NM Sen. Martin Heinrich, Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham and Santa Fe Mayor Allen Weber are now all getting into the act of proposing changes to gun laws on a National, State and City levels. This blog article explores all 3 efforts at gun control and advocates the New Mexico Legislature enact comprehensive gun control legislation.

UNITED STATES MARTIN HEINRICH

In October, a gunman in Lewiston, Maine, went on a rampage and killed 18 people in a mass shooting while using a high-capacity, semi-automatic rifle that had been modified rapid fired shooting. Police found a high-capacity, semi-automatic AR-10 rifle made by Ruger in the car of the Lewiston gunman.  the gunman had reportedly duct-taped two large-capacity magazines together so that when one was depleted, he could quickly flip to the next magazine.

After an intensive manhunt that lasted a full week, the mass shooter was found dead from self-inflicted gunshot wound. It turns out the shooter had an extensive history of mental disorder and hospitalization.  the Lewiston gunman reportedly spent two weeks in a psychiatric hospital in New York and was banned by his U.S. Army Reserve unit in Maine from possessing military weapons because of his increasing paranoia and aggressive behavior. His family also expressed concerns about his deteriorating mental health and access to guns.

On November 30, caused in part by the mass shooting, Maine Independent Senator Angus King announced the introduction of a Senate Bill that if it becomes law would regulate rifles and shotguns.  New Mexico’s Senior Democrat Senator Martin Heinrich is cosponsoring the bill. King and Heinrich have worked together on similar bills for years. In addition to Heinrich, the bill has two other co-sponsors so far: Democratic Sens. Mark Kelly of Arizona and Michael Bennett of Colorado.

Senator Angus King said this about the legislation:

“If I had any doubts [about this legislation], they were resolved by what happened [in my state of Main].  … The shooter in Lewiston had a high-capacity magazine, duct-taped together, that could be [quickly reloaded]. That’s what would be prohibited by this law.

 “The key is the lethality of the weapon. … How do you make it less dangerous? Not what it looks like, but how do you make it less dangerous? … The key here is in the midst of a mass shooting, it’s when the shooter needs to re-load that there’s an opportunity either for people to escape or for first responders or for people in the room to disarm the shooter. … But if there’s not lapse in the firing, that can’t happen. …  My goal straight up is saving lives. We believe that the legislation we’re proposing today will do exactly that.

We were very careful to craft this pragmatically to stand up to the Supreme Court we have today. … We reviewed all of the  appropriate case law and tried to stay on the safe side of that line. And also, frankly, gun-rights folks, of whom there are many in Maine, are very much attune to the idea of confiscation, and this bill is very clearly not that.”

New Mexico Senator Martin Heinrich for his part said he and King had been working on legislation for years to regulate certain firearms that are particularly lethal.  Heinrich, who is a gun owner and avid hunter, said he hopes the bill’s focus on the mechanisms that make some semi-automatic guns so lethal will win bipartisan support.  Heinrich said this:

“I firmly believe our families and children should feel safe when they go to a bowling alley, when they enter the classroom or when they go to a place of worship.  They shouldn’t have to live in fear that they might fall victim to the next mass shooting tragedy. And I refuse to accept the premise that Democrats and Republicans or gun safety advocates and gun owners are so divided that we can’t take common-sense actions that save lives. … The key is that this bill is not aimed at a particular weapon. It’s aimed at the lethality based upon the magazine size.”.

THE “GOSAFE” BILL

The introduced senate bill is entitled the Gas-Operated Semi-Automatic Firearms Exclusion (GOSAFE) Act.

Unlike other proposed assault weapons bans that he opposed, King said their bill focuses on the mechanisms that can make some semi-automatic guns so deadly rather than their appearance or model numbers. The bill would also make it illegal to make certain modifications to semi-automatic guns. But it would exempt certain types of common gun used by hunters and for self-defense, such as semi-automatic shotguns and handguns that operate with a recoil mechanism. The bill would limit the number of rounds in a gun magazine and require gas-operated, semi-automatic firearms to have permanent or fixed magazines to prevent shooters from rapidly reloading.

The legislation would regulate rifles and shotguns that can fire more than 10 rounds before reloading and handguns that fire more than 15 rounds. It would also prohibit machine gun conversion devices and other modifications that make the guns more deadly.  The bill specifically exempts several types of firearms from any regulation, including breach-loading and smooth-bore rifles or handguns. A .22-caliber rifle or a bolt-action rifle would also be exempt, for example. The bill would also “grandfather in” all currently owned guns, though those gun owners would be restricted on to whom they could sell the weapon to.

The legislation if enacted would regulate the sale, transfer, and manufacture of gas-operated semi-automatic weapons by:

• Establishing a list of prohibited firearms;
• Preventing unlawful modifications of permissible firearms;
• Mandating that future gas-operated designs are approved before manufacture; and
• Preventing unlawful firearm self-assembly and manufacturing.

The bill would limit the number of rounds that large capacity ammunition feeding devices are permitted to carry to 10 rounds of ammunition or fewer. The capacity must be “permanently fixed ” meaning the firearm cannot accept a detachable, high-capacity magazine that would increase the number of rounds that can be fired before reloading and make reloading easier.

The bill includes exemptions based on maximum ammunition capacity according to a firearm’s individual class: a rifle, shotgun, or handgun. Exemptions include:

• .22 caliber rimfire or less firearms
• Bolt action rifles
• Semi-automatic shotguns
• Recoil-operated handguns
• Any rifle with a permanently fixed magazine of 10 rounds or less
• Any shotgun with a permanently fixed magazine of 10 rounds or less
• Any handgun with a permanently fixed magazine of 15 rounds or less

The bill would also “grandfather in” all currently owned guns, though those gun owners would be restricted on to whom they could sell the weapon

OPPOSITION QUICK TO EMERGE

The proposed legislation drew quick opposition and encountered skepticism and opposition from gun owners’ rights groups. David Trahan, the executive director of the Sportsman’s Alliance of Maine, said this:

“Sen. King’s legislation has a slim chance of getting out of Congress and an even slimmer chance of getting through the Supreme Court.”

Randy Kozuch, executive director of the NRA’s Institute for Legislative Action, said this in a statement:

“This legislation blatantly violates the U.S. Constitution and U.S. Supreme Court rulings by banning the very types of firearms and magazines most often utilized by Americans for defending themselves and their families. … This bill unjustly and improperly places the full burden of the law on law-abiding residents, while doing nothing to take guns out of the hands of dangerous criminals.”

https://www.abqjournal.com/news/heinrich-joins-maine-senator-on-gun-bill/article_43046712-8ede-11ee-8922-af6f753a4c3d.html

https://www.koat.com/article/bill-introducing-approach-to-gun-regulation/46004642#

https://www.mainepublic.org/maine/2023-11-30/angus-king-proposes-limits-on-semi-automatic-guns-magazine-capacity-after-lewiston-shooting

https://www.newscentermaine.com/article/news/politics/maine-politics/gosafe-act-sen-angus-king-lewiston-maine-shooting-gun-bill/97-34139651-17f2-4d67-ae4d-83fc90a1ec33

GOVERNOR MICHELLE LUJAN GRISHAM 

On December 15, at a news conference in Santa Fe,  Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham said she will  encourage the New Mexico Legislature to consider the  proposed federal Go Safe Act, co sponsored by Senator Martin Heinrich, aimed at reducing a shooter’s ability to fire off dozens of rounds a second and attach new magazines to keep firing.  If approved, it would mean assault-style weapons would have permanently fixed magazines, limited to 10 rounds for rifles and 15 rounds for some heavy-format pistols. Lujan Grisham said this:

“I’ve got a set of lawmakers that are more likely than not to have a fair debate about guns, gun violence, weapons of war and keeping New Mexicans safe than members of Congress are. … We will have to see how those votes all shake out.”

Bans on assault rifles in several states are under legal challenge after the U.S. Supreme Court in June broadly expanded gun rights in a 6-3 ruling by the conservative majority. The decision overturned a New York law restricting carrying guns in public and affected a half-dozen other states with similar laws. After the ruling, New York and other states have moved to pass new gun restrictions that comply with the decision.

The 2024 New Mexico legislature is a 30 day session and opening day on January 16 and it ends on February 15. However, from January 2 to January 12, legislators can “prefile” proposed legislation. The session will focus primarily on budget matters but other bills can be heard at the discretion of the governor.

GOVERNOR’S EMERGENCY HEALTH CARE ORDER

Lujan Grisham recently suspended the right to carry guns at public parks and playgrounds in New Mexico’s largest metro area under an emergency public health order, first issued in response to shootings that included the death of an 11-year-old boy outside a minor league baseball stadium. The governor’s health orders include directives for gun buybacks, monthly inspections of firearms dealers statewide, reports on gunshot victims at New Mexico hospitals and wastewater testing for illicit substances.

The order sparked public protests among gun rights advocates and legal challenges in federal court that are pending.  The Governor has scaled back restrictions on carrying guns from her initial order in September that broadly suspended the right to carry guns in most public places. Bernalillo County Sherriff John Allen and Albuquerque Police Chief  refused to enforce the orders while Attorney General Raul Torrez announced he would not defend those orders in court.

Lujan Grisham claims  her emergency health care orders restricting guns and its approach to violent crime is resulting in  more arrests and reducing gun violence a claim that is repeatedly discredited as gun gun violence continues to be reported in Albuquerque, especially involving teenagers. A good example is a 14 year old  teenager discharging a gun at Coronado Mall the day after Thanksgiving  during a foot chase.

https://www.lcsun-news.com/story/news/2023/12/15/governor-wants-nm-to-legislators-to-debate-new-approach-to-regulating-assault-style-weapons/71911358007/

SANTA FE MAYOR ALAN WEBBER

On November 16, the Sant Fe City Council adopted on a 7 to 2 vote as part of its legislative agenda for the 2024 New Mexico Legislature  Santa Fe Mayor Alan Webber’s proposal for  a ballot measure that would amend the state constitution and give local government more power when it comes to gun regulations. If the legislature passes the proposal, it would be up to New Mexicans to vote on the issue.

The New Mexico Constitution does not allow local governments, such as cities or counties, to make gun regulations that are more restrictive than the state. If approved, that provision would be removed from the state constitution, giving power to local governments to add more restrictions if it still falls in line with the United States Constitution.

Mayor Alan Webber said this about his proposal:

“We just had a horrific mass shooting in Maine. It is the worst nightmare of every mayor in America that someday something like that will happen in your community. …  When we see something happen anywhere in America and lives are lost … local officials, a mayor or a county official in that community is put in the position of saying ‘I wish I’d done more. I wish I’d tried more.’ … The point [of the legislation] is simply to allow more local choice and more local control so that we at the local level can reflect the views of our residents and indicate that we take seriously trying to reduce or eliminate gun violence at the local level.   [This amendment is needed] so that city governments, local governments, are no longer preempted by the constitution of New Mexico from having gun laws, gun safety provisions that are more restrictive than what the State currently has . … Talk to our residence and say, ‘What would you support in the way of limitations, sensible gun limitations.”

https://www.krqe.com/news/new-mexico/santa-fe-mayor-proposes-constitutional-amendment-on-gun-laws-heading-into-legislative-session/#:~:text=(KRQE)%20%E2%80%93%20Santa%20Fe%20Mayor,provision%20in%20the%20state%20constitution.

https://www.santafenewmexican.com/news/local_news/city-council-oks-mayors-call-for-state-constitutional-amendment-on-gun-laws/article_dd6735ea-7cc4-11ee-b65d-d395df6e2ae7.html

https://www.krqe.com/news/new-mexico/santa-fe-mayor-proposes-constitutional-amendment-on-gun-laws-heading-into-legislative-session/#:~:text=(KRQE)%20%E2%80%93%20Santa%20Fe%20Mayor,provision%20in%20the%20state%20constitution.

https://www.koat.com/article/new-gun-proposal/45704152

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

The proposed legislation by Senator Heinrich, Governor Lujan Grisham and Mayor Alan Webber are no doubt well intentioned efforts by all 3 but in reality are very weak at best when it comes to enacting legislation that will actually accomplish anything dealing with gun violence.

