On October 9, 2026 the Office of outgoing Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham announced in a news release that the state’s General Services Department has selected the Albuquerque-based architect firm Hartman + Majewski Design Group  to produce a detailed master plan for the New Mexico State Fair Grounds also known as EXPO New Mexico. The contract awarded is valued at more than $6.4 million. Stantec Consulting Services Inc. has already created a general master plan for the site.

Hartman + Majewski was founded in Albuquerque in 2002. The firm describes itself as a “full-service firm specializing in community development”. The group’s past projects include Christus St. Vincent Regional Medical Center, the Albuquerque BioPark’s Asia exhibit, Rio Rancho’s City Hall, Christus St. Vincent Regional Medical Center in Santa Fe, UNM’s Anderson Student Financial Services Center, and the New Mexico State Police District 1 facility. The selection of  Hartman + Majewski Design Group comes seven months after the State Fairgrounds District Board voted 6-1 to approve redevelopment plans for the property’s southwest corner.

The General Services Department has  issued  Request for Proposals (RFP)  for an anchor developer and intends  to make its selection in December. That developer will use the master plan to build Phase One, which will  include affordable housing, parks, an event center and stadium. The state General Services Department will oversee the project development.

The multi-year redevelopment is projected to support upwards of  940 jobs annually over 30 years. The Hartman + Majewski’s detailed plan will provide more specific guidance for the project’s future developer including where to position a proposed sports stadium, a public park and housing. The plan includes designing a park, pedestrian improvements, mixed housing and commercial development, and a stadium.  The entire planning and development process is expected to take up to two years. The Commercial Real Estate Development Association recently released a poll showing that local real estate leaders support the redevelopment project and think it could spur more investment in the International District located directly south if the fairgrounds on Central.

Phase One  is funded with $200 million, which includes money for buying out private properties. The first phase could include housing, a public park, pedestrian improvements, mixed-use commercial spaces and a sports stadium for a professional soccer team. The state is also looking at a potential “phase two” which would add hotels and other features to the site.

State leaders call it an exciting milestone because of what it could do to revitalize Albuquerque’s International District along Central Ave., east of San Pedro. Anna Silva, the Secretary of the New Mexico General Service Department, said this:

“[The contract award marks] a significant step in establishing the planning and design framework necessary to advance the project. The detail master planner basically takes the concept and what we say, what we call program the site, and basically it’s determining where all the pieces are going to be laid out on the site. … The state is also looking at a potential “phase two,” which would add hotels and other features to the site. …  We plan to bring security. We plan to bring development. We plan to bring opportunities for everybody around the area.  So the housing is not going to be pushing people out. we’re going to be enhancing the community,”

Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham said this in a statement:

“We’re making steady progress on the State Fairgrounds, and each step brings us closer to the day when families in the International District can take pride in a revitalized neighborhood that’s safer and provides more economic, recreational and cultural opportunities for all who call the area home. Today’s announcement shows that my administration is committed to enhancing quality of life in the International District and all of Albuquerque.”

Links to quoted or relied upon news sources are here

https://www.krqe.com/home/state-picks-firm-to-create-state-fairgrounds-master-plan/

https://www.kob.com/news/top-news/new-mexico-picks-albuquerque-firm-to-plan-state-fairgrounds-redevelopment/

https://www.abqjournal.com/business/albuquerque-firm-to-create-detailed-state-fairgrounds-redevelopment-plan/3138931

EVOLUTION OF STATE FAIR GROUNDS REDEVELOPMENT EFFORTS

It was on March 21, 2025, in response to Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham’s announcement to redevelop or move the State Fair, also known as Expo New Mexico, the New Mexico legislature passed legislation creating the “State Fairgrounds District.” It is a board that has redevelopment funding authority over the existing State Fair grounds area. The State Fair Commission still remains as the  oversight authority over of the state fair. Voting members of the State Fairgrounds District Governing Board are:

• Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham, chairperson
• Albuquerque Mayor Tim Keller
• Senator Mimi Stewart, Senate President Pro-Tempore, International District, #17
• State  Representative Janelle Anyanonu whose district the fair grounds is located
• City Councilor Nichole Rogers whose district the fair grounds is located
• County Commissioner Adriann Barboa whose district the fair grounds is located
• Peter Belletto, President, District 6 Neighborhood Coalition

On June 18, 2025 the state General Services Department announced that a $844,433 contract with Stantec Consulting Services Inc. was entered into with the State for Stantec to create a Master Plan  for repurposing the 236-acre tract of land that will make suggestions for the land’s use.

STATE FAIRGROUNDS DISTRICT BOARD VOTES TO SPEND $114 MILLION ON PHASE 1

On March 14, 2026, the State Fairgrounds District Board held its regularly scheduled monthly meeting on the Fairgrounds, with the meeting chaired by Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham. All 7 voting members were present.

The State Fairgrounds District Board voted 6-1 to approve Phase 1 of the Master Plan giving  their approval  for the state to spend $114 million in appropriations from the Legislature once the fiscal year began on July 1. The Phase 1 price tag is upwards of $200 million when combined with previously approved bonds.

Phase 1 includes infrastructure maintenance for the State Fair and to add permanent retail space. Phase 1 concentrates on reshaping and redevelopment of  the 250-acre site and includes upgrading fairground facilities, adding retail and entertainment options and an outdoor stadium.  Phase 1 proposes a mixed-income housing and public park spaces.

According to Stantec Consulting Services Inc  the investment is expected to generate $5.7 million a year in tax earnings which is double what the State Fair currently produces. Phase 1 is expected to create nearly 1,000 jobs.

Representatives with Stantec said the investment covers a wide mix of long‑needed improvements. Stantec said it’s recommending a stadium as an anchor tenant, because it could draw activity year-round.  The funding triggers the start of Phase 1 construction and  includes the following:

• A new multi-purpose sports stadium.
• New housing and business space.
• Park Plaza public spaces.
• Pedestrian safety improvements.
• Infrastructure upgrades.
• New traffic calming and pedestrian safety upgrades on San Pedro.
• New roads through the fairgrounds site, a park, housing.

The vote included building  an outdoor sports stadium on existing State Fair  property with no plans for replacing and demolition of the aging Tingly Coliseum. It also included a mixed use and  mixed-income housing development on the property located at southwest corner of the Fairgrounds bordered by San Pedro on the West and Central on the South of the New Mexico State Fairgrounds. The Phase 1 development will see the annual State Fair operating as normal while demolition and construction are underway around it.

Voting “YES” to Phase One were Governor Lujan Grisham,  Mayor Tim Keller, City Councilor Nichole Rogers, Senate President Pro Tem Mimi Stewart, D-Albuquerque, state Rep. Janelle Anyanonu, D-Albuquerque, and Peter Belletto, the president of the District 6 Neighborhood Coalition. Bernalillo County Commissioner Adriann Barboa voted “NO” after her motion to defer the vote for one month narrowly failed. Barboa wanted to defer the decision for a month so that the board could first vote on a Community Benefit Agreement (CBA), which sets out requirements for development, such as local hiring.

SEEKING TO REDEVELOP PROPERTY NOT OWNED

The current State Fairgrounds District Board voted to spend upwards of  $200 million on property that is not part of the State Fair grounds and where there are 12 business located.  The Southwest corner property is bordered  by San Pedro on the West and Central on the South and is in fact private property owned by a number of individuals and including limited liability corporations. The state sent out Letters of Interest to Purchase all the properties.

