On October 5, the Albuquerque City Council enacted three out of four measures sponsored by MAGA Republican Dan Lewis misleadingly labeled the “Better Neighborhoods” package under the guise and falsehood to cut red tape and spur development projects. On October 20, the Albuquerque City Council approved the fourth measure which substantially raises appeal fees of developments. The “Better Neighborhoods” package consists of two ordinances directed at neighborhood coalitions and two memorials that request action from the New Mexico legislature.

CITY ORDINANCES

The two city ordinances make dramatic changes to the Neighborhood Association Recognition Ordinance (NARO) and are O-26-61 and O-26-60.

0-26-61 OVERVIEW AND ENACTMENT

O-26-61 is the most egregious of the four measures. Neighborhood  Coalitions are defined as groups of neighborhood associations that can represent entire areas of the city and can be larger than some city council districts. Under the ordinance they could still organize but without a recognized city role.

O-26-61 removes city recognition for neighborhood coalitions and ends developer good-faith requirements.

Ordinance O-26-61 was introduced and moved forward within 2 weeks for a full council vote without a committee hearing and no community discussion. O-26-61 strips standing from neighborhood coalitions, raises appeal fees, and requires coalitions to pay legal fees if they lose a challenge against a developer who has applied for permits. The ordinance limits formal city recognition of neighborhood coalitions and eliminates automatic development notices to them. Appeal rights under O-26-61are limited to resident-based neighborhood associations near a project. Neighborhood coalitions to a limited can still file appeals but they must prove legal standing.

The ordinance caps individual neighborhood association boundaries to 2 square miles. The ordinance requires neighborhood associations to come into compliance with boundary requirements by July 1, 2027 and allows  associations to retain current boundaries until July 1. Amendments to the ordinance requires associations to approve appeals by a majority vote and change advance notice of an appeal vote from seven days to two weeks. The ordinance encourages outreach to apartment buildings and public spaces.

The ordinance adjusts meeting notice rules so associations can act on appeals. An amendment requires approval from at least 10% of an association’s members or 15 confirmed members for any appeal.

Ordinance O-26-61 passed on a 5 to 4. Voting YES were MAGA Republican City  Councilor Dan Lewis, Dan Champine, Renee Grout and Progressive Democrats Stephanie Telles and Tammy Fiebelkorn. Voting NO were Democrat City Council President Klarissa Peña, Progressive Democrats Jaquin Baca and Nichole Rogers and Republican Brook Bassan.

If signed by Mayor Tim Keller O-26-61 will become law. If vetoed by Mayor Keller, the veto would require six votes of nine to override.

O-26-60 OVERVIEW AND DEFERRAL

O-26-60 substantially raises appeal fees which are  currently between $190 to $265 to $925 for approved appeals and $300 for denied appeals. Amendments added indigency waivers for people who cannot afford the fee, extended the payment deadline to two business days. It requires the Planning Department to give the City Council an annual report on land-use appeals and their outcomes. O-26-60  was deferred by Councilor Lewis to the October 19 City Council meeting. On October 19, the Albuquerque City Council approved ordinance O-26-60 which increases fees for appealing issues surrounding a development.

CITY COUNCIL MEMORIALS

State law governs zoning appeals. Councilor Lewis sponsored two memorials asking the New Mexico Legislature to make changes to state law governing zoning appeals.

M-26-01 asks the Legislature to clarify state law allowing municipalities to define the circumstances under which someone can appeal a development. It ask that the legislature clarify who qualifies as an “aggrieved” person with legal standing to challenge and sue and asks state lawmakers to remove restrictions that allow home-rule cities to set local definitions for legal standing. Memorial M-26-01 passed UNANIMOUSLY on a 9 – 0 vote.

M-26-02 asks the Legislature to allow municipalities to designate certain land-use categories, including zoning and development decisions, for direct appeal to District Court. Lewis said this about M-26-02 :  “Currently, a coalition can appeal an approved project and ask the City to review a decision the City has already made, delaying the project for months. … We are asking the Legislature to eliminate this duplicative review and require the appeal to proceed directly to court.”   M-26-02 passed on a 6-3 vote, with Bassan, Rogers and Peña voting against.

PUBLIC COMMENT AND DEBATE ON “BETTER NEIGHBORHOODS” PACKAGE

During the October 5 City Council meeting, upwards of  75 residents spoke during the meeting, with 44 opposing the reforms and 28 supporting them. Dozens spoke out during public comment, including residents, developers and members and leaders of neighborhood associations and coalitions

The main focus of public comment and debate was on O-26-61 and its removal of neighborhood coalitions from the Neighborhood Association Recognition Ordinance, which were added to the NARO in 2022 by the City Council. Dozens spoke out during public comments, including residents, developers and members and leaders of neighborhood associations and coalitions.

SUPPORTERS SPEAK OUT

During public comments, developers and real estate agents said neighborhood coalitions were filing appeals that led to costly delays for needed projects. Some homeowner associations did support the bill and said they didn’t appreciate coalitions speaking for them.

Homeowner associations, coalition members and residents opposing the bill said coalitions bolster associations and notify residents of projects that may be out of their neighborhood boundary, but still 100 feet from their property line.

Rebecca Latham, president of her neighborhood association, said the bill strengthened accountability and gives associations “a clear voice.” Latham works for HB Construction and  said her association takes time to build relationships and share information to understand “what makes most sense for our neighbors” and she said this:

“So when a group presents a position representing our association, without us having a chance to discuss it or approve it, it puts our credibility at risk.”

Angela Piarowski, a CEO with Modulus Architects, said many of their project have been affected by appeals with  some projects delayed by years.  Piarowski said this:

“We follow the rules, our clients invest based on those rules, they should be able to rely on the outcome. … A coalition’s disagreement should not become an effective veto over the city’s approvals.”

Adam Silverman, a local real estate developer who supported the changes, said coalitions without local ties can stall projects and neighborhood associations closest to developments should lead community discussions. Silverman was somewhat contradictory supporting then changes and when he said this:

“I believe the neighborhood association should absolutely have the right to be involved in the process when something new is being proposed near their community.”

OPPOSITION SPEAKS OUT

Julie Radoslovich, president of the Hurley Neighborhood Association, opposed the “Better neighborhoods Package” and said volunteer neighborhood associations rely on coalition expertise to navigate land-use rules and challenge improper developments. Radoslovich said this:

“Neighborhood coalitions serve as a buffer when actions threaten our neighborhoods.”

Jennifer Jones of the Inez Neighborhood Association said coalitions benefit parts of the city, like hers which is  positioned beside Uptown and surrounded by major roads,  that wish to address greater environmental impacts and traffic issues.  Jones  said associations “wouldn’t have a voice” in those wider problems if the bills passed.

Sarah Thomas said coalitions can give associations a leg up. She said her coalition “has really allowed us to put our heads together with a broader view of what I consider to be our community.” Thomas said her association, meanwhile, “is just barely hanging on” with only six people attending the last annual meeting. She added, “We had to beg people to be on our board.”

Neighborhood Activist Steven Holman is a resident of City Council District 7 which is the mid heights city council district of City Councilor Tammy Fiebelkorn. During City Council Public Comment on October 5, Holman gave the following one minute comment that succinctly addresses the impact of  Better Neighborhoods Package:

In regards to the better neighborhoods package, I am going to keep this short and bitter.

This is retaliation for a history of litigation protecting the petroglyphs, marginalized communities, and historic sites that have often found the city violated its own rules.

There used to be over 300 neighborhood associations and now there are less than 150.  They are disappearing and declining and coalitions have been filling the void.

This legislation will make it so there is actually less community representation. But that’s what you want, no way to fight back against Data Centers. The city has over 60 acres it said it could annex and rezone for a data center, yet it won’t do the same for affordable housing. True hypocrisy.

Coalitions exist to help marginalized groups and historic sites.  My neighborhood is one of the largest and if a hate group somehow got the ok to build, my association couldn’t afford the litigation.  I certainly know my city councilor [Tammy  Fiebelkorn]  wouldn’t hear me out. This is why coalitions are needed.

The question needs to be asked: Maybe the city is the problem?

The developers and sellouts like Strongtowns support this, even Senator Moe Maestas who tried to take zoning away from all cities statewide last legislative session supports this.  Vote against the better neighborhoods package.

Don’t sell us out!

SPONSOR LEWIS LASHES OUT AT NEIGHBORHOOD COALITIONS

Republican Dan Lewis, the sponsor of the “Better Neighborhoods” package has lashed out at  neighborhood coalitions in general and has said they are “undemocratic” as decision-making bodies. Lewis said O-26-61 “right-sizes” neighborhood representation by putting authority back with “the neighborhoods that are closest and have a direct stake.” Lewis said appeals often come after a development has spent years moving through the city process and Lewis said this:

“And just the process of that keeps projects delayed by months and months We have neighborhoods that don’t have things that other parts of the city have like grocery stores and good housing and good quality of life type projects in their neighborhoods that they desperately need.”

Lewis assailed  the Westside Coalition of Neighborhood Associations (WSCONA), which is  in his district, as one of the “worst offenders” as it cost 400 jobs in its appeal of Mesa Studios. That neighborhood appeal was repeatedly denied but eventually won in State District Court because WSCONA President Jane Baechle, who did not live in the project area, walked the area of the petroglyphs and recognized the threat of development so close to the federally protected petroglyphs.

Lewis argued falsely that his ordinances strengthens neighborhood associations and falsely claimed that no one in his district opposed the bill and many “have left the coalition.” Lewis said this:

“These are simply good reforms … that puts the primary responsibility and say to our neighborhoods.”

Richard Schaefer, WSCONA secretary, said in a letter that the bill O-26-61was a “veiled attempt to make it far more difficult for residents to organize and exert their rights as fully enfranchised citizens of the City of Albuquerque.”

LEWIS HAS BEEN SUCCESSFUL IN PAST GUTTING NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION RIGHTS AND REMEDIES

It is clear that  the four city council actions sponsored by Dan Lewis are politically motivated. Lewis has an extensive history of tangling and disagreeing with the West Side Coalition of Neighborhood Associations (WSCONA) who have often objected to many of his efforts on the city council and development projects that may affect their homes and neighborhoods.

The four legislative actions sponsored by MAGA Republican City Councilor Dan Lewis are not the first time that Dan Lewis and the City Council have gutted the rights and remedies of neighborhood associations and coalitions when it comes to appealing zoning changes and development projects.

In 2025, the City of Albuquerque lost a lawsuit in District Court that the Westside Coalition Of Neighborhood Associations filed against it when Dan Lewis acted improperly on behalf of developers to gut scenic protection rules near Petroglyph National Monument. His behavior was specifically cited in the Opinion and Order in that case (No. D-202-CV-2023-03961).  The City appealed and lost again in the Court of Appeals. (See related guest column by Mike Voorhees regarding the law suite and Dan Lewis and the ordinances he sponsored in the postscript.)

