVAL to the City Council [for the removal of all references to Safe Outdoor Spaces in the Integrated Development Ordinance.]”

[FINDINGS OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING COMMISSION]

1. The request is for a recommendation to City Council would amend the Integrated Development Ordinance (IDO) to eliminate all references to Safe Outdoor Spaces, or SOSs.

2. The IDO was recently updated via the 2021 Annual Update amendment process. Language addressing Safe Outdoor Spaces was included in the amendments, which were adopted via Council Bill . … The 2021 amendments became effective on July 28, 2022 and are part of the IDO currently in effect. The amendments included a definition of Safe Outdoor Spaces, Use-Specific Standards, and some references to them.

3. Bill No. O-22-33 was drafted in June 2022 and referred to the Planning Department for EPC review and recommendation. Like other IDO text amendments regarding uses and standards, the proposed text amendments to the IDO … would apply generally throughout the City (City-wide) and fall under Amendment to IDO Text-Citywide. … Therefore, the request is a legislative matter.

4. On August 15, 2022, City Council adopted Resolution 22-56, which placed a moratorium on review and decision for all SOS applications. The Mayor vetoed the Resolution … on September 7, 2022.

5. The Albuquerque/Bernalillo County Comprehensive Plan and the Revised Ordinances of Albuquerque (ROA) 1994 are incorporated herein by reference and made part of the record for all purposes.

6. The request is generally consistent with the following, applicable articles of the City Charter:

A. Article I, Incorporation and Powers: Enacting a bill to revise and supersede the text of the Integrated Development Ordinance (IDO) … .

B. Article IX, Environmental Protection: Removing references to Safe Outdoor Spaces (SOS) in the IDO generally expresses the Council’s desire to ensure the proper use and development of land and maintain an aesthetic and humane urban environment City-wide.

C. Article XVII, Planning– Section 1: Amending the IDO is an instance of the Council exercising its role as the City’s ultimate planning and zoning authority. The IDO will help implement the Comprehensive Plan and ensure that development in the City is consistent with the intent of any other plans and ordinances that the Council adopts.

7. The request is generally consistent with the following, applicable Comprehensive Plan Goals and Policies from Chapter 4: [dealing with] Community Identity:

A. Character: Enhance, protect, and preserve distinct communities.

The request to remove Safe Outdoor Spaces (SOS) from the IDO would generally help to enhance, protect, and preserve distinct communities because it would ensure that SOS are no longer allowed City-wide. However, SOS are only allowed permissively in non-residential zones.

B. Identity and Design: Protect the identity and cohesiveness of neighborhoods by ensuring the appropriate scale and location of development, mix of uses, and character of building design.

The request to remove SOS from the IDO would generally help to protect the identity and cohesiveness of neighborhoods because it would ensure that the use is not allowed to be near neighborhoods. There are no use-specific standards or design standards for SOS that would ensure the appropriate scale and location of the use.

C. Neighborhoods: Enhance, protect, and preserve neighborhoods and traditional communities as key to our long-term health and vitality [by]

… Respecting existing neighborhood values and social, cultural, recreational resources.

… Support improvements that protect stable, thriving residential neighborhoods and enhance their attractiveness.

The request to remove SOS would be consistent in enhancing, protect, and preserving the long-tern health and vitality of neighborhoods because it would remove a use that is temporary, in some instances. A temporary use would not respect neighborhood values because the use is allowable in both Areas of Change and Areas of Consistency. Though only allowable in non-residential zone districts, the use would not stabilize neighborhoods or enhance their attractiveness.

8. The request is generally consistent with the following, applicable Comprehensive Plan Goals and Policies from Chapter 5 [dealing with] Land Use:

A. Land Uses: Create healthy, sustainable, and distinct communities with a mix of uses that are conveniently accessible from surrounding neighborhoods.

… Encourage development and redevelopment that brings goods, services, and amenities within walking and biking distance of neighborhoods and promotes good access for all residents.

… Maintain the characteristics of distinct communities through zoning and design standards that are consistent with long-established residential development patterns.

… Encourage higher density housing as an appropriate use in the [listed] situations.

The request to remove SOS from the IDO would generally continue to create and support healthy, sustainable and distinct communities because SOS would no longer be allowed Citywide, which in turn would protect the characteristics of distinct communities. SOS are allowed in a variety of non-residential or MX uses, as well as residential zones when associated with religious institutions, where higher density housing is allowed. By removing SOS as a use, higher density housing will continue to be encouraged on those sites.

B. Locally Unwanted Land Uses: Ensure that land uses that are objectionable to immediate neighbors but may be useful to society are located carefully and equitably to ensure that social assets are distributed evenly and social responsibilities are borne fairly across the Albuquerque area.

SOS are currently allowed in all MX zone districts as conditional temporary uses and in NR-C, NR-BP, NR-LM and NR-GM as temporary uses, as well as residential zone districts when associated with a religious institution. The request to remove SOS form the IDO would ensure that SOS as a locally unwanted land use are eliminated, since they are allowed in a variety of zone districts in both Areas of change and Areas of Consistency City-wide.

C. … City Development Areas: Encourage and direct growth to Areas of Change where it is expected and desired and ensure that development in and near Areas of Consistency reinforces the character and intensity of the surrounding area.

The request would generally ensure that the character and intensity of development in Areas of Consistency is reinforced by removing SOS from the IDO because the use is currently allowed in areas of consistency with minimal design standards. Furthermore, growth that is desired in areas of change would be generally encouraged in zone districts that SOS are currently allowed on.

9. The request is generally consistent with the following, applicable Comprehensive Plan Goal and policy pair from Chapter 8 [dealing with] Economic Development:

Placemaking: Create places where business and talent will stay and thrive.

Available Land: Maintain sufficient land that is appropriately zoned to accommodate projected employment growth in targeted areas.

The request would raise the sufficient land available to accommodate projected employment growth City-side by eliminating Safe Outdoor Spaces. SOS are currently allowed in a variety of non-residential zone districts that could otherwise be developed as businesses.

10. The request is generally consistent with the following, applicable Comprehensive Plan Goal from Chapter 9: Housing.

Goal – Homelessness: Make homelessness rare, short-term, and non-recurring.

The request would reduce options to serve people experiencing temporary homelessness by eliminating Safe Outdoor Spaces, places where this population can camp safely, though other options such as shelters and religious institutions, would remain available and would not be affected.

The applicant’s policy analysis shows that the request is generally consistent with applicable Goals and policies in the Comprehensive Plan … .

… Therefore, the request is generally consistent with the spirit and intent of the Comprehensive Plan.

12. The affected neighborhood organizations include all registered Neighborhood Associations and organizations city-wide, which were notified as required.

13. The applicant has stated that they are submitting this request, in part, due to an abundance of opposition from constituents about the SOS use.

14. On September 13, 2022 Staff was contacted by the Westside Coalition of Neighborhood Associations which expressed concerns about keeping SOSs in the IDO and stated that there are many community members in support of the proposed bill.

There are many community members who have come forward with concerns about Safe Outdoor Spaces who are in support of the bill [which will elinate SOS from the IDO].

CONDITION FOR RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL

… The definition of SOS shall remain in the IDO as a term.

[The Environmental Planning Commission (EPC) voted to forward a recommendation of APPROVAL to the City Council for the removal of all references to Safe Outdoor Spaces in the Integrated Development Ordinance.]

Sincerely,

CATALINA LEHERNER

for Alan M. Varela, Planning Director

The link to the unedited EPC decision and findings is here:

https://documents.cabq.gov/planning/environmental-planning-commission/September2022/NOD%20PR-2021-001843_RZ-2022-00043_SOS%20IDO%20Text%20Amendment_Amended.pdf

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

What is clear from the EPC ruling is that what is now occurring within the city is a prolonged political battle to prohibit Safe Outdoor Spaces from being allowed throughout the city, a battle that is being lost by the public with the Mayor and City Council. This is not just an issue of “not in my back yard” syndrome, but one of hostility and mistrusts of elected officials, especially Mayor Tim Keller, who are viewed as mishandling the city’s homeless crisis despite millions and millions being spent each year to help the homeless with little or no progress being made by Keller and with the homeless crisis becoming even worse under his 5 years in office.

It is an epic political battle being waged between the city’s elected officials and the general public. On one side of the battle are elected the city’s elected officials of Democrat Mayor Tim Keller and Democrats City Councilors Isaac Benton, Pat Davis and Tammy Fiebelcorn and Republican Trudy Jones and City Departments who feel they know best for the city and public. All 5 are hell bent on creating “Safe Outdoor Spaces” and cramming them down the public and their constituents’ throats ignoring city ordinances and the city’s housing first policy and without public input and contrary to public opinion.

On the other side of the issue is the general voting public who by all accounts are extremely hostile and who are opposed to temporary homeless tent encampments known as “Safe Outdoor Spaces.” Notwithstanding the objections of property owners and voters, Keller and the 4 city councilors believe they know best and intend to go forward with Safe Outdoor Spaces.

CITY COUNCILOR JONES LOSES CREDIBILITY WITH CONSTITUENTS

On September 7 when Republican City Councilor Trudy Jones voted not to override Mayor Tim Keller’s veto it was a “flip flop” of epic proportions, and she was downright sneaky in the way she did it by not taking calls from constituents the days leading up to the vote. During city council discussion, the normally vocal Jones on all thing related to the Integrated Development Ordinance sat stoically and then she voted. Only after she voted no to override Keller did she speak to the media and then gave a very lame excuse for her changed vote when she said:

“It’s the right thing to do. … Sometimes, along the line, you have to stick your neck out and do what’s right, not what is politically expected.”

The links to quoted news sources are here

https://www.abqjournal.com/category/news/abq-news

With her reversal of her position on the Safe Outdoor Space moratorium, Republican City Councilor lost a significant amount of her credibility and public trust with her constituents that she had built up over 20 years of service on the council because of her failure to represent her constituent’s best interests and demands. Rumors are swirling that she cut a deal with Keller, but no one knows for certain, and she has not said.

What is truly amazing is that Jones is a former and successful realtor and in all likely knows the detrimental effect Safe Outdoor Spaces will have on real estate values. This is the same Republican city councilor who sponsored legislation to stop the homeless from pan handling and who also lives in a gated community where tent encampments will not be tolerated. The problem is, Trudy Jones will likely have the opportunity to once again go against her own constituent’s demands and refuse to eliminate Safe Outdoor Spaces from the IDO when the new legislation is presented.

A FEW TOOLS NOT NEEDED

Repeatedly, Mayor Tim Keller and his administration have said that Safe Outdoor Spaces are a “tool in the tool box” that is needed in his “all above approach” to deal with the homeless. That is simply false, and tools such as Safe Outdoor Spaces need to be thrown out of the toolbox when it comes to the homeless crisis. The only “real tools” here are our government and elected officials who are promoting an unsustainable policy of Safe Outdoor Spaces. They ostensibly do not know that government sanctioned encampments are being abandoned by major cities and have been found to be a very bad substitute for permanent housing and services which have the most impact on reducing the homeless crisis.

Cities such as Honolulu, Salt Lake City and Seattle, have abandoned their support of government sanctioned encampment such as Safe Outdoor Spaces and have begun implementing ordinances to remove all encampments to move toward a transitional housing or campus model, programs that have been found to bring physical and fiscal safety to communities while reducing crime. Some 65 cities across the United States have implemented ordinances to remove all encampments.

https://newmexicosun.com/stories/626700965-there-s-a-better-way-to-serve-the-homeless-sanctioned-encampments-aren-t-it

Mayor Tim Keller created a nuisance with city property when he allowed and condoned the use of Coronado Park as a de facto city sanction homeless encampment. Coronado Park had an extensive history of criminal activity including 4 murders, violent crimes and drug trafficking. Keller himself was forced to announce the closure of Coronado Park on June 27 as a result of the extensive criminal activity and the contamination of the grounds of the park that made it a threat to public safety and use. Safe Outdoor Spaces will in essence become “miniature” Coronado Parks.

The millions being spent each year by the city to deal with the homeless with the “housing first” policy and new Gibson Gateway Homeless Shelter and the Westside Homeless Shelter should be more than enough to deal with housing the homeless, yet Mayor Keller and the 4 City Councilors demand and want more from the public in the form of Safe Outdoor Spaces. Then there is that matter that Safe Outdoor Space encampments violating the city’s and Keller’s own “housing first” policy by not providing a form of permanent housing and with reliance on tents as temporary housing.

Safe Outdoor Spaces are not the answer to the homeless crisis. “Safe Outdoor Spaces” will be a disaster for the city as a whole. They will destroy neighborhoods, make the city a magnet for the homeless and destroy the city’s efforts to manage the homeless through housing. The homeless crisis will not be solved by the city, but it can and must be managed. Safe Outdoor Spaces represent a very temporary place to pitch a tent, relieve oneself, bathe and sleep at night with rules that will not likely be followed.

