On September 10,  the Alburquerque  Journal published on its front page, below the fold,  an investigative entitled “City government’s unclassified workforce grows under Keller” and written by staff reporter Jessica Dyer.

According to the Journal column, when Keller was sworn into office on December 1, 2017, the city had a budget of $957 million and 5,956 funded full-time positions.  The  current 2022-2023 year’s budget is $1.4 billion and the Journal reported there are now  6,911 jobs in city government, though upwards of 20% remain unfilled.

The link to the full, unedited Albuquerque Journal report is here:

https://www.abqjournal.com/2531378/city-governments-unclassified-workforce-grows-under-keller.html

CLASSIFIED VERSUS UNCLASSIFIED

There are 5,947 City Hall employees that are “classified employees” who are covered by the city’s personnel rules and regulations. Classified employees have vested rights including retirement benefits, sick leave and annual leave benefits and can only be terminated for cause. Disciplinary actions such as suspensions, demotions and terminations can be appealed by classified employees to the City Personnel Board. The City of Albuquerque pays an average of $17.61 an hour to City Hall employees or $36,628.80 a year depending on the positions held and required education level and training levels. (40-hour work week X 52 weeks in a year = 2,080 hours worked in a year X $17.61 paid hourly = $36,628.80)

https://www.payscale.com/research/US/Employer=City_of_Albuquerque/Hourly_Rate

https://www.cabq.gov/humanresources/city-employment-opportunities

There are 589  full time “unclassified” positions at City Hall, who are “at-will” employees who can be terminated “without cause” and who work at the pleasure of the Mayor or the City Council. “Unclassified employees” or exempt employees do not have the same vested rights classified employees have. They have no appeal rights to the City Personnel Board for disciplinary action so when they are fired, they are in fact terminated with little or no recourse.

All City Hall Department Directors are “unclassified employees” and serve at the pleasure of the Mayor and can be terminated without cause. City Department Directors as at will employees are paid yearly salaries but their salaries are broken down in hourly rates for payroll purposes.  The average pay for Department Directors under Keller has been $116,000 to $125,000 a year depending on experience and background. The 27 Department Directors are not paid time and a half when they work in excess of a 40-hour work week.

DRAMATIC GROWTH OF UNCLASSIFIED WORKFORCE UNDER KELLER

The September 10 Albuquerque Journal reported that out of the 6,911 funded full-time employees, 589 of those full-time positions are “unclassified” employees, who are not covered by the personnel rules and regulations and who can be terminated without cause, who serve at the pleasure of the mayor or at discretion of the city’s chief administrative officer.  In otherwards, there are 6,322 full time city employees who are classified and 589 who are unclassified. (6,322 classified + 589 unclassified = 6,911 total full time postions.)

According to the Journal, 266 unclassified positions, or 45%, of the added full-time unclassified jobs are positions added since Mayor Tim Keller took office December 1, 2017.   According to information provided by the city Human Resources Department, many of the unclassified potions are classified as “performance and innovation managers, chief impact officer and civic engagement coordinators”.  Many other of the unclassified positions are  the traditional positions like APD Chief, Fire Chief, City Attorney, City Clerk and the other Department Directors.

According to the Journal analysis, Keller has had a 45% increase in unclassified positions since taking office on December 1, 2017, with the 18% of unclassified workers in jobs created during the 8 years under Keller’s predecessor Richard Berry.

Pay varies across the new unclassified jobs created, with the lowest compensated at the Parks and Recreation as techs, who make about $31,000 annually.  However, the Journal September 10 article zeroed in on positions that have been created and filled by Keller paying in excess of $100,000 a year.  A total of 55 of the 266 new unclassified positions created by Keller earn at least $100,000 per year.

NEWLY APPOINTED POSTIONS

It was on June 1 that Mayor Keller announced the appointments of 3 new executive staff.  Those individuals are:

Bob White, Associate Chief Administrative Officer (ACAO)

White, 74, is being paid $170,000 a year. White retired as City Attorney in 2010, has not worked for the city in any capacity for 12 years.  At the time of his retirement in 2010, White was paid $145,000 a year.  Sources have confirmed that White was asked to resign in 2009 as City Attorney by Mayor Richard Berry so he could be replaced by Republican political operative Rob Perry as city attorney who later became Chief Administrative Officer (CAO) under Mayor Berry.

 Katarina Sandoval, Chief Operations Officer (COO)

Katrina Sandoval was the Deputy Secretary of Finance and Operations and Academic Engagement and Student Success at the New Mexico Public Education Department. It is believed Keller is paying Sandoval upwards of $150,000 a year.

Annie Manriquez, Deputy Chief of Staff

She replaced Justine Freeman who transferred to a newly created position as the city’s “chief impact officer” and is paid  $131,000 per year.

NEW SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE REFORM HIRED

On March 9, 2021, Mayor Tim Keller announced the creations of the new position of “Superintendent of Police Reform” and Deputy Chief Administrative Officer to oversee the implementation of the Department of Justice (DOJ) reforms of APD.  According to the job description, the Superintendent salary is $155,001.60 to $185,016.00 and oversees all APD academy operations including cadet training and education as well as Department of Justice (DOJ) reform efforts, internal affairs and has the final say on police disciplinary matters.

One paragraph of the job description for the position of Superintendent of Police Reform is worth noting:

“Recognizing what the Department of Justice has described as the inherent need for internal affairs to exercise independence and have some separation from institutional politics and pressures, the Superintendent will also directly oversee all internal affairs matters related to the Police Department. Exercising the delegated authority of the CAO, the Superintendent will have the final say on police disciplinary matters. The Superintendent will ensure consistency and fairness in the application of disciplinary policies and compliance with CASA requirements related to discipline. The Superintendent will also develop policies and practices to ensure that the Police Department has a wide range of tools to foster culture change, in addition to discipline.”

After a so-called national search, the first Superintendent of Police Reform Keller appointed was Sylvester Stanley who retired at the end of December of 2021, a mere 8 months after his appointment.  According to the listing of the 250 top paid city hall employees, Stanley was paid $123,219.28 for his 8 months of city employment.

After Stanley departed, Keller quickly announced that a “national search” would be conducted.  Almost a full 4 months went by, and on Monday, April 25, Mayor Tim Keller announced in a press release that he had nominated La Tesha Watson, Ph.D., as the new Superintendent of Police Reform to be confirmed by the Albuquerque City Council. Dr. LaTesha Watson has 25 years of policing experience most recently served as the director of the Office of Public Safety Accountability for Sacramento having served in that position since April, 2020. Prior to that she was the chief of the Henderson Police Department in Nevada for 16 months

Mayor Keller had this to say about the appointment:

“We’ve put a lot of work into considering what reform means for our community, and how we reach important goals that allow our department to do the best job of protecting and serving the people of Albuquerque. … This means putting leaders in place who understand that there’s a balance, and who will work to break down roadblocks.”

Reaction to the Watson appointment was very positive among the Amici Parties in the Federal Lawsuit involved with the Court Approved Settlement Agreement (CASA).

Dr. Watson’s nomination was very short lived.  On May 3, one week after the Dr. LaTesha Watson appointment was announced, the Keller Administration issued a press release announcing it was not moving forward with her appointment. In the press release announcing her nomination withdrawal, the Keller Administration said in part:

“After the final round of in-person discussions with Dr. LaTesha Watson, the [Keller] administration has chosen to not to proceed with her nomination to the position of Superintendent of Reform for the Albuquerque Police Department. Watson recently concluded a site visit and a series of meetings with City and Department Executive Staff as part of her nomination for confirmation.

Watson brought alternative ideas and views about the path forward on reform, but the candidate and the administration identified key differences in our approach to the role and for continued progress in Albuquerque.

During the visit to Albuquerque, Watson put forward a proposal for restructuring the role in a manner that ultimately did not align with the position that the city is hiring for, as outlined in the job description created last year to meet the specific needs of APD. The administration determined that her alternative approach could in fact hold back recent progress made in the Department of Justice consent decree. … ”

The Superintendent of Reform was created last year by the City to bring individual accountability and leadership to reform, create differential use of force and discipline processes from APD chain of command, and add overall governance to the reform process. The position is also designed to enable the Chief of Police to better focus on crime fighting.”

YET ANOTHER NEW SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE REFORM HIRED

On August 31, 2022, after passage of another 4 months without s Superintendant of Police Reform, Mayor Keller announced the appointment of retired Republican Bernalillo County Metropolitan Court Judge Victor Valdez to serve as the city’s new Superintendent of Police Reform. Prior to becoming a Metro Judge, Valdez was a Deputy City Attorney under then City Attorney Bob White and prior to that he practiced law for 15 years, specializing in civil rights.

The appointment of Judge Valdez raised more than a few eyebrows amongst the Amici Parties and observers of the Federal Court Approved Settlement Agreement (CASA). Mayor Keller’s had promised to conduct a national search but that promise appears to have disappeared in thin air after the disastrous mishandling of the Watson appointment.

Judge Valdez was a respected Metro Judge.  However, Valdez has absolutely no experience in the implementation of federal police reforms anywhere, he has never overseen police internal affairs in any police department, he has never been responsible for police disciplinary matters, functions and processes and he has never dealt with APD academy operations, cadet training and education, all of which are required under the job description for Superintendent of Police Reform.

Simply put, Judge Victor Valdez credentials for the position of Superintendent of Police Reform are dubious at best and its liklly he is not a good fit for the job.  He is essentially an unknown to those involved with the Court Approved Settlement Agreement process.  During the last 7 years of the Court Approved Settlement Agreement, Judge Valdez has never attended a single federal court hearing on the CASA. His actual knowledge of the CASA in all likelihood is negligible at best and he has 7 years of catching up to do when it comes to the 261 mandated reforms

The rational for Judge Valdez’ appointment as Superintendent of Police Reform is an absolute mystery to many, other than being a political appointment because of his prior work as an Assistant City Attorney working under then City Attorney Bob White who is now Associate Chief Administrative Officer.

COMMUNICATIONS AND MARKETING

Mayor Tim Keller is known for his never ending, almost daily press conferences. Keller has taken photo ops to an all-new level by attending protest rallies to speak at, attending marches, attending heavy metal concerts to introduce the band, running in track meets and participating in exhibition football games as the quarterback and enjoying reliving his high school glory days, and posting pictures and videos on his FACEBOOK page.

