On June 20, the New Mexico Sun published the following guest column provided by www.PeteDinelli.com:

HEADLINE: “APD two step on DOJ reforms justify need to remove sergeants and lieutenants from police union”

By Pete Dinelli
Jun 20, 2022

“APD is struggling mightily with implementation of 271 mandated reforms to eliminate APD’s “culture of aggression” found by the Department of Justice in 2014. APD has now taken 2 major steps forward and 2 major steps backwards in its continuing 7-year saga to come into compliance with the Court Approved Settlement Agreement (CASA).

On May 11, the Federal Monitor filed his 15th report. It was a dramatic reversal from the past 3 monitor’s reports. At the end of the reporting period, APD’s compliance levels are:

100% Primary Compliance
99% Secondary Compliance
70% Operational Compliance

When APD achieves a 95% compliance rate in the 3 identified compliance levels and maintains compliance for 2 consecutive years, the case can be dismissed.

The Federal Monitor tempered his findings when he wrote:

“The weak points of APD’s compliance efforts remain the same as they were in [the previous reports]: supervisors and mid-level command personnel continue to be the weak link when it comes to holding officers accountable for their in-field behavior. Until that issue is resolved, further increases in APD’s compliance levels will be difficult to attain.”

When the Federal Monitor released his 15th report, APD Police Chief Medina was quick to take credit for the latest improvements. Medina also set the goal for the department to be in full compliance with the settlement agreement in 2 years. Medina’s goal to attain full compliance within two years means the case will not be dismissed for at least 4 years with 2 years to achieve compliance and 2 more years of sustaining compliance.

On May 16, the External Force Investigation Team (EFIT) filed with the Federal Court its third Quarterly Report. EFIT found 102 out of the 229 , or 44.54%, of the APD Use of Force investigations closed by APD were out of compliance. EFIT also reported that as of April 22, 2022, EFIT and the Internal Affairs Force Division responded and opened investigations on 3,674 Use of Force incidents.

The EFIT report states:

“EFIT has serious concerns with the manner in which Internal Affairs Force Division first line supervisors [who are sergeants, lieutenants] are handling daily supervision of the Detectives in the Division. EFIT believes that this is clearly a first line supervisory issue that, if left uncorrected, will continue to render investigations out of compliance with the Process Narrative.”

The Federal Monitor, and now the EFIT, have found that APD sergeants and lieutenants are failing in the use of force investigations or who are resisting the reforms. In the 15th report, the Federal Monitor said:

“What remains to be done is to focus on APD’s sergeants, lieutenants, and commanders to ensure that APD’s major compliance systems are CASA-congruent and reflect department-established oversight of uses of force, oversight of day-to-day delivery of CASA-compliant services to the communities APD serves, and oversight of the compliance functions with respect to uses of force and day-to-day interactions with the public.”

Police sergeants and lieutenants cannot serve two masters of APD management and union that are in conflict when it comes to the reforms. To achieve compliance, sergeants and lieutenants need to be removed from the police union and made at will employees. The removal will allow APD management to take appropriate measures to ensure the reforms are accomplished and hold those who resist the reforms accountable.”

Pete Dinelli is a native of Albuquerque. He is a licensed New Mexico attorney with 27 years of municipal and state government service including as an assistant attorney general, assistant district attorney prosecuting violent crimes, city of Albuquerque deputy city attorney and chief public safety officer, Albuquerque city councilor, and several years in private practice. Dinelli publishes a blog covering politics in New Mexico: www.PeteDinelli.com.

POSTSCRIPT

ABOUT THE NEW MEXICO SUN

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

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

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

https://newmexicosun.com/

On Tuesday, June 21, Mayor Tim Keller and APD Chief Harold Medina held a news conference at Central and Third to announce a new law enforcement initiative they are calling “Targeted Enforcement Action Monitoring” or “TEAM” program. The new program will begin after July 4.

According to Don Tim Keller, extra police officers will be assigned to focus on traffic enforcement, DWIs, modified car exhaust citations, illegal firearms and to patrol parking lots where after parties and violence break out after the numerous bars close. The city will also be adding more streetlights and is planning to open a substation on Central between Third and Fourth in the Rosenwald Building by the end of the summer.

THERE’S A CATCH

Keller and Medina’s message to downtown businesses is that if you are concerned about crime and public safety issues and you want police protection, you need to pay extra for it. Mayor Tim Keller and APD Police Chief Harold Medina announced that they want businesses to contribute to a fund to pay for a program modeled after “chief’s overtime.”

Due to the officer shortage in Albuquerque, officers participating in this program will do so on a volunteer basis at first through the chief’s overtime program. Main Capo Chief Harold Medina explained that the TEAM program will build and expand off the Chief’s overtime program. Medina had this to say:

“The TEAM concept will build off of our Chief’s overtime program. What’s different about this is, in the past, we’ve always gone out and allocated resources to big box stores and protected one industry or one location. In a way it was hampering our ability to put the resources where we wanted to, to protect the whole city. So we did make adjustments to our chief’s overtime program earlier this year and we cut out our involvement at so many big box stores to ensure we would be prepared for this next step.”

According to Medina, this TEAM program will also be of no cost to the taxpayer. Instead, it will be funded by the city, downtown business owners, and private donations. Medina said he has noticed that the big box stores are hiring private security instead.

Typically, chief’s overtime consists of private businesses, organizations or event organizers paying for officers to be stationed in certain areas. In anticipation of the implementation of the plan, APD Chief Harold Medina began moving officers off assignments at big box stores.

Don Tim Keller had this to say:

“What we are announcing today Downtown is that we are going to do something very different. We are going to treat Downtown, essentially, like a neighborhood that has an acute crime problem. … Now I want to mention not all of the businesses are supporting this. … We want them to, we need them to. We have enough funding to get started and try this out this summer. That’s all the funding we have. But we hope we’re going to demonstrate how important this is and then we’ll get enough funding to run this year round.

Downtown all of a sudden is going to be a very different place in terms of a couple of things. We’re adding in lights all over downtown, including the alleys over the next six months, we also know that we’re going to be opening this new police station right in the middle of downtown and most importantly we’re adding desperately needed resources downtown at key times of the day and key days of the week.

The challenge is we are in a resource-constrained environment. … Downtown has to take control of their own future, too [ by creating a business improvement district.] … We’re there to help them and we’re going to get it started but they cannot be dependent on the City of Albuquerque to continue to do everything for them every year. … Because that is exactly why we’ve gotten into this spot right now.

Chief Capo Harold Medina was asked during the press conference why private businesses should be asked to pay for extra police presence instead of the city itself. Capo Medina said he must choose where to spend public funds and have to be fair to the rest of the city. Chief Capo Harold Medina had this to say:

“This is a way for people to fund Downtown, specifically, and not us devoting all our resources and money to just one specific part of town. … Because the moment I devote our resources and funding to Downtown, I guarantee there’s going to be another part of town asking ‘where’s my cut?’”

The use of the term “where’s my cut?” by Capo Medina is embarrassing but reflects that he thinks police protection is some sort of ill gotten gain a person in not entitled to.

Officials said PNM has contributed $15,000. So far there is a total of $90,000 pledged. President of the Greater Albuquerque Chamber of Commerce Terri Cole said the chamber supports the plan. Cole had this to say:

“We think this proposal helps level the playing field for smaller businesses in the Downtown area, which we’re obviously supportive of. … Right now businesses like Home Depot and Lowe’s pay chief’s overtime during the day and it seems reasonable to us that Downtown businesses ought to be able to use the same model.”

https://www.abqjournal.com/2510241/officials-announce-new-plan-to-address-downtown-crime.html

https://www.ksfr.org/criminal-justice/2022-06-21/downtown-albuquerque-gets-a-new-t-e-a-m-to-combat-crime

ALBUQUERQUE POLICE DEPARTMENT BUDGET

On May 16, the Albuquerque City Council voted 7 to 2 to approve the 2022-2023 city budget that will commence on July 1, 2022 and runs through to June 30, 2023. The overall budget approved by the Albuquerque City council is for $1.4 Billion and with $857 million in general fund Appropriations. The budget approved by the council was increased by 20% over the current year’s budget which ends June 10, 2022.

The Keller administration projected that the city will have over $100 million more in gross receipts tax to spend in 2023 than it budgeted for this year. Gross Receipts Tax is the tax assessed on the sale of most goods and services and GRT revenues have been much stronger than expected creating a balance of funding that can be applied to the 2022- 2023 budget cycle.

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.

APD PROJECTED TO HAVE $12,390,000 IN UNSPENT SWORN POLICE SALARIES AT END OF FISCAL YEAR 2023

On Thursday, April 28, the City Council “Committee of the Whole” held its budget hearing on the 2022-2023 proposed Albuquerque Police Department Budget. Capo APD Chief Harold Medina presented the budget for his department to the Council.

