Mike Voorhees Guest Column: Republican City Councilor Dan Lewis Sponsors Punitive City Council Ordinances As Retaliation Against Neighborhood Coalitions And To Benefit Developers; Dinelli Commentary and Analysis: Dan Lewis Seeks Help From Legislature To Eviscerate Influence Of Neighborhood Coalitions; Contact City Council And Tell Them To Vote NO On October 5 On Ordinances (O-26-60 and O-26-61) and Two Memorials (M-26-1 and M-26-2)”

Posted on October 4, 2026 by Pete Dinelli

INTRODUCTION

The Office of Neighborhood Coordination (ONC) was established in 1985. The City of Albuquerque identifies and recognizes 144 neighborhood associations that are registered with the city and 94 have web sites. Neighborhood Associations serve as a liaison between residents, city government and businesses facilitating community engagement, support and cooperation and communication. The Albuquerque Neighborhood Recognition Ordinance (NARO) establishes a framework for recognizing neighborhood associations within the city. NARO facilitates the recognition of neighborhood associations, registration and charters and requires them to receive notifications about city actions and developments that may impact their areas and neighborhoods. The ordinance outlines specific criteria and processes for neighborhood associations to gain official recognition from the City of Albuquerque.

The link to the City Office of Neighborhood Coordination is here:

https://www.cabq.gov/office-of-neighborhood-coordination

The link to view a map of recognized Neighborhood Associations is here:

https://www.cabq.gov/office-of-neighborhood-coordination/documents/recognized-neighborhood-associations.pdf/view

DAN LEWIS SPONSORED CITY ORDINANCES AND MEMORIALS

On October 5^th, the Albuquerque City Council will consider and vote on four major legislative proposals sponsored by westside Republican City Councilor Dan Lewis that will have major impact eliminating the rights of neighborhood coalitions to challenge developments. Two proposals are ordinances making dramatic changes to the Neighborhood Association Recognition Ordinance (NARO) and two are memorials asking the New Mexico legislature to make changes to zoning laws as they relate to appeals of development projects.

O-26-61 would remove city recognition for neighborhood coalitions, homeowners associations and business groups, and end developer good-faith requirements. Coalitions are defined as groups of neighborhood associations that can represent areas larger than some city council districts. Under the ordinance they could still organize but without a recognized city role. O-26-60 would raise fees to appeal project approvals to $925, up from $190-$265, to cover review costs.

State law governs zoning appeals. Councilor Lewis is sponsoring two memorials asking the New Mexico Legislature to make changes to state law governs zoning appeals. M-26-01 would clarify who qualifies as an “aggrieved” person with legal standing to challenge and sue. M-26-02 would let appellants go directly to District Court.

GUEST COLUMN BY MIKE VOORHEES

Mike Voorhees, whose educational background includes degrees in geography and engineering, moved to Albuquerque in 1995 to help grow the aerospace sector. Since then, he has been involved in various community organizations and activities, including a Habitat for Humanity house build, open space trail repair, and advocacy for safety and education in hot air ballooning. In 2024, after exposing multiple improper actions of the City’s Planning Department, he was elected to the Executive Committee of the West Side Coalition of Neighborhood Associations (WSCONA) as Member at Large. Mike Voorhees currently serves as the Vice President of the West Side Coalition of Neighborhood Associations.

Mike Voorhees 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:

Republican City Councilor Dan Lewis Sponsors Punitive City Council Ordinances As Retaliation Against Neighborhood Coalitions And To Benefit Developers

While most Burqueños are welcoming the world to our rich cultural heritage and spectacular color-filled skies for the 54th Albuquerque International Balloon Fiesta, at least one city councilor is using the celebration as cover for his rushed attempt to push through four horrendous bills that will trample upon our Constitutional rights while rapidly changing Albuquerque into a generic collection of fast food chains, overpriced high-rent apartments, carwashes, and multistory self-storage monstrosities.

Councilor Dan Lewis, who is also the Executive Director of the Asphalt and Pavement Association of New Mexico (APANM) is sponsoring City Council bills that expressly discriminate against Neighborhood Coalitions. What are Neighborhood Coalitions you ask? They are simply the people from different neighborhoods who have banded together to share information, help their neighbors stay informed about what is going on, and when necessary, hold the City accountable to following the law. Neighborhood Coalitions have repeatedly stood up for sustainable communities, open space, parks, and well designed commercial projects that enhance the quality of our lives. When the City has allowed unscrupulous developers to violate its own ordinances, we have taken them to court and won…repeatedly.

Councilor Lewis complains that our actions are “frivolous”, but the courts have ruled in our favor that City has violated its own rules and ordinances, state laws, and the Constitution. The courts have stated that Councilor Lewis specifically acted with biased prejudgment when serving in a quasi-judicial roll, and have barred him from repeating that. The State Ethics Commission forced Councilor Lewis into a Settlement Agreement requiring “Mandatory Recusal from all matters involving APANM and its Members.” And yet the four ordinances he is sponsoring are designed to favor developers, APANM, and its members, while discriminating against any who dare oppose one of their projects. Very few commercial development projects are built without some amount of asphalt pavement.

Former politicians can usually recall which vote of theirs was a career-ending mistake. I suspect supporting any of Dan’s four bills will haunt those future former politicians for the remainder of their lives. Why are these so egregious?

Let me explain. The Constitution forbids Bills of Attainder: Article 1, Section 10 “No State shall…pass any Bill of Attainder”. Being prohibited from the start, many Americans have forgotten what a Bill of Attainder is. Simply put, it is any targeted, punitive law against a group or individual (such as Neighborhood Coalitions) without due process, and based upon the past actions of such a group (like the repeated success of Neighborhood Coalitions exercising their Constitutional Rights in the courts). The Constitution also protects Freedom of Speech in the First Amendment and Equal Protection in the Fourteenth Amendment. The Supreme Court has ruled that Viewpoint Discrimination is an “egregious form of content discrimination” and is not permitted under the First Amendment.

Dan Lewis’ legislation would charge anyone with a viewpoint opposing a development $1000 to appeal, but those favoring a development (the developer) would only pay $300. This treats different groups unequally and thus also violates the Fourteenth Amendment. The First Amendment also bans any law abridging the right of the people… to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. Lewis’ memorials are designed to do just that if the State Legislature followed his request. So any councilor voting for this would, by definition, be violating their oath to the Constitution.

Lewis’ narrative is that if only pesky neighborhood advocates would get out of the way of letting developers build whatever they want, wherever they want it, we would live in an affordable paradise. He would have us silenced so that developers could build AI data centers next door, using all the water, and consuming ever more and more electricity, and no one would have standing to stop it.

Sadly, in each city that has been gullible enough to listen to this private equity propaganda campaign, they have found the opposite to be true. Those cities became dramatically less affordable, their local businesses are closing at an accelerating rate, homeless is going up, and quality of life is declining.

Surprise legislation with only two weeks public notice is almost never legitimate. This certainly isn’t. Let’s hope Albuquerque’s other City Councilors are less gullible than I fear.

