The regular 2023 municipal election to elect City Councilors for City Council Districts 2, 4, 6, and 8 will be held on November 7, 2023 along with $200 Million in bonds to be approved by city voters.  From June 5 to July 10, all city council candidates were required to collect 500 nominating petition signatures and $5.00 qualifying donations from voters within their districts to secure public financing. July 10 was the deadline for the candidates to turn in to the City Clerk all collected nominating petition signatures and qualifying donations for review and verification.

EDITORS NOTE: The postscript to this blog article provides an explanation on qualifying petition signatures, number of qualifying donations required and amount of public financing for each council district and private financing donation limits.

PROCESSED PETITION SIGNATURES AND $5 QUALFYING DONATIONS

On Friday, July 14, the City Clerk published on the City Clerk web site the tabulations of processed candidate petitions signatures and qualifying donations.  Following are the tabulations and those who will be on the November 7 ballot and those candidates who will be given public financing:

DISTRICT 2 (DOWNTOWN, OLD TOWN, PARTS OF THE NORTH VALLEY AND WEST SIDE)

All 3 candidates in District 2  have qualified for the ballot with 2 candidates qualifying for public finance. The candidates are:

Joaquin Baca, Democrat, a hydrologist and elected member of the Middle Rio Grande Conservancy District and president of the ABQCore neighborhood association. Baca secured 100% of the required 500 nominating petition signatures with 528 petition signatures verified and 54 signatures rejected by the city clerk. Baca secured 100% of the required 381 $5.00 donations with 458 donations verified and 14 donations rejected by the city clerk.  Baca will be given $40,000 in public financing by the city.

Loretta Naranjo Lopez, Democrat, a retired city planner and current member of the New Mexico Public Employees Retirement Association Board. She is the President of the Santa Barbara-Martineztown neighborhood association. Ms. Naranjo Lopez secured 100% of the required 500 petitions signatures with 724 petition signatures verified and 101 signatures rejected by the city clerk.  Naranjo Lopez   secured 100% of the required 381 $5.00 donations with 456 donations verified and 23 donations rejected by the city clerk.  Naranjo Lopez will be given $40,000 in public financing by the city.

Moises A. Gonzalez, community activist. Gonzales  secured 100% of the required 500 petitions signatures with  539 petition  signatures verified and 216 signatures  rejected by the city clerk.  Gonzales did not collect 100% of the required 381  $5.00 donations with  252 donations verified  and 23  rejected by the city clerk and fell  short by  129 donations.  Mr. Gonzalez will not  be given $40,000 in public financing by the city but his name will be on the ballot and he can  continue his candidacy as a privately financed candidate.

DISTRICT 4 (NORTHEAST HEIGHTS)

Both candidates in District 2 have qualified for the ballot and one for public finance.  The candidates  are:

Brook Bassan, Republican, a stay-at-home mom and incumbent councilor who sought public financing.  Bassan secured 100% of the required 500 petitions signatures with 570 petition signatures verified and 48 signatures  rejected by the city clerk.  Bassan secured 100% of the required 403  $5.00 donations with 411 donations verified and 21 donations rejected by the city clerk.  Bassan will be given $40,262 in public financing by the city.

Abby Foster, Progressive Democrat, and private attorney.  Foster secured 100% of the required 500 petitions signatures with 595 signatures verified and 64 petition signatures rejected by the city clerk. Foster did not seek public financing and will be a privately financed candidate and allowed to self-finance and spend whatever amount she can raise.

DISTRICT 6 (NOB HILL, INTERNATIONAL DISTRICT)

Five of 6 candidates have qualified for the ballot in District 6, with 3 candidates qualifying for public financing, 2 candidates privately financing and 1 candidate not qualifying for the ballot nor public financing. The candidates are:

Abel Otero, a Democrat, a barber and community activist.   Otero secured 100% of the required 500 petitions signatures with 564 nominating petition signatures verified and 40 signatures rejected by the city clerk.  Otero secured 100% of the 333 required $5.00 donations with 373 donations verified and 6 donations rejected by the city clerk.  Otero will be given $40,000.00 in public financing by the city.

Kristin Green, progressive Democrat and community activist.  Green secured 100% of the required 500 petitions signatures with 611 nominating petition signatures verified and 102 signatures rejected by the city clerk. Green secured 100% of the 333 required $5.00 donations with 356  donations verified and 10  donations rejected by the city clerk.  Green will be given $40,000.00 in public financing by the city.

Joseph Pitluck Aguirre, an Independent, a dentist and software development company owner.   Pitluck  Aguirre secured 100% of the required 500 petitions signatures with 613  nominating petition signatures verified and 119  signatures  rejected by the city clerk.  Mr.  Pitluck  Aguirre did not seek public finance and is a privately finance candidate who has already raised well over $10,000 and will likely raise at least $40,000 or more.

Jeff Hoehn, Democrat, a nonprofit executive director.  Hoehn secured 100% of the required 500 petitions signatures with 681 nominating petition signatures verified and 168 signatures rejected by the city clerk.  Sources have confirmed that Hoehn initially sought public financing but elected to go private financing when his efforts to collect qualifying donations failed and he is now a privately financed candidate.

Nichole Rogers, Democrat, business consultant with background in health care, education and government and influencer in the Black community. Ms. Rogers secured 100% of the required 500 nominating petitions signatures with 575  nominating petition signatures verified and 107 signatures  rejected by the city clerk.   Rogers secured 100% of the 333 required $5.00 donations with 373 donations verified and 6 donations rejected by the city clerk.  Rogers will be given $40,000.00 in public financing by the city.

Jonathan Ryker Juarez, party affiliation and background unknown. Juarez did not secure the 500 required petition signatures and collected 194 verified  petition signatures with 51 signatures rejected by the city clerk. Mr. Juarez did not collect the 333 required $5.00 donations and collected 71verified  qualifying donations with 2 rejected by the city clerk and falling short by 262 donations. Mr. Juarez did not qualify to be on the November 7 ballot nor qualify for public financing.

COMMENTARY:  In order to be elected city council, the winner must secure 50% + 1 of the vote or there is a runoff between the two top vote getters. The fact that there are 5 candidates in District 6 that have qualified for the ballot makes it  more likely than not that there will be a run off between the two top vote getters.

DISTRICT 8 (NORTHEAST HEIGHTS AND FOOTHILLS)

Both candidates in District 8  have qualified for the ballot and for public finance. The candidates are:

Dan Champine, Republican, a retired police officer and current mortgage lender. Champine secured 100% of the required 500 petitions signatures with 756 petition signatures verified and 48 signatures  rejected by the city clerk.  Champine secured 100% of the required 446  $5.00 donations with  541 donations  verified  and  23  donations rejected by the city clerk.  Sources have confirmed that Champine was given significant last minute help from the Republican party and Republican City Councilor Trudy Jones when his own efforts were failing to collect both qualifying petition signatures and qualifying donations.  Sources have also confirmed that Champine, a retire Albuquerque Police Officer, was also given discrete help from West Side Democrat City Councilor Louis Sanchez, who is also a retired police officer.   Champine will be given $44,577.00 in public financing.

Idalia Lechuga-Tena, Democrat, a consultant and former state representative. Lechuga-Tena  secured 100% of the required 500 petitions signatures with 795   signatures verified and 78  signatures rejected by the city clerk.  Lechuga-Tena secured 100% of the required 446  $5.00 donations with 552 donations  verified  and 12  donations rejected by the city clerk. Sources have confirmed that  Lechuga-Tena secured the petition signatures and qualifying donations almost single handedly by going door to door daily for 6 weeks.  Lechuga-Tena will be given $44,577.00 in public financing.

The link to the City clerk’s website listing the qualifying candidates is here:

https://www.cabq.gov/vote/candidate-information/2023-candidates-and-committees-1/2023-petition-qualifying-contribution-tally

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

The municipal election is on November 7, almost a full 4 months from now, with a very hot summer in between and anything can and likely will happen with all 4 races being hotly contested, especially in District 6 where 5 candidates are running to replace the Progressive Democrat Pat Davis who is not seeking another term.

The November 7 municipal election could remake the council and perhaps there will be a shift in numbers from the current 5 Democrats control to a Republican control city council or at least a conservative shift to challenge Mayor Keller’s progressive agenda. After the 2021 municipal election, the city council went from a 6 – 3 Democrat Majority with the loss of one Democrat to a Republican and it became a 5-4 Democrat majority, but the ideology split is 5 conservatives to 3 progressives and 1 moderate.

THE KELLER FACTOR

Like it or not, the 2023 municipal election will be a referendum on the job performance of Mayor Tim Keller only because he himself and his supporters are inserting themselves into the races for city council when they should keep their noses out of the races. Mayor Keller is not on the 2023 ballot, but City Hall sources say he has already told key staff and financial supporters he is running for a third term in 2025.

Informed sources have also confirmed Mayor Tim Keller has met or spoken to at least 3 progressive democrats running and pledging his support to them. This is a clear indication that Keller is fully aware the stakes are high in the upcoming 2023 municipal election. Keller intends to take an active roll in electing city councilors who will support his progressive agenda during the final 2 years of his second term thereby setting himself up to run for a third term in 2025.

Sources have confirmed that Progressive Political consultant Neri Holguin, who was Mayor Tim Keller’s 2021 campaign manager, is managing the campaigns of District 2 Progressive Democrat candidate Joaquin Baca and District 4 Progressive Democrat candidate Abby Foster leading to wide speculation that they are Mayor Keller’s selected candidates.  Holguin was  the campaign manager in 2019 for former Progressive Democrat State Senator Richard Romero who split the Democratic vote with Democrat Mayor Martin Chaves resulting in the election of conservative Republican Richard Berry.   Mayor Tim Keller has yet to publicly endorse candidates and it is unknown to what extent Keller supporters and his city hall staff will go to help those candidates he is helping or will be endorsing.

Complicating Keller supporting and endorsing candidates for city council is  Keller’s low approval ratings.  On November 3, the Albuquerque Journal released a poll on the job performance of Mayor Tim Keller. The results of the poll showed Keller has a 40% disapproval rating, a 33% approval rating an with 21% mixed feelings. The low approval rating was attributed to Keller’s continuing failure to bring down the city’s high crime rates despite all of his promises and programs, his failure to deal with the homeless crisis and his failure to fully staff APD after promising to have 1,200 sworn police during his first term.

https://www.abqjournal.com/2545820/mayor-kellers-job-approval-rating-sinks.html

KELLER UNIVERASLLY DISLIKED AT THE DOOR

At least five candidates for city council have confirmed that as they went door to door  collecting  qualifying nominating signatures and qualifying $5 donations they discovered there was no shortage of voters who expressed a strong dislike for Mayor Tim Keller.  Not at all surprising is the dislike for Mayor Keller in District 4 and District 8.  Both city council Districts are  Republican leaning Districts now represented by Republicans Brook Bassan and Trudy Jones respectively. Voters in both Districts 4 and 8 are hostile and very vocal over Mayor Keller and the City Council advocating and allowing city sanctioned Safe Outdoor Space homeless encampments.  What came as a surprise to candidates going door to door is the dislike for Mayor Keller in District 2, the downtown, old town, parts of the north valley and west side district and District 6, the Nob Hill area and International District area and the most progressive district leaning Democrat.