The answer is to the homeless crisis is to provide the homeless the support services, including food and permanent lodging, and mental health care needed to allow the homeless to turn their lives around and perhaps become productive self-sufficient citizens.

Given the City Council’s vote on the Safe Outdoor Space moratorium, it is more likely than not that the city council will vote down and NOT to support the EPC recommendation to eliminate all references to Safe Outdoor Spaces. The legislation eliminating from the IDO Safe Outdoor Spaces will likely pass on a 5 to 4 vote and Mayor Tim Keller is expected to veto the legislation. The council will need 6 votes to override the mayor’s veto. Unless City Councilor Trudy Jones comes to her senses or has some sort of divine epiphany and changes her mind once again and votes to override Keller’s veto, the override will fail on a 5 to 4 vote and Safe Outdoor Spaces will become law. This is the type of conduct that results in general public distrust of city government.

Voters and residents are urged to contact and voice their opinion and tell all city councilors to vote YES and support the EPC recommendation to eliminate all references to Safe Outdoor Spaces, or SOSs, in the Integrated Development Ordinance (IDO). Their phone numbers and email address are:

CITY COUNCIL PHONE: (505) 768-3100

CITY COUNCIL EMAILS

lesanchez@cabq.gov
louiesanchez@allstate.com
bmaceachen@cabq.gov,
ibenton@cabq.gov,
namolina@cabq.gov,
kpena@cabq.gov,
rmhernandez@cabq.gov,
bbassan@cabq.gov,
danlewis@cabq.gov,
galvarez@cabq.gov,
patdavis@cabq.gov,
seanforan@cabq.gov,
tfiebelkorn@cabq.gov,
lrummler@cabq.gov,
trudyjones@cabq.gov,
azizachavez@cabq.gov,
rgrout@cabq.gov,
rrmiller@cabq.gov,
LEWISABQ@GMAIL.COM,
nancymontano@cabq.gov,
cortega@cabq.gov
cmelendrez@cabq.gov

2022 PIT City Homeless Count: 256 Fewer Homeless; 1,311 Total Homeless; 940 Emergency Sheltered, 174 Transitional Housing, 197 Unsheltered; City’s Homeless Crisis And Visibility Aggravated By Mayor Keller’s Hands Off Crime Policies; City Spending Over $100 Million Over 2 Years To Assist Homeless

Posted on September 22, 2022 by

Since being sworn into office as Mayor on December 1, 2017, Tim Keller has made dealing with the city’s homeless as a major priority. To that end, Keller has proclaimed an “all the above approach” to deal with the homeless. Keller says he is willing to consider any ideas to reduce the number of homeless. Keller has implemented the following policies:

Increased funding to the Family Community Services Department for assistance to the homeless with $40 million allocated in fiscal year 2021 and $60 million allocated in fiscal 2022 and adopting a “housing first” policy.
Advocated for 24/7 homeless shelters including converting the old Westside Jail into a 24/7 homeless shelter and purchasing the Gibson Medical Center for $15 million to convert it into a 24/7 homeless shelter which will serve upwards of 1,000 homeless per day once it’s up and running.
Advocating and supporting Safe Outdoor Spaces (SOS) which are city sanctioned homeless encampments with 40 designated spaces for tents that will allow upwards of 50 people, require hand washing stations, toilets and showers, require a management plan, 6 foot fencing and social services offered. Keller set aside $950,000 for the encampments in his 2022 fiscal year budget. Under the Integrated Development Ordinance (IDO), 18 SOS encampments are allowed, 2 in each council district. Keller vetoed a one-year moratorium on SOS encampments which was upheld by the city council. A total repeal of SOS encampments is pending before the city council.
Adopted a “no arrest” policy of the homeless for violations of the city’s camping, trespassing and vagrancy laws with an emphasis on citations.
Allowed Coronado Park for 5 years to become a “de facto” city sanctioned homeless encampment, which he closed down in August without any plan for dealing with the 75 to 125 homeless that were displaced.

Throughout all of his efforts, Keller has never outlined the actual number or homeless the city has been dealing with over the past 5 years. Private homeless providers, many who have contracts with the city to provide services to the homeless, consistently claim the city has upwards of 4,500 to 5,000 homeless at any given time. The 4,500 to 5,000 figure is likely inflated and is not supported by the yearly federal government sponsored survey known as the “Point in Time Survey”.

“POINT IN TIME” SURVEY

Each year the “Point in Time” survey is conducted to determine how many people experience homelessness on a given night in Albuquerque, and to learn more about their specific needs. The PIT count is done in communities across the country. The New Mexico Coalition to End Homelessness (NMCEH) is contracted by the city to do the survey. NMCEH released the 2022 PIT report breaking down the demographics of the homeless population in Albuquerque.

This blog article reports on the city of Albuquerque 2022 PIT report statistics citing and editing portions of the report and excludes New Mexico’s and national numbers. The PIT report is 40 pages long and includes graphs and pie charts outlining the statistics reported. You can review the entire report at this link:

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

“POINT IN TIME” SURVEY EXPLAINED

The PIT count is the official number of homeless reported by communities to the federal Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to help understand the extent of homelessness at the city, state, regional and national levels.

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

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

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

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

The Housing Inventory Count (HIC) is an inventory of provider programs within a Continuum of Care that provide total numbers of beds and units dedicated to serving people experiencing homelessness. There are 5 homeless Program Types:

Emergency Shelter

Transitional Housing;

Rapid Re-housing;

Safe Haven

Permanent Supportive Housing.

EVEN – ODD NUMBER OF YEAR SURVEYS

In even numbered years, only sheltered homeless are surveyed. In odd numbered years, both sheltered and unsheltered homeless are surveyed. Only those homeless people who can be located and who agree to participate in the survey are counted.

The PIT count is viewed as a single night snapshot of the homeless. The City of Albuquerque contracts with The New Mexico Coalition to End Homelessness to conduct its annual “Point in Time” (PIT) survey.

Taken together, the Sheltered, Unsheltered, and Housing Inventory counts provide a complete picture of the homelessness response system, with the sheltered and unsheltered counts illustrating the need for services and the HIC illustrating the capacity for providing those services.

2022 POINT IN TIME SURVEY RESULTS

The date selected for the 2022 year’s PIT count was Monday, January 31^st. From February 1st to 4^th, The New Mexico Council to End NMCEH) coordinated activities to tally the PIT count. Unsheltered count data was collected from people experiencing unsheltered homelessness by street outreach teams making personal contact with the homeless and completing surveys. The “outreach teams” canvassed neighborhoods, alleys, parks, high-traffic areas, known encampments and points of congregation, meal service sites, and general service sites to engage and survey people who identified as being homeless on the night of January 31st.

The SHELTERED COUNT represents all people residing in Emergency Shelters (ES) and Transitional Housing (TH) projects.

(2022 PIT Report, page 4)

The HOUSING INVENTORY COUNT reports each project’s current service capacity in terms of bed and unit inventory and the total number of people enrolled in Permanent Supportive Housing (PSH) and Rapid ReHousing (RRH) on the night of the count.

(2022 PIT Report, page 4)

2009 – 2022 PIT ESTIMATED NUMBER OF HOMELESS

In even numbered years, only sheltered homeless are surveyed for the PIT survey. In odd numbered years, both sheltered and unsheltered homeless are surveyed. The 2022 PIT report provides the odd number years of shelter and unsheltered homeless in Albuquerque for 8 years from 2009 to 2019 and including 2022:

2009: 2,002

2011: 1,639

2013: 1,171

2015: 1,287

2017: 1,318

2019: 1,524

2021: 1,567

2022: 1,311

The 2022 PIT data breakdown for the unsheltered for the years 2009 to 2022 is as follows:

Chronic homeless: 67% (homeless 6 months to a year or more)

Veterans: 9%

First-time homeless: 38%

Homeless due to domestic violence: 16%

Adults with a serious mental illness: 46%

Adults with substance use disorder: 44%

(2022 PIT Report, page 7)

HOMELESS HOUSHOLDS IN EMERGENCY SHELTERS, TRANSITIONAL AND UNSHELTERED ON JANUARY 31, 2022

The total estimated number of households experiencing homelessness in Albuquerque on January 31, 2022 was broken down into households with one child, without children and with only children in Emergency Shelters, Transitional and Unsheltered.

The total number of households in emergency shelters, transitional housing unsheltered housing on January 31, 2022 was reported as 860.

(2022 PIT Report Chart, page 6)

INDIVIDUALS EXPERIENCING HOMELESSNESS IN EMERGENCY SHELTERS, TRANSITIONAL AND UNSHELTERED ON JANUARY 31, 2022

The total estimated number of individuals experiencing homelessness in Albuquerque on January 31, 2022 was broken down into individuals with one child, without children and with only children in Emergency Shelters, Transitional and Unsheltered.

The total number of individuals in emergency shelters, transitional housing unsheltered housing was reported as 1,311.

(2022 PIT Report Chart, page 6)

TOTALS OF SHELTERED, TRANSITIONAL HOUSING, UNSHELTERED HOMELESS ON JANUARY 31, 2022

The breakdown of homelessness on January 31, 2022 is as follows:

Emergency sheltered: 940

Unsheltered: 197

Transitional housing: 174

COMBINED TOTAL OF HOMELESS: 1,311

DATA BREAK DOWN FOR A CATEGORIES OF UNSHELTERED, EMERGENCY SHELTERED AND TRANSITIONAL HOUSING

The data breakdown for the categories of unsheltered, emergency sheltered, and transitional housing on January 31, 2022is as follows:

I. UNSHELTERED DATA BREAK DOWN

The Unsheltered are defined as those who encamp in neighborhood open space areas, alleys, parks, high-traffic areas and points of congregation, meal service sites, and general service sites.

A. GENDER OF INDIVIDUALS UNSHELTERED HOMELESS

The unsheltered homeless January 31, 2022 who responded to the question of GENDER identified their gender as follows:

120 identified themselves as male

56 identified themselves as female

2 refused to identify

1 identified as other than singularly female or male

1 identified as transgender

(2022 PIT Report, page 7)

B. AGE OF INDIVIDUALS UNSHELTERED HOMELESS

The unsheltered individual homeless on January 31, 2022who responded to the question of their AGE stated their age as follow:

Under 19: 4

20-29: 22

40-49: 66

50-59: 48

60-69: 12

70-79: 6

80-89: 1

Refused to say: 29

(2022 PIT Report, page 8)

C. ETHNICITY OF UNSHELTERED INDIVIDUAL HOMELESS

The unsheltered individual homeless who responded on January 31, 2022 to the question of ETHNICITY stated their ethnicity as follows:

Non-Hispanic: 138

Hispanic/Latin: 105

Data NOT collected: 12

Refused to respond: 9

(2022 PIT Report, page 9)

D. RACE OF UNSHELTER INDIVIDUAL HOMELESS

The individual unsheltered homeless on January 31, 2022 who responded to the question of RACE stated their race to be as follows:

White: 115

American Indian or Alaska Native: 58

Black of African American: 26

Multicultural: 8

Data Not collected: 4

Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander: 3

Refused to respond: 50

(2022 PIT Report, page 9)

REASONS UNSHELTER HOMELESS GAVE FOR NOT USINGS SHELTERS

Unsheltered homeless respondents were asked “Why do you not use the shelter system?” Following are the most common reasons given with the numbers that responded:

“I’m blind and need everyday assistance” (1)
“Work” (4)
“I don’t like to be separated from my partner” (4)
“I’ve never tried” (5)
“I got kicked out of shelters” (5)
“It’s my choice/I don’t need it” (6)
“Pets aren’t allowed” (6)
“Anxiety around crowds” (9)
“PTSD from being incarcerated” (9)
“Transportation” (20)
“Overcrowded” (21)
“Unsanitary/fear of getting COVID” (22)
“Staff Concerns” (23)

(2022 PIT Report, page 11)

II. EMERGENCY SHELTERED HOMELESS DATA BREAKDOWN

Estimated number of people living in an unsheltered living condition in Albuquerque during the PIT Counts 2009-2022.

2009: 931

2011: 387

2013: 144

2015: 183

2017: 384

2019: 567

2021: 413

2022: 197

Following is the data breakdown reflecting the number and categories of homeless in emergency shelters in Albuquerque on during the PIT Counts 2009-2022.

Identified as chronically homeless: 341 (36%)

Identified as households without children: 491 (80%)

Identified as veterans: 43 (4%)

Identified as adults with a serious mental illness: 236 (25%)

Adults with substance use disorder: 127 (13%)

Adult survivors of domestic violence: 58 (6%)

(2022 PIT Report, pages 6 and 12)

EMERGENCY SHELTER DATA BREAKDOWN FOR JANUARY 31, 2022

The total emergency shelter reported for January 31, 2020 is 940.