Respectfully,

Mike Voorhees

DINELLI ANALYSIS AND COMMENTARY

It is clear that the four proposed 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.

City Councilor Dan Lewis is one of the longest serving City Councilors having been elected to three 4 year terms. During the last five years Dan Lewis has exhibited a pattern of downright hostility towards his own constituents who oppose or who disagree with his votes on policy and legislation. Lewis has a reputation during city council meetings of berating, insulting or ignoring members of the public who disagree with him. Lewis is known to be on his phone or texting during city council public comments. Lewis is known to go out of his way to offend citizens by leaving meetings very early on not to return.

Since being elected in 2021 to a third four year term, and after he ran for Mayor in 2017 and lost to Tim Keller in a landslide runoff 62.20% to 37.8% of the vote and returning to the City Council, Lewis has engaged in obstruction tactics to carry out a very personal vendetta against Mayor Tim Keller. His tactics include demanding additional confirmation hearings on already council approved Keller Department Director appointments, such as the City Clerk and Chief Administrative Officer, so he could disparage their job performance and insult them during public hearings he presided over with the full intent not to vote for their confirmation. In 2021, immediately upon being sworn in, Lewis introduced legislation to repeal pandemic era legislation he disagreed with and that was enacted after he left the council in 2017, with all 4 of his efforts to repeal failing to his chagrin.

Based on his conduct and his hostility towards his own constituents, Dan Lewis has overstayed his welcome. Lewis is more interested in promoting his own personal agenda over the interests of his own constituents and carrying out a vendetta against neighborhood associations and coalitions to benefit developers.

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

The four legislative actions sponsored by City Councilor Dan Lewis are not the first time that Lewis has attempted to gut 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 article in 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. It 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 Limit 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

FINAL COMMENTARY

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 in Albuquerque, such as the data center akin to Project Jupiter in Las Cruces, that would have a negative impact on the entire city.

The most glaring problem with the introduction of all four measures sponsored by Lewis is the fact that they were not referred to the City Council Land, Use and Planning Committee for a hearing and recommendations. Instead the full City Council will be voting on all four measures on October 5. It is clear that Lewis and perhaps the entire city council is once again taking steps to oppose neighborhood associations and coalitions.

Taken together, the four city council actions are nothing more than a continuation of Dan Lewis vicious attempt 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.

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. You can sign up for Public Comments for the October 5 City Council meeting here:

https://www.cabq.gov/council/find-your-councilor/public-comments

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

stelles@cabq.gov

stephenchavez@cabq.gov

joaquinbaca@cabq.gov

bacajoaquin9@gmail.com

ipadilla@cabq.gov (Director of Council Services)

__________________

POSTSCRIPT

The link to a related article is here:

Patricia D. Willson Guest Column: City Councilor Dan Lewis Legislation Will Not Build Better Neighborhoods; Link To “THE PAPER” News Article “Councilor Dan Lewis Wants More Say For Neighborhood Associations, Less For Coalitions; Dinelli Analysis And Commentary: Dan Lewis Wants To Eviscerate Or Disembowel Neighborhood Coalitions With Help From Legislature; Contact City Council And Tell Them To Vote NO On Ordinances (O-26-60 and O-26-61) and two Memorials (M-26-1 and M-26-2)

Steven Holman Guest Column “Councilor Dan Lewis Seeks To Eviscerate Neighborhood Coalitions In Retaliation For A History Of Litigation To Preserve Indigenous Sites And Historic Communities; Dinelli Commentary and Analysis: Dan Lewis Seeks Help From Legislature To Destroy Influence Of Neighborhood Coalitions; Contact City Council And Tell Them To Vote NO On Ordinances (O-26-60 and O-26-61) and Two Memorials (M-26-1 and M-26-2)”

Mike Voorhees Guest Opinion Column: “ABQ City Councilor Dan Lewis Sponsors Sinister Legislation to Gut Your Rights and Silence Neighborhoods To Favor Developers; Lewis Violates Both Court Order and Settlement Agreement”; Lewis Needs To Go; Tell City Council To Vote NO On Lewis Council Bill No. O-24-69

Steven Holman Guest Column “Councilor Dan Lewis Seeks To Eviscerate Neighborhood Coalitions In Retaliation For A History Of Litigation To Preserve Indigenous Sites And Historic Communities; Dinelli Commentary and Analysis: Dan Lewis Seeks Help From Legislature To Destroy Influence Of Neighborhood Coalitions; Contact City Council And Tell Them To Vote NO On Ordinances (O-26-60 and O-26-61) and Two Memorials (M-26-1 and M-26-2)”

Posted on October 2, 2026 by Pete Dinelli

INTRODUCTION

The link to the City Office of Neighborhood Coordination is here:

https://www.cabq.gov/office-of-neighborhood-coordination

The link to view a map of recognized Neighborhood Associations is here:

https://www.cabq.gov/office-of-neighborhood-coordination/documents/recognized-neighborhood-associations.pdf/view

DAN LEWIS SPONSORED CITY ORDINANCES AND MEMORIALS

State law governs zoning appeals. Councilor Lewis is sponsoring two memorials asking the New Mexico Legislature to make changes to state law governing zoning appeals. M-26-01 would clarify who qualifies as an “aggrieved” person with legal standing to challenge and sue. M-26-02 would let appellants go directly to District Court.

GUEST COLUMN BY STEVEN HOLMAN

Steven Holman is a resident of City Council District 7 which is the mid heights city council district. 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 and his husband Jesus decided to permanently set their roots in Albuquerque in 2023 and purchased their first home in the Bel-Air neighborhood. They are both everyday working-class citizens who have overcome obstacles like poverty and homelessness to achieve their home ownership.

Steven 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 and Jesus 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:

City Council To Vote On Council Lewis Sponsored Legislation That Will “Disempower” Community Coalitions And Neighborhood Associations; City Process Approving Development Projects Is The Problem Creating Litigation

BY Steve Holman

On Monday, October 5th the Albuquerque City Council is set to vote on O-26-60, O-26-61, M-26-1, and M-26-2.

These proposals will completely dismantle not only Community Coalitions but Neighborhood Associations as well by placing increased burden on their already strained and limited resources.

This legislation was introduced because of communities who have come together to fight back against harmful practices that the city rubber stamped. This is retaliation to a history of litigation by Community Coalitions and Neighborhood Associations that has protected indigenous sites and historic low income communities who have been traditionally marginalized by the city.

Have city officials ever stopped to think that the reason the city gets tied up in so much litigation is because the city is the problem?

Neighborhood Associations are largely on the decline as many are severely underfunded or on the verge of disappearing, my own included and I live in one of the largest neighborhoods. If for instance, a hate group decided to set up shop in my community, my Neighborhood Association couldn’t foot the necessary bill to do anything about it. That is why coalitions exist, to help serve communities that are incapable of fighting back.