City Council Candidates campaigning door to door in all 4 City Council Districts reported that they found that Keller is perceived as mishandling the homeless crisis with homelessness increasing, residents believing they are not safe in their own homes and that Keller has done a poor job dealing the city’s spiking crime rates with murders reaching all-time records under Keller. Voters asked city council candidates what they intended to do about the homeless crisis and crime that would be different.

It turns out that Mayor Keller did himself no favors with advocating for city sanctioned homeless encampments and casita and duplex developments in all areas of the city to favor developers over property owners and historic neighborhoods. The city council deliberations and votes approving Mayor Keller’s Housing Forward  ABQ Plan occurred during the 6 week nominating petition and qualifying donation period resulting in voters being fully aware of what Keller was doing to change the city’s zoning laws to favor developers and investors.

In District 2, the downtown, old town, parts of the north valley and west side district, voters told city council candidates that they were very upset about Coronado Park that was a de facto  Keller city sanctioned homeless encampment that destroyed the park and was riddled with violent crime and illicit drug trafficking.  Wells Park area residents and businesses are particularly hostile to Keller because of his handling of Coronado Park over 5 years and him allowing it to become a homeless encampment.  When Keller closed Coronado Park, the homeless merely infiltrated the neighborhoods adjacent to the park and negatively affected businesses.

District 2 voters have also expressed anger over Keller promoting Safe Outdoor Space city sanctioned homeless encampments with the Santa Barbara-Martitnezown Neighborhood Association successfully appealing a Safe Outdoor Space for 50 victims of sex trafficking on Menaul west of the freeway. It was City Council District 2 candidate Loretta Naranjo Lopez  who is President of the Santa Barbara-Martineztown neighborhood Association who spear headed the opposition and filed the appeal to the Menaul Safe Outdoor Space Homeless encampment. She also opposed the city waste transfers station in the same area.  Her main opponent is Democrat Joaquin Baca whose campaign manager is Nerie Holguin, Tim Keller’s 2021 campaign manager, raising speculation that Baca is Keller’s handpicked candidate to replace City Councilor Isaac Benton a strong Keller supporter and his policies.

District 6  has within its borders the Gateway Homeless Shelter which is the massive  Loveless Hospital and Medical complex on Gibson. Mayor Keller infuriated more than a few neighborhood associations, area residents and businesses by  ignoring their concerns as the city purchased the complex without first reaching a consensus with neighborhoods on how it was going to be developed and how it was going to be used as a 24/7 homeless shelter.

April 6, 2021 Mayor Tim Keller held a press conference in front of the Gibson Medical Center to officially announce the city has bought the massive complex and the city would  transform it into a Gateway Center for the homeless. After his press conference, Mayor Keller came under severe criticism for his failure to reach a consensus and take community input before the Gibson Medical Center was purchased. On April 9, neighbors who felt  they had  been ignored and overlooked in the planning process and being asked to shoulder too big of a burden  staged  protests all for not.  Keller said this in response to the protests:

“We know that our administration believes in experimenting … We’re going to experiment and find out what works best over time. … And so really what we’re looking at here is to move past this question of where … No matter how you feel about it, we’ve answered that question.”

After close to 3 years, the Gateway Center is still being remodeled and has yet to open.

Voters in Districts 2, 4, 6 and 8 also told candidates campaigning door to door for city council that they were upset with Mayor Keller’s support and advocacy of city sanctioned Safe Outdoor Space encampments for the homeless as well as his Housing Forward ABQ plan. In particular, voters, home  owners and property owners object to the zoning changes allowing casitas to be built in neighborhoods taking away adjoining property owners rights to oppose and object to them and giving the city’s Planning Department exclusive authority to allow them.   Mayor Tim Keller is now perceived by more than a few, especially by many in his progressive base, as placing “profits over people” and favoring the business and development community with his “Housing Forward ABQ Plan”  that overwhelming favors developers and investors over historical neighborhoods and which encourages gentrification.

Another issue that came up as candidates for city council went door to door was that the Keller Administration spent $236,622 to purchase artificial turf for the Rio Rancho Events Center. The purchase was for the benefit of the privately owned New Mexico Gladiators to play their home football games. The City Inspector General noted in no uncertain terms that the New Mexico Department of Finance (DFA) found the purchase was in violation of “anti donation clause” which strictly bars public government entities from donating to private corporations. Mayor Keller tried to proclaim the artificial turf purchase  was not a violation of the states anti donation clause, which it was as found by the DFA.

There is little doubt as the races for city council heat up, the candidates will be asked if they support Mayor Tim Keller’s progressive agenda and if they are Keller’s handpicked candidate who will do his bidding and follow his policies if elected to the city council.

FINAL COMMENTARY

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 affordable housing, lack of mental health care programs and very little next to nothing in economic development. The city cannot afford city councilors who makes promises and 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. What’s needed is a healthy debate on solutions and new ideas to solve our mutual problems, a debate that can happen only with a contested election. A highly contested races reveal solutions to our problems.

Voters are entitled to and should expect more from candidates than fake smiles, slick commercials, and no solutions and no ideas. Our city needs more than promises of better economic times and lower crime rates for Albuquerque and voters need to demand answers and hold elected officials accountable.

Best wishes and good luck to all the candidates.

___________________

POSTSCRIPT

REQUIRED PETITION SIGNATURES

Candidates for City Council were required to collect 500 signatures from registered voters within the district the candidate wishes to represent. The City Clerk’s Office encourages candidates to collect more petitions signatures than required for the reason that signatures collected on paper forms must be verified as registered voters in the candidate’s district by the City Clerk’s Office once submitted to the city clerk. Signatures collected from voters not registered in the district are disqualified.

REQUIRED $5 QUALIFYING DONATIONS

Candidates for City Council who were seeking public financing were required to collect qualifying contributions from 1% of the registered voters in the district they wish to represent for public financing. The number of qualifying $5 donations is different for each district and changes based on the actual number of registered voters.  The City Clerk’s Office encouraged candidates to collect more $5 qualifying donation than required in that donations collected from voters not registered in the district are disqualified.

The number of $5 Qualifying Contributions representing 1%  of the registered voters in each City Council Disitrict were as follows:

• District 2: 381
• District 4: 403
• District 6: 333
• District 8: 446

PUBLIC FINANCING AND SPENDING LIMIT

Once a candidate submitted the required and verified $5 donations, the following public finance was given the candidates and they agreed to the following spending cap for their campaigns:

• District 2: $40,000.00
• District 4: $40,262.00
• District 6: $40,000.00
• District 8: $44,577.00

PRIVATELY FINANCED CANDIDATES

Candidates who did not choose public financing can collect and spend as much as they can in private financing from any source and there is no campaign spending cap. There are some limitations to privately financed candidates. A privately financed candidate may give him or herself an unlimited amount of money. However, another individual may only donate up to a certain amount. For a City Council candidate, an individual may only donate up to $1,683.00. A privately financed candidate may not accept money from a city contractor, any anonymous donor, or any foreign national. Privately financed candidates may accept contributions from individuals who live outside of New Mexico.

On Wednesday, July 12, Democrat Mathias Swonger announced at a meeting of Democratic Party ward and precinct chairs that he is running for Bernalillo County District Attorney in 2025. After his announcement, he emailed links to his campaign web site and FACEBOOK page.

Mathias Swonger published his official announcement on his campaign web site as follows:

 “I’m a Democrat running for District Attorney in 2024 with a clear vision and commitment to change. In my decade on the front lines of the criminal justice system, I’ve learned that a strong community is one where everyone feels safe and is treated fairly, regardless of who they are, what they look like, or where they come from.

Right now, that doesn’t describe Bernalillo County.

For years, we’ve recycled the same old, status quo, tough-on-crime policies that divide us and make us weaker. When we throw law enforcement at every problem, treat people unfairly just to move things along, and overcrowd our jails and prisons at taxpayers’ expense without any practical long-term plan, we don’t make our community safer, fairer, and stronger.

But there is a way forward. A District Attorney’s office with a clear vision and a commitment to change. A vision that prioritizes the most violent crimes, partners with community providers to help address substance use, mental illness, and poverty, treats everyone with dignity and respect, and supports investments in long-term solutions to help returning citizens from jail or prison reintegrate without reoffending.

That’s why I’m running.

To bring new leadership to the DA’s office, and to fight every day for a more sensible, thoughtful approach to public safety in Bernalillo County. For a strong community, where everyone feels safe and is treated fairly, regardless of who they are, what they look like, or where they come from.

I look forward to working for you, and thank you for your support.”

Links to quoted sources are here:

www.swongerfornm.com

https://swongerfornm.com/

MATHIAS SWONGER IN HIS OWN WORDS

The following information was gleaned and then edited from campaign materials published on SWONGER’s internet campaign web page:

PERSONAL BACKGROUND

 “Originally from Rhode Island, Matthias made New Mexico his home after moving here over a decade ago. He fell in love with his community, the Sandias, and most importantly, the love of his life, his wife Rosa, who was born and raised here.

Ten years later, Matthias and Rosa are the proud parents of two wonderful and spirited daughters, ages 5 and 6. On the weekends, he and the girls can be found at their local park, hiking in the foothills, or hanging out at home with nieces, nephews, and cousins.

Family is incredibly important to Matthias, and is one of the central reasons he is running: to make sure every family in Bernalillo County feels safe.

 His wife Rosa is the principal of a local elementary school.”

EDUCATION AND PUBLIC SERVICE.

 “Matthias Swonger graduated from NYU Law School, in New York City, where he interned with the Legal Services of New York City Housing Unit, the Unemployment Action Center, and the Brooklyn Defender Services. In those roles, he worked with families facing evictions from public housing, people grappling with job loss, and children involved in the delinquency system.

 Mr. Swonger has served as a local public defender, in various capacities, for the past 11 years. He was drawn to public defense because of his passion for public service and working alongside people without means who need legal assistance. He has represented hundreds of clients in a wide range of cases, and his experiences with the system have convinced him that the status quo approach to public safety is not working for anybody in our community.”

As a public defender, Mr. Swonger  has worked alongside many community partners to help individuals and families get access to necessary care, treatment, and other resources, like housing. As District Attorney, he hopes to build on those relationships to create stronger partnerships between the DA’s office and community providers as another tool to improve public safety.”

 [I am a]… proud democrat.  [I have] … long supported local democratic leaders and causes, like criminal justice reform, disability awareness, and educational opportunities for all. He previously served on the board of the Autism Society of New Mexico.”

SWONGER’S PLATFORM

Mr. Swonger’s platform was gleaned from review of his published campaign web site and FACEBOOK page and is edited and quoted as follows:

 PROPOSALS A SAFER COMMUNITY:

USE DATA. Place data and facts about crime front-and-center when making big and small decisions, communicating with the public, and pursuing reform. The shape of a public safety system should be informed by reliable information, not assumptions or exaggerations.