It was on January 23, 2025 that Council Bill No. O-24-69, sponsored by Councilor Dan Lewis, was enacted by the city council on a 7 YES to 2 NO vote.  O-24-69 blatantly  limits the standing of Neighborhood Associations to appeal zoning changes and development projects  approved by the city.  Specifically, Council Bill No. O-24-69 as enacted limits the standing of Neighborhood Associations and provides as follows:

• It excludes an individual’s use of public lands as a basis for standing to appeal.
• It eliminates the failure to notify Neighborhood Associations as a basis for appeal or remand.
• It requires Neighborhood Associations to pay  attorney fees and costs to developers when their  appeals of approvals are denied, but  developers  have no liability to pay attorney fees of Neighborhood Associations when developers appeal a denial, regardless of the decision. If the appellant Neighborhood association loses their appeal, they are responsible for paying up to $1,000 for  reasonable costs.
• It allows  amendments by the request of a developer or other unknown party to bypass the EPC or LUPZ and go straight to the City Council.
• It adds the burdensome requirement for a Neighborhood Association to file a petition in order to have standing in any appeal.
• It allows a City Councilor to NOT be recused even when that councilor sponsors an amendment

The link to review the enacted  O-24-69 is here:

https://www.cabq.gov/clerk/documents/o-2025-004.pdf

Links to quoted or relied upon news sources are here:

https://www.abqjournal.com/news/city-council-removes-formal-recognition-standing-from-neighborhood-coalitions/3136165

https://www.abqjournal.com/news/the-city-appeal-process-is-a-headache-for-some-a-tool-for-others-a-new-law-hopes-to-streamline-it/3146280

https://abq.news/2026/10/lewis-better-neighborhoods-bills-meeting-recap/

https://www.kob.com/new-mexico/albuquerque-ends-city-recognition-for-neighborhood-coalitions-in-5-4-vote/

MAYOR KELLER ISSUES PRESS RELEASE

On October 19, Mayor Tim Keller issued the following press release for immediate relese announcing that he had signed O-26-61:

OCTOBER 19, 2026

Mayor Keller Empowers Neighborhood Associations, Signs Recognition Ordinance

“Updated ordinance ensures that neighborhoods can’t be represented without their consent”

ALBUQUERQUE – Today, Mayor Keller announced he has signed legislation updating Albuquerque’s Neighborhood Association Recognition Ordinance (NARO), strengthening the role of individual neighborhood associations and ensuring residents have a direct voice in decisions affecting their communities by removing the ability for coalitions to speak for them without their consent.

“The voices of a few don’t reflect the will of the majority, neighborhoods should be able to choose how and who represents them in court,” said Mayor Keller “This bill is fundamentally about one question: In ABQ should any group, including coalitions, be allowed to legally represent a neighborhood without their consent? Common sense clearly says ‘no’; neighborhoods are fundamental cornerstone of our community and should be the legal representative of their needs. “

The legislation, O-26-61, updates the City’s neighborhood association process to strengthen voices and direct representation of neighborhood associations and establish clearer requirements for participation in development decisions. The bill does not change the opportunity for neighborhood coalitions to organize and advocate – it simply ensures that only neighborhood associations can be the legal representatives in court. 

Neighborhood associations will continue to receive development notifications and retain qualifying appeal rights with new requirements to demonstrate member support when challenging development decisions.  Other groups wishing to advocate for communities are not affected, other than that they may not represent neighborhood associations legally without their consent.

The updated ordinance is more in line with Mayor’s broader efforts to reduce bureaucracy, remove red tape and streamline processes for innovative projects, housing, grocery stores, essential services, while preserving opportunities for residents to participate in decisions affecting their communities.

The legislation was approved by the Albuquerque City Council on October 5, 2026.

https://www.cabq.gov/mayor/news/mayor-keller-empowers-neighborhood-associations-signs-recognition-ordinance

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

It’s very difficult to believe that Mayor Keller even bothered to read let alone tried to understand the measures that make up the “Better Neighborhoods” measures. His press release mislabels the measure as the “Recognition Ordinance” and falsely claims the “updated ordinance ensures that neighborhoods can’t be represented without their consent.” This is a false and misleading narrative that Mayor Keller wants the public to believe as he pretends to be a supporter of neighborhood associations and not the development community.

When Keller is quoted in  the press release saying “This bill is fundamentally about one question: In ABQ should any group, including coalitions, be allowed to legally represent a neighborhood without their consent? Common sense clearly says ‘no’; neighborhoods are fundamental cornerstone of our community and should be the legal representative of their needs”  he is trying to reframe the issues or change the narrative by attempting to show he supports neighborhood associations and residential property owners when he does not. Keller is more interested in promoting the real estate development community and he could care less about the impact of developments on established neighborhoods.

The press release shows a clear ignorance of the law and the content of the measures that made up the “Better Neighborhoods” package passed.  The truth is that the bylaws of  the neighborhood associations and that of the neighborhood coalitions mandate that they secure support on legal matters and initiation of lawsuits. Individual neighborhood associations are not required to join neighborhood coalitions with coalition membership being strictly voluntary and neighborhood associations can drop out of neighborhood coalitions whenever they want and for whatever reason they have.

The  very real consequences of passage of O-26-61 are clear and are as follows:

• Thirteen neighborhood associations will either lose recognition or have to kick out their county neighbors as members.
• Loss of recognition equals the loss of notification to those individuals and neighborhoods that are likely to be harmed by the development.
• It makes sure contact information is publicly available to neighborhood associations and volunteers only who can disseminate information on developments. Currently, contact information is publicly available only by request to developers from the Office of Neighborhood Coordination and only after the neighborhood association has submitted the correct Public Notice form.
• It removes the requirement for developers to act in good faith and to cooperate with the very neighborhoods they chose to develop.

The two memorials sponsored by Lewis and enacted by the city council do not officially end Albuquerque’s Home Rule authority, but they do undercut the “quasi legal” review process for appeals within the city. By inviting the State legislature to alter the process of zoning appeals, the City is clearing the way for fast-tracked developments. It makes it much harder, and far more expensive, for regular people to have a voice in how their neighborhoods develop.

The Better Neighborhoods package benefits the development, real estate and investment community to the determent of established neighborhoods. It will have a major impact eliminating the rights of neighborhood coalitions to challenge developments. When a new apartment complex or commercial development is proposed in neighborhoods that will have a detrimental impact on the neighborhood, especially historical or established neighborhoods, individual property owners  look to neighborhood coalitions to help appeal or challenge the projects.  All too often, private property owners and  individuals do not have the financial resources nor knowledge of the appeal process of their own to oppose multimillion dollar development projects and  developers. A good example would be data center development.

Passage of the Better Neighborhoods package within two weeks of its introduction and without public hearings was as underhanded as it gets by the City Council. Enactment continues with the City Council’s dangerous practice of amending the city’s zoning laws to prohibit or limit extensive public input and to stifle public opinion. Passage of the Better Neighborhoods package is  an effort to deconstruct guardrails and protections. It  marginalizes the voices of neighborhoods and city residents. Simply put, the passage of  the Better Neighborhoods package on a 5 to 4 vote was a sellout by Mayor Tim Keller and the Albuquerque City Council of the citizens of Albuquerque, property owners and neighborhood associations and coalitions in favor of the development community.

CITY COUNCIL CAN  REPEAL“BETTER NEIGHBORHOODS” PACKAGE

The public should also weigh in an voice their opinion to Mayor Keller that they do not feel he acted in the best interest of the city when he signed into law O-26-61.

The four City Councilors who voted NO to enact O-26-61 were Democrat City Council President Klarissa Peña, Progressive Democrats Jaquin Baca and Nichole Rogers and Republican Brook Bassan. One or all 4 should take immediate steps to repeal O-26-61 and the “Better Neighborhoods” package by sponsoring and introducing a resolution or ordinance repealing the legislation and demanding public hearings before the City Council’s Land Use and Planning committee to allow the public sufficient time weigh in and to avoid the the two week rush job that came with enactment of O-26-61. Contact your City Councilor and tell them to repeal O-26-61 and protest the underhanded way it was enacted.

MAYOR TIM KELLER CONTACT INFORMATION

Department: Office of the Mayor

Phone: 505-768-3000
Fax: 505-768-3019

Physical Address: 1 Civic Plaza, 11th Floor, Albuquerque NM 87102

Mailing Address:

Office of the Mayor

PO Box 1293

Albuquerque NM 87103

EMAIL: tkeller@cabq.gov, MayorKellerIQ@cabq.gov, MayorTimKellerPress@cabq.gov

CITY COUNCIL CONTACT INFORMATION

CITY COUNCIL PHONE: (505) 768-3100

CITY COUNCILOR AND SUPPORT STAFF EMAILS

stelles@cabq.gov

stephenchavez@cabq.gov

joaquinbaca@cabq.gov

bacajoaquin9@gmail.com

namolina@cabq.gov

kpena@cabq.gov

cquezada@cabq.gov

bbassan@cabq.gov

dawnmarie@cabq.gov

danlewis@cabq.gov

galvarez@cabq.gov

nrogers@cabq.gov

district6@cabq.gov

tfiebelkorn@cabq.gov

seanforan@cabq.gov

dchampine@cabq.gov

eromero@cabq.gov

rgrout@cabq.gov

rrmiller@cabq.gov

ipadilla@cabq.gov  (Director of Council Services)

mmmontoya@cabq.gov (Council Clerk)

 

The New Mexico  Health Care Authority’s Behavioral Health Services Division is tasked with rebuilding New Mexico’s behavioral healthcare infrastructure. On September 22, Nick Boukas, the director of the New Mexico Health Care Authority’s Behavioral Health Services Division, told the New Mexico Legislatures interim Legislative Finance Committee that his agency has signed off on 11 of the state’s proposed 13 regional behavioral healthcare plans.

While needs vary from region to region, Boukas said that they have largely held four priorities in common:

1. Expanding access to behavioral health treatment and recovery services.
2. Strengthening youth, family, school and caregiver support.
3. Addressing housing and transportation; and building and
4. Retaining a behavioral health workforce.

According to a Legislative Finance Committee briefing document (brief) the state invested $565 million for behavioral health services in 2025, yet there is  “little data” to indicate whether outcomes are improving or whether “access is better today than it was when the state began making these investments.” According to the brief  the 13 plans carry a price tag of $110 million, according to the brief.

A few of the members of LFC committee  in attendance expressed frustration over the slow-going process, which has become a common theme in this summer’s legislative hearings on the matter. Rep. Mark Duncan (R-Kirtland) told Boukas this:

“We’ve spent a whole lot of money with zero results yet.”

In response, Boukas told lawmakers that the seemingly slow nature of SB3’s implementation is to be expected and he said this:

“When I say that this is working, it’s that we’re getting folks to start talking to each other. None of the programs have rolled out yet to where we can start collecting data.”

Boukas has said he hopes to have all 13 regional plans approved by the end of the year. The Behavioral Health Reform and Investment Act Executive Committee is scheduled to meet in Santa Fe on Oct. 6.