The link to the proposed 244-page 2022-2023 budget it here:

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

During the budget hearing, the city council was told that as of the week of April 15, APD had a mere 878 sworn officers. During each of the last 4 years, APD’s budget has provided full funding for 1,100. In an interview, Medina had this this to say:

“It’s going to be very difficult for us to get to 1,100 [sworn officers] … But we want to start laying the groundwork with extra PSAs and helping find proper support for our officers.”

Over the last 4 years of city budgets under Keller, the City’s Finance Department that prepares the yearly budget has budgeted enough money to pay for 1,100 officers in APD. During the April 28 budget hearing APD Chief Harold Medina acknowledged for the very first time that APD employing 1,100 sworn police is likely unrealistic. Medina told the city council that APD estimates that it will finish the fiscal year 2023 that begins on July 1, 2022 and ends on June 30, 2023 with just 982 officers.

According to City officials, budgeted sworn officer positions carry a price tag of upwards $105,000 apiece when you include base salaries and add benefits such as the city’s portion of retirement pay. That means if by next year’s end there are only 982 officers as Medina told the city council, and APD is budgeted for 1,100 sworn positions, 118 salaries will go unspent.

That translates into $12,390,000 in unspent salaries calculated as follows: 118 vacant positions at $105,000 a piece equals $12,390,000 salaries will accrue as unspent.

MEDINA WANTS TO USE $12.4 MILLION FOR OTHER PERSONNEL

APD Chief Harold Medina told the City Councilors he intends to use some of the money to hire more Police Service Aides (PSAs). Medina told the counselors:

“We know that’s the best pipeline for us to add officers to this department. The vast majority of our police service aides become officers.”

During the April 28 budget hearing, Republican City Councilor Dan Lewis questioned APD for more information on its budgeting strategy on using unspent sworn police officers’ salaries for other priorities. Lewis said this:

“I think it’s good for us to understand this is not a budget that [actually] funds 1,100 police officers. … We’re going to give you [funding for] 1,100 officers this year. We’re going to fund [the amount] just like we did last year. We’re continuing to do that, but I think at the very least what this council is going to need and want is a very specific breakdown of where those salary savings went because we didn’t hire those officers.”

The link to a related blog article is here:

https://www.petedinelli.com/2022/05/01/apd-projected-to-have-12390000-in-unspent-sworn-police-salaries-at-end-of-fiscal-year-2023-apd-has-20-fewer-sworn-police-officers-than-when-keller-and-medina-took-over-in-2017-13-pay-raises-fo/

CHIEF’S OVERTIME EXPLAINED

APD “Chief’s Overtime” is an APD overtime program where APD police officers work off-duty security assignments at businesses locations as Walmart, Target, gas stations and other local businesses or work special events. APD officers wear their APD uniforms and use city equipment to perform their security duties. The overtime can only be worked if approved by the Chief. The city receives between $57 and $77 an hour for each chief’s overtime shift worked, depending on the officer’s rank. Police officers from patrolman first class to lieutenants are paid between $31.32 an hour to $45.36 which is taken out of the Chief’s overtime paid with the balance kept by the city, with city essentially making a profit.

The arguments made in favor of Police Overtime include that it place officers out in the community while giving them an opportunity to make extra income using the valuable training and experience city taxpayers have invested in them. And the cost of their extra presence on the streets is more than covered by the businesses footing the bill. Arguments against Chief’s overtime is that the APD Force Review Board has found that officers working chief’s overtime are using force nearly 3 times more often. Further, working consecutive shifts of city shifts followed by Chief’s overtime shifts is a dangerous combination contributing to “burn out”.

The biggest problem with Chief’s Overtime is that it is essentially a program where city resources are being used to make a profit for the city. Any city program that uses public funded resources to make a profit is dangerous and is a ripe for corruption and severe public criticism and scrutiny. The now defunct city “red light camera” program and the defunct “vehicle forfeiture “ programs were two such programs.

DE JA VUE ALL OVER AGAIN

Almost 4 years ago on September 13, 2018, Mayor Tim Keller and the Albuquerque Police Department (APD) announced the creation of a “Downtown Public Safety District.” The creation of the “Downtown Public Safety District ”was in response to a petition drive by Downtown businesses and residents demanding such a substation. The substation for the Downtown Public Safety District is located at the Alvarado Transportation Center at First and Central SW. The location is a conversion of a prisoner transport holding area that required remodeling to remove jail cells.

The goal was to have more of a permanent police presence in Downtown Albuquerque. The congregation of the homeless in the area have been a chronic problem especially around the Alvarado Transportation Center. Consequently, a Crisis Intervention Team (CIT) was to be assigned to the district to address homelessness and behavioral health needs.

According to the City website, the Downtown Public Safety District is committed to the principles of community policing. The officers walk, bike and drive the streets and alleys of the core downtown (Lomas to Coal, Broadway to 12th Street). The don’t drive by, they walk in and know the business owners, residents, office workers, service providers and people on the streets. They partner with the community to increase safety, address problems, provide training, assist with medical or mental health transport, de-escalate situations, find solutions and create a positive downtown environment.

https://www.cabq.gov/echo

https://www.abqjournal.com/1219908/keller-unveils-new-downtown-public-safety-district.html

https://www.koat.com/article/mayor-we-re-trying-to-move-beyond-the-notion-of-a-band-aid-solution-for-downtown/23109157

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

The “Targeted Enforcement Action Monitoring” program requiring private funding is as about as messed up as any Mayor can get with police department. It is a program that will uses public funded resources, sworn police, to make a profit by charging the private sector for services rendered that it is already entitled to. The proposal to charge the public and private sector for law enforcement services they are entitled to is dangerous and is a ripe for corruption.

Simply put, APD is awash with unused funding that is dedicated to funding sworn police positions never filled. Public Safety and police protection are probably the most important city essential service that any city provides it citizens and which they pay for with taxes, yet Keller and Medina want private funding, telling Downtown business owners they need to take “control of their own future” which means in their eyes paying for police protection.

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 4 years at least, APD has been fully funded for 1,100 but APD has fallen short of that goal each year by 100 sworn police or more . At the time the 2023 budget was enacted there are were 875 sworn officers. During the budget hearing for APD, Capo APD Chief Medina said there was no way APD would end the 2023 fiscal year with 1,100 sworn police and that he intended to use the savings from not hiring upwards of 100 sworn police for other priorities. This excessive unused funding from police vacancies should be used to fund the “Target Enforcement Action Monitoring”.

Don Keller and his Capo Chief Medina telling downtown business that if they are concerned about crime and public safety issues and they want police protection, they must pay extra for it amounts to nothing more than a godfather like “shake down.” In making the request for donations to fund police, both essentially concede that they are failures in managing the personnel resources of the largest budgeted department in the city despite a 14.7% increase in APD’s annual budget which is $255.4 million.

With the enactment of a $1.4 Billion Budget, and with a $857 million general fund appropriations budget containing a $255.4 million APD budget, Keller and Medina should be ashamed of themselves asking for private funding for their “Targeted Enforcement Action Monitoring” program. It is projected that the city will have over $100 million more in gross receipts tax to spend in 2023 than it did last year, yet Keller and Medina proclaimed they are working in a resource-constrained environment.

The only constraint that really exists is in the inability of Mayor Tim Keller and Chief Harold Medina to manage APD resources. The fact that APD has a shortage of police officers is Keller’s and Medina’s fault, not the taxpayer’s fault, and is a result of their failure, some would say, incompetence to staff APD at the levels that have been fully funded.

Instead of kissing Keller’s ring and paying more for police protection, Downtown business owners should demand Keller and Medina deliver on the police protection they are already paying for.

________________________________________

POSTSCRIPT

On June 28, the Albuquerque Journal published the following editorial repeating many of the argument made in the Dinelli blog article above:

Editorial: ABQ’s Downtown police OT scheme like TV mob plot
BY ALBUQUERQUE JOURNAL EDITORIAL BOARD
PUBLISHED: TUESDAY, JUNE 28TH, 2022 AT 12:02AM
UPDATED: TUESDAY, JUNE 28TH, 2022 AT 10:40AM

It sounds a lot like a deal they can’t refuse: Pay police a little extra and they’ll protect your Downtown business. If it sounds somewhat shady, that’s because it’s the stuff of gangster movies and TV shows.

Mayor Tim Keller and Albuquerque Police Department leaders announced the scheme last week that involves businesses paying “chief’s overtime” to have officers stationed Downtown at night. Called “Targeted Enforcement Action Monitoring” it is set to begin July 4.

“Now I want to mention not all of the businesses are supporting this,” the mayor said during a Downtown news conference last week. “We want them to; we need them to.”