If Heinrich, Lujan Grisham and Webber are serious about the State’s crime crisis and want to do something about it, all three should be calling for the New Mexico Legislature to  enact an “Omnibus Gun Control And Violent Crime Sentencing Act” and do so during a special session of the legislature.  The message that must be sent out loud and clear to violent criminals by our elected officials is that New Mexico has a zero tolerance of violent crimes committed with firearms.  The only way to do that is with responsible gun control measures to reduce the availability of guns and to enhance criminal sentencings.

CRIME AND PUNISHMENT MEASURES

The following crime and sentencing provisions should be included in the “Omnibus Gun Control And Violent Crime Sentencing  Act”:

• Allow firearm offenses used in a drug crime to be charged separately with enhance sentences.
• Making possession of a handgun by someone who commits a crime of drug trafficking an aggravated third-degree felony mandating a 10-year minimum sentence.
• Increase the firearm enhancement penalties provided for the brandishing a firearm in the commission of a felony from 3 years to 10 years for a first offense and for a second or subsequent felony in which a firearm is brandished 12 years.
• Create a new category of enhanced sentencing for use of a lethal weapon or deadly weapon other than a firearm where there is blandishment of a deadly weapon in the commission of a felony with enhanced sentences of 5 years for a first offense and for second or subsequent felony in which a lethal weapon other than a firearm is brandished 8 years
• Increase the penalty of shooting randomly into a crowded area a second-degree felony mandating a 9-year sentence.
• Increase the penalty and mandatory sentencing for the conviction of the use of a fire arm during a road rage incident to a first degree felony mandating a life sentence.
• Change bail bond to statutorily empower judges with far more discretionary authority to hold and jail those pending trial who have prior violent crime reported incidents without shifting the burden of proof from the prosecution to the defense.

GUN CONTROL MEASURES

Gun control measures that should be included the “Omnibus Gun Control And  Violent Crime Sentencing  Act” would include legislation that failed in the 2023 legislative session and other measures and would include the following:

• Call for the repeal the New Mexico Constitutional provision that allows the “open carry” of firearms. This would require a public vote and no doubt generate heated discussion given New Mexico’s high percentage of gun ownership for hunting, sport or hobby, but what is the real rational for allowing side arms and rifles to be carried down the street other than to intimidate others.
• Restrict the sale, manufacture and possession of AR-15-style rifles along with semiautomatic firearms and make it a fourth-degree felony to purchase, possess, manufacture, import, sell or transfer assault weapons in the state.
• Prohibited magazines with more than 10 rounds.
• Prohibited the possession of semiautomatic firearm converter that allows the weapon to fire more rapidly.
• Established a 14-day waiting period for the purchase of any firearm and requires a prospective seller who doesn’t already hold a valid federal firearms license to arrange for someone who does to conduct a federal background check prior to selling a firearm. 
• Institute a Federal and State background check system  with a  mental health component  that would disqualify a person with a history of mental health violent outbursts or a history of threats to others from making a gun purchase.  
• Established a minimum age of 21 for anyone seeking to purchase or possess an automatic firearm, semiautomatic firearm or firearm capable of accepting a large-capacity magazine.
• Ban the manufacture, sale, trade, gift, transfer or acquisition of semiautomatic pistols that have two or more defined characteristics.
• Revised the state’s Unfair Practices Act to target the sale of illegal firearms and parts, allowing the filing of lawsuits to enforce the act.
• Prohibit in New Mexico the sale of “ghost guns” parts. Ghost guns are guns that are manufactured and sold in parts without any serial numbers to be assembled by the purchaser and that can be sold to anyone.
• Require in New Mexico the mandatory purchase of “liability insurance” with each gun sold as is required for all operable vehicles bought and driven in New Mexico.
• Mandate the school systems and higher education institutions “harden” their facilities with more security doors, security windows, and security measures and alarm systems and security cameras tied directly to law enforcement 911 emergency operations centers.
• Require a permit to purchase all rifles and handguns.  There are 15 other states require a permit to purchase or licensing.  The best predictor of future performance is past performance. Firearm licensing has past performance.  A John Hopkins University study in a comparative analysis, describes licensing as the most effective firearm policy. Connecticut notes a 28% decrease in homicides, 33% decrease in suicides 10 years post licensing. When you compare states with and without licensing, there is a 56% decrease in mass shootings. Studies reveal a decrease of gun trafficking of more than 60% after licensing.  Missouri found similar increases in homicides and suicides when removing their purchase restrictions.  Licensing is constitutional it has broad public support.  Licensing brings in revenue to the state vs simply cost the state money.

The Omnibus Gun Control And Violent Crime Sentencing  Act Omnibus Gun Violence And Sentencing  Act  must include funding for the criminal justice system. This would include funding District Attorney’s Offices, the Public Defender’s Office, the Courts and the Corrections Department and law enforcement departments across New Mexico.

FINAL COMMENTARY

When it comes to gun control legislation, it’s not at all likely anything is going to actually in get done in the upcoming 30 day legislative session that begins on January 16.  That is why the Governor should again consider calling a special session to deal with gun control measures immediately after the 2024 session.

Until the New Mexico legislature get serious about New Mexico’s gun violence crisis and enacts reasonable gun control measures in conjunction with crime and punishment measures, we can expect our violent crime rates to continue to increase, and God forbid, yet another killing of a child which is what prompted the Governor to issue her executive orders in the first place.

The link to a related article is here:

Comprehensive Report On “Gunshot Victims Presenting at Hospitals in New Mexico”; Scathing Indictment Of New Mexico Legislature’s Failure To Address New Mexico’s Gun Violence Crisis; Crime Statistics Reflect Epidemic; Combined Both Identify  Need For Comprehensive Gun Control Measures

On Monday, November 26, the New Mexico Supreme Court affirmed a State District Court’ s ruling that the congressional voting district maps drawn by the 2021 NM Legislature  do not rise to the level of “egregious” gerrymandering. The New Mexico Supreme Court ruled congressional districts drawn up by state lawmakers in 2021 are not gerrymandered, even though there is evidence the new boundaries diluted votes between political opponents. This blog article is an in depth legal analysis of the decision.

SOUTHERN NEW MEXICO DISTRICT GROUND ZERO

It was the redrawing of the Sothern New Mexico District that was ground zero to insure the election of  a Republican to congress. Republican and Democratic lawmakers argued in court primarily over the map that set the boundaries for the southernmost congressional district in New Mexico. The Democratic-drawn congressional map divvied up a conservative, oil-producing region and reshaped a swing district along the U.S. border with Mexico . The lower court found that the Democratic lawmakers did purposely choose the map in order to try to entrench power, but that the map didn’t violate voters’ constitutional rights under the Equal Protection Clause of the state’s constitution.

The Republican Party challenged the maps in court. District 2 is typically a battleground between Democrats and Republicans every two years, but GOP leaders argued the Democrats gave themselves an unfair advantage in the last election. They argued that the Democratic lawmakers essentially violated voters’ rights by choosing a gerrymandered map.

The Republican Party argued unsuccessfully that the new district boundaries would entrench Democratic officials in power, highlighting the 2022 defeat of incumbent GOP Congresswoman Yvette Herrell by Democratic U.S. Rep. Gabe Vasquez. Democratic state lawmakers argued that the 2nd District in southern New Mexico remains competitive, with just a 0.7% margin of victory in the 2022 election. The two are squaring off once again in 2024

All 5 of  New Mexico Supreme Court  justices signed a shortly worded order  affirming the  lower District Court decision that the redistricting plan enacted by Democratic state lawmakers in 2021 succeeded in substantially diluting votes of their political opponents but that the changes fell short of “egregious” gerrymandering.

DISTICT IN NATIONAL SPOTLIGHT

The district is one of about a dozen in the national spotlight as Republicans campaign to keep their slim U.S. House majority in 2024. Courts ruled recently in Alabama, Louisiana and Florida that Republican-led legislatures had unfairly diluted the voting power of Black residents. Legal challenges to congressional districts are also ongoing in Arkansas, Kentucky, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas and Utah.

New Mexico was among several states to use a citizen’s advisory board with the aim of tempering political inclinations without taking redistricting powers away from state lawmakers. Groups, including Common Cause, said the process resulted in fairer maps. But Republicans in the state’s legislative minority argued that they were effectively shut out of the final legislative process amid conversations beyond legislative hearings via email and text messages that were subpoenaed at trial.  Democrats gained a 12% advantage in voter registrations over Republicans in the newly drawn 2nd District, where major party registration previously was roughly evenly split.

PARTIES REACTION TO RULING

State Republican Party Chairman Steve Pearce said the legal outcome in New Mexico “leaned heavily on the closeness of the previous election” in which a “popular Republican incumbent” was defeated by a lesser-known rival.

The New Mexico Republican Party in a statement said this:

“We are disappointed in the NM Supreme Court’s ruling to uphold the gerrymandered map that disenfranchises the voices of conservative Democrats, Republicans, and Independents alike and divides up vital industries.”

The Democratic Party of New Mexico said in a statement

“We are glad that the State Supreme Court ordered that the District Court’s redistricting decision will be upheld, hopefully putting to rest months of frivolous distractions”.

Democrats hold every statewide elected office in New Mexico, along with its three House and two Senate seats. Though Republicans won control of the U.S. House from Democrats in the 2022 election, the closely divided chamber more accurately reflects the ratio of Republicans to Democrats among voters nationally than at any time in recent years.

Links to quoted news sources are here:

https://www.koat.com/article/nm-supreme-court-upholds-democratic-congressional-map/45966673

https://www.kob.com/new-mexico/new-mexico-supreme-court-upholds-decision-on-redistricting-case/

https://nmpoliticalreport.com/2023/11/28/state-supreme-court-upholds-congressional-maps/

https://www.sfreporter.com/news/morningword/2023/11/28/nm-supreme-court-affirms-democrats-congressional-map/

https://www.abqjournal.com/ap/new-mexico-supreme-court-upholds-democratic-drawn-congressional-map/article_abed4030-249a-5de8-b59a-1619a899d069.html#tncms-source=home-featured-7-block

REVISTING LAWSUIT ALLEGATIONS

The lawsuit was filed back in 2021 when the New Mexico legislature redrew all 3 of New Mexico’s political boundaries in the process known as redistricting.  The process of congressional redistricting occurs every 10 years to keep political voting boundaries relatively fair as local populations change.