Links to relied upon or quoted news sources are here:

https://www.newsbreak.com/source-new-mexico-1589738/4903562262644-new-mexico-behavioral-health-committee-closes-in-on-goal-of-approving-13-regional-health-plans

https://sourcenm.com/2026/09/23/new-mexico-behavioral-health-committee-closes-in-on-goal-of-approving-13-regional-health-plans/

BEHAVIORAL HEALTH REFORM PACKAGE RECALLED

It was on February 27, 2025 that Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham signed into law the Behavioral Health Reform Package.  The legislation consists of 3 Senate Bills that makes sweeping changes to how New Mexico’s mental health and drug abuse treatment programs are run statewide.

Senate Bill 3, known as the Behavioral Health Reform and Investment Act creates 13 behavioral health regions mirrored after the state’s 13 judicial districts. The bill requires regional plans crafted for providing mental health and substance abuse treatment.

The plans are overseen by the state judicial branch and  include time lines and regional funding priorities.  Local officials with counties, tribes and cities within each region have crafted unique plans to identify their communities’ biggest gaps in behavioral healthcare and to set goals for addressing them. During the  60-day 2025  New Mexico legislative session, Lawmakers also earmarked more than $555 million to fund an overhaul the state’s system for mental health and substance abuse treatment programs.

Under the enacted Behavioral Health Reform Package, the new mental health care model places the State Judiciary in charge of planning while leaving the state Health Care Authority largely in charge of overseeing funding. This is a significant change from the former system which largely fell under the Governor’s executive branch jurisdiction. The legislation enacted increases accountability by requiring regional plans outlining priorities for providing mental health and substance abuse treatment. The new  trust fund provides annual funding to support the regional plans, which would largely be overseen by the state’s judiciary.

Senate Bills 1 and 2 signed into law by  Governor Lujan Grisham on February 27, 2025 were also part of the Behavioral Health Reform Package and are summarized as follows:

Senate Bill 1: This bill created the Behavioral Health Trust Fund for the state of New Mexico to support mental health and substance abuse treatment, prevention, and intervention programs throughout the state. The behavioral health trust fund is  invested by the State Investment Council. The trust fund distributes 5% of its annual value to fund programs and support investments in necessary infrastructure, technology, and workforce development to facilitate the expansion of services. The fund could also helps New Mexico unlock matching funds from federal, local, and private sources.

Money for the new fund was provided in a separate budget bill during the 60-day session and was for $555 million. The Behavioral Health Trust Fund, created by Senate Bill 1, aims to provide a sustainable funding source for regional behavioral health initiatives.

Senate Bill 2: This bill allocates $200 million to expand regional behavioral health services such as crisis response and outpatient care. The bill appropriates the funding to the New Mexico Administrative Office of the Courts and various state agencies to set up a new framework for behavioral health programs statewide. Senate Bill 2 was not part of the signing ceremony but never the less is part of the behavioral health reform package and became a part of general fund appropriations by the legislature.

CHANGES IN COMPETENCY LAWS FOR CIVIL MENTAL HEALTH COMMITEMENTS

It was also during the 2025 legislative session, the New Mexico legislature also enacted House Bill 8 known as the Omnibus Crime Package.  House Bill 4 is the criminal competency legislation which was part of the enacted Bill 8 Omnibus Crime Package. It gives prosecutors more options to involuntarily commit people into a locked psychiatric facility if they are found to be dangerous to themselves or others and unable to stand trial. The courts will now have more options when dealing with suspects who are deemed incompetent to stand trial instead of simply releasing them back on the streets.

Under House Bill 4, when a court determines that a defendant is not competent to proceed in a criminal case the court shall determine if the defendant is dangerous and with a process for evaluating whether criminal defendants are competent to stand trial established. House Bill 4 specifically requires that “competency evaluators” determine whether defendants are dangerous to themselves or others. After a competency hearing, and if a defendant is found not to be competent, a judge then decides whether the defendant poses a threat. Based on that determination, a defendant is either ordered to attend an assisted outpatient treatment program or be sent to the state Behavioral Health Institute in Las Vegas, New Mexico.

The link to review House Bill 4 is here:  https://legiscan.com/NM/text/HB4/2025

DESTRUCTION  OF NON-PROFIT MENTAL HEALTH CARE PROGRAMS BY GOVERNOR SUSANA MARTINEZ

The need for the enactment of the Behavioral Health Reform Package in 2025 was necessitated in large part by the actions of  Republican Governor Susana Martinez who falsely accused several providers of fraud, which led to a mass departure of mental health care providers in the state. One of the cruelest things that Republican Governor Susana Martinez did as governor was order an “audit” of mental health services by nonprofits in New Mexico which devastated New Mexico’s behavioral health system. In 2014, more than 160,000 New Mexicans received behavioral health services with most of those services funded by Medicaid according to the Human Services Department at the time.

In June 2013, under the direction of Governor Martinez, the Human Services Department cut off Medicaid funding to 15 behavioral health nonprofits operating in New Mexico. The Martinez Administration said that the outside audit showed more than $36 million in overbilling, as well as mismanagement and possible fraud. The audit was false. The Martinez Human Services Department agency brought in the 5 Arizona providers to take over.

In early 2016, at least 13 of the 15 nonprofits that were shut down were exonerated of fraud by New Mexico Attorney General Hector Balderas. Even though AG Balderas found no fraud and cleared the nonprofits of fraud the damage had been done to the nonprofits and many just went out of business. Lawsuits ensued and the Governor Lujan Grisham Administration was stuck settling most of the cases out of court to the tune of millions of taxpayer dollars.

Three of the five Arizona providers brought in by Governor Susana Martinez’s administration in 2013 to replace the New Mexico nonprofits pulled up stakes in the state and the states mental health system never fully recovered.

The freezing of Medicaid funding to 15 providers over false fraud and overbilling accusations and intentionally gutting the state’s mental health care system can only be described as cruel and vicious conduct by a political hack in the form of Republican Governor Susana Martinez.  The state is still  playing  catch up to fill the void to provide mental health care services to those who desperately need them.

https://www.abqjournal.com/749923/third-arizona-behavioral-health-provider-to-pull-out-of-state.html

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

The passage of the three behavioral health bills by the Senate was a bi partisan vote and was a major victory and a reflection of just how far the state has come to fix its broken health care system.  The passage of the 3 bills came more than a decade after former Republican Governor Susana Martinez gutted New Mexico’s behavioral system in 2013. Enactment of all 3 Senate bills making  sweeping changes to the state’s health care system to deal with mental illness and drug abuse was long overdue.

Simply put, since 2014, the state of New Mexico has had a broken mental health care system largely in part because of the actions of former Republican Governor Susana Martinez when she ordered an “audit” of mental health services by nonprofits in New Mexico which devastated New Mexico’s behavioral health system. It will take more time to rebuild the broken mental health care system, but impressive progress is in fact being made.

Let’s hope that progress will continue come 2027 with the new Governor.

 

On Tuesday October 13, Democrat Deb Haaland and Republican Gregg Hull filed campaign finance reports with the New Mexico Secretary of State covering the time period of September 8 through October 5. The Campaign finance reports filed reveal a sharp financial divide in the 2026 New Mexico’s race for governor. Democrat Deb Haaland has raised nearly three times as much as Republican Gregg Hull during the latest reporting period and ending it with more than five times the amount of available cash.

According to the Secretary if States Office, the Haaland campaign reported raising $1,910,870.49 and spending $2,502,405.07 from September 8 through October 5. The Haaland campaign closed with $2,837,260.02 in cash on hand.

According to the Secretary of States Office, the Hull campaign  reported raising $643,834.89 and spending $631,690.84 from September 8 through October 5. The Hull  campaign ended the period with $521,796.33 in cash on hand.

The two campaigns spent more than $3.1 million combined. The filings show that both candidates are spending their donations about as quickly as they are receiving them, with expenditures going primarily to digital and television advertisements.

Under New Mexico campaign finance laws, a candidate for governor can accept up to $12,400 from one donor during an election cycle.

Neither campaign reported loans or debt.

HAALAND CAMPAIGN DONATIONS AND EXPENDITURES

Democrat Deb Haaland would become the nation’s first female Native American governor if elected on November 3.  Haaland is a former U.S. congresswoman and became the nation’s first-ever Indigenous cabinet secretary during Joe Biden’s presidency. Haaland has tapped into a national fundraising network of progressive donors to power her campaign and has drawn on her national profile to outraise both her primary and general election opponents by large margins.

In total, Deb Haaland has raised nearly $20 million across the primary and general elections, including more than $6.4 million during the general election.  As October 13, 2026, the Secretary of States office reported the Deb Haaland has raised for her entire campaign  total contributions of  $19,215,366.09,  with total expenditures of $16,378,076.07,  in-kind contributions of $74,624.64 with a current debt Balance of $0.0 and a current cash balance of $2,837,260.02

https://login.cfis.sos.state.nm.us/index.html#/exploreDetails/o-FWxlqdlSZjoP5Ut0jHQX1lK5MpzTLbNw12UnzEQ-I1/5/0/125/2026

The Deb Haaland campaign received roughly $1.9 million covering the time period from of September 8 through October 5 from a little more than 34,000 donations. That amounts to an average donation of roughly $55. A Haaland campaign spokesperson said the average online contribution to the Haaland campaign in this report was $21.76 with 96% of online contributions being under $100 and there were 7,521 first-time online donors. The new campaign filings reveal that just 17% of Haaland’s donors are state residents. A little more than 6,000 donations came from donors with California addresses compared with fewer than 5,900 donations from New Mexico residents.

The Deb Haaland campaign reported 28 donations of the maximum amount from one donor of $12,400 at totaling $347,200 for the  time period from September 8 through October 5. Those contributions came from individuals, businesses, labor organizations, tribal interests and political action committees.

The $12,400 maximum-level donors listed in Haaland’s report are:

• New Mexico Federation of Labor, AFL-CIO
• Candida Covington
• John Wertheim (husband of Bianca Wertheim, the Haaland campaign treasurer}
• Devon Energy Production Company
• Occidental Petroleum
• Olivia Walton
• Sergio Saenz
• Motorola Solutions Political Action Committee
• IBEW PAC Voluntary Fund
• Stahmanns Inc.
• George Martin (Game of Thrones author)
• Jana Singleton
• Paul Blanchard (Downs race Track and Casino)
• Leigh Ann Blanchard (wife of Paul Blanchard)
• Mescalero Apache Tribe
• Michelle Maestas
• Rudy Andrew Guzman (Owner of Guzman Construction)
• Tanya Kiehne
• United Food and Commercial Workers
• New Mexico Gas Company
• Doug Campbell
• Laurie Michaels
• NEA Fund for Children and Public Education
• Barbara Serna
• Global Financial Strategies Group
• Ashish Patel
• Bill Bloomfield
• Zane Kiehne

The Deb Haaland Campaign four largest payments went to Sage Media Planning & Placement for television airtime and production. Those payments totaled $1,408,621.98:

• $405,542.89 on Oct. 1
• $388,461.02 on Sept. 16
• $314,474.53 on Sept. 10
• $300,143.54 on Sept. 23

Other major Deb Haaland campaign expenses included:

• $228,833.57 to Mission Wired
• $147,000 to the Democratic Party of New Mexico
• $100,000 to The Perkey Group
• $80,000 to the Democratic Party of New Mexico

Deb Haaland said this in a statement about her campaign donations:

“I know firsthand how hard people work to earn every paycheck, and I am deeply grateful for everyone that shares my vision for New Mexico.”