Mayor Keller has also implemented a public relations and marketing campaign to rebrand the city image with his “One ABQ” slogan. Keller has come up with a strained logo that rearranges the city’s name to reflect the slang name for the city as “BURQUE” in red. Slick videos to present the city in a positive image have been produced which can be viewed here https://onealbuquerque.com/

Given his penchant for public relations, it should come as no surprise that the number of unclassified city employees in communications or marketing has more than doubled under Keller during his 5 years in office.  12 new positions in communications or marketing have been created since Keller took office. That is in addition to 8 in communications and marketing-related roles that predated Keller with a total of 20 positions in communications or marketing.

OTHER POSTIONS CREATED

Many of the new unclassified employees are in high-ranking administrative positions.  The city created 2 new Associate Chief Administrative Officers, 3 new Associate Directors and 16 new Deputy Directors, though 2 deputies are for the newly created Albuquerque Community Safety Department, with all being paid upwards of $100,000.

Albuquerque Fire and Rescue (AFR) Deputy Chiefs and the Fire Chief are “at will” employees and they are all paid $100,000 or more. Further, all 311 call center employees, which number around 45  are “at will” employees, but thier salaries are about $40,000 a year.

APD GETS LION’S SHARE

It is APD that has been given the lion’s share of the newly created positions under Keller.  There are 117 people in unclassified positions at APD added since Keller became Mayor.   20 positions, mostly investigators have been added to APD’s Internal Affairs with 17 new APD police service aide positions added.  Chief Harold Medina has also hired 3 new APD Deputy Chiefs, when historically there have only been 3, and added 3 new Commanders and 8 new Deputy Commanders.

The Albuquerque Police Department (APD) is the largest city budget out of 27 departments. The fiscal year 2023 approved General Fund budget is $255.4 million, which represents an increase of 14.7% or $32.8 million above the fiscal year 2022 level. The approved General Fund civilian count is 665 and sworn count is 1,100 for a total of 1,765 full-time positions.

APD’s general fund budget of $255.4 provides funding for 1,100 full time sworn police officers, with the department fully funded for 1,100 sworn police for the past 3 years. However, there are currently 875 sworn officers in APD. The APD budget provides funding for 1,100 in order to accommodate growth. During APD’s budget review hearing, APD Chief Medina acknowledged that the department will likely not meet that staffing level and the personnel funds will help cover other operating costs.

The APD’s budget was increased to accommodate for an immediate 8% in police pay and another 5% in police pay to begin in July because of the new police union contract. The APD budget provides for a net total increase of $1.2 million in overtime pay to accommodate the police union contract hourly rate increase that went into effect on January 1, 2022.

NEW LEVEL OF BUREACRACY AND PAY LEVELS CREATED

During the last 4 years, the APD high command that works directly out of the Chief’s Office went from 3 to 10 full time sworn staff. Those positions are Chief, Superintendent Of Police Reform, Deputy Superintendent of Police Reform, 6 Deputy Chiefs, 1 Chief of Staff. Although APD abolished the ranking of Major that existed 4 years ago, which there were only 4, it has created the new position of “Deputy Commanders” which there are 16. The 16 “Deputy Commander” positions create a whole new level of bureaucracy and management between Commanders and Lieutenants that is highly questionable as to duties and responsibilities other than “assisting” commanders, perhaps as the commander’s drivers and escorts around town.

The hourly pay rate for APD Lieutenants is $40.00 an hour or $83,200 yearly. Commanders and Deputy Commanders are paid upwards of $93,000 a year in base salary and with overtime they can easily earn well over $100,000 a year and as much as $120,000 as evidenced by those listed in the top 250 wage earners for the city. Therefore, with the creation of 16 Assistant Commanders, a least $1.6 million in line-item salary has been added to the APD bureaucracy.

COMPARING 2017 APD STAFFING LEVELSTO 2021 REVEALS NEW LEVEL OF BUEROCRACY OF “DEPUTY COMMANDERS” CREATED

During the December 16, 2021, court hearing before Federal Judge James Browning on the Federal Monitor’s 14th Compliance Report for the Court Approved Settlement Agreement, APD reported on the “rebuilding” of APD during the past 4 years by comparing APD staffing levels on December 7, 2017, to the December 6, 2021, staffing levels. Following are the statistics provided to the court:

DECEMBER 7, 2017 APD STAFFING LEVELS

Full Sworn Officer Count: 836

1 APD Chief

1 Assistant Chief

1 Deputy Chief

3 Majors

13 Commanders

33 Lieutenant

105 Sergeants

680 Patrol Officers

Note that the APD high command that worked directly out of the Chief’s Office consisted of 6 sworn APD staff: APD Chief, Assistant Chief, Deputy Chief and 3 Majors.

DECEMBER 6, 2021 STAFFING LEVELS

Full Sworn Officer Count: 917

1 APD Chief,

1 Superintendent of Police Reform,

1 Deputy Superintendent of Police Reform,

6 Deputy Chiefs (3 new Deputy potions created and added)

1 Chief of Staff

12 Commanders,

14 Deputy Commanders

44 Lieutenants

113 Sergeants,

731 Patrol Officers

2 Sworn CSA’s

Note that the that the APD high command that worked directly out of the Chief’s Office went from 6 to 10 employees and consists of Chief, Superintendent of Police Reform, Deputy Superintendent of Police Reform, 6 Deputy Chiefs and one Chief of Staff.  There are now 12 Commanders and 14 Deputy Commanders.   There are now a total of 36 command staff employees who are all unclassified, at will employees and can be terminated without cause.

The positions of 44 Lieutenants, 113 Sergeants and 731 Patrol Officers, for a total of 888, are all classified employees, can only be terminated for cause and can be members of the police union.

ALBUQUERQUE COMMUNITY SAFETY DEPARTMENT

The ACS currently accounts for 43 of the unclassified employees in jobs created under Keller’s administration.

It was in fiscal year 2021, the Keller Administration created the Albuquerque Community Safety Department (ACS) with an initial budget of $2.5 million. The ACS dispatches trained and unarmed professionals to respond to 9-1-1 calls that do not require a police or paramedic response.  ACS responds to hundreds of calls per month, easing the burden on police and paramedics and improving outcomes on behavioral health calls. It is the ACS that that are responding to homeless encampments.

The ACS consists of social workers and mental health care workers to deal with those suffering from a mental health crisis or drug addiction crisis and they are dispatched in lieu of sworn police or fire emergency medical paramedics.

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

The Fiscal Year 2023 proposed budget was for $15 million to provide funding to add 74 new positions to make it a 24/7 round-the-clock operation across the city. However, at the Keller Administration’s request during the budget hearing, the council voted to fund the new jobs for only part of next year under the assumption they would not all be filled as of July 1.

LIST OF 250 TOP CITY HALL WAGE EARNERS

At the end of each calendar year, City Hall releases the top 250 wage earners. The list of 250 top city hall wages earners is what is paid for the full calendar year of January 1, to December 31 of any given year. The City of Albuquerque updated the list for the year 2021.

According to the list of the top 250 city hall wage earners, they were paid between $119,356.16 to $211,144.75. The City of Albuquerque has 26 separate departments.  21 of the 26 Departments have assigned to them employees listed in the top 250 wage earners.

The list of 250 top wage earners includes both classified and unclassified positions with 146 listed positions assigned to APD and 48 assigned to the Fire Department for a total of 194 positions out of the 250.  The remaining 56 positions earning between $119,356.16 to $211,144.75 are scattered throughout 19 other departments. 16 are assigned to City Support, 9 to Municipal Development, 5 to Finance Admin Services, 4 to the Chief Administrative Office, 3 to City Legal, 3 to Cultural Services, 2 to each to Human Resources, Technology and Innovation and Parks and Recreation and 1 each to the Planning Department, Environmental Health, Office of the City Clerk, Family Community Services, Mayor’s Office, Animal Welfare, Senior Affairs, Solid Waste, Aviation and Council Services.

The top upper commands of the APD and Fire Departments and Chief Offices and Deputies are unclassified, with a balance of upwards of 40 employees of the 250 top paid positions being “unclassified”, at will positions, with those employees assigned to other departments.

The link to the top 250 wage earners listing names, titles and salaries paid can be found here:

https://publicreports.cabq.gov/ibmcognos/bi/?perspective=classicviewer&pathRef=.public_folders%2FTransparency%2FTop%20Earners%20of%20the%20City%20of%20Albuquerque%20List&id=i5AAD1EA752BA417099BA819E482F6642&objRef=i5AAD1EA752BA417099BA819E482F6642&action=run&format=HTML&cmPropStr=%7B%22id%22%3A%22i5AAD1EA752BA417099BA819E482F6642%22%2C%22type%22%3A%22report%22%2C%22defaultName%22%3A%22Top%20Earners%20of%20the%20City%20of%20Albuquerque%20List%22%2C%22permissions%22%3A%5B%22execute%22%2C%22traverse%22%5D%7D

DEFENDING AND REACTING TO INCREASE IN UNCLASSFIED POSITIONS 

Chief Administrative Officer Lawrence Rael defended the increase in the number of unclassified positions as necessary.  Rael noted that many of the new positions are tied to the U.S. Department of Justice mandated reform as well as the creation of the newly created Albuquerque Community Safety Department. Rael attributed the mushrooming communications workforce in part to the broader media landscape “including digital and social platforms that government didn’t use 10 years ago” as well as the administration’s overall strategy.

Rael said the number of new unclassified jobs reflects the size of municipal government operations and he said in a statement:

“The changing needs of a growing city require more out of city government. … [The size of the city operation] requires high-level talent to manage its many departments and work effectively. … Albuquerque has grown, and government leadership needs to grow with it.  …  We prioritize being responsive and transparent to both the media and the public. …  That can’t happen without people in place to carry out those functions.”

Two city councilors questioned the need for some of the unclassified employee growth under Keller with on asserting that it was political to promote Keller’s ambitions.

Democrat Councilor Pat Davis said the police department positions are hard to argue against because APD remains subject to the Federal Court Approved Settlement agreement and the mandated reform.   However, Davis did say he has concerns since Keller’s early days in office about the number of “unclassified marketing and communications personnel” in the mayoral administration’s reporting chain, even if their jobs are funded by individual department budgets. Davis had this to say:

“I think there’s just a general sense that these [unclassified] positions more serve the agenda of the mayor than the day-to-day work of the city and you generally see them in places like marketing and not out in the street engaging directly with [the general public].”

Davis said the city clearly needs more workers in that the city vacancy rate as of this summer was about 20%.  There is a shortage of city employees in areas of bus drivers and 911 call operators.