The plaintiffs in the case include the New Mexico Republican Party, Republican State Senator David Gallegos and Roswell Democrat Mayor Tim Jennings. It was filed against Governor Michell Lujan Grisham, Lt. Gov. Howie Morales and all Democrat State Senate and House legislative leaders.

In 2020, the state asked an independent redistricting committee to recommend new maps to the legislature. After considering 3 maps for redrawn congressional districts, New Mexico’s Democratically controlled legislature was not satisfied with what was submitted and approved  a fourth map instead, one drawn up by the lawmakers.

For decades, New Mexico has had 3 congressional districts.  The First Congressional District (CD1) was based almost entirely in Albuquerque. The 2^nd Southern Congressional District (CD2) was the entire southern portion of New Mexico.  The 3^rd Northern Congressional District (CD3) covered Santa Fe and entire northern New Mexico.

The Albuquerque and Northern New Mexico Districts have been decidedly Democrat leaning while the Southern-most district has been decidedly Republican. The new congressional map for District 3 moves southern parts of Albuquerque into the Southern Congressional District, creating a Democratic leaning district. Following its adoption, Republican Yvette Herrell lost her reelection bid in 2021.

The lawsuit controversy centered primarily around the new Congressional District 2 approved by state officials and signed into law by Lujan Grisham in 2021 during a special session of the Democrat-controlled Legislature.  The map divides Lea County in half.  Lea County now straddles the border between the Second and Third congressional districts and adds parts of Albuquerque to the southern Second Congressional District (CD2).

Republicans argued this change to Congressional District 2 was the cause of former U.S. Representative Yvette Harrell losing the seat to U.S. Rep Gabe Vasquez in 2022.  Herrell had previously won the seat in 2020 against former-U.S. Rep. Xochitl Torres Small, who defeated Herrell in 2018 after Republican Party of New Mexico Chairman Steve Pearce vacated the seat in a losing bid for the governorship.

The Republican Party argued that the map was developed to intentionally curb Republican influence.  The map once approved drew immediate backlash from the state Republican Party and Republican local officials in southeast New Mexico who argued that its conservative stronghold was being diluted

MOTION TO DISMISS

It was in February, 2022 that a Motion to Dismiss the case was filed by attorneys for Defendants Governor Lujan Grisham and Lt. Governor Howie Morales. The New Mexico’s Supreme Court denied the Motion To Dismiss and the case was remanded back to Judge Van Soelen for a trial on the merits. The New Mexico Supreme Court ruled the equal protection clause of the New Mexico Constitution allows the state courts to take up claims of illegal partisan gerrymandering.  The New Mexico Supreme Court rejected the arguments made by Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham and other high-ranking Democrats who said the courts had no way to determine what constitutes illegal “partisan” gerrymandering.

The New Mexico Supreme Court  acknowledged the “inherently political nature of redistricting” and said some partisan gerrymandering is permissible.  The New Mexico Supreme Court ruled the three-part test outlined by U.S. Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan in her dissenting opinion in the US Supreme Court case of RUCHO V. COMMON CAUSE should be used in the case to determine whether the map goes too far and violates the law. This meant the Republican plaintiffs had  to prove Democrats redrew the map to keep them in power, and that they achieved what they wanted to degree that was “egregious in intent and effect.”

REVISITING JUDGE VAN SOELEN’S RULING

On  October 6, after a weeks long trial, State  District Judge Fred Van Soelen of the 9^th Judicial District based in Clovis, ruled in a 14 page decision to strike down a lawsuit file by State Republicans alleging Democratic lawmakers gerrymandered New Mexico’s three congressional districts to favor and elect Democrats, especially in the southern congressional district. Judge Van Soelen in siding with Democrats ruled Republicans’ votes were diluted, but it did not rise to an “egregious gerrymander” and upheld the legislature’s approved redistricting maps. Republicans have vowed to appeal to the New Mexico Supreme Court.

In his ruling, District Judge Fred T. Van Soelen wrote in part:

“[The] predominant purpose of redrawing CD 2 [the southern district] in Senate Bill  1 was to entrench the Democratic Party in power by diluting the votes of citizens favoring Republicans. … Because ‘entrenchment’ is the touchstone of an egregious partisan gerrymander which the New Mexico Constitution prohibits, the court finds that the congressional redistricting map enacted under Senate Bill 1 does not violate the plaintiff’s equal protection rights.”

Van Soelen wrote that there is sufficient evidence to say Republicans were “cracked.” In other words, the evidence showed the maps split up Republican voters into multiple districts in order to dilute their voting power.  As an example Van Soelen noted Lea and Eddy Counties were split into two separate congressional districts.

During the trial, Democrats argued the contrary and said the boundaries in the map approved were meant to allow the oil industry in the southern portion of the state to have multiple voices in Washington, D.C. To accomplish this, the map adds land from southeast New Mexico to both Congressional District 1 and Congressional District 3.  Judge Van Soelen wrote that the defendants didn’t prove that splitting up that land was beneficial for residents.

Judge Van Soelen pointed to the 2022 congressional election, the only one held since the boundaries were redrawn, as evidence that Democratic and Republican candidates have a competitive chance to win in Congressional District 2. In the 2022 race for the District 2 U.S. congressional seat, Democrat Gabe Vasquez defeated Yvette Herrell, a first-term Republican incumbent, by the slim margin of 0.7%  The Republican Party countered that Herrell’s “very high name recognition” makes that race an unfair test of District 2’s competitiveness.

Judge Van Soelen wrote  that  while the case shows evidence of partisan political vote dilution, the dilution itself “does not rise to the level of gerrymandering that violates the rights of voters.” Van Soelen wrote that while the maps were intended on “entrenching” Democratic power, there was not sufficient evidence to prove that they were actually successful in entrenching their power.   Judge Van Soelen concluded that the legislative approve map does not  violate residents’ equal protection rights under the state’s constitution.

Judge Van Soelen applied  the three-part Kagan test and other criteria and he evaluated the maps and has made a decision that there was no “egregious in intent and effect.”  The postscript to this blog article provides a report on the Supreme Court ruling in the case of RUCHO V. COMMON CAUSE and provides an explanation of the Kagan 3 part test.

FINAL COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

It is more likely than not that any effort to appeal the New Mexico Supreme Court’s ruling to the United States Supreme Court will fail miserably with the US Supreme Court denying  certiorari with a one sentence order affirming the decision and denying any further hearings. At this point, efforts would be better served trying to seek the creation of a congressional, non-partisan redistricting committee with final say  that would be convened every 10 years to coincide with the United States Census to redraw districts for final approval of the courts.

___________________________________

 POSTSCRIPT

RUCHO V. COMMON CAUSE

In 2019, the United States Supreme Court in a 5-4 vote in the case of  Rucho v. Common Cause ruled that partisan gerrymandering claims  cannot be brought under the U.S. Constitution. The Ruch decision was a major set back for voting right advocates but in her dissent Justice Elena Kagan’s outlined and provided a blueprint on  how state judges can set aside and kill the practice of gerrymandering by legislatures under their own constitutions. Every state constitution protects the right to vote or participate equally in elections, and the Kagan dissent shows how state courts can enforce those protections under state law.

In her dissent, Justice  Kagan annunciates the precise harms inflicted by partisan gerrymandering and explains how they can be measured and remedied. Kagan identified two distinct but intertwined constitutional violations. First, gerrymandered maps “reduce the weight of certain citizens’ votes,” depriving them of the ability to participate equally in elections. Second, they also punish voters for their political expression and association. Kagan concluded that these dual injuries, implicate fundamental principles of both equal protection and freedom of speech. Kagan illustrated the ease with which courts can address them.

In his Rucho majority opinion, Chief Justice John Roberts insisted that federal courts were unable to determine when a partisan gerrymander goes “too far.” Kagan pointed out that, in fact, plenty of lower courts have already done exactly that. These courts deployed a three-part test. First, they ask whether mapmakers intended to entrench their party’s power by diluting votes for their opponents. Second, they ask whether the scheme succeeded. Third, they ask if mapmakers have any legitimate, nonpartisan explanation for their machinations. If they do not, the gerrymander must be set aside and declared void.

Justice Kagan wrote:

“If you are a lawyer … you know that this test looks utterly ordinary. It is the sort of thing courts work with every day.”

In practice, the most important part of the test is its evaluation of a gerrymander’s severity and that boils down to an analysis and hard look at the data.  The North Carolina’s congressional map contained 10 Republican seats and 3 Democratic ones. Experts ran 24,518 simulations of the map that used traditional, nonpartisan redistricting criteria. More than 99% of them produced at least one more Democratic seat. The exercise verified that North Carolina’s map isn’t just an outlier but “an out-out-out-outlier.”

Chief Justice Roberts rejected Kagan’s reasoning and asserted  that her test was “indeterminate and arbitrary.” But the North Carolina Superior Court rested its decision precisely on the three-part test that Kagan proposed. The North Carolina court adopted Kagan’s methods to demonstrate that North Carolina’s legislative gerrymander was indeed an “out-out-out-outlier.” Experts ran thousands of simulations to gauge the severity of the map’s partisanship and found that the current gerrymander is more favorable to Republicans than about 99.99 percent of maps drawn using nonpartisan redistricting factors.

This fact would not matter if North Carolina courts were powerless to stop partisan gerrymandering. But state courts are free to interpret their constitutions differently from the United States Supreme Court  and are not bound by the Rucho decision. The North Carolina Superior Court therefore refused to adopt Roberts’ rejection toward the judiciary’s competence to defend voting rights.

The North Carolina Court agreed that  Kagan’s view of gerrymandering is  an assault on equal protection and free speech. The North Carolina Court wrote the state constitution safeguards “the fundamental right of each North Carolinian to substantially equal voting power.”  The Northe Carolina court also found that the state constitution  protects citizens’ ability to engage in “core means of political expression,” including “voting for the candidate of one’s choice and associating with the political party” without retaliation. Partisan gerrymandering infringes upon these freedoms, diluting citizens’ vote on the basis of their political expression. In short, the court ruled  the North Carolina constitution contains the same protections that Kagan sought under the First and 14^th Amendments to the U.S. Constitution.

The North Carolina court took a step further than Kagan, because unlike the U.S. Constitution, the North Carolina constitution declares that “all elections shall be free.” This clause, the court held, means “that elections must be conducted freely and honestly to ascertain, fairly and truthfully, the will of the people.” Partisan gerrymandering violates that guarantee by “specifically and systematically designing the contours of the election districts for partisan purposes and a desire to preserve power.”

The link to quoted new source material is here:

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2019/09/partisan-gerrymander-kagan-state-courts.html

On November 14, 2014, the City of Albuquerque, the Albuquerque Police Department and the United State Department of Justice (DOJ) entered into a stipulated Court Approved Settlement Agreement (CASA). The settlement was the result of an 18-month long investigation by the Department of Justice (DOJ) that found that the Albuquerque Police Department engaged in a pattern of “excessive use of force” and “deadly force”, especially when dealing with the mentally ill. The DOJ investigation also found a “culture of aggression” existed within the APD.

The Court Approved Settlement Agreement mandates 271 police reforms, the appointment of a Federal Monitor and the filing of Independent Monitor’s reports (IMRs) on APD’s compliance with the reforms. There are 276 paragraphs in 10 sections within the CASA with measurable requirements that the monitor reports on.