FOLLOW SCIENCE. Studies show that addressing incidents associated with poverty, substance use, and mental illness with solutions that redirect people to resources, as opposed to involvement in the criminal justice system, is the most effective strategy for improving public safety and reducing crime in the long-term. The DA’s office should incorporate the research into its decision-making and case resolution process.

 STOP VIOLENCE. Reorder priorities and resources so the DA’s office can successfully prosecute individuals who actually pose a great danger to society. Right now, much time, energy, and manpower at the DA’s office is devoted to addressing lower-level offenses with ineffective resolutions. With a different approach, the office can be more strategic about how resources are used to more effectively stop violence.

SUPPORT FAMILIES. Our community includes victims of crime, people returning from jail or prison, and all of their loved ones. Sometimes the same family includes all of the above. A DA’s office focused on reducing crime should partner with all families and community organizations to direct resources and services that promote restoring families and community ties and reduce recidivism. This includes access to treatment, financial assistance, and meaningful opportunities for personal and professional development.

ADVOCATE FOR CHANGE. The DA’s office has a critical voice in helping determine what our public safety system looks like. In applying a fact-focused, informed approach to increasing safety in the community, the DA should advocate for meaningful reforms to the entire structure of the criminal justice system that promotes public health and safety, regardless of political pressure or the influence of special interests.

 A safer community is one in which we follow the facts and are laser-focused in our pursuit of evidence-based solutions that reduce the risk of harm to people and property. Our current one-size-fits-all approach to crime makes us less safe by separating families, overcrowding our jails and prisons, and engaging in short-term thinking.

The link to the quoted source material is here:

 https://swongerfornm.com/safer

PROPOSALS FOR A STRONDER AND  FAIRER COMMUNITY

A STRONGER COMMUNITY is one in which every community member is treated fairly and respectfully regardless of who they are, what they look like, or where they come from. It is a community where individuals and families in every neighborhood feel safe and secure, with hope for the future.

A FAIRER COMMUNITY is one in which people who undermine safety are held accountable in a manner that is proportionate and restorative. It’s an environment where folks struggling with substance use, poverty, and mental health issues are not stigmatized, and are given the opportunity to get the help they need and move their lives forward in positive ways.

EQUAL JUSTICE. Recognize and take measures to address the troubling reality that the criminal justice system often treats people differently based on their race, class, gender, and ability. Ignoring the realities of systemic racism, cyclical poverty, and ableism and the role these forces play in our system sows widespread distrust, is inconsistent with the concept of “equal justice”, and diminishes public faith in our institutions.

REHABILITATE AND RESTORE. Advocate and pursue resolutions early on that center truly rehabilitating individuals and restoring relationships, when possible, between parties. Seek resolutions that are thoughtful, deliberative, and proportional to the offense, taking into account a host of factors and long-term public safety goals.

RESPECT EVERYONE. Resist dehumanizing and stigmatizing people involved in criminal cases, and treat everyone involved with basic dignity and respect. Understand that behind every case, regardless of how it appears on its face, is a complex set of factors that shouldn’t be reduced into a black-and-white narrative, and that doing so undermines fairness in the system, which does not advance long-term public safety goals.

UPHOLD THE CONSTITUTION. Respect and hold sacred the legal and Constitutional rights of everyone, like due process, fair and transparent investigations, humane treatment, timely trials, and proportionate resolutions. When we sidestep peoples’ rights in order to just move things along, we undermine the overall integrity and fairness of the system, which makes our community less safe.

REDUCE COSTS. Advocate for reforms and changes that in the long-term, reduce the staggering cost of the criminal justice system. These costs come with little accountability and fall at the feet of taxpayers and those without means, who are often indebted to fines and fees programs that help prop up the system. The lack of basic economic fairness in the system undermines public safety in the long run.

The link to the quoted source materials is here:

https://swongerfornm.com/fairer

DISTRICT ATTORNEY SAM BREGMAN

On January 4, Sam Bregman was appointed Bernalillo County District Attorney by Governor Mitchell Lujan Grisham to serve out the remaining two years of the 4-year term of Raul Torrez who was elected Attorney General in 2022. Bregman was among 14 applicants. When appointed, Bregman said he would serve only 2 years and not run for reelection.

On Thursday, June 29, a full 6 months after his appointment as District Attorney, Sam Bregman held a press conference to “update” the public on the District Attorney’s Office. The press conference was called to highlight the success of his office over his 6 months as District attorney.  Not withstanding the purpose and intent of the press conference, DA Sam Bregman was asked by the press if he intended to run for District Attorney in 2024.  Bregman responded:

“Yes, I will be running for district attorney. When I got into this office, I was sincere in the sense that I didn’t think I would. But we have put things in place … that I believe are starting to make a difference. …  I believe things are starting to get better when it comes to crime.”

On Friday, June 30, Bernalillo County District Attorney Sam Bregman made it official and announced to the public he was indeed running for a full 4 year term as District Attorney.

The link to read the full, unedited Sam Bregman campaign announcement is here:

https://www.scribd.com/document/656685248/Bregman-Announce

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

The 2024 Democratic primary is on June 4, 2024. Normally, official announcements for elections occur the January  of  the election year. It is very difficult to recall anyone announcing for Bernalillo County District Attorney so soon, yet there are now 2 candidates and both are Democrat.

Thus far, no Republicans have announced and that may not happen which would mean whoever is the Democrat nominee will be the next District Attorney.  The last Republican elected District Attorney was over 36 years ago. Republican Steve Schiff served as District Attorney from 1981 to 1989 and was then elected to Congress where he served from January 3, 1989 to March 25, 1998  before passing away from cancer at the very young age of 51.

Bregman’s June 29 early announcement no doubt was an attempt  to “clear the field”  and to set himself up without opposition in next year’s June Democratic Party primary and perhaps run unoppose assuring an easy election. That has now changed.

From all accounts, Matthias Swonger is indeed a serious candidate that offers a fresh face to Bernalillo County politics. The biggest question will be if he can raise enough money to take on Bregman and spend enough to run respectable campaign.

It is more likely than not that there will be other candidates for Bernalillo County District Attorney. One name in particular that continues to circulate amongst politicos is that of former New Mexico United States Attorney Damon Martinez. He was one of the  14 who applied for Bernalillo District Attorney but who was passed over by Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham in favor of appointing Sam Bregman.

 

On June 11, the on line news outlet the New Mexico Sun published the below Pete Dinelli guest column:

 Headline: “A republic or ‘political judicial monarchy’?”

 By Pete Dinelli

Jul 11, 2023

“The United States Supreme Court at one time was viewed with a unique “sense of awe” and respect because it consistently interpreted the United States Constitution as a “living and evolving document”.  A document that evolved and ensured and protected civil rights and remedies to conform with changing times, changing norms, changing viewpoints.

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

In the span of a mere 370 days, the United States Supreme Court with the appointment of 3 right wing supreme court justices by President Donald Trump, has set aside 50 years of legal precedent. Major Supreme Court decisions that have had a direct impact on New Mexico include the court overturning Roe v. Wade guaranteeing a woman’s right to abortion. The reversal was anticipated by the New Mexico legislature so it repealed the 1969 criminal law outlawing abortions and enacted legislation protecting a woman’s right to choose.

This year’s decision to eliminate affirmative action in higher education will have major impacts on all New Mexico Universities in that all have affirmative action programs, including the fields of law and medicine. The court’s ruling that a Christian business owner can discriminate and deny services to LGBTQ+ community based on religious grounds essentially negates provisions of the New Mexico civil rights and public accommodation laws.  

The United States Supreme Court’s legitimacy has always depended upon the public perceiving the court and its decisions as being “fair and impartial” based on the rule of law and precedent known as “stare decisis” and absent all partisan politics. So much so that labels such as “liberal”, “progressive”, “moderate” and “conservative” are used in referring to Supreme Court Justices’ philosophies without party affiliations used. It’s a charade that Supreme Court Justice’s and federal judge’s party affiliations are never identified nor reported by the media. 

It’s a realty that the process of selecting Supreme Court Justices is as partisan as it gets. The overlap between “judicial ideology”, “political ideology” and the “party affiliation” of those selected supreme court justices are now one and the same. The President nominating and the Senate having the power to confirm Supreme Court Justices results in selection of Justices who will interpret the law identical to the views held by the political party in power in the White House and the US Senate.

The Supreme Court’s eclectic mix of decisions over the past two years by the right-wing Republican court calls into question its legitimacy. The Supreme Court’s legitimacy is undermined by the ethical missteps of court members and the Court not having a Code of Ethics as required by all other federal courts. There have been repeated reports of years of undisclosed vacations and large gift payments to family members of Justice Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito from billionaire Republican donors. Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts has resisted instituting a Code of Judicial Ethics requiring financial disclosures by Supreme Court members saying Congress has no authority to impose a Code of Judicial ethics on the court. Roberts merely promises the Court will do more to adhere to high ethical standards, but fails to condemn the ethical indiscretions of Thomas and Alito.

An ABC News/Ipsos poll revealed that 53% of the American people believe the Supreme Court makes decisions based on their partisan political view, 33% believes the court rules on the basis of the law while 14% said they don’t know.  The poll found 76% of Democrats and 51% of independents believe the Court rules on the basis of their partisan political view and 36% of Republicans believe the court makes rulings based on their partisan political view. 

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

What we have now is a “political judicial monarchy” complete with 9 people all dressed up in black ropes with gavels replacing scepters and a courtroom replacing a royal thrown room as they render their decrees of justice to carry out the will of the Trump Republican Party.

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

__________________________________

POSTSCRIPT

ABOUT THE NEW MEXICO SUN

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

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

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

https://newmexicosun.com/

 

On  October 18, 2022,  Mayor Tim Keller announced his “Housing Forward ABQ Plan”. It is a “multifaceted initiative” where Keller set the goal of adding 5,000 new housing units across the city by 2025 above and beyond what the private sector normally creates each year.  According to Keller, the city is in a major “housing crisis” and the city needs between 13,000 and 28,000 new housing units.

Keller’s “Housing Forward ABQ Plan” was embodied in amendments to the Integrated Development Ordinance (IDO) which is the city’s zoning laws. To add the 5,000 new housing units, Keller proposed that the City of Albuquerque fund and be involved with the construction of new low-income housing.  The strategy includes “motel conversions” where the city buys existing motels or commercial office space and converts them into low-income housing.  It includes “casitas” on existing residential properties as permissive uses and not as conditional uses.

The most controversial provision of Keller’s “Housing Forward ABQ” plan  was to allow the construction of 750 square foot casitas and 750 square foot duplex additions on every single existing R-1 residential lot that already has single family house built on it  in order to increase density.  The zoning code amendments would have made both casitas and duplex additions “permissive uses” and not “conditional uses” as they have always been historically. A “conditional use” requires an application process with the city Planning Department, notice to surrounding property owners and affected neighborhood associations and provides for appeal rights.   A “permissive use” would give the Planning Department exclusive authority to issue permits for construction without notices and hearings and with no appeal process. Objecting adjoining property owners and neighborhood associations would be relegated to filing lawsuits to enforce covenants and restrictions.