Republican Councilor Dan Lewis called the unclassified employee expansion under Keller “outrageous” and at a scale he did not see under the Republican Mayor Berry administration when Lewis was a city councilor before for the full 8 years Berry was in offce. Lewis specifically challenged the necessity of added upper-management and communications personnel and said:

“We don’t need more managers. … We need people to get things done to produce results.”

https://www.abqjournal.com/2531378/city-governments-unclassified-workforce-grows-under-keller.html

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

It’s very difficult to accept the dramatic increase in the sure number of city hall unclassified employees earning in excess of $100,000 a year.  Many of the positions are Mayor Keller’s appointed cronies and department heads.  Many of those hired are dedicated to city marketing, promotions and communications who are in essence promoting all things good about Tim Keller and in the best light possible.

With that said, City Councilors Pat Davis and Dan Lewis reflect a level of hypocrisy with their criticism of Keller.

Davis has been on the city council for the full 5 years Keller has been in office and has voted for all 5 city budgets Keller has submitted to the council and not once has he ever offered a single amendment to cut any city hall positions or to cut salaries.

Dan Lewis calling the unclassified employee expansion under Keller “outrageous” is true, but so is Lewis’ hypocrisy in going along and voting for a full 8 years along party lines with former Republican Mayor Richard Berry’s budget priorities, including the disastrous ART Bus project without so much of a single objection.

Both Davis and Lewis voted for Keller’s 2022-2023 $1.4 Billion dollar budget without sponsoring a single amendment to cut any city hall positions or to cut salaries, and for them to complain now is indeed laughable and politcal opportunism.

 

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

ABQ JOURNAL POLL

On Sunday, August 28, the Albuquerque Journal released it 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%

Abortion is considered the defining issue in the governor’s race. On August 29, the Albuquerque Journal released it poll on the issue.

  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%

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 c.

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

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

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 now busted out a two-digit lead over Ronchetti.  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.

On September 10, Chief Justice John Roberts defended the authority of the Supreme Court to interpret the Constitution, saying its role should not be called into question just because people disagree with its decisions. When asked to reflect on the last year at the court in his first public appearance since the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, Roberts said he was concerned that lately some critics of the court’s controversial decisions have questioned the legitimacy of the court, which he said was a mistake.

Chief Justice John Roberts was quoted as saying:

“The court has always decided controversial cases and decisions always have been subject to intense criticism and that is entirely appropriate.  … If the court doesn’t retain its legitimate function of interpreting the constitution, I’m not sure who would take up that mantle.  You don’t want the political branches telling you what the law is, and you don’t want public opinion to be the guide about what the appropriate decision is.”

Roberts also said it was “gut wrenching” to drive into the Supreme Court that was surrounded by barricades every day. The barriers were installed in May when protests erupted outside the court and outside the homes of some Supreme Court justices after there was an unprecedented leak of a draft opinion indicating the justices were planning to overturn Roe v. Wade, which provided women constitutional protections for abortion for nearly 50 years.

The link to quoted source material is here:

https://apnews.com/article/abortion-us-supreme-court-denver-public-opinion-john-roberts-6921c22df48b105cdff5fabdc6c459bb

https://theweek.com/supreme-court/1014626/us-confidence-in-supreme-court-plummets-to-record-low-gallup-finds

CONFIDENCE IN U.S. SUPREME COURT SINKS TO HISTORIC LOW

On June 23, a Gallup poll reported that confidence in the Unites States Supreme court has dropped sharply over the past year and reached a new low in Gallup’s nearly 50-year trend. Twenty-five percent of U.S. adults say they have “a great deal” or “quite a lot” of confidence in the U.S. Supreme Court, down from 36% a year ago, and five percentage points lower than the previous low recorded in 2014.

The prior low in Supreme Court confidence was 30% in 2014, which was also the year when confidence in major U.S. institutions in general hit a low point, averaging 31%.

Public confidence in the Supreme Court has been lower over the past 16 years than it was before. Between 1973 and 2006, an average of 47% of U.S. adults were confident in the court. During this 33-year period, no fewer than four in 10 Americans expressed high confidence in the court in any survey, apart from a 39% reading in October 1991 taken during the Clarence Thomas confirmation hearings. Since 2006, confidence has averaged 35% and has not exceeded 40% in any survey.

“Confidence in the Supreme Court is down by double digits among both Democrats (30% to 13%) and independents (40% to 25%), but it is essentially unchanged among Republicans (37% to 39%).

The Democratic figure is the lowest Supreme Court confidence rating Gallup has measured for any party group historically, eight points lower than the 21% figure among Democrats in 2019. Independents’ 25% confidence rating is the lowest registered for that group historically, with the prior low being 28% in 2015.

 Republican confidence has been lower in the past than now, with the 26% measured in 2010 still the lowest for GOP supporters to date. That low point occurred after Barack Obama picked a liberal justice, Sonia Sotomayor, in 2009 and nominated another, Elena Kagan, in 2010 before the poll was conducted.

 While Republicans’ confidence hasn’t changed much in the past year, it has come down significantly from 53% in 2020. That measure was taken during Donald Trump’s reelection year — after he had two of his nominees confirmed to the Supreme Court, but before a third Trump justice was confirmed days prior to his being defeated for reelection in November.”

The link to the Gallup poll results is here:

https://news.gallup.com/poll/394103/confidence-supreme-court-sinks-historic-low.aspx

SUPREME COURT DOCKETS REPUBLICAN POLITICAL AGENDA

On June 6, it was reported that the Supreme Court has agreed to hear arguments in a North Carolina redistricting challenge that could have profound implications for how states manage presidential and congressional elections. The appeal from North Carolina Republican lawmakers could significantly weaken the ability of state courts nationwide to review laws for federal elections at a time when the Supreme Court has become increasingly partisan.

The case of Moore v. Harper involves and appeal where the North Carolina Supreme Court undid an extreme partisan gerrymander of the state’s congressional map that would have given Republicans a large advantage in races for House seats. Several Republican state legislators asked the Supreme Court to restore the biased map for this spring’s primary elections. Their emergency filings claimed that the North Carolina state supreme court didn’t have the power to even review the legislatively drawn congressional map, despite the fact that the map violated several guarantees in the state’s constitution, because, in their view, neither state courts nor state constitutions should have a say in how federal elections are run. Republicans are challenging not only whether the North Carolina court got its decision right but also whether state courts have any role to play in reviewing laws passed by legislatures that deal with federal elections.

Links to quoted and related sources

https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/21-1271.html

https://portside.org/2022-07-14/case-could-blow-american-election-law?utm_medium=email&utm_source=portside-snapshot

Republicans control a majority of state legislatures and there is a coordinated effort to disenfranchise voters by not allowing for “mail in” balloting and requiring in person voting on election day. Americans are losing faith in elections after years of hearing false claims of widespread fraud from former President Der Führer Donald Trump and his allies. After the 2020 presidential elections and Der Führer Trump’s unfounded allegations of voter fraud, Republican control legislatures rushed to change their election laws asserting election law reforms were needed to protect the vote from widespread fraud when there is no fraud.

At the center of the dispute is a clause in the Constitution that delegates responsibility for federal election rules to the “legislature” of each state subject to oversight by Congress. Republicans are saying the plain meaning of the constitution is that state legislatures, and only state legislatures, have the power to set those rules. Such a reading of the clause would cut governors, election officials and state courts out of the rulemaking process giving all power over federal elections to the legislatures who could simply invalidate an election saying it was fraudulent.

At least 4 of the conservative justices have already signaled varying levels of interest in the idea of giving legislatures more power, embracing “the independent state legislature doctrine”. Associate Justice Brett Kavanaugh said that the North Carolina lawsuit presented an “important” question and that “both sides” had “advanced serious arguments.” Kavanaugh and Chief Justice John Roberts have long been viewed as near the ideological center of the court but given how they voted to overturn “Roe v. Wade”, they could easily change their minds and Kavanaugh has shown he is not above lying saying he is impartial and has not made a decision as he did with Roe v. Wade.

Michael Kang, a law professor and elections expert at Northwestern University had this to say:

“We’re in a different era now that we really opened the door to – however you want to think about it – manipulating or changing the election law in ways that seem designed to advantage one side. … “

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2022/06/30/supreme-court-takes-appeal-could-affect-2024-election-rules/7660635001/

VOTING RIGHTS NOT THE ONLY THING SUPREME COURT WANTS TO DETROY

Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas is a “strict constructionist” in interpreting the United States Constitution. Strict constitutional constructionist stands for the proposition that that a constitutional right does not exist if it is not specifically provided for in the constitution and such rights are reserved for the states to decide. Such rights include same sex marriage, access to birth control, the right to privacy and perhaps even inter racial marriage.

Justice Thomas writes that the Supreme Court should reconsider rights like birth control and same sex marriage in future decisions. Thomas agreed that the Roe v. Wade reversal ruling itself does not apply to other cases saying “the court’s abortion cases are unique” because they involve protecting a life and justices only considered this one set of circumstances, rather than rights granted through “substantive due process” as a whole.

However, Justice Thomas wrote in his concurring opinion:

“In future cases, we should follow the text of the Constitution, which sets forth certain substantive rights that cannot be taken away, and adds, beyond that, a right to due process when life, liberty, or property is to be taken away. … Substantive due process conflicts with that textual command and has harmed our country in many ways. Accordingly, we should eliminate it from our jurisprudence at the earliest opportunity.”

Justice Thomas specifically said the court “should consider” reversing other precedents and he wrote:

“In future cases, we should reconsider all of this court’s substantive due process precedents, including Griswold, Lawrence, and Obergefell. … After overruling these demonstrably erroneous decisions, the question would remain whether other constitutional provisions guarantee the myriad rights that our substantive due process cases have generated.”

Thomas argued that using the due process clause to uphold these rights is a “legal fiction” that’s “particularly dangerous” and believes the court should issue a ruling saying the court cannot grant civil rights using that legal argument.

With his dissent, Justice Clarence Thomas invites a reversal of many constitutional rights not found in the constitution, including gay marriage. The United States Constitution also does not contain any provision that marriage is a constitutional right. Thomas is married to a white woman and the question is if he will also want to reverse the case of Loving v. Virginia where the United Sates Supreme Court case struck down state laws banning interracial marriage in the United States.