A. GENDER OF EMERGENCY SHELTERED HOMELESS

The emergency sheltered homeless who responded to the question of GENDER on January 31, 2022 identified their gender as follows:

565 identified themselves as male

371 identified themselves as female: 371

1 identified as “Non-Binary”

3 identified as transgender

(2022 PIT Report, page 12)

B. AGE OF EMERGENCY SHELTERED HOMELESS

The emergency shelter homeless during the PIT Count on January 31, 2022 who responded to the question of their AGE stated their age as follow:

Under 19: 191

18-24: 45

24+: 704

(2022 PIT Report, page 12)

C. ETHNICITY OF SHELTERED HOMELESS

The emergency shelter homeless on January 31, 2022 who responded to the question of ETHNICITY stated their ethnicity as follows:

Non-Hispanic: 518

Hispanic: 422

(2022 PIT Report, page 13)

D. RACE OF SHELTERED HOMELESS

The emergency sheltered homeless on January 31, 2022 who responded to the question of RACE stated their race to be as follows:

White: 607

American Indian or Alaska Native: 138

Black of African American: 86

Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander: 19

Asian or Asian American: 4

(2022 PIT Report, page 13.)

III. TRANSITIONAL HOUSING HOMELESS DATA BREAKDOWN

There were a total of 174 individuals in transitional housing on January 31, 2022

Following is the data breakdown from transitional housing programs data breakdown on January 31, 2022:

53 identified as households without children

18 identified as veterans

15 identified as adults with a serious mental illness

8 identified as adults with a substance use disorder

10 identified as adult survivors of domestic violence

(2022 PIT Report, page 13.)

A. GENDER OF TRANSITIONAL HOUSING HOMELESS

Transitional housing homeless on January 31, 2022 who responded to the question of GENDER identified their gender as follows:

70 identified themselves as male

82 identified themselves as female

21 identified as Non-Binary

1 identified as transgender

(2022 PIT Report, page 14)

B. AGE OF TRANSITIONAL HOUSING HOMELESS

Albuquerque transitional housing homeless on January 31, 2022 who responded to the question of their AGE stated their age as follow:

Under 18: 75

18-24: 32

24+: 67

(2022 PIT Report, page 14 )

C. ETHNICITY TRANSITIONAL HOUSING HOMELESS

Albuquerque transitional housing homeless on January 31, 2022 who responded to the question of ETHNICITY stated their ethnicity to be as follows:

Non-Hispanic: 60

Hispanic: 114

(2022 PIT Report, page 15)

D. RACE OF TRANSITIONAL HOUSING HOMELESS

The transitional housing homeless on January 31, 2022 who responded to the question of RACE stated their race to be as follows:

White: 117

American Indian or Alaska Native: 11

Black of African American: 12

Multiple races: 33

Asian or Asian American: 1

(2022 PIT Report, page 15 )

2021 POINT-IN-TIME (PIT) REPORT

On June 22, 2021, Albuquerque’s 2021 Point-In-Time (PIT) report was released that surveyed both sheltered and unsheltered homeless. In 2021, the PIT survey asked where people stayed the night of January 25.

Major highlights of the 2021 PIT report are as follows:

There were 1,567 sheltered and unsheltered homeless people living in Albuquerque, a slight increase over the 2019 count of 1,524 homeless. The 2020 homeless count is 2.8% higher than in 2019 and 18.9% more than in 2017, despite the pandemic limiting the 2021 counting efforts.

The 2021 PIT count found that 73.6% of the homeless population was staying in emergency shelters, transitional housing or using motel vouchers rather than sleeping in alleys, parks and other “unsheltered” locations. The 73.6% in the 2021 count is much a higher than the 2019 and 2017 PIT counts.

Albuquerque’s unsheltered homeless decreased from 567 people in 2019 to 413 in the 2021 count.

42% of Albuquerque’s unsheltered were defined as chronically homeless, meaning they had been continuously homeless for at least a year and had a disabling condition.

21% said they were homeless due to COVID.

37% were experiencing homelessness for the first time.

12% were homeless due to domestic violence.

30.19% of the homeless in Albuquerque self-reported as having a serious mental illness.

25.5% self-reported as substance abusers.

Note that a whopping 55.69% combined total of those surveyed self-reported as having a serious mental illness or were substance abusers.

The link to quoted statistics is here:

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

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

2019 AND 2017 POINT-IN-TIME COUNT

According to the 2019 Point-In-Time count, there were 1,524 sheltered and unsheltered homeless people counted in Albuquerque. This is 206 more homeless than the 2017 PIT count that recorded 1,318 homeless people in the city limits.

The 2017 survey found that there were 1,318 people reported experiencing homelessness on the night of the count, which then was an increase of 31 people over the 2015 PIT Count. The 2015 survey count found 1, 287 people reported experiencing homelessness on the night of the count.

For 2017, 379 people self-reported as chronically homeless, which was an increase of 119 people over the 2015 PIT Count. PIT counted 39 more people who self-reported as chronically homeless who were sheltered and 80 more people that self-report as chronically homeless who were unsheltered in 2017. The 2019 PIT report states that most people experiencing unsheltered homelessness in Albuquerque were residents of Albuquerque before becoming homeless.

The link to quoted statistics is here:

https://www.abqjournal.com/1355819/annual-count-shows-citys-homeless-numbers-up.html

https://www.petedinelli.com/2021/07/06/2021-point-in-time-survey-is-yearly-snapshot-of-citys-homeless-we-have-a-moral-obligation-to-help-homeless/

CITY DOWNPLAYS 2022 PIT COUNT

Tony Watkins, the New Mexico Council to End Homelessness, director for homeless assistance, downplayed the 256 fewer homeless found by the PIT survey saying the cold temperatures on January 31 were a factor in this year’s count. The Albuquerque Department of Family and Community Services, which partners with the coalition on homeless issues, went even further to downplay the report and said in a statement:

“We always appreciate new data from the Point-In-Time count, but we know that it’s an undercount. We need to base our services and solutions on the situation today, not yesterday, or six months ago when the count was taken.”

The link to the quoted news source is here:

https://www.abqjournal.com/2534188/albuquerque-homeless-count-declines.html

CITY’S FINANCIAL COMMITMENT TO THE HOMELSS CRISIS

The Keller Administration has adopted a housing first policy when it comes to dealing with the homeless crisis which also includes funding provided to at least 10 service providers.

During the 2021 fiscal year that ended June 10, 2021, the Family and Community Services Department and the Keller Administration spent upwards of $40 Million to benefit the homeless or near homeless. The 2021 adopted city budget for Family and Community Services Department provides for mental health contracts totaling $4,329,452, and substance abuse contracts for counseling contracts totaling $2,586,302 and emergency shelter contracts totaling $5,688,094, affordable housing and community contracts totaling $22,531,752, homeless support services contracts.

Mayor Keller’s 2022-2023 approved budget that began on July 1, 2023, significantly increased the Family and Community Services budget by $24,353,064 to assist the homeless or near homeless by going from $35,145,851 to $59,498,915. A breakdown of the amounts to help the homeless and those in need of housing assistance contained in the 2022-2023 budget is as follows:

$3,773,860 total for mental health contracts

$2,818,356 total substance abuse contracts for counseling, up by $288,680 from last year.

$42,598,361 total for affordable housing and community contracts with a major emphasis on permanent housing for chronically homeless.

$6,025,544 total for emergency shelter contracts

$4,282,794 total homeless support services, up $658,581 from last year.

The links to the adopted 2021-2022 and 2022-23 approved budgets are here:

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

https://www.cabq.gov/dfa/documents/fy23-proposed-final-web-version.pdf

GIBSON GATEWAY HOMELESS SHELTER

On April 6, 2021, Mayor Tim Keller announced the city had bought the massive 572,000 square-foot Gibson Medical Center, formerly the Lovelace Hospital for $15 million. The massive facility is being transformed into a Gateway Center Homeless Shelter. On September 3, 2022, it was reported that the Gibson Gateway Homeless Shelter will open sometime in the Winter of 2022 and that the shelter will assist 1,000 homeless a day and the shelter will be 330 bed homeless shelter.

The first phase of the facility when opened will feature 50 emergency shelter beds exclusively for women. It also includes 20 beds for medical respite, which will provide people without other options, a place to recuperate from illness or injury. It also includes 20 beds for medically supervised sobering. The shelter services will concentrate on serving people picked up by APD police, or other first responders, but who do not belong in the emergency room or jail. That includes those who are intoxicated, dealing with mental illness or “down and outs” as they are commonly described by first responders. The city estimates 1,500 people could go through the drop-off each year. The “dropoff for the down and outs” will initially have 4 beds.

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

It should come as absolutely no surprise, and it’s downright pathetic, that the City’s Family and Community Services Department and the service providers go out of their way to disparage the results of the PIT report by dismissing it as an “undercount”. The likely reason for downplaying the survey results is that millions of dollars are at stake for the department and the service providers. Thier dismissive attitude is a reluctance to be questioned or challenged and be held accountable for how much money is being spent and the results they are achieving. What cannot be refuted are the PIT survey statistics over the last 5 years are very consistent and do not support the contention that the City’s homeless count is anywhere near what they are claiming.

The 2022 point in time survey when compared to the surveys taken 2021, 2019 and 2017 is by far the better of the surveys given the depth of information provided when comes to individual and households of homeless, gender, age and ethnicity who are sheltered, in transitional housing, or who are unsheltered. The surveys taken together provide an in-depth analysis of the city’s homeless crisis.

A major and surprising takeaway of the past 4 surveys is the actual number of the city’s homeless has hovered between 1,311 to 1,567 over the last 5 years as follows:

2017: 1,318

2019: 1,524

2021: 1,567

2022: 1,311

The 1,311 figures in the 2022 PIT report is the lowest number of unsheltered reported for the last 5 years. According to the 2022 PIT report there were 256 fewer homeless in January 2022 than in January 22. This is very surprising given the public perception that the homeless crisis has only gotten worse in the city under Mayor Tim Keller.

It is not a crime to be homeless. The city does have a moral obligation to help the homeless, especially the mentally ill and the drug addicted, and it is doing so with the huge financial commitment that is being made with services and shelter. Even though as a community there is a moral obligation to help the homeless, that does not give the homeless the right to trespass, camp and break vagrancy laws whenever they want and wherever they want.

The biggest and likely reason for the perception in the increase of the homeless is that the homeless have become far more visible to the public and far more aggressive where they illegally camp in parks, on streets, in alleyways and in city open space areas. Mayor Tim Keller bears most of the responsibility for the homeless crisis becoming far more visible in that over the last 4 years the city and the Albuquerque Police Department under Keller’s orders did not enforce the city’s trespassing, vagrancy and nuisance abatement laws when it comes to the homeless. Keller essentially took a hands-off approach to deal with the homeless when it came to enforcing the city’s ordinances and laws as they relate to the homeless.

HOMELESS ARE MORE VISIBLE BECAUSE OF NO ARREST POLICY

In 2017 the city entered into a stipulated settlement agreement in the McClendon federal case where the city agreed that people accused of nonviolent misdemeanors such as shoplifting, petty larceny and prostitution will not be arrested where there are no circumstances requiring an arrest. The primary reason for the settlement was to prevent jail overcrowding. It had nothing to do with the homeless.

When it comes to “homeless crimes”, such as illegal camping, criminal trespassing and loitering, Mayor Keller took the APD “no arrest” policy a major step further which was ill advised. Keller and APD adopted a policy that arrest was very last resort to deal with the homeless and citations would be the strict policy.

At one point, police discretion to make arrests of homeless was taken away from APD. The Family Community Service Department was given authority over APD to decide what homeless would be arrested and when, relegating APD to the role of public safety officers. APD was allowed to make arrests of the homeless when the circumstances warranted such as the commission of felony. The policy giving the Family Community Service Department authority over APD policy was later withdrawn.

CORONADO PARK

The mayor’s policies dealing with the homeless changed when Keller was essentially forced to close Coronado Park and displacing upwards of 125 homeless. Mayor Tim Keller created a nuisance with the city property when he allowed and condoned the use of Coronado Park as a “de facto” city sanction homeless encampment.

Coronado Park had an extensive history of criminal activity including 4 murders, violent crimes and drug trafficking. Keller himself was forced to announce the closure of Coronado Park on June 27 as a result of the extensive criminal activity and the contamination of the grounds of the park that made it a threat to public safety and use.