The good of coalitions is that they can help representation of LGBTQlA, indigenous, and other marginalized groups city wide, but with this legislation they would have no power or ability to stand up to harmful decisions should they be enacted. The ACLU wouldn’t even be able to do anything on behalf of communities because they wouldn’t be recognized by the city. So when people lie and say coalitions are supposedly rooted in racism, maybe they should take several seats and realize they’re hurting marginalized communities in having a means to fight back.

This is all intended to pave the path for developers to do what they want, wherever they want it. They didn’t get what they wanted in zoning changes via Integrated Development Ordinance (IDO) updates, which is all the city’s zoning laws, so instead they’ve changed tactics to dismantle the means of communities to fight back against these policies. This is once again the selling out of our communities to special interests and groups who have no care for history, culture, or preservation. Why do you think the sellouts from StrongTowns and Urbanist shills support this? They are backed by developer and city interests to build baby build.

Worst of all with the advent of data centers, this is a sure fire way to ensure there is no pushback. Remember folks, the city has said publicly that is has 60+ acres they’re willing to annex and update zoning for a data center, yet they aren’t willing or able to do the same for affordable housing. Pay attention, the hypocrisy is ripe.

The fact that this legislation hasn’t even been through the Land Use Planning and Zoning committee due to it changing parts of the IDO and is instead going straight to a general council vote, is very disturbing as well. Looks like someone is not following proper policy and procedure, because IDO changes require community notice and feedback as well as committee vote.

Remember these are public servants and if constituents have to file lawsuit over a decision an elected official has backed, then maybe that official should re-examine why they ran for office to begin with. At the end of the day, the city should be asking “Maybe I am the problem?” and begin working to rebuild community partnerships instead of further stripping away community empowerment.

RESPECTFULLY

Steven Holman

DINELLI ANALYSIS AND COMMENTARY

It is clear that the four proposed 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.

City Councilor Dan Lewis is one of the longest serving City Councilors having been elected to three 4 year terms. During the last five years Dan Lewis he has been an Albuquerque City Councilor, he has exhibited a pattern of downright hostility towards his own constituents who oppose or who disagree with his votes on policy and legislation. Lewis has a reputation during city council meetings of berating, insulting or ignoring members of the public who disagree with him. Lewis is known to text on his cell phone or be on his phone during city council public comments. Lewis is known to go out of his way to offend citizens by leaving meetings very early on not to return.

Since being elected in 2021 to a third four year term, and after he ran for Mayor in 2017 and lost to Tim Keller in a landslide runoff 62.20% to 37.8% of the vote, returning to the City Council, Lewis has engaged in obstruction tactics to carry out a very personal vendetta against Mayor Tim Keller. His tactics include demanding additional confirmation hearings on already council approved Keller Department Director appointments, such as the City Clerk and Chief Administrative Officer, so he could disparage their job performance and insult them during public hearings he presided over with the full intent not to vote for their confirmation. In 2021, immediately upon being sworn in, Lewis introduced legislation to repeal pandemic era legislation he disagreed with and that was enacted after he left the council in 2017, with all 4 of his efforts to repeal failing to his chagrin.

It is clear from his conduct and his hostility towards his own constituents, Dan Lewis has overstayed his welcome on the city council and is more interested in promoting his own personal agenda over the interests of his own constituents.

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

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

FINAL COMMENTARY

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.

The most glaring problem with the introduction of all four measures sponsored by Lewis is the fact that they were not referred to the City Council Land, Use and Planning Committee for a hearing and recommendations, but instead the full City Council will be voting on all four measures on October 5. Its clear that Lewis and perhaps the entire city council is once again takin steps to opposition opposition of neighborhood associations and coalitions.

CONTACT CITY COUNCILORS

CITY COUNCIL PHONE: (505) 768-3100

CITY COUNCILOR AND SUPPORT STAFF EMAILS

stelles@cabq.gov

stephenchavez@cabq.gov

joaquinbaca@cabq.gov

bacajoaquin9@gmail.com

ipadilla@cabq.gov (Director of Council Services)

____________________________

POSTSCRIPT

Links to related articles are here:

Patricia D. Willson Guest Column: City Councilor Dan Lewis Legislation Will Not Build Better Neighborhoods; Link To “THE PAPER” News Article “Councilor Dan Lewis Wants More Say For Neighborhood Associations, Less For Coalitions; Dinelli Analysis And Commentary: Dan Lewis Wants To Eviscerate Or Disembowel Neighborhood Coalitions With Help From Legislature; Contact City Council And Tell Them To Vote NO On Ordinances (O-26-60 and O-26-61) and two Memorials (M-26-1 and M-26-2)

Mike Voorhees Guest Opinion Column: “ABQ City Councilor Dan Lewis Sponsors Sinister Legislation to Gut Your Rights and Silence Neighborhoods To Favor Developers; Lewis Violates Both Court Order and Settlement Agreement”; Lewis Needs To Go; Tell City Council To Vote NO On Lewis Council Bill No. O-24-69

Patricia D. Willson Guest Column: City Councilor Dan Lewis Legislation Will Not Build Better Neighborhoods; Link To “THE PAPER” News Article “Councilor Dan Lewis Wants More Say For Neighborhood Associations, Less For Coalitions; Dinelli Analysis And Commentary: Dan Lewis Wants To Eviscerate Or Disembowel Neighborhood Coalitions With Help From Legislature; Contact City Council And Tell Them To Vote NO On Ordinances (O-26-60 and O-26-61) and two Memorials (M-26-1 and M-26-2)

Posted on September 30, 2026 by Pete Dinelli

INTRODUCTION

The link to the City Office of Neighborhood Coordination is here:

https://www.cabq.gov/office-of-neighborhood-coordination

The link to view a map of recognized Neighborhood Associations is here:

https://www.cabq.gov/office-of-neighborhood-coordination/documents/recognized-neighborhood-associations.pdf/view

DAN LEWIS SPONSORED CITY ORDINANCES AND MEMORIALS

O-26-61 would remove city recognition for neighborhood coalitions, homeowners associations and business groups, and end developer good-faith requirements. Coalitions are defined as groups of neighborhood associations that can represent areas larger than some city council districts. Under the ordinance they could still organize but without a recognized city role. O-26-60 would raise fees to appeal an approved project to $925, up from $190-$265, to cover review costs.

State law governs zoning appeals. Councilor Lewis is sponsoring two memorials asking the New Mexico Legislature to make changes to state law governs zoning appeals. M-26-01 would clarify who qualifies as an “aggrieved” person with legal standing to challenge and sue. M-26-02 would let appellants go directly to District Court.

PATRICIA D. WILLSON GUEST COLUMN

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 5^th, 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 27^th 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 27^TH 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 5^th.