When questioned why private businesses should pay for extra police presence instead of the city, Police Chief Harold Medina said the city has to make choices: “This is a way for people to fund Downtown, specifically, and not us devoting all our resources and money to just one specific part of town.”
Stuart Dunlap, president and CEO of The Man’s Hat Shop, told KOAT-TV he already pays taxes for police protection.

“Businesses pay property taxes,” Dunlap said. “We pay business tax when you buy a business license. I don’t think that that’s the correct answer. Additional monies com(ing) from business owners Downtown is completely out of line.”

“For us to have to pay the government to protect us, I just don’t think it’s right,” added Jessica Zubia of Katrina’s Ice Cream Shop.

Never mind the city is experiencing a revenue boom. The city’s 2022-23 budget of $1.4 billion is about $200 million more than the current budget.

Or the city’s $857 million operating budget, which is supposed to cover most basic city services, will increase by about 20%. The bulging budget includes funding for a new police union contract that recently boosted police pay by 8% and will bump it another 5% in July.

Or APD’s $255.4 million budget funds 1,100 sworn police officers when it has just 888. Why not use that unspent money if the brass think more overtime is a good idea?

Never mind the city budget doubles spending on Albuquerque Community Safety and funds 74 new positions for the fledgling unit to take calls related to public inebriation and homelessness.

Or the COVID-19 pandemic has caused about 40% of small businesses to close, taking a heavy toll on Albuquerque’s Downtown. And patrons of Downtown businesses will be the ultimate losers when the cost of a hot dog hits $10 and a beer goes for $15.

At its core, it is just wrong to shake down businesses for police protection.

Keller says Downtown businesses must take control of their own future. That attitude ignores government’s, in this case the city’s, basic responsibility to maintain law and order and will have a chilling effect on new businesses locating Downtown.

Keller also says the Downtown officers — and they are not extra officers, as they are coming from the same limited pool of trained, sworn law enforcement professionals — will be able to focus on things like illegal firearms and fights in parking lots when the bars close. But that type of “chief’s overtime” — for which the city in December 2020 received between $57 and $72 an hour for each shift — is a lot more high stress than simply managing traffic after a large church service or athletics event. It adds the risk of burning our officers out even faster.

Focusing “chief’s overtime” on officers working extra hours Downtown also means they aren’t available for OT in other neighborhoods in an endless game of Whac-A-Mole. What happens if, say, the Winrock/ABQ Uptown area offers to pay more? Only those who pay get police presence?

The bottom line is APD needs to recruit and hire more officers so it can perform the basic functions it’s more than adequately funded to do.

Downtown has to be saved, but Keller and Medina need to come up with something better than pulling a scheme from a mob script and sticking businesses with the bill.

This editorial first appeared in the Albuquerque Journal. It was written by members of the editorial board and is unsigned as it represents the opinion of the newspaper rather than the writers.

https://www.abqjournal.com/2512102/webhedline-96.html

On June 22, Albuquerque City Councilor Brook Bassan made a “front page” apology to her constituents as she reversed her support the day before on city sanctioned homeless camps known as “Safe Outdoor Spaces.” In doing so, she lost credibility by showing a remarkable ignorance of what her constituents want and what the city is actually doing to combat the homeless crisis. She also showed a serious misunderstanding of the Albuquerque Police Department, the Department of Justice Reforms and the critical role law enforcement must play.

FRONT PAGE COVERAGE

On June 22, the Albuquerque Journal on its front page, above the fold with the headline “Bassan pulls back support for proposed outdoor sites” and sub headline “City councilor calls earlier vote backing safe spaces a mistake”, with a color photo of the councilor, published its report that read in part as follows:

“An Albuquerque city councilor is apologizing to her constituents for supporting safe outdoor spaces and says she is now working to fix her “mistake.”

Councilor Brook Bassan says she will introduce legislation to undo the council’s recent adoption of safe outdoor spaces – organized sites where people who are homeless can legally live in tents and vehicles.

Bassan, who represents the Northeast Heights, was among the “yes” votes earlier this month when the council voted 5-4 to approve safe outdoor spaces as part of Albuquerque’s annual zoning code update. She had voiced support for giving people who are homeless another option, saying both on the council dais and in a Journal op-ed that it was worthwhile to attempt something new because the current situation is untenable.

But on Tuesday she announced she is planning bills to repeal the safe outdoor space language the council incorporated into the Integrated Development Ordinance. Since that is a lengthy process, she will also propose a separate one-year moratorium on any safe outdoor space approvals.

She said her backtracking is due to public outcry combined with her growing concern that the plan was not fully formed and that it would not lead the city – as some had hoped – to step up enforcement of illegal camping and trespassing.
…
Bassan said her backtracking was due to public outcry combined with her growing concern that the plan was not fully formed and that it would not lead APD to step up enforcement of illegal camping and trespassing.

Bassan met strong community opposition to safe outdoor spaces last week during a neighborhood meeting in her district. She said people who live around North Domingo Baca Park were under the false impression that an encampment was planned near the park. Though the zoning regulations the council had approved would have enabled a safe outdoor space in that area, she said none was planned or even discussed.”

BASSAN STATEMENTS MADE IN EXPLAINING REVERSAL

Bassan in a written statement and in other comments to news media outlets had this to about her reversal and now opposition to Safe Outdoor Spaces:

“I have always promised that, if I ever made a mistake such as this, I would apologize and work to correct my action. … I am sorry for not registering your opposition to this idea sooner.

I’m not saying safe outdoor spaces are bad and we can’t do it, but – and I wish I would’ve come to this conclusion a lot earlier – it’s definitely something that needs more answers, like what the other councilors have mentioned. Clearly the public is not ready for it as it stands, and it’s my job to listen to them.

I don’t think that it is something that we need to implement at this time. I think it is important to listen to the constituents of Albuquerque and hear what they are saying. …

I was very supportive of sanctioned encampments when I was under the impression that we would have a stronger and more capable ability to enforce the laws that currently exist.

We need more officers, we need the Department of Justice to leave Albuquerque because we are in compliance as a department as in a city, we need to do more for drug addiction and behavioral health treatment and services. We need to increase housing, we need to increase security for everyone in Albuquerque and that’s going to take working together.”

Bassan downplayed “safe outdoor spaces” when she said the City Council has put so many “barriers” in the zoning code that may have been more of an idea than a reality and said this:

“I would be surprised if these ever actually came about in the first place because Albuquerque has a really strong tendency to get in [its] own way. ”

MAYOR TIM KELLER ADMINISTRATION REACTS

Mayor Tim Keller spokeswoman Ava Montoya criticized Bassan’s reversal in a statement by saying this:

“Vacillating by passing legislation and then immediately repealing it doesn’t help anyone. … Council is the land use authority for our city and we need them to put forward solutions. Right now, when Coronado Park is cleared every two weeks, people have nowhere to go except right back to the park, and that won’t change without solutions from Council.”

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

https://www.abqjournal.com/2510096/bassan-pulls-back-support-for-safe-outdoor-spaces.html

Links to other quoted news sources are here:

https://www.krqe.com/news/politics-government/albuquerque-city-councilor-changes-stance-on-homeless-encampments-after-pushback/

https://www.kob.com/new-mexico/neighbors-city-councilor-protest-outdoor-safe-spaces-plan/#:~:text=The%20%E2%80%9COutdoor%20Safe%20Spaces%E2%80%9D%20plan,for%20the%20city’s%20homeless%20population.

ORGANIZED PROTEST

“Women Taking Back Our Neighborhoods” (WTBON) is a citizen activist group founded in 2018 in the Albuquerque South East Heights to inform the public and demand greater accountability from elected and other civic leaders for preventing crime on Central Ave., in neighborhoods, and in public parks.

On Tuesday, June 21 “Women Taking Back Our Neighborhoods” held a protest on the corner of Academy and Eubank to protest the City of Albuquerque’s Council vote to institutionalize “Safe Open Spaces” and Motel Conversions in the City’s Zoning Code.

WTBON stated in a press release:

“As proposed, the city could designate two “Open Space” lots for each district, for a total of 18 lots in the city, and an untold number of motel conversions for unvetted homeless individuals coming to Albuquerque for the social benefits provided by the Family and Community Services Dept. The concept has never been brought to citizens for a vote, and the city does not have a plan of action in place, nor a budget for its implementation, which will be a tremendous amount of money as yet undefined which tax-payers will be responsible for. Considering the failure of the Tiny Homes to attract drug-free, homeless individuals to the campus, a city plan of 18 “Safe Open Spaces” will be another disastrous idea by the City that forces taxpayers to foot the bill and live with the consequences of crime to businesses and neighborhoods, decreasing property values and new residents, and reducing tourism.”