Governor Lujan Grisham and state officials had hoped to have all the property acquired by September 1 so they could break ground on Phase 1. They were being way too optimistic. The State has set aside $22 million to purchase the property and another $15 million for relocation on business, and that just may not be enough, especially if you are dealing with an unwilling seller.

Confidential sources have confirmed that property owners were extremely upset with the state efforts to condemn the properties. Notwithstanding, considerable progress has  been made in acquiring the properties at fair market value but those acquisitions and associated purchase prices for the land have yet to be announced by the state.

MASTER PLAN PRESENTATION BY STANTEC

On March 14, 2026, after over three months of community input and surveys conducted, Stantec Consulting Services held a public meeting and made a presentation on the Master Plan which included a presentation on Phase 1 of the Master Plan.

“Recommendations highlights include the State Fair remaining on the Fairgrounds, with investment in infrastructure and facilities upgrades, as well as an outdoor sports stadium as a strong economic anchor, activating the Fairgrounds and its edges with a walkable, mixed-use core, including housing and commercial activity.

Based on community feedback and discussion with Expo NM staff, the Fairgrounds would be reimagined from a seasonal venue into a place where residents and visitors can meet, dine, shop, stay, recreate, learn, live, and work through-out the year. Mixed-use environments would be programmed even on non-event days, centering housing, community venues, parks, and workplaces that could significantly expand Gross Receipts Tax (GRT) generation, a portion of which is utilized to unlock bonding for future development on the Fairgrounds.

Critical to Phase 1 recommendations are that the Fairgrounds are integrated into the surrounding neighborhoods by connected streets, parks, activated edges and pedestrian improvements.”

The Stantec report found that the cost of relocating the fair would be $1.1 Billion to $1.970 Billion for relocation and redevelopment. ($1.1 billion along with another $870 million for development. )

The link to review Stantec’s March 14 Master Plan presentation is here:

Click to access NMSFG_Draft-Recommendations_Public-Meeting-3.pdf

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

On January 1, 2027, Governor Elect Deb Haaland will officially be sworn into office replacing Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham.  Virtually all  6 of the Governor appointed members of the State Fairgrounds District Governing Board can be replaced by new Governor Deb Haaland.  Haaland could decide not to chair the governing board and even seek to abolish it.

The entire seven member State Fair Commission appointed by Governor Lujan Grisham will likely be replaced by Governor Haaland as commission terms end. Then there is the fact that State Fair Manager Dan Morning could also be replaced by Governor Haaland. Dan Mourning has been the manager of the New Mexico State Fair for about a decade. He took over the role approximately ten years ago when he was appointed by then Republican Susana Martinez. By all accounts, Morning has done a respectable job and has significantly influenced the fair’s environment and operations. It is well known that Morning is no fan of moving the State Fair Grounds.

It is downright pathetic that outgoing Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham would award a $6.2 Million contract to create a detailed State Fairgrounds Redevelopment Plan less than 90 days before she leaves office. It is an apparent effort by her to cling to a legacy project depriving her successor Governor Deb Haaland any room to change course on design or priorities.  Governor Lujan Grisham could easily go  down as the Governor who destroyed the State Fair for the sake of her ego.

AFFORDABLE HOUSING NOT HIGHEST AND BEST USE OF FAIRGROUNDS

At least $30 million of the Phase 1 monies is dedicated specifically for affordable housing and other types of income level housing. The blunt reality is that $30 million will not  go very far to build affordable housing. The term affordable housing is a false narrative. When the term “affordable housing” is used by elected officials, investors and developers, what they mean is “subsidized government housing.”  Construction costs are consistent when it comes to building a new housing and affordable housinfg.  According to the Homebuilders Digest, construction costs covering everything from materials to the actual construction average between $175 to $225 per square foot. To build a 750 square foot housing unit would therefore carry a cost of $131,000 to $168,750.

What the State Fair District Board did not take into account nor discuss is that the years 2024, 2025, 2026 were banners years for state appropriations to expand homeless and affordable housing projects in the City, including in the International District. During the 2024 and the 2025 legislative sessions, the New Mexico Legislature dedicated more than $300 million to various housing-related measures at different agencies, including revolving loans for builders, down-payment assistance and anti-homelessness programs.  The Legislature specifically earmarked $110 million in the 2025  year’s budget of the $10.8 billion budget for affordable housing and homelessness assistance programs.

During the 2026 legislative session, the New Mexico legislature appropriated $175 million for statewide housing and homelessness initiatives with the lion’s share going to Albuquerque. The 2025 New Mexico Legislature approved upwards of  $140 million for housing programs during the legislative session with $83 Million of the $140 Million is earmarked for  projects in the Albuquerque area for housing and the unhoused.

PARK AREA ACCESED FROM CENTRAL WILL LIKELY BE MAGNET FOR CRIME AND UNHOUSED

Phase 1 places a major emphasis and dedicates a large portion of the State Fair property to park area with access from Central. The reality of the city’s homeless crisis is that parks are notoriously magnets for crime and the unhoused. At this point, the State Fairgrounds, does not have a crime problem with the New Mexico State Police having primary law enforcement responsibility to calls for service. The lack of crime on the state fair property will no doubt change with a park and access from Central.

Area resident Dave Kailer was absolutely correct when he was questioned whether a proposed park could thrive in the area and he said this:

“You know what is going to happen to that park if you put it in the war zone? It will turn into a homeless park, let’s face it. … I don’t want to be ugly about it or negative about it. I’m just being realistic.”

History tends to repeat itself over and over again especially when it comes to the homeless crisis and parks in Albuquerque. The State Fair District Board might as well dedicate any park on State Fair grounds property with public access from Central as Coronado Park 2 in remembrance to Coronado Park which was closed by the city as a result of more than 125 unsheltered people taking over the park to camp and it becoming a hot bed for narcotic usage, trafficking illicit drugs and violent crime, including homicides and rapes.

MISPLACED REDEVLOPMENT GOALS

Five out of the current seven State Fair District Board members are elected officials of the International District with the President of the District 6 Coalition of Neighborhoods all in the International District.  It apparent that  Governor Lujan Grisham’s appointed State Fair District Board were strictly dedicated to reviving and benefiting the International District.  Governor Lujan Grisham  and her appointments to the State Fair District  Board  essentially  ignored  the needs and concerns of neighborhoods and businesses to the West, North and East of the Fairgrounds as well as the state wide support for the State Fair remaining where it is.

 Outgoing Governor Lujan Grisham  and her appointed State Fair District Board  are using  State Fair property to solve all the crime, economic problems and lack of affordable housing of the International District.  Until you reduce crime and homeless on Central itself and in the International District itself, redevelopment of the State Fair property to benefit the International District will fail.

The International District, which is bordered by Central South of the State Fairgrounds has had for decades some of the highest violent crime, property crime and drug offense rates, so much so that it was at one time referred to as the WAR ZONE until it was officially renamed the International District, but the renaming had no impact on the trajectory of the area.  The International District continues to be plagued by high crime rates and  now has become a magnet for the homeless with encampments constantly popping up and cleaned up by the city only to pop up again.

Crime and the unhoused is what is destroying  private investment, job growth and small business development within  in the International District. After all the millions are spent to redevelop the fairgrounds, to improve infrastructure and traffic flow, building a park, adding public spaces and allowing businesses and low-income housing, the problems of high crime rates and the unhoused will remain the same in the International District because they have never been solved for decades. No businesses will want to relocate to the State Fair grounds after it is developed into commercial property, and it will become a magnet for crime and for the homeless, especially with parks.