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 29^th, 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 13 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

CITY COUNCIL PHONE: (505) 768-3100

CITY COUNCILOR AND SUPPORT STAFF EMAILS

stelles@cabq.gov

stephenchavez@cabq.gov

joaquinbaca@cabq.gov

bacajoaquin9@gmail.com

ipadilla@cabq.gov (Director of Council Services)

Debate Over Debate Schedule Leads To No Debate At All; Haaland Plays “Rope A Dope” With Greg Hull, MAGA Republican Party And Media; POSTCRIPT: Dinelli Endorsement

Posted on September 24, 2026 by Pete Dinelli

The tactic “rope-a-dope” is a boxing fighting technique in which one contender leans against the ropes of the boxing ring to draw non-injuring offensive punches in an effort to tire out the opponent and, whilst on the ropes, tries to execute devastating offensive punches. The rope-a-dope is most famously associated with Muhammad Ali in his October 1974 Rumble in the Jungle match against world heavyweight champion George Foreman in Kinshasa, Zaire.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rope-a-dope

In the 2026 New Mexico Governor’s race between Democrat Deb Halland and Republican Gregg Hull we have witnessed in the politcal arena what you can only call “Political Rope A Dope” over scheduling debates!

Republican Gregg Hull and Democrat Deb Haaland agreed to one 30 minute debate previously scheduled for October 8 at 6 p.m. on KOB and Haaland then said she was “unavailable.” Democrat Deb Haaland then said she was available to debate October 12, 13 or 14 in a joint, statewide debate broadcast across the local news networks KOB, KRQE, KOAT, KKOB and KVIA, but Gregg Hull refused to agree to any one of those 3 dates saying he is “unavailable” and wanting to keep the debate on October 8.

According to a September 26 Albuquerque Journal report “Democrat Deb Haaland has closed the window on debating Republican Gregg Hull before the Nov. 3 election for New Mexico’s next governor. The campaigns were unable to agree on a date, with Haaland saying that she is ending negotiations.” Haaland’s campaign proposed a debate at the Journal or one of its media partners on October 12, 13 or 14 and gave Hull’s campaign 48 hours to agree to one of those dates.

Haaland campaign manager Dylan McArthur wrote this in an email to the Albuquerque Journal:

“Since July, our campaign has held eight different dates for a debate. … However, Deb’s opponent is unwilling to agree to any of them, we will no longer be able to hold these dates and would like to move past this sideshow.”

PRIMARY ELECTION RESULTS RECALLED

On Tuesday, June 2, 2026, the New Mexico primary election took place. It was the first semi-open primary in New Mexico history where independent voters could choose either the Democratic or Republican primary to vote in without having to register with that party. Overall voter turn out was the largest primary turnout in the last twelve years helped by the inclusion of independent voters who for the first time were allowed to vote in major party primaries. Independents voted Democratic with 28,000 and voted Republican with 10,000.

New Mexico history was made in the Democratic Primary for Governor when former Biden Cabinet Secretary of Interior Deb Haaland became the first Native American woman to be nominated for Governor of New Mexico. Deb Haaland garnered 72.3% (156,861 votes) of the votes to Bernalillo County District Attorney Sam Bregman’s 27.7% (60,189) cast around New Mexico. Haaland won every single county in the state by varying percentages. In Santa Fe County she won with 80% of the Democratic vote. In Bernalillo County Haaland won with 69%. In Dona Ana County, she won with 79%. In conservative Chavez County, thought to lean moderate Bregman, she won with 73%. Haaland won the Democratic Party primary in a landslide despite refusing to debate Bregman.

On the Republican side for Governor, former three-term mayor of Rio Rancho Greg Hull prevailed to win the Republican nomination claiming victory over business owner Doug Turner and cannabis entrepreneur Duke Rodriguez in a three-way race for the GOP nomination. Gregg Hull secured 47% of the vote (56,412), Doug W. Turner secured 36.9% of the vote (44,319) and Duke Rodriguez secured 16.1% of the vote (19,288).

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

Gregg Hull should have jumped at Debs Haaland’s last offer without any questions asked and without any bickering. But no, he just had to stand his ground to make a point. Haaland is the front runner and Hull needs all the exposure he can get. Hull missed the opportunity for debate by refusing to back off on the October 8 debate as did Channel 4 which says they will go forward with their “debate” with Hull appearing on stage all by his lonesome self I guess debating an empty chair.

Debates are needed, but no candidate is obligated to participate for the sake of satisfying the opposition demands for debating nor the media’s schedules. Republican Gregg Hull and the MAGA Republican crowd are seriously mistaken if they believe Democrats and Independent’s will vote for Hull simply because Haaland refuses to debate Hull. District Attorney Sam Bregman learned that lesson in a very humiliating way when Haaland refused to debate Bregman and she won the election with 72.3% (156,861 votes) of the votes to Bernalillo County District Attorney Sam Bregman’s 27.7% (60,189). It’s more likely than not that Hull will experience the very same fate as Bregman and as President Trump’s popularity continues to nose dive and Hull refuses to denounce Trump and the MAGA extremists.

Much hate, hostility, nasty criticism and outright racism has been thrown at Deb Haaland on social media over her refusal to debate, especially by the MAGA crowd as they degrade and question Haaland’s intelligence and competency suggesting she is scared to debate. Simply put Deb Haaland has played “Political Rope a Dope” with the MAGA crowd, Greg Hull and the news media, especially Channel 4 and the Albuquerque Journal and its driving them nuts.

Notwithstanding, the political posturing by both Gregg Hull and Deb Haaland over scheduling debates reflects poorly on them both. It has resulted in no debate at all, but you can thank Gregg Hull and the MAGA extremists for that and no one should slight Deb Haaland for outsmarting them and thumbing her nose at them.

Links to quoted or relied upon news sources are here:

https://www.abqjournal.com/news/haaland-ends-talks-for-governor-debate/3128515

https://www.kob.com/new-mexico/deb-haaland-declines-any-new-mexico-governor-debate/

https://www.abqjournal.com/opinion/haaland-hull-respond-to-debate-challenge/3126823

POSTSCRIPT

Please click on the below to read Dinelli endorsement of Deb Haaland for Governor

Deb Haaland In Her Own Words On Her Plans For New Mexico; Dinelli Endorsement Of Deb Haaland For Governor

Democrat Deb Haaland Proposes Reasonable And Responsible Statewide Data Center Moratorium; Republican Gregg Hull Opposes And Wants Local Control Over Data Center Development; Haaland’s $87,000 In Campaign Contributions Tied To Data Center Project Jupiter Becomes Distraction; COMMENTARY: Haaland Should Simply Return $87,000 In Campaign Contributions GivenThat She Has Raised Over $17 Million

Posted on September 23, 2026 by Pete Dinelli

INTRODUCTION

Project Jupiter is a massive data center campus under development for use by Oracle and OpenAI to train artificial intelligence models. Located in Doña Ana County, in Santa Teresa, New Mexico, it has been under construction since September 2025. The project is being led by STACK Infrastructure in partnership with BorderPlex Digital Assets. With an estimated total investment of up to $165 billion it represents one of the most significant private-sector infrastructure initiatives in the state’s history. The minimum initial investment is $50 billion with the potential total investment of up to $165 billion over 30 years. Approximately 2,500 construction jobs will be created between 2025 to 2028, with a minimum 750 full-time jobs and 50 part-time jobs after operations begin. The average wages estimated will be between $75,000 and $100,000.

https://www.donaana.gov/about_us/project_jupiter/index.php

HAALAN ANNNOUNCES WILL DECLARE STATEWIDE MORATORIUM ON DATA CENTERS FIRST DAY AS GOVERNOR

On Thursday September 16, Democratic nominee for Governor Deb Haaland held a press conference at the Indian Pueblo Cultural Center in Albuquerque to announce that immediately upon taking office, she would order a statewide moratorium on new large-scale data center projects, such as Project Jupiter, until a regulatory framework is put in place. Haaland said her plan is to hold data centers accountable and to support of a moratorium on new large-scale projects until clear guardrails are established. The Haaland moratorium plan directly addresses growing concern over data centers, the state’s water crisis, and the rising cost of living.