CASITAS IN, DUPLEXES OUT 

On June 21, the Albuquerque City council voted 5-4 to approve the  zoning code changes to the Integrated Development Ordinance.    The version of the bill that ultimately passed on a 5-4 vote was amended extensively. The city council voted to allow casita construction a “permissive use” in all single-family R–1 zone and reduce parking requirements for some multifamily properties and changing building height limitations.  The city council voted to strike the amendment and not allow duplexes to be permissively zoned in R–1 zone areas.

Other amendments adopted included additional setbacks for backyard casitas of 5 feet on either the back or side of a property’s lot lines and a limit on the height of accessory dwelling units, but not other accessory buildings,  to the same height as the main building on the lot.  The enactment of the amendment   also paves the way for converting motel properties into housing and includes provisions to ease parking challenges at developments.

The biggest point of contention dealt with by the city council was whether casitas would be allowed as a “conditional use” mandating and application process  or  a “permissive use” giving the planning department unilateral authority to grant construction  in R–1 zones. The amendment making casitas a  conditional use passed 5-4.  Because casitas known as Accessory Dwelling Units  are now zoned permissively in R–1 zones, any home or property owner living in the area will automatically be qualified for a permit to build, so long as they meet the zoning and building standards, which include lot size, accessory structure size as well as setback and height requirements. Casitas will require water and sewer lines and electric hook ups which will be above and over mere construction costs.

KELLER SIGNS INTO LAW “HOUSING FORWARD ABQ” PLAN

On July 6, Mayor Tim Keller, surrounded by low income housing and homeless advocates, signed into law all the zoning code amendments passed by the city council that embody his “Housing Forward ABQ Plan” including those that will allow casita construction on 68% of all built out  residential lots in the city.  Keller said his administration does not have an “all-encompassing solution“, but they do have a step in the right direction which is  changing the zoning code. The annual update amendments to the Integrated Development Ordinance will take effect on July 27.

Before signing the legislation, Keller said this:

“I remember asking, I was like, ‘Well, what would actually make a difference?’ because when you have a shortage of, you know, 19,000  to 30,000 [housing] units, it’s not about one more building or 100 more units. …  I had no idea what the answer was to that question. … This is a big, big deal for Albuquerque.  …  We decided to put something forth.  It was very bold, very visionary … And it came from the team saying that, ‘Look, right now our current zoning code,  not on purpose, but by default,  discourages things like casitas, things like converting hotels to apartments. … This notion that your adult child or your grandparents can live with you on your property is fundamentally New Mexican. …  That is the promise of Albuquerque and this bill delivers and reflects on that promise.  ….”

Not a single city councilor, including the amendment sponsors Democrat City Councilor Issac Benton or Republican Councilor Trudy Jones attended the signing ceremony. Several low income housing advocates who spoke referred to the legislation as a “compromise bill.” The bill survived City Council with several amendments, which Keller called reasonable.

Keller announced that what is next on the Housing Forward agenda is the actual implementation of the zoning code changes and in particular making headway on hotel conversion projects around the city.  The city has already purchased the Sure Stay Motel located in motel circle for upwards of $8 million and is in the process of converting it into 100 efficiency apartments for low-income housing. City sources have confirmed the city has enough funding to perhaps purchase one more motel for conversion into low income housing.

One of the provisions of the zoning code change was allowing a microwave and additional heating element, such as an induction cooktop, to qualify as a kitchen.  This is a change intended to make it easier for developers to convert out-of-use hotels and motels into housing.

KELLER ANNOUNCES GOAL OF 1,000 CASITAS

During the July 6 bill signing ceremony, Mayor Keller announced to the public for the first time that it was his administration’s goal to have 1,000 new casitas in the city by 2025.  The casitas  will be part of  the overall goal of 5,000 new housing units.  To carry out Keller’s goal, Planning Manager Mikaela Renz-Whitmore announced the Planning Department is currently discussing how to “lower the bar” of entry for property owners to build casitas. Renz-Whitmore said that within 120 days, the Planning Department is expected to release some “preapproved casita designs” which should reduce the time and cost for a homeowner to build an accessory dwelling unit.

The department is also looking at how other cities have incentivized casita construction. In Los Angeles, Renz-Whitmore said, there’s a program where the city will loan building costs to homeowners that agree to rent their casita to a Section 8 housing voucher holders for a certain number of years. Renz-Whitmore said the department is discussing a similar program.

“That really helps make sure that this isn’t just for the people who can already afford to build an extra unit. … It actually helps those folks who are middle income.  They’re already homeowners and they’re just looking for either a little bit of rental income, or even to provide housing for their own family members.”

Links to quoted news sources materials are here:

https://www.kob.com/new-mexico/albuquerque-mayor-signs-off-on-zoning-changes/

https://www.krqe.com/news/politics-government/albuquerque-mayor-signs-zoning-change-allowing-for-more-casitas/

https://www.abqjournal.com/news/this-is-a-big-big-deal-mayor-signs-zoning-change/article_a62a2450-1c40-11ee-a951-e781218ba7f5.html

 COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

Mayor Keller’s major announcement that his administration has set the goal of constructing 1,000 casitas by 2025 took more than a few people by surprise, especially property and home owners and neighborhood associations who so strenuously opposed casita’s during the 6  month process that included public hearings and city council committee meetings and council hearings.

“COMPROMISE BILL” A LIE

Low incoming housing advocates and Keller calling the zoning code amendments a “compromise bill” is simply a lie. Throughout the process, the Keller Administration showed no signs of wanting any kind of compromise and opposed any and all efforts by the public to stop casitas and duplexes from being allowed.

From December of 202 to March 20, 2023, the Keller Administration held 6 public meetings at various quadrants of the city to promote and educate the general public on the “Housing Forward ABQ Plan”.  The proposals for casita and duplex development were met with hostility and mistrust by an overwhelming majority of property and homeowners.  

The Keller Administration officials made no changes  to the “Housing Forward ABQ Plan” base on the public comments made at the meetings. The Keller Administration went so far as to oppose any and all amendments offered by City Councilor Renee Grout to make casita and duplex construction conditional uses.

CASITA COST PROHIBITIONS

It is more likely than not that the Keller Administrations goal for 1,000 casitas by 2025 is more fantasy than reality simply because of construction costs and market forces.  The Keller Administration has never discussed the actual cost of construction of 750 square foot casitas. They simply presume property owners will be able to afford to do it themselves which is not likely given the high cost of construction and materials.

Home builders serving the Albuquerque area estimate the cost to build residents in Albuquerque is between $175 to $275 per square foot. It’s a cost that equally applies to casitas.  To build and construct a 750 foot casita or duplex at the $175 foot construction cost would be $131,425 (750 sq ft X 175 = $131,421).  The addition of plumbing, sewer, electrical and gas hook ups and permits will likely add an additional $30,000 to $50,000 to the final construction costs.  Very few people have the financial ability to invest another $130,000 to $200,000 in homes they already own.

Mayor Tim Keller and supporters of casita development argue it is needed to increase density, create affordable housing and to get away from “urban sprawl”.  They repeatedly made the misleading representation that many within the community want additional housing for extended families making reference to “mother-in-law quarters”.  Keller himself is now calling “casitas” uniquely New Mexico.  The only thing unique about “casitas” is the use of the spanish word in that the most common term in zoning is “accessory dwelling” and accessory dwelling are found through out thee country. Calling casitas “mother-in-law quarters”  or “casitas'” is nothing more than a publicity ploy to make the proposal palatable to the general public given the fact very few individuals will actually be able to afford the construction. The only ones likely to afford to construct casitas are investors and developers.

PRE-APPROVED CASITA DESIGNS

The Planning Department attempting to “lower the bar” of entry for property owners to build casitas and to provide  “preapproved casita designs”  is so very wrong on a number of levels.  The private sector investors, developers and contractors are required to go through a very lengthy and costly process to secure approval of planned developments and architectural plans, including the application for construction permits they pay for themselves.  Architectural plans for construction and remodeling are paid for in full by the developer who then submits them for the Planning Department for review and approval and to  insure compliance with zoning codes  and construction codes.  Final approval of development plans and issuance of construction permits can take anywhere from between 4 months and at times as much as a full year.

It is common knowledge that the Planning Department is currently extremely short staffed when it comes to certified and trained  code inspectors and personnel dedicated to approval and review development plans. The Planning Department does not have sufficient staff who have the  training and certifications in permit and final construction inspection process. There has been a mass exodus of planning department personnel and code inspectors resulting in a serious backlog in approving projects.

The city’s efforts to reduce the time and cost for a homeowner to build an accessory dwelling units amounts to nothing more than giving preferential treatment over those in the private sector  that have diligently followed the process and who have incurred substantial expenses. The city providing “preapproved casita designs” means the Planning Department is stepping over the line of being a code enforcement and approval agency to one of providing architectural plans or designs where the city taxpayer is absorbing the costs for the developer.  The “preapproved casita designs” plan likely violates the state’s “anti-donation clause”  which strictly bars public government entities from donating to private corporations and individuals.

CITY LOW INTEREST LOANS FOR CASITA DEVELOPMENT LIKELY VIOLATION OF STATE ANTI DONATION CLAUSE

Mayor Keller announced that his administration is looking at how other cities in other sates have incentivized casita construction. Planning Manager Mikaela Renz-Whitmore in particular said the city is looking  at Los Angeles California’s program where the city loans building costs to homeowners that agree to rent their casita to those who use  Section 8 housing vouchers.

Albuquerque, New Mexico is no way comparable to Los Angeles, California when it comes to assets and resources.  Also in New Mexico there is the anti donation clause  which strictly bars public government entities from donating to private corporations and individuals that does not exist in California or other states.

Ostensibly Mayor Tim Keller and his administration are totally ignorant of just how the “anti donation clause” works or they just choose to ignore it.  Least anyone forget, the Keller Administration spent $236,622 to purchase artificial turf for the Rio Rancho Events Center. The turf  purchase was for the benefit of the privately owned New Mexico Gladiators to play their home football games. The City Inspector General  found the turf  purchase and installation in another city  was in violation  of “anti donation clause” which strictly bars public government entities from donating to private corporations.

The city’s proposal to offer low interest loans dedicated for  construction of casitas in exchange for the property owners committing  that the casita be rented to low income Section 8 housing voucher holders is very problematic on a number of levels:

First,  its likely the loan program for casita development to private property owners to construct casitas is a violation of New Mexico’s anti donation clause.  This would be  especially true if no collateral is required to secure the loan for casita construction and the city is forced to  write off of loan for nonpayment or if the city  converts the loans to none refundable grants for home improvements.

Second,  it presumes the city has the financial resources to offer low interest loans to private citizens when the city’s responsibility is funding  essential services such as police protection, fire protection and other essential services.

Third, it amounts to  the city going into home improvement loan business assuming a financial risk when the city is supposed to responsible for construction code enforcement and permits.

Fourth, the City is not equipped to be a loan institution for collections and recovery on high risk loan defaults for casita development.

CASITAS NO SOLUTION TO AFFORDABLE HOUSING SHORTAGE

The housing shortage is related to economics, the development community’s inability to keep up with supply and demand and the public’s inability to purchase housing or qualify for housing mortgage loans.  The shortage of rental properties has resulted in dramatic increases in rents.