The link to the 118-page CASA is here:

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

18^th FEDERAL MONITOR’S COMPLIANCE REPORT FILED

On November 8, 2023, Federal Court Appointed Monitor James Ginger filed his 18th report. The 18th Independent Monitor’s Report covers the time period of February 1, 2023 through July 1, 2023. The report is 168-pages long.  It is the shortest report filed to date with the previous reports averaging about 300 pages.  The link to review the entire 18^th report is here:

Click to access final-imr-18.pdf

The 18^th report finds that APD is only ONE percentage point from full compliance in “Operational Compliance” going from 92% to 94%.  APD went down by 1% in “Secondary Compliance” going down from 100% to 99%.  APD  and sustained  Primary Compliance at 100%.

Under the terms and conditions of the CASA, once APD achieves a 95% compliance rate in all 3 identified compliance levels and maintains it for 2 consecutive years, the case can be dismissed. Originally, APD was to have come into compliance within 4 years and the case was to be dismissed in 2018.

The 3 compliance levels are explained as follows:

PRIMARY COMPLIANCE

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

SECONDARY COMPLIANCE

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

OPERATIONAL COMPLIANCE

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

DRAMATIC PROGRESS MADE IN COMPLIANCE LEVELS OVER 4 REPORTING PERIODS

Operational Compliance is considered the most difficult to implement and achieve. The 14^th, 15^th  and 16^th  reports saw significant gains in Operational Compliance but the 17^th report  brought APD  the closest it had ever been to full compliance with 92% reported and with 95% needed to be achieved and sustained for 2 years in all 3 compliance levels.

In the Federal Monitors IMR-14 report filed on November 12, 2021, the Federal Monitor reported the 3 compliance levels were as follows:

• Primary Compliance: 100 %; (No change from before)
• Secondary Compliance: 82 %; (No change from before)
• Operational Compliance: 62 % (An increase 3% points from before)

15^th FEDERAL MONITOR’S REPORT COMPLIANCE LEVELS

On May 11, 2022, Federal Court Appointed Independent Monitor filed his 15th Report on the Compliance Levels.   APD’s compliance levels in the IMR-15 Federal Monitor’s report were as follows:

• Primary Compliance: 100%
• Secondary Compliance: 99%
• Operational Compliance: 70%.

The 15th Federal Monitors report was  a dramatic reversal from the past 3 monitor reports that were highly critical of the Keller Administration and the Albuquerque Police Department.

16^th  FEDERAL MONITOR’S REPORT COMPLIANCE LEVELS

The Federal Monitor reported that as of the end of the IMR-16 reporting period, APD’s compliance levels were as follows:

• Primary Compliance: 100% (No change)
• Secondary Compliance: 99% (No change)
• Operational Compliance: 80%. (10% increase from 70%)

17^th FEDERAL MONITOR’S REPORT COMPLIANCE LEVELS

The Federal Monitor IMR-17 report which covers August 1, 2022, through January 31, 2023, reported APD’s compliance levels were as follows:

• Primary Compliance 100%
• Secondary Compliance 100%
• Operational Compliance 92% (95% needed to be achieved and sustained for 2 years)

18^th FEDERAL MONITOR’S REPORT COMPLIANCE LEVELS

 The Federal Monitor IMR-18 report covers February 1, 2022, through July 31, 2023, and reports APD’s compliance levels are as follows:

• Primary Compliance 100%
• Secondary Compliance 99% (Down 1%)
• Operational Compliance 94% (95% is needed to be achieved and sustained for 2 years)

HIGHLIGHTS OF 18^TH FEDERAL MONITOR’S REPORT

Dr. James Ginger in his 18^th Federal Monitor’s Report praises APD’s significant progress over the last 2 years and applauds  the work of force investigators and supervisors.  Ginger notes the steady upward trend in Operational Compliance starting in IMR-14 and continuing through IMR-18.

During the 18^th reporting period, from February 1, 2023 through July 1, 2023, the monitor reported:

“… training processes  remained strong, reflecting “best-standards” of training needs, curricula development, and delivery of CASA-congruent training programs. Importantly, during this reporting period, with the approval of the Parties and the concurrence of the monitor, APD is now self-monitoring 157 specific paragraphs.  APD continues to develop the ability to independently self-monitor with review by the monitoring team.”

The monitor noted compliance findings began improving markedly during the 2021 IMR-14 reporting period and that APD  continued to make gains for 5 consecutive monitoring periods.  The monitor reported that the compliance surge was  due to APD’s finally understanding the change process, and focused APD leadership vis a vis compliance issues.

During the 18^th reporting period, the monitor’s team reviewed 8  cases completed by the External Force Investigation Team  and found each case to be “thorough, accurate, well-documented, and congruent with APD policy and national standards.   This is a major milestone.  The case reports comply with  policy, training, and in-field performance.  This is a central reform requirements of the Court Approved Settlement Agreement (CASA).”

The Federal Monitoring Team found APD’s disciplinary findings and practices continue to improve during this reporting period. However, the monitoring team found they are not yet at the 95% compliance level which is mandated for 2 years before the case can be dismissed. During the  reporting period, the monitoring team  found that all on-body recording devices (OBRD) usage standards followed CASA requirements.

DEFICIENCIES NOTED

The Federal Monitor noted some other critical compliance issues during the  reporting period. These include a continuing issue of adequately staffing the Citizen’s Police Oversight Agency (CPOA) and providing adequate training for board members and reconstituting the process of strong CPOA oversight.

The 18^th report found an unacceptable delay in the process of appointing a contract compliance officer, a qualified permanent executive director of Civilian Police Oversight Agency (CPOA), and a deputy executive director of the agency.  The monitor noted a continuing issue with CPOA investigators meeting articulated timelines. The Federal Monitor again recommended   a formal external assessment of CPOA workload and staffing.

A major concern was identified about the trend during IMR-17 and IMR-18 with Force Review Boards mishandling of some officer-involved shootings. The report noted it is extremely difficult for an agency to function well, absent strong oversight processes related to high-risk critical tasks, particularly when these tasks are a major reason for the existence of the CASA.  The monitor identified this  issue as a major problem due to the fact that one of the major reasons for the existence of the CASA was questionable APD officer-involved shootings over a protracted period.

FUNDAMENTAL CONCERNS ABOUT APD OVERSIGHT

The 18^th Federal Monitors Report raised fundamental concerns about oversight from the top management levels of APD, or those who make up the Internal Affairs Force Division (IAFD) and Force Review Board (FRB). The report said for the second time, the FRB and IAFD had disagreed with investigators, deeming fatal police shooting as being in line with APD policy when it was not.

A few nonfatal police shootings have been found out of policy in recent years but yet APDs top command staff has yet to find a fatal police shooting out of policy, meaning an officer’s actions were not “objectively reasonable, proportional, nor the minimum amount of force necessary.”  The Federal Monitoring team said it identified “a grave and substantial malfeasance” in the top command staff mishandling of a fatal police shooting, erroneously ruling it justified.

The monitoring team reported the concerning trend of Internal Affairs Force Division leadership and the Force Review Board “mishandling” police shootings following a year in which the department shot or shot at a record-high 18 people, with 10 of them being killed.

REVISITING THE JESUS CROSBY DEADLY USE OF FORCE CASE 

The monitoring team described the Jesus Crosby deadly use of force  case as one of the “more obvious mishandlings of organizational oversight that we have seen since the inception of the CASA. … The case is replete with issues, from the shooting itself through the handling of the case.”

Officers simultaneously fired Tasers and bullets at Crosby, who was suffering a mental health crisis and holding fingernail clippers outside APD headquarters. A force investigator, civilian oversight director and one Force Review Board (FRB)  member found the shooting out of policy, but an Internal Affairs Force Division  commander and the rest of the FRB reversed that finding.  APD modified its policies following the shooting in the hopes of expanding the use of less-lethal force in such situations.

The 18^th IME  Report went so far as to questioned if Internal Affairs Force Division (IAFD) leadership or Force Review Board (FRB)  members “are competent to review cases of this significance.”  The report said no FRB member asked questions about the policy disagreement or about the six shots fired after Crosby was on the ground, and only one member “asked insightful questions regarding the appropriateness of deadly force.” That same member, according to the report, voted  the use of force was not necessary but was outvoted by the other members.

The team noted it marked the second time the FRB has ignored “a compelling justification” for an out-of-policy ruling in a fatal shooting. The monitoring team added, “In our opinion, all parties should be concerned if any IAFD personnel believe, or were led to believe, that the use of deadly force by officers, in this case, was appropriate.”

The report noted that the FRB has excelled in recent years due to 3 “specific deputy chiefs,” one of whom has retired while the other two were not at the FRB meeting.  According to the report:

“We have commented in the past that reforms cannot exist as a result of specific people, and instead have to be woven into the fabric of APD’s culture.”

Referencing the November 2022 shooting of Jesus Crosby, the Federal Monitor’s report states:

“Most troubling is that in this case, the IAFD investigator and supervisor did what was required, and the deficiencies began at the Internal Affairs Force Division command level and were endorsed by the Force Review Board  … We are equally concerned with the chilling effect a case like this can have on Internal Affairs Force Division investigators and supervisors who will be called to make difficult, honest, and accurate findings in the future.”

Independent Monitor James Ginger said it was the second such occurrence in a year and warned the Albuquerque Police Department of the “chilling effect” it could have on those tasked with investigating use of force incidents in the future.

Private Attorney Mark Fine, who is represents the Crosby family in a civil rights and wrongful death lawsuit, said the family thanked the monitoring team for its “good-faith assessment of the killing of Jesus and for calling out the backwardness of APD leadership’s absurd determination that the shooting was ‘within policy.’” Fine said this:

“Since 2014, the City has known and admitted that a lack of supervisory oversight allowed a culture of aggression to develop in its ranks, which resulted in a pattern of unnecessary and deadly uses of force. …The Monitor’s report reveals that this toxic dynamic continues.”

CPOA CASES REVIEWED

According to the 18^th Federal Monitor’s, the monitoring team reviewed a random sampling of 20 CPOA cases centered on civilian complaints.  The auditors found deficiencies in 6 of the cases.  In all of the cases there was a failure  to meet deadlines, and two cases also had incomplete interviews.

The issues stemmed from low staffing, with six investigators tasked with investigating more than 600 complaints a year, according to the 18^th IME report. The end result was a backlog of dozens of complaints and only half of the investigations being completed.

The monitoring team called the workload “excessive and unsustainable,” saying it “likely leads to poor outcomes regarding timelines, quality, and effectiveness.” In the worst-case scenarios, lower-priority cases extend past due dates, and any sustained findings cannot be disciplined, according to the report.

The Federal Monitor’s team suggested fully staffing the board, filling three vacant supervisory roles and conducting a staffing study to “establish realistic expectations” on a mandatory number of investigators needed for the workload.

CIVILIAN POLICE OVERSIGHT BOARD FOUND IN CRISIS

The Federal Monitor identified in the 18^th Report the failures of civilian oversight that represent the largest remaining roadblock to the city ending its yearslong consent decree with the U.S. Department of Justice.

Twelve of the remaining 15 paragraphs of the Court Approved Settlement Agreement involve failures with the Civilian Police Oversight Agency (CPOA) which is appointed and overseen by the Albuquerque City Council.  The Civilian Police Oversight Advisory Board (CPOA) was formed in January of this year after the City Council abolished the previous Civilian Police Oversight Board.