During the June 21 protest, Colleen Aycock, the leader of ‘“Women Taking Back Our Neighborhoods” said “Safe Outdoor Spaces” will not work and she had this to say:

“There are solutions, but the solutions aren’t in tents. We need residential living situations and those living situations are number one incarceration, if you’re a criminal you need to go to jail. if you have a drug behavioral problem you need to go to a treatment facility.”

The link to quotes news source is here:

https://www.kob.com/new-mexico/neighbors-city-councilor-protest-outdoor-safe-spaces-plan/#:~:text=The%20%E2%80%9COutdoor%20Safe%20Spaces%E2%80%9D%20plan,for%20the%20city’s%20homeless%20population.

SAFEOUTDOOR SPACES EXPLAINED

On June 6, the Albuquerque City Council enacted upwards of 100 amendments updating the Integrated Development Ordinance (IDO). The IDO update legislation passed on a 5 to 4 vote. Democrat City Counselors Isaac Benton, Tammy Fiebelcorn, Pat Davis and Republicans Trudy Jones and Brook Bassan voted YES to approve all of the IDO update amendments. Democrats Klarissa Pena, Louie Sanchez and Republicans Dan Lewis and Renee Grout voted NO. The city sanctioned homeless encampment amendment called “Safe Outdoor “Spaces” was co-sponsored by Republican City councilors Brook Bassan and Trudy Jones and Democrat Isaac Benton.

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

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

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

The map reveals a large concentration of eligible open space area that lies between San Pedro and the railroad tracks, north of Menaul to the city’s northern boundary. The map reveals that the encampments could be put at next to the Big-I, the northeast heights, and on the west side not far from homes. The map does not account for religious institutions that may want to use their properties for living lots or safe outdoor spaces.

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

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

On June 6 when the Safe Outdoor Space Amendment was presented to the City Council, 17 spoke out against it with only 4 supporting it. The council approved the plan with conditions. Those conditions include that no more than 18 camps in the city at one time and no more than two in a specific area of town will be allowed. Registered sex offenders will also not be able to stay in them.

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

CITY FUNDING

The City of Albuquerque has adopted the Housing First policy as mandated by the Homeless Emergency Assistance and Rapid Transition to Housing Act (HEARTH Act) in order to secure federal funding. The HEARTH Act provides that in order to receive federal dollars, cities must adopt a “housing first” policy and, crucially, that homeless organizations had to work together in “continuums of care” under a single lead agency, coordinating their programs and sharing data.

On May 16, the Albuquerque City Council voted to approve the 2022-2023 fiscal year city budget which will begin on July 1,2022 . The 2022-2023 approved city budget provides major funding of upwards of $60 Million to deal with the homeless. Included in the adopted budget is funding for Safe Community programs that deal with issues such as substance abuse, homelessness, domestic violence and youth opportunity. Following is a listing of approved funding:

• $24 million in Emergency Rental Assistance from the federal government, which the City will make available in partnership with the State.

• $4 million in recurring funding and $2 million in one-time funding for supportive housing programs in the City’s Housing First model. In addition, as recommended by the Mayor’s Domestic Violence Task Force, the budget includes $100 thousand for emergency housing vouchers for victims of intimate partner violence.

• $4.7 million net to operate the City’s first Gateway Center at the Gibson Medical Facility, including revenue and expenses for facility and program operations.

• $500 thousand to fund Albuquerque Street Connect, a program that focuses on people experiencing homelessness who use the most emergency services and care, to establish ongoing relationships that result in permanent supportive housing.

• $1.3 million for a Medical Respite facility at Gibson Health Hub, which will provide acute and post-acute care for persons experiencing homelessness who are too ill or frail to recover from a physical illness or injury on the streets but are not sick enough to be in a hospital.

• Full funding for the Westside Emergency Housing Center which is operated close to full occupancy for much of the year. On October 23, 2019, it was announced that Albuquerque’s West Side Emergency Housing Center was expanded to provide a coordinated approach to homelessness. The homeless use that facility to get medical care, treatment for addiction and behavioral health, job placement and case management services. The west side shelter now has the University of New Mexico Health Sciences Center, Presbyterian Hospital and Alburquerque Health Care for the Homeless providing medical services two days a week. It also has case management services being provided by Centro Savila, funded by Bernalillo County. Job placement opportunities are being provided by workforce connections.

• $500 thousand to fund the development of a technology system that enables the City and providers to coordinate on the provision of social services to people experiencing homelessness and behavioral health challenges.

The Fiscal Year 2023 budget includes the following funding for Safe Community programs:

• $1.8 million to develop what will be Albuquerque’s only medical substance abuse facility dedicated to youths likely housed at the Gibson Health Hub.

• Full funding for the Violence Intervention Program that deals with both APD and Family & Community Services departments, including the first phase of School-Based VIP in partnership with APS.

• $730 thousand for a partial year of operation of a Medical Sobering Center at Gibson Health Hub, which will complement the social model sobering facilities available at the County’s CARES campus.

• Full funding for service contracts for mental health, substance abuse, early intervention and prevention programs, domestic violence shelters and services, sexual assault services, health and social service center providers, and services to abused, neglected and abandoned youth.

The link to the enacted 2022-2023 proposed budget is here:

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

COMMENTARY ANALYSIS

Republican City Councilor Brook Bassan is commended for doing the right thing by scrapping her support of Safe Outdoor Spaces. Now it’s up to the rest of the city council as well as Mayor Tim Keller to do the right thing and back off totally on making any attempt at implementing Safe Outdoor Spaces.

There never was anything temporary about “city sanctioned” encampments with “safe outdoor spaces”. Allowing 18 “safe outdoor spaces” would be a major setback for the city and its current policy of Housing First seeking permanent shelter and housing as the solution to the homeless crisis

CITY FUNDING AND EFFORTS IGNORED

Throughout all discussions of the “Safe Outdoor Spaces” debate, not a word was spoken by any City Councilor nor Mayor Keller of the millions being spent each year to deal with the homeless crisis. Much of the funding the city gets to help the homeless comes in the form of federal grants under HEARTH Act. “Safe Outdoor Spaces” violates the city’s “Housing First Policy” in that “Safe Outdoor Spaces” are not permanent housing and will place into jeopardy federal funding. What is troubling is that Mayor Keller and the City Council in all likely have no idea if “Safe Outdoor Spaces” places federal funding in jeopardy.

Last year, the city spent upwards of $40 million to benefit the homeless in housing and services. The 2023 proposed budget significantly increases funding for the homeless by going from $35,145,851 to $59,498,915. The city contracts with 10 separate homeless service providers throughout the city and it funds the Westside 24-7 homeless shelter.

The city has bought the 572,000-square-foot Lovelace Hospital Complex on Gibson for $15 million that currently has space of 200 beds or more and transforming it into the Gateway Center Homeless shelter. City officials have said that the city is expected to launch multiple services on the property this winter, including a 50-bed women’s shelter, a sobering center and a space designed to deliver “medical respite” care for individuals who would have no place other than a hospital to recover from illnesses and injury. The massive facility could be remodeled even further to house the homeless and convert offices, treating rooms, operating rooms and treatment rooms into temporary housing accommodations. The onsite auditorium and cafeteria could also be utilized for counseling and feeding programs for service providers.

When City Councilor Brook Bassan says “… we need to do more for drug addiction and behavioral health treatment and services. We need to increase housing … “ she showed a remarkable ignorance of the fact the for the last 4 years the city has been scrambling to do just what she wants. She ostensibly does not realize she has already voted for such funding, yet she proclaims the city needs to do more.

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE REFORMS

It is downright pathetic that City Councilor Brook Bassan essentially lied about APD’s progress with implementing the Court Approved Settlement reforms. She did so as a means of trying to rehabilitate her reputation with her constituents and the mistake she made with her support of Safe Outdoor Spaces.

Bassan shot off her mouth with falsehoods to justify her reversal of her support of safe outdoor spaces when she said:

“We need more officers, we need the Department of Justice to leave Albuquerque because we are in compliance as a department as in a city … .”

APD is struggling mightily with implementation of 271 mandated reforms to eliminate APD’s “culture of aggression” found by the Department of Justice in 2014. The truth is APD is a longways off from being in compliance with the Department of Justice reforms. APD also has an extensive history of making significant increases in compliance levels only to experience significant decreases in those compliance levels.

On May 11, the Federal Monitor filed his 15th report. It was a dramatic reversal from the past 3 monitor’s reports. At the end of the reporting period, APD’s compliance levels are:

100% Primary Compliance
99% Secondary Compliance
70% Operational Compliance

When APD achieves a 95% compliance rate in the 3 identified compliance levels and maintains compliance for 2 consecutive years, the case can be dismissed.