The City Council’s reclassification zoning of all R-1 single-family lots to allow for casita development will encourage large private investors and real estate developers, including out-of-state corporate entities, to buy up distressed properties to lease and convert whole blocks into casita rental areas.  This has already happened in the South area of the University of New Mexico dramatically degrading the character of neighborhoods and the city as a whole. It will now happen, or is already happening, in the South East Heights International District and historic areas of downtown.

To put the argument in perspective, individual investors will now be able to purchase single-family homes to rent, and add a 750-square-foot free-standing casita.  More outside investors are also  buying multifamily properties around the city. According to New Mexico Apartment Advisors CEO Todd Clarke, there are currently 1,999 investors looking in the Albuquerque multifamily market, a number that has increased sixfold since before the pandemic. Casitas will be used predominantly by outside investors and developers as rental units and it is in all likely they will not be low income units and the rent charged will be what the market will bear.

The result is a one-home rental being converted into 2 separate rental units. Such development will increase an area’s property values and property taxes. It will also decrease the availability of affordable homes and raise rental prices even higher. It will increase gentrification in the more historical areas of the city as generational residents will be squeezed out by the developers and increases in property taxes.

People buy single detached homes wanting to live in low density neighborhoods not high-density areas that will reduce their quality of life and the peaceful use and enjoyment of their homes and families.  The city allowing  casita development, which in all likelihood will be rentals on single family properties, will seriously damage the character of any neighborhood.

People buy their most important asset, their home, with the expectation they can trust the city not to change substantially the density, quality and appearance of their neighborhood. What happened with the enactment of Keller’s Housing Forward ABQ Plan and amendments to the Integrated Development Ordinance was a breach of trust between home owners, property owners  and the city and its elected officials who put “profits over people” to benefit the development and investment industry.

Mayor Tim Keller calls himself a Progressive Democrat as he gives a wink and a nod to the business and development community with his “Housing Forward ABQ Plan” that overwhelming favors developers over neighborhoods. The City Council did its constituents a real disservice to the city by allowing development that will have a dramatic negative impact on historic areas of the city.  Keller  used  the short-term housing “crunch” to declare a “housing crisis” to shove his Housing Forward ABQ Plan down the throats of city property owners.

The regular 2023 municipal election to elect city councilors for City Council Districts 2, 4, 6, and 8 will be held on November 7, 2023 along with $200 Million in bonds to be approved by city voters. Three of the four incumbents whose seats are on the ballot are not running for reelection. Those incumbents  are District 2’s Democrat Isaac Benton, District 6’s Democrat  Pat Davis and District 8’s Republican Trudy Jones. The only sitting councilor running this year is District 4’s first term Republican Brook Bassan.

The 2023 Regular Local Election Calendar for candidates began on April 30 with an “exploratory period” to allow candidates to organize and collect “seed money” donations and that period ended on June 4.  From June 5 to July 10, city council candidates were required to collect nominating petition signatures and $5.00 qualifying donations  from voters within their districts.    All City Council Candidate were required to collect  petition  signatures and  qualifying donations for public finance from June 5 through July 10.

QUALIFYING CANDIDATES

All candidates were required to submit their nominating signatures and qualifying  donations collected on or before July 10 to be verified by the City Clerk as legally submitted. On Friday, July 14, the City Clerk will officially certify who has qualified for the Nov 7  ballot and public financing.  Candidates who have collected the requisite number of petitions signatures  and qualifying donations as of June 11 and who are listed on the City Clerks web page are as follows:

DISTRICT 2 (DOWNTOWN, OLD TOWN, PARTS OF THE NORTH VALLEY AND WEST SIDE)

• Joaquin Baca, Democrat, a hydrologist and elected member of the Middle Rio Grande Conservancy District and president of the ABQCore neighborhood association. Baca secured both the mandatory number of nominating petition signatures and $5.00 qualifying donations and he will be given $40,000 in public finance by the city to run his campaign and will be capped at $40,000 on what he can spend.
• Loretta Naranjo Lopez, Democrat, a retired city planner and current member of the New Mexico Public Employees Retirement Association Board and she is the President of the Santa Barbara-Martineztown neighborhood association. Ms. Lopez secured the mandatory number of nominating petition signatures as well the mandatory number of qualifying $5.00 donations and will also be given $40,000 in public finance.
• Moises A. Gonzalez, community activist. As of July 7, Gonzalez had failed to secure both the required number of nominating petition signatures as well as $5.00 donations.  His numbers do not include the last paper nominating  petitions nor donations turned in on July 10 nor the electronic petitions and donations turned in after July 7 so he may still make the ballot.

DISTRICT 4 (NORTHEAST HEIGHTS)

• Brook Bassan, Republican, a stay-at-home mom and incumbent councilor who sought public financing. Bassan has qualified for the ballot by  submitting  the needed 500 petition signatures and she also qualified for the $42,600 in public financing for her campaign by submitting 500 qualifying donations.
• Abby Foster, Progressive Democrat, and private attorney.  Foster qualified for the ballot submitting the 500 petition signatures, but did not seek public financing and will be a privately financed candidate and allowed to self-finance and spend whatever amount she can raise.

DISTRICT 6 (NOB HILL, INTERNATIONAL DISTRICT) 

• Abel Otero, Democrat, a barber and community activist. Mr. Otero qualified for the ballot collecting the required number of nominating signatures and qualified for public financing of $40,000.
• Kristin Green, progressive Democrat and community activist.  Green has qualified for the ballot securing the mandatory number of nominating signatures and but no final decision has been announced by the city clerk as to the qualifying number of $5.00 donations.
• Joseph Pitluck Aguirre, Independent, a dentist and software development company owner. Mr.  Pitluck  Aguirre has qualified for the ballot, he did not seek public finance and is a privately finance candidate who has already raised well over $10,000 and will likely raise at least $40,000 or more.
• Jeff Hoehn, Democrat, a nonprofit executive director. Hoehn has qualified for the ballot. Jeff Hoehn initially sought public financing but elected to go private after a poor showing in the first few weeks and he is now a privately financed candidate.
• Nichole Rogers, Democrat, business consultant with background in health care, education and government and influencer in the Black community. Ms. Rogers has qualified for the ballot and has qualified for public financing.

COMMENTARY:  In order to be elected city council, the winner must secure 50% + 1 of the vote or there is a runoff between the two top vote getters. The fact that there are 5 candidates in District 6 makes it far more likely than not that there will be a run off.

DISTRICT 8 (NORTHEAST HEIGHTS AND FOOTHILLS)

• Dan Champine, Republican, a retired police officer and current mortgage lender. Champine qualified for the ballot by submitting the required  500 petition signatures and he also qualified for public financing for his campaign by submitting 500 qualifying $5.00 donations.
• Idalia Lechuga-Tena, Democrat, a consultant and former state representative. Lechuga-Tena qualified for the ballot by  submitting  the needed 500 petition signatures and she  also qualified for  public financing for her campaign by submitting 500 qualifying $5.00 donations.

The link to the City clerk’s website listing the qualifying candidates is here:

https://www.cabq.gov/vote/candidate-information/2023-candidates-and-committees-1

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

Now the hard part begins for the candidates.  The municipal election is on  November 7, almost a full 4 months from now, with a very hot summer in between and anything can and likely will  happen with all 4 races being hotly contested, especially in District 6 having 5 candidates who are running to replace the Progressive Democrat incumbent Pat Davis who is not seeking another term.

BALANCE OF POWER AT STAKE

The November 7 municipal election could remake the council and perhaps there will be a shift in numbers  from the current 5 Democrats control to a Republican control city council or at least a conservative shift to challenge Mayor Keller’s progressive agenda. After the 2021 municipal election, the city council went from a 6 – 3 Democrat Majority with the loss of Democrat Cynthia Borrego to Republican Dan Lewis  and it  became a 5-4 Democrat majority, but the ideology split is  5 conservatives to 3 progressives and 1 moderate. The current breakdown by name is as follows:

Democrats

District 1 Conservative Democrat Louie Sanchez
District 2 Progressive Democrat Isaac Benton
District 3 Moderate Democrat Klarissa Peña
District 6 Progressive Democrat Pat Davis
District 7 Progressive Democrat Tammy Fiebelkorn

Republicans

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

Although the City Council is currently split with 5 Democrats and 4 Republicans, Conservative Democrat Louie Sanchez has often allied himself with Republicans Dan Lewis, Renee Grout, Trudy Jones and Brook Bassan allowing them to approve or kill measures on a 5-4 vote but being unable to override Mayor Tim Keller’ veto’s with the required 6 votes.

THE KELLER FACTOR

Like it or not, the 2023 municipal election will be a referendum on the job performance of Mayor Tim Keller only because he himself and his supporters are inserting themselves into the races for city council when they should keep their noses out of the races. Mayor Keller is not on the 2023 ballot, but he has already made  it known he is running for third term in 2025.  City Hall sources are  saying he has already told many of key staff and supporters he is running for a third term in 2025.

Informed sources have confirmed Mayor Tim Keller has already met or spoken with at least 2 progressive democrats running and pledging his support to them. This is a clear indication that Keller is fully aware of the stakes in the upcoming 2023 municipal election and that he intends to take an active roll in electing city councilors who will support his progressive agenda over the final 2 years of his second term and to set himself up to run for a third term in 2025.

Sources have confirmed that Progressive Politcal consultant Neri Olguin, who was Mayor Tim Keller’s 2021 campaign manager, is  managing  the campaigns of District 2 Progressive Democrat candidate  Joaquin Baca and  District 4 Progressive Democrat candidate Abby Foster.  Sources have confirmed that Progressive Political consultant Brandon Padilla,  who has worked for Mayor Tim Keller, is managing the campaign of  District 6 candidate Abel Otero.  The real question that remains to be answered is if Tim Keller will actually publicly endorse candidates and to what extent Keller supporters will go to help those candidates he supports at his direction?

Complicating Keller supporting and perhaps even endorsing candidates for city council is his Keller’s low approval ratings.  On November 3, the Albuquerque Journal released a poll on the job performance of Mayor Tim Keller. The results of the poll showed Keller has a 40% disapproval rating, a 33% approval rating an with 21% mixed feelings. The low approval rating was attributed to Keller’s continuing failure to bring down the city’s high crime rates despite all of his promises and programs, his failure to deal with the homeless crisis and his failure to fully staff APD after promising to have 1,200 sworn police during his first term.

https://www.abqjournal.com/2545820/mayor-kellers-job-approval-rating-sinks.html

KELLER DISCOVERED NOT WELL LIKED AT THE DOOR

Candidates for city council have confirmed that as they went door to door to collect qualifying nominating signatures and qualifying $5 donations they discovered that there was no shortage of voters who expressed a strong dislike for Mayor Tim Keller.  Not at all  surprising is the dislike for the Mayor Keller in District 8, a Republican leaning District now represented by Republican Trudy Jones. What is surprising is the dislike for the Mayor Keller is high in District 6, the most progressive district leaning Democrat now represented by Pat Davis.  Davis himself is not  well liked in his own district  which  explains his decision not to run for a third term and the 5 candidates running to replace him.