SAFE OUTDOOR SPACES TOOL NOT NEEDED

Repeatedly, Mayor Tim Keller and his administration have said that Safe Outdoor Spaces are a “tool in the toolbox” that is needed in his “all above approach” to deal with the homeless. That is simply false, and tools such as Safe Outdoor Spaces need to be thrown out of the toolbox when it comes to the homeless crisis. The only “real tools” here are our government and elected officials who are being used to promote an unsustainable policy of Safe Outdoor Spaces. Ostensibly, they do not know that government sanctioned encampments are in fact being abandoned by major cities and have been found to be a very bad substitute for permanent housing and services which have the most impact on reducing the homeless crisis.

https://newmexicosun.com/stories/626700965-there-s-a-better-way-to-serve-the-homeless-sanctioned-encampments-aren-t-it

The millions being spent each year by the city to deal with the homeless with the “housing first” policy and new Gibson Gateway Homeless Shelter and the Westside Homeless shelter should be more than enough to deal with housing the homeless, yet Mayor wants more from the public in the form of Safe Outdoor Spaces. Then there is that matter that Safe Outdoor Space encampments violate the city’s and Keller’s own “housing first” policy by not providing a form of permanent housing and with reliance on tents as temporary housing.

The answer to the homeless crisis is to provide the homeless the support services, including food and permanent lodging, and mental health care needed to allow the homeless to turn their lives around and perhaps become productive self-sufficient citizens.

The millions being spent each year by the city to deal with the homeless with the “housing first” policy and new Gibson Gateway Homeless Shelter and the Westside Homeless shelter should be more than enough to deal with housing the homeless. Then there is that matter that Safe Outdoor Space encampments violate the city’s and Keller’s own “housing first” policy by not providing a form of permanent housing and with reliance on tents as temporary housing.

RESET OPPORTUNITY

Mayor Tim Keller should consider the 2022 PIT report as a reset opportunity. The report found that the total individual unsheltered is 197 homeless which should be manageable by law enforcement. It is likely these are those who refuse to accept any kind of assistance and want to be left alone. Given the upwards of $100 million being spent over two years and the opening of the Gibson Homeless Shelter, Keller has no excuse in dealing with the 197 unsheltered.

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, on city streets in alleys and trespass in open space 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.

ABQ Journal Guest Column: Fast-Tracked Safe Outdoor Spaces Are Discriminatory; Appeals Of “Safe Outdoor Space” Tent Encampments For “Sex-Trafficking Victims Scheduled For September 28; Public Encouraged To Attend

Posted on September 21, 2022 by

On July 30, Dawn Legacy Point filed the first application ever for a ‘Safe Outdoor Space’ homeless encampment. “Safe outdoor spaces” are city sanctioned homeless encampments with 40 designated spaces for tents that will allow upwards of 50 people, require hand washing stations, toilets and showers, require a management plan, 6 foot fencing and social services offered. The Dawn Legacy Point application was approved despite a City Council resolution to repeal and prohibit the land use now allowed by the Integrated Development Ordinance (IDO). On Thursday, September 15, the City Environmental Planning Commission (EPC) voted to recommend to the city council to pass the city council resolution to eliminate “Safe Outdoor Spaces” from the Integrated Development Ordinance (IDO).

The Dawn Legacy Point homeless encampment is intended to provide accommodations for upwards of 50 women who are homeless and who are “sex-trafficking victims” and other vulnerable populations. The homeless encampment is to be located on vacant land at 1250 Menaul Blvd, NE which consists of two large parcels of property owned by the city with an assess value of $4,333,55.

On August 8, the City Planning Department approved the Dawn Legacy Point application for a Safe Outdoor Space homeless campsite at 1250 Menaul, NE. Seven appeals of the Dawn Legacy Point Safe Outdoor Spaces homeless tent encampment have been filed. The appellants are asking the City Planning Department to reverse its decision and deny the Safe Outdoor Space application of Dawn Legacy.

The 7 appellants are:

Martineztown Santa Barbara Neighborhood Association
Menaul Middle School
Life Roots
Reuele Sun Corporation, a participant in the Menaul Redevelopment Area
Crown Plaza Hotel, a participant in the Menaul Redevelopment Area
T-Mobil Cell Phone Call Center
Sunset Memorial Cemetery
Greater Albuquerque Hotel and Lodging Association

The City of Albuquerque Land Use Hearing Officer has now scheduled a hearing on all 7 of the above appeal cases on Wednesday, September 28, 2022 at 9:00 am in the Vincent E. Griego Chambers at the Albuquerque/Bernalillo County Government Center, One Civic Plaza NW, Albuquerque, NM 87102. The general public is encouraged to attend this hearing as a sign of support to the appealants.

Despite the appeals, sources have confirmed that on August 21 the City began preparing the property for the homeless tent encampment.

ALBUQUERQUE JOURNAL GUEST COLUMN

On September 20, the Albuquerque Journal published guest column written by Loretta Naranjo Lopez, the President of the Martineztown Santa Barbara Neighborhood Association, one of the appellants of the of the approved Dawn Legacy Point “Safe Outdoor Space” application for 1250 Menaul, NE. Naranjo Lopez is a retired City of Albuquerque employee having served upwards of 30 years with the Planning Department and the Zoning Enforcement department and she has an extensive background in the city’s zoning laws. Below is the Albuquerque Journal guest column followed by the link:

HEADLINE: Fast-tracked Safe Outdoor Spaces are discriminatory

BY Loretta Naranjo Lopez, Albuquerque resident
PUBLISHED: TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 20TH, 2022 AT 12:02AM

“The Albuquerque Journal’s Aug. 21 report, “Appeal targets first approved safe outdoor space,” failed to report in any detail the legitimate grounds the Santa Barbara Martineztown Neighborhood Association has in asking the city to reverse its approval of the Dawn Legacy Pointe “safe outdoor space” homeless encampment for women who are sex-trafficking victims. The article was … a biased regurgitation of the applicant’s justification for the homeless encampment.

The application approved by the city was as sneaky and underhanded as it gets. The application was “fast tracked” by the Planning Department to approve the application just eight days before the City Council repealed the Safe Outdoor Spaces zoning use on Aug. 16. The city failed to notify the neighborhood association of the application and failed to allow the neighborhood association to give input on how the neighborhood will be detrimentally affected.

The Planning Department unilaterally approved the application behind closed doors without notice to neighborhood associations or businesses or public hearing or input. The city gave preferential treatment to the applicants, working with them to identify city-owned property to be used and with the city agreeing to fund operating costs and not affording others the same opportunity.

… The security plan offered and approved by the city for the homeless camp is defective and insufficient for the campsite to ensure safety of the homeless and surrounding landowners and businesses.

The operation of the encampment will have a detrimental impact on the Martineztown-Santa Barbara neighborhood. It will adversely affect property values and interfere with residents’ peaceful use and enjoyment of their properties. Occupants will not be confined during the day and will be free to go and come as they please and will wind up uninvited in the neighborhoods.

The Planning Department’s approval of the application is akin to Mayor Tim Keller allowing Coronado Park to become the city’s de facto city sanctioned homeless encampment in violation of the city’s own public nuisance laws and city ordinances. The encampment will be a magnet for crime, prostitution or illicit drug trade. …

The Martineztown-Santa Barbara Neighborhood is sick and tired of the blatant discrimination and racism it has experienced for decades from the outright neglect the city has shown toward the neighborhood. The city has imposed on its residents methadone clinics, has failed to address rising crime rates, failed to provide adequate police protection, failed to provide city facilities like a community center and has allowed property destruction and filthiness throughout the neighborhood. The residents are under siege by the homeless displaced from Coronado Park and now the city wants to allow a safe outdoor space on city-owned property … to house women in tents who will likely be victimized again at the homeless encampment.

https://www.abqjournal.com/2533679/fasttracked-safe-outdoor-spaces-are-discriminatory.html

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

The location of 1250 Menaul Blvd, NE for a city sanctioned homeless tent encampment for victim of sex trafficking is very troubling and has the potential of becoming a magnet for crime, prostitution or illicit drug trade. To be blunt, it’s just plain nuts for the city to allow it.

It’s located in close proximity to a truck stop known amongst law enforcement for prostitution and illicit drug activity. It’s directly across the street from a major call center, a motel suite and is walking distance of Menaul Boarding School and apartments. Occupants of the ‘Safe Outdoor Space’ will not confined and would be free to go and come as they pleased and could easily wind up uninvited wherever they want to go. This includes the truck stop and disrupting the peaceful use and enjoyment at nearby locations or engaging in illicit activity.

Victims of sex trafficking need permanent housing that is a safe place to live and be provided with far more stable housing than a tent in an open area. Forcing victims of sex trafficking to live in tents is nothing more than victimizing them again and its inhumane. What is being created at 1205 Menaul, NE is a location for victims to become victims once again. There is no common sense to it at all. Mayor Tim Keller holds himself out as a progressive and has made housing of the homeless a top priority, yet ostensibly he has no problem with a Safe Outdoor Space to be use for victims of sex-trafficking.

The millions being spent each year by the city to deal with the homeless with the “housing first” policy should be more than sufficient to deal with housing the homeless. Safe Outdoor Space encampments violates the city’s “housing first” policy by not providing a form of permanent housing and with reliance on temporary housing.

Safe Outdoor Spaces are not the answer to the homeless crisis. “Safe Outdoor Spaces” will be a disaster for the city as a whole. They will destroy neighborhoods, make the city a magnet for the homeless and destroy the city’s efforts to manage the homeless through housing. The homeless crisis will not be solved by the city, but it can and must be managed. Safe Outdoor Spaces represent a very temporary place to pitch a tent, relieve oneself, bathe and sleep at night with rules that will not likely be followed.

City Council Enacts “Status Quo” Redistricting Map; Council Rejects Davis/Fiebelkorn Gerrymandering Efforts To Affect Minority Influence In Their Own Districts

Posted on September 20, 2022 by

Every 10 years, the City Charter requires that the Council appoint a committee composed of an equal number of representatives from each of the 9 Council District to review and make recommendations regarding redistricting the 9 Council Districts based on information from the Federal Census. The committee is called the City Council Redistricting Committee. The Committee was made up of 18 members, one voting member and one alternate member from each of the 9 City Council Districts.

The Committee was tasked with using the population data from the official 2020 U.S. Census along with any other pertinent information to make a report recommending changes in the Council District boundaries that the Committee decides are necessary based on constitutional principles governing voting rights, population, compactness and other related factors.

Research & Polling, the most reliable and accurate polling company in New Mexico and for decades has helped with congressional and legislative redistricting, was hired as consultants and provided the committee with 5 initial Concept Maps, titled Map A through E. In addition, the City and Research & Polling contracted with DistrictR, an online mapping tool that allows the public to submit their own maps. 4 additional maps were submitted by citizens, including a map proposed by Democrat City Councilors Pat Davis and Tammy Fiebelkorn.

On June 29th the Redistricting Committee met for the final time. The committee decided not to settle on a single map but rated and ranked each of the 8 maps. After rating each map, the committee voted to send all 8 maps to the City Council for their consideration and final selection. The Committee rated each of the 8 maps on a 5-point scale, ranging from 0 to 4.

On June 29 the Redistricting Committee voted to rate and ranked the maps as follows:

1.Concept Map A scored the highest with a total rating of 24 and an average rating of 2.7.
2. Citizen Map 2 scored the second highest with a total rating of 19 and an average rating of 2.1.
3. Concept Map D scored the third highest with a total rating of 16 and an average rating of 1.8.
4. Citizen Map 1 scored fourth highest with a total rating of 13 and an average rating of 1.4
5. Citizen Map 5 scored fifth highest with a total rating of 12 and an average rating of 1.3
6. Citizen Map 3 scored sixth highest with a total rating of 9 and an average rating of 1.0
7. Concept E map and Citizens Map 4 tied for seventh highest place each with a total rating of 7 and an average rating of 0.8

https://documents.cabq.gov/council/2022%20Redistricting%20Report.pdf

COUNCIL VOTES TO ADOPT CONCEPT MAP A

On Monday September 19, the Albuquerque City Council voted 6-3 to approve Concept Map A that resets all 9 City Council Districts without making any major changes to existing council district borders. Redistricting experts referred to it as “minimal change” map. Only 5.8% of the city’s population are moved into new city council districts. It was Democrat Westside City Councilor Klarissa Peña, District 3, and Republican NE Heights City Councilor Brook Bassan, District 4, who co-sponsored the Concept Map A, the minimal change map.

Democrats City Councilors Pat Davis, Isaac Benton and Tammy Fiebelkorn voted against the map. Each of the 3 supported at least one different option they contended would have amplified minority voices. All 3 councilors disparaged the adopted council map as the “status quo” option. City Councilor Pat Davis in particular had this to say:

“If we’re going to keep doing the same thing, we’re going to get the same results. … If it’s frustrating to all of us that not much seems to change up here, I think part of it is it’s easy to keep the same districts because we [as councilors] just got elected and we know those neighborhoods, but they don’t challenge us to think in new ways or build new coalitions.”

