Patricia D. Willson has lived in New Mexico since 1969 and has been a licensed Architect in the state since 1987. As a resident of District 6 for over fifty years, she has served on her neighborhood association board, District 6 Coalition and Inter-Coalition Council (ICC). The ICC is an unrecognized coalition of neighborhood association coalitions formed by the late Dr. Joe Valles in 2014. The ICC has a committee of dedicated volunteers who review the Integrated Development Ordinance (IDO) amendments every year—and keep their fingers on the pulse of zoning issues coming before Council.
On September 29, Patricia D. Willson submitted the following guest opinion column to www.PeteDinelli.com to be published as a public service announcement. Ms. Willson has not been paid any compensation to publish the guest column and has given his consent to publish on www.PeteDinelli.com.
DAN LEWIS LEGISLATION WILL NOT BUILD BETTER NEIGHBORHOODS
BY: Patricia D. Willson
On October 5th, Council will hear a package of four legislative proposals sponsored by Councilor Lewis. These will address what the Councilor claims causes “…our neighborhoods, economy and quality of life suffer when worthwhile projects become trapped in an approval process that seems designed to produce delay rather than resolution.”
In a September 27th article in the Albuquerque Journal, Councilor Lewis presented a simplified summary of each bill, but did not mention several egregious consequences of each piece of legislation. The following is my opinion about each major point he made.
WILLSON RESPONSE TO SEPTEMBER 27TH ALBUQUERQUE JOURNAL LEWIS COLUMN “A BETTER APPROVAL PROCESS CAN HELP BUILD BETTER NEIGHBORHOODS”
Dan Lewis said the following things about his sponsored legislation to be heard at Council on October 5th.
DAN LEWIS COLUMN: “The first ordinance would remove the city-recognized authority of coalitions of neighborhood associations to appeal approved projects. Individual neighborhood associations would retain their voice and become even more empowered, placing influence back in the hands of the communities most directly affected.”
PATRICIA WILLSON RESPONSE: O-26-61 would revise the Neighborhood Association Recognition Ordinance (NARO) to “remove the city-recognized authority of coalitions of neighborhood associations to appeal approved projects.” Councilor Lewis fails to mention that by removing Coalitions from Recognition, it would also remove them from Notification. Not only would O-26-61amend the NARO with no Committee or Public review, it would amend the IDO (Integrated Development Ordinance) outside of the accepted three step process. It also would make the contact information for each NA’s two designated points of contact publicly available. Currently, that information is given out to developers by request. It also deletes § 14-8-2-9 DEVELOPER RESPONSIBILITES entirely. That paragraph requires developers to act “with diligence and good faith…promote collaboration and listen with respect to neighborhood concerns.”
DAN LEWIS COLUMN: “The second ordinance would increase the fees for appealing projects that the city has already approved. Those fees would help offset the administrative cost of reconsidering decisions that have already gone through public hearings and formal review. The change would apply only to appeals of approved projects and would not significantly change the cost of appealing a denial.”
PATRICIA WILLSON RESPONSE: O-26-60 is another attempt to raise the price point for appeals by neighborhood associations and coalitions to around $1,000—an amount out of reach for volunteer groups that are not allowed to collect dues. Several previous IDO amendments (there have been over 700 since its adoption in 2018) have made pre-submittal review of applications more difficult. Sometimes an appeal of an already approved project is the only option to protect neighborhoods.
DAN LEWIS COLUMN: “The third proposal is a memorial asking the New Mexico Legislature to amend state law so that appeals of approved projects would be allowed to proceed directly to state district court instead of returning to the city for another review of a decision it has already made. This would eliminate a duplicative step while preserving the right to seek judicial review.”
PATRICIA WILLSON RESPONSE: M-26-01 asks the State Legislature to strip municipal accountability by fast-tracking appeals to the State district Court system. It would outsource localized zoning disputes to State judges who lack local neighborhood context, and create an intentionally complex, expensive barrier, forcing residents to hire attorneys instead of speaking at city administrative hearings. It also allows the zoning authority to define who is considered “aggrieved”.
DAN LEWIS COLUMN: “The fourth proposal is another memorial asking the Legislature to clarify who has legal standing to file an appeal. Someone challenging an approved project should be able to demonstrate a meaningful connection to it, such as living nearby or experiencing a direct effect from the development.”
PATRCIA WILLSON RESPONSE: M-26-02 adds language to State law narrowing the legal standards governing who has standing to appeal an approved project. Huge areas of the city have no neighborhood association and thus no notification regarding projects in the first place. Coalition coverage is crucial to notification.
There are two aspects of these bills that are harder to summarize but potentially significant. They are:
- The revised NARO language will also remove recognition/notification from a subset of neighborhood associations (not only from coalitions). The three items are: removing eligibility if in existence prior to 2017, removing eligibility if overlapping boundaries with another NA and removing eligibility if the association/neighborhood boundaries include any part of unincorporated Bernalillo County.