City Council Candidates campaigning door to door  found that Keller is perceived as mishandling the homeless crisis with homelessness increasing, residents believing they are not safe in their own homes and that Keller has done a poor job dealing the city’s crime rates with murders reaching all time records under Keller.  Voters asked city council candidates what they intended to do about the homeless crisis and crime.  It turns out that Mayor Keller also did himself no favors with advocating casita and duplex developments in all areas of the city to favor developers over property owners and historic neighborhoods.

Another issue that came up as candidates for city council went door to door was  that the Keller Administration spent $236,622 to purchase artificial turf for the Rio Rancho Events Center. The purchase was for the benefit of the privately owned New Mexico Gladiators to play their home football games. The Inspector General noted in no uncertain terms that the New Mexico Department of Finance (DFA) found the purchase was in violation  of “anti donation clause” which strictly bars public government entities from donating to private corporations. Mayor Keller tried to proclaim the artificial turf was not a violation of the states anti donation clause, which it was as found by the DFA.

There is little doubt as the races for city council heat up, the candidates will be asked if they support Mayor Tim Keller’s progressive  agenda and if they are Keller’s hand picked candidate who will do his bidding if  elected to the city council.

FINAL COMMENTARY

What is downright pathetic is that more than a few well known politcal pundits and city hall observers are already attempting to declare who the front runners are  and predicting the final outcomes of all 4 city council races even before the races are fully engaged and campaigning begins in earnest. Predictions of winners now does a real disservice to the candidates and the election process.  What these politcal pundits are really trying to do  is  to act like king makers. They are trying to influence the public opinion, discourage candidates  and to tip public perception in favor of their preferred candidates.  It  is the real slimy side of politics from those who have never run for office themselves and it is  so very discouraging to those who run for office who listen to their political drivel.

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 affordable housing, lack of mental health care programs and very little next to nothing in economic development. The city cannot afford city councilors who makes promises and 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. What’s needed is a healthy debate on solutions and new ideas to solve our mutual problems, a debate that can happen only with a contested election. A highly contested races reveal solutions to our problems.

Voters are entitled to and should expect more from candidates than fake smiles, slick commercials, and no solutions and no ideas. Our city needs more than promises of better economic times and lower crime rates for Albuquerque and voters need to demand answers and hold elected officials accountable.

Best wishes and good luck to all the candidates.

The Adelante Congressional District 2 Caucus is a group of Democratic Party activists who are involved with their communities within Congressional District 2. According to its web site, the values of the Progressive Adelante Progressive Caucus is to promote Democratic Party core values including social, racial, economic, gender, and environmental justice. To advance these values, the Adelante Progressive Caucus works in part to create transparency and accountability in all functions of our state and national party and to reach out to historically underrepresented communities across the state to include their voices in the democratic process.

https://adelantecaucus.org/

https://adelantecaucus.org/invitation-to-join-2/

JUNE 24 DINELLI PRESENTATION

Pete Dinelli was invited to speak before the Adelante Congressional District 2 Caucus in Socorro, New Mexico on Jun 24.  The topic of the presentation was “NEW MEXICO’S GUN VIOLENCE CRISIS AND SOLUTIONS”. Following is the prepared presentation with research links added for publication on www.PeteDinelli.com.  The presentation has also been updated to include additional research with links.

INTRODUCTION

On May 15, nine people were injured or killed by an 18-year-old male armed with an AR-17 style rifle in a mass shooting in Farmington, New Mexico. Three woman over the age of 70 were killed. The 3 fatal shooting victims were identified as 79-year-old Shirley Voita, 73-year-old Melody Ivie, and 97-year-old Gwendolyn Schofield. Schofield and Ivie were mother and daughter. Two police officers were also injured.

The Suspect was identified as 18-year-old Beau Wilson who was shot and killed by police. Wilson was a student at Farmington High School.  Wilson  used  an AR-style rifle and used a 9mm handgun and a .22 caliber firearm belonging  to a family member.

When 18-year-old Wilson stepped out of his father’s house police say he was wearing a bulletproof vest and he had a note in his pocket. The note in Wilson’s pocket was scrawled in green ink and said “If you’re reading this I’m the end of the chapter. … lay eyes or dear put a finger on my little sister.  I promise there will be regrets.”

Police say Wilson fired 141 rounds from his house on North Dustin with the assault-style rifle  before dropping the weapon in nearby bushes, taking off the vest and walking down the street continuing to fire one handgun and then a second.   Wilson fired on at least 6 houses and 3 cars in a “rampage” in a   quiet middle-class neighborhood lined with houses and churches in the heart of Farmington involving up to a quarter of a mile length of the neighborhood street.

IF IT CAN HAPPENED IN FAMINGTON, IT WILL  HAPPEN ANYWHERE IN NEW MEXICO

One thing for certain is what happened in Farmington on a quiet, middle-class neighborhood lined with houses and churches, can happen in any community, large or small, in New Mexico. Farmington is clear proof it’s a tragedy that no one can presume will only happen in the larger cities of the state such as Albuquerque, Las Cruces and Sant Fe.  It’s a tragedy that could easily happen in Clovis, Portales, Hobbs, Espanola, Taos or Raton.

GOVERNOR RENEWS CALLS FOR ASSAULT WEAPONS BAN

On May 17, Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham, in response to the Farmington mass shooting, said she would again pursue an assault weapon ban and age restrictions for purchasing firearms.   Both proposals were introduced during the 2023 NM legislative session but failed to reach her desk in this year’s 60-day legislative session.  The Governor said this:

 A ban on assault weapons … doesn’t have universal support in many states, including this one. I am putting it on the table. … I want to be able to go to Farmington and say this will never happen again. I don’t know of a tool that prevents all tragedies. … If there was one thing that would cure it, it would already be done. …  I would call a special session … if we could pass something that could be implemented in a timely manner.”

GUNS IN THE UNITED STATES

Discussion of gun violence must begin with the astonishing proliferation of guns in the United States. In 2023, it is estimated we now exceed 400 million guns.  There are 53,267-gun shops and only 15,876 Macdonald’s in the U.S.

https://robarguns.com/gun-sales-in-the-us-by-state

About 81 million Americans, or 31% of all adults, own an average of 5 guns each.

https://americangunfacts.com/gun-ownership-statistics/

Americans own nearly half (46%) of all civilian-owned guns worldwide, and we own more per capita  than any other country on earth.

https://www.cnn.com/2017/10/03/americas/us-gun-statistics/index.html

MASS SHOOTINGS

The Gun Violence Archive is an online archive of gun violence incidents collected from over 7,500 law enforcement, media, government and commercial sources daily in an effort to provide near-real time data about the results of gun violence. GVA is an independent data collection and research group with no affiliation with any advocacy organization. Gun Violence Archive (GVA) is a not-for-profit corporation formed in 2013 to provide free online public access to accurate information about gun-related violence in the United State.

The Gun Violence Archive defines a MASS SHOOTING as four or more people, excluding the shooter, being shot.

https://www.gunviolencearchive.org/about

Over a 35-year period, during the five administrations between Presidents Ronald Regan and Barack Obama (1981-2016), there was an average of 44 mass shooting victims per year with 22 deaths and 22 injuries. During the first three years of Donald Trump’s administration (2017-2019) the United States witnessed a nearly 900% increase in total deaths and injuries in mass shootings, per year, to 377 annually (108 deaths and 269 injuries).

The Gun Violence Archive (GVA) reported that there were over 5,000 more fatal shootings during Joe Biden’s first year in office compared to Donald Trump’s first year as president.  According to the Gun Violence Archive, the United States saw 44,868-gun deaths in Biden’s first year as president. The total number of murders, justifiable self-defense homicides, and accidental homicides involving firearms were 20,783 in 2021, compared to 15,727 in 2017 when Trump took office.  This means that in the past few years alone, gun violence has increased by 32%.

https://www.wionews.com/world/trump-vs-biden-gun-violence-in-joe-bidens-us-sees-a-sharp-escalation-447054

As of May 21, 2023, the year has seen more mass killings to date than any other year since data collection started in 2006.

https://apnews.com/article/mass-shooting-anniversary-uvalde-buffalo-325b8649c7d34577051ed4118b8dbac4

https://apnews.com/article/mass-killings-record-pace-2023-d685a6cd67e0f449f3f9d1d8713d451c

According to data compiled by the Gun Violence Archive, 2023 is on pace to become the deadliest year for mass shootings in recent history.  As of July 4, the U.S. has reported 346  mass shootings. This is the earliest in any year the  gruesome milestone has been reached since the Gun Violence Archive  began tracking them in 2014.  The statistics works out to nearly 1  mass murder per week in the first half of 2023.

GUN VIOLENCE DEATHS

After reviewing the proliferation of guns in the United States, the number of  HOMICIDES, the number of SUICIDES the number of GUN VIOLENCE DEATHS, and the number of MASS SHOOTINGS involving guns is in order to fully understand the crisis:

According to the “Gun Violence Archive” the number of HOMICIDES over the last 4 years were as follows:

• 2019: 15,516
• 2020: 19,580
• 2021: 21,020
• 2022: 20,272

The number of SUICIDES over the last 4 years were as follows:

• 2019: 24,090
• 2020: 24,156
• 2021: 24,090
• 2022: 24,090

The number of GUN VIOLENCE DEATHS over the last 9 years were as follows:

• 2014: 12,354 deaths
• 2015: 13,577 deaths
• 2016: 15,148 deaths
• 2017: 15,750 deaths
• 2018: 14,941 deaths
• 2019: 39,606 deaths
• 2020: 43,736 deaths
• 2021: 45,110 deaths
• 2022: 44,362 deaths

The number of MASS SHOOTINGS over the last 9 years were as follows:

• 2014: 272 mass shootings
• 2015: 336 mass shootings
• 2016: 383 mass shootings
• 2017: 348 mass shootings
• 2018: 336 mass shootings
• 2019: 415 mass shootings
• 2020: 610 mass shootings
• 2021: 690 mass shooting
• 2022: 646 mass shootings
• 2023: 346  Mass Shootings (January 9, to July 4, 2023)

As of  June 23, 2023 the total number of gun violence deaths stood at 20,416, homicides stood at  8,932, suicides stood at 11,484.  As of July 4, 2023, the total number of  MASS SHOOTING stood at 346. 

https://www.businessinsider.com/2020-more-gun-deaths-than-any-year-over-two-decades-2021-3

https://theconversation.com/mass-shootings-in-the-us-have-risen-sharply-in-2020-why-150981

CORONA VIRUS 19 CONTRIBUTING CAUSE

What cannot be ignored as a likely  contributing cause in the increase in gun violence is the CORONA VIRUS 19 pandemic and its cumulative effect on the country’s mental health.  The CORONA VIRUS 19 pandemic lead to extensive confinement or quarantine, loss of employment and stress leading to substance abuse or increased alcohol consumption.

It was on January 19, 2019, that the United States Secretary Alex Salazar of the Department of Health and Human Services declared the corona virus outbreak a national emergency. It was on March 11, 2020 that Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham ordered the state into lockdown.  Note that it was in 2019 that homicides began to spike dramatically over 4 years, gun violence deaths more than doubled over 4 years and mass shooting began to spike over 3 years.