Davis submitted an amendment intended to better empower the city’s International District, but it failed on a 3-6 vote with only Davis, Benton and Fiebelkorn voting in support.

City Councilor Tammy Fiebelkorn for her part failed to secure support for an alternative map and amendments to Concept Map that would have created 4 Hispanic-majority districts, one more than the map the council ultimately approved. Fiebelkorn did so without support of the only 2 Hispanic City Councilors on the 9-member Council, city council, Klarisa Peña and Louie Sanchez.

City Councilor Peña made it clear with her support of Concept A map that it was the best map option. Peña said the other maps considered would actually harm marginalized communities. She acknowledges that the approved Concept Map A would not create 4 Hispanic “majority” districts like Fiebelkorn was advocating, but she defended it by saying that Hispanics are still the largest share of the population in 5 out of the 9 City Council districts. Peña put it this way:

“I just want to make sure [that] when we’re having these conversations about representations for minorities, we [acknowledge minorities do] have representation [now].”

Three of the 9 city council districts will not change under the adopted redistricting map. Those districts are District 3 represented by Democrat Klarisa Peña, District 4 represented by Republican Brook Bassan and District 9 represented by Republican Renee Grout.

The link to quoted news source material is here:

https://www.abqjournal.com/2533691/council-opts-for-minimal-change.html

APPROVED CONCEPT MAP A

Concept Map A scored the highest with the city council redistricting committee with a total rating of 24 and an average rating of 2.7. The objective of this map was a minimal change map to account for population changes and minimize voter confusion. No incumbents are displaced nor paired against each other.

The approved Map A addresses the disproportionate population growth the city has seen west of the Rio Grande. To compensate for the change in population, it extends Downtown-based District 2 across the river. Under the new boundaries, District 2, currently represented by Benton, absorbs some neighborhoods west of the river between Central and Interstate 40.

The approved map “shrinks” the geographic size of District 5.

The city’s northwestern-most district, represented by Republican Dan Lewis, currently has about 16% more people than ideal for balancing purposes. Some neighborhoods are taken out the north side of Montano and moved to District 1 which is represented by Democrat Louie Sanchez.

The Northeast Heights-based District 8, represented by Trudy Jones, adds some terrain from Fiebelkorn’s District 7 by expanding south to Comanche between Wyoming and Eubank.

City Councilor Pat Davis’ District 6 will absorb parts of what is now District 2, including the area east of Interstate 25 between Lomas and Gibson.

The overall boundary changed to the City Council Districts can summarized as follows:

The city council districts are identical to current districts with respect to Districts 3 (Peña), District 4 (Bassan) and District 9 (Grout).

District 5 (Lewis) lost population and the boundary with District 1 (Sanchez) moves north to the bluff south of the Petroglyph Estates.

District 2 (Benton) crosses the river between Central and I-40 to Coors taking the West Mesa and Pat Hurley neighborhoods from District 1 (Louie Sanchez).

District 6 (Davis) moves west into District 2, (Benton) from Buena Vista to I-25 between Gibson and Lomas. District 6 (Davis) also takes the University West area (including Carrie Tingley Hospital) from District 2 (Benton).

District 7 (Fiebelkorn) moves south into District 2 (Benton) from I-40 to Lomas between I-25 and Carlisle not including the University West area.

District 8 (Trudy Jones) moves into District 7 (Tammy Fiebelkorn) from Montgomery to Comanche between Wyoming and Eubank.

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

The City Council was under no legal obligation to adopt any one of the 8 maps and could have conceivably rejected all 8 maps and start from scratch and ignore the work of the City Council 2022 Redistricting Committe and their rankings. The Albuquerque City Council is commended for doing the right thing in adopting Concept Map A, despite the gerrymandering efforts of Democrat City Councilors Pat Davis, Isaac Benton and Tammy Fiebelkorn. It is easy to see how the redistricting of all 9 City Council Districts could have affected the balance of power on the City Council with one or more Districts becoming a swing District. With that point in mind, Concept Map A was the one concept map that maintains the status quo.

All 3 councilors argued that they wanted to “amplify minority voices” and create districts that gave “marginalized communities”, especially Hispanics, more representation on the City Council. This coming from 3 white progressive Democrats without any assistance or the votes from the 2 Hispanic City Councilors. The truth is that Pat Davis, Isaac Benton and Tammy Fiebelkorn were attempting to gerrymander their own selfish best interests by reducing the numbers of minorities in their districts or marginalized voters in their own districts thereby by making their districts more to their liking

SINISTER INTENT OF CONCEPT MAP 4 WAS TO REDUCE MINORITY INFLUENCE

What must not be forgotten is that Citizen Map 4, which came in last with the rankings by the re-districting committee, was originally the citizens map prepared and submitted by City Councilors Pat Davis and Tammy Fiebelkorn. The Davis/Fiebelkorn concept map was the most radical map of all the 8 maps under consideration. All the other 7 maps made adjustments that were very minor in comparison and essentially “tweaked” the existing districts, respecting the existing borders and neighborhoods and communities.

The Davis/Fiebelkorn District 6 and District 7 maps reflected in their proposed Concept Map 4 represented a dramatic departure changing borders. The concept map essentially gutted both Districts and carved them up to the benefit of Democrat Tammy Fiebelkorn to give advantage to Fiebelkorn for reelection.

Under the Davis/Fiebelkorn concept Map 4, District 7 would have kept part of its existing Northeast Heights area, but then would have sweep west of District 6 and take up the Nob Hill area and the Mesa del Sol development area. Both the International District and the Nob Hill areas are considered progressive and are currently in City Council District 6 represented by Pat Davis.

he Nob Hill area along Central under the concept map would have been shifted to District 7 and be represented by City Councilor Fiebelkor and would have jettison south to include the Mesa Del Sol development. The International District in the Southeast Heights would remain in the newly aligned District 6 but the State Fairgrounds area and the Uptown area including Coronado Shopping Center and Winrock would have been shifted from District 7 to District 6.

Simply put, the Davis/Fiebelkorn Citizen redistricting Map 4 was an abomination. It is a prime example of gerrymandering at its very worse designed to protect newly elected incumbent Tammy Fiebelkorn while the departing City Councilor Pat Davis thumbed his nose at his own City Council District 6.

City Councilor Fiebelkorn said of the Davis/ Fiebelkorn concept map submitted would have given the International District’s “large, culturally significant population” a more united voice on the council, yet she does not represent them. She said she thinks International District residents may have more in common with residents just north of Lomas than with the current district that includes Nob Hill, which she called a “completely different demographic” one ostensibly more to her liking because it is considered the most progressive area of the city.

Tammy Fiebelkorn was being a hypocrite and opportunistic to say after a mere 5 months in office at the time:

“One of the baselines of redistricting is that we find ways to make marginalized communities have a voice. … I want … what would be the best to make sure everybody is represented in a fair and equitable way. … we [must] find ways to make marginalized communities have a voice. … [and give] large, culturally significant populations [a more united voice on the council].”

Fiebelkorn was not talking about her own district when she says she wanted to help the marginalized have a voice. She was referring to the International District, a minority area she did not want to be included in her own new district. Fiebelkorn does not currently represent the Nob Hill area, yet she was advocating just that by cutting it out and placing it in District 7 and cutting out an area viewed as more conservative and ignoring those she currently is supposed to be representing. Simply put, Fiebelkorn wanted to “raid” District 6 and absorb the highly progressive Nob Hill area, knowing full well it will increase her own reelection chances.

City Councilor Pat Davis was nothing but the hypocrite he has always been when he said at the time his map was originally offered:

“I think we should have some different voices on the City Council. … If you look at it now, the entire east side of the city is represented by white folks, and I think that shows the current districting is leaving some people out of the process.”

THE WHITE PRIVILEGE THREE

Isaac Benton, Pat Davis, and Tammy Fiebelkorn do not want to admit it, but they are those very “white folks” that Davis complained about. All 3 pretend to know what “marginalized communities” as they essentially stick their noses into minority issues pretending they want to protect minorities when all 3 are essentially “white privilege”. They did so without so much as asking the two Hispanics on the city council for help and support.

It is not at all difficult to figure out what so called progressive Democrats Isaac Benton, Pat Davis and Tammy Fiebelkorn were up to with their own maps and amendments to Concept Map A that was adopted. What they really wanted to do is to reduce the influence of minorities, especially Hispanics, in their own City Council Districts to reflect their own “white privilege” backgrounds and to increase their own reelection chances.

The City Council saw right through the efforts of Isaac Benton, Pat Davis and Tammy Fiebelkorn and they did the right thing and voted to approve Concept Map A without their amendments that maintains the status quo.

The link to a related blog article is here:

Two “White Folk” City Councilors Pat Davis And Tammy Fiebelkorn Seek To Gut Council Districts 6 and 7 With Proposed Redistricting Map To Help The “Marginalized”; What’s Needed Are Two Additional City Council Districts, Not “Political Movida”; June 8 Redistricting Committee Meeting

EPC Votes To Recommend Striking “Safe Outdoor Spaces” From Integrated Development Ordinance; A Political Battle Of Epic Proportions Of Elected Officials Telling Public “We Know What’s Best For You”; A “Few Tools” Not Needed

Posted on September 19, 2022 by

On Thursday, September 15, the City Council nominated, and Mayor appointed Environmental Planning Commission (EPC) voted to Eliminate “Safe Outdoor Spaces” from the Integrated Development Ordinance (IDO). The vote was 4 to 3 to delete all references of Safe Outdoor Spaces in the IDO effectively outlawing the conditional land use anywhere in the city. Two of the 9 commissioners were not present for the hearing. It was on June 22 that legislation was introduced by city Councilor Brook Bassan at city council to repeal and to eliminate Safe Outdoor Spaces amendment to the IDO. The repeal legislation was referred to the Environmental Planning Commission (EPC) for review and hearing and to make recommendations to the City Council.

EPC HEARING PRESENTATION AND TESTIMONY

The hearing began with a very detailed analysis of the legislation presented by a representative of City Councilor Brook Basaan who is the sponsor of the legislation calling for elimination of Safe Outdoor Spaces from the IDO. The presentation went through numerous provisions of the IDO and identified how Safe Outdoor Spaces violated the IDO provisions and the spirit and intent of the IDO.

During the course of the September 15 hearing, and after the presentation of Councilor Basan’s city council legislative analysis, the public was allowed to speak, with each speaker given a mere 2 minutes. The overwhelming majority of the testimony given by members of the general public was in opposition to Safe Outdoor Spaces. Representatives from neighborhood associations, including the Santa Barbara Martineztown Neighborhood Association, Wells Park Neighborhood Association and the Greater Albuquerque Business Alliance, a coalition of downtown businesses, testified in opposition to Safe Outdoor Spaces. The main arguments made by those opposed to Safe Outdoor Spaces include the following:

The City Council amendment for Safe Outdoor Space is not well planned out. Safe Outdoor Spaces will not be safe despite security plans and will be magnets for crime.
Safe Outdoor Spaces in the form of “tent encampments for the homeless” constitute temporary housing that has been found to be the least effective means with dealing with the homeless. Many city’s that once embraced city sanctioned homeless encampment such as tent encampments are abandoning them in favor of more permanent housing.
Safe Outdoor Spaces will be detrimental to the neighborhoods and surrounding business and interfere with the peaceful use and enjoyment of property, both private and public property, and will reduce property values and interfere with redevelopment efforts.
The Safe Outdoor Spaces provisions are not in conformity and contradict the numerous provisions of the Integrated Development Ordinance (IDO), including relating to “higher and best use” of property and the intent and goal of the IDO to have reasonable, responsible redevelopment provisions that do not hinder development.
Annual updates and amendments to the IDO, such as is the case with Safe Outdoor Spaces, are enacted without public support or input. The Integrated Development Ordinance (IDO) annual amendment process undertaken by the City Council is seriously flawed and is defective and does not allow for community input for major types of amendments affecting communities, such as Safe Outdoor Spaces. There is no complete review of data coming from the Planning Department to the EPC for IDO Amendments. Substantive amendments to the IDO are not being fully investigated and vetted by the Planning Department for recommendations to EPC as was the case with Safe Outdoor Spaces.
Safe Outdoor Spaces violates the city’s “Housing First” policy jeopardizing millions of dollars in federal funding by offering temporary housing and tent encampments to the homeless. In the 2021 fiscal year, the city spent $40 million and in the 2022 fiscal year will be spending $60 million to assist the homeless and much of the federal funding will be placed in jeopardy because of Safe Outdoor Spaces.
Safe Outdoor Spaces are nuisances and are in violation of city ordinances dealing with nuisance abatement on real property, especially property owned by the city. The following city ordinances were cited to the EPC:

The City’s nuisance abatement ordinance defines nuisance as:

“Any parcel of real property, commercial or residential, … on which
… illegal activities occur, or which is used to commit, conduct, promote, facilitate, or aide the commission of … any [felony or misdemeanor, including illicit drugs and prostitution]”

The city’s nuisance abatement ordinance prohibits “public nuisances” as follows:

“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.”