The plaintiffs in the case were Richard and Mildred Loving, a white man and Black woman whose marriage was deemed illegal according to Virginia state law. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled unanimously that “anti-miscegenation” statutes were unconstitutional under the 14th Amendment. The decision is often cited as a watershed moment in the dismantling of “Jim Crow” race laws.

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

It is clear that Chief Justice John Roberts is totally out of touch as to what is going on in the country or he is simply lying to himself how much his court has now become so politized to the point it has become a threat to our very democracy in order to favor a Republican political agenda.

Thomas Jefferson himself warned of “strict constructionist” like Clarence Thomas in interpreting the United States Constitution. Thomas Jefferson warned us not to regard the United States Constitution as sacred writ too sacred to be touched but a document that must “keep pace with the times”. On July 12, 1816, Jefferson wrote:

“Some men look at constitutions with sanctimonious reverence, and deem them like the ark of the covenant, too sacred to be touched. They ascribe to the men of the preceding age a wisdom more than human and suppose what they did to be beyond amendment.

I knew that age well; I belonged to it, and labored with it. It deserved well of its country. It was very like the present, but without the experience of the present; and forty years of experience in government is worth a century of book-reading; and this they would say themselves, were they to rise from the dead.

I am certainly not an advocate for frequent and untried changes in laws and constitutions. I think moderate imperfections had better be borne with; because, when once known, we accommodate ourselves to them, and find practical means of correcting their ill effects.

But I know also, that laws and institutions must go hand in hand with the progress of the human mind. As that becomes more developed, more enlightened, as new discoveries are made, new truths disclosed, and manners and opinions change with the change of circumstances, institutions must advance also, and keep pace with the times. We might as well require a man to wear still the coat which fitted him when a boy, as civilized society to remain ever under the regimen of their barbarous ancestors.”

https://www.governing.com/context/americas-constitution-in-2021-what-would-thomas-jefferson-do#:~:text=Thomas%20Jefferson%20warned%20us%20not,too%20sacred%20to%20be%20touched.

The United States Supreme Court since its very inception has been viewed with a unique “sense of awe” and respect because it consistently interpreted the United States Constitution as a “living, evolving document” meaning one that evolved and ensured and protected civil rights and remedies to conform with changing times, changing norms, changing viewpoints.

Thomas Jefferson said it best:

“Laws and institutions must go hand in hand with the progress of the human mind. As that becomes more developed, more enlightened, as new discoveries are made, new truths disclosed, and manners and opinions change with the change of circumstances, institutions must advance also, and keep pace with the times.”

Without such constitutional evolution, slavery would still exist in the United States, woman would not be allowed to vote, discrimination based on a person’s gender, race, color or religion would be allowed, interracial marriage would be illegal, and the doctrine of “sperate but equal” and Jim Crow laws would still be the law of the land.

The United States Supreme Court’s legitimacy has always depended upon the public perceiving the court and its decisions as being based on the rule of law, prior precedent known as “stare decisis” and not partisan politics. So much so that labels such as “liberal”, “progressive”, “moderate” and “conservative” are used in referring to Supreme Court Justices’ philosophies instead of party affiliations. Supreme Court Justice’s and federal judge’s party affiliations are never identified or reported by the media and it’s a charade.

THE POLITICAL REPUBLICAN TRUMP COURT

The very nature of the process of selecting a Supreme Court Justices is as partisan as it gets. The overlap between “judicial ideology” and the “political ideology” and party affiliation of those who select supreme court justices is undeniable to the point that they have come to be one and the same. The President nominating and the Senate having a confirmation process leads to the selection of Supreme Court Justices whose ideological approach to interpreting the law is identical with the views shared by the political party in power in the White House and the US Senate.

Ryan C. Williams, assistant professor of law at Boston College Law School, put it in perspective in a column written for MSNBC when he wrote:

“The polarized nature of our politics has contributed to a court that is closely divided on numerous hot-button political issues — such as abortion, gun rights, campaign finance regulation and affirmative action. In the 1980s and 1990s, the partisan nature of these divisions was mitigated to some extent by justices whose views did not match the ideology associated with the political party of the president who appointed them, such as David Souter and Byron White. But since the 2010 retirement of [the very liberal] John Paul Stevens, appointed by President Gerald Ford, all of the Justices appointed by Republican presidents have been recognizably more conservative than the justices appointed by Democrats.

The court’s perceived partisan orientation has been further exacerbated by the gamesmanship and spectacle surrounding confirmations. The court’s three most recent appointees — Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh and Barrett — have each taken office amidst controversy. Gorsuch’s appointment was made possible by the Republican-controlled Senate’s decision to deny a hearing or vote to Merrick Garland, President Barack Obama’s nominee to fill the vacancy created by the death of Justice Antonin Scalia, resulting in a 14-month vacancy on the court. Kavanaugh’s confirmation was placed in jeopardy by accusations of sexual assault that he denied, leading to a highly contentious and much-publicized confirmation hearing. Barrett’s confirmation was rapidly pushed through the Senate shortly before the 2020 election by the same Republican Senate leaders who had earlier used the pending presidential election as an excuse not to vote on Garland.

The willingness of Republican politicians to play hardball with the confirmation process and the resulting shift in the balance of power on the court has left raw feelings on the left and led to increasing calls for retaliatory measures — including court-packing. The nominees were not themselves the architects of these strategies. But nor were they mere passive bystanders. Their willingness to accept and press forward with their nominations involved at least a degree of cooperation with the sharply partisan methods through which their appointments were secured.”

https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/supreme-court-justices-say-institution-must-be-nonpartisan-they-make-ncna1279280

Part of the greatness of the Supreme Court has always been that the public has had a tremendous respect for the Supreme Court because it has been viewed by and large as “fair and impartial” and “a political” not subservient to any political party nor religious philosophy. With the reversal of Roe v. Wade and the reversal of a well settled constitutional right for women, the United State Supreme Court has lost its legitimacy and credibility with the American people.

As the saying goes, elections have consequences. The 2022 midterm elections are shaping up to be one of the most consequential elections in our history where the Supreme Court is on the ballot as well as the control of congress, not to mention our basic right to vote in an election.

A story has been told and retold about another founding father Benjamin Franklin. Franklin was walking out of Independence Hall after the Constitutional Convention in 1787, when someone shouted out, “Doctor, what have we got? A republic or a monarchy?” To which Franklin supposedly responded, “A republic, if you can keep it.”

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.

A “Safe Outdoor Space” is a lot, or a portion of a lot, developed to provide designated spaces for occupancy by tents, recreational vehicles, and/or light vehicles. Designated spaces are provided to occupants at no charge. A safe outdoor space offers social services and support facilities.  The Integrated Development Ordinance (IDO) limits Safe Outdoor Space camps to 40 spots and a total of 50 residents each and makes them a temporary use where operators can run them for two years at a selected sites with the possibility of a single two-year extension.

https://www.cabq.gov/family/services/homeless-services/about-homeless-services#encampments

On September 12, the on-line news agency New Mexico Sun published the following editorial commentary written by Bob Reuel:

HEADLINE:  Councilor Trudy Jones homeless tent camps: Flip-flop of epic proportions

It is extremely disappointing and disheartening, when our City of Albuquerque Councilors are not responding to the will of their constituents. I live in District 8 represented by my Councilor Trudy Jones, and she epically flip-flopped on her vote for the Safe Outdoor Spaces – Homeless Tent Encampments (SOS), three times in a matter of weeks. 

How is this possible? 

This SOS policy is deeply flawed in a number of ways, with homeless tent camps scheduled to be installed next to neighborhoods and in the epicenter of our most fragile business districts, for which I and many others, reached out to Councilor Jones to oppose. 

It is most certain that our citizenry favors taking care of our homeless population in a thoughtful and planned out manner, but let’s be honest, it cannot be at the expense of our personal safety or economic security, which the SOS clearly violates. Councilor Jones should be fully aware of her constituent’s opposition to the SOS, particularly if she read the most recent Citizens Perception Survey, that indicates only 9% of respondents believe the City is doing a good job with the homeless. 

If Councilor Jones was truly committed to the mandates of her constituents, she would have been steadfast in her position to not only oppose the original SOS resolution that she voted for, but also to override the Mayor’s veto of the one-year Moratorium for the SOS, that she voted against. 

To put this into perspective, Councilor Jones voted for the original resolution to allow SOS homeless tent encampments to be peppered in and around our City at two encampments per district with 50 occupants per camp. I live in the far northeast heights and would like to know where Councilor Jones intends to approve the importation of 100 additional homeless occupants, injected into our neighborhoods, which will exacerbate an already critical mass of homeless that now disrupt, corrupt and destroy the property and wellbeing of law-abiding citizens. 

How is it that an issue as sensitive to the health and safety of our neighborhoods, economic viability of our businesses and survivability of our City, is being played off like a political football? Councilor Jones first voted Yes on the original SOS resolution, but due to the backlash from voters, saw the light and voted Yes for a one-year Moratorium of the SOS, to allow policy makers time to reexamine the impacts of the SOS in more detail. Without notice of her intentions and without regard for her constituents, Councilor Jones then flipped her vote again, to allow the mayor’s veto to stand for the dissolution of the one-year Moratorium, which now delivers the green light for the SOS encampments to move forward. This is nothing short of a quid-pro-quo between Councilors and the Mayor, whereby deals are cut behind closed doors and transparency of our policy makers is completely sealed off from public view. 

I implore Councilor Jones and all other Councilors, to not only listen to the objections of their constituents to this most egregious SOS policy, but also respond to the will and mandates of their constituents,  and vote down any future SOS actions meant to facilitate Homeless Tent Encampments, and keep our neighborhoods and business districts safe and viable.

Bob Reule, a lifetime resident of Albuquerque for 68 years, resides in the NE heights. He attended Eubank and Mitchell Elementary, Madison Jr High, Sandia High School and UNM. Bob owns and operates a family-owned local business since 1958.

The link to the New Mexico Sun article is here:

https://newmexicosun.com/stories/631603067-councilor-trudy-jones-homeless-tent-camps-flip-flop-of-epic-proportions

HEARING SCHEDULED FOR SEVEN APPEALS ON SOS FOR “VICTIMS OF SEX TRAFFICKING”

On August 8, the City Planning Department approved the Dawn Legacy Point application for a Safe Outdoor Space homeless campsite at 1250 Menaul, NE which will be used by woman who have been “victims of sex trafficking”.   The City Planning Department unilaterally reviewed the application behind closed doors with no notice to surrounding businesses or neighborhood associations, no public hearing and no public input. The application was “fast tracked” by the Planning Department to approve the application just 8 days before the City Council was scheduled to repeal the Safe Outdoor Spaces zoning use on August 16.