BIGGEST PREDICTORS OF GUN VIOLENCE

Clinical factors that have an increased risk of violence and that  are also predictors of violence are younger age, male sex, lower income and substance abuse.  Contextual factors include major life changes such as divorce, unemployment, or victimization. Expressions of hate, rage and threatening behavior are not mental illnesses but are predictors of violence.

https://www.mhanational.org/gun-deaths-violence-and-mental-health#:~:text=Clinical%20factors%20that%20have%20an,divorce%2C%20unemployment%2C%20or%20victimization.

The predicators of violence ostensibly are indeed at play in Albuquerque.  On June 26,  a shooting at a busy movie theater left a man dead happened during an argument over seats. On June 16,  a man shot two people randomly in the parking lot of a popular restaurant, on July 10,  a woman shot another woman whose car she was trying to steal in a busy mall parking lot.

Dr. Kristina Sowar, the Attending Child and Adolescent Psychiatrist at the University of New Mexico Children’s Psychiatric Center, said understanding the psychology behind actions like those is an important topic.  She said many people have been feeling more stressed in the last few years  since the COVID pandemic  and that can be one cause of this behavior. Sowar this:

“We do see many people who are struggling more with irritability, impulse regulation, and sometimes the aggressive behavior that comes about with that. …  As can things like having another mental health condition, so having depression, having anxiety, having had a head injury, having a substance use history. ”

Dr. Sowar said short fuses can show that people need improvement in conflict resolution:

“Especially if people aren’t raised in environments where that’s encouraged, it can be an area of deficit for them that they just don’t learn and it continues to persist as a challenge when they get older.” 

She said experiencing trauma as a kid can lead to more of these problems as an adult. She noted that trauma is more common in New Mexico. Dr. Sowar said there can be a lack of value in human life and people feel like they don’t have a connection to others.

Dr. Sowar said teenagers are seeing an increase in mental health issues across the country in the last few years. The covid pandemic was particularly tough. Some of the recent violence in Albuquerque has been among teenagers. On July 13, two teens got into a struggle over a gun. A 15-year-old boy was shot and a 13-year-old boy was stabbed.

“The rates of depression and PTSD and anxiety in a lot of teenagers, the kind of things they’ve been exposed to, things that maybe have been normalized for them that weren’t normalized before.  …  Some of the cumulative stress, trauma loads on the population, and the mix of teenagers plus weapons, unfortunately, being a tough combo.”

https://www.kob.com/new-mexico/perspective-on-what-could-be-causing-recent-violence-in-albuquerque/

PUBLIC SUPPORT FOR GUN CONTROL

American voters have already said “enough is enough” when it comes to gun violence and they are demanding responsible gun control by congress and state legislatures but both fail to act. The Second Amendment is always cited by gun advocates.

A Wall Street Journal-NBC News poll was conducted in August 2019 after the mass shootings in El Paso, Texas and Dayton, Ohio. The poll found that an overwhelming majority of Americans favor Congress banning assault weapons, expanding background checks for firearm sales, passing “red flag” laws and instituting a voluntary buyback program.

According to the poll, overall, the public remains divided over the government’s role in gun control, despite widespread support for those specific measures. 50% of Americans say they’re more concerned that the government won’t go far enough to regulate access to firearms, while 45% are more concerned gun control laws will be too restrictive. Only 46% of the 834 registered voters surveyed have a gun in their household.

Highlights of the poll are:

62% favor banning the sale of selected semi-automatic firearms referred to as assault weapons.
89% say they favor Congress expanding background checks to all firearm sales and transfers.
76% back “red flag” laws that help law enforcement temporarily remove guns from those deemed to pose a danger to themselves or others.
75% support a voluntary program where the government would buy back firearms that people no longer want.
25% support banning the sale of handguns.

https://www.usnews.com/news/national-news/articles/2019-08-19/poll-majority-favor-gun-control

NEW MEXICO CRIME STATISTICS

New Mexico’s firearm ownership and fatality rate is also among the nation’s highest. In 2016 over 37% of adults in the state lived in a household with a firearm which is 5% higher than the national average according to the think tank Rand Corp.

In 2020, New Mexico had the nation’s second-highest violent crime rate.

2021 NEW MEXICO CRIME STATISTICS

New Mexico’s firearm fatality rate is among the nation’s highest. According to the New Mexico Department of Health, there were a total of 562 state residents who died in 2021 due to firearm-related injuries.

This figure is up significantly from the 481 firearm-related deaths in 2020. Of the 562 state residents who died in 2021 due to firearms, 319 cases, were classified as suicides and 243 were classified as homicides.

In 2021 New Mexico law enforcement reported over 28,000 crimes against persons. That includes crimes such as murder, rape, assault, and kidnapping. In 2021,  FBI data showed for every 100,000 people in New Mexico, law enforcement reported 2,189 crimes against persons. The only state with a higher rate was Arkansas, which reported 2,276 crimes per 100,000 people.

In 2021 New Mexico law enforcement agencies reported nearly 25,500 instances of assault . That’s 1,872 more than the state reported in 2020. New Mexico law enforcement also reported more homicides in 2021 than the year before.

In 2021 across New Mexico, police reported 193 homicides to the FBI.  That’s 67 more than in 2020.  Not at all surprising is that the majority of the state’s reported homicides were in Albuquerque.

In 2021, New Mexico law enforcement reported to the FBI 822 kidnappings and abductions to the FBI. That put New Mexico at the top of the list regarding kidnappings and abductions per 100,000 people. Kansas, Colorado, and Utah also rank high on the list of kidnappings and abductions per population.

2022 NEW MEXICO CRIME STATISTICS

“Safe Wise”  is a national  private company that reviews, rates  and promotes private home security systems and  products. It conducts national surveys on crime statistics and trends and publishes a newsletter on it findings.

https://www.safewise.com/about/#:~:text=SafeWise%20streamlines%20it%20for%20you,they’re%20worth%20your%20time.

On March 13, 2023, Safe Wise published a “State of Safety Report” for New Mexico.  Following are edited noteable excerpts from the report:

“New Mexico continues to have higher-than-average crime rates across the board.  … [T]he good news is that both property and violent crime rates are declining year over year. Violent crime fell from 8.2 incidents per 1,000 people to 7.8  but that still gives New Mexico the second-highest violent crime rate in the US, behind Alaska with 8.4 incidents per 1,000.

Property crime fell from 31.8 incidents per 1,000 people to 28.4. New Mexico is one of just a dozen states to see declines in both violent and property crime, but fewer cities reporting crime data to the FBI may also be a factor.”

VIOLENT CRIME IN NEW MEXICO: FEAR VS. REALITY

“New Mexicans have the 8^th highest level of concern about violent crime in the nation with 58% of our State of Survey respondents indicating they worry about it on a daily basis. Concern about gun violence is just a tad lower with 57% of the population reporting daily concern.

• 31% of people in New Mexico reported feeling safe in their state compared to 50% of Americans. Only the residents of Illinois and New York feel less safe in their states.
• 15% of New Mexicans reported having a personal experience with violent crime in the 12 months prior to our survey, which matches the national average but represents an increase of 200% year over year for New Mexico.
• 42% of survey participants report using some form of personal protection— above the US average of 39%. Pepper spray was the most popular personal safety device carried.
• 48% of New Mexicans say their personal safety has been affected by the COVID-19 pandemic compared to 44% of Americans.”

ATTITUDES ABOUT GUN VIOLENCE IN NEW MEXICO

• “57% of New Mexico respondents named gun violence as a top safety concern—well above the US average of 47%.
• 16% of residents reported experiencing gun violence in the 12 months prior to the survey, up from 5% in our previous report.
• Mass shooting incidents increased 300% in New Mexico during the 2023 reporting year, rising from 1 to 4.
• Firearms are the third-most common method used for both personal safety and property protection in New Mexico.”

PROPERTY CRIME IN NEW MEXICO: FEAR VS. REALITY

“New Mexicans’ personal experiences with property crime increased year over year to 39%, which is the second-highest percentage in the nation. With that said, 41% of New Mexicans said they increased their security or safety measures in the 12 months prior to the survey, and people in New Mexico were more likely to use all types of property protection compared to the average American.

• Property crime experiences increased by 105% year-over-year in New Mexico.
• 39% of New Mexicans experienced package theft in the 12 months prior to our survey, which is the eighth-highest rate in the nation and represents an increase of 70% year over year.
• 46% of survey respondents said they use security cameras. Guard dogs were the second-most popular option for protecting property in New Mexico (38%). 
• Doorbell cameras are the most popular form of package theft protection among New Mexico residents.”

 The link to review the full unedited Safe Wise report is here:

https://www.safewise.com/blog/safest-cities-new-mexico/

ALBUQUERQUE CRIME RATES

Albuquerque is at the forefront of New Mexico’s high violent crime rate.  According to legislative data released, the city had about half of the state’s violent crime in 2022 but has just 25% or so of its total population.

The Albuquerque Police Department reported that in November, 2022 gun law violations spiked 85%. The last two years have also been two very violent years for Albuquerque.  The number of homicides in the city have broken all-time records.   In 2021, there were 117 homicides, with 3 declared self-defense reducing homicide number to 114.  In 2022, there were 120 homicides, a historical high.

On Thursday, March 16, 2023 the Albuquerque Police Department (APD) released the 2022 crime statistics along with crime statistics for 2022 for a comparison. During his March 16 press conference announcing the City’s 2022 crime statistics, APD Chief Harold Medina embellished that a  3% drop in  overall total of crime and a 4% decrease in Crimes Against Persons and the 2% decrease in Crimes Against Property was positive movement.  The slight 3% decrease in overall crime was over shadowed by the 24% spike in CRIMES AGAINST SOCIETY which are largely made up of drug and gun offenses and a 71% increase in murders over the last 6 years.

Chief Medina revealed that over the last 6 years, Albuquerque has had a dramatic 71% spike in homicides.  The number of homicides reported over the last 6 years is as follows:

• 2017: 70 homicides
• 2018: 69 homicides
• 2019: 80 homicides
• 2020: 78 homicides
• 2021: 110 homicides
• 2022: 120 homicides

On March 16, in addition to reporting that there has been a 71% spike in homicides, APD officials reported that over the past 6 years there has been a 28% increase in Aggravated Assaults which by definition includes the use of a firearms. Following are the Aggravated Assaults numbers:

• 2017: 4,213
• 2018: 5,156
• 2019: 5,337
• 2020: 5,592
• 2021: 5,669
• 2022: 5,399

Crime rates in Albuquerque are high across the board. According to the Albuquerque Police’s annual report on crime, there were 46,391 property crimes and 15,765 violent crimes recorded in 2021.  These numbers place Albuquerque among America’s most dangerous cities.

ALBUQUERQUE IS RANKED 17TH AMONG 70 OF THE LARGEST CITIES

On April 26, the Major Cities Chiefs Association released its Violent Crime Survey and national totals for the crimes of homicides, rapes, robberies and aggravated assaults. According to the report, Albuquerque is ranked 17th among 70 of the largest cities in the nation looking at trends in the 4 categories. The single most troubling statistic is Albuquerque’s increase in homicides.