CONCLUSION

On day one of assuming office, Governor Deb Haaland will have to decide sooner than later exactly what to do with the State Fairgrounds District Governing Board, replacing members of the State Fair Commission where she can and perhaps finding a new State Fair Manager. Governor Haaland should also decide if she wants to suspend or decide what can be done with the $6.4 million contract awarded for to create a detailed State Fairgrounds Redevelopment Plan by Governor Lujan Grisham in the wanning days of her administration.

Expo New Mexico can be revitalized into an Entertainment and Commercial Hub  that could revitalize the entire SE Heights and surrounding area with creation of all new commercial property areas leased by the State Fair for shops, restaurants, theaters and entertainment venues that would also be used for operations of the annual State Fair and during the State Fair itself. The aging Tingly Coliseum should be demolished and a new multipurpose, state of the art venue should be built to replace it.

There should be no affordable housing and no other housing on the property. No portion of the State Fair acreage should be sold to any developer. The existing walls along San Pedro, Lomas and Louisiana should remain intact for security reasons but develop larger entrances. Efforts to revitalize adjoining neighborhoods should only be undertaken by private developers perhaps with state and city development and tax incentives.

The link to a related, previous article is here:

State Fairgrounds District Board Votes To Spend $114 Million On State Fair Grounds Redevelopment; Includes Building Outdoor Sports Stadium; Housing And Redevelopment Included On Private Property Not Yet Acquired; No Decision Made On Moving Fairgrounds With Cost Of $1.1 Billion To $1.97 Billion To Move

On  November 4, the United States Attorney’s Office for the District of New Mexico announced that a federal grand jury returned the first indictment in the ongoing DWI bribery and corruption investigation of law enforcement officers charging a former Bernalillo County Sheriff’s Deputy with using his official position to further a long-running scheme involving the dismissal of DWI cases in New Mexico.  According to the indictment  filed, between March 2018 and January 2024, Bernalillo County Sheriff Deputy Paul Jessen Jr., conspired with attorney Thomas J. Clear III and his paralegal, Ricardo Mendez, to help DWI offenders avoid criminal and administrative penalties related to their DWI arrests. In exchange for items of value, Jessen allegedly failed to appear at required criminal settings for DWI offenders who retained Clear, knowing his absence would allow Clear to seek dismissal of the proceedings. Jessen was also convicted earlier this year of obstructing a Drug Enforcement Administration investigation and making false statements to the FBI,

https://www.justice.gov/usao-nm/pr/former-bcso-officer-indicted-federal-dwi-corruption-investigation

Former Bernalillo County Sheriff Deputy Paul Jessen Jr., age 36,  was indicted by the  federal grand jury on the single felony criminal charge of “Conspiracy to Commit Interference With Commerce By Extortion Under Color of Official Right.”  Jessen stands accused of taking bribes to allow DWI charges dismissed against defendants. The bribery scheme of law enforcement officials is the state’s largest public corruption scandal involving law enforcement officers from the Albuquerque Police Department (APD), the New Mexico State Polic (NMSP) and the Bernalillo County Sheriff’s Department (BCSO). If convicted, Jessen faces up to 20 years in prison.  Jessen is  already facing federal prison time  in another case for tipping off drug dealers.  In July, a jury convicted him of obstructing justice for tipping off a North Valley drug dealer that he was under investigation by the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration.

It was in September 2024 that Jessen was first indicted in an unrelated federal case. In 2021, Jessen and fellow BCSO Deputy Kyle Linker were notified by the federal Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) about an impending raid near a drug dealer’s North Valley home. The DEA claimed that Jessen and Linker wanted to keep the drug dealer as a confidential informant and tipped off the dealer so he’d stay out of trouble. Jessen along with his  partner, Kyle Linker were charged with leaking confidential information to the drug dealers who were being investigated by the DEA. Linker pleaded guilty in the case and served 30 days in prison. In June, Jessen was found guilty by a jury for his role. The drug  dealer  Rod White, was a star witness against Jessen, who denied any wrongdoing in court papers and didn’t testify during a four-day federal trial. Jessen’s sentencing in the case is set for December 15, 2026.

Deputy Paul Jessen Jessen  joined the BCSO in 2012. Jessen was an award-winning detective working drug trafficking and other cases on an FBI task force.  Jessen served in the BCSO DWI Unit for four years starting in 2016. BCSO spokesperson Jayme Gonzales said Paul Jessen was terminated by BCSO and declined to say if BCSO is aware of the identity of the other BCSO deputy allegedly involved and if that person is still with the agency.

U.S. Attorney’s Office spokesperson Tessa DuBerry declined to say if other BCSO deputies involved with the DWI  scheme are still with BCSO and declined to give any other details. DuBerry also declined to say if former BCSO deputies Johann Jareno and Jeffry Bartram, both who have been  identified by Sheriff John Allen as being tied to the scheme, were being investigated as well.  Former BCSO Deputies Jareno,  Bartram,  and  Hammerel have been added to the 2nd Judicial District Attorney’s Office Brady-Giglio list, which names law enforcement personnel deemed untrustworthy to testify. Unlike Hammerel, Jareno, Bartram neither has been charged.

JESSEN INDICTMENT ALLEGATIONS

The bribery and conspiracy scheme to dismiss DWI cases by law enforcement first became public in January 2024 after FBI agents raided the homes of several Albuquerque Police Department officers, Clear’s law office and Mendez’s home. As the conspirators pleaded guilty, the breadth of the scheme widened to include BCSO and New Mexico State Police personnel.

The indictment against Jessen alleges he worked with a “senior BCSO deputy” to take bribes from criminal defense attorney Thomas Clear III  to have DWI cases against Clear’s clients dismissed.  The bribes accepted by Jenssen allegedly include  a Craftsman tool chest, Pit Boss smoker, flat-screen TV and free legal services.  A BCSO senior deputy,  referred to as “co-conspirator 1” by federal prosecutors in the indictment, is not identified in the indictment filed in U.S. District Court for New Mexico.

The indictment alleges that BCSO Deputy Jessen’s involvement in the DWI scheme occurred between March 2018 and January 2024. The indictment states that when Mendez offered Jessen a cash bribe, he refused to take it “and expressed concerns about being offered the cash” to a senior BCSO deputy.  Afterward, Jessen agreed to accept “items of value for his home” for letting his DWI cases get dismissed by skipping out on required court appearances. Between 2016, when Jessen joined BCSO’s DWI unit, and 2019, he had eight DWI cases involving Clear and all but one were dismissed. The indictment alleges in part:

“To ensure successful operation of the scheme, Mendez contacted persons in authority at BCSO, including Co-Conspirator 1 to ensure that participating Conspiring Officers, including Jessen, would fail to appear at required settings in exchange for either cash payments or gifts and other items of value.”

In 2022, the indictment alleges criminal defense attorney Thomas Clear III gave Jessen “free legal representation while Jessen was under investigation for criminal charges unrelated to the conspiracy described herein.”  At that time, Jessen had become a suspect in a separate federal corruption case, though he wasn’t charged for two more years.

Jessen is the second Bernalillo County Sheriff’s  Deputy to be implicated in the three decades long scheme.  Thus far, nine Albuquerque police officers, attorneys Thomas Clear III and Rudolph Chavez and Clear’s paralegal Ricardo “Rick” Mendez have pleaded guilty to federal charges ranging from racketeering to extortion.