Haaland said her priorities include lowering the cost of living and opposing policies advanced by President Donald Trump. Haaland also said she would continue traveling across New Mexico and meeting directly with voters through November.

HULL CAMPAIGN DONATIONS AND EXPENDITURES

As October 13, 2026, the Secretary of States office reported the Gregg Hull Campaign has raised for the entire campaign total contributions of  $2,532,391.01, has had Total Expenditures of $2,010,594.68 with In-Kind Contributions of $104,437.20 with a $0.00 Current Balance and a

Current Cash Balance $521,796.33.

https://login.cfis.sos.state.nm.us/index.html#/exploreDetails/pyDxIVw11ZjA5jjAGYukHH1lK5MpzTLbNw12UnzEQ-I1/5/0/125/2026

The Hull campaign received about $634,000 during  the time period  from of September 8 through October 5  from 1,400 donations which averages to roughly $450 per donation. The new campaign filings reveals  that 99% of Hull’s donors come from New Mexico.

The Hull Campaign  reported 11 contributions at the $12,400 maximum limit allowed totaling $136,400 for the  time period from September  8 through October 5. His maximum-level donors included corporations, businesses, individuals and a local Republican organization:

• Chase Oil Corporation
• Republican Party of Lincoln County
• Fair and Square Builders LLC
• Melloy Brothers Enterprises Inc.
• Bertrand Parnall (Prominent Personal Injury attorney)
• Marta Parnall (Wife of Bert Parnell)
• Parnall Law Firm LLC
• Mary Featherstone
• Rob Sneed
• John Obermiller
• Sanna Obermiller

Hull’s campaign made three payments totaling $420,000 to Red Surge for television and cable airtime and production:

• $180,000 on October 1
• $161,735 on October 1
• $78,265 on October 1

Major Hull campaign expenses include $60,643 in combined payments to the Republican Party of New Mexico for literature and mailings, nearly $31,000 to Peakland Strategies for consulting and $25,000 to Perez & Associates for consulting.

Hull said this about Haaland’s fundraising advantage:

“We’ve spent millions and millions and millions less than our opponent to be basically in a neck-and-neck race … We’re spending our money very effectively, and we’re getting our message out to the voters across New Mexico. … When you’re fundraising across the nation [like Haaland has], that brings in a much larger cash pool than what you’re going to find in New Mexico.”

Gregg Hull claimed more than 95% of his contributions throughout the campaign have come from New Mexico donors.

The next campaign finance reports are due October  29 and will cover campaign activity from October 6 through October 27. They will provide the final campaign-finance snapshot before voters choose New Mexico’s next governor.

Links to other quoted relied upon news sources other than filed campaign finance reports are here:

https://www.koat.com/article/haaland-hull-pour-millions-into-final-stretch-of-governors-race/74138320

https://www.santafenewmexican.com/news/local_news/haaland-continues-to-dwarf-hull-in-fundraising-reports-show/article_a85e1c88-c2e9-4786-ab8d-beb39e4f41d7.html

https://sourcenm.com/2026/10/14/new-mexico-dem-governor-nominee-haalands-fundraising-advantage-grows-heading-into-election-day/

HAALAND’S LEAD OVER HULL REMAINS STEADY IN POLLS

On Sunday, October 11, with just 23 days left before the  November 3  general election for New Mexico Governor the Albuquerque Journal Published its second and final election poll in the 2026 race for Governor. The Journal poll found 49% of likely voters surveyed said they plan to vote for Democrat Deb Haaland, who is seeking to become the first Native American woman elected governor in the nation’s history.  Meanwhile,  42%of voters said they plan to vote for Republican Gregg Hull, the former Rio Rancho mayor who would be the first Republican to win a statewide race in New Mexico since 2016. The remaining 9% of voters surveyed said they were undecided or did not know who they would vote for in the November general election.

https://www.abqjournal.com/news/journal-poll-haaland-maintains-lead-over-hull-as-new-mexicos-race-for-governor-nears-homestretch/3139307

On October 5, one month before the November 3 general election, KOB-4 released the results of a scientific  poll taken of 800 registered and likely voters in the ’26  New Mexico Governor’s race between Democrat Deb Haaland and Republican Greg Hull. The Poll was conducted exclusively for KOB-4 by Survey USA. The poll was taken from September 25 to September 30. The poll reveals that  Democrat Deb Haaland leads Republican Gregg Hull 47% to 41% in the race for Governor with 12% of likely voters undecided.  The links to quoted or relied upon news sources are here:

https://www.kob.com/new-mexico/kob-poll-finds-haaland-leading-hull-by-6-points-in-head-to-head-race/

https://results.surveyusa.com/client/PollReport.aspx?g=6e6ded19-6ad8-4379-8fa9-6a15dfa99052

On Sunday, August 30, the Albuquerque Journal Published its first poll in the 2026 race for  Governor. The Journal poll found 49% of likely voters surveyed said they plan to vote for Democrat Deb Haaland. Meanwhile, 43% of voters said they plan to vote for Republican Gregg Hull, the former Rio Rancho mayor who would be the first Republican to win a statewide race in New Mexico since 2016. The remaining 8% of voters surveyed said they had not yet decided on who they would support in the November general election. The overall 6-point margin separating Deb Haaland and Greg Hull in the Journal Poll mirrors the final margin of New Mexico’s 2022 gubernatorial race between Democrat Incumbent Governor Lujan Grisham and Republican Mark Ronchetti.

https://www.abqjournal.com/news/journal-poll-haaland-leads-hull-by-closer-than-expected-margin-in-new-mexicos-race-for-governor/3111874

The two Albuquerque Journal Polls and the one KOB 4 poll showing that Deb Haaland is leading Greg Hull by 6% or 7% in the three  polls but falling short of the magical 50% plus one margin to win reflects that the race for Governor is close to being over and the trajectory of the race still remains that  Deb Haaland will win decisively on November 3. To win outright, Haaland has to only secure 1% of the 9% undecided.  For Hull to turn things around and win he would have to secure all 9% of the undecided which is not at all likely. The 6% to 7% Haaland lead in the three polls is essentially identical to the margin Democrat Governor Michelle Lujan defeated Republican Mark Ronchetti in her bid for a second four year term. In 2022, Governor Lujan Grisham did not garner 50% in polling until late in October, 2022.

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

Simply put, Republican Gregg Hull is facing an uphill battle in a very Democratic leaning state. Haaland is the former U.S. Interior secretary under President Joe Biden and a former congresswoman. Haaland is a national figure with respect to her fundraising ability and the historical nature of her candidacy. She will be the first native American who would  be elected  governor. On the other hand, Gregg Hull is a virtual unknown throughout most of the State even though he was Mayor of Rio Rancho.

Haaland has tremendous support among women, Hispanics, Independent voters and  highly educated voters and taken together they will decide the election. Then there is the matter of the national political mood that clearly favors Democrats thanks in large part to President Trump’s disastrous presidency, the Iran war he has started and his disastrous handling of the economy and his very low approval rating.  Haaland’s candidacy has been significantly bolstered in New Mexico with the recent endorsement by former Democratic President Barack Obama.

As evidenced by Deb Haaland’s Democratic primary victory of  72.3% (156,861 votes) over  Bernalillo County District Attorney Sam Bregman’s 27.7% (60,189), Democrats are highly motivated to vote for Deb Haaland and its highly unlikely they will change their minds and vote for Republican Hull. President Trump’s extremely high negatives in the state will also have a major impact motivating voter turn out in a deep blue Democrat state.

In the final analysis, it will be a combination of the independent voters, the progressive voters and the female and Hispanic voters, along with an expected high Democratic voter turnout because of Trump’s negatives, that will result in Deb Haaland being elected our next Governor.

Election day is November 3.  Early voting began October 6 and goes to October 31, 2026 (county clerk offices October 6–16; expanded locations October 17–31; hours vary by location).  Please vote!

In mid August, the New Mexico Coalition to End Homelessness released the  2026 Point-In-Time (PIT) Report with graphs and charts reflecting the numbers of unhoused people in Albuquerque and in the balance of the State. The link to review the entire 61 page 2026 PIT report is here:

https://www.nmceh.org/pitreports

This article is an in depth review of the PIT statistics, the City of Albuquerque’s efforts at shelter and providing services to the unhoused and a discussion Albuquerque’s financial commitment to the unhoused. The article further address the need for civil mental commitments to get the unhoused off the streets as a viable solution.

INTRODUCTION

“The Point-In-Time (PIT) Count is the process of identifying and counting individuals and families experiencing sheltered and unsheltered homelessness within a community on a single night in January, as outlined and defined by the U.S. Housing and Urban Development Department (HUD)

…

The PIT Count consists of an unsheltered count and a sheltered count. These counts help to measure a community’s need for services. The unsheltered count tracks individuals and families whose primary nighttime residence is a location not meant for human habitation. Conversely, the sheltered count records those residing in emergency shelters or transitional housing programs.

Complementing the PIT Count, the Housing Inventory Count (HIC) measures local capacity to meet these service demands. The HIC tallies all dedicated beds and units available within Emergency Shelter, Transitional Housing, Rapid Re-Housing, and Permanent Supportive Housing programs designed to assist households experiencing homelessness upon entry.”

 The 2026 PIT Count reflects another increase in the reported number of people experiencing homelessness in New Mexico. For the first time in the history of these counts, Albuquerque recorded over 3,000 individuals, while the Balance of State count topped 2,000. There are many data points suggesting homelessness in New Mexico continues to increase and the 2026 PIT is another indicator of that trend.”

https://www.nmceh.org/pitreports

SUMMARY OF  2026 PIT  STATISTICS

The following statistics were reported in the 2026 Point-In-Time (PIT) Report:

• The annual Point In Time Count for unhoused people in Albuquerque on January 26th, 2026 was 3,122. (In 2025, it was 2,960.)
• The annual Point In Time Count for unhoused people in the Balance of the State of New Mexico on January 26th, 2026  was 2,173. (In 2025, it was 1,723.)
• The number of students identified as experiencing homeless by the New Mexico Department of Public education during the 2025 – 2026 school year was 9,954.
• The number of individuals identified through medical service records and diagnosis criteria was 9,168.
• The distinct number of individuals who engaged with any part of New Mexico’s homeless response system in the year 2025 was 31,430.