See City’s Nuisance Abatement Ordinance, Section 11-1-1-10 Public Nuisances Prohibited.

The City of Albuquerque’s Uniform Housing Code also defines “nuisance” as:

“(1) Any nuisance known at common law …

(2) Any attractive nuisance which may prove detrimental to children whether in a building, on the premises of a building, or upon an unoccupied lot. …

(3) Whatever is dangerous to human life or is detrimental to health, as determined by the health officer.
…

(6) Inadequate or unsanitary sewage or plumbing facilities.

(7) Any violation of the housing standards set forth in this code.”

City of Albuquerque and 14-3-1-4 ROA 1994 of Housing Code, Definitions for public nuisance.

CITY ATTEMPTS TO DISCREDIT PRIVATE CITIZENS

After the public spoke, the planning department representatives proceeded to attempt to discredit the arguments made by the public who testified. It became obvious to those who had testified that the city representative were advocating the Keller Administration policy supporting Safe Outdoor Spaces.

City representatives took issue and challenged Pete Dinelli and his request to be recognized as being a qualified expert in nuisance abatement laws. Dinelli has been a licensed private attorney for 43 years, 28 in government service, who offered his expert legal opinion on the city’s nuisance abatement laws, which he enforced for a full 8 years on behalf of the city as Director of the Safe City Strike Force. The absurd argument was made by an assistant city attorney that the EPC cannot qualify anyone to be an expert who testify before them under oath, yet expert testimony and presentations are given before the EPC on a regular basis and EPC hearings are often “quasi-judicial”. Dinelli gave his expert legal opinion that Safe Outdoor Spaces constitute a public nuisance under the City Nuisance Abetment Ordinance, and he read into the record the above provisions of city ordinances.

City representatives were not at all suttle with their opposition to the proposed legislation to eliminate Safe Outdoor Spaces from the IDO and advocated that the EPC commission recommend a “do not pass” of the legislation to the City Council. City planning officials went so far as to offer “alternative findings” prepared in advance and ask for a delay so the EPC could consider alternatives that ostensible the Keller Administration wanted. The EPC decided to go forward with a vote anyway and voted 4-3, with 2 commissioners being absent.

At the conclusion of the September 15 EPC hearing, the committee adopted upwards of 4 pages of very detail findings in support of their ruling to recommend the elimination of Safe Outdoor Spaces from the Integrated Development Ordinance. Those finding outlined and extensive number of provisions of the IDO that Safe Outdoor Spaces violate. The EPC recommendation will now be referred to the City Council Land Use and Zoning Committee for further hearings and ultimately the legislation will be presented for a vote to the full City Council. It is the City Council that has the ultimate and final authority over land use issues.

MAYOR KELLER VETOS MORITORIUM OF SAFE OUTDOOR SPACES

On Monday, August 15, the City Council passed the moratorium on a 6 to 3 vote that barred the City Planning Department from accepting or approving any pending applications for “Safe Outdoor Spaces”. Before passing the moratorium, the City Council amended the bill to ensure that the moratorium stopped the City Planning Department from approving any “pending” applications and to add language stopping the city from authorizing any “Safe Outdoor Space” on city property. Under the legislation, a complete moratorium was to be in effect until August 1, 2023, unless the City Council enacts a separate bill removing them totally from the zoning code.

The vote was bipartisan. Voting YES for the moratorium where Republicans Brook Bassam Renee Grout, Trudy Jones, and Dan Lewis who were joined by Democrats Klarissa Peña and Louie Sanchez. Voting “NO” on the moratorium were Democrats Isaac Benton, Pat Davis and Tammy Fiebelcorn.

On Friday, August 26, in a late afternoon and what amounts to a “sneaky announcement” to ensure little media attention, Albuquerque Mayor Tim Keller announced he vetoed the Albuquerque City Council legislation that placed a moratorium on “Safe Outdoor Spaces.”

Keller argued in his veto message that the city cannot afford to limit its options for addressing homelessness and said he understood how new policies sometimes take time to refine after testing. Keller wrote in part in his veto message:

“We need every tool at our disposal to confront the unhoused crisis and we need to be willing to act courageously. … However, reasonable time, testing and piloting has not been allowed”.

The link to the quoted news source article is here:

https://www.abqjournal.com/2527750/new-keller-veto-aims-to-save-safe-outdoor-spaces.html

COUNCIL FAILS TO OVERRIDE VETO

On September 7, the Albuquerque City Council voted “NO” to override Democrat Mayor Tim Keller’s veto of a one-year moratorium on the application process for “Safe Outdoor Spaces”. In order to override the veto, 6 YES votes were needed. The 4 who voted NO to override were Republican Trudy Jones who joined Democrats Isaac Benton, Pat Davis and Tammy Fiebelcorn. The 5 who voted YES to override the veto. Were Republicans Brook Bassam, Renee Grout, and Dan Lewis who were joined by Democrats Klarissa Peña and Louie Sanchez.

During the September 8 city council meeting, discussion about the veto went on for more than an hour. The city council heard from more than 15 people who signed up to comment, and from several councilors who spoke both for and against Safe Outdoor Spaces.

What is interesting to note is that City Councilor Trudy Jones for more than a few days ignored or would not respond to calls and questions from her constituents who wanted to voice their support for the veto and who wanted to know how she intended to vote. During the September 8 City Council debate on the veto, Jones remained stoically silent and then when the time came to vote, she voted NO without any explanation for her reversal.

Councilor Jones in an interview after the vote was asked why she changed her vote and she had this to say:

“It’s the right thing to do. … Sometimes, along the line, you have to stick your neck out and do what’s right, not what is politically expected.”

The links to quoted news sources are here

https://www.abqjournal.com/category/news/abq-news

https://www.kob.com/new-mexico/albuquerque-city-council-fails-to-override-veto-of-safe-outdoor-spaces/

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

What is clear from the EPC vote is that what is now occurring within the city is a prolonged political battle to prohibit Safe Outdoor Spaces from being allowed throughout the city, a battle that is being lost by the public. This is not just an issue of “not in my back yard” syndrome, but one of hostility against elected officials, especially Mayor Tim Keller, who are mishandling the city’s homeless crisis despite millions and millions being spent each year to help the homeless with little or no progress being made by Keller and with the homeless crisis becoming even worse.

CITY COUNCILOR JONES LOSES CREDIBILITY WITH CONSTITUENTS

“It’s the right thing to do. … Sometimes, along the line, you have to stick your neck out and do what’s right, not what is politically expected.”

The links to quoted news sources are here

https://www.abqjournal.com/category/news/abq-news

With her reversal of her position on the Safe Outdoor Space moratorium, Republican City Councilor lost a significant amount of her credibility and public trust with her constituents that she had built up over 20 years of service on the council because of her failure to represent her constituent’s best interests and demands. Rumors are swirling that she cut a deal with Keller, but no one knows for certain, and she has not said.

A FEW TOOLS NOT NEEDED

https://newmexicosun.com/stories/626700965-there-s-a-better-way-to-serve-the-homeless-sanctioned-encampments-aren-t-it

Mayor Tim Keller created a nuisance with city property when he allowed and condoned the use of Coronado Park as a de facto city sanction homeless encampment. Coronado Park had an extensive history of criminal activity including 4 murders, violent crimes and drug trafficking. Keller himself was forced to announce the closure of Coranado Park on June 27 as a result of the extensive criminal activity and the contamination of the grounds of the park that made it a threat to public safety and use. Safe Outdoor Spaces will in essence become “miniature” Coronado Parks.

CITY COUNCIL PHONE: (505) 768-3100

CITY COUNCIL EMAILS

Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham Leads Mark Ronchetti In 3 Recent Polls; Abortion, Crime, Economy Are Top 3 Issues; Follow The Money

Posted on September 16, 2022 by

Within the last 3 weeks, 3 separate public opinion polls in Governor’s race and on issues the voting public are concerned about were taken and released by the Albuquerque Journal, KOB “4 Investigates” and KRQE 13 been taken and release. This blog article is an in-depth comparison of all 3 polls as well as the issues on voter’s minds as they decide how to cast their vote with analysis and commentary

KRQE NEWS 13 EMERSON POLL

On September 15, KRQE NEWS 13 published the latest of 3 polls in the New Mexico Governor’s race. The KRQE commissioned Emerson College Polling on the New Mexico Governor’s race as well as issues facing the state. The results of the poll in the Governor’s race is as follows:

Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham 48%

Republican Mark Ronchetti: 43%

Undecided: 5.2%

FAVORABILITY RATINGS

The favorability of both candidates was polled. 52% viewed Lujan Grisham favorably compared to 46% who viewed her unfavorably. Meanwhile, 51% percent viewed Ronchetti favorably compared to 41% who viewed him unfavorably. Both candidates at 52% for Lujan Grisham and Ronchetti at 51% are well liked and essentially tied in favorability.

Although Lujan Grisham’s unfavorable rating at 46% is higher by 5% over Ronchetti’s 41%, this must be tempered with the fact that she has been in office for the last 4 years dealing with a health crisis that required difficult and at time’s controversial decisions that Ronchetti has capitalized on with very negative ads. Ronchetti’s 41% unfavorables can be considered surprisingly higher than what is normal in that for the last 4 years he has been essentially a TV weatherman personality with no expierence to be held accountable for his mistakes and he has also run and lost for US Senator.

The candidate’s favorability ratings broke along party lines. Just over 90% of people who said they voted for Donald Trump in 2020 found Ronchetti “favorable”. Just under 90% of those who say they voted for Biden in 2020 found Lujan Grisham favorable.

Lujan Grisham found slightly more favor among urban voters, while Ronchetti found more support among rural voters. Suburban voters were fairly split between the two candidates.

A gender divide was found between the candidates. Female voters consistently support Lujan Grisham, while the male vote is split between the candidates. Nearly 50% of females polled say they will vote for Lujan Grisham while just over 40% of females say they’d vote for Ronchetti. Meanwhile, 46.8% of males say they’d vote for Ronchetti and another 46.8% say they’d vote for Lujan Grisham.

Lujan Grisham has the advantage when it comes to name identification amongst voters who are undecided. Only 6% of undecided voters have no opinion of Lujan Grisham or have never heard of her while 30% of undecided voters have never heard of, or have no opinion of Mark Ronchetti. This is very significant in that the 5.2% undecides in the poll will likely decide the race with Lujan Grisham polling at 48% or just 2% plus one vote short of a win.

ISSUES POLLED

The KRQE Emerson poll asked voters about the issues utmost on their minds leading up to the election. When asked in the Emerson poll what issue is most important for voting this November, 35% of those polled said the economy is the key issue. According to the poll, abortion, crime, housing, education, healthcare, COVID-19, and immigration were also issues listed, but none of those topics came close to the issue of jobs, inflation, and taxes.

While voters from across the political spectrum voice concern over the economy, nearly half of registered Republicans polled said the economy is the key issue in determining their vote. A little under a quarter of Democrats said the economy is their key focus while 38.4% of Independents and other voters said the economy is their key issue.

ABORTION

The Emerson KRQE 13 Emerson poll found that fter the economy, abortion access is a top issue for voters. 15.1% said it’s the key issue that will determine their vote this November. Poll numbers revealed that 23.1% of Democrats say it’s the most important issue for deciding their vote. Only 6.4% of Republicans say it’s the most important issue. 11.6% of independent voters or voters from other parties say it’s the top issue.

For some voters, the recent overturning of Roe v. Wade is likely to spur on voting. About 50% of those polled say the decision will make it more likely that they’ll vote in the 2022 election. But about 45% of people say it’s not affecting how likely they are to vote.

It is not just female voters that say the overturning of Roe v. Wade makes them more likely to vote. Nearly 49% of males polled say the Supreme Court decision has made it somewhat more likely or much more likely that they’ll vote this year. A little over 50% of females polled say it’s made them at least somewhat more likely to vote. 50% of Democratic voters said healthcare and abortion access are the two top issues.

Democrat Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham is “”, in 2021, she signed the repeal of the state’s 1969 criminal abortion law and signed an executive order pledging $10 million for a new abortion clinic citing an influx of abortion patients from Texas and other states.

Candidate Mark Ronchetti has said that he’s “pro-life” and has promised to “seek a middle ground with our legislature that ends the practice of late-term and partial-birth abortion.” Ronchetti says politicians should not be deciding the issue and is now calling for a public referendum vote to permit abortion up to 15 weeks and in cases involving rape, incest, and when a mother’s life is at risk. Calling for a referendum on a what was a consitutional right is even worse than politicians deciding the issue.