The 18th Federal Monitor’s Report found that the civilian oversight mandated by the CASA is “in crisis” with understaffing and excessive caseloads leading to inadequate investigations by the external board tasked with everything from evaluating civilian complaints to weighing in on police shootings.

The report also showed that 12 of the remaining 15 sections of the settlement that are noncompliant revolve around the operations of the Civilian Police Oversight Advisory Board. The monitor found that since the change made in January, the CPOA hasn’t been able to properly function.  The five-person board currently has only two members.  The 18^th Monitor Report states:

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

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

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

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

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

Come January 1, a new city council will be sworn that will not include Pat Davis in that he did not run for a third term

During a November 8 news conference announcing the 18^th Federal Monitors Report, Mayor  Keller emphasized  the CPOA is the responsibility of the City Council, but said his administration is “here to help.” When asked if the city could reach full compliance without the CPOA portions of the CASA fulfilled, city and police officials replied, “Just barely.”

Keller said if the City Council doesn’t get the CPOA into compliance with the CASA, one option would be to split the CASA into two, calling the CPOA half “a little casita.”

REACTION TO 18^TH FEDERAL MONITOR’S REPORT

Standing in front of a graph charting the city’s progress and noting the 1%  left in the reforms to achieve compliance, Mayor Tim Keller said this:

“The amazing thing is — this is all that’s left. … There’s like that much left in the DOJ process. That’s it and that is how far we have come [in 9 years].”

Albuquerque Police Chief Harold Medina, using a football analogy, said APD  is at the 1-yard line with the Court Approved Settlement Agreement and said this:

“We don’t want to fumble the football, and we want to get into the end zone. … I think it is imperative that we recognize the hard work of the men and women of this department. We will never be perfect anytime we have a process that involves humans … but this is about ensuring that there’s accountability when we’re not perfect.”

Medina noted that APD statistics have shown a drop in crime and uses of force, outside of police shootings, since 2017, alongside a boost in officer productivity, measured by arrests and traffic stops.  Medina said this:

“We wanted to beat the idea that you cannot have reform and a safe city.”

Police union president Shaun Willoughby said he was looking forward to the end of the CASA.  Willoughby also called the monitoring process “a scam”.  Willoughby said this:

“This report and the impact of the report changes absolutely nothing for years to come, in my opinion.  … Using force as a police officer, it’s good to take it seriously … But I also think that we overdo [investigating] it.”

Willoughby added APD has learned to categorize and investigate force at “an expert level” but believes it could’ve been done for much less time and money.

The American Civil Liberties Union of New Mexico, a major critic of APD,  in responding to the 18^th Federal Monitors report, recognized the work that has been done by APD. However,  Daniel Williams, the ACLU Policing Policy Analyst said the shortcomings and failures identified in the 18^th  Federal Monitors  report  speak to culture change within the department and what “brought DOJ to town in the first place.” Williams said this:

“If the chain of command has not bought into a new attitude toward policing, has not really bought into these reforms and is continuing to go with the same status quo that has failed us for years, is the CASA going to be sustainable when DOJ leaves town?”

Links to quoted news sources are here:

https://www.cabq.gov/police/documents/final-imr-18.pdf

https://www.cabq.gov/police/documents-related-to-apds-settlement-agreement

https://www.abqjournal.com/news/monitor-praises-apd-progress-but-warns-of-top-brass-mishandling-police-shootings-as-city-eyes/article_bb68cdf2-7f42-11ee-bd00-bfcb21c9f70c.html

https://www.abqjournal.com/news/report-civilian-police-oversight-in-crisis-as-city-police-near-full-compliance-on-reforms/article_a30f73ea-8038-11ee-a4ea-67a9771862fc.html#tncms-source=home-featured-7-block

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

THE REAL SCAM ARTIST IDENTIFIED

Police Union President Shaun Willoughby just had to open his big mouth and make the inflammatory and false statement that the  reform process has been “a scam” and that the reforms could have been completed much sooner and less costly.  The real scam artists during the last 9 years of implementing the reforms has been none other than Shaun Willoughby himself  and the police union members of sergeants and lieutenants he represents who did everything they could to undercut the police reforms brought on by the Department of Justice (DOJ) investigation that found a “culture of aggression” and repeated use of deadly force and excessive use of force. 

Over the years, the Federal Court Appointed Monitor labeled the policde union interference with the reforms as the “County Casa Effect”.  The monitor said this in one of his reports:

“Some members of APD … resist actively APD’s reform efforts, including using deliberate counter-CASA processes. For example, … Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) disciplinary timelines, appear at times to be manipulated by supervisory, management and command levels at the area commands, letting known violations lie dormant until timelines [mandated by the union contract] for discipline cannot be met.

Many of the instances of non-compliance seen in the field are a matter of “will not,” instead of “cannot”! The Monitor … report[s] … he sees actions that transcend innocent errors and instead speak to issues of cultural norms yet to be addressed and changed by APD leadership.  …   Supervision, which includes Lieutenants and Sergeants in the union, need to leave behind its dark traits of myopia, passive resistance, and outright support for, and implementation of, counter-CASA processes.”

On April 27, 2021, it was widely reported that the Albuquerque Police Officers Association (APOA) launched a $70,000 political ad campaign to discredit the Department of Justice (DOJ) mandated reforms saying the police reforms are preventing police officers from doing their jobs and combating crime. The federal monitor’s response was swift and sure and he said in open court:

“[The accusation is] a union canard. We’ve talked about the counter-CASA effect in Albuquerque for years and years, and it is still alive and well. This latest process from the union is just another piece of counter-CASA. The union would like us out of town, I’m sure, and remember this monitoring team – as much as we love Albuquerque – would be glad to be done with the job. But we’re not going to give passing scores unless passing scores are earned. … [if the city] will actually focus on compliance”

REFORMS ACHIEVED UNDER THE CASA

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

Now after  9 full years, the federal oversight and the CASA have produced results.

Reforms achieved under the CASA can be identified and are as follows:

1. New “use of force” and “use of deadly force” policies have been written, implemented and all APD sworn have received training on the policies.
2. All sworn police officers have received crisis management intervention training.
3. APD has created a “Use of Force Review Board” that oversees all internal affairs investigations of use of force and deadly force.
4. The Internal Affairs Unit has been divided into two sections, one dealing with general complaints and the other dealing with use of force incidents.
5. Sweeping changes ranging from APD’s SWAT team protocols, to banning choke-holds, to auditing the use of every Taser carried by officers and re-writing and implementation of new use of force and deadly force policies have been completed.
6. “Constitutional policing” practices and methods, and mandatory crisis intervention techniques an de-escalation tactics with the mentally ill have been implemented at the APD police academy with all sworn police also receiving the training.
7. APD has adopted a new system to hold officers and supervisors accountable for all use of force incidents with personnel procedures implemented detailing how use of force cases are investigated.
8. APD has revised and updated its policies on the mandatory use of lapel cameras by all sworn police officers.
9. The Repeat Offenders Project, known as ROP, has been abolished.
10. Civilian Police Oversight Agency has been created, funded, fully staffed and a director was hired.
11. The Community Policing Counsels (CPCs) have been created in all area commands.
12. The Mental Health Advisory Committee has been implemented.
13. The External Force Investigation Team (EFIT) was created and is training the Internal Affairs Force Division on how to investigate use-of-force cases, making sure they meet deadlines and follow procedures.
14. Millions have been spent each year on new programs and training of new cadets and police officers on constitutional policing practices.
15. APD officers are routinely found using less force than they were before and well documented use of force investigations are now being produced in a timely manner.
16. APD has assumed the self-monitoring of at least 25% of the CASA reforms and is likely capable of assuming more.
17. The APD Compliance Bureau has been fully operational and staffed with many positions created dealing directly with all the reform efforts and all the duties and responsibilities that come with self-assessment.
18. APD has attained a 100% Primary Compliance rate, a 99% Secondary Compliance rate and a 92% Operational Compliance rate.

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

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

Despite the concerns raised in the 18^th  Federal Monitors Report,  the city’s compliance with reforms has never been higher. The monitor’s 18th report shows APD has reached  100% in Primary Compliance,  99% in Secondary Compliance and 94% in  Operational Compliance the highest levels ever reached in 9 years. Once 95% compliance or better is reached in all 3 of the compliance levels, APD  must sustain that compliance for two years. After a full two years of compliance in the 3 compliance levels, the case can be dismissed bringing and to end the consent decree.

Given the extent of the compliance levels, the work of the Federal Monitor can be said to be winding down. The purpose and intent of the settlement has been achieved.  The city should seek to negotiate a stipulated dismissal of the case with the Department of Justice (DOJ) sooner rather than later.  Should the DOJ refuse, the City Attorney should move to immediately to dismiss the case under the termination and suspension provisions of the CASA by filing a Motion to Dismiss the case and force the issue with an evidentiary hearing and let the assigned federal judge decide the issue of dismissal.

With all 10 vote centers reporting as of 9 p.m. Tuesday, December 12, former city employee and financial adviser Nichole Rogers prevailed against her opponent Jeff Hoehn, the executive director of nonprofit Cuidando Los Niñosto, to win the District 6 City Council seat with 52.4% to Hoehn’s 47.76%.  According to the raw vote, Nichole Rogers received 2,416 votes and Jeff Hoehn received  2,209 votes.

There are upwards of 30,000 registered voters in City Council District 6. According to numbers from the Secretary of State’s Office, turnout for the run off lagged behind the regular local election, with just 15% of eligible voters casting their ballots in the runoff election.

A total of 4,675 votes were cast in Tuesday’s runoff election was  a dramatic drop from the 7,395 in the November election when 4 candidates were on the ballot. Hoehn and Rogers originally faced two other candidates, Abel Otero and Kristin “Raven” Greene, in the regular election. Rogers and Hoehn were the two top vote getters in the first election with Rogers securing  40% of the vote and Hoehn 32%. Greene endorsed Hoehn while Otero endorsed Rogers.

EXPENSIVE AND CONTENTIOUS CAMPAIGN

Jeff Hoehn was privately financed candidate. Hoehn raised $43,075 and spent at least  $37,870. Nichole  Rogers was publicly financed candidate and was given  upwards of $40,000 in public finance to run her campaign. Because Rogers was a publicly finance candidate, she had had a spending limit of $40,000, and was given another $20,000 in public finance for the runoff.

The runoff election campaign was  as contentious as it gets, as Measure Finance Committees went on the attack pushing for their particular candidates. Rogers was supported by the  Real New Mexican Leadership measured finance committee,  headed up by Mayor Tim Keller’s confidant and handler Neri Holguin, which funded at least 3  misleading or false mailers against Jeff Hoehn. One particularly egregious mailer cited reports of sexual harassment and racial discrimination by the National Association of Realtors, one of Hoehn’s donors, and that essentially accused Hoehn of the same conduct using a guilt by association tactic. Rogers never disavowed the mailer.

HelpABQ, the measured finance committee  supporting Hoehn, in turn, labeled Rogers “unserious, inexperienced,” and “wrong for ABQ,” and in the ad  saying she is endorsed by the “most extreme groups.” Hoehn disavowed the “negative messaging” which he said occurred without his authorization.