2026  CITY OF  ALBUQUERQUE PIT COUNT BY HOUSING TYPE

The 2026 PIT Count found 3,112 total people within 2,628 total households experienced homelessness in Albuquerque on January 26, 2026. Following is the breakdown:

Persons in Households with at least one Adult and one Child

• Emergency Shelters:  328
• Transitional Housing: 112
• Unsheltered:      4
• Total: 444

Persons in Households with only Children

• Emergency Shelters: 12
• Transitional Housing:   7
• Unsheltered: 0
• Total: 19

Persons in Households without children

• Emergency Shelters: 1,033
• Transitional Housing: 180
• Unsheltered: 1,436
• Total:  2,649

Total PIT Person Count

• Emergency Shelters: 1,373
• Transitional Housing: 299
• Unsheltered: 1,440
• Total: 3,112

 COMPARING 2025 PIT REPORT FOR ALBUQUERQUE

In 2025, a total of 2,960 total homeless people were reported in Albuquerque, broken down is as follows:

• 1,367 were reported as unsheltered people.
• 1,327 were reported in emergency shelters which is up from 658 in 2011.
• 266 in transitional housing with women more prevalent than men in this type of housing.
• 8% of people reported experiencing homelessness for first time.
• 2,566 total are reported as homeless groups/families in Albuquerque.

2026  BALANCE OF THE STATE PIT COUNT  BY HOUSING TYPE

The 2026 PIT Count found a total of 2,173 people within 1,239 households experienced homelessness in the Balance of State  on January 26th, 2026.

Persons in Households with at least one Adult and one Child:

• Emergency Shelters:         566
• Transitional Housing:        139
• Unsheltered:                       27
• Total:                                 732

Persons in Households with only Children:

• Emergency Shelters:        29
• Transitional Housing:         6
• Unsheltered:                      0
• Total:                                35

Persons in Households without children:

• Emergency Shelters:              598
• Transitional Housing:               85
• Unsheltered:                           723
• Total:                                    1,406

TOTAL PIT PERSONS COUNTED

• Emergency Shelters:      1,193 
• Transitional Housing:        230       
• Unsheltered:                      750
• Total:                                2,173    

COMPARING 2025 PIT REPORT FOR THE BALANCE OF THE STATE:

In 2025, a total of 1,723 homeless people throughout the rest of New Mexico were counted and broke down as follows:

• 779 unsheltered people
• 774 in emergency shelters
• 170 in transitional housing
• 39% of people reported experiencing homelessness for first time

DEMOGRAPHIC BREAKDOWN

The following Demographic breakdown was provided in the 2026 PIT Survey. It has been edited for brevity and clarity.

GENDER

“In the Albuquerque and in the Balance Of the State statistics, those identifying as male experienced unsheltered homelessness at higher rate than those identifying as female.”

RACE AND GENDER

“Across both the Albuquerque and Balance of State  unsheltered counts, individuals identifying as American Indian or Alaska Native, Black or African American, and Hispanic/Latina experienced homelessness at disproportionately higher rates relative to their census baselines. Those identifying as White and Asian or Asian American experienced homelessness at lower rates than expected.

By gender, in Albuquerque, American Indian or Alaska Native women and Black men had disproportionately higher counts of unsheltered homelessness. In the Balance of State, the count of white women is higher than expected, while the count of white men is lower than expected. The 2025 PIT Count data showed the opposite pattern for both white women and men for the BoS.”

AGE

“Within the unsheltered population, 64.2% of individuals in the Albuquerque CoC are under the age of 45, compared to 54.4% in the Balance of State. This demographic variance indicates a higher concentration of unhoused young adults within the Albuquerque urban core than in the other parts of the state.”

DOMESTIC VIOLENCE

“Over 70% of women in both Albuquerque (77.5%) and BoS (70.8%) reported a past domestic violence experience, compared to 40.4% of ABQ men and 34.8% of BoS men. In Albuquerque, 38% of women and 11% of men, along with 33.6% of women and 10.8% of men in the Balance of State, indicated that domestic violence was the direct cause of their unsheltered status. Both results are statistically significant (p ≤ .001), demonstrating that domestic violence and its subsequent impact on housing instability are deeply gendered phenomena.”

MILITARY SERVICE

“Within the unsheltered counts, 8% of respondents in Albuquerque and 6.6% in the Balance of State (BoS) had served in the U.S. Military. By race, Black and white unsheltered veterans were overrepresented in Albuquerque and the Balance of State. Hispanic/ Latina/e/o respondents were underrepresented for both ABQ and BoS, while American Indian or Alaska Native veterans were underrepresented for Albuquerque.”

ONLY TIME EXPERIENCING HOMELESSNESS

 “Within the Unsheltered count, 42.4% of respondents in Albuquerque and 39.4% in Balance of State reported experiencing homelessness for the first time. First-time episodes of homelessness are concentrated among the 25–34 age demographic in Albuquerque and the 35–44 age demographic in the Balance of State. By gender, instances of new homelessness hovered between 38-43% for both women and men in both Albuquerque and the Balance of State.”

LOCATION/WHERE FROM

“Within the Albuquerque CoC unsheltered count, 50.6% of respondents reported being from Albuquerque. However, among those who identified as nonnative, the largest percentage had resided in the city for over 15 years. Statewide residency data indicates that 68.3% of respondents in the Albuquerque CoC and 55.8% in the Balance of State (BoS) CoC were originally from New Mexico. Furthermore, among individuals who migrated from outside New Mexico, 69.4% in the Albuquerque CoC and 65.7% in the BoS CoC were stably housed upon their arrival, meaning they became unhoused after relocating to the state.”

KELLER’S  GATEWAY SYSTEM OF SHELTERS

The Gateway Shelter Network consists of 5 shelters of support for people struggling with homelessness and drug and substance addiction consists of the following:

1. Gateway Center– (Located on Gibson.) Campus providing medical, behavioral, and social services including overnight beds, first responder intake, medical sobering and respite. Old Lovelace Hospital city purchased for $15 million costing $95 million to remodel into shelter with city officials saying upwards of 1,000 unhoused per month are being provided assistance.
2. Gateway West – Safe, supportive 660-bed facility for individuals experiencing homelessness, offering specialized resources and case management. (City officials say the annual impact is services to 5,700 Individuals. Open 24/7 Since 2019)
3. Gateway Family – Supportive housing center for families with overnight beds, meals, and case management to help achieve stable housing. (City officials say the annual impact is 987 individuals being served, Open Since 2020.)
4. Gateway Recovery– 50-resident micro-community offering low-barrier beds, recovery services, and support for 18 – 24 months. City officials say the annua projected impact is 50 – 100 being served. Opening Early 2025
5. Gateway Young Adult – Housing and support for young adults ages 15-25 experiencing homelessness, tailored to their unique needs. City officials say the projected impact is 120 Individuals being served. Opened March, 2026.

ALBUQUERQUES FINANCIAL COMITMENT TO UNHOUSED

Editor’s Disclaimer: Jaemes Shanley is the President of the Mark Twain Neighborhood Association and past contributor of guest columns published on www.PeteDinelli.com. Mr. Shanley assisted with the identification of City of Albuquerque budget funding and capital outlay funding for shelters and contract services for the unhoused as outlined below in this article.

It has been determined from review of City Council approved city budgets and capital outlay spending by the city, the city has spent a minimum of $127 million dollars for construction of the 5 Gateway shelters. The Gateway System Capital Outlay spending for Gateway Shelter system is as follows:

Gateway West Shelter:  

•   $7.6 million for cumulative refurbishing
•   $2.0 million in Fiscal Year ’26 for remodeling

Gateway Gibson Center:

• $15 Million building purchase (Lovelace Hosp)
• $71 Million remediation and remodeling

Gateway Recovery:  

• $5 Million to acquire and install 48 pallet homes
• $1.7 incremental facility development

Gateway Young Adult:  

• $17 Million building acquisition of former motel
• $ 5 Million for remodeling into 70 unit facility
•  $3 Million US Senate earmark

TOTAL CAPITAL OUTLAY FOR 5 GATEWAY SHELTERS: $127.3 Million

HEALTH, HOUSING AND HOMELESS DEPARTMENT BUDGETED CONTRACTS FOR UNHOSED INITIATIVES

It is the City of Albuquerque Department of  Health, Housing and Homeless (HHH) that is responsible for operating all 5 Gateway Shelters and responsible to provide services to the unhoused. The HHH budgets are  where line-item funding for services to the unhoused are provided for in the following contracts:

• Affordable Housing contracts
• Emergency Shelter contracts
• Health and Human Services contracts
• Homeless Support Services contracts
• Gateway Shelter operating contracts
• Mental Health contracts
• Substance Abuse contracts

The approved FY/23  General Fund budget for the Health, Housing and Homeless Department (HHH) was  $62.28 Million and included the following line item funding in the millions of dollars:

• Total Affordable Housing contracts:                          $42.60 million
• Total Emergency Shelter contracts:                             $6.03 million
• Total Health and Human Services contracts:             $2.63 million
• Total Homeless Support Services contracts:              $4.34 million
• Total Gateway Shelter Operating contracts:                   -0-
• Total Mental Health contracts:                                     $3.87 million
• Total Substance Abuse contracts:                               $2.82 million

TOTAL F/Y 2023 HHH CONTRACTS                          $62.28  Million

https://www.cabq.gov/dfa/documents/fy23-approved-budget-final-sept-13.pdf/view

The  approved FY/24 General Fund budget for the Health, Housing and Homeless Department (HHH) was $63.10 Million and included the following line item funding in the millions of dollars:

• Total Affordable Housing contracts:                           $38.2  million
• Total Emergency Shelter contracts:                            $5.58  million
• Total Health and Human Services contracts:             $2.33 million
• Total Homeless Support Services contracts:              $5.16 million
• Total Gateway Shelter operating contracts:               $5.03 million
• Total Mental Health contracts:                                      $3.65 million
• Total Substance Abuse contracts:                                $2.53 million

TOTAL F/Y 2024 HHH CONTRACTS                              $63.10 Million

 https://www.cabq.gov/dfa/documents/fy24-web-version.pdf/view

The  approved FY/25 General Fund budget for the Health, Housing and Homeless Department (HHH) was $61.55  Million and included the following line item funding in the millions of dollars:

• Total Affordable Housing contracts:                 $39.79 million
• Total Emergency Shelter contracts:                   $5.24 million
• Total Health and Human Services contracts:    $2.02 million
• Total Homeless Support Services contracts:    $4.80 million
• Total Gateway Shelter operating contracts:      $4.03 million
• Total Mental Health contracts:                           $3.13 million
• Total Substance Abuse contracts:                      $2.53 million

TOTAL F/Y 2025 HHH  CONTRACTS                     $61.55 MILLION

The  approved FY/26 General Fund budget for the  Health, Housing and Homeless Department (HHH)  lists 116  separate contracts for services benefiting directly or indirectly to the unhoused totaling $53,901,355. The 116 separate contracts totaling $53,901,355 include:

• 32 for Affordable Housing Contracts totaling                  $30,391,436
• 12 for Emergency Shelter contracts totaling                      $6,347,819
• 16 for Health and Human Services Contracts totaling    $1,962,486
• 28 for Homeless Support Services contracts totaling      $5,746,188
• 11 for Mental Health Contracts totaling                            $2,995,400
• 12 for Substance Abuse contracts totaling                         $2,573,526
• 5  for Gateway Shelter operating contracts totaling           $3,884,500