Less than a half mile from the vacant land and within walking distance from the property is Menaul School, a private boarding school for 6th to 12th graders. Directly across the street from the property is the T-Mobile Call Center and a Quality Inn & Suites. Going West on Menaul and one block from the property is Carrington College and two apartment complexes. Immediately East of the Freeway is the massive TA Travel Truck Stop on University that can accommodate parking of upwards of 150 semitrucks. Within law enforcement circles, the truck stop is known for prostitution and illicit drug activity. Immediate south of the truck stop on University Blvd is the Crown Plaza Hotel.

The vacant land borders Sunset Memorial Park to the West. It has been reported that workers daily patrol the cemetery grounds, monitoring the activity of homeless people who have taken to lounging in the various meditative shelters provided for grieving families. The homeless are known to use the various fountains throughout the park to wash themselves or use the fountains as a toilet, despite there being an easy-to-find portable toilets located at the northeast end of the park.

https://www.abqjournal.com/2523606/cemeteries-lament-bathing-camps-on-grounds.htm

Seven  separate appeals of the Dawn Legacy Point “Safe Outdoor Spaces” homeless tent encampment have been filed asking the City Planning Department to reverse its decision and deny the Safe Outdoor Space application of Dawn Legacy for 1250 Menaul.  The 7 appellants are:

Santa Barbara Martineztown Neighborhood Association (AC-22-11, PR-2022-007490, VA-2022-00233)

Albuquerque Boca Hotel Limited Partnership dba Crown Plaza Albuquerque (AC-22-12, PR-2022-007490, VA-2022-00239)

Greater ABQ Hotel & Lodging Association (AC-22-13, PR-2022-007490-VA-2022-00240)

Beth Brownell, Stronghurst Improvement Association (AC-22-14, PR-2022-007490-VA-2022-00238)

LifeRoots Inc. (Law Offices of Brian A. Thomas) (AC-22-16, PR-2022-007490, VA-2022-00242)

Menaul School (AC-22-17, PR-2022-007490-VA-2022-00243)

Reule LLC (Robert D Reule) (AC-22-18, PR-2022-007490, VA-2022-00239)

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 public is encouraged to attend and give support to the appellants.

 COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

Republican Albuquerque City Councilor Trudy Jones should be absolutely ashamed of herself for her flip flopping of major proportions in voting to uphold Mayor Keller’s veto. In the context of the 1250 Menaul safe outdoor space for victims of sex trafficking, she should know that woman who are 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.  A tent encampment for victims of sex trafficking is nothing short of inhumane treatment of woman who have been victimized. Encouraging victims of sex trafficking to live in tents is nothing more than victimizing them again. 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 and it’s just plain crazy.

The actual location is troubling and has the potential of becoming a magnet for crime, prostitution or illicit drug trade. 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.

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, yet Mayor Keller demands and wants more from the public in the form of Safe Outdoor Spaces.  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.

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.

 

From August 31 through to September 3, the Albquerquerqu Journal published a series of front-page articles of a  poll conducted primarily for the 2022 midterm election.  The reports covered the following:

1. Voter’s opinions on issues facing the state
2. What voters felt were the causes of crime and pretrial detention
3. Gun Control measures
4. The Permanent Fund Constitution Amendment

“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.”

The link to the quoted poll results and news article is here:

https://www.abqjournal.com/2528871/ex-those-most-likely-to-vote-also-worry-about-the-economy-and-public.html

JOURNAL POLL REPORT ON 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 reported 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 and pretrial detention. 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.”

PRETRIAL DETENTION

On November 8, 2016, the “New Mexico Denial of Bail Measure” was approved by New Mexico voters by a landslide vote. The Constitutional Amendment amended the New Mexico Constitution to change the conditions under which a defendant can be denied bail and not released from custody pending trial. The Constitutional Amendment was designed to retain the right to pretrial release for “non-dangerous” defendants. The adopted amendment changed bond requirements allowing bail to be denied to a defendant who has been charged with a felony only if the prosecutor can prove to a judge that the defendant poses “a threat to the public.” The adopted amendment also provides that a defendant who is not a danger to the community or a flight risk cannot be denied bail solely because of the defendant’s financial inability to post a money or property bond. The final vote was 87.23%, with 616,887 voting YES and 12.77%, with 90,293 voting No.

https://votesmart.org/elections/ballot-measure/2076/a-joint-resolution-proposing-an-amendment-to-article-2-section#.XNyEJo5KiUk

Over the last 6 years, violent crime rates have increased significantly, and high-profile violent crimes have been reported where criminal defendants have been released pending trial and the public attitudes and perceptions on pretrial detention have changed, albeit no thanks to elected officials placing the blame on the courts for high violent crime rates. The

Journal poll questioned voters on changing “pretrial detention” and   changing the law to make it easier for judges to hold individuals who have been charged with certain violent crimes in jail until trial.  The Journal poll asked the question:

“Do you support or oppose changing New Mexico law to make it easier for judges  to hold individuals who have  who have been charged with certain violent crimes in jail until trial?”

 The Journal Poll results were as follows:

85% support the change

4% oppose the change

8% said it depends

3% said they did not know or would not answer

According to the Journal article, while there are slight variations across political parties, regions of the state and education levels, in nearly every demographic more than 80% of respondents said they supported a change. Brian Sanderoff, the president of Research & Polling Inc. told the Journal:

“Rarely do you see numbers where 85% of the people supports something and only 4% oppose on questions that we typically ask in a Journal Poll.  And so we’re seeing just very significant, very large support levels for this change in the law, regardless of gender, ethnicity, party, etc.   …  Likely voters are clearly expressing some frustration regarding the high crime rate. … It would still be up to the governor and the Legislature to address the public’s concern in an effective and constitutional manner.”

Sanderoff reported that among those who, if the gubernatorial election were held today, would vote for incumbent Michelle Lujan Grisham, a Democrat, 81% supported changing the law.  That compares to 90% who would vote for Republican Mark Ronchetti, and 97% of those who would vote for Libertarian.  Sanderoff also reported that political leanings plays a major role in “pretrial detention” attitudes.  Sanderoff reported 93% of those who identified as conservative said they would support changing the law compared to 76% of those who identified as liberal and 87% who identified as moderate.

DINELLI COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

Changing the law to make it easier for judges to hold persons who have committed certain violent crimes is easier said than done. Further, studies have suggested that even with the change, it likely have little impact on crime and crime may not go down.

The fact that the law was changed by constitutional means that it would then again require a constitutional amendment or a repeal of what was passed in 2016. Further proposed legislative changes have failed. During the 2022 legislative session, Governor Lujan Grisham proposed major changes to reshape the pretrial detention system and they failed.  Simply put, legislators said they were not convinced the proposed changes would address crime and questioned their constitutionality.

Complicating legislative changes were the fact that several studies and reports, including one by the bipartisan Legislative Finance Committee, found that the proposals put forward by the Governor and state prosecutors would have little or no impact on reducing violent crime.

It was on September 15, 2019, that the Administrative Office of the Courts issued the results of a report to take sharp issue with the proposals to change the bail bond system once again. The study was conducted by the University of New Mexico (UNM). The report supported the proposition that the existing system does not endanger the public. The UNM study reviewed 10,289 Bernalillo County felony cases from July 2017 to March 2020 in which defendants were released from jail while awaiting trial. The statistical findings were decisive and reported as follows:

Of the cases analyzed, only 13 were arrested for a first-degree felony while on pretrial release, or about 0.1% of the total. 19% of felony defendants released from jail pending trial, 1,951 of 10,289, were arrested for new criminal activity during the pretrial period. Most of those arrests were for fourth-degree felonies and misdemeanors, including property, drug and violent crimes. Fewer than 5% of defendants, or up to 480, released pretrial were arrested for new violent crimes. Of the cases analyzed, 95.3% were not arrested for violent crimes during the pretrial period.

Artie Pepin, director of the Administrative Office of the Courts, had this to say about the study:

“The evidence from research clearly shows that the great majority of people released pending trial are not committing new crimes. … Objective research validates the pretrial justice improvements under way in New Mexico. Blaming judges and courts for crimes highlighted in news accounts does nothing to make anyone safer.”

In July, 2022 a study by the Santa Fe Institute and the University of New Mexico Institute for Social Research released found that under House Bill 5,  which was proposed during the 2022 legislative session and failed, would have resulted in an additional 2,403 people held in jail. The study found that those people were released and while awaiting trial, 96% were not charged with any violent crimes and 85% were not charged with any other new crimes.

https://www.abqjournal.com/2529113/journal-poll-vast-majority-think-pretrial-detention-law-should-change.html

Under the United States and the New Mexico Constitutions, all are guaranteed the right of due process of law no matter how heinous or violent the crime. In criminal trials, with no exceptions, any defendant is presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt by the prosecution. A person is also entitled to post bond.

What is always forgotten whenever bond reform is discussed are some of the main reasons for the changes in the law: jail overcrowding and people held for crimes they did not commit or held on low level criminal charges, such as drugs, felony thefts and credit card fraud charges, for months and at times years only to be released. Those that could afford or had the resources to pay a bond, cash or surety, were released while those who were indigent sat in jail days, weeks or even months awaiting a trial, no matter the charges.

Prior to the bond reform, the Bernalillo County Detention Center was chronically overcrowded. Years ago, the downtown jail could house up to 800 and it often would house up to 1,200 forcing the doubling up on individual cell space. The overcrowding resulted in a Federal Lawsuit that was finally settled after almost 30 years of litigation. The West side facility after it was built can house up to 2,000, and sure enough overcrowding occurred again within a matter of months.

The New Mexico Supreme Court needs to revisit the bond rules, change them and find a permanent solution that will give the lower court’s far more latitude and discretionary authority when it comes to the bond hearings and holding violent criminals in jail until trial. Common sense guidelines, not hard-set mathematical formulas allowing no discretion, need to be given the Judges to allow them to make decisions that they believe are in the best interest to protect the public as well as the defendant’s rights to due process of law. Otherwise, the New Mexico legislature may act on its own and seek repeal of the constitutional amendment.