CANDIDATES REACT TO ELECTION RESULTS

City Councilor Elect Nichole Rogers is half Hispanic and half Black, and she becomes the first Black elected to an ABQ City Council seat since inception of the modern form of government in 1974. City Councilor Elect Nichole Rogers said this in a statement:

“Tonight represents not just the culmination of a campaign, but the hopes and aspirations of District 6. … We’ve worked tirelessly to bring our vision of a more inclusive, thriving community to the forefront. … The prospect of becoming the first African American woman on the Albuquerque City Council is both an honor and a profound responsibility. … It symbolizes breaking barriers and represents a step forward towards greater diversity and representation in our city’s leadership. …”

After calling to congratulate Rogers, Jeff Hoehn for his part said his political career is not over.  He thanked his volunteers and voters and said this:

“We started a conversation in District 6 [about crime and homelessness] … I will sleep well, and I will regroup. …I’m not afraid to move forward. This district matters too much.”

https://www.abqjournal.com/news/nichole-rogers-wins-district-6-seat-in-tight-runoff-race/article_5d7ccb6e-9967-11ee-ae46-2347bda28761.html#tncms-source=home-featured-7-block

https://www.krqe.com/news/politics-government/elections/nichole-rogers-wins-albuquerque-city-council-runoff-in-district-6/

https://www.kob.com/new-mexico/albuquerque-metro/nichole-rogers-wins-district-6-seat-runoff-race/

https://www.koat.com/article/albuquerque-city-council-runoff-election-results-2023/46105640

ANALYSIS AND COMMENTARY

District 6 was the only City Council District to have a runoff election out of  the 4  council seats on the ballot in this year’s regular municipal  election. In 3 of the 4 districts, the incumbent city councilor chose not to run for reelection. In District 4,  incumbent Republican Brook Bassan kept her seat by  prevailing against Progressive Democrat Abby Foster. In District 8, retired police officer and Conservative Republican Dan Champine prevailed over moderate Democrat Idalia Lechga Tena to replace Conservative Republican Trudy Jones. In District 2,  Progressive Democrat Joaquín Baca won without a runoff prevailing against Moderate Democrat Loretta Naranjo Lopez and Independent Moses Gonzales to replace Progressive Democrat Isaac Benton.

MAYOR KELLER’S INVOLVEMENT IN CITY COUNCIL RACES

Mayor Tim Keller became actively involved and behind the scenes in the campaigns of 3 Progressive Democrat  city council candidates. The candidates who had the full support of Mayor Tim Keller were Progressive Democrats Abby Foster, Joaquin Baca and Nichole Rogers. Keller’s own campaign manager, politcal advisor and confidant Neri Holguin  was the paid politcal consultant for Progressive Democrat Abby Foster, who lost to Incumbent Brook Bassan  and Joaquin Baca, who prevailed over his two opponents to win without a runoff.

Mayor Keller  was also involved with the campaign of Nichole Rogers. She had worked for the Mayor Tim Keller as a policy advocate and community organizer. Confidential sources confirmed that Rogers received significant help in collecting nominating petitions signatures and qualifying donations from at least 2 city hall employees who work directly for Mayor Tim Keller.  Rogers  also went so far as to tell Progressive Democrats privately in the District that she was Mayor Keller’s candidate to replace Progressive Democrat Pat Davis who is a Keller ally.

Keller political consultant Neri Holguin initially was involved with the Rogers campaign. It was Holguin who called Jeff Hoehn and told him in no uncertain terms not to run for city council, that he could not win and that Mayor Keller would not support him and that Keller wanted a person of color for the district. Holguin also  headed up the measured finance committee and solicited donations for it  that published a number of negative and misleading politcal hit pieces against Jeff Hoehn in the runoff.

A NO MANDATE, RUBBER STAMP CITY COUNCILLOR

City Councilor elect Nichole Rogers credibility and reputation took more than a few major hits tainting her reputation when allegations of her impropriety were revealed during the run off, allegations that will still linger as she assumes office.  Those areas of concern included gross mismanagement of her nonprofit Westland Foundation and failure to file required documents with the Internal Revenue Service, the New Mexico Attorney General and the New Mexico Secretary of State, failure to account fully income and fund raising for her corporation, a disturbing history of civil litigation over debts and money due, failure to pay rent, evictions and property liens and misdemeanor convictions she refused to confirm or deny and actual residency in the District for a full 6 years as she claimed.

Although Councilor Elect Nichole Rogers prevailed in the election, with such an extremely low voter turnout, and a tainted reputation to go with it, the election was way too close for Rogers to consider it a mandate on any level. Given the amount of support she received from Mayor Tim Keller, his political confidant Neri Holguin as well as the negative campaign by the measured finance committees that opposed Progressive Democrat Jeff Hoehn, she will be viewed as totally indebted to Mayor Tim Keller and will will likely be an  ineffective city councilor. Sadly, Rogers  will be viewed as nothing more than a rubber stamp for any and all things Tim Keller and all of his policies over the next two years of his second term.  She will also have to deal with a new city council who  will no doubt not be  so willing to do Mayor Keller’s bidding and that will likely marginalize her.

KELLER NEW CITY COUNCIL MORE COMBATIVE CITY COUNCIL

Come January 1, 2024  the new city council will look much the same as the old city council.  Following is how the new city council looks:

Democrats

District 1 Conservative Democrat Louie Sanchez
District 2 Progressive Democrat Joaquin Baca
District 3 Moderate Democrat Klarissa Peña
District 6 Progressive Democrat Nichole Rogers
District 7 Progressive Democrat Tammy Fiebelkorn

Republicans

District 5 Conservative Republican Dan Lewis
District 4 Conservative Republican Brook Bassan
District 8 Conservative Republican Dan Champine
District 9 Conservative Republican Renee Grout

Although the new City Council will still be split with 5 Democrats and 4 Republicans, Conservative Democrat Louie Sanchez has often allied himself with conservative Republicans Dan Lewis, Renee Grout, and Brook Bassan who still will be on the council and Conservative Republican Dan Champine is expected to join in allowing them to approve or kill measures on a 5-4 vote but being unable to override Mayor Tim Keller’s veto’s with the required 6 votes.

The first item of business of the new city council once they are sworn in on January 1, 2024  will be the election of  a new City Council President and Vice President. It would come as no surprise if Conservative Democrat City Councilor Louis Sanchez is voted as the new City Council President along with  Conservative Republican Dan Lewis elected as the new Vice President with votes of Sanchez, Lewis, Bassan, Champine and Grout.

COUNCIL OVERIDES TWO PROGESSIVE KELLER VETOS

Notwithstanding the Democrat majority, the city council has already begun to show resistance to Mayor Keller’s progressive agenda as going too far.  In November, Republican City Councilor Dan Lewis sponsored two separate resolutions, one to replace the Albuquerque-Bernalillo County Air Quality Control Board and  another to place on hold the boards plans to dramatically change environmental justice regulations by increasing regulations and prohibitions on the issuance of air quality permits. The resolution increased regulations and prohibitions on the issuance of air quality permits and mandated excessive environmental studies. The Air Quality Board was conducting hearings on the environmental justice regulations. Mayor Tim Keller vetoed both resolutions. The City Council voted  to override both vetoes with bi partisan votes, one on a 6 to 3 vote and the other on a 7 to 2 vote, with Democrats Louis Sanchez,  Klarissa Pena, and even Progressive  Pat Davis joining in on one of the votes.

https://www.koat.com/article/a-vote-from-city-council-that-could-change-the-albuquerque-air-quality-control-board/46021734

FINAL COMMENTARY

Mayor Tim Keller took an active roll in trying to elect 3 city councilors who he believed will support his progressive agenda over the final 2 years of his second term. He did so to set himself up to run for a third term in 2025. Keller has already made it known to top aides he intends to run for a third term.

As it stands now in 2023, Tim Keller has extremely low approval ratings with one Journal Poll showing he has a 32% approval rating and his approval rating is  likely to go down even further over the next 2 years with an adverse city council. Keller no doubt thinks he can turn his popularity around over the next two years and like the last time believes he will have weak to no opposition. Don’t bet on it given that sources have confirmed efforts are now underway to find candidates to oppose Keller in 2025 with another poll taken and potential candidates listed and where Keller garnered 18% in the poll.

Names are already  beginning to surface to run against Tim Keller in 2025 and include  Republican City Councilor Dan Lewis, Democrats Bernalillo County Clerk Linda Stover, former NM Lieutenant Governor Diane Denish, Bernalillo County Sheriff John Allen and even Bernalillo County District Attorney Sam Bregman. If Jeff Hoehn is serious for his part saying his political career is not over, he just may want to run against Tim Keller in 2025 which would be genuine poetic justice on a number of levels.

In one of the most contentious runoff elections in recent memory, voters in Nob Hill and the International District go  back to  the polls on Tuesday, December 12,  for the Albuquerque City Council District 6 Runoff Election between two Progressive Democrats. While the City Council Districts 2, 4 and 8 races were decided on November 6,  District 6 was forced into a runoff  because neither candidate received more than 50% of the vote during the Regular Local Election in November.  Candidates Jeff Hoehn, the executive director of nonprofit Cuidando Los Niños, and Nichole Rogers, a former city employee and business consultant, face off against each other in Tuesday’s runoff election to replace City Councilor Pat Davis who chose not to run for a third term.

District 6 spans the central corridor from Interstate 25 to the east. It also covers the University of New Mexico and Mesa del Sol. The district has been represented by City Councilor Pat Davis for the last 8 years but he decided not the seek a third term.

According to the city clerks office just 8% of the more than 30,000 voters in the district have cast their votes. In the November  7 general local election, 22% of District 6 voters turned out which was  greater than the total voter turnout for Albuquerque.

The runoff election campaign has been as contentious as it gets, as Measure Finance Committees have been on the attack pushing for their particular candidates. Rogers is supported by the  Real New Mexican Leadership measured finance committee,  headed up by Mayor Tim Keller’s confidant and handler Neri Holguin,  which funded a misleading or false mailer that cited reports of sexual harassment and racial discrimination by the National Association of Realtors, one of Hoehn’s donors, and that essentially accused Hoehn of the same conduct using a guilt by association tactic. Rogers never disavowed the mailer.

HelpABQ, the measured finance committee  supporting Hoehn, in turn, labeled Rogers “unserious, inexperienced,” and “wrong for ABQ,” and in the ad  saying she is endorsed by the “most extreme groups.” Hoehn disavowed the “negative messaging” which he said occurred without his authorization. Hoehn wrote in a letter to voters:

“I reject HelpABQ’s message that organizations like Planned Parenthood or the Sierra Club are extremist groups.”

Hoehn is privately financed.  Rogers is publicly financed. Hoehn has raised $43,075 and spent $37,870. Rogers has a spending limit of $40,000, plus a $20,000 bonus for the runoff. She’s spent $41,034.