TOTAL F/Y 2025 HHH  CONTRACTS                                   $53,901,355

TOTAL SERVICE CONTRACTS:  116   

The link to review the approved  FY/26 budget for the HHH department, page 209, is here:

Click to access fy26-approved-final.pdf

Mayor Tim Keller’s approved FY/27 General Fund budget  for the Health, Housing and Homeless Department (HHH) lists 122 separate contracts for services directly or indirectly to the unhoused totaling $85,283,474. The 122 separate contracts totaling $85,283,47 include:

• 34 for Affordable Housing Contracts totaling                   $35,534,228
• 13 for Emergency Shelter contracts totaling                     $10,230,537
• 14 for Health and Human Services Contracts totaling       $2,418,638
• 23 for Homeless Support Services contracts totaling       $6,091,714
• 11 for Mental Health Contracts totaling                              $3,925,400
• 12 for Substance Abuse contracts totaling                         $5,530,478
• 15 for Gateway Shelter operating contracts totaling        $21,552,479

TOTAL  F/Y 2026 HHH CONTRACTS                                        $85,283,471

TOTAL SERVICE CONTRACTS:   122      

The link to review the FY/27 budget for the HHH department, page 124, is here:

https://www.cabq.gov/dfa/documents/fy27-proposed-budget-with-weblink-final-4-01-2026.pdf

ALBUQUERQUE COMMUNITY  SAFETY DIVISION

The Albuquerque Community Safety Division (ACS) must be considered a big part of the City’s financial commitment to deal with the unhoused and remove them from city streets. Five years ago, Mayor Keller created the ACS and staffed it with social workers and mental health care professionals to do outreach to the homeless and to reduce by the thousands calls for service to APD. The problem is that the homeless still proliferate city streets at unacceptable levels despite ACS efforts.

The Albuquerque Community Safety Department (ACS) dispatches first responders to 911 calls with or without other first responders from the police and fire departments. Albuquerque Community Safety responders may have backgrounds as social workers, peer-to-peer support, clinicians, counselors, or similar fields. It is a first-of-its-kind cabinet-level department responding to calls on inebriation, homelessness, addiction, and mental health. It will work alongside APD and AFR as a third option for 911 dispatch. The approved FY/27 General Fund budget for ACS  is $19.6 million, representing an increase of $1.7 million, or 9.5%, from the FY/26 original budget. The F/Y 27 approved budget for ACS contains funding for 156 full time employees. (Page 165 of F/Y 27 budget)

The link to download and review the 2027 approved city budget is here:

https://www.cabq.gov/dfa/documents/fy27-approved-numbered-final-w-hyperlinks-7-31-2026.pdf/view

Links to other quoted or relied upon news sources are here:

https://www.abqjournal.com/news/article_42aba680-62c4-4228-95a2-da72df1a34e1.html

https://citydesk.org/2025/09/10/albuquerque-becomes-new-mexicos-homeless-hub-as-gateway-contracts-add-100-beds/?mc_cid=b9e7b25ad7&mc_eid=001367acf1

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

Since day one of becoming Mayor in 2017, dealing with the unhoused on the streets of Albuquerque and getting the homeless off the streets and getting them services has been a major priority of Mayor Tim Keller. During Keller’s tenure as Mayor, the number of homeless has more than doubled as Keller’s efforts to remove the unhoused permanently off the streets has failed  and as the homeless proliferate the city streets. The most recent “Point In Time” Survey of the unhoused released mid- August reports the city has 3,122 people unhoused, up from  2,960 reported in 2025.

According to review of approved city budgets, the  city of Albuquerque has spent a staggering $452 million dollars to build the 5 Gateway Shelters and to provide services to the unhoused calculated as follows:

Total capital outlay for 5 shelters:                            $127.00  million

• FY/23  HHH Department Contracts:                $  62.28   million
• FY/24  HHH Department Contracts:                $  63.10  million
• FY/25  HHH Department Contracts:                $  61.23  million
• FY/26 HHH  Department Contracts:                $  53.90  million
• FY/27 HHH  Department Contracts:                $  85.28   million

TOTAL CAPITAL OUTLAY AND SERVICE CONTRACTS:  $452.79 MILLION

Keller has increased spending for services to the unhoused in one year from $53,901,355 (F/Y ‘26) to $85,283,471 (F/Y ’27). The biggest obstacle is that 75% of the homeless refuse city shelter and services, yet millions are being spent.  Keller has advocated allowing upwards of 100 Safe Outdoor Spaces for 1,000  homeless to camp, scattered through out the city.

The fiscal year budgets for the HHH Department service contracts for  the fiscal years 2026 and 2027 divided by the most recent  2026 Point In Time figure provides a reasonable calculation of the amount spent individually on the 3,122  identified homeless over a the past two year period as  $44,581.94.  Following is the calculation:

$ 53.90 million (2026) + $85.28 million (2027) ÷ 3,122 unhoused = $44,581.94

It must be emphasized that the $44,581.94 per individual was for services only and does not include the cost of shelter operations.

The 2026  Point-In-Time (PIT) survey found 3,122 people in Albuquerque called the streets or an emergency shelter their home. Of that number, 1,440  people were completely unsheltered with no roof over their heads, living on the streets or in emergency shelters. The 2026 PIT report revealed an increase in homelessness going from 2,960 in 2025 to 3,112 in 2026, an increase of 152 people.

Statewide, 2026 PIT Count found a  total of 2,173 people within 1,239 households experienced homelessness in the Balance of State  on January 26th, 2026 reflecting and increase of 450.  In 2025, the Balance of the State total was 1,723 homeless people.

Simply put, Albuquerque has become New Mexico’s de facto “homeless capitol”  providing shelter and services to the homeless for all communities throughout New Mexico. The problem is that the City’s unhoused numbers are getting worse and not any better after spending a staggering $452.79 million dollars with the unhoused proliferating city streets.

UNHOUSED POPULATION INCREASES UNDER KELLER

The city’s homeless population has more than doubled from 2022 to 2026, while the increase in homeless people jailed by the county has more than tripled during the same time period. Police and court records and interviews with homeless people show the increase in their incarceration is primarily driven by the cascading effects of repeatedly citing people who are experiencing homelessness.

A 2025 report by the city found 30% of individuals experiencing homelessness self report having a serious mental illness, 25% self report having a substance use disorder and around 66% experience some form of mental health condition. A report by the New Mexico Justice Reinvestment Working Group found that 65% of individuals who enter the state’s criminal justice system have behavioral health needs and the criminal justice system cannot provide necessary medical  treatment and facilities.

A major problem is that approximately 75%  to 80% of the chronic, emergency unhoused simply refuse city services, yet the city spends upwards of $55 to $85 million a year on contracts to provide services and assistance to the unhoused

METROPOLITAN COURT DIVERSION COURT

On January 6, 2026, the Metropolitan Court Diversion Court was launched. The court redirects people with serious mental illness into voluntary treatment as an alternative to criminal prosecution for minor and nonviolent crimes. The court deals with people who previously have had criminal charges dismissed because they were found incompetent to stand trial. Eligible defendants are assessed by a social worker or case manager at the point of prosecution and offered on a voluntary basis a structured diversion option, including shelter intake, case management, substance use or mental health treatment, or other supportive services.

FORM SPECIALIZED UNIT TO INITIATE MENTAL HEALTH COMMITMENTS

It is likely that the Albuquerque Police Department and the city’s Community Safety Department know who the “frequent flyers” are and who need to be taken immediately off the streets because they pose and immediate threat to themselves and others. Both departments could and should assist the District Attorney or the City Attorney with civil mental health commitments of the unhoused and file civil mental commitment actions.

Under New Mexico statutes, the legislature has empowered  District Attorneys authority to initiate civil mental health commitments. The Bernalillo County District Attorney and the Albuquerque City Attorney’ office should form a specialized unit of at least four attorneys to deal exclusively with civil mental commitment actions in the Metropolitan Court’s new Diversion Court. The state or courts would  provide  funding for  the mental health services provided by the state through the Behavioral Health Trust Fund and  the Behavioral Health Reform Package.

The District Attorney should  cross deputized Assistant City Attorney’s, supported with para legals, to initiate mental health commitment proceedings to work in unison with the Bernalillo County District Attorney’s Office. Such an arrangement of cross deputization of Assistant City Attorney’s has occurred in the past with the City Attorney’s Metro Court Traffic Court arraignment program that processed at one time 60,000 cases per year negotiating plea agreements. Under the process, citations are issued by sworn police and dates for arraignments by the court are immediately scheduled in the citations. The arraignment dates could be the initial step to begin the process of civil mental health commitments.

It is understood the Gateway Shelter on Gibson, which is the former Lovelace Medical Center and Hospital, is still largely vacant and has upwards of 200 patient rooms that are vacant. The Gateway Shelter on Gibson should be utilized for referrals by the Metropolitan Court’s “Diversion Court” with the State providing mental health services to those committed for mental health and substance abuse treatment.

More must and can be done by the courts mandating unhoused people off the streets and ordering them into the mental health or drug addiction treatment programs they desperately need. The Albuquerque City Attorney and the Bernalillo County District Attorney should form a specialized unit to initiate civil mental health commitments in Metro Court to secure court orders to get chronically mentally ill and drug-addicted people off city streets and get them the medical or mental health counseling help they desperately need.

Links to related articles are here:

City Council Passes Ban On Sitting, Sleeping On Sidewalks To Deal With Unhoused; Safe Outdoor Spaces To Be Offered At Gateway West Shelter; City Announces New Diversion Program; COMMENTARY: New Diversion Program Needs To Include Civil Mental Health Commitments Of Unhoused Who Are Danger To Selves And Others Or In  Need Of Addiction Medical Treatment

2025 Point In Time Count Of Unhoused Finds 8% Increase In City; Goes From 2,740 In 2024 To 2,960 In 2025;  50% Of Unhoused Found Not To Be From New Mexico; City Spends Millions On Shelters And Services The Unhoused Reject; Civil Mental Health Commitment Hearings Viable Option To Get Unhoused Off Streets

 

On October 5, the Albuquerque City Council enacted three out of four measures sponsored by MAGA Republican Dan Lewis misleadingly labeled the “Better Neighborhoods” package under the guise and a false attempt to cut red tape and spur development projects. The “Better Neighborhoods” package consists of two ordinances directed at neighborhood coalitions and two memorials that request action from the New Mexico legislature to act to curb city’s zoning authority.

The two city ordinances make dramatic changes to the Neighborhood Association Recognition Ordinance (NARO). It is O-26-61 that is the most egregious of the four measures and the ordinance eliminates formal city recognition of  neighborhood coalitions, homeowners’ associations and business groups and eliminates automatic development notices to them and ends developer good-faith requirements. O-26-61 strips standing from neighborhood coalitions, raises appeal fees, and requires coalitions to pay legal fees if they lose a challenge against a developer who has applied for permits.