Haaland is proposing the following protections for New Mexico communities, which are only a starting point and do not impact the current county moratoriums, but instead make sure all New Mexicans can rely on the state to stand up for them:

No backroom deals, strong community benefits:Open, transparent, and meaningful conversations without NDAs so that communities have a say ahead of decisions, and ensure strong benefits that support schools, roads, infrastructure, workforce, and meet community needs. Formal Tribal consultation is imperative, as is robust monitoring, follow-up, community oversight bodies, and enforcement by state agencies, including clawbacks for failing to meet their promises.
No utility rate increases & reliable energy for New Mexicans: Require data centers to build their own renewable energy infrastructure to keep energy costs from passing onto consumers and local communities, while also improving energy reliability.
Protect New Mexico’s water:Require closed-loop systems and the best available technology to protect New Mexico’s clean water supply. Place effective penalties on any industry overuse or water waste.
New Mexico jobs for New Mexico workers:Projects must be built and run with New Mexico labor, ensuring New Mexicans get job opportunities first, that those jobs are union, and that they meet prevailing wage and fringe-benefit rates. Invest in local pre-apprenticeships and apprenticeship programs in partnership with labor unions. Set in-state workforce targets to train New Mexicans and grow the local workforce.
Expand renewable energy:Require data centers meet New Mexico’s renewable energy and zero-carbon requirements with restrictions on economic incentives and strong clawbacks in place if these standards are not met.
Clean air, land, and habitat: Robust and practical plans to ensure data centers don’t harm our water, air, or environment. Protections for communities that are disproportionately impacted by irresponsible development, and adherence to clean air standards, noise limits, light pollution restrictions, habitat protections, and more.
Clean up your mess:Any industry in New Mexico should clean up after themselves. We will require decommissioning bonds so that data centers clean up after their mess, and we avoid repeating the tragic history that led to our landscapes being littered with orphaned oil and gas wells.
Accountable to communities: Data centers must go above and beyond these guardrails to be eligible for aid from state business programs, and will pay every penny back if they don’t keep their promises.

During her press conference, Haaland said she would sign an executive order on day one to pause new data centers until the state adopts stronger protections. Haaland said this:

“Let me be clear: If elected governor, we will not move forward with any new projects until the state has adopted protections along with strong enforcement mechanisms. Data centers in New Mexico lack clear accountability, and it’s time we take a stand to protect our communities, our workers and our water.”

Haaland said her checklist containing the eight expectations that data centers would have to meet in order to continue or create a new project in New Mexico are reasonable given the controversy surrounding them. For instance, she said that data centers would be required to create their own source of renewable energy, such as geothermal energy, which she said has not been explored enough in the state and could be a viable energy option in the future

Haaland said New Mexicans would have the first bid on any jobs and that data centers would not receive aid from state business programs unless they “go above and beyond these guardrails.”

Haaland said this:

“Right now, New Mexicans are at the whims of the industry. That will change when I am governor. My administration will work with the Legislature and take the time to get it right, because New Mexicans deserve a state that responds to emerging needs.

New Mexicans are right to be concerned about the fast-paced growth of data centers. Our communities should be protected. That’s why I support a moratorium on data centers until the state adopts clear and transparent accountability measures for this industry. New Mexico has the opportunity to lead the way on how to protect our communities, safeguard our water, boost our economy, and sustain our environment for generations to come.”

Haaland said she believes a moratorium would not make New Mexico less competitive. Instead, she said, it would hold data centers more accountable and encourage additional protections. She noted that counties are free to outright ban data centers in their community if they choose.

Haaland said she has concerns about protecting water, air, and land and the lack of transparency involved with data center projects. As the state faces rapid data center development, Haaland said she will address New Mexicans’ desire for strong, clear, statewide protections and a moratorium to ensure that these projects do not harm our communities or natural resources.

Throughout her campaign, Haaland has said she is has committed to putting people over profit and reining in unfettered development, continuing her record as a leader who stands up for New Mexicans.

SUPPPORT FOR MORITORIUM EMERGES

The Democratic Party of New Mexico and the energy savings nonprofit Prosperity Works came out in support of Haaland’s call for a statewide moratorium on data centers.

New Mexico House Democrats said in a statement members of the caucus have been working on legislation to address concerns about the impact of data centers on land, water and communities and said this: .

“We look forward to working with our next governor, along with our legislative colleagues and community members, to establish the policies and guardrails necessary to protect our people, our water, and our environment.”

The Rio Grande chapter of the Sierra Club also applauded Haaland’s announcement on a moratorium, saying data centers could erase New Mexico’s progress on curbing climate change and Chapter President Camilla Feibelman said this in a statement: .

“We support a moratorium on data centers until serious and enforceable guardrails are in place.”

MEDIA QUESTIONS HAALAND OVER CAMPAIGN DONATIONS FROM PROJECT JUPITER

The Santa Fe New Mexican reported that Haaland’s campaign received thousands of dollars in campaign contributions tied to Project Jupiter. A recent campaign finance report shows that an Oracle Corp. subsidiary, the software company behind Project Jupiter, donated $12,400 to Haaland’s campaign. According to financial reports filed with the N.M. Secretary of State, Haaland’s campaign raised more than $3.4 million. Haaland’s campaign also accepted three $12,400 contributions, the maximum allowed, from Oracle America and Oracle executives Clayton Magouyrk and Michael Sicilia, totaling $37,200.

According to an article by The Pugilist with Alisa Valdes-Rodriguez, the $37,200 in contributions were part of at least $87,200 Haaland received from Oracle America and people whose names, jobs and addresses match top leadership at Oracle and Clayco, the firm building Project Jupiter. The article identified $12,400 from Oracle America and at least $74,800 more from people connected to the two companies.

KOB 4 reporter Blake Troli asked Haaland this during the press conference:

“How do you assure voters that this will be a fair process in holding project Jupiter accountable”

Haaland answered the question as follows:

“Thank you so much for the question and let me be the first person to say, elections are entirely too expensive. … I wish I didn’t have to raise as much money as I do just to protect New Mexicans and have a better New Mexico for everyone. But I believe that I can walk and chew gum at the same time. … If I’m elected governor my first priority is for every New Mexican is to make sure that are communities are safe, healthy, that they can move forward.