The Major Cities Chiefs Association report shows in 2022, there was a 5% drop in homicides nationwide. According to the Major Cities Chiefs Association, Albuquerque had one of the worst homicide rates in the nation and is one of 27 cities across the nation that saw an increase in homicides.

Click to access MCCA-Violent-Crime-Report-2022-and-2021-Midyear.pdf

https://www.koat.com/article/albuquerque-homicide-rate-increase/43702586

FOUR MAJOR SOLUTIONS TO REDUCE GUN DEATHS AND MASS SHOOTINGS

Consistently there are 5 major solutions that are offered to reduce gun violence.  Those 5 solutions are:

   1.  ASSAULT WEAPONS BAN

Simply put and based on history, assault weapon bans can work. Federal restrictions enacted in 1934 on the ownership of fully automatic weapons (machine guns) were successful based on the rarity with which such guns were used in crime after enactment.  Washington, D.C.’s restrictive handgun licensing system, which went into effect in 1976, produced a drop in gun fatalities that lasted for several years after its enactment.

It was on September 13, 1994, Title XI of the Federal Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, known as the Crime Control Act of 1994, took effect.  The act banned the manufacture, transfer, and possession of certain semiautomatic firearms designated as assault weapons and “large capacity” ammunition magazines.

“Gun massacres of six or more killed decreased by 37% for the decade the ban [on assault weapons] was active [1994-2004], then shot up 183 percent during the decade following its expiration.” 

Click to access 173405.pdf

 https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/press/dem/releases/studies-gun-massacre-deaths-dropped-during-assault-weapons-ban-increased-after-expiration

    2.  WAITING PERIODS

Studies have found that if a certain number of days are required between the purchase of a gun and when the buyer can take possession of that gun, referred to as a “cooling off period”, can lead to fewer firearm suicides. “In a study of statewide suicide rate changes between 2013 and 2014, states with waiting periods saw a decrease in suicide rates, while those without waiting period laws had an increase.”

https://everytownresearch.org/solution/waiting-periods/

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, in a 2017 study, found  “Waiting period laws that delay the purchase of firearms by a few days reduce gun homicides by roughly 17%. Our results imply that the 17 states (including the District of Columbia) with waiting periods avoid roughly 750 gun homicides per year as a result of this policy. Expanding the waiting period policy to all other US states would prevent an additional 910 gun homicides per year without imposing any restrictions on who can own a gun.”

https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.1619896114.

   3.  BACKGROUND CHECK LAWS

More than 5 in 6 Americans (84%), including over three-fourths of Republicans, support a law requiring a background check on all firearm purchases.

https://www.bradyunited.org/press-releases/new-polling-overwhelming-support-for-universal-background-checks

Legislation  for background checks varies from state to state. In a 25-year study (1991-2016), the following was reported:

“State gun laws requiring universal background checks for all gun sales resulted in homicide rates 15% lower than states without such laws. Laws prohibiting the possession of firearms by people who have been convicted of a violent crime were associated with an 18 percent reduction in homicide rates….None of the state gun laws studied were found to be related to overall suicide rates.” The study concluded, “controlling who has access to guns has much more impact on reducing gun-related homicides than controlling what guns people have.”

“Researchers found that a 1995 Connecticut law requiring gun buyers to get permits (which themselves required background checks) was associated with a 40% decline in gun homicides and a 15%  drop in suicides. Similarly, when researchers studied Missouri’s 2007 repeal of its permit-to-purchase law, they found an associated increase in gun homicides by 23 percent, as well as a 16-percent increase in suicides.”

http://www.npr.org/2016/01/09/462252799/research-suggests-gun-background-checks-work-but-theyre-not-everything

4.  RED FLAG LAWS

 Extreme Risk Protection Orders (ERPO), also known as “Red Flag” laws, were first adopted in Connecticut in 2005. They are now in 19 states and Washington D.C. They allow loved ones and law enforcement to intervene when a family member is in crisis and considering harm to themselves or others. They can petition the court for an order to temporarily prevent someone from accessing guns.

https://everytownresearch.org/solution/extreme-risk-laws/

In 2021 New Mexico adopted a red flag law, but it has been implemented only 9 times by  resistant law enforcement officers during the first two years after the law’s passage. Any law without law enforcement can never prove its effectiveness. New Mexico Sherriff’s were universally opposed to New Mexico’s Red Flag  arguing it violates the second amendment right to bear arms so much so that they condemned Governor Lujan Grisham and opposed her  re election in 2022. Simply put, elected County Sherriff’s, because of personal beliefs,  who are not willing nor capable of enforcing New Mexico laws  designed to intervene and prevent violence of a person in crisis deemed a threat to the public or themselves, they need to resign.  Red flag laws can play a role in preventing mass shootings, as a 2019 study revealed “the subjects in 21 of the 159 court orders that were analyzed showed clear signs that they intended to commit a mass shooting.”

https://rockinst.org/blog/what-does-the-research-say-about-extreme-risk-protection-orders-erpo/

5. SAFE GUN STORAGE LAWS

Safe gun storage legislation does help reduce gun violence. Presently, there are only 14 states that have laws concerning either gun storage or firearm locking devices with New Mexico  becoming  the 14^th state in 2023.

 https://www.factcheck.org/2022/06/qa-on-bidens-gun-proposals/

“A 2015 study published in the American Journal of Public Health found that states requiring gun locks experienced a 68% lower suicide rate compared with states that had no similar requirement….A 2020 meta-analysis of 18 different gun policies by the RAND Corporation found that CAP [Child Access Prevention] laws have reduced both firearm suicides and accidental shootings among young people. The RAND team concluded that CAP laws were the most effective out of 18 categories of laws it examined.”  In a survey interviewing over a thousand adults, nearly 8 in Americans 10 (nearly 70% of Republicans, nearly 80% of Democrats and Independents) support mandating that guns are stored with a lock in place.

https://gunsandamerica.org/story/20/07/13/do-safe-storage-gun-laws-prevent-violence/

When the 2023 New Mexico 60 day legislative session began on January 17, Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham in her “State of the State” address announced her support of the following 4 gun control measures:

• Banning the sale of AR-15-style rifles.
• Allowing crime victims to sue gun manufacturers.
• Making it a crime to fail to properly secure a firearm that’s accessible to an unsupervised minor.
• Closing a loophole in state law to allow prosecution when a person buys a gun for a someone who isn’t legally able to make the purchase themselves, a transaction known as a straw purchase.

Only 2 of the 4 measure’s the Governor endorsed were enacted by the legislature. The 2 measures enacted and signed into law were:

House Bill 9.   This bill is referred to as the Bennie Hargrove Gun Safety Act also known as “Bennies Bill” and makes it a misdemeanor to negligently allow a child access to a firearm and would make it a felony if that negligence resulted in someone dying or suffering great bodily harm.

House Bill 306. This bill is directed at “straw purchases” of firearms and making it illegal to buy a firearm on behalf of someone who’s not allowed to have it or intends to use in a crime.

GUN CONTROL MEASURES THAT FAILED 

During the 2023 legislative session, there were 10 major gun-control measure bills introduced and seriously considered in the New Mexico House or Senate.  Eight of those bills were:

House Bill 50 would have prohibited magazines with more than 10 rounds.

House Bill 72 would have prohibited the possession of semiautomatic firearm converter that allows the weapon to fire more rapidly.

House Bill 100 would have 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.

House Bill 101  would have made it a fourth-degree felony to purchase, possess, manufacture, import, sell or transfer assault weapons in the state.  It would restrict the sale, manufacture and possession of AR-15-style rifles along with semiautomatic firearms.

Senate Bill 44 would have made it a misdemeanor to carry a firearm within 100 feet of a polling location on election day or during early voting. On-duty law enforcement officers and security personnel would be exempt.

Senate Bill 116 would have 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. The bill would have effectively raised the minimum age for buying an AR-15-style rifle from 18 to 21.

Senate Bill 171 sought to ban the manufacture, sale, trade, gift, transfer or acquisition of semiautomatic pistols that have two or more defined characteristics.

Senate Bill 428 would have 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.

Bills that did not pass include bail reform and changes to pretrial detention, both priorities of Democrat Governor Lujan Grisham and the Republican Party, and both opposed by Democrats in both chambers.

NO SPECIAL SESSION

On Saturday March 18 during a news conference immediately after the  2023 session ended, Governor Lujan Grisham told reports that a special session was not needed this year on gun control. The Governor said this:

“I think the public is going to ask me and these Legislatures know, so they’re not surprised by that.  I’ll be asked to look into a public safety special session, and we usually find ourselves it’s an imperfect world where we didn’t anticipate. So the special sessions we have called have been unforeseen and dramatic circumstances.”

TWO DIVIDING ISSUES BETWEEN DEMOCRATS AND REPUBLICANS

There are two major issues that are sure to divide Democrats and Republicans in New Mexico. The first issue where there is never a meeting of the minds is on “crime and punishment”.  The second issue is gun control.

Republicans always advocate for increased sentencings as a solution to all types of  crimes with the attitude of “lock em up and throw away the key”. It is nothing more than the warehousing of defendants for all sorts of crime  that is very costly and a drain on resources that could be better used elsewhere.   Democrats oppose increased and enhanced sentencings believing that the only way to reduce crime and gun violence  is to solve the underlying causes of crime and gun violence such as  lack of  education, poverty, drug addiction and mental illness and that rehabilitation of any defendant  is possible.

The second issue is “gun control measure’s” that Democrats advocate  for and Republicans universally oppose always citing Second Amendment embodiment of right to bear arms. Republicans essentially adopt the the position of the National Rifle Association that any and all gun control measures and the outlawing the manufacturing and sale of any type of firearm violates the Second Amendment. Republicans always  proclaim that gun control measures translate into only criminals will have guns. Democrats essentially argue that  there is a need for reasonable and responsible gun control to bring down the proliferation of guns and to reduce gun violence.

Democrats and Republicans fail to recognize that both issues overlap with each other and  can be combined as a solution to address gun violence. There must be a zero tolerance of violent crimes committed with firearms, especially involving drug trafficking.  There must be a reduction in the proliferation and the availability of guns used to commit crime and mass shootings that can be addressed with gun control.

ENACT “OMNIBUS GUN CONTROL AND VIOLENT CRIME SENTENCING ACT”

The current makeup of the New Mexico legislature is 45 Democrats and 25 Republicans in the House with 27 Democrats and 15 Republicans in the Senate.  What is very discouraging is the fact that the New Mexico legislature is decidedly in control by Democrats, yet very little to no progress is every made when it comes to gun control measures as Republicans out maneuver Democrats by relying on Democrats who also oppose gun control.

If Governor Lujan Grisham and the New Mexico legislature are indeed sincere about the State’s crime crisis both should seek the enactment of an “Omnibus Gun Control And Violent Crime Sentencing Act.”

CRIME AND PUNISHMENT  

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 and the only way to do that is with with enhanced sentencings.

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.

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 all 8 bills 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.

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.

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.

CONCLUSION

Until the Governor and the New Mexico legislature gets 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 mass shooting.