Ordinance O-26-61 passed on a 5 to 4. Voting YES were MAGA Republican City Councilor Dan Lewis, Dan Champine, Renee Grout and Progressive Democrats Stephanie Telles and Tammy Fiebelkorn. Voting NO were Democrat City Council President Klarissa Peña, Progressive Democrats Jaquin Baca and Nichole Rogers and Republican Brook Bassan.

If signed by Mayor Tim Keller O-26-61 will become law. If vetoed by Mayor Keller, the veto would require six votes of nine the nine city councilors to override.

GUEST COLUMN BY STEVEN HOLMAN

Steven Holman is a resident of City Council District 7 which is the mid heights city council district represented by City Councilor Tammy Fiebelkorn. The district includes the uptown retail business district including the Commons, Winrock and Coronado Shopping Center. The District boundaries are generally Montgomery Boulevard on the North, I-25 on the West, Lomas on the South and Eubank on the East.

Steven Holman is a strong believer in accountability in government, having been involved in progressive marches in Washington DC against the Iraq War, for Women’s reproductive rights, for Marriage Equality, and with the Occupy and BLM Movements. In writing this piece, Steven Holman want the voices of local communities and their advocates to not be suppressed or silenced.

Steven Holman submitted the below guest column to be published on www.PeteDinelli.com. He was not compensated for it and his column is being published as a public service:

MAYOR TIM KELLER SHOULD VETO 0-26-61 AND THE “BETTER NEIGHBORHOODS” PACKAGE; VETO WILL DEFINE KELLER LEGACY AND  FUTURE OF CITY

Mayor Tim Keller faces decisions that will define his legacy and the future of Albuquerque. He has to choose between siding with citizens and established and historical  communities versus investors, real estate developers, and corporations and nationally backed organizations.  A core principle of being a Democrat and a progressive one at that, is maintaining the value that elected officials should serve the people and not be beholden to businesses and special interest groups.

Unfortunately, Mayor Keller has proven in the past that he aligns with investment developers more than the people of Albuquerque.  This was never more evident than his utilizing the nationally backed organization Strongtowns in their common quest to deregulate zoning and allow developers to build what they want, wherever they want , and how they want without any requirements for affordable housing. Earlier this year, they both lost this agenda not only at the Albuquerque City Council level but in the New Mexico Legislature as well.  This was because communities organized and stood up against these kinds of policies in a rare win against this kind of Reagan-era deregulatory free market hand out to developers.

At their core, Mayor Keller and Strongtowns want to largely remove all zoning regulations and allow development to run free without any zoning limitations and no input from communities that will be negatively affected by development.  The hope is that development will flood the market and bring housing prices down. It will not! The reality is that studies are finding more and more this only has up to a 3% impact in affordability and targets poor and marginalized communities due to the low cost of acquiring their properties and leading to gentrification and displacement. For example, in cities like Memphis this has proven to gentrify and displace lower income communities. The truth is that zoning doesn’t stand as a barrier to housing or impacts affordability. It protects historic, indigenous, and marginalized communities.

Because these groups haven’t gotten what they wanted, there has now been the introduction of the outright retaliatory Better Neighborhoods legislative package that eviscerates neighborhood associations and coalitions power to fight back against developers and the city.  They are also introducing 0-26-65 on October 19, 2026, sponsored by Republican Brook Bassan, who is pro development, that will allow  the city Planning Department to manage the  Integrated Development Ordinance (IDO), which is all the city’s zoning laws, with updates to city zoning laws. This is troubling because the City Council inserted unapproved language in the last IDO updates and were forced to change it back while calling it a “clerical error.”  Meanwhile this would also change the IDO zoning updates from every TWO YEARS to TWICE YEARLY, eliminating consistency of policy for development and forcing communities to come together and review changes far more often. 

Organizations like Strongtowns can be utilized as a way for politicians to say they’re listening to the “will of the people”.  They pose as a “local” activist community group that’s pro-affordable housing while they are nationally organized and backed by local developer interests. What is very troubling about Strongtowns is that they use their media sources to outright lie to the public. This makes it easier for political allies like Mayor Keller to side with them and investment developers.  This is never more evident than a Friday, October 9,  post on social media by their communications team saying that “special interests” are trying to sway Mayor Keller to veto the Better Neighborhoods legislative package. Those are not special interests. They are neighborhood associations and coalitions and everyday citizens asking  Mayor Keller not to stab them in the back with the Better Neighborhoods legislation. The only special interest groups who are contacting the mayor are developers and nationally backed organizations like Strongtowns.

Most of the Better Neighborhoods package has largely passed the city council.  It is now  headed to Mayor Keller’s desk for his signature approval or veto. Keller is left with the  grim choice of either backing the people and voters he represents or backing the city’s special interest groups or the investment developers and corporations. These pieces of legislation headed to Mayor Keller for his signature will ultimately disarm citizens and communities from being able to defend against encroachment on indigenous sites, destruction of historical neighborhoods, and displacement of lower income communities.

For my part, I’m seeing history repeat itself.  Growing up in Northern Virginia outside Washington DC, I was witness to the worst of what these policies do.  Among the many things I’ve seen are:

• A historic Civil War battlefield being bulldozed for a shopping center and then unironically named Battlefield Shopping Center.
• The demolition of a historic African American Church so a development could be built.
• The demolition of a historic community center that was previously the town elementary and high school.
• People’s homes allowed to burn to the ground so the land could be used for developments.
• The displacement of Washington DC’s poorest neighborhood when they bulldozed the entire community to build the nationals baseball stadium.
• The displacement and pricing out of my own family who was there there for four generations, forcing them to move to another nearby state due to housing being some of the most expensive in the country due to gentrification.

With the policies these people want to pass I can see the same things happening to the petroglyphs or historic parts of Old Town or Martineztown.  Unlike the many transplants of Strongtowns, I respect the culture and history of this place and realize I’m just a guest here.  I don’t want to force changes on communities in Albuquerque but instead want to help preserve and protect what makes this place special and uniquely beautiful.

Change can happen without destroying identity, but handing the keys to the kingdom to investment developers is just plain bad policy. Ultimately, the Mayor’s actions will serve as a message to communities, organizations and citizens across the city letting us know if we have an ally in Mayor Tim Keller.

If Mayor Keller signs this legislation into law, it will stand as a reflection of his “abundance agenda” and “democratization” of housing he announced earlier this year in his State of the City address. In essence he will have proven to be no better than Trump and his “Big Beautiful Bill” that also gave special business interests a handout over helping people.  These decisions will ultimately shape Mayor Keller’s legacy not only in Albuquerque, but for any future political aspirations he may have.

Mayor Keller, the ball is in your court!  We hope you’ll be a true Democrat and support the will of the people reaching out to you or you may end up showing us who really holds your puppet strings.

DINELLI COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

The “Better Neighborhoods” package sponsored by MAGA Republican Dan Lewis is a false and misleading attempt to cut red tape and spur development and encourage upzoning to increase density. Taken together, the measures  will have a major impact eliminating the rights of neighborhood coalitions to challenge developments. The legislation is nothing more than  a continuation of a complete frontal assault of rights and remedies of not only neighborhood association coalitions and businesses but of neighborhood associations themselves and private citizens. The City Council’s objective is to stifle and prevent opposition to developments that have a negative impact on residential neighborhoods and giving developers unchecked influence and authority.

PLAN OF ACTION OPTIONS

There are three options voters, and the public, have to reverse the disastrous enactment of the “Better Neighborhoods” package:

First, contact Mayor Tim Keller and ask him to veto Ordinance O-26-61. Strong Towns and the development community are already engaging in an extensive lobbying effort contacting the Mayors Office and encouraging Mayor Keller to sign the legislation into law.

Second, in the event Mayor Keller does not veto the legislation and signs it into law, city voters and residents need to contact city councilors. They have two options:

1. City residents should demand that City Councilor Republicans Dan Lewis, Dan Champine, Renee Grout and Progressive Democrats Stephanie Telles and Tammy Fiebelkorn, who voted for passage,  move to reconsider passage of the legislation or introduce a Resolution or Ordinance repealing it .
2. City residents should ask City Council President Klarissa Peña, Progressive Democrats Jaquin Baca and Nichole Rogers and Republican Brook Bassan who voted NO to introduce a Resolution or Ordinance .

CONTACT INFORMATION

MAYOR TIM KELLER CONTACT INFORMATION

Department: Office of the Mayor

Phone: 505-768-3000
Fax: 505-768-3019

Physical Address: 1 Civic Plaza, 11th Floor, Albuquerque NM 87102

Mailing Address:

Office of the Mayor

PO Box 1293

Albuquerque NM 87103

EMAIL: tkeller@cabq.gov, MayorKellerIQ@cabq.gov, MayorTimKellerPress@cabq.gov

CITY COUNCIL CONTACT INFORMATION

CITY COUNCIL PHONE: (505) 768-3100

CITY COUNCILOR AND SUPPORT STAFF EMAILS

stelles@cabq.gov

stephenchavez@cabq.gov

joaquinbaca@cabq.gov

bacajoaquin9@gmail.com

namolina@cabq.gov

kpena@cabq.gov

cquezada@cabq.gov

bbassan@cabq.gov

dawnmarie@cabq.gov

danlewis@cabq.gov

galvarez@cabq.gov

nrogers@cabq.gov

district6@cabq.gov

tfiebelkorn@cabq.gov

seanforan@cabq.gov

dchampine@cabq.gov

eromero@cabq.gov

rgrout@cabq.gov

rrmiller@cabq.gov

ipadilla@cabq.gov  (Director of Council Services)

mmmontoya@cabq.gov (Council Clerk)

 BELOW ARE LINKS TO RELATED ARTICLES

NEWS UPDATE:  According to a Channel 7 news report, Statewide early voting numbers as of Oct. 16 are strong with Democrats voting more than twice as much as Republicans. Total vote: 84,945, Democrats voting 50,611, Republicans voting 18,111, Decline to State 15,422. With these type of numbers it could be a blow out for Dems but Republicans always waite to vote on election day.

On Sunday, October 11, with just 23 days left before the  November 3  general election for New Mexico Governor the Albuquerque Journal Published its second and final election poll in the 2026 race for Governor.

The Journal poll found 49% of likely voters surveyed said they plan to vote for Democrat Deb Haaland, who is seeking to become the first Native American woman elected governor in the nation’s history.  Meanwhile,  42%of voters said they plan to vote for Republican Gregg Hull, the former Rio Rancho mayor who would be the first Republican to win a statewide race in New Mexico since 2016. The remaining 9% of voters surveyed said they were undecided or did not know who they would vote for in the November general election.

RAW POLLING RESULTS

The raw and demographic poll results are as follows:

PARTY AFFILIATION

Both Deb Haaland and Gregg Hull received strong support from voters of their own political parties.

Deb Haaland garnered 85% of Democrats polled, 7% of Republicans polled who said they plan to vote and 8% of Democrats said they were undecided or did not know who they would vote for.

Gregg Hull garnered 91% of Republicans and only 5% of Democrats who said they plan to vote and 4% of Republicans polled said they were undecided or did not know who they would vote for.