Under my leadership, New Mexicans will not hand over our water, our land or our power in order to enrich big business. … Industry in our state must be sustainable, supporting investment, creating opportunity and opening doors for New Mexicans.”

Haaland essentially said she has the ability to balance the needs of New Mexicans without being swayed or influenced by data center contributions.

The full exchange can be viewed here.

Haaland said she would discuss with her campaign how to move forward with donations, adding that she “cannot be bowled over” by the donations.

REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE GREGG HULL’S POSITION ON DATA CENTERS

Democrat Haaland’s stance on data centers is in sharp contrast to that of Republican gubernatorial candidate Gregg Hull. When contacted by news outlets for a reaction to Haaland’s proposed moratorium, Republican Candidate for Governor Gregg Hull said he does not support a statewide moratorium on data centers.

Hull said he believes decisions on projects should be left to counties and communities. However, Hull said in an interview, he would support legislative action ensuring taxpayers and ratepayers don’t face increases because of data center water use. Hull said this:

“I don’t think you have to send a message that New Mexico is closed for business, but at the same point in time, we do have to safeguard resources …. If there’s anybody that understands the water demand in the state of New Mexico, it’s me.”

Gregg Hull supports legislation to protect water and electric rates, including a ban on using potable water and requiring data centers to pay for their own electrical infrastructure. Hull said this:

“I would never support allowing a mega company to come into the state and raise utility rates, so they could have the energy they need. … Each of these deals has to be evaluated on its own merit. … If you do a statewide moratorium then that sends the message that we’re not even open for discussion. … As being a former mayor, I like to believe that our communities have the intelligence to make these decisions on their own.”

In an Albuquerque Journal candidate questionnaire, Hull said this:

“I support real water and energy accountability, with limits set project-by-project based on local infrastructure capacity, not one-size-fits-all rules from Santa Fe. … I support guardrails, not block walls.”

Hull said he would tie electric and water protections to state business incentives for projects before any such water or electric legislation is in effect. Hull argued without such incentives, the data centers likely wouldn’t want to set up shop in New Mexico.

HULL BLASTS HAALAND’S PRESS CONFERENCE AS “DAMAGE CONTROL”

The Hull campaign blasted Haaland’s press conference as “damage control,” while a spokesperson said Hull has not accepted or solicited donations from “big data” companies. The Hull campaign pointed to campaign finance reports and accused Haaland of taking multiple donations totalling over $87,000 from entities associated with Project Jupiter.

Republican Gregg Hull said this:

“My opponent’s call for a moratorium on data centers is suspicious considering it comes two days after it was discovered that she took nearly $100,000 from Oracle and Project Jupiter executives. … She was caught with her hand in the cookie jar and this press conference was just an attempt to do damage control.”

HAALAND’S AND HULL’S CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS

On September 16, the Albuquerque Journal reported that the Deb Haaland campaign for Governor raised more than $3.4 million during a two-month-plus time period that began in late June and ended late August. The recent fundraising means the former U.S. Interior secretary has raised an unprecedented $17.3 million since launching her campaign in February 2025 and her campaign has spent roughly $13.9 million of that amount. Among the campaign contributions shown in Haaland’s latest report was the $12,400 on August 26 from Oracle America, the California-based software company behind the controversial Project Jupiter data center campus in southern New Mexico.

Republican general election opponent Gregg Hull has struggled to keep up with Haaland’s fundraising. The GOP nominee reported having received more than $943,000 in contributions during the recent reporting period, which came after he won a three-way Republican primary race. Those contributions included donations from several current and former GOP legislators. He also received several large donations from oil and gas companies operating in New Mexico, including $12,400 from a political committee affiliated with the Merrion Oil & Gas Co. in Farmington. Since officially launching his campaign for governor in October, the former Rio Rancho mayor has raised nearly $1.9 million and spent roughly $1.4 million. Hull has a roughly $500,000 left to spend on the remaining g weeks of the campaign.

With a mere 6 weeks before the November 3 general election, Deb Haaland has a minimum $3.4 Million while Gregg Hull has $503,000 remaining to spend on their campaigns. It’s likely both candidates will raise even more and spend more over the next six weeks.

The link to the quoted and relied upon news source is here:

https://www.abqjournal.com/news/deb-haalands-big-cash-advantage-over-gregg-hull-grows-in-new-mexicos-gubernatorial-race/3121709

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

THE DATA CENTER DEBATE

Halland’s proposed statewide moratorium on data centers comes amid rising national political pressure over data centers. A recent Journal poll found that 65% of respondents opposed the development of large-scale data centers, while 20% were supportive.

There are more than 20 data centers in New Mexico, and further proposals are springing up as some counties, including Santa Fe County, opt to adopt their own moratoriums. In early September, residents and environmental advocacy groups in Grant County decried an apparent proposal, which appeared as a legal notice in a local newspaper, to build a data center at the county’s rural southern edge.

New Mexico would not be the first state in the nation to place a temporary pause on data centers. Sixteen other states, including Delaware, Michigan and South Carolina, have proposed moratoriums until certain expectations have been met. Only New York and Virginia have successfully passed legislation.

In Virginia, data center projects will be halted until specific requests have been fulfilled or until July 2028, while New York Gov. Kathy Hochul signed an executive order that pauses further development on hyperscale projects for one year while lawmakers create more regulatory framework.

The Project Jupiter data center in southern New Mexico has become very controversial. In July, a skirmish broke out during a Doña Ana County Commission meeting that ended with three opponents of the data center being arrested and charged with misdemeanors.

Supporters of data centers say the projects will make New Mexico a more lucrative state and create more job opportunities for residents. Opponents of data centers say the facilities are dangerous to the environment.

It is more likely than not that Haaland as Governor will get support for her moratorium plan in the 2027 New Mexico Legislature. In July, four Democratic lawmakers proposed a data center moratorium, though critics said it could send a harmful economic message.

What needs to be emphasized is that Haaland is not proposing and outright ban of all data centers, but a moratorium until legislation can be enacted that will provide reasonable and responsible guardrails and regulations on their development to protect the state, its citizen’s and our natural resources. Deb Haaland’s proposed statewide moratorium on data Centers is reasonable and responsible given the fact that New Mexico’s natural resources and water resources are very limited, the state is in a drought with no end in sight and the current national opposition that is emerging against data center development.

HAALAND CAMPAIGN SHOULD RETURN PROJECT JUPITER CONTRIBUTIONS

Democrat Deb Haaland was severely criticized by many on social media, by political observers, political gossip columnists, MAGA Republicans and so called Socialist Democrats for having accepted $87,000 in campaign contributions from Project Jupiter data center developers because she claimed those same developers would not influence her policy. Republican opponent Gregg Hull simply could not resist getting into the act saying Haaland did something wrong. Hull said Haaland’s call for a moratorium on data centers was “suspicious” because it came within days after the Santa Fe New Mexican reported the Haaland Campaign took donations from Oracle and Project Jupiter executives. Hull went so far as to make the outlandish claim that Haaland “was caught with her hand in the cookie jar.”