For the west side, that effectively revokes recognition for Santa Fe Village NA, Molten Rock, Quaker Heights and probably Taylor Ranch. Vista Grande Heights NA includes both City and County parcels. There may be others because so much of the west side is a patchwork of city/county jurisdictions.
- The proposed changes also require any association comment on a land use issue to be voted on by the entire association membership and the meeting/vote to be announced two weeks prior to holding the vote. So, appeals must be filed in 15 days. The President’s letter of introduction is official two weeks before a vote. The publication in the Journal of applications is 15 days before the hearing date. Even the remaining recognized NAs have zero time to craft an organization position and plan a vote.
WILLSON COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS
Another colleague has said that by shifting the forum from accessible local community boards to expensive state courtrooms, the “Better Neighborhoods” package ensures that the public purse pays for the litigation while private equity profits from the silence. But municipal efficiency does not require public disenfranchisement. True regulatory reform means shifting from a reactive cycle of crisis management to a proactive framework of shared design—speeding up development by front-loading neighborhood voices rather than silencing them.
REPECTFULLY YOURS,
Patricia D. Willson
THE PAPER NEWS ARTICLE
On September 29th, the on line news agency “THE PAPER” published a news story written by staff reporter Jesse Jones. The headline reads “Councilor Dan Lewis wants more say for neighborhood associations, less for coalitions in ABQ development” The by line quote reads “Lewis proposes four measures to streamline project appeals and limit coalition standing, while community leaders argue the changes weaken neighborhood oversight.”
According to the “THE PAPER” news report, O-26-61 is the centerpiece of Dan Lewis’ efforts to limit the influence of neighborhood coalitions and associations. The Paper article reads in part:
“O-26-61 would remove city recognition for neighborhood coalitions, homeowners associations and business groups, and end developer good-faith requirements. Coalitions, [defined as] groups of neighborhood associations that can represent areas larger than some city council districts … could still organize without a recognized city role. Lewis said neighborhood associations have defined boundaries, elected leadership, meetings and voting requirements in order to represent an entire neighborhood. Coalitions, however, he calls “unaccountable” and “undemocratic,” saying they can represent areas where leaders lack a direct connection to a project and appeal projects without the same voting requirements. He said those appeals can stall housing, grocery stores and job centers. Recognized associations would retain development notices and appeal standing. O-26-60 would raise fees to appeal an approved project to $925, up from $190-$265, to cover review costs. Denied project appeal fees remain $225, and city applications remain free.”
“State law governs zoning appeals, so Lewis’ two memorials ask the New Mexico Legislature to make changes. M-26-01 would clarify who qualifies as an “aggrieved” person with legal standing. M-26-02 would let appellants go directly to District Court. “It gives them a choice; it doesn’t take away anything from them,” Lewis said. “They can still go through the whole city process if they want to… It’s just another way to help keep from the delays.” … Neighborhood coalition leaders, including the West Side Coalition of Neighborhood Associations and the District 6 Coalition, oppose the package, saying it could make it harder for residents to organize across neighborhood boundaries.”
“Patricia Willson, District 6 Coalition treasurer and Inter-Coalition Council representative, said O-26-61 would remove coalitions’ authority to appeal approved projects. She said the $925 fee could create barriers for volunteer groups and questioned dropping developer good-faith requirements. Willson said regional coalitions notify residents where active neighborhood associations are absent, adding that past coalition appeals succeeded when the city failed to follow its own Integrated Development Ordinance rules and due process.”
The link to read the full article with images and maps published by the Paper with is here:
https://abq.news/2026/09/good-neighbors/
DINELLI ANALYSIS AND COMMENTARY
Republican City Councilor Dan Lewis is one of the longest serving city councilors representing the west side having served 16 years. It is clear that the four proposed city council actions sponsored by Dan Lewis are highly 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.
Taken together, the four city council actions are nothing more than Dan Lewis attempting to eviscerate or disembowel neighborhood coalitions and neighborhood associations and their influence to speed up development and silencing their influence with help from the New Mexico legislature. One major consequence of the Dan Lewis legislation, both on the city and state levels, would be that neighborhood coalitions would not have the standing to object to major developments, such as Data Centers, that would have a negative impact on the entire city.
CONTACT CITY COUNCILORS
On Monday, October 5, the City Council meeting will be held in the Vincent E. Griego Council Chambers, basement level of the City of Albuquerque Government Center, 1 Civic Plaza NW, Albuquerque, New Mexico 87102. The meeting is open to the public. The meeting will begin at 5:00 p.m., and to speak during the meeting on the resolution during public comments, you must sign up beginning at 4:30 p.m.
Voters and residents are urged to attend the meeting or contact and voice their opinion and tell all city councilors or their city council service assistants to VOTE NO on O-26-60, O-26-61, M-26-1 and M-26-2.
CITY COUNCIL PHONE: (505) 768-3100
CITY COUNCILOR AND SUPPORT STAFF EMAILS
mmmontoya@cabq.gov (Director of Council Services)