Among Independents polled, who have seen their ranks swell and now make up more than one-quarter of registered New Mexico voters, Deb Haaland secured 48% of Independents to Gregg Hulls 34%  and 18% of Independent voters said they were undecided or did not know who they would vote for.

GENDER

Among Female voters polled, Democrat Deb Haaland received 54%  support, Republican Greg Hull received 38% and 8% were undecided

Among Male voters polled, Democrat Deb Haaland received 44% support, Republican Greg Hull received 47% and 9% were undecided.

RACE AND ETHNICITY

Amongst Hispanics polled, 53% said they would vote for Democrat Deb Haaland, 36% said they would vote for Republican Gregg Hull, while 11% said they were undecided.

Amongst Anglo/Whites polled, 44% said they would vote for Democrat Deb Haaland, 50% said they would vote for Republican Gregg Hull and 6% said they were Undecided.

NEW MEXICO REGIONS

Looking at the race state wide by region, Democrat Deb Haaland has a significant advantage over Republican Gregg Hull in the Albuquerque metro area and in north central New Mexico area, a traditional Democratic stronghold.

Republican Gregg Hull has a lead in other, less populated parts of the state, including in northwest and southern New Mexico, along with the state’s usually conservative east side.

Voters polled within the Albuquerque Metro area, 49% said they will vote for Democrat Deb Haaland, 40% said they would vote for Republican Gregg Hull and 10% said they were Undecided.

Voters polled within the Las Cruces/Southwest  area of the State, 53% said they will vote for Democrat Deb Haaland, 40% said they would vote for Republican Gregg Hull and 7% of those said they were Undecided.

Voters polled in conservative leaning Eastern New Mexico, 29% said they will vote for Democrat Deb Haaland, 60% said they would vote for Republican Gregg Hull and 12% of those polled said they were Undecided.

Voters polled in North Central area of the State, 65% said they will vote for Democrat Deb Haaland, 29% said they would vote for Republican Gregg Hull and 6% of those polled said they were Undecided.

The link to the quoted, unedited Albuquerque Journal article with photos and graphs written by Albuquerque Journal reporter Dan Boyd is  here:

ANALYSIS OF FINAL JOURNAL POLL RESULTS

Democrat Deb Haaland’s lead in the October 11 Journal Poll is due to her strong lead among four major voting blocks:

1. Female voters
2. Hispanic voters
3. Independents
4. Democratic strongholds

Haaland received the support of 54% of women surveyed as compared to Hulls 38%. Male voters were more evenly split, as they preferred Hull over Haaland by a narrow margin with Hull receiving  47% of the male vote to Haalands 44% of the male vote.

Haaland also had a significant advantage over Hull among Hispanic voters and among other non-Anglo voters, a group that includes Native Americans. Roughly 64% of such voters backed Haaland, compared to 26% for Hull. In contrast, white voters were more likely to vote for Hull with 50% to Haaland’s 44%.

Both candidates had strong support from voters affiliated with their respective political parties.  Haaland secured  85% of  Democrats polled  and Hull secured 91% of Republicans polled amongst Republicans.

Haaland leads Hull among independent voters, a growing voting bloc that includes a large number of younger voters.  Among independents polled, 48% said they planned to vote for Haaland compared to 34% for Hull. The remaining 18% of independents said they  were undecided or did not know who they planned to vote for.

FINANCIAL ADVANTAGE

Complicating matters for Republican Gregg Hull is Democrat Deb Haaland’s huge financial advantage. Haaland has significantly outraised Hull.

Haaland has raised $17.3 million since launching her campaign last year, compared to roughly $1.9 million for Hull. According to the  most recent campaign finance reports, Haaland had upwards of $3.5 million left to Hull’s $600,000 to spend in the last month of the campaign.

Last week a political committee backed by the Democratic Governors Association launched a TV ad blitz in New Mexico  linking  Hull to President Donald Trump. Hull has described the attacks as an attempt to distract from hot-button issues, but the national Republican Party and the Republican Governor’s Association has not come to Hull’s rescue in any meaningful financial way and time is simply running out to make a difference.

METHODOLOGY

“The Journal Poll was conducted from October 1 through October 9. It is based on a statewide random sample of 1,125 voters who cast ballots in the 2022 and/or 2024 general elections, and a sample of adults who registered to vote since January 2025 and who said they are likely to vote in the upcoming election. The total sample of 1,125 voters has a margin of error of plus or minus 2.9 percentage points. The margin of error grows for subsamples.

The sample was stratified by county within congressional district and weighted by race/ethnicity and party affiliation based on traditional voting patterns in New Mexico general elections, to ensure a more representative sample. All interviews were conducted by live, professional interviewers based in Albuquerque, with multiple callbacks to households that did not initially answer the phone. Both cellphone numbers (97%) and landlines (3%) of likely general election voters were used.”

The link to the quoted or relied upon Albuquerque Journal article written by Journal staff reporter Dan Boyd with photos and graphics is here:

https://www.abqjournal.com/news/journal-poll-haaland-maintains-lead-over-hull-as-new-mexicos-race-for-governor-nears-homestretch/3139307

RECALLING KOB 4, SURVEY USA  POLL

On October 5, one month before the November 3 general election, KOB-4 released the results of a scientific  poll taken of 800 registered and likely voters in the ’26  New Mexico Governor’s race between Democrat Deb Haaland and Republican Greg Hull. The Poll was conducted exclusively for KOB-4 by Survey USA. The poll was taken from September 25 to September 30. The poll reveals that  Democrat Deb Haaland leads Republican Gregg Hull 47% to 41% in the race for Governor with 12% of likely voters undecided.

The links to quoted or relied upon news sources are here:

https://www.kob.com/new-mexico/kob-poll-finds-haaland-leading-hull-by-6-points-in-head-to-head-race/

https://results.surveyusa.com/client/PollReport.aspx?g=6e6ded19-6ad8-4379-8fa9-6a15dfa99052

RECALLING FIRST ALBUQUERQUE JOURNAL POLL

On Sunday, August 30, the Albuquerque Journal Published its first poll in the 2026 race for  Governor. The Journal poll found 49% of likely voters surveyed said they plan to vote for Democrat Deb Haaland.  Meanwhile, 43% of voters said they plan to vote for Republican Gregg Hull, the former Rio Rancho mayor who would be the first Republican to win a statewide race in New Mexico since 2016. The remaining 8% of voters surveyed said they had not yet decided on who they would support in the November general election. The overall 6-point margin separating Deb Haaland and Greg Hull in the Journal Poll mirrors the final margin of New Mexico’s 2022 gubernatorial race between Democrat Incumbent Governor Lujan Grisham and Republican Mark Ronchetti.

https://www.abqjournal.com/news/journal-poll-haaland-leads-hull-by-closer-than-expected-margin-in-new-mexicos-race-for-governor/3111874

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

The two Albuquerque Journal Polls and the one KOB 4 poll showing that Deb Haaland is leading Greg Hull by 6% or 7% in the three  polls but falling short of the magical 50% plus one margin to win reflects that the race for Governor is very,very close to being over and the trajectory of the race still remains that  Deb Haaland will win decisively on November 3. To win outright, Haaland has to only secure 1% of the 9% undecided.  For Hull to turn things around and win he would have to secure all 9% of the undecided which is not at all likely. The 6% to 7% Haaland lead in the three polls is essentially  identical to the margin Democrat Governor Michelle Lujan defeated Republican Mark Ronchetti in her bid for a second four year term. In 2022, Governor Lujan Grisham did not garner 50% in polling until late in October, 2022.

“DEBATING THE DEBATES” THAT NO ONE CARED ABOUT

Hull generated a lot of media attention and tried to make a big deal alleging Deb Haaland refused to debate him or that she refused to reach an agreement as to when a debate could be scheduled. On October 8, Channel 4 went so far with holding a “debate” with Hull only standing next to an empty podium while reporters asked Hull questions.  Hull and the MAGA Republicans were hoping that Haaland’s failure to debate would move the needle in Hull’s direction. Republican Gregg Hull and the MAGA Republican crowd were seriously mistaken if they believed Democrats and Independent’s will vote for Hull simply because Haaland did not debate Hull.

All three poll results and Haaland’s lead revealed the harsh reality for Hull that it did not matter and no one really cared if Deb Haaland debated Hull. Debates are beneficial, but no candidate is obligated to participate for the sake of satisfying the opposition demands for debating nor the media’s schedules.

Ugly hate, hostility, nasty criticism and outright racism were thrown at Deb Haaland on social media over her refusal to debate, especially by the MAGA crowd as they degraded and questioned Haaland’s intelligence, competency and suggesting she was scared to debate. Simply put Deb Haaland  played “Political Rope a Dope” with the MAGA crowd, Greg Hull and the news media, especially Channel 4 and the Albuquerque Journal and it drove them nuts.

HULL’S UPHILL BATTLE CONTINUES

Simply put, Republican Gregg Hull is facing an uphill battle in a Democratic leaning state. Haaland is the former U.S. Interior secretary under President Joe Biden and a former congresswoman. Haaland is a national figure with respect to her fundraising ability and the historical nature of her candidacy and the possibility of  being the first native American who would  be elected a governor. On the other hand, Gregg Hull is a virtual unknown throughout most of the State even though he was Mayor or Rio Rancho.

Haaland has tremendous support among women, Hispanics, Independent voters and  highly educated voters and taken together they will decide the election. Then there is the matter of the national political mood that clearly favors Democrats thanks in large part to President Trump’s disastrous presidency, the Iran war he has started and his disastrous handling of the economy.

Haaland’s candidacy has been significantly bolstered in New Mexico with the recent endorsement by former Democratic President Barack Obama. The link the Obama endorsement video is here:

As evidenced by Deb Haaland’s Democratic primary victory of  72.3% (156,861 votes) over  Bernalillo County District Attorney Sam Bregman’s 27.7% (60,189), Democrats are highly motivated to vote for Deb Haaland and its highly unlikely they will change their minds and vote for Republican Hull. President Trump’s extremely high negatives in the state will also have a major impact motivating voter turn out in a deep blue Democrat state. In the final analysis, it will be a combination of the independent voters, the progressive voters and the female and Hispanic voters, along with an expected high Democratic voter turnout because of Trump’s negatives, that will result in  Deb Haaland being elected our next Governor.

Election day is November 3.  Early voting dates began October 6 and goes to October 31, 2026 (county clerk offices October 6–16; expanded locations October 17–31; hours vary by location).  Please vote!

Links to related articles are here:

KOB 4 Releases Poll in Governor’s Race: Haaland 47%, Hull 41%; Identical 6% Spread To Journal Poll: 49% Haaland, 43% Hull; Commentary: Trajectory Of A Haaland Win Over Hull Remains The Same; Early Voting Started October 6 With Election On November 3; Please Vote!

ABQ Journal Governor’s Race Poll: Democrat Deb Haaland 49%, Republican Gregg Hull 43%, 8% Undecided; 6% Spread Signals Closer Race Than Expected; Poll Benefits Republican Hull Fundraising Making Him Competitive