The Jessen indictment marks the first time in the 3-year-old DWI corruption investigation that federal prosecutors sought a grand jury indictment against a target.  Federal prosecutors had previously secured guilty pleas before announcing such cases.

Jessen is set for a Nov. 18 initial appearance in federal court.

Links to relied upon or quoted news sources are here:

https://www.abqjournal.com/news/former-bcso-deputy-charged-in-dwi-corruption-scheme/3156294

https://www.krqe.com/news/crime/albuquerque-police-department-dwi-investigation/former-bcso-deputy-indicted-in-connection-to-federal-dwi-corruption-investigation/

https://www.kob.com/new-mexico/former-bcso-deputy-indicted-in-dwi-deception-scheme/

HOW DWI ENTERPRISE BRIBERY AND DISSMISSAL SCANDAL WORKED

According to criminal complaints, indictments and plea agreements filed in Federal District Court by the New Mexico United States Attorney and the US Department of Justice, the DWI Enterprise scheme was very simple and straight forward.  It went on for upwards of 3 decades. Arresting officers would give contact information on motorists they arrested for  DWI charges to private  investigator Carlos Mendez who worked for defense attorney Thomas Clear or to Clear himself. In exchange, the officers would receive cash, gifts and legal services and intentionally fail to show up to required pretrial interviews or court hearings. The officers would also withhold evidence in cases where the suspects hired Clear. Clear would then file motions to dismiss the charges, and judges had no choice but to dismiss the cases for “lack of prosecution” as a sanction against the prosecution.

Clients whose cases were dismissed would typically pay more in legal fees of between $5,000 and $10,000 depending on if the charges were DWI, aggravated DWI other charges in addition to DWI. Law enforcement officers would be recruited by Clear and Mendez to participate in the scheme over many years. The conspirators would also profile people as to their ability to pay higher fees. Defense attorneys customarily charge between $3,000 and $6,000 to defend DWI cases depending on if the case is a person’s first, second, third or even fourth offense, misdemeanor or felony DWI. There is no charge if a defendant  qualifies and is defended by the Public Defender’s Office.

Police officers would intentionally fail to appear at required court hearings, withhold evidence or fail to file court paperwork for DWI offenders, some of whom were aware of the scheme and others who were not, who hired Clear.

Clear said during in his plea agreement that the scheme dated back to 1995. Clear admitted this in his plea agreement:

“Under this scheme, I would then appear at the (Motor Vehicle Division) administrative hearings and the criminal case settings on behalf of the DWI offender and would move to dismiss the proceedings”

Clear and his paralegal and co-conspirator Ricardo Mendez entered guilty pleas on charges of racketeering, among other federal charges. Clear and Mendez have been disbarred from the practice of law. Clear faces 130 years in prison. No one who has pleaded guilty in the case has been sentenced.

HUNDREDS OF DWI CASES DISMISSED

It has been reported that the 2nd Judicial District Attorney’s Office has dismissed over 260 DWI cases linked to the federal cases.  From January 2024 through June 2025,  sixteen officers were added to what’s called the Brady-Giglio List, a designation that deems them untrustworthy witnesses in court. As a result, two New Mexico district attorneys were forced to dismiss the officers’ open criminal cases in Bernalillo and Valencia counties. The two District Attorneys have had to dismiss 306 DWI cases against suspected drunk drivers.

https://www.krqe.com/news/investigations/dwi-dismissal-scandal-306-drunk-driving-cases-dropped-did-the-drivers-reoffend/

The bribery of law enforcement to dismiss DWI Cases is the single largest government corruption scandal in the City of Albuquerque’s and the State of New Mexico’s history involving the 3 largest law enforcement agencies in the state consisting of the Albuquerque Police Department (APD), the Bernalillo County Sheriff’s Department (BCSO)  and the New Mexico State police.

CHRONOLOGY 16 APD OFFICERS IMPLICATED, CHARGED OR PLEADING GUILTY

On August 31, 2026,  it was widely reported by Albuquerque news outlets that six additional, unidentified,  Albuquerque Police sworn officers have been placed on leave as part of an ongoing investigation into a decades-long scheme involving criminal defense attorney Thomas Clear III, his private investigator Ricardo “Rick” Mendez and defense attorney Rudy Chavez  who paid law enforcement to get DWI cases dismissed. APD spokesperson Gilbert Gallegos said  that APD is doing an internal investigation into the six officers, who were not named.

https://www.kob.com/new-mexico/six-more-apd-officers-on-leave-after-dwi-deception-investigation/

https://www.krqe.com/news/crime/albuquerque-police-department-dwi-investigation/apd-places-6-officers-on-leave-pending-investigation-into-former-dwi-unit/

https://www.koat.com/article/apd-places-6-officers-on-leave-as-part-of-dwi-investigation/73573369

https://www.krqe.com/news/crime/albuquerque-police-department-dwi-investigation/apd-places-6-officers-on-leave-pending-investigation-into-former-dwi-unit/

In addition to the unidentified six APD officers implicated in the scandal, another nineteen (19) law enforcement officers have been identified by name and implicated and have resigned, retired, been terminated or federally charged or plead guilty to charges. The FBI executed five search warrants  in January 2024 at three APD officers’ residences, the home of a private investigator, and the law office of prominent DWI attorney Thomas Clear III. Private Criminal  Defense Attorneys Thomas Clear and Rudy Chavez have plead guilty to federal charges and have been disbarred by the New Mexico Supreme Court and the Federal Court. Clear’s private investigator and paralegal Ricardo “Rick” Mendez also plead guilty to federal charges.

A total of 22 APD police officers have  been implicated with six not publicly identified by APD. Sixteen APD Police officers have been identified by name by APD in the corruption scandal by APD. One by one, the accused APD officers have turned in their badges and resigned or retired  rather than talking to Internal Affairs investigators about an alleged public corruption scheme involving DWI cases. The names and dates of the 16 officers who have resigned, placed on leave, who have been terminated, retired, charged or plead guilty are:

On February 7, 2024 Justin Hunt, who started at APD in 2000, resigned. On January 20, 2026 Hunt plead guilty to one count of “Conspiracy to Commit Interference With Commerce By Extortion Under Color of Official Right.”

On February 29, 2024, Honorio Alba, who started at APD in 2014, resigned. On February 7, 2025 he plead guilty to racketeering, bribery, extortion and conspiracy.(Article link: Took a plea deal on February 7, 2025.)

On March 13, 2024, Harvey Johnson, who started at APD in 2014, resigned.

On March 15, 2024, Nelson Ortiz, who started at APD in 2016, resigned. On March 24, Nelson Ortiz  admitted to his role in the DWI Enterprise bribery scandal and  plead guilty in federal court to one count of Conspiracy to Commit Interference With Commerce By Extortion Under Color of Official Right. He faces 20 years in prison.

On March 20, 2024 Joshua Montaño, who started at APD January 2005, resigned. On Friday, February 8, Montaño plead guilty as charge to  racketeering, bribery, extortion and conspiracy. (Article link: Took a plea deal on February 7, 2025.)

On May 2, 2024 Daren DeAguero, who started with APD in 2009, resigned.

On May 9, 2024, Matthew Trahan was placed on paid leave as the investigation played out. Trahan has been with APD since 2006, was with the DWI unit from 2014-16 and recently worked as a detective.

On July 30, 2024 APD Officer Neill Elsman, who had worked in the DWI unit within the past several years, resigned before returning to work from military leave. On February 12, 2025 Elsman plead guilty as charged  to 5  counts of  conspiracy, extortion, and bribery. (Article: February 12, 2025.)