If Project Jupiter data center developers were expecting preferential treatment from Haaland for their donations, they sure the hell did not get it from Haaland in the form of her proposed moratorium, which still could impact them. Haaland has raised over $17 Million to run for Governor, still has $3.4 million to spend and will likely raise and spend even more while Hull has a paltry $503,000 remaining to spend.

The Project Jupiter data center developer donations to Haaland are nothing more than a distraction from the discussion of a very serious issue of data centers and their impact on New Mexico. In order to avoid any appearance of conflicts of interests or the accusation of impropriety or preferential treatment, the Haaland campaign should return the $87,000 in campaign contributions from Project Jupiter data center developers.

Links to relied upon or quoted news sources are here:

https://www.kob.com/new-mexico/data-center-debate-enters-gubernatorial-race-candidates-spar-over-project-jupiter-donations/

https://www.abqjournal.com/news/deb-haaland-vows-to-impose-data-center-moratorium-via-executive-order-if-elected-governor/3123658

https://www.santafenewmexican.com/las_cruces/local_news/haaland-proposes-data-center-moratorium-guardrails-despite-87-000-in-data-center-related-donations/article_7cb90471-e6db-45b0-b9e4-38dffe188a9f.html

https://www.lcsun-news.com/story/news/politics/elections/2026/09/17/new-mexico-gubernatorial-candidate-deb-haaland-lays-out-data-center-policy/91809743007/?gnt-cfr=1&gca-cat=p&gca-uir=false&gca-epti=z114101p004150c004150e009600v114101&gca-ft=180&gca-ds=sophi

https://abq.news/2026/09/haaland-data-centers/https://searchlightnm.org/haaland-proposes-data-center-moratorium-guardrails-despite-87000-in-data-center-related-donations/

Haaland Backs Data Center Moratorium, Outlines Accountability Plan to Stand Up for New Mexico’s Water and Communities

Albuquerque Community Safety Department Addresses Safety And Efficiency Deficiencies A Full Year After 2025 Audit; Updated Training and Resources Provided’; Issues Remain With Response Delays; ACS Department Has Become A Failure At Permanently Removing Unhoused Off City Streets; Civil Mental Health Commitments Are In Order To Remove Unhoused Off Streets

Posted on September 21, 2026 by Pete Dinelli

The Albuquerque Community Safety Department (ACS) was created in June 2020 amid the nationwide protests over police violence after the killing of George Floyd in Minneapolis, Minnesota by police. ACS was proposed as a third branch of the city’s first responder system focused on handling behavioral health and homelessness calls instead of using armed police officers. ACS is an Office of the Mayor cabinet-level department that works alongside the Albuquerque Police Department (APD) and the Fire and Rescue Department (AFRD).

The ACS dispatches first responders to 9-1-1 calls that are non-medical and non-criminal in nature. ACS responds to calls on inebriation, homelessness, addiction, and mental health. ACS dispatches first responders to 9-1-1 calls with or without other first responders from the police and fire departments. ACS personnel have backgrounds as social workers, clinicians and counselors and they respond to 9-1-1 emergency calls reporting people who are suffering from addiction, homelessness and mental health emergencies.

Since its inception, the ACS budget has gone from $2.5 million in 2021 to $23 million in 2026. The department has 156 full-time positions. The department’s annual call volume has more than quadrupled, with the department taking 45,000 calls in 2025 a year that marked its 100,000th call for service after operations moved from daily hours to 24/7 service.

According to the most recent ACS quarterly report, nearly 80% of ACS calls are for an unsheltered individuals, wellness or welfare checks while 7% are related to behavioral health calls and 4% of the calls are related to suicidal ideation. While the department’s call volume has increased, quarterly reports showed the amount of behavioral health and suicidal ideation calls it responds to have not grown at the same pace.

The link to the ACS quarterly report is here:

Click to access quarterly-report-q4-2026fy-final.pdf

CITY INTERNAL AUDIT OF ALBUQUERQUE COMMUNITY SAFETY DEPARTMENT

On July 25, 2025, the City of Albuquerque Office of Internal Audit released a Performance and Operations Audit of the Albuquerque Community Safety Department (ACS). The link to review the full city audit is here:

https://www.cabq.gov/audit/documents/25-103_acs_policy_-_practices_performance_audit.pdf/view

The audit reviewed ACS records and operations between 2020 and March 2025. Ride alongs with ACS responders were conducted in mid-March 2025. The ride-alongs were in reaction to ACS responders’ “consistently” expressing safety concerns in 2024 and 2025. ACS Responders reported that they struggled with an inability to provide immediate housing to the homeless while dealing with delayed response times from lags in the 311 citizen call system and 911 communication gaps with fire department dispatch.

According to the audit, ride-alongs with ACS responders “confirmed” those concerns, finding a responder can never be certain if someone is unarmed and remains on alert due to a lack of protection barriers between vehicle seats. In some calls, responders entered homes or encampments without police or fire assistance or protection.

The audit found ACS provides responders with training to de-escalate “with empathy and compassion,” but responding to people in crisis and unpredictable situations “can expose employees to high-stress and potentially unsafe conditions.” The audit states in part: “This perceived lack of safety, coupled with the emotional demands of crisis intervention work, creates an elevated risk for employee burnout, low morale, and diminished job satisfaction. Over time, these factors may contribute to increased absenteeism, lower performance, and ultimately higher staff turnover.”

In addition to safety issues, the audit found ACS Responders expressed challenges with finding shelter for those in immediate need, but have no authority to determine shelter placement, relying on partner agencies. The audit states in part:

“When ACS responders are unable to secure immediate shelter for individuals in need, it increases the risk of continued exposure to unsafe or unstable environments, potentially worsening physical or mental health conditions. … This gap in service can lead to repeated crisis calls, strain on emergency resources, and a missed opportunity to provide timely, stabilizing support.”

The audit found communication issues that led to 311 calls holding for hours “creating bottlenecks that delay the ability of ACS to clear a scene and become available for the next call.” According to the audit, a lack of updates from the Fire Department AFR, which uses separate radio channels to protect health information, results in ACS responders sometimes duplicating resources with fire crews.

The audit found in a sampling of calls, responders did not find the subject of the call on several occasions. The response times in those calls, which came through 311 and 911, stretched from a few hours to over 19 hours. ACS officials said responders went to 10,000 calls in 2025 “where the subject of the call could not be located. … This is often related to the high number of calls for unsheltered individuals that come in via 311. … In many cases, the unsheltered individual is not aware that someone has called on their behalf and leaves the area prior to ACS arriving.”

The audit recommended collaborating with the Fire Department, but ACS responded that decisions about communications between APD, which routes ACS calls and the Fire Department “are the responsibility of those two organizations.”

The July 25, 2025 Office of Internal Audit Report suggested improving protective equipment and training for responders, working with 311 dispatch to ensure calls are appropriately prioritized and developing a process with Albuquerque Fire Rescue to ensure ACS receives “timely and accurate” updates if firefighters respond to the same calls. Additionally, the audit recommended that ACS should remind responders they “do not always have to respond to calls for service if they feel it is unsafe.”