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%

GENDER BREAKDOWN

Female support: 75%

Female opposition: 19%

Male support: 69%

Male Opposition: 24%

POLITICAL PARTY BREAKDOWN

Democrat Support: 85%

Democrat Opposition: 11%

Republican Support: 53%

Republican Opposition: 35%

OTHER PARTY

Other Party Support: 77%

Other Party Opposition: 19%

Do you support or oppose making it a crime if a person fails to safely secure a firearm from children?

Support: 73%

Oppose: 14%

It depends: 10%

Don’t know/won’t say: 3%

 GENDER BREAKDOWN

Female support: 76%

Female opposition: 11%

Male support: 70%

Male Opposition: 17%

POLITICAL PARTY BREAKDOWN

Democrat Support: 81%

Democrat Opposition:  9%

Republican Support: 61%

Republican Opposition: 22%

Other Party Support: 74%

Other Party Opposition: 10%

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. Following are the percentages:

SUPPORT FOR AMENDMENT

Democrat: 79%

Republican: 56%

Other parties: 70%

OPPOSITION TO  THE AMENDMENT

Democrat: 7%

Republcan: 26%

Other parties:  14%

Brian Sanderoff, president of Research & Polling, in reaction to the results said this:

“We know New Mexicans recognize that early childhood education is critical in a state like New Mexico, where we have generational challenges bringing New Mexico’s children up to speed.  … Democrats just tend to be more supportive of additional government monies going toward social programs than Republicans but even a majority of Republicans support the proposed amendment.”

Sanderoff  said support for the measure is not likely to narrow unless well-funded opposition emerges before Election Day.

The link to the full, unedited Journal article is here:

https://www.abqjournal.com/2529481/education-amendment-gets-bipartisan-backing-ex-the-ballot-question-w.html

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.

Links to related blog articles are here:

Albuquerque Journal Poll Released In Governor’s Race: Governor Lujan Grisham 47%, Mark Ronchetti 40%, Undecided 5%, Libertarian 5%; Two Months Is An Eternity In Politics; Expect McCleskey Hit Pieces Against Lujan Grisham

https://www.petedinelli.com/2022/08/28/albuquerque-journal-poll-released-in-governors-race-governor-lujan-grisham-47-mark-ronchetti-40-undecided-5-libertarian-5-two-months-is-an-eternity-in-politics-expect-mccleskey-hit-piec/

Albuquerque Journal Poll Results For Governor, Secretary of State, Attorney General, State Treasurer and Land Commissioner; Governor’s Race Closest; Democrats Lead In All Races; Republicans Win When Democrats Fail To Show Up 

https://www.petedinelli.com/2022/08/29/albuquerque-journal-poll-results-for-governor-secretary-of-state-attorney-general-state-treasurer-and-land-commissioner-governors-race-closest-democrats-lead-in-all-races-republicans-wi/

Journal Poll Reflects Woman’s Right To Choose And Reproductive Rights Decisive Issue In New Mexico Governor’s Race And National Midterms; Poll Proves Ronchetti Extremist And Out Of Step With New Mexico’s Values; Governor MLG Signs Executive Order For Abortion Clinic

 

 

 

 

 

On September 6, standing in front of the Albuquerque Public Schools Building in Uptown Albuquerque, instead of a TV green screen, Republican Candidate for Governor Mark boldly announced his 8-point education plan to get New Mexico’s education system “back on track.”  Ronchetti released his plan just days after the New Mexico Department of Education released dismissal academic proficiency rates with  standardized test results showing only about a quarter to a third of students met the proficiency standards

In a nutshell, Mark Ronchetti wants to have major influence on how and what is it taught in the public schools, give parents more say so on education curriculums and how their children are taught, redistribute state funding and issue $4,500 in vouchers he calls “stipends” to help parents pay for education. Ronchetti wants to limit growth in school administration spending and  increase instructional time for students and dictate that  COVID-19 relief funds are spent on classroom programs not capital improvements. Simply put, Ronchetti’s Education Plan is one driven by conservative Republican ideology.

The link to review the unedited Ronchetti Education Plan is here:

https://markronchetti.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/NM-MR-2227-Education-Plan.pdf

RONCHETTI’S 8 POINT EDUCATION PLAN

This blog article is a detailed analysis of Republican Mark Ronchetti’s 8-point Education Plan deleting his political rhetoric from the plan.  Following is a break down and analysis of each of the 8 points:

1. MAKE UP FOR LOST TIME

Ronchetti faults Governor Lujan Grisham for issuing emergency health care orders shutting down the state’s public school system because of the corona virus pandemic.  He proclaims closure of the schools resulted in students losing   406 million in-class hours of instruction that cannot be made up and  that academic growth suffered.  To solve the lost time instruction deficiency, Ronchetti proposes the following:

1. Provide every low-income child’s family in the first through third grades a $1,500 education “stipend” for 3 consecutive years to purchase outside-of-the-classroom academic support for their child. The projected cost of the program is $100 million.
2. Require school districts to spend their COVID-relief funds on classroom learning interventions, directed at helping those who have fallen furthest behind.
3. Launch school-based summer academies, short academic programs designed to help struggling students master the basics and get back on grade level over the summer.
4. Increase meaningful and strategic instructional time throughout the school year with a school by-school commitment to getting kids more time in the classroom.

DINELLI ANALYSIS AND COMMENTARY

Ronchetti faults Governor Lujan Grisham for issuing emergency health care orders shutting down the state’s public school system because of the corona virus. He does not disclose what he would have done.  It’s likely he would have done absolutely nothing and allowed the public schools to remain open and become incubators for the virus risking the health of all school children and their families.

Use of the term “stipend” for the proposal to give $1,500 for 3 consecutive years is a pathetic attempt by Ronchetti to avoid the term “vouchers” for education.  There is no requirement that the stipends advanced must actually be used for education. Vouchers for private schools has been a long-held ploy of Republicans to undercut funding of public-school systems.

The manner and method covid relief funds are spent, school-based summer academies and “strategic instructional” proposed are a repetition of policies already in place or in the process of being implemented by the Public Education Department (PED) or elected school boards.  The New Mexico legislature has further allocated funding to add additional days of schooling to make up for lost classroom time.

2. PUT MORE EDUCATION DOLLARS IN THE CLASSROOM

Ronchetti proclaims general and central school office administration has increased by 55%, while instructional and student support spending grew by 20%. According to Ronchetti, nearly 70% of school districts have grown their central office administrative spending faster than their classroom spending.  Ronchetti wants to  limit the growth of administrative spending in education, directing the lion’s share of new education dollars into classrooms including additional instructional coaches, teacher leaders, academic resources, and interventions for struggling students. Additional dollars would also be targeted to retain and recruit new teachers to help bring down class sizes to improve the teacher-to-student ratio.

DINELLI ANALYSIS AND COMMENTARY

Democrat State Senator and Majority Leader Mimi Stewart responded to Ronchetti’s plan to put more education dollars in the classroom and not school administration by saying public education administration spending in schools simply “is not a problem.”  Legislation already requires the Public Education Department (PED) to monitor school and district budgets to ensure funding goes to the functions most likely to improve student outcomes.

Ronchetti’s Education Plan is painfully inadequate to the point of being embarrassingly useless at best. What is pathetic is that Mark Ronchetti suffers from “political amnesia” when he does not even mention in his Public Education Plan the mandates of the landmark case of Yazzie v. State of New Mexico and Martinez that requires state funding.  

Republican Mark Ronchetti is pathetic as he desperately tries to hold Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham somehow responsible for the failures of our public education system  when says:

“It’s time to abandon the failed policies of Lujan Grisham and [legislators.]  … We have failed the kids of this state and this system year, after year, after year.”

It was Governor Lujan Grisham’s predecessor former Republican Governor “She Who Shall Not Be Named” who failed for a full 8 years  “year, and year after year”  New Mexico’s kids by destroying the state’s public  education system.

Roncheti and the Republican party should be absolutely ashamed of the damage done by the former Republican Governor to New Mexico’s public education system.  The former Republican Governor with her public education policies and her Secretary of Public Education appointments, especially the appointment of Secretary Hanna Skandera, contributed and resulted in the state’s failing education system.

YAZZIE V. STATE OF NEW MEXICO AND MARTINEZ REVISITED

On Friday, July 20, 2018, Santa Fe District Court Judge Sarah Singleton ruled in the case that the state of New Mexico violated the constitutional rights of at-risk students by failing to provide them with an education. The Court ruling centered on the guaranteed right under the New Mexico Constitution to provide a sufficient education for all children. The lawsuit alleged a severe lack of state funding, resources and services to help students, particularly children from low-income families, students of color, including Native Americans, English-language learners and students with disabilities. The Court found that the New Mexico Public Education Department (PED) under Republican Governor Suzann Martinez did not do the best it could with the funding it was given by the legislature to the education system.

BLISTERING COURT RULING

State District Judge Sarah Singleton pulled no punches with her decision. The Judge found that it was clear that many New Mexico students were not receiving the basic education in reading, writing and math they should be receiving in our public-school system. As a matter of law, Judge Singleton wrote the “lack of funds is not a defense to providing constitutional rights.”

Judge Singleton wrote:

“[The evidence presented at trial] proves that the vast majority of New Mexico’s at-risk children finish each school year without the basic literacy and math skills needed to pursue post-secondary education or a career. … Indeed, overall New Mexico children rank at the very bottom in the country for educational achievement. … The at-risk students are still not attaining proficiency at the rate of non-at-risk students … and the programs being lauded by [the Public Education Department] are not changing this picture.”

According to the judge’s ruling, in New Mexico at the time, 71.6% of the state’s public-school students come from low-income families, and 14.4% are English-language learners. Further, 14.8% of students have disabilities, and 10.6% are Native American. Judge Singleton addressing proficiency rates for Native American students said that in the previous 3 years, those students’ reading proficiency was at 17.6% and their math proficiency was at 10.4%.

The Court also found that New Mexico does not have enough teachers and that New Mexico teachers are among the lowest paid in the country and stated:

“The evidence shows that school districts do not have the funds to pay for all the teachers they need. … [An example is] Gadsden, one of the better performing school districts in the state, has had to eliminate over 53 classroom positions and 15 essential teachers since 2008.”

Judge Singleton ruling addressed the state teacher evaluation system implemented by the Governor Martinez Administration by saying:

“[The teacher evaluation system] may be contributing to the lower quality of teachers in high-need schools. … In general, punitive teacher evaluation systems that penalize teachers for working in high-need schools contribute to problems in this category of schools.”