On August 1, APD announced that it fired Mark Landavazo, the APD Commander of Internal Affairs for Professional Standards, who started with APD in  2007 and was with the DWI unit from 2008 through 2013.

On October 16, 2024 Deputy Commander Gustavo Gomez placed on paid administrative leave. Gomez was with the DWI unit from 2010 to 2013.

On January 24, 2025 APD announced they placed officers Matthew Chavez on leave.

On February 28, Kyle Curtis announced his retirement after he was placed on leave on February 24 amid being targeted in the Internal investigation involving DWI arrests.

In 2022, Timothy McCarson retired from the Albuquerque Police Department  and he has been implicated in the DWI scandal. The last week of January, 2025,  the FBI asked that he be added to the Bernalillo County District Attorney’s Office‘s Giglio list, which classifies potential court testimony as unreliable. On December 15, 2025, McCarson plead guilty to one count of “conspiracy to commit interference with commerce by extortion under color of official right.”

On May 12, former APD officer Steve Hindi was placed on the Giglio list of officers whose credibility is compromised after being implicated in the scandal.

On March 24, 2024  APD  announced it  had placed Lucas Perez on leave as a part of its internal investigation into its DWI unit and the federal investigation. Perez had been with the department since 2016 and served in the DWI unit and become the DWI unit sergeant. On May 27,2025 Lucas Perez plead guilty to conspiracy to commit interference with commerce by extortion under color of official right.

On June 26, 2025  APD Officer Daniel Carr who served with APD for nearly 20 years and who then became a lateral hire and went to work for the Durango Police Department, became the 16th former APD officer to join the ranks of officers listed on the Bernalillo County District Attorney’s Office ‘Giglio list‘.  This is a listing  of officers who are no longer trusted witnesses in court. He was implicated in the DWI bribery and conspiracy case to dismiss cases. Carr immediately resigned from the Durango Police Department after the Department was notified of the action. Carr has not been charged with a crime.

THREE BERNALILLO COUNTY SHERRIFF DEPUTIES IMPLICATED

The dates and names of the 3 BCSO officers who have resigned or placed on leave by Sherriff John Allen or who have plead guilty to charges are:

On February 25, 2025  BCSO Deputy Jeff Hammerel resigned from BCSO and  plead guilty to one count of conspiracy to commit extortion, two counts of extortion and two counts of bribery.

On February 24, 2025, BCSO Undersheriff Johann Jareno was asked to resign by  Bernalillo County Sheriff John Allen.

March 7^th, BCSO Deputy Jeffry Bartram was placed on leave on after early findings that he may have been involved in the scheme. He has been with BCSO since February 2010 and was on the BCSO DWI Unit from July 2014 to August 2020.

ONE MEXICO STATE POLICE OFFICER IMPLICATED

On February 14, 2025 the New Mexico State Police announced it placed Sgt. Toby LaFave on administrative leave after he was implicated by the FBI as accepting bribes in the DWI Enterprise to dismiss cases. Sgt.Toby LaFave was placed on paid leave as the agency did  its own internal investigation into allegations. LaFave was featured for years in state ENDWI campaigns and he was referred to as the DWI King. In in November 2025 LaFave was officially fired for his alleged role in the bribery scheme, but he has not yet been criminally charged.

LaFave, who joined State Police in 2012, said in an online public service promotion video that he has made 3,000 arrests during his 20 years in law enforcement. Court records show LaFave has filed at least 1,300 felony and misdemeanor DWI cases from 2009 to February, 2025. Of the 31 DWI cases where LaFave was the arresting officer and Clear was the defense attorney, 17, or 57%, were dismissed by the courts.

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

https://www.abqjournal.com/news/article_97483524-eb17-11ef-9c15-8320a7b16191.htm/

DWI DISMISSAL SCANDAL SCORE CARD

To date, 13 people, including Clear and Mendez, have pleaded guilty to federal charges tied to the conspiracy. Over the last three years, federal prosecutors have secured guilty pleas from Clear, Mendez, attorney Rudy Chavez, nine Albuquerque Police Department officers and one Bernalillo County sheriff’s deputy. Other law enforcement officers, including one from the New Mexico State Police, have either been fired or retired. None have gone to trial, and all 13 defendants prosecuted on racketeering- and extortion-related charges are awaiting sentencing.

Nine APD officers and one Bernalillo County Sheriff’s Office Deputy have plead guilty to federal charges of taking bribes. Additionally, two Albuquerque defense attorneys, and one private investigator have plead guilty in the ongoing federal investigation into a nearly 30-year conspiracy in which a group of DWI officers received cash, free legal services and other benefits for helping get DWI cases dismissed.

NINE APD COPS AND ONE BERNALILLO COUNTY DEPUTY SHERIFF HAVE PLEAD GUILTY AS CHARGED

The nine APD officers and one Bernalillo County Sheriff’s Office Deputy who have plead guilty to federal charges of taking bribes are:

1. On February 7, 2025 former APD Officer Honorio Alba plead guilty to racketeering, bribery, extortion and conspiracy. (Article link: Took a plea deal on February 7, 2025.)
2. On February 7, 2025 former APD Officer Joshua Montaño plead guilty as charge to  racketeering, bribery, extortion and conspiracy.(Article link: Took a plea deal on February 7, 2025.)
3. On February 12, 2025 former APD Officer Neill Elsman plead guilty as charged  to 5 counts of  conspiracy, extortion, and bribery.  ( February 12, 2025.)
4. On March 24, 2025 former APD officer Nelson Ortiz admitted to his role in the DWI Enterprise bribery scandal and pleaded guilty in federal court to one count of Conspiracy to Commit Interference With Commerce By Extortion Under Color of Official Right. He faces 20 years in prison.
5. On April 29, 2025 former APD Police Officer Harvey Johnson plead guilty to one count of conspiracy to commit “Interference With Commerce By Extortion Under Color Of Official Right”. He is facing 20 years in jail.
6. On May 27, 2025 former APD Officer Lucas Perez plead guilty to “conspiracy to commit interference with commerce by extortion under color of official right.” It was on March 24, 2024 that APD announced it had placed Lucas Perez  on leave as a part of its internal investigation into its DWI unit and the federal investigation. Perez had been with the department since 2016 and served in the DWI unit to become the unit sergeant.
7. On June 23, 2025 former APD Officer Louis Henckel plead guilty in federal court, admitting to his role in the conspiracy with criminal defense attorney Thomas Clear and his employee  Ricardo Mendez to accept bribes to get DWI cases dismissed. Henckel plead guilty to one count of “conspiracy to commit interference with commerce by extortion under color of official right.” The maximum penalty is up to 20 years in prison and a fine up to $250,000.
8. On December 15, 2025, retired APD Officer Timothy McCarson plead guilty to one count of “conspiracy to commit interference with commerce by extortion under color of official right.”
9. On February 25, 2025,  BCSO Deputy Jeff Hammerel resigned from BCSO and  plead guilty to one count of conspiracy to commit extortion, two counts of extortion and two counts of bribery. (Took a plea deal on February 25, 2025.)
10. On January 20, 2026, former APD Lieutenant Justin Hunt plead guilty to one count of “Conspiracy to Commit Interference With Commerce By Extortion Under Color of Official Right.”

TWO RING LEADERS PLEAD GUILTY AS CHARGED

Former DWI Criminal defense attorney Thomas Clear III and his private  investigator Ricardo “Rick” Mendez  plead guilty as charged to paying bribes to law enforcement to get their client’s DWI cases get dismissed.