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

When the Federal Monitor released his 15th report, APD Police Chief Medina was quick to take credit for the latest improvements. Medina also set the goal for the department to be in full compliance with the settlement agreement in 2 years. Medina’s goal to attain full compliance within two years means the case will not be dismissed for at least 4 years with 2 years to achieve compliance and 2 more years of sustaining compliance.

CONCLUSION

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

Too many elected and government officials, like Mayor Tim Keller and City Counselors Isaac Benton, Tammy Fiebelcorn, Pat Davis and Trudy Jones and Brook Bassan who voted for Safe Outdoor Spaces and who want to establish government sanction encampments have a hard time dealing with the fact that many homeless adults simply want to live their life as they choose, where they want to camp for as long as they can get away with it, without any government nor family interference and especially no government rules and no regulations.

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

The city has a moral obligation to help the homeless who suffer from mental illness and drug addiction. The city is in fact meeting that moral obligation with the millions it spending each year and huge financial commitment to help the homeless. The city needs to continue with the approach of offering programs, building shelter space and making beds available for its homeless population.

As for the political career of Brook Bassan, she is up for re election to a second term in 2023. Apologies from politicians are usually never enough to fully regain the trust of constituents they once experienced. What remains to be seen is if her front page apology was enough and if she has time to rehabilitate her reputation and get back the trust of her constituents to avoid opposition next year.

NEWS UPDATE

On June 22, two bills were introduced at City Council by Brook Bassan that could eventually repeal safe outdoor spaces. The city council also rejected on a 4 to 5 to kill the resolution that would have required city staff to develop operating procedures for safe outdoor spaces. Bassan was joined Renee Grout, Dan Lewis, Klarissa Peña and Louie Sanchez to kill the operating rules bill. Notwithstanding the rejection of the operating rules, the Integrated Development Ordinance amendment updates that allow for Safe Outdoor Spaces will take effect. Safe outdoor spaces may be allowed in Albuquerque as soon as August 1. Bassan in a statement said in a written statement she did not see that as a real possibility, given the number of elements an operator would have to have in place to actually launch one. The City Council will now be on summer break until August.

https://www.abqjournal.com/2510597/council-rejects-bill-for-safe-outdoor-space-planning-ex-councilor-is.html

On June 20, Albuquerque Republican City Council Brook Bassan, in a stunning reversal of support, announced by email to her constituents her withdrawal and sponsorship of the “Safe Outdoor Spaces” amendment to the Integrated Development Ordinance.

City Council Brook Bassan sent her constituents the following email:

District 4
June 20, 2022, at 7:59 PM
Subject: Re: Homeless Solution

“Good evening,

Please see the written statement I have drafted below. I plan on a formal press release tomorrow and a potential press conference Wednesday.

I am seeking to repeal the law enabling sanctioned encampments.

I initially supported sanctioned encampments based on the understanding that existing vagrancy, loitering, trespassing and overnight camping laws would be enforced once we created the sanctioned encampments. However, upon hearing Mayor Tim Keller’s recent press conference statements, it has become clear that this enforcement is highly unlikely to occur. That means creating sanctioned encampments won’t work.

Additionally, I have heard your voice in opposition to sanctioned encampments. I have always promised to listen to my constituents and then act on their behalf.

In order to repeal the law, I am introducing two separate pieces of legislation at Wednesday’s City Council meeting. The first is a one-year moratorium on all Safe Outdoor Spaces approvals so that none can be approved in the near future. The second bill is a repeal of all references to Safe Outdoor Spaces from our zoning ordinances.

Since being elected, I have been focused on implementing solutions to reduce crime and homelessness. Safe Outdoor Spaces was an idea to force homeless encampments from our neighborhoods and towards behavioral health services. You have helped me understand that this idea is not a workable solution and needs to be abandoned.

I have always promised that, if I ever made a mistake such as this, I would apologize and work to correct my action. I am sorry for not registering your opposition to this idea sooner. Moving forward, I will work even harder to represent your voice in City government. I will continue to focus on supporting our police department’s ability to enforce existing laws, increasing the availability of behavioral health services, and providing rental assistance to those at risk for experiencing homelessness.

Thank you for reaching out to me. I promise to continue to listen and represent your voice.”

Brook Bassan
Albuquerque City Councilor

THROWING MAYOR TIM KELLER UNDER THE BUS

When Councilor Bassan says “… upon hearing Mayor Tim Keller’s recent press conference statements, it has become clear that this enforcement is highly unlikely to occur. That means creating sanctioned encampments won’t work” what she is referring to are comments made by Mayor Tim Keller on June 14.

On June 14, it was reported that a 4th murder in 2 years occurred at Coronado Park. In response to the questioning about the shooting and what his Administration was doing about the homeless, Keller said he and the city has plans for addressing homelessness. Those plans include the long-awaited Gateway Center shelter and services center at the old Lovelace hospital. Keller said the Gateway Center project has been delayed due to neighborhood opposition and a “never-ending purgatory of policy”. Mayor Keller also noted that the city plans include “safe outdoor spaces” as part of its plans to deal with the homeless.

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

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

Link to quoted news source material:

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

CORONADO PARK

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

At any given time, Coronado Park will have 70 to 80 tents crammed into the park with homeless wondering the area. It comes with and extensive history lawlessness including drug use, violence, murder, rape and mental health issues. In 2020, there were 3 homicides at Coronado Park. In 2019, a disabled woman was raped, and in 2018 there was a murder.

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

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

The link to a related blog article entitled “Another Murder At Coronado Park; Park Is Symbol Of Tim Keller’s Failure To Deal With Homeless Crisis; City Council Should Declare Coronado Park A Public Nuisance, Enact Resolution Calling For Permanent Closure And Fencing Off With A Rededication Of Purpose” is here:

https://www.petedinelli.com/2022/06/15/another-murder-at-coronado-park-park-is-symbol-of-tim-kellers-failure-to-deal-with-homeless-crisis-city-council-should-declare-coronado-park-a-public-nuisance-enact-resolution-callin/

“SAFE OUTDOOR SPACES” AMENDMENT

On June 6, the Albuquerque City Council enacted upwards of 100 amendments updating the Integrated Development Ordinance. The legislation passed on a 5 to 4 vote. Democrat City Counselors Isaac Benton, Tammy Fiebelcorn, Pat Davis and Republicans Trudy Jones and Brook Bassan voted yes to approve the amendments. Democrats Klarissa Pena, Louie Sanchez and Republicans Dan Lewis and Renee Grout voted no.

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

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

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

The map reveals a large concentration of eligible open space area that lies between San Pedro and the railroad tracks, north of Menaul to the city’s northern boundary. The map reveals that the encampments could be put at next to the Big-I, the northeast heights, and on the west side not far from homes. The map does not account for religious institutions that may want to use their properties for living lots or safe outdoor spaces.

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

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

On June 6 when the Safe Outdoor Space Amendment was presented to the City Council, 17 spoke out against it with only 4 supporting it. The council approved the plan with conditions. Those conditions include that no more than 18 camps in the city at one time and no more than two in a specific area of town will be allowed. Registered sex offenders will also not be able to stay in them.

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

COUNCILOR BASSAN LOSES CREDIBITY SCRAMBLING TO DEFEND SAFE OUTDOOR SPACES

On June 16, a neighborhood association meeting was held in the far North East Heights City Council District 4 represented by first term Republican City Councilor Brook Bassan. The neighborhood association meeting was a regularly scheduled meeting that Bassan agreed to speak to discuss efforts to combat crime. A post on the Nextdoor app prompted a record turnout at the meeting. The Nestdoor App named a potential location for the recently passed “safe outdoor space” as North Domingo Baca Park. The map of potential locations for safe outdoor spaces was shown to city councilors and it included the lot in question near North Domingo Park.

The meeting degenerated into a heated discussion of Bassan’s support of “Safe Outdoor Spaces”. Bassan told those attending the association meeting that there are no plans in the northeast heights for “Safe Outdoor Spaces”.

When Bassan spoke to the angry residents, she said in part:

“Hello everybody I know you’re all angry at me. Let me explain. [This is case of miscommunication.] It’s not going to happen two in every single district, it’s not going to happen overnight and I can guarantee you it was never going to happen near residential properties, at businesses in Albuquerque that are nearby here and certainly not south of North Domingo Baca Park. It was never, ever, ever a proposal. … The zoning here would technically allow that. … Technically allow that. The City of Albuquerque would be able to choose which properties if we decided to do it.”

“[Safe Outdoor Spaces] was an answer to the community saying ‘We don’t want encampments in front of our businesses, at city parks, in front of our homes, on private property anywhere in the city.’ I am supportive of creating a lot where people, who want to live in a tent, for whatever their reason is, have to go to that designated location instead of just anywhere in Albuquerque – which would, in turn, allow APD to start actually being able to enforce the laws to a fuller extent.”