Voting convenience centers will be open from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. The address of the convenience centers are:

• Central Mercado – 301 San Pedro Dr. SE, Suites B, C, D & E, 87108
• Clerk’s Annex – 1500 Lomas Blvd NW, Suite A, 87104
• Daskalos Center – 5339 Menaul Blvd NE, 87110
• Four Hills Shopping Center – 13140 Central Ave SE, Suite 1420, 87123
• University of New Mexico– Student Union Building, Louie’s Lounge, 87131
• Bandelier Elementary School – 3309 Pershing Ave SE, 87106
• Highland High School – 4700 Coal Ave SE, 87108
• Jefferson Middle School – 712 Girard Blvd NE, 87106
• La Mesa Elementary School – 7500 Copper Ave NE, 87108
• Van Buren Middle School – 700 Louisiana Blvd SE, 87108

https://www.krqe.com/news/politics-government/albuquerque-city-council-district-6-runoff-election-set-for-tuesday/

https://www.abqjournal.com/election-2023-the-candidates-the-turnout-and-where-to-vote-in-albuquerque-city-council-district/article_826c4858-9879-11ee-9323-8b6638785e80.html

ALLEGATIONS OF MISCONDUCT

Nichole Rogers campaign took more than a few  hits  when allegations of her impropriety were revealed during the run off in 4 major areas. Those 4 areas are:

1. WELSTAND FOUNDATION

Welstand Foundation is a one-person organization that was started by Nichole Rogers in 2019  and whose federal tax exempt status was revoked in 2022. Nichole Rogers failed to file required documents with the Internal Revenue Service, the New Mexico Attorney General and the New Mexico Secretary of State regarding her nonprofit Westland Foundation that she created and now manages. Rogers continued to fund raise while her nonprofit was not in “good standing” with the state and the corporation had lost its federal status as a 501 C 3 charitable organization. It was also reported that she failed to report income and account for monies she raised, including $15,000 in city funding she secured for her foundation and how the funding was spent. How much money the nonprofit received and where it went since its inception  is impossible to know based on the non-existent tax filings.

    2.  HISTORY OF CIVIL LITIGATION AND MISDEAMEANOR CHARGES

An extensive review of public records and court dockets revealed a disturbing history of civil litigation over debts and money due, failure to pay rent, evictions and property liens.  The total amount of judgments for debts and property liens filed were at least $25,726.47. It was also revealed misdemeanor traffic offense convictions by Nicole L. Rogers with times when bench warrants were issued for her arrest for failures to appear.  She did not disclose to the Albuquerque Journal her misdemeanor convictions in its candidate questionnaire.

A review of court dockets was conducted to determine the extent of litigation Nichole Rogers has been involved with over the years. A listing of 7 specific civil court and 4 metro court misdemeanor cases was compiled which are believed to be cases Rogers has been named the defendant. When confronted with the cases, Rogers declined to admit or deny if the cases were in fact her as a named defendant. She said NO in her Albuquerque Journal candidate questionnaire if she had ever been convicted of a misdemeanor which is false.

    3. RESIDENCY CHALLENGED

Confidential sources  alleged  that Nichole Rogers has not lived in District 6 for the 6 years she has claimed and as she told the Albuquerque Journal in its candidate questionnaire. She has said at forums she has lived in the district for 6 years which is false and she has raised her two children at the address she claims to be her home.  The home in District 6 is a rental she owns and has rented to others as she lived with her children.   It has been determined she has lived on the Westside in an apartment with others and is now using a District 6 residence that she owns but has rented to others in order to run for city council.

   4. POLITICAL HIT PIECE FROM MAYOR KELLER’S HANDLER

Confidential  sources have confirmed that Mayor Tim Keller was involved with Nichole Rogers candidacy from the get go. Jeff Hoehn was told in no uncertain terms by Mayor Keller’s political confidant and campaign manager Neri Holguin he should not run, he was told he could not win and that the Mayor would not support him and that the Mayor wanted another person.

Mayor Keller’s political confidant  and handler Neri Holguin  inserted herself into the City Council District 6 run off race.  On December 5 a “politcal hit piece” mailer was sent to all District 6 registered voters. The  flyer  was from Real New Mexico Leadership, the measured finance committee supporting Nichole Rogers and that Neri Holguin solicited  $12,000 in donations  to produce and distribute.

The politcal hit piece says in part “Jeff Hoehns biggest backer has the kind of record we don’t need in Albuquerque. … With friends like these, we can’t count on Jeff Hoehn to stand with us.”  The politcal hit piece then goes on to make the inflammatory accusations of “Sexual harassment reports by multiple woman”, “Discrimination against people of Color trying to buy homes”, “Paid $1.8 Billion jury veredict for inflating the price of home sales commissions.”

The politcal hit piece uses a unflattering photo of Jeff Hoehn positioned next to the accusations ostensibly to imply that Hoehn condoned the conduct or was guilty of the same conduct. The very, very fine print that strains they eye to read at the bottom offers as a Fact Checker and identifies the National Association of Realtors who was accused of the conduct.  The measured finance committee, or Political Action Committee, “Help ABQ and National Association of Realtors” is the real subject  of the hit piece. Looking at the hit piece at a glance you would think it was Jeff Hoehn who was accused of sexual harassment and discrimination.

Progressive Democrat  Nichole Rogers has never denounced the flyer nor distance herself from the Real New Mexico Leadership measured finance committee thereby giving her tacit approval of the hit piece and reflects she will do anything to win an election.

PROGRESSIVE DEMOCRAT JEFF HOEHN

Progressive Democrat Jeff Hoehn has a Master of Public Administration from the University of New Mexico, he is married to Charlotte Itoh and the couple have one child. He has lived in the district 21 years. He is the executive director of Cuidando Los Niños, a shelter and school for homeless children.  He has identified crime and homelessness as his top concerns for District 6.

https://www.abqjournal.com/election/district-6-candidate-questionnaire-jeff-hoehn/article_86040c9c-646e-11ee-8e6e-5f3f903f9fa5.html

Hoehn’s approach to the homeless would differ significantly from Mayor Keller’s large shelters at the Gateway Center and Westside Emergency Housing Center. To combat homelessness and the housing crisis in the city, he would fund smaller, population-specific shelters that are attractive and safe for those who want help. He agrees that the Albuquerque Community Safety Department should be a proactive force that is on the streets every day, all day actively encountering individuals who are homeless so that they accept help or choose to relocate.

Hoehn advocates short-term mobile APD command units in high crime areas. He advocates for a dedicated team of police officers that can embed with the community, build trust and make the area unfriendly to criminal activity.   His crime proposals lean heavily on police and policing technology to get that done. Hoehn told the League of Woman Voters this:

“I advocate instituting short-term APD mobile command units in high crime areas. …  We must be strategic so that officers can spend their time preventing and addressing crime. Technology such as speed cameras has a role to play also.”

PROGRESSIVE DEMOCRAT NICHOLE ROGERS

Progressive Democrat Nichole Rogers is a certified Emergency Medical Technician (Basic) and has an  Associate of Arts and Sciences in Integrated studies from Central NM Community College (2012). She lists her occupation as a business consultant and financial adviser, She has  2 children, aged 15 and 6 years old and had lived in District 6 for six years.

https://www.abqjournal.com/election/district-6-candidate-questionnaire-nichole-rogers/article_c891ab32-646e-11ee-8250-bb9887ac9743.html

Progressive Democrat Nichole Rogers identifies herself as a Black and Hispanic single mother and survivor of abuse. She has worked for the Mayor Tim Keller Administration as a policy advocate and community organizer.  Progressive Democrat Nichole Rogers cited poverty as her top priority if she is elected seeing it as an underlying cause of crime and homelessness.

Rogers says too many families do not have what they need to survive much less thrive. Rogers says short-term solutions include getting the Gateway Homeless shelter  open and functioning and the long-term solution is addressing poverty.

She vows to work to implement a Universal Income pilot that will provide families with the financial boost they need. To combat homelessness and the housing crisis in the city, Rogers wants to increase the number of shelter beds as a short-term solution and from there increase “wrap-around services” to get the unhoused in permanent supportive services that will help them stay housed.

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

The city is facing any number of problems that are bringing it to its knees. Those problems include exceptionally high violent crime and murder rates, the city’s increasing homeless numbers, lack of mental health care programs and little to no economic development. It is City Council District 6 that has suffered the brunt of all the city’s ills with the highest violent crime and property crime rates, increased homelessness and the highest poverty rates in the city  with no economic development, all issues Jeff Hoehn knows about, has dealt with and knows what to do about.

The city and District 6  cannot afford any longer city councilors who makes promises and who offers only eternal hope for better times that result in broken campaign promises.  What is needed are city elected officials who actually know what they are doing, who will make the hard decisions without an eye on their next election, not make decisions only to placate their base and please only those who voted for them or Mayor Tim Mayor.

District 6 is entitled to a City Councilor who is ethical, who is above reproach, who knows how to manage finances both privately and in their private business dealings, who actually knows the problems of the district by actually living in the district for more than a few years.

Elect Jeff Hoehn City Councilor in District 6 on December 12.

The City Council District 6 runoff race between the two top vote getters of Progressive Democrat Jeff Hoehn and Progressive Democrat Nichole Rogers is scheduled for December 12.  District 6 includes Nob Hill, the International District, and other neighborhoods and is currently represented by Progressive Democrat City Councilor Pat Davis who did not seek a third term.

Based upon how the candidates have presented themselves, have conducted their campaigns and what has been revealed about them during the runoff, Progressive Democrat Jeff Hoehn is the clear candidate that voters in District 6 should vote to represent them in District 6 as their city councilor.  

PROGRESSIVE DEMOCRAT JEFF HOEHN

Progressive Democrat Jeff Hoehn has a Master of Public Administration from the University of New Mexico, he is married to Charlotte Itoh and the couple have one child. He has lived in the district 21 years. He is the executive director of Cuidando Los Niños, a shelter and school for homeless children.  He has identified crime and homelessness as his top concerns for District 6.

https://www.abqjournal.com/election/district-6-candidate-questionnaire-jeff-hoehn/article_86040c9c-646e-11ee-8e6e-5f3f903f9fa5.html

Hoehn’s approach to the homeless would differ significantly from Mayor Keller’s large shelters at the Gateway Center and Westside Emergency Housing Center. To combat homelessness and the housing crisis in the city, he would fund smaller, population-specific shelters that are attractive and safe for those who want help. He agrees that the Albuquerque Community Safety Department should be a proactive force that is on the streets every day, all day actively encountering individuals who are homeless so that they accept help or choose to relocate.

Hoehn advocates short-term mobile APD command units in high crime areas. He advocates for a dedicated team of police officers that can embed with the community, build trust and make the area unfriendly to criminal activity.   His crime proposals lean heavily on police and policing technology to get that done. Hoehn told the League of Woman Voters this:

“I advocate instituting short-term APD mobile command units in high crime areas. …  We must be strategic so that officers can spend their time preventing and addressing crime. Technology such as speed cameras has a role to play also.”

GUEST OPINION COLUMN BY CANDIDATE JEFF HOEHN

City Council candidate Jeff Hoehn submitted the following guest column published on www.PeteDinelli.com on September 11:

“We all love Albuquerque.  We are all choosing to live here. 

 I am Jeff Hoehn, and I am running for City Council for District 6. I have lived in District 6 for over 20 years. I am Executive Director of Cuidando Los Niños, a nonprofit working to end homelessness, and I am President of the Nob Hill Neighborhood Association Board of Directors. My commitment to Albuquerque and to District 6 are proven in my work and volunteering.

District 6 is a large and diverse district stretching from Eubank to the east, I-25 to the west, Lomas to the north and Gibson to the south as well as Mesa del Sol. It holds so much potential, yet it bears a significant share of the problems that are holding our city back. The time for effective and genuine progressive leadership is now, for District 6 and for Albuquerque.