On January 24, Ricardo “Rick” Mendez, 53, the private investigator for attorney Thomas Clear III, plead guilty to all the charges contained in the criminal Information including racketeering, bribery of an agent receiving federal funds, aiding and abetting, interference with commerce by extortion under color of official right and to conspiracy. Mendez is facing 110 years in prison on the charges. On April 29  Ricardo “Rick” Mendez was scheduled to be sentenced connection with the DWI scandal. In a surprise move on the day of his sentencing it was simply vacated by the federal court. The  likely reason for the delay is that Mendez is providing new information about the DWI scandal and identifying more suspects to be charge.

On February 12, DWI defense attorney Thomas Clear III, 67 plead guilty as charged to nine federal charges including racketeering (RICO) conspiracy, bribery, and extortion. Clear faces up to 130 years in prison and $2 million in fines. Clear has been permanently disbarred from the practice of law by the New Mexico Supreme Court and the Federal Court. A forfeiture action against a home Clear used as his offices has been taken as an asset and as part of the racketeering charge.

DEFENSE ATTORNEY RUDOLPH “RUDY” CHAVEZ PLEADS GUILTY

On July 10, 2025, private criminal defense attorney Rudolph “Rudy” Chavez plead guilty to a federal extortion charge admitting he bribed an Albuquerque police officer in 2023 to help get his  client’s drunken driving case dismissed. Chavez  plead guilty to one count each of interference with commerce by extortion and lying to FBI agents investigating the payoff in March 2024.

In his plea agreement, Chavez admits he contacted Clear’s assistant Recardo “Rick” Mendez after he was hired by his client who had been arrested in April 2023 by Albuquerque Police Department DWI officer Honorio Alba Jr. Through Mendez, Chavez paid Alba to intentionally not appear in court on the DWI case.  Chavez admits this in his plea agreement:

“I admit that when coordinating the scheme, I knew that Alba was a necessary witness and because Alba planned to fail to appear, I knew that the case and proceedings would likely be dismissed.”

Chavez states in his plea agreement he agreed to be interviewed by FBI agents on March 26, 2024. During his FBI interview, Chavez was warned of the potential criminal consequences of lying to federal law enforcement officers. During his interview with  FBI agents, Chavez denied knowing Alba was not going to appear in court.

In his federal plea agreement, Chavez admits he lied to  FBI agents and admits he had phone calls with Mendez ahead of the court hearings to ensure Alba would not attend. Chavez  admits  in his plea he spoke on the phone with Mendez after the dismissal “during which I thanked him and asked him to thank Alba.”

NO AGREEMENTS AS TO SENTENCINGS

Review of all plea agreements reveals there are no agreements as to sentencing, meaning it will be up to the federal judge assigned who will decide the sentences of each defendant. A pre-sentence report will be prepared by sentencing, probation and parole authorities for each defendant, and a recommendation will be made as to sentencing to the judge. Depending on the actual number of charges plead to by each defendant, they are facing jail sentences between 5 years and 20 years and as much as130 years in federal prison and could face fines  as low as $20,000 or in excess of $1 million dollars.

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

There is absolutely no doubt that APD’s reputation has beeb trashed to a major extent because of this scandal and the number of APD officers involved. APD is viewed by many as again having just another bastion of “dirty and corrupt cops” who have brought dishonor to their department and their badge and to the department’s professed values of “Pride, Integrity, Fairness and Respect”.  There is little doubt that this whole DWI dismissal bribery scandal has shaken the public’s faith in our criminal justice system and APD to its core especially with the involvement of the Bernalillo County Sheriffs Office BCSO and New Mexico State Police Officers.

The only way that any semblance of faith can begin to be restored and for people to begin trusting APD and law enforcement in general is if all the police officers involved in this scandal are held accountable, the lawyers involved are held accountable and when they are all behind bars. That will only happen with aggressive prosecutions, convictions, and lengthy prison sentences for the law enforcement officers and attorneys involved in the “DWI Enterprise” scheme. Justice will not be served until all are sentenced. Sentencings delayed means Justice has not been served.

The courts need to get along with the sentencings.

The  link to a related blog article is here:

APD Places Another 6 Sworn Officers On Leave In DWI Dismissal Scandal; Additional Six Brings Total To 22 APD Police Officers Implicated in Scandal; Sentencing Dates Scheduled; Expect More Charges; COMMENTARY: Faith In APD Will Only BEGIN To Be  Restored When All Dirty Cops Behind Bars 

Following are the 2026 New Mexico General Election results in Federal congressional  races, Statewide offices and  in Bernalillo County as compiled and reported by the New Mexico Secretary of State:

UNITED STATES SENATOR

BEN R LUJAN   (INCUMBENT)

Democrat                63%            455,165

LARRY E MARKER

Republican             37%            265,557

TOTAL VOTES:                        720,722

https://www.abqjournal.com/news/lujan-wins-second-term-in-us-senate/3154396

U.S. HOUSE, NEW MEXICO DISTRICT 1

MELANIE ANN STANSBURY (INCUMBENT)

Democrat            64%         178,268

NDIDIAMAKA EKWUA CHARLENE OKPAREKE

Republican         36%        102,301

TOTAL VOTES:                  280,562

https://www.abqjournal.com/news/stansbury-wins-reelection-in-us-house-race-1/3154737

U.S. HOUSE, NEW MEXICO DISTRICT 2

GREGORY G CUNNINGHAM

Republican       41%          86,650

GABRIEL VASQUEZ (INCUMBENT)

Democrat         59%        123,113

TOTAL VOTES              209,763

https://www.abqjournal.com/news/vasquez-wins-third-term-in-new-mexicos-2nd-congressional-district/3154771

U.S. HOUSE, NEW MEXICO DISTRICT 3

TERESA LEGER FERNANDEZ (INCUMBENT)

Democrat    61%         139,967

MARTIN ZAMORA

Republican   39%       87,653

TOTAL VOTES            227,620

https://electionresults.sos.nm.gov/Default.aspx

https://electionresults.sos.nm.gov/resultsSW.aspx?type=FED&map=CTY

https://www.abqjournal.com/news/leger-fernandez-wins-fourth-term-in-congressional-district-3/3154775

GOVERNOR AND LT. GOVERNOR

GREGGORY D. HULL AND DAVID M. GALLEGOS

Republican     43%       308,315

DEB HAALAND AND STEPHANIE GARCIA RICHARD

Democrat      57%        412,834

TOTAL VOTES           721,149

https://www.abqjournal.com/news/haaland-makes-history-bucks-state-trend-by-defeating-hull-to-become-new-mexicos-next-governor/3154673

SECRETARY OF STATE

AMANDA LÓPEZ ASKIN

Democrat     61%         433,163

RAMONA L GOOLSBY

Republican   39%       279,014

TOTAL VOTES         712,177

https://www.abqjournal.com/news/lopez-askin-wins-new-mexico-secretary-of-state-race/3155346

ATTORNEY GENERAL

RAUL TORREZ (INCUMBENT)

Democrat    63%     450,371

SAMUEL ISAIAH KANE SR

Republican  37%    265,517

TOTAL VOTES       715,888

https://www.abqjournal.com/news/torrez-wins-reelection-in-attorney-general-contest/3154913

STATE AUDITOR

JOSHUA JAMES RYAN LAWRENCE

Republican   40%    280,397

JOSEPH M. MAESTAS (INCUMBENT)