Notwithstanding Bassans assurances, those attending the neighborhood association meeting made it clear to Bassan they did not want any talk of sanctioned homeless camps in their neighborhoods.

https://www.kob.com/new-mexico/albuquerque-city-officials-clarify-homeless-camp-plans/

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

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

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

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

Republican City Councilor Brook Bassan is commended for doing the right thing by scrapping her support of Safe Outdoor Spaces. Now it’s up to the rest of the city council as well as Mayor Tim Keller to do the right thing and back off totally on making any attempt at implementing Safe Outdoor Spaces.

There never was anything temporary about “city sanctioned” encampments with “safe outdoor spaces”. Allowing 18 “safe outdoor spaces” would be a major setback for the city and its current policy of seeking permanent shelter and housing as the solution to the homeless crisis.

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

Too many elected and government officials, like Mayor Tim Keller and City Counselors Isaac Benton, Tammy Fiebelcorn, Pat Davis and Trudy Jones who voted for Safe Outdoor Spaces and who want to establish government sanction encampments have a hard time dealing with the fact that many homeless adults simply want to live their life as they choose, where they want to camp for as long as they can get away with it, without any government nor family interference and especially no government rules and no regulations.

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

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

The city has bought the 572,000-square-foot Lovelace Hospital Complex on Gibson for $15 million that currently has space of 200 beds or more and transforming it into the Gateway Center Homeless shelter. City officials have said that the city is expected to launch multiple services on the property this winter, including a 50-bed women’s shelter, a sobering center and a space designed to deliver “medical respite” care for individuals who would have no place other than a hospital to recover from illnesses and injury. The massive facility could be remodeled even further to house the homeless and convert offices, treating rooms, operating rooms and treatment rooms into temporary housing accommodations. The onsite auditorium and cafeteria could also be utilized for counseling and feeding programs for service providers.

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

COUNCIL CAN ACT TO RECONSIDER

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

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

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

PRTOEST ANNOUNCED BY WOMEN TAKING BACK OUR NEIGHBORHOODS

“Women Taking Back Our Neighborhoods” (WTBON), is a group founded in 2018 in the Albuquerque South East Heights to inform the public and demand greater accountability from elected and other civic leaders for preventing crime on Central Ave., in neighborhoods, and in our public parks.
WTBON has announced a protest to be held on Tuesday June 21. The following press release was issued:

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

“Women Taking Back Our Neighborhoods” (WTBON) will be meeting on the corner of Academy and Eubank, Tuesday, June 21, from 11:00 am to 1:00 pm, to protest the City of Albuquerque’s Council vote to institutionalize “Safe Open Spaces” and Motel Conversions in the City’s Zoning Code. The public is invited to stand with us.

As proposed, the city could designate two “Open Space” lots for each district, for a total of 18 lots in the city, and an untold number of motel conversions for unvetted homeless individuals coming to Albuquerque for the social benefits provided by the Family and Community Services Dept. The concept has never been brought to citizens for a vote, and the city does not have a plan of action in place, nor a budget for its implementation, which will be a tremendous amount of money as yet undefined which tax-payers will be responsible for. Considering the failure of the Tiny Homes to attract drug-free, homeless individuals to the campus, a city plan of 18 “Safe Open Spaces” will be another disastrous idea by the City that forces taxpayers to foot the bill and live with the consequences of crime to businesses and neighborhoods, decreasing property values and new residents, and reducing tourism.

WTBON urges all City Councilors to vote NO for Safe Open Spaces and Motel Conversions.

On Sunday, June 19, the Albuquerque Journal published an editorial on the City Council’s and Mayor Keller’s recent enactment and support of “Safe Outdoor Spaces” to deal with the homeless and to provide city sanctioned homeless encampments. Following is the entire, unedited editorial followed with further Dinelli commentary and analysis:

HEADLINE: 18 MORE CORONADO PARKS? Sanctioned encampments are supposed to clean up city, not sacrifice areas

BY ALBUQUERQUE JOURNAL EDITORIAL BOARD
PUBLISHED: SUNDAY, JUNE 19TH, 2022 AT 12:02AM
UPDATED: SUNDAY, JUNE 19TH, 2022 AT 12:15AM

“Sometimes the unvarnished truth just seeps out.

At a news conference Tuesday afternoon unrelated to the bland topic of the presser, Mayor Tim Keller made a stark acknowledgement when asked about the latest homicide at the city’s troubled Coronado Park.

“It is not lost on me that we created Coronado Park because Wells Park said, ‘We don’t want these folks in our neighborhood,’ and we agree with them,” the mayor said. “And that’s why they were all grouped to one area.”

So, there it was. The mayor said out loud what people who live and work near Third and Interstate 40 have complained about for years: Their neighborhood park was sacrificed to a tent city plagued by violence, drugs and filth to save another neighborhood.

“You can’t have it both ways,” Keller continued. “You want to close Coronado Park, you are going to open all of Wells Park neighborhood to something none of us want to see.”

Um, that’s not what the public was told when the City Council pushed through its “safe outdoor spaces” encampments plan. That proposal was pitched as the only way to be able to clean up cesspools like Coronado Park and get the unhoused off the sidewalks, out of the arroyos and parks and into sanctioned encampments with basic security, improved sanitary conditions and a path to services and more permanent housing.

It was not sold as a way to move the deck chairs on the Titanic.

The deplorable conditions at Coronado Park preceded Keller’s administration, though the pandemic and troubled economy have certainly exacerbated the number of people struggling with homelessness. And it has fallen on this city administration to finally address them.

After a long and contentious meeting on June 6 the Albuquerque City Council paved the way for sanctioned encampments, euphemistically termed “safe outdoor spaces,” in an attempt to get a grip on the homeless situation. The update to the city’s Integrated Development Ordinance, adopted by a 5-4 vote, adds safe outdoor spaces as a new use in certain nonresidential and mixed-use zones.

We’re officially told the safe outdoor spaces will be managed sites, up to two in each of the nine council districts, where people can sleep in tents or automobiles over the long-term while waiting for motel conversions or affordable housing. Each would have on-site restrooms and shower facilities.

Some city councilors say the city will be better able to enforce loitering, trespassing and overnight camping laws throughout the city if it has designated spaces for the homeless.

But until Tuesday we were apparently not given all the facts. Keller’s unbridled candor revealed that for years the homeless have essentially been funneled to Coronado Park like cattle through a chute and the city premeditated its surrender of the neighborhood to lawlessness.

So with up to 18 “safe outdoor spaces” now on the table, the public deserves to know: How many more neighborhoods will be sacrificed? And will replicating versions of Coronado Park be allowed?

Just last week a 33-year-old man was fatally shot there. It’s unclear if Andrew Aguilar lived at the unsanctioned encampment, but he was there at 2:30 a.m. Tuesday, and it’s where he died.

Aguilar’s slaying was the fourth homicide at or within a block of Coronado Park since 2019. No telling how many beatings, rapes and drug deals have gone down there, but the cleanup costs tell part of the story.

Every other week taxpayers’ foot the $27,154 bill for a multi-department team to temporarily clear and clean the park — and that’s not even a deep clean. How many discarded needles are buried and missed? It would take rotary tilling and a Hazmat team with metal detectors to make the park safe to use.

The sanctioned camp amendment bans registered sex offenders. But who’s going to enforce that? The same people who don’t enforce widespread illegal camping, that’s who.

Meanwhile Coronado Park’s homeless move a block or two away during the cleanups but immediately return in a perpetual game of cat-and-mouse. Others do drugs on the sidewalk or sleep under tarps along Third.

Open fires on sidewalks and in the park are not rare. And while there are homeless folks camping in every quadrant of the city, the Coronado Park neighborhood has become what Keller succinctly describes, the de facto location for everything negative that goes along with the desperate, lawless life of living on the streets: “Something none of us want to see.”

The mayor says along with the much-hyped Gateway Center shelter, safe outdoor spaces can help address homelessness. Great — but we repeat our qualified support that these are supposed to be clean and safe and in place of sleeping in parks, on sidewalks and in doorways, ditches and alleys; not filthy and dangerous and in addition to.

It’s not OK for anyone to live in squalid conditions on public property with the city’s OK — even if they want to.

We need to offer the unhoused safe and sanitary places to live temporarily while they get their lives in order, like the Westside Emergency Housing Center, the Gateway Center and Bernalillo County’s Tiny Home Village.

No one would want anyone they cared about living in or near the danger zone that is Coronado Park. We certainly don’t need 18 more of the same.