The Court wrote that she was not persuaded by the Martinez Administration’s arguments that no new funding is needed because at-risk student performances are improving.

https://www.abqjournal.com/1200069/questions-surround-ruling-on-nm-education-funding.html

A spokeswoman for the state Public Education Department at the time announced that the State decided to appeal the ruling. However, soon after assuming office on January 1, 2018, Governor Lujan Grisham decided the state would not appeal the case, work at increasing funding for public education and changes to the system.

Randi Weingarten, president of the American Federation of Teachers, provided the following statement after the court ruling:

“For too long, New Mexico Gov. Susana Martinez and her administration have abandoned their responsibility to kids and public schools. This ruling confirms what parents and educators know—that New Mexico children are deprived of the essential resources, including qualified teachers and support staff, they need. This deprivation is especially severe for those at risk and in need of additional supports—English language learners, Native American students and those in poverty. The ruling also calls out the governor’s obsession with testing over teaching. … We call on the state to use this ruling as a long-overdue opportunity to overhaul its broken school funding system to ensure all New Mexico children are afforded the public education they deserve and are entitled to.”

Linls to news sources are here:

https://www.kob.com/albuquerque-news/judge-rules-lack-of-sufficient-education-for-all-nm-students-violates-constitutional-rights/4997869/?cat=500

https://www.petedinelli.com/2018/07/23/governor-martinez-legacy-illiterate-children-and-a-pizza-party/

LUJAN GRISHAM MAKES EDUCATION FUNDING PRIORITY

In response to the Yazzie v. State of New Mexico landmark education decision, Govern Lujan Grisham undertook to fully fund the state’s efforts to reform the State’s public education system and she was highly successful.  She succeeded in securing millions for public education during the 2019, 2020, 2021 and 2022 legislative sessions and her success is worth remembering.

2019 LEGISLATIVE SESSION

During the 2019 Legislative session, Governor Lujan Grisham made good on her commitment to improve New Mexico’s public education system. The 2019 legislature enacted dramatic increases in public education funding, created  the Early Childhood Department, issued mandates to the Children, Youth and Families and Public Education departments, not to mention raises for educators and increasing CYFD social workers by 125. These were clearly the biggest accomplishments of the 2019 Legislative session.

The total approved education budget was a whopping $3.2 Billion, 16% over the previous year’s budget, out of the total budget of $7 Billion. Included in the budget was a $500 million in additional funding for K-12 education and increases in teacher pay. Early childhood programs were given a major increase in funding. Under the enacted 2019-2020 budget, every public-school district was allocated significantly more funding.

Teachers did not have any raises to speak of for 8 years under the previous Republican Administration. Teachers and school administrators were given 6% pay raises with more money to hire teachers.

The creation of an “Early Childhood Department” was a major priority of the Governor Lujan Grisham it was funded and began full operation in June 2020.The new department will focus state resources on children from birth to 5 years of age.  A major goal of the new department, coupled with other investments, is more New Mexico children growing up to secure gainful employment as adults who don’t require government services.

2020 LEGISLTIVE SESSION

In 2020, the New Mexico legislature adjourned their 30-day session after approval of a $7.6 billion spending plan. The enacted budget increased spending by 7.6% over current levels. The new budget included $17 million for the new college scholarship program sought by Lujan Grisham. The goal was to provide need-based tuition aid for full-time students who already qualify for a separate assistance.  An Early Childhood Trust Fund of $320 million was approved that supporters hope will put $30 million annually toward the cause.

https://www.petedinelli.com/2020/02/21/monahans-take-on-2020-nm-legislature-short-session-and-more-a-so-so-30-day-session-comes-to-an-end/

2021 LEGISLTIVE SESSION

During the 2021 legislative session, the New Mexico legislature enacted a $7.4 billion state budget which Governor Lujan Grisham signed into law.  State government spending increased by 4.8%, or $373 million. Upwards of half of the $7.5 Billon dollar budget went go to public education. $110 million was allocated to extend the school year by ten days with an additional $120 million for kindergarten to fifth-grade programs to add 25 extra school days to make up for lost learning time.  Part of the budget will be used to increase the governor’s Opportunity Scholarships to $18 million which helps provide funding for tuition at two-year universities,  An additional $35 million will head towards addressing the needs of Native student’s education.

2022 LEGISLATIVE SESSION

During the 2022 New Mexico legislative session, annual spending for public education increased dramatically. Annual spending on K-12 grade public education was increased by $425 million to $3.87 billion, a 12% boost.  Starting July 1, the base pay for teachers rose to $50,000, $60,000 and $70,000 depending on the level of a teacher. According to a fiscal impact report, New Mexico’s average teacher salary was just under $55,000 a year. That’s lower than Colorado, Texas and Utah, but higher than Arizona and Oklahoma. Legislators also approved a measure to allow Indigenous language teachers to be paid at the same rate as their peers, even if they don’t have an undergraduate degree. For Native American language teachers paid as teaching assistants in many districts, their salaries could triple

https://www.kob.com/albuquerque-news/nm-teacher-pay-increase-bill-heads-to-governors-desk-after-unanimous-house-vote/6393826/

During the 2022 New Mexico legislative session, 3 bills supported by Governor Lujan Grisham and sponsored by Rep. Derrick Lente, D-Sandia Pueblo passed that were  in response to the historic 2018 Yazzie/Martinez court ruling.  House bills 87, 88 and 90 allocated 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 money will be used to create culturally relevant learning programs, including Native language programs, for students in the K-12 system.

extend learning opportunities and support tribal school libraries and allocate $29.6 million to four state colleges and three tribal colleges for 53 initiatives, such as building a Native American teacher pipeline and expanding high school-to-college programs to encourage those students to attend college.

https://nmpoliticalreport.com/2022/02/01/bills-to-address-yazzie-martinez-court-ruling-advance%ef%bf%bc/?mc_cid=21ff84b79b&mc_eid=d03b0979c3

3. PROTECT PARENTS’ RIGHTS TO ENGAGE IN THEIR CHILD’S EDUCATION

Ronchetti proclaims he wants to enact laws to make it clear that parents have rights on how their children are taught. He wants parents to have the following rights:

1. Parents should have access to course materials, curriculum, and books and know and have a say on what their children are being taught and learning. Ronchetti argues there is a reasonable expectation that students will be taught the basics at school “not be subjected to political agendas”.
2. Understand at all times where their children stand academically and how schools are performing.  “Parents should know—at various points throughout the school year—whether their child is learning at grade level, and if not, what options and interventions are available to get them back on track.”
3. Annual testing should be made available in a timely way so that parents, teachers, and schools can make summer-time decisions about interventions to keep kids progressing at grade level.
4. Know how education funding is being spent, all the way down to the school level. Ronchetti says There is no investment more worthwhile than education and it accounts for 45% of the state budget. Parents must be able to easily determine whether the nearly $4 billion our state spends on public education is getting into classrooms and to kids who need the most help.
5. Parents should be able to send their children to the public school that best meets their needs and have more public-school options to choose from and be empowered to select the public school that best fits the interests, needs, and abilities of their child, whether that’s a traditional, magnet, or charter school.

RONCHETTI SAYS:

“When we find public schools that are getting great results for the kids they serve, we should allow them to serve more students and encourage their learning models to be shared and implemented in other parts of the education system.”

DINELLI ANALYSIS AND COMMENTARY

It is a major red flag that Ronchetti intends to exert influence over what is taught in the state’s public schools when he says “There is a reasonable expectation that students will be taught the basics at school, not be subjected to political agendas”.  If this sounds at all too familiar, it’s because it is very much like Florida Governor Ron DeSantis who came to New Mexico to endorse Ronchetti.  

Ronchetti proclaims he wants to enact laws to make it clear that parents have rights on how their children are taught. What Ronchetti is advocating for without coming out and saying it is a “Parental Bill of Rights in Education” bill.   It was on March 22 that De Santis signed the controversial “Parental Rights in Education” where public school teachers in Florida are banned from holding classroom instruction about sexual orientation or gender identity. The bill is called by opponents as the “Don’t Say Gay” bill.

The truth is elected local school boards play the most critical role in ensuring parental rights and provide remedies to address grievances.  Many, if not all the “parental rights” Mark Ronchetti wants to guarantee to parents already exist, either by existing state law or school board policies.  Parents can decide to send their children to public schools, charter schools, private schools or for that manner do home schooling.

A Governor Mark Ronchetti no doubt will take issue with “critical race” theory, evolution being taught in schools and will want school prayer.  It’s now painfully obvious that Governor Rochetti will want to be involved not only with what is taught in New Mexico classrooms but also what goes on in the privacy of a Doctor’s offices with their  woman patients and their reproductive rights given his position when it comes to abortion and a woman’s right to choose.

When Ronchetti says “Parents should know—at various points throughout the school year—whether their child is learning at grade level, and if not, what options and interventions are available to get them back on track” he ostensibly does not know that “parent teacher” conferences are a staple for younger students.  When it comes to mid school and high school students, parents always have the option to ask for conferences with school assigned counselors. As far as parents “understanding at all times where their children stand academically” that is the purpose and function of quarterly report cards of students.

4. BETTER PREPARE OUR STUDENTS FOR THE WORKFORCE

“Some students will choose college after graduating high school while others will enter the workforce. For students who will enter careers after high school, we can do a much better job ensuring they have the tools to be successful.”  Ronchetti’s plan is to include helping students earn work certifications while still in high school, so they can be as employable as possible, as quickly as possible.  Students who complete their high school course requirements by the end of the 11th grade would receive a scholarship to spend their entire senior year in an apprenticeship, internship, or career-focused postsecondary education.

The Ronchetti education plan would expand trade and vocational schools, and better align our high school and community college course offerings with the workforce shortage areas and industry growth target areas in New Mexico.  Ronchetti wants to allow those who are not traditional licensed teachers such as electricians, nurses, computer programmers, entrepreneurs, and others who have knowledge to share to teach in middle and high school classrooms.  This would help alleviate teacher recruitment challenges.  New Mexico’s education system should make it easier for students to “learn outside of a classroom’s walls—on job-sites, in hospitals, and “in the field” instead.”

DINELLI ANALYSIS AND COMMENTARY

Ronchetti’s plan is to include helping students earn work certifications while still in high school. It’s a plan that already exists in many school systems in the state. CNM community college is already known for course offerings within workforce shortage areas and industry growth target areas in New Mexico. Examples include the nursing program, the film industry and law enforcement certifications.  Ronchetti’s plan to allow those who are not traditional licensed teachers such as electricians, nurses, computer programmers, entrepreneurs to teach will require a major overhaul of state public education licensing laws.