EDITOR’S COMMENT: No one should have the right, and that includes voters, to decide on a woman’s right to choose and to make decisions on her health care.

OTHER ISSUE IDENTIFIED IN EMERSON POLL

11.6% in the polled said healthcare is their top issue. The Emerson poll revealed healthcare is a priority for minority voters more often than white voters. A little over 16% of Hispanic and Latino voters said healthcare is their top issue, over a quarter of Black and African American voters said their top focus is healthcare. Only about 9% of white voters said healthcare is their top priority. Healthcare showed a party divide. A little over 18% of Democrats say healthcare is their top priority, while less than 3% of Republicans say it’s their top focus.

11% in the poll said crime is their top issue.

2.1% in the Emerson poll said say COVID-19 is the most important issue in determining their vote. For urban voters, it’s slightly higher, but still only 3.2% of those living in cities say COVID-19 is their top issue.

OPINIONS ON BIDEN AND TRUMP

In the 2020 Presidential election, Democrat Joe Biden won New Mexico by about 10 points. The KRQE-Emerson College poll shows that New Mexico’s likely voters are now split on Biden with just over 47% polled say they approve of the job Biden is doing and about 47% say they disapprove.

Biden’s approval rating is lower among American Indian and Native American voters. The majority of those voters in New Mexico disapprove of the job Biden is doing, the poll shows.

The KRQE News 13 Emerson poll asked voters whether or not the recent news about the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s search of Mar-a-Lago has impacted their views of former President Donald Trump, if he runs for office in 2024. Those polled were essentially evenly split between those who said the FBI search has made them more likely to support Trump, those who said the FBI search has made them less likely to support Trump, and those who said the FBI search has made no difference.

ABOUT THE EMERSON POLL

Emerson College Polling conducted the poll of 1,000 people from September 8-11, 2022. The data comes from people across the state. The results are intended to represent voter turnout, so input from voters in Albuquerque is proportional to the share of New Mexico voters who are likely to turn out in Albuquerque. Results were collected through several methods. Emerson College Polling used phone calls, emails, text messaging, and an online panel. The poll has a plus-or-minus ratio of 3%, and demographic comparisons have a higher ratio due to the sample size.

The 2 links to the unedited, quoted KRQE news stories are here:

https://www.krqe.com/news/politics-government/krqe-emerson-poll-lujan-grisham-leads-ronchetti-by-5-in-governors-race/

https://www.krqe.com/news/politics-government/krqe-emerson-poll-what-issues-are-most-important-to-new-mexican-voters/

KOB “4 INVESTIGATES” SURVEY USA

On September 14, KOB Channel 4 published a “4 Investigates” Poll” on the New Mexico Governor’s race it commissioned with Survey USA. The results of the poll in the Governor’s race revealed that Democrat Governor Michell Lujan Grisham has now busted out a double-digit lead over Republican Mark Ronchetti. The results of the poll reported are:

Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham: 48%

Republican Mark Ronchetti: 36%

Libertarian Karen Bedonie: 5%

Undecided: 11%

The link to the KOB 4 report is here:

https://www.kob.com/news/top-news/4-investigates-poll-mlg-has-12-point-advantage-over-ronchetti/

POLL ANALYSIS

Following is the poll’s narrative analysis:

PARTY AFFILIATION

Governor Luajn Grisham has the backing of 88% of Democrats.

Lujan Grisham leads by an 83-point margin among both Democrats and liberals, and by 82 points among Biden voters.

Ronchetti has the backing of 76% Republicans. Ronchetti leads among Republicans by 67 points, among those who voted for Donald Trump in 2020 with 66%, and among conservatives by 38 points.

GENDER

Lujan Grisham is up by 18 points support among women with 51%.

Ronchetti has 33% support among women.

Lujan Grisham has 45% support among men.

Ronchetti has 39% support among men.

AGE

Lujan Grisham leads by 20 points among voters under age 50, but by 7 points among those 50+.

ETHNICITY

White voters back Ronchetti by an 8-point margin.

Latinos prefer Lujan Grisham by 33 points at 59%.

INCOME LEVELS

Lujan Grisham leads in lower and middle-income households.

Lujan Grisham and Ronchetti are effectively tied in upper-income households, with Ronchetti nominally ahead.

THE ISSUES

On issues, the Governor leads by 67 points among the 23% who say the environment is among the most important issues to them, by 50 points among the 7% focused on housing, by 46 points among the 29% who will be focused on abortion when casting their ballots, by 44 points among the 34% focused on healthcare, and by 10 percentage points among the 23% focused on education.

On the issues, Ronchetti leads by 43 points among the 1 in 3 voters who say immigration and border security are among the issues most likely to influence their votes this November, by 5 points among those who list inflation and the economy as a top issue (59% of the electorate).

Ronchetti and Lujan Grisham are effectively tied among the 58% of voters who say crime and public safety is a top issue.

CRIME

Crime is considered the Governors vulnerability, with Ronchetti making it the cornerstone of his campaign, yet she managed to outpoll Ronchetti on the issue:

Governor MLG: 44%

Ronchettis: 41%

ABORTION

Abortion and a woman’s right to choose is considered the defining issue in the race for Governor and the poll results confirm that:

68% support the Governor on the issue.

22% support Ronchetti.

ABOUT THE POLL

SurveyUSA interviewed a representative cross-section of 840 New Mexico adults online 09/08/22 through 09/12/22. Of the adults, 665 were registered to vote. Of the registered voters, 558 were identified by SurveyUSA as being likely to vote in the November 2022 general election and were asked poll questions. The pool of adult survey respondents was weighted to US Census targets for gender, age, race, education, and home ownership. The poll has a relatively high margin of error of 5.7 percent.

The link to review further the poll results and analysis is here:

SurveyUSA Election Poll #26477

ALBUQUERQUE JOURNAL POLL

On Sunday, August 28, the Albuquerque Journal released its first poll in the 2022 Governor’s race between Democrat Incumbent Michell Lujan Grisham and Republican TV weatherman Mark Ronchetti. The poll was conducted by Research and Polling which for decades has done all political polling for the Journal and with polling firm considered the gold standard in New Mexico political polling because of its consistent accuracy.

RESULTS OF JOURNAL POLL

The poll asked the question “If the election for Governor were held today, who would you vote for? “ The poll results reported were:

Democrat Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham: 47%

Republican Mark Ronchetti: 40%

Libertarian Karen Bedoni: 5%

UNDECIDED: 8%

JOURNAL POLL ON ISSUES FACING STATE

On August 29, the Albuquerque Journal released its poll on the issue of abortion which is considered the defining issue in the governor’s race.

The poll asked the question “WHICH COMES CLOSEST TO YOUR VIEW ON ABORTION” The results were as follows:

It should always be legal: 35%

It should be legal with some limitations: 22%

It should be illegal except for rape, incest, or to save the mother’s life: 25%

It should always be illegal: 12%

Don’t know: 2%

None of these/won’t say: 4%

POLITCAL PARTY BREAKDOWN

The poll results were broken down according to party affiliation. The responses to the poll question by party affiliation were as follows:

It should always be legal:

Democrats: 55%

Republicans: 8%

Other: 35%

It should be legal with some limitations:

Democrats: 24%

Republicans: 18%

Other: 26%

It should be illegal except for rape, incest, or to save the mother’s life:

Democrats: 11%

Republicans: 41%

Other: 28%

It should always be illegal:

Democrats: 5%

Republicans: 24%

Other: 8%

POLL ON 5 ISSUES FACING STATE

On August 31 the Journal reported the results of it poll on the various issues voters felt were serious in the state. In the poll, respondents were read a list of five issues facing New Mexico and asked to state if they felt each one was a “very serious problem, somewhat serious problem, minor problem, or no problem at all.” The specific issues asked about in the poll were Crime, Homelessness, Quality of Education, the Strength of the State’s Economy, and Covid 19.

The poll question and the results for each of the 5 issues asked about are as follows:

“How serious are these issues facing New Mexico?”

CRIME

Very Serious: 82% Somewhat Serious: 14% Minor: 3% No Problem: 0 Don’t Know/Would Not Say: 1%

DINELLI COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

It should come as absolutely no surprise to anyone that Crime was listed as “Very Serious” problem with a whopping 82%. Concern about crime cut across party lines, geographic regions and age. Albuquerque and the State has seen a major spike in violent crime and the rates are some of the highest in the country. In the last 3 years, Albuquerque has had a breaking number of homicides each year. In 2021 the city had 117 homicides. As of August 30, APD reports that there have been 88 homicides, with the city well on it way to breaking the 2021 all time record.

apd-homicide-list-for-web-site-as-of-02sep2022.pdf (cabq.gov)

HOMELESSNESS

Very Serious: 77% Somewhat Serious: 16% Minor: 4% No Problem: 1% Don’t Know/Would Not Say: 2%

DINELLI COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

When it comes to the issue of Homelessness, it should come as no surprise that 77% feel that it is a very serious problem, once again with Albuquerque being the driving force behind the increase for concern. Likely voters in the Albuquerque metropolitan area were far more likely than people in eastern or southwestern New Mexico to call homelessness a very serious problem. According to the Journal report, the 77% is a sharp increase from four years ago when 54% of likely voters described homelessness as a very serious problem. Simply put, the homeless numbers have increased as has their visibility with the government struggling to come to a solution on how to deal with the crisis. Mayor Tim Keller’s recent closure of Coronado Park as well as his failure to manage the homeless crisis has become a major source of controversy.

QUALITY OF EDUCATION

Very Serious: 61% Somewhat Serious: 24% Minor: 9% No Problem: 4% Don’t Know/Would Not Say: 3

DINELLI COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

The 61% “very concern” for education is based in sobering reality and understanding of the state’s education system, but there is major reason for optimism for improvement.

On January 19, 2022, the New Mexico Voices for Children released the 2021 Kids Count Data Book. New Mexico’s rankings in the nation for education was 50^th. The state ranked 29th in the number of young children not enrolled in school, 49th in the nation for 8th grade math proficiency and 50th in the nation for 4th grade reading proficiency and 25% of New Mexican high schoolers do not graduate on time. The links to the Kids Count Data Book is here:

https://www.nmvoices.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/KidsCount-DataBook2021-FINAL.pdf

https://www.nmvoices.org/archives/16481

On Friday, July 20, 2018, Santa Fe District Court Judge Sarah Singleton ruled in the case of Yazzie v. State of New Mexico and Governor Suzanna Martinez that the state of New Mexico was violating the constitutional rights of at-risk students by failing to provide them with a sufficient education. In response to the court ruling, the New Mexico legislature increased public education funding to the highest levels in state history. During the last 3 years, the New Mexico legislature dramatically increased public education funding, created the Early Childhood Department (CYFD), issued mandates to Children, Youth and Families and Public Education departments, and gave raises to educators.

The 2022 New Mexico Legislature approved an $8.48 billion state budget, the largest budget in state history. The budget bill boosts state spending by $1 billion, nearly 14%, over current budget levels. The enacted budget includes significant increases in spending in areas that should have a direct impact on major areas identified by the New Mexico Kids Count Data Book. Annual spending on K-12 grade public education was increased by $425 million to $3.87 billion, a 12% boost.

A trio of bills to fund programs to help Native American students succeed in school past was enacted by the 2022 legislature. The house bills provided more than $70 million to tribal entities to help offer culturally relevant lesson plans and access to virtual and after-school programs for those students. The budget contains salary increases of 7% for school districts and state government staff across the state. A minimum hourly wage of $15 for public employees and higher base salaries for teachers is provided. The enacted budget extends free college tuition to most New Mexico residents pursuing two- and four-year degrees. $75 million is allocated to the “opportunity scholarship” program, providing free tuition and fees for New Mexico residents.

On the November 8 general election ballot is also a Constitutional Amendment that if passed will increase funding by the millions from the state’s permanent school fund with more funding to go towards extra funding in the millions for K-12 education. Outlined below is a report on a separate poll question on the Constitutional Amendment.

STRENGTH OF THE STATE’S ECONOMY

Very Serious: 52% Somewhat Serious: 30% Minor: 9% No Problem: 3%

Don’t Know/Would Not Say: 5%

DINELLI COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

The 52% “Very Serious” and 30% “Somewhat Concern” poll numbers for the state’s economy must be tempered with reality. Things are not at all as bad as the poll suggests.