The link to the Albuquerque Journal editorial is here:

https://www.abqjournal.com/2509300/webhedline-90.html

THE FEDERAL HEARTH ACT

In May 2009, Congress passed the Homeless Emergency Assistance and Rapid Transition to Housing commonly known as the HEARTH Act. It is the the largest source of funding for homeless assistance programs and grants for city, county and state governments. The HEARTH Act accelerated the shift from temporary housing shelter to a “Housing First” policy. Housing First focuses on helping people experiencing homelessness get into permanent housing as quickly as possible, rather than conditioning permanent housing on sobriety, treatment, employment, or other milestones.

The HEARTH Act helped entrench federal support for Housing First and expanded the availability of permanent housing beyond people experiencing chronic homelessness to families, youth, and nondisabled, single adults. It authorized funds for rapid re-housing assistance to help people move into permanent housing and increase their incomes so they can remain housed without a long-term subsidy.

HEARTH expanded the definition of who should be considered homeless to include people at imminent risk of homelessness, previously homeless people temporarily in institutional settings, unaccompanied youth and families with persistent housing instability, and people fleeing or attempting to flee domestic violence.

The HEARTH Act provides that in order to receive federal dollars, cities must adopt a “housing first” policy and, crucially, that homeless organizations had to work together in “continuums of care” under a single lead agency, coordinating their programs and sharing data. The federal government had recommended these continuums of care since 1994, but not until the Hearth Act was funding tied to specific metrics of effectiveness.

Links to quoted news source material are here:

“Five Ways the HEARTH Act Changed Homelessness Assistance”

https://www.urban.org/urban-wire/five-ways-hearth-act-changed-homelessness-assistance#:~:text=In%20May%202009%2C%20Congress%20passed,funding%20for%20homeless%20assistance%20programs.

“How Houston Moved 25,000 People From the Streets Into Homes of Their Own”

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/06/14/headway/houston-homeless-people.html

CITY FUNDING

The City of Albuquerque has adopted the Housing First policy as mandated by the HEARTH Act in order to secure federal funding.

On May 16, the Albuquerque City Council voted to approve the 2022-2023 fiscal year city budget which will begin on July 1,2022 . The 2022-2023 approved city budget provides major funding of upwards of $60 Million to deal with the homeless. Included in the adopted budget is funding for Safe Community programs that deal with issues such as substance abuse, homelessness, domestic violence and youth opportunity. Following is a listing of approved funding:

• $24 million in Emergency Rental Assistance from the federal government, which the City will make available in partnership with the State.

• $4 million in recurring funding and $2 million in one-time funding for supportive housing programs in the City’s Housing First model. In addition, as recommended by the Mayor’s Domestic Violence Task Force, the budget includes $100 thousand for emergency housing vouchers for victims of intimate partner violence.

• $4.7 million net to operate the City’s first Gateway Center at the Gibson Medical Facility, including revenue and expenses for facility and program operations.

• $500 thousand to fund Albuquerque Street Connect, a program that focuses on people experiencing homelessness who use the most emergency services and care, to establish ongoing relationships that result in permanent supportive housing.

• $1.3 million for a Medical Respite facility at Gibson Health Hub, which will provide acute and post-acute care for persons experiencing homelessness who are too ill or frail to recover from a physical illness or injury on the streets but are not sick enough to be in a hospital.

• Full funding for the Westside Emergency Housing Center which is operated close to full occupancy for much of the year. On October 23, 2019, it was announced that Albuquerque’s West Side Emergency Housing Center was expanded to provide a coordinated approach to homelessness. The homeless use that facility to get medical care, treatment for addiction and behavioral health, job placement and case management services. The west side shelter now has the University of New Mexico Health Sciences Center, Presbyterian Hospital and Alburquerque Health Care for the Homeless providing medical services two days a week. It also has case management services being provided by Centro Savila, funded by Bernalillo County. Job placement opportunities are being provided by workforce connections.

https://www.abqjournal.com/1381895/westside-shelter-adds-computers-behavioral-health-care-and-career-services-ex-mayor-says-the-move-is-part-of-the-citys-multipronged-approach-to-homelessness.html

• $500 thousand to fund the development of a technology system that enables the City and providers to coordinate on the provision of social services to people experiencing homelessness and behavioral health challenges.

The Fiscal Year 2023 budget includes the following funding for Safe Community programs:

• $1.8 million to develop what will be Albuquerque’s only medical substance abuse facility dedicated to youths likely housed at the Gibson Health Hub.

• Full funding for the Violence Intervention Program that deals with both APD and Family & Community Services departments, including the first phase of School-Based VIP in partnership with APS.

• $736 thousand to fully fund the Assisted Outpatient Treatment program.

• $730 thousand for a partial year of operation of a Medical Sobering Center at Gibson Health Hub, which will complement the social model sobering facilities available at the County’s CARES campus.

• Full funding for service contracts for mental health, substance abuse, early intervention and prevention programs, domestic violence shelters and services, sexual assault services, health and social service center providers, and services to abused, neglected and abandoned youth.
The link to the enacted 2022-2023 proposed budget is here:

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

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

Political commentator Pete Dinelli and the Albuquerque Journal are often at odds as to how they see things, but when they do agree, it’s usually on positions that affect the City of Albuquerque or the conduct of elected officials. The June 19 Journal Editorial is one of those occasions when they agree. The JournAL Editorial essentially repeats identical arguments Pete Dinelli has made in recent blog articles about “Safe Outdoor Spaces”. The Journal arguments merit further discussion.

KELLER ACKNOWLEGES CORONDO PARK

Mayor Keller admitted that he and his Administration condoned and supported Coronado Park being used as a “de facto” city sanctioned homeless encampment even though its a public park and camping is illegal. The Journal noted “the homeless have essentially been funneled to Coronado Park like cattle through a chute and the city premeditated its surrender of the neighborhood to lawlessness” when he said at a June news conference:

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

The Journal editorial continues:

“Every other week taxpayers foot the $27,154 bill for a multi-department team to temporarily clear and clean the park — and that’s not even a deep clean. How many discarded needles are buried and missed? It would take rotary tilling and a Hazmat team with metal detectors to make the park safe to use. … Meanwhile Coronado Park’s homeless move a block or two away during the cleanups but immediately return in a perpetual game of cat-and-mouse. Others do drugs on the sidewalk or sleep under tarps along Third. Open fires on sidewalks and in the park are not rare. And while there are homeless folks camping in every quadrant of the city, the Coronado Park neighborhood has become what Keller succinctly describes, the de facto location for everything negative that goes along with the desperate, lawless life of living on the streets … ”

The violent crime history of Coronado Park has been reported as has the monthly cost of cleanup. Simply put Coronado Park needs to be condemned by city council as a public nuisance.

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

https://www.petedinelli.com/2022/06/15/another-murder-at-coronado-park-park-is-symbol-of-tim-kellers-failure-to-deal-with-homeless-crisis-city-council-should-declare-coronado-park-a-public-nuisance-enact-resolution-callin/

KELLER AND COUNCIL’S GOAL IS TO CREATE TENT CITY’S, NOT PERMANENT HOUSING

According to the Journal editorial, the City Council pushed through the Safe Outdoor Space amendment “as the only way to be able to clean up cesspools like Coronado Park and get the unhoused off the sidewalks, out of the arroyos and parks and into sanctioned encampments with basic security, improved sanitary conditions and a path to services and more permanent housing. … It was not sold as a way to move the deck chairs on the Titanic.”

The truth is Keller’s and the City Council’s real goal is to create “tent” city’s. On
May 16 it was reported on www.PeteDinelli.com that city purchased tents were being proposed for “Safe Outdoor Spaces”. The link to the blog article “City Purchased Tents Proposed For “Safe Outdoor Spaces”; “Tent City’s” Will Destroy City’s Permanent Housing Efforts; Scant Evidence Found On How Permanent Homeless Shelters Affect Surrounding Community; Safe Outdoor Spaces Will Make City “Land of Encampments” is here:

https://www.petedinelli.com/?s=City+purchased+tents&submit=Search

On June 9, it was reported that city officials were laying out more details about what Albuquerque’s upcoming Safe Outdoor Spaces could look like in coming months. According to the report, the city wants to have a “safe outdoor space” up and running by the end of the summer. Two church congregations have shown interest in providing Safe Outdoor Space.

Elizabeth Holguin, the deputy director of Homeless Solutions in Albuquerque’s Family and Community Services Department, had this to say about the city’s plans to going forward with Safe Outdoors Spaces:

“… Usually the site will provide meals, there’s always bathrooms and hand washing stations, sometimes showers, sometimes Wi-Fi is provided, there’s a whole gamut of options that could happen with enough resources. … Just as in anybody’s home you know what they do in their tent is their business. … However, there is no drug dealing, no sort of transactions at all or any display of paraphilia in the common space. … Having the safe outdoor spaces would give that extra … layer of protection for the police department to be able to more definitively say you know ‘you want to camp, you can’t camp here, this is where you can camp now.”