We find ourselves at a crossroads with respect to the future of our city. Albuquerque has so much opportunity and promise, but it is not being realized. More than five years ago, we entrusted the future of our city to our Mayor, Tim Keller. We trusted him to lead, and to make a real difference on major issues including homelessness and crime. This is why we elected him.

The Mayor has had more than enough time to effect the change that we all voted for. I do agree with many of the mayor’s policies, and I too am a Democrat. But I am independent of the party line, and I am independent of the Mayor. I hold deeply to the values of the Democratic party but question the strategies this administration has developed. A City Councilor must put people first, offering practical and realistic approaches that are achievable rather than seeking political gain.

Now that Pat Davis has decided not to run for another term, we have a unique opportunity to vote for leadership and to effect change. My love for this city has motivated me to run for office for the first time. My background, experience and leadership qualities set me apart from every other candidate in this race.

The son of a union construction worker, I worked my way through college as a student at UNM. I worked in kitchens to support myself, working my way up from dishwasher to prep cook, line cook and then kitchen manager and chef. Inspired to a career change after starting a family with my wife Charlotte, I once again worked my way through school, working full time at a nonprofit, while earning a Master of Public Administration. This degree has given me a broad base of knowledge about public policy, leadership, budgeting and much more.

I have put these skills to work for the betterment of our community, first as Executive Director of the Carrie Tingley Hospital Foundation, and for the past five years, as Executive Director of Cuidando los Niños. Cuidando is a pillar of our community of which we can all be proud. It is a five star preschool and day shelter for families experiencing homelessness.

For the past five years, I have seen the struggle and heartbreak these families endure, living on the edge of homelessness. But I have also seen the way that compassionate assistance and support can change lives. Cuidando now has a diversity of programs and assistance available to the families it serves, from housing assistance to a food program to transportation for the kids.

In fact, Cuidando has grown exponentially under my leadership. The budget has gone from $800,000 to $3,750,000 per year. We have grown the number of staff from 16 to almost 40, and increased pay and benefits for all employees. The number of homeless families served went from 40 a year to 225 a year. That is real community impact. This is all to say that I have the needed experience and leadership, and I am prepared for this job on day one.

Having thought about these issues for many years, I have policy positions that I intend to build coalitions around with residents and the City Council. 

With respect to homelessness, the Mayor’s legacy is an enormous homeless shelter the neighborhood did not want and that many people experiencing homelessness will not use. As we all know, it has been hugely expensive. It cost $15 million to acquire the site, and another $7 million has been spent getting it up and running. Yet it is not up and running even now. And the ambitions for its scope have been dramatically scaled back, the Mayor having announced that it will serve just 50 women when it opens. In yet another example of the City’s haplessness, we are facing a fine of more than three-quarters of a million dollars for the asbestos debacle. I know that we can do better. 

I believe that smaller, population-specific homeless shelters will be much more appealing to those experiencing homelessness. These can offer targeted wraparound services to their populations, and they will place a much lighter burden, if any on neighborhoods. We need to have compassion alongside pragmatism guiding our homelessness policy. We need to put real solutions before politics.

The mayor’s strategy on homelessness seems to stop at housing. Yet more housing alone will not solve homelessness. Our focus must be on preventing homelessness before it begins.  For example, a robust eviction prevention program that helps pay rent or a bill will prevent people from becoming homeless for very low cost. The city should also consider compassionate, safe environments for those who choose to sleep outdoors. A successful example of this exists in Las Cruces. We simply can’t be afraid to do what is right, and what has been proven to work elsewhere.

 With respect to crime, we must interrupt the cycles of crime and place much more focus on mental health and addiction treatment. We need to target the underlying drivers of crime. As a social scientist by training, I know that this can make an appreciable difference. We also need a functional justice system, and I applaud District Attorney Sam Bregman’s efforts to increase prosecutions and more importantly the efficiency and effectiveness of prosecutions.

 It is true that the city needs far more police officers. But we need well trained, dedicated officers who will engage in constitutional policing. We need to get out from under the DOJ consent decree but do so with integrity. Real culture change in APD is still needed. While rebuilding the culture to attract police officers, we must be strategic so that officers are maximizing their time spent preventing and addressing crime.

For example, I advocate short-term mobile APD command units in high crime areas. A dedicated team of officers can embed with the community, build trust and make the area unfriendly to criminal activity. I also know that ‘curb and gutter’ improvements in underserved areas of the city – such things as getting street lights working, building parks, adding trees and making sure basic city services are functioning – can have an impact on both crime and economic development.  Everyone in our city deserves a clean and safe neighborhood.

We must demand economic development in the International District. This area has been ignored for too long by politician after politician. As City Councilor I will ask every other Councilor to spend time with me in the International District. Then, I will work with City Council on developing a comprehensive plan for the International District that is informed by residents and business owners and not by policy makers from above.

It’s time to put people above politics. This is why I am the change we need on the City Council. Elect a proven leader in November. We can do better. Vote Jeff for District 6.

Visit jeff4d6.com to learn more about me and my specific policy proposals.”

PROGRESSIVE DEMOCRATE NICHOLE ROGERS PROVEN NOT FIT TO BE CITY COUNCILOR

There are four major areas that voters in District 6 need to be concerned about Progressive Democrat Nichole Rogers.  All 4  areas surfaced during the run off. Those 4 areas all taken together establish that Nichole Rogers  is simply not fit to be a city councilor.

WELSTAND FOUNDATION

Welstand Foundation is a one-person organization that was started by Nichole Rogers in 2019  and whose federal tax exempt status was revoked in 2022. Nichole Rogers failed to file required documents with the Internal Revenue Service, the New Mexico Attorney General and the New Mexico Secretary of State regarding her nonprofit Westland Foundation that she created and now manages. Rogers continued to fund raise while her nonprofit was not in “good standing” with the state and the corporation had lost its federal status as a 501 C 3 charitable organization. It was also reported that she failed to report income and account for monies she raised, including $15,000 in city funding she secured for her foundation and how the funding was spent. How much money the nonprofit received and where it went since its inception  is impossible to know based on the non-existent tax filings.

The link to the Albuquerque Journal article is here:

https://www.abqjournal.com/election/district-6-candidate-nichole-rogers-nonprofit-raised-money-despite-delinquent-submissions-with-ags-office-secretary/article_c3bbc350-7a66-11ee-8d56-ab4b462eb662.html

HISTORY OF CIVIL LITIGATION AND MISDEAMEANOR CHARGES

An extensive review of public records and court dockets revealed a disturbing history of civil litigation over debts and money due, failure to pay rent, evictions and property liens.  The total amount of judgments for debts and property liens filed were at least $25,726.47. It was also revealed misdemeanor traffic offense convictions by Nicole L. Rogers with times when bench warrants were issued for her arrest for failures to appear.  She did not disclose to the Albuquerque Journal her misdemeanor convictions in its candidate questionnaire.

A review of court dockets was conducted to determine the extent of litigation Nichole Rogers has been involved with over the years. A listing of 7 specific civil court and 4 metro court misdemeanor cases was compiled which are believed to be cases Rogers has been named the defendant. When confronted with the cases, Rogers declined to admit or deny if the cases were in fact her as a named defendant. She said NO in her Albuquerque Journal candidate questionnaire if she had ever been convicted of a misdemeanor which is false.

The links to look up the New Mexico court cases Nichole L. Rogers has been involved are as follows:

https://caselookup.nmcourts.gov/

“Search NM”:  https://researchnm.tylerhost.net/CourtRecordsSearch/Home#!/home 

RESIDENCY CHALLENGED

Confidential sources are alleging that Nichole Rogers has not lived in District 6 for the 6 years she has claimed and as she told the Albuquerque Journal in its candidate questionnaire. She has said at forums she has lived in the district for 6 years which is false and has raised her two children at the address she claims to be her home.  The home in District 6 is a rental she owns and has rented to others as she lived with her children.   It has been determined she has lived on the Westside in an apartment with others and is now using a District 6 residence that she owns but has rented to others in order to run for city council.

ROGER’S IS MAYOR TIM KELLER’S DESIGNATED CANDIDATE

Confidential  sources have confirmed that Mayor Tim Keller was involved with Nichole Rogers candidacy from the get go. Jeff Hoehn was told in no uncertain terms by Mayor Keller’s political confidant and campaign manager Neri Holguin he should not run, he was told he could not win and that the Mayor would not support him and that the Mayor wanted another person.  Members of Keller  administration took and active roll in helping Nichole Rogers to secure nominating signatures to get her on the ballot and collecting $5.00 qualifying donations to secure $40,000 in public financing. Rogers herself has told progressive democrats that she is the Mayor’s candidate to replace City Councilor Pat Davis.

Mayor Keller’s political advisor, campaign manager and handler Neri Holguin  inserted herself into the City Council District 6 run off race between Progressive Democrats  Nichole Rogers and Jeff Hoehn with a political hit piece against District 6 City Council Candidate Jeff Hoehn. On December 5 a “politcal hit piece” mailer was sent to all District 6 registered voters. The  flyer  was from Real New Mexico Leadership, the measured finance committee supporting Nichole Rogers and that Neri Holguin solicited  $12,000 in donations  to produce and distribute.

The politcal hit piece says in part “Jeff Hoehns biggest backer has the kind of record we don’t need in Albuquerque. … With friends like these, we can’t count on Jeff Hoehn to stand with us.”  The politcal hit piece then goes on to make the inflammatory accusations of “Sexual harassment reports by multiple woman”, “Discrimination against people of Color trying to buy homes”, “Paid $1.8 Billion jury veredict for inflating the price of home sales commissions.” The politcal hit piece uses a unflattering photo of Jeff Hoehn positioned next to the accusations ostensibly to imply that Hoehn condoned the conduct or was guilty of the same conduct. The very, very fine print that strains they eye to read at the bottom offers as a Fact Checker and identifies the National Association of Realtors who was accused of the conduct.  The measured finance committee, or Political Action Committee, “Help ABQ and National Association of Realtors” is the real subject  of the hit piece. Looking at the hit piece at a glance you would think it was Jeff Hoehn who was accused of sexual harassment and discrimination.

Progressive Democrat  Nichole Rogers has never denounced the flyer nor distance herself from the Real New Mexico Leadership measured finance committee thereby giving her tacit approval of the hit piece and reflects she will do anything to win an election.

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

The city is facing any number of problems that are bringing it to its knees. Those problems include exceptionally high violent crime and murder rates, the city’s increasing homeless numbers, lack of mental health care programs and little to no economic development. It is City Council District 6 that has suffered the brunt of all the city’s ills with the highest violent crime and property crime rates, increased homelessness and the highest poverty rates in the city  with no economic development, all issues Jeff Hoehn knows about, has dealt with and knows what to do about.

The city and District 6  cannot afford any longer city councilors who makes promises and who offers only eternal hope for better times that result in broken campaign promises.  What is needed are city elected officials who actually know what they are doing, who will make the hard decisions without an eye on their next election, not make decisions only to placate their base and please only those who voted for them or the Mayor.

District 6 is entitled to a City Councilor who is ethical, who is above reproach, who knows how to manage finances both privately and in their private business dealings, who actually knows the problems of the district by actually living in the district for more than a few years.

Elect Jeff Hoehn City Councilor in District 6 on December 12.