Democrat     60%     427,943

TOTAL VOTES        708,340

https://www.abqjournal.com/news/democratic-incumbents-cruise-to-victory-in-state-auditor-and-treasurer-races/3154755

STATE TREASURER

JAMES F ELLISON

Republican       40%     285,923

LAURA M MONTOYA (INCUMBENT)

Democrat         60%      423,445

TOTAL VOTES              709,368

https://www.abqjournal.com/news/democratic-incumbents-cruise-to-victory-in-state-auditor-and-treasurer-races/3154755

COMMISSIONER OF PUBLIC LANDS

MICHAEL JACK PERRY

Republican     39%      280,049

JUAN DE JESUS SANCHEZ III

Democrat      61%       430,427

TOTAL VOTES             710,476

https://electionresults.sos.nm.gov/Default.aspx

https://electionresults.sos.nm.gov/resultsSW.aspx?type=SW&map=CTY

https://www.abqjournal.com/news/voters-elect-sanchez-as-new-mexico-land-commissioner/3154810

BERNALILLO COUNTY

Bernalillo County Commissioner DISTRICT 1

BARBARA CHRISTINE BACA (INCUMBENT – UNOPPOSED)

Democrat        100%      36,980

TOTAL VOTES                 36,980

Bernalillo County Commissioner DISTRICT 5

THOMAS WAYNE RILEY

Republican      39%        21,877

ERIC OLIVAS (INCUMBENT)

Democrat      61%           33,833

TOTAL VOTES              55,710

https://www.abqjournal.com/news/commissioner-olivas-wins-reelection-to-district-5-as-stover-claims-victory-in-assessor-race/3154822

BERNALILLO COUNTY SHERRIFF

JOHN D ALLEN  (INCUMBENT – UNOPPSED)

Democrat     100%    165,768

TOTAL VOTES            165,768

BERNALILLO COUNTY ASSESSOR

MICHAEL RAY MAINE

Republican      33%    77,489

LINDA STOVER

Democrat        67%     159,653

TOTAL VOTES            237,142

https://www.abqjournal.com/news/commissioner-olivas-wins-reelection-to-district-5-as-stover-claims-victory-in-assessor-race/3154822

BERNALILLO COUNTY BOND MEASURES

All seven Bernalillo County Bond measures were approved by voters with landslide votes of YES of between 61% and 81%

https://electionresults.sos.nm.gov/Default.aspx

https://electionresults.sos.nm.gov/resultsSW.aspx?type=CTYSPEC&map=CTY&cty=02%20&name=Bernalillo

NOTEABLE STATE HOUSE RACES

New Mexico House Democrats have secured a supermajority of 47 seats who will again be lead by New Mexico Speaker of the House Javier Martinz.  There were no Senate races this year on the ballot.

In Southwest New Mexico, Republican Luis Terrazas was defeated by Democrat Raul Turrieta with a  53% to 47% final vote. Democrats Rickie Gonzalez of Los Lunas, Chriselle Martinez of Rio Rancho, Dave Mooney of Radium Springs and Raul Turrieta of Silver City defeated their incumbent Republican opponents. Winning Democrats also  included Sarah Boses of Galisteo, Abby Foster of Albuquerque, Yolanda “Pancha” Jaramillo of Dixon and Lori Martinez of Las Cruces.

CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT FOR PAID LEGISLATURE

Constitutional Amendment 4 to allow pay to  New Mexico legislators limited to the median household income passed with a 63% YES vote (415,498 votes) to a 37%  NO vote (239,681 votes).

 https://electionresults.sos.nm.gov/resultsSW.aspx?type=SW&map=CTY

https://www.abqjournal.com/news/new-mexico-voters-approve-legislative-pay/3153847

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

The historical significance of Deb Haaland being elected Governor of New Mexico and to become the first Native American woman ever elected governor in U.S. history is truly remarkable. Deb Haaland’s political journey from grassroots organizer, to Democratic party chairperson, to Congresswoman, to Interior Secretary appointed by President Joe Biden and to a nationally recognized figure and now New Mexico  Governor is truly remarkable as it is historical. The personal obstacles Haaland has overcome during her lifetime makes it clear she understands New Mexico and the needs of its people

It cannot be ignored that throughout the election process, much hostility, and outright racism was thrown at Deb Haaland on social media, especially by the Republican MAGA crowd, as they degraded and questioned her intelligence and competency despite her education, the positions she has held and her accomplishments. Governor Elect Haaland simply ignored the hate and racism as she campaigned as did the overwhelming majority New Mexico voters as she proved her critics wrong and won in a landslide. As we say in New Mexico “you done good!”

Thank you to all the voters who took their civic responsibility serious and who voted.  Congratulations and best wishes to all the victors. Now the hard part begins in making decisions that are in the best interest of our state and its people.

On Sunday, November 1, the Albuquerque Journal published two separate guest opinion columns on the Albuquerque City Council passage of city ordinances that eliminates formal city recognition of neighborhood coalitions and impacts appeals to prevent developments. The two opinion columns were submitted separately and unbeknownst to each other.

One opinion column was written by Albuquerque City Councilors Tammy Feibelkorn, and Stephanie Telles entitled “Local Neighborhoods should have the strongest voices.”  The other  opinion column was written by Pete Dinelli entitled “ Mayor, City Council sold out Albuquerque neighborhoods.”  Both columns do not exceed 600 words to conform with Albuquerque Journal policy. 

The headlines and accompanying photos were written and provided by the Albuquerque Journal. Read together, the columns complement each other and highlight major differences.  Many thanks to the Albuquerque Journal for publishing the articles together. Following are the unedited opinion columns with links followed by additional commentary:

HEADLINE: “Local neighborhoods should have the strongest voices”

BY:  Stepahnie Telles and Tammy Feiebelkorn

“Albuquerque families are priced out of neighborhoods where they want to plant their own roots. Young entrepreneurs and local business owners lack investment opportunities, yet they persist, and when they find ways to grow and reinvest into the communities they were raised in, their resilience is rewarded by coalitions blocking their ambition.

Seniors whose children have grown up and moved on can’t find housing that lets them downsize without being forced to leave the neighborhoods they’ve called home for decades. And our most vulnerable residents, people experiencing homelessness, are being swept from place to place because emergency shelters and safe outdoor spaces are blocked or shut down entirely, displacing people who have already been displaced.

 Burqueños ask us every day to do something about these challenges, begging us to work together, across political ideological lines, to find solutions. Yet when we answer that call and do exactly that, we’re accused of silencing neighborhood voices.

 Nothing could be further from the truth.

On Oct. 5, after working with the bill’s sponsor on a slate of amendments to address the concerns heard from coalition members, the City Council passed one of two critical measures: O-26-61. There is quite a bit of confusion about what the ordinance does, so we want to be clear. It does not disband coalitions, and it does not silence neighborhood associations or individual residents. And it does not remove anyone’s right to appeal.

 What it does is return recognition and focus on the neighborhood associations that residents make the choice to join directly. Since 2022, coalitions granted recognition could appeal projects in neighborhoods far from where their members actually live. In some cases, coalitions have presented themselves as speaking for entire neighborhoods, including residents and neighborhood associations, without demonstrating that those communities actually authorized them to do so.

Consider what that means. A neighborhood association or an individual resident could find an organization they have never joined, never consulted — and perhaps never even heard of — claiming to represent their interests. That organization could then use its recognized status to challenge a project affecting their community, even without evidence that the community asked it to speak on its behalf.