5. IMPROVE THE SYSTEM SCHOOL-BY-SCHOOL, FOCUS ON DEVELOPING GREAT LEADERS

The public schools are failing to educate because of lack of leadership.  Great school leaders can turn around poor-performing schools, by elevating expectations, improving hiring practices, building a “can do” culture, better developing and supporting teachers, and implementing best practices designed to understand each child’s academic needs and help them grow.  Under the Rochetti education plan:

1. A. Chronically low-performing schools would undergo leadership changes.
2. The State’s very best principals would earn six-figure salaries and be given more autonomy in how they lead their school.
3. Schools led by great principals would take on assistant principals who would train for a year or two under their leadership, then be deployed to lead schools of their own.
4. Successful school leaders would be paired with principals in need of help, and they would engage in an active mentoring relationship.
5. The highest-performing teachers in each school district would be encouraged and funded to enter principal development training.

DINELLI ANALYSIS AND COMMENTARY

When Ronchetti says “Chronically low-performing schools would undergo leadership changes” and “the public schools are failing to educate because of lack of leadership” he is not at all clear on exactly what he is talking about. He is long on political rhetoric with no specifics when he says “Great school leaders can turn around poor-performing schools, by elevating expectations, improving hiring practices, building a “can do” culture, better developing and supporting teachers, and implementing best practices designed to understand each child’s academic needs and help them grow”.  Simply put, this is what you can call “sound bite management” of the public education system designed to “purge” educator’s that are considered substandard or who do not “tow” his philosophical education line.

6. EARLY INTERVENTION ON LITERACY

New Mexico ranks 49th in the nation in literacy. Students who cannot read by the third grade have a harder time learning, are more prone to discouragement in later grades, and are more likely to drop out of school.

Ronchetti’s education plan for literacy growth hinges on three things:

1. An expectation that every early-grade teacher is trained every year in the best strategies and science on teaching literacy
2. Instructional coaches and support staff are prioritized toward English Language Arts classes in grades K through 3; and
3. Both parents and students knowing their reading level—and how it’s changing—on a month-by-month basis, with regular conversations between parents and teachers about what needs to be done inside and outside the classroom to improve their reading skills.

The Ronchetti education plan focuses on early childhood education programs and accountability to improving kindergarten readiness for kids age 0 to 5.  The plan is to ensure the State’s new early Childhood Cabinet Department, which was created by Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham in 2020, is fulfilling its intended purpose which is to better coordinate early childhood programs and ensure that those families who really need to be accessing the childcare, home visiting, and pre-K programs are, in fact, enrolling in them.

DINELLI ANALYSIS AND COMMENTARY

Much if not all of Mark Ronchetti’s Education Plan dealing with early intervention on literacy is already being dealt with aggressively, addressed or planned by the Public Education Department in response to the reforms mandated by the landmark education case of Yazzie v. State of New Mexico and Martinez.  As a result of the landmark ruling, the Lujan Grisham over the last 4 legislative sessions has been highly successful in securing the millions necessary to implement the reforms to bring the public school system in compliance with the court ruling.

7. ATTACK THE TRUANCY PROBLEM

The Ronchetti education plan cites that over 40% of the students in APS are chronically absent, which is nearly double the rate of absenteeism from a few years ago, calling it a “systemic failure.”   Ronchetti charges that Governor Lujan Grisham has taken a failing approach to truancy that serves no one.   The Ronchetti education plans is to Use COVID funds to hire and build teams in high truancy schools to focus exclusively on getting children back to school and/or finding education alternatives that meet the needs of the child and their family.  He proposes create high-risk classrooms with lower student-teacher ratios in high-risk schools for children experiencing high rates of truancy.

DINELLI ANALYSIS AND COMMENTARY

Mark Ronchetti’s Education Plan dealing with “attack the truancy problem” is already being be addressed by the individual school districts in the state.

8. SCHOOL SAFETY AND ATTENTION TO MENTAL, EMOTIONAL HEALTH

The Ronchetti plan proclaims more needs to be done to recognize and address the mental health needs of students, including investing education resources in a more robust mental health system.

Ronchetti wants to implement a program aimed at placing retired law enforcement and military in the public schools to act as “Security Resource Officers” to provide security as part of faculty and they would pay into education retirement.  Each school would be allowed to define the role for its or security aide.

The benefits of having a security resources officer or security aide include:

1. Increased perception of safety by students, staff, and parents resulting in an improved perception of the school environment.
2. Leads to more positive relationships between police and young students, and between police and schools nurturing a positive attitude of respect.
3. Police presence serves as a deterrent to crime and misbehavior.
4. Allows police to establish relationships with students and staff that facilitate gathering information to prevent crimes or intervening with students who may be planning a crime.

DINELLI ANALYSIS AND COMMENTARY

Mark Ronchetti’s education plan dealing with “school safety and attention to mental, emotional health” reflects a level of sure ignorance in two areas of major concern.

With respect to addressing the mental health needs of students with a more “robust mental health system,” the State is still struggling with restoring the state mental health care system decimated by the former Republican Governor who shut down 15 mental health care providers after she made false accusations of Medicaid fraud billing and withholding state funding. In early 2016, following exhaustive investigations, the Attorney General cleared all 15 of the healthcare providers of any wrongdoing and exonerated all of them of fraud but the damage had been done.  Many of the 15 nonprofits could not continue and just went out of business leaving many of the 160,000 New Mexicans receiving behavioral health services without a behavioral health service provider.

Ronchetti’s  wants to implement a program aimed at placing retired law enforcement in the schools.  Ronchetti is ignorant of the fact that most if not all the school systems in the state already have “school resource officers” that provide security, many in response to school shootings in the country.

The Albuquerque Public School System already has its own, full time police force, most who are retired APD officers.   The City of Albuquerque also assigns and pays sworn APD police officers to provide security at all high schools in the city.

REACTION OF GOVERNOR LUJAN GRISHAM

Governor Lujan Grisham issued the following statement in response to the Ronchetti   Education Plan

“Governor Lujan Grisham believes that every New Mexico student, regardless of where they come from or who they are, should be able to access the high-quality education they deserve. That’s why her administration invested more than $1 billion to improve New Mexico’s public schools, raised educator pay to be the highest in the southwest, brought retired educators back to work, created universal pre-k, made child carefree for most New Mexico families, and built the most extensive tuition-free higher education program in the country. 

In contrast, Mark Ronchetti’s education ideas would disadvantage New Mexico’s most vulnerable students, especially rural and Native students, with a school voucher scheme that would drain funding from public schools by allowing wealthy parents to use taxpayer dollars to send their kids to private schools in cities, with no oversight or accountability for how tax dollars are spent.

Ronchetti opposes funding for early childhood education that nearly 70% of New Mexicans support and has said he would completely overturn the Opportunity Scholarship program allowing all New Mexicans to access a higher education. There’s a clear choice in this race between Gov. Lujan Grisham’s record of historic investments in New Mexico’s public schools, and Mark Ronchetti’s dangerous schemes to rip money out of the public school system.” 

REACTION BY STATE SENATOR MIMI STEWART

Albuquerque Democrat Senate President Pro Tem Mimi Stewart, who is  a retired public-school teacher, was quick to  take issue with Ronchetti’s Public Education Plan asserting it was nothing more than a lead up to school vouchers.  She did so by bringing up a March radio interview where Ronchetti indicated his support for vouchers for private schools.

In the interview Ronchetti explain that vouchers would give flexibility to parents for their public-school education. Public education would come first but then he would build on success to cover private schools.   Ronchetti answered a question this way:

“Now when you said, you mentioned the money follows the student. How far would that money be able to follow the student? Does the student have to be in public school or would that money be able to follow if the parent wanted to put them in a private school?”

Ronchetti responded

“No, no, I think ideally, you want to give people the maximum amount of flexibility you can.”

[KSVP, 10:52-11:12, 3/31/22]. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HPGkcjx3Z7I

Senator Stewart had this to say about Ronchetti’s Education Plan:

“I really believe he’s a danger to public education here as we know it … Ronchetti seems determined to undermine public education in his effort to push school vouchers. And even though he said this morning those vouchers would be for public schools, he’s said in interviews that it would extend to private schools, draining funding for public schools and New Mexico’s most vulnerable students. That means he would send taxpayer dollars to private schools with no accountability to the public. We must keep public dollars in public schools. A zip code shouldn’t determine whether a child has access to a great education from a great public school. Parents should have more public-school options to choose from and be empowered to select the public school that best fits the interests, needs, and abilities of their child – whether that’s a traditional, magnet, or charter school.”

REACTION BY PUBLIC EDUCATION REPRESENTATIVES

Not at all surprising, the reaction of those within the state’s Public Education system to Ronchetti’s education plan was generally negative.  Many said it was no plan at all, would damage public education and much of what Ronchettis is being proposing is already being undertaken. For example, this year’s budget legislation requires the Public Education Department (PED) to monitor school and district budgets to ensure funding goes to the functions most likely to improve student outcomes.

Whitney Holland, president of the American Federation of Teachers noted that Lujan Grisham has a proven track record of accomplishment on education that goes beyond campaign promises.  That record includes a bipartisan bill that boosted the starting pay for teachers from $40,000 to $50,000, in addition to other increases.  The salary increases have made a real difference in recruitment of teachers.  According to Public Education Department data, upwards of 5,200 new teachers have joined the state’s education workforce in the recent fiscal year, up from fewer than 2,900 the year before.

Holland had this to say:

“We have seen her work firsthand. … Now is not the time to take our foot off the gas.”

The increase instructional time for students is already a priority of New Mexico policymakers and lawmakers who have made more funding available for programs that extend the school year, among other strategies.

https://www.abqjournal.com/2530262/ronchetti-pitches-his-plan-to-improve-nm-schools.html

https://www.koat.com/article/new-mexico-candidates-for-governor-education/41098849

FINAL COMMENTARY ANALYSIS

Mark Ronchetti’s Public Education Plan is as about as weak as it gets and it deserves a failing grade of “F”. When comes down to it, it is as if his education plan was hurriedly put together by someone with little or no knowledge of the state’s public education system and someone with no knowledge of the roles of locally elected school boards.  Before Republican Mark Ronchetti tries to offer anything more on improving the state’s public education system, it is suggested that he goes back to school and educate himself on the realities of public education and at least try to offer something more than just school vouchers.