On August 16, during a meeting of the influential New Mexico Legislative Finance Committee held in Chama, New Mexico, legislators were told the state will have a staggering projected $2.5 billion in “new” money during the 2023 budget year that starts on July 1, 2023. The total revenue is forecast is to rise from $9.2 billion in the fiscal year that just ended to nearly $10.9 billion for 2023. The projections were reported by the LFC executive economists. The LFC economists reported that the $2.5 money, which represents the difference between current spending levels and projected new revenue, is in addition to a projected budget surplus of nearly $3.8 billion for the current fiscal year and with upwards of $2.6 billion to go into the state’s early childhood trust fund. According to the economic projections reported, the revenue flow is showing no signs of slowing down. It is inflation related consumer spending, strong wage growth and increased oil production that is spiking the state’s revenue flows to historic heights.

On August 19, 2022, the New Mexico Department of Workforce Solutions (DWS) released an Economic Update on the state’s unemployment rates. The Department of Workforce Solutions (DWS) reported that New Mexico’s unemployment dropped to the lowest it has been since September 2008. The DWS reported that the unemployment rate for the state in July stood at 4.5%, a drop from 4.9% in June of this year and a year-over-year decrease from 7% from July 2021. This is the second month in a row the unemployment rate has come in below 5% this year. Despite the reduction in unemployment rates, the state is struggling with a low workforce participation rate which is the measurement of working-aged adults that are participating in the labor force and who are looking for a job. According to the Department of Workforce solutions (DWS), there is a need for more workers across all industries. The DWS says it has been focusing on the issue by setting up programs funded largely by federal dollars and creating a template for outreach to non-working New Mexicans.

https://www.petedinelli.com/2022/08/23/drop-in-new-mexicos-unemployment-rate-to-4-5-vacancies-and-need-for-workers-abound-state-well-on-its-way-to-recovering-to-pre-pandemic-work-levels-republicans-forget-7-8-unemployment/exicans.

COVID 19

Very Serious: 25% Somewhat Serious: 35% Minor: 25% No Problem: 14% Don’t Know/Would Not Say: 1%

DINELLI COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

The 25% “Very Serious” % “Somewhat Serious” concern over Covid 19 is a clear indication that the state, much like the rest of the country, is now pulling out of the effects of the pandemic and is in an indicator that things are indeed getting back to normal and proof of the effectiveness of the vaccines. The 25% “very serious” concern is in sharp contrast to two years ago when the pandemic resulted in closure of businesses, schools and public functions and mask mandates when there were no vaccines.

Notwithstanding the decline of Covid 19 as being a “very serious” concern to voters, the poll broke along party lines on COVID-19. According to the Journal report:

“Supporters of Governor Lujan Grisham, who issued public health care orders and restricted in-person activity at businesses and schools during early parts of the pandemic, were much more likely than supporters of other candidates to describe COVID-19 as a very serious problem at 29% or somewhat serious problem at 42%. … Lujan Grisham’s supporters appeared to give her credit for being tough on COVID and addressing it. Just 21% of Ronchetti supporters described COVID-19 as a very serious problem, and 27% described it as a somewhat serious concern.”

JOURNAL POLL REPORT ON CAUSES OF CRIME

On September 1 the Albuquerque Journal reported the results of its poll on voters’ opinions on what they believe are the leading causes of crime. Those polled on the “causes of crime” were allowed up to 3 responses and the poll compiled the top 9 answers.

CAUSES OF CRIME

The Journal poll questioned voters on their beliefs as to the causes of high crime rates. The poll question and the results reported are as follows:

“What do you believe is the leading cause of New Mexico’s high crime rate?”

DRUGS: 31%

POVERTY: 15%

RELEASING DEFENDANTS AHEAD OF TRIAL: 15%

LIGHT SENTENCES OF JUDGES: 14%

HOMELESSNESS: 13%

WEAK/BROKEN CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM:12%

POOR ECONOMY: 8%

UNEMPLOYMENT: 8%

NOT ENOUGH POLICE OFFICERS: 8%

Brian Sanderoff, the president of Research & Polling Inc., whose company did the poll, had this to say to the Journal about the poll results:

“Seven out of the 10 most frequently mentioned issues among likely voters deal with societal issues, challenges that we face regarding drug abuse, poverty, economy, homelessness, mental illness. … And three of the 10 are dealing more with criminal justice issues.”

Sanderoff said that the causes for crime by those polls broke along party lines. Republican voters were more likely to mention problems in the criminal justice system while Democrats were more likely to mention societal issues. Sanderoff said this:

“When you look at the same thing by candidate … Michelle Lujan Grisham supporters are nearly twice as likely to mention poverty than Ronchetti supporters.”

GUN CONTROL

On Sunday, September 4, the Journal published poll results on two-gun control proposals. Both proposals received overwhelming bi partisan support from those polled. The poll questions and results were as follows:

Do you support or oppose legislation in New Mexico to raise the age from 18 to 21 to purchase an AR-15 style semi-automatic rifle?

Support: 72%

Oppose: 21%

It depends: 4%

Don’t know/won’t say: 2%

DINELLI COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

New Mexico lawmakers in recent years have passed laws expanding background check requirements for firearm purchases and allowing guns to be seized from individuals deemed to pose a threat to themselves or others. But with the state’s firearm violence rate still high, many voters want lawmakers to enact additional gun control measures.

While Democratic voters were significantly more likely to support the gun control measures, a majority of Republican voters surveyed also expressed support for both proposals. A total of 61% of GOP voters surveyed support making it a crime to fail to store guns safely around children, while 53% of Republicans said they support raising the minimum age to purchase AR-15-style rifles.

Brian Sanderoff, the president of Albuquerque-based Research & Polling Inc., had this to say:

“We’re seeing that even conservative voters, at least a small majority of them support raising the minimum age to purchase certain firearms.”

It is difficult to gage what effect, if any, the passage of “gun safety” measures as the poll questions suggest, will have on reducing gun violence and mass shootings. More realistic proposals that will likely reduce gun violence would be proposals such as banning the manufacturing, sale or distribution of AR-15 style semi-automatic rifles and, in the state, gun registration, banning large capacity gun magazines and types of ammunition and mandatory background checks and perhaps repealing the state’s open carry provision in its constitution.

CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMEMT FOR K-12 FUNDING

On September 3, the Albuquerque Journal published the poll results on the constitutional amendment that will to tap more heavily into New Mexico’s permanent school fund is drawing broad voter support ahead of the Nov. 8 election.

The poll question asked was:

Do you support or oppose the proposed constitutional amendment that would distribute more money from New Mexico’s Land Grant Permanent School Fund to be used for early childhood education, teacher compensation, and K-12 education programs?

The poll results were as follows:

Support: 69%

Oppose: 15%

It depends: 8%

Don’t know/won’t say: 8%

Although the constitutional amendment has strong bi-partisan support, Democrats support the measure by 23% more than Republicans, while Republican opposition is upwards of 4 times of Democrats.

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

New Mexico’s permanent fund for education funding is one of the largest of such funds in the United States. The fund grows with a combination of investment income and royalty revenue from oil and gas production on state lands. The proposed amendment if it passes will boost the annual distribution for the permanent school fund to 6.25%.

According to Legislative Finance Committee economists, the state receives 5% out of the permeant fund each year to spend on public schools and other beneficiaries. The fund will be providing $1.3 billion the current 2022-2023 fiscal year. Bottom of Form

State economists say the proposed amendment will generate upwards of $230 million a year in new revenue with 60% of the funds to be dedicated to early childhood education and 40% for K-12 education.

Even if the amendment does not pass the annual funding for early childhood programs has been increase dramatically by the legislature going from $179 million to $579 million over a 10-year period.

Supporters say the investment would be worth it, making more money available for programs that can interrupt the cycle of poverty, and improve the education and well-being of New Mexico’s children.

Opponents of the increased withdrawals say it would eventually leave the state with smaller annual distributions because pulling more out of the fund now will slow its growth.

ABOUT THE JOURNAL POLL

“The Journal Poll was based on a scientific, statewide sample of 518 voters who cast ballots in the 2018 and/or 2020 general election and who said they are likely to vote in the upcoming election. The poll was conducted from Aug. 19 through Aug. 25. All interviews were conducted by live, professional interviewers, with multiple callbacks to households that did not initially answer the phone. Both cellphone numbers (79%) and landlines (21%) of proven general election voters were used. The voter sample has a margin of error of plus or minus 4.3 percentage points.”

FOLLOW THE MONEY

On September 12, the candidates for Governor filed their latest campaign finance reports. It covered a two-month period.

GOVERNOR MICHELL LUJAN GRISHAM

The Governor reported an opening balance of $2,749,077.80.

Total Monetary Contributions the reporting period was $2,590,990.40.

Total Expenditures the Reporting Period was $2,376,845.55.

The closing balance for the Reporting Period was $2,963,222.65.

Total In-Kind Contributions the Reporting Period was $12,225.00.

The Governor reported raising nearly $2.6 million, bringing her total fundraising for her reelection campaign to slightly more than $10 million which is more than the $9.7 million raised when first running for governor in 2018. Currently, Lujan Grisham has roughly $3 million in her campaign account with less than two months until Election Day.

Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham’s campaign finance report can be viewed here:

https://login.cfis.sos.state.nm.us//Files/ReportsOutput//103/d7180219-a9c4-4b5c-bf47-b846e82a0df3.pdf

MARK RONCHETTI

Mark Ronchetti reported and opening balance of $1,415,075.12

Total Monetary Contributions the Reporting Period were $2,402,094.31

Total Expenditures the Reporting Period were $1,404,539.04 d.

The Closing Balance was $2,412,630.39

Total In-Kind Contributions this Reporting Period was $10,996.52

Ronchetti reported raising $2.4 million during the same reporting period. He spent roughly $1.4 million on TV ads and other expenses, leaving upwards $2.4 million in his campaign war chest.

Republican Mark Ronchetti’s finance report can be viewed here:

https://login.cfis.sos.state.nm.us//Files/ReportsOutput//103/dda701b4-b57f-4837-9a4a-837037175310.pdf

VOTER REGISTRATION

No matter the polls, it is the final vote that counts. Governor Lujan Grisham has the upper hand when it comes to voter registration.

Democrats have a decisive 13.8% advantage over Republicans in the state. As the saying goes, “Republicans win in New Mexico when Democrats stay home on election day.”

According to New Mexico Voter Registration Statistics from the New Mexico Secretary of State, as of January 31, 2022, there are a total of 1,342,690 registered voters in the state. The breakdown of the registration numbers is as follows:

Registered Democrats: 599,242, or 44.6 %,

Registered Republicans: 414,067 or 30.8 %,

No Party or Independents: 301,598 or 22.5 %

Registered Libertarian: 13,644 or 1.0 %

Other Registrations: 14,139 or 1.1 %

https://api.realfile.rtsclients.com/PublicFiles/ee3072ab0d43456cb15a51f7d82c77a2/f7ecf5cb-2653-4b16-b2a5-6fd42cdcb6f0/Statewide_01-31-2022.pdf

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

Averaging out all 3 of the polls reflects that Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham polling average is 47.66% compared to Ronchetti’s 39.66% Ronchetti has yet to surpass 43% in any of the public polling which is essentially the Republican base in New Mexcio. Lujan Grisham has yet to bust the 50% plus one to clinch a victory, but she is off by 2% to 3%.

There is less than two months left before the November 2 general election, but in politics that can be an eternity, and anything can happen. Notwithstanding, Governor Lujan Grisham has led in the polls throughout the race and she has busted out a two-digit lead over Ronchetti in one poll.

Debates still remain, anything can happen including missteps by the candidates and both candidates have hefty amounts of campaign cash that make it certain that the race is far from over.

NEWS AND COMMENTARY

Category Archives: Opinions

Official Notification And Findings Of Environmental Planning Commission Decision To Eliminate “Safe Outdoors Spaces” from the Integrated Development Ordinance; Decision Forwarded To City Council To Decide Fate Of “Safe Outdoor Spaces”

2022 PIT City Homeless Count: 256 Fewer Homeless; 1,311 Total Homeless; 940 Emergency Sheltered, 174 Transitional Housing, 197 Unsheltered; City’s Homeless Crisis And Visibility Aggravated By Mayor Keller’s Hands Off Crime Policies; City Spending Over $100 Million Over 2 Years To Assist Homeless

ABQ Journal Guest Column: Fast-Tracked Safe Outdoor Spaces Are Discriminatory; Appeals Of “Safe Outdoor Space” Tent Encampments For “Sex-Trafficking Victims Scheduled For September 28; Public Encouraged To Attend

City Council Enacts “Status Quo” Redistricting Map; Council Rejects Davis/Fiebelkorn Gerrymandering Efforts To Affect Minority Influence In Their Own Districts

EPC Votes To Recommend Striking “Safe Outdoor Spaces” From Integrated Development Ordinance; A Political Battle Of Epic Proportions Of Elected Officials Telling Public “We Know What’s Best For You”; A “Few Tools” Not Needed

Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham Leads Mark Ronchetti In 3 Recent Polls; Abortion, Crime, Economy Are Top 3 Issues; Follow The Money