That is the problem this ordinance addresses.

 Residents should be able to choose who represents them. Neighborhood associations should be able to speak for their own members. Coalitions should be able to express their views and advocate for their priorities. But no organization should automatically be entitled to claim it represents people who have not chosen to be represented by it.

 As city councilors, we believe in democracy and that the democratic process should extend to any organization that claims to speak for anyone.

 The ordinance is about who has the right to speak for you and your neighborhood. The answer is simple: the people who live there. Whether it’s a family trying to stay in the neighborhood where they grew up, a local business owner investing in their community, a senior looking to downsize close to home or a shelter serving people in need, the people who live in that neighborhood should have the strongest voice in decisions affecting it. Neighbors — not outside interests — should determine what their community needs and what is best for its future.

Neighborhood associations and residents keep their voices and coalitions keep theirs, and every resident keeps the right to appeal. It simply draws a clearer line between advocating for a position and claiming to represent an entire community.

 Democracy begins with the people. In Albuquerque, that means the people who live in our neighborhoods must have the right to speak for themselves.”

Stephanie W. Telles represents District 1 and Tammy represents District 7 on the Albuquerque City Council.

The link to read the published Albuquerque Journal column is here:

https://www.abqjournal.com/opinion/opinion-local-neighborhoods-should-have-the-strongest-voices/3141274

HEADLINE: Mayor, City Council sold out Albuquerque neighborhoods

BY: Pete Dinelli

The Albuquerque City Council has enacted four measures misleadingly labeled the Better Neighborhoods package. The legislation was passed under the guise of cutting red tape to allow development projects. The Better Neighborhoods package consists of two ordinances and two memorials. The two ordinances make dramatic changes to the Neighborhood Association Recognition Ordinance and severely limit the rights of appeals to stop developments. The two memorials request the New Mexico Legislature to define who has standing and the right to appeal developments and mandates direct and costly appeals to the courts.

The most egregious of the four measures is O-26-61. This ordinance eliminates formal city recognition of neighborhood coalitions and eliminates automatic development notices to them. It eliminates the requirement for developers to act in good faith and to cooperate with the very neighborhoods they want to develop in. O-26-61 strips standing from neighborhood coalitions to appeal developments. It requires neighborhood associations to redraw boundaries, adding extensive appeal conditions. Loss of city recognition of neighborhood coalitions means loss of notification to individuals and neighborhoods that are likely to be harmed by any development. Thirteen neighborhood associations will now lose city recognition or will have to kick out their county neighbors as members.

Ordinance O-26-61 was introduced and moved forward within two weeks for a full council vote without a committee hearing and no community discussion. It passed on a 5-4 vote. Voting “yes” were Republican councilors Dan Lewis, Dan Champine and Renee Grout and Democrats Stephanie Telles and Tammy Fiebelkorn. Voting “no” were Democratic City Council President Klarissa Peña, Democratic councilors Joaquín Baca and Nichole Rogers and Republican Brook Bassan. Mayor Tim Keller signed O-26-61 into law, falsely arguing that neighborhood coalitions were legally representing neighborhood associations without their consent.

Also last month, the Albuquerque City Council approved ordinance O-26-60, which increases fees for appealing certain projects. The ordinance increases the filing fees to $300 for anyone appealing a development application that was denied, and $1,000 for appealing an approved project.

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

The Better Neighborhoods package benefits the development, real estate and investment community to the determent of established neighborhoods. It will have a major impact eliminating the rights of neighborhood coalitions to challenge developments. When a new apartment complex or commercial development is proposed in neighborhoods that will have a detrimental impact on the neighborhood, especially historical or established neighborhoods, individual property owners often look to neighborhood coalitions to help appeal or challenge the projects because the individuals do not have the financial resources of their own to oppose developers.

Passage of the Better Neighborhoods package within two weeks of its introduction and without public hearings was underhanded. It continues with the City Council’s dangerous practice of amending the city’s zoning laws prohibiting or limiting extensive public input.

Passage of the Better Neighborhoods package is an effort to deconstruct guardrails and protections. It marginalizes the voices of neighborhoods and city residents. Passage of the Better Neighborhoods package was a sellout by Keller and the Albuquerque City Council of the citizens of Albuquerque, property owners and neighborhood associations and coalitions in favor of the development community.

Pete Dinelli is a former Albuquerque city attorney and chief public safety officer.

The link to read the published Albuquerque Journal column is here:

https://www.abqjournal.com/opinion/opinion-mayor-city-council-sold-out-albuquerque-neighborhoods/3149980

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

City Councilors Stepahnie Telles and Tammy Feiebelkorn and Mayor Tim Keller falsely claim that Neighborhood Coalitions are representing neighborhood associations without individual neighborhood association consent to appeal developments. The truth is neighborhood associations are not required to join neighborhood coalitions. They can withdraw at any time they want for any or no reason at all. Neighborhood coalitions by laws govern appeals and mandate a vote and neighborhood association representatives have every right to vote NO on any appeal and cease membership because they disagree with an appeal.

Both city councilors falsely argue that the legislation will lead to more affordable housing and types of housing. It will not. It removes rights to appeal developments that will have direct impact on established neighborhoods and in all likelihood lead to gentrification. The legislation will have no impact on affordable housing and it contains no provisions mandating affordable housing. The only thing the legislation does is to stifle public opinion and prevent appeals in order to allow developers to do what they want.

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

• Thirteen neighborhood associations will either lose recognition or have to kick out their county neighbors as members.
• Loss of recognition equals the loss of notification to those individuals and neighborhoods that are likely to be harmed by the development.
• It removes the requirement for developers to act in good faith and to cooperate with the very neighborhoods they chose to develop.

A DEGREE OF HYPOCRISY EHIBITED

Both self proclaimed progressive Democrats Tammy Feibelkorn and Stephanie Telles admit in their column they “worked closely with the bill’s sponsor”  MAGA Republican Dan Lewis to get the legislation passed. They  revealed an extraordinary hypocrisy in favor of investors and developers. On the one hand they both say they want affordable housing and development, yet the legislation does nothing to guarantee it but stifles opposition. Both Feibelkorn and Telles wanted the legislation to pass in the dark of night believing that no one was paying attention, yet they say neighborhood coalitions are not “democratic.”

It is downright hypocritical for Feiebelkorn and Telles say “they believe in democracy and that the democratic process should extend to any organization that claims to speak for anyone.” The democratic process does not include suppressing opposition,  denying people’s right to free speech, denying due process of law, denying the right to appeal grievances and infringing on people’s vested property rights as the ordinances and memorials they support and voted for actually represent.

Feiblekorn in particular falsely holds herself out as Progressive Democrat and advocates for progressive causes. The truth is she promotes the interests of the real estate, investment and development communities. A few years ago she literally gave a guided tour of her city council district in a bus full of developers as she stood in front of the bus with a microphone in hand beside the driver to provide a narrative and to show off properties and neighborhoods where development could occur in her city council district.

Feiblekorn does not act in the best interests of her own constituents and voters.  Feiblekorn ignores real property rights of homeowners and she promotes her own personal agenda. She has degraded neighborhood associations and coalitions to their faces during their meetings telling them they are not representative of the best interests of her district even though they are her constituents as she proclaims she knows best.

Feiblekorn and Telles both have bought into the false narrative that increasing density in established neighborhoods will somehow create affordable housing and allow for needed commercial development when it will not. Market forces will prevail and developers will build only