It is clear from the city’s articulated plans as voiced by Elizabeth Holguin that “Safe Outdoor Spaces” are not temporary with “ bathrooms and hand washing stations, sometimes showers.”

Link to Dinelli blog article “Devil In The Details On Safe Outdoor Spaces; “Tent City” Is City’s Real Goal; First Encampment Expected By End Of Summer; Tell Council To Vote No On June 22 To Safe Outdoor Spaces”

https://www.petedinelli.com/2022/06/10/devil-in-the-details-on-safe-outdoor-spaces-tent-city-is-citys-real-goal-first-encampment-expected-by-end-of-summer-tell-council-to-vote-no-on-june-22-to-safe-outdoor-s/

NEIGHBORHOODS AND PARKS ARE AT RISK

The Journal editorial asks:

“[W]ith up to 18 “safe outdoor spaces” now on the table, the public deserves to know: How many more neighborhoods will be sacrificed? And will replicating versions of Coronado Park be allowed?”

It was on April 18, 2021 that www.PeteDinelli.com reported that it was first reported 5 Safe Outdoor Spaces were proposed in all 9 City Council Districts and that they had the potential of being Coronado Parks. The council later reduced the number to 2 in each council district for a total of 18. According to the April 18 blog article:

The City Council amendment to the Integrated Development Ordinance will allow … sanctioned homeless campsites in each of the city’s 9 city council districts, with … sanctioned campsites spread throughout the city, and allowing 40 tents, cars or recreational vehicles in each campsite … This is the best example of elected officials’ good intentions that will go awry making a crisis even worse. … sanctioned campsites, coupled with $59,498,915 million in spending for the homeless, will likely have the unintended consequence of making Albuquerque an even bigger magnet for attracting the homeless to the city.

Any city councilor or any member of the general public that thinks … city sanctioned campsites with upwards of 40 occupants spread throughout the city is somehow “good idea” need to have their head examined. All they need to do to realize this is a very bad idea is to take a tour of the Coronado Park located near I-40 and 2nd street. As of April 17, the public park has upwards of 60 tents with the homeless wondering the park and the surrounding area.

The link to the blog article “City Sanctioned Homeless Encampment Coming To Open Space Area Near You!; City Council To Allow 45 Homeless Camps For 1,800 Homeless And Allowing Up To 40 Tents; Councilors Need Their Heads Examined And Tour Coronado Park” is here

https://www.petedinelli.com/2022/04/18/city-sanctioned-homeless-encampment-coming-to-open-space-area-near-you-city-council-to-allow-45-homeless-camps-for-1800-homeless-and-allowing-up-to-40-tents-councilors-need-their-heads-exami/

The answer as to the Journal’s question of “how many more neighborhoods will be sacrificed” is provided by a map prepared by the city detailing where “safe outdoor space” zoning would be allowed for encampments. The map reveals numerous areas in each of the 9 City Council districts that abut or within walking distance or are actually in many residential areas.

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

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

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

The map of eligible open space for Safe Outdoor spaces includes open space owned by the city. What is also clear is that Coronado Park is evidence that the city has the authority and ability to convert any city park into a homeless encampment if it so desires without city council approval nor any public input.

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

https://www.petedinelli.com/2022/06/17/city-councilor-brook-bassan-at-worst-lies-at-best-misleads-constituents-by-making-guarantees-she-cant-keep-on-location-of-safe-outdoor-spaces-and-north-domingo-park/

SAFE OUTDOOR SPACES VIOLATES “HOUSING FIRST” POLICY

The Journal editorial says:

“The mayor says along with the much-hyped Gateway Center shelter, safe outdoor spaces can help address homelessness. Great — but we repeat our qualified support that these are supposed to be clean and safe and in place of sleeping in parks, on sidewalks and in doorways, ditches and alleys; not filthy and dangerous and in addition to.”

Research shows that housing is the most effective approach to end homelessness with a much larger return on investment than offering government sanctioned encampments such as “Safe Outdoor Spaces”. What Mayor Tim Keller has done with his support of city sanctioned “Safe Outdoor Space” homeless encampments is to undercut the policy of shelter and housing first policy mandated to secure federal funding under the HEARTH Act.

If the City Council and Mayor Tim persist in going down the road of allowing 18 “safe outdoor spaces”, it will be a major setback for the city and its current policy of seeking permanent shelter and housing as the solution to the homeless crisis.

The city has likely not revealed if it has disclosed its plans for Safe Outdoor Spaces in federal grant applications to help the homeless. Mayor Tim Keller and the City Council allowing city sanctioned “Safe Outdoor Space” homeless encampments more likely than not will place into jeopardy federal funding under the HEARTH Act resulting in grant funding being denied

THEY JUST DON’T GET IT

Too many elected and government officials, like Democrat Mayor Tim Keller, and Democrat City Councilors Isaac Benton, Pat Davis and Tammy Fiebelkorn and Republican City Councilors Brook Bassan and Trudy Jones who want to establish government sanction encampments have a hard time dealing with the fact that many homeless adults simply want to live their life as they choose, where they want to camp for as long as they can get away with it, without any government nor family interference and especially no government rules and no regulations.

CITY MEETING MORAL OBLIGATION TO HOMELESS WITHOUT SAFE OUTDOOR SPACES

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

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

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

LAW ENFORCMENT MUST PLAY ROLE IN DEALING WITH HOMELESS

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

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

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

COUNCIL CAN RECONSIDER

On June 22, the City Council has the option to reconsider their vote on the Integrated Development Ordinance and vote on the Safe Outdoor Space resolution being prepared by the Family and Community Services Department. Reconsideration of the Integrated Development Ordinance would require at least one city councilor who voted for the IDO to change their vote. Those city Councilors who voted NO were Democrats Klarisa Pena, Louie Sanchez and Republicans Dan Lewis and Renee Grout. This means Republicans Trudy Jones or Brook Bassan, and Democrats Isaac Benton, Pat Davis and Tammy Fiebelkorn would have to move to reconsider and change their vote on the Integrated Development Ordinance and the Safe Out Door Space amendment.

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

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

PRTOEST ANNOUNCED BY WOMEN TAKING BACK OUR NEIGHBORHOODS

“Women Taking Back Our Neighborhoods” (WTBON) is a citizen activist group founded in 2018 in the Albuquerque South East Heights to inform the public and demand greater accountability from elected and other civic leaders for preventing crime on Central Ave., in neighborhoods, and in public parks.

WTBON has announced a protest to be held on Tuesday June 21. The following press release was issued:

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

“Women Taking Back Our Neighborhoods” (WTBON) will be meeting on the corner of Academy and Eubank, Tuesday, June 21, from 11:00 am to 1:00 pm, to protest the City of Albuquerque’s Council vote to institutionalize “Safe Open Spaces” and Motel Conversions in the City’s Zoning Code. The public is invited to stand with us.

As proposed, the city could designate two “Open Space” lots for each district, for a total of 18 lots in the city, and an untold number of motel conversions for unvetted homeless individuals coming to Albuquerque for the social benefits provided by the Family and Community Services Dept. The concept has never been brought to citizens for a vote, and the city does not have a plan of action in place, nor a budget for its implementation, which will be a tremendous amount of money as yet undefined which tax-payers will be responsible for. Considering the failure of the Tiny Homes to attract drug-free, homeless individuals to the campus, a city plan of 18 “Safe Open Spaces” will be another disastrous idea by the City that forces taxpayers to foot the bill and live with the consequences of crime to businesses and neighborhoods, decreasing property values and new residents, and reducing tourism.

WTBON urges all City Councilors to vote NO for Safe Open Spaces and Motel Conversions.”

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

CNN REPORT

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

Following is the unedited article in full:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

EASTMAN EMAILED GIULIANI ABOUT RECEIVING A PRESIDENTIAL PARDON AFTER JANUARY 6

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

LUTTIG TURNS PARTS OF THE HEARING INTO A LENGTHY CONSTITUTIONAL SEMINAR

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

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

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

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

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

AMERICAN DEMOCRACY IS ON THE LINE

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

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

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

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

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

The link to the CNN article is here:

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

NBC NEWS REPORT

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

EASTMAN WAS AIDING TRUMP’S PRESSURE CAMPAIGN

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

TRUMP KNEW HE WAS PUTTING PENCE’S LIFE AT RISK

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

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

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

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

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

PENCE’S TEAM WAS UNIFIED AGAINST TRUMP’S PLAN

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

ALL THE PRESIDENT’S MEN

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The link to the NBC news report is here:

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

DER FÜHRER TRUMP REACTS

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

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

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

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

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

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

Der Führer Trump told the crowd:

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

His comments unleashed cheers from the crowd.

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

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

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

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

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

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

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

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

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

A link to a related blog article is here:

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