The July 25, 2025 Internal Audit report made the following recommendations to the Albuquerque Community Safety Department:

Routinely remind ACS Responders that they do not always have to respond to calls for service if they feel it is unsafe.
Provide enhanced safety and situational awareness training to better equip ACS Responders for unpredictable field conditions, helping them feel more empowered.
Routinely remind ACS Responders that immediate shelter is available for individuals in need and reinforce the importance of offering and facilitating access to those resources.
Work with 3-1-1 dispatch to ensure calls are appropriately assessed based on priority directing high-priority situations to 242-COPS or 9-1-1 for quicker ACS response times.
Explore the feasibility of expanding or improving the personal protective equipment for ACS Responders. This review should consider ACS Responder’s feedback, recent incidents, and specific risks.

CITY ADDRESSES ACS SAFETY AND EFFICIENCY CONCERNS IN WAKE OF 2025 AUDIT

A full one year after the July 25, 2025 audit, ACS department leaders said ACS has updated safety training, equipment and has added scenarios that police are put through, and have added an integrated alert system for responders dispatched to problem areas or difficult subjects. According to ACS officials, the department turnover rate has dropped from 35% in 2023 to 28% in 2026. The department has 31 vacancies, including four administrator roles and 12 field positions. An ACS spokesperson said the department has added reflective vests and biohazard cleanup kits to responders’ inventory.

ACS Director Jodie Esquibel said the audit pushed the department to implement the “ACS Field Safety Information” platform. It consists of a dashboard that shows safety alerts for specific areas or subjects that can be used by responders, calling it “a huge safety net.” ACS said the department “is fully committed to ensuring that if an individual needs a place to stay, a placement will be found.” An ACS spokesperson said responders can “escalate any placement issues to their supervisors to ensure the department finds a swift solution.” ACS said in September 2025 the department partnered with APD to launch the “Priority 1 call type,” which prioritizes critical incidents, like suicidal ideation, behavioral health crises and officer requests.

Another issue, according to the audit, is delayed updates on calls from AFR as the dispatch systems do not interface with APD. As a result, ACS responders may go to a call where AFR was already en route to take someone to the hospital, “resulting in duplicate resources and miscommunication.” The audit recommended collaborating with AFR to avoid the issue, but ACS responded that decisions about communications between APD — which routes ACS calls — and AFR “are the responsibility of those two organizations.”

ACS Spokesperson Jorge Hernandez said the department sends about 1% of its calls back to the Albuquerque Police Department due to safety concerns. APD, in general, responds to a higher number of suicidal ideation and behavioral health calls than ACS. In an email to the Albuquerque Journal, Hernandez said, “Not every behavioral health-related 911 call is appropriate for an ACS response” as it may involve weapons and other “significant safety concerns.”

DEFICIENCY REMAINS ON DISPATCHING

On August 21, 2026 it was reported by the Albquerquerqu Journal that a persistent problem identified by the audit remains involving delayed updates on calls from the Fire Department. ACS responders may go to a call where the Fire Department was already en route to take someone to the hospital “resulting in duplicate resources and miscommunication.” The audit recommended collaborating with the Fire Department to avoid the issue, but ACS responded that decisions about communications dispatch are between APD and the Fire Department and “dispatch” is the responsibility of those two organizations and not the ACS.

A Fire Department spokesperson did not respond to questions on whether efforts were made to resolve the communication problem identified by the audit. AFR firefighters spoke with the Journal during recent ride-alongs, with varying opinions on the services ACS offered to the community. One firefighter said sometimes ACS “adds an extra step to something that was already going to be done.” He said ACS will go to a call but then request AFR anyway due to a medical need. Another firefighter said ACS “was necessary” on a recent call where a man had no emergency or medical complaint and ACS took him to the city’s sobering center.

To address issues with delayed calls, ACS Spokesperson Jorge Hernandez said ACS “continues to collaborate with 311 and 911 to optimize call triaging and dispatch efficiency.” While ACS has done 3,200 transports this year, three times as many “unsheltered individual” calls have gone nowhere due to delays and other reasons. With the updates to training and equipment made, Hernandez said the department “does not anticipate making any major changes to policies or processes unless operational needs dictate a change.”

ACS Deputy Director of Field Operations Walter Adams emphasized that all ACS encounters and transports are voluntary. Adams said this:

“We’re always consistently evolving, we’re only 5 years old, we didn’t know the situations we’re going to come across. … We really trust our responders to make that decision on if they feel safe. They don’t have to, they can call a supervisor. They don’t have to put those people in the car. ”

2026 POINT-IN-TIME SURVEY OF CITY’S UNHOUSED

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

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.

ALBUQUERQUE’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:

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.
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)
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.)
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
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.

It has been determined from review of City Council approved capital outlay spending by the Keller Administration 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: $127.3 Million

$332.11 MILLION SPENT BY HEALTH, HOUSING AND HOMELESS DEPARTMENT OVER 5 YEARS FOR HOMELESS 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.

The approved FY/23 General Fund budget for the Health, Housing and Homeless Department (HHH) was $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

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

Click to access fy25-approved-budget-final-numbered-hyperlinks-7-31-2024.pdf

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 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 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

Mayor Tim Keller and the City Council 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. Keller created the Albuquerque Community Safety Division and staffed it with upwards of 125 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, but the homeless still proliferate city streets.

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 8 years and 9 months in office as Mayor, the number of homeless has more than doubled despite his efforts as the homeless to proliferate the city streets.

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. This is a number that should be manageable to deal with the coordination of first responders efforts, but that is simply not happening.

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. It is clear that the Albuquerque Community Safety Department and its 156 full-time positions are at the forefront of first responders to get the unhoused off the streets and to get them the assistance and services they need, but that is not happening.

It’s difficult to understand how it has taken over a full year for the city to address the deficiencies identified in the 2025 audit and the acute failure of the city to coordinate resources to deal with response delays when dealing with the unhoused on the streets of the city.

Mayor Tim Keller has spent a staggering $459.40 million over the last 5 years for unhoused shelter and services, yet the homeless numbers on the streets increases. Mayor Tim Keller spent $127.3 to construct the 5 Gateway shelters and spent and additional $332.11 million for service contract for the unhoused over 5 years for a grand total of $459.40 million.

It is painfully obvious that the efforts of Albuquerque Community Safety Department are seriously lacking to the point of failure in reducing the number of the unhoused on the streets as the unhoused numbers only get worse each year.

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.

Until a far more effective approach is taken to remove the unhoused off the streets and and get them them mental health services they need, the Albuquerque Community Safety Department and its 156 full-time positions will be nothing more than a public relations referral service that is ignored by the unhoused.

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

https://www.cabq.gov/audit/documents/25-103_acs_policy_-_practices_performance_audit.pdf/view

Click to access quarterly-report-q4-2026fy-final.pdf

https://www.abqjournal.com/news/acs-addresses-safety-and-efficiency-in-wake-of-2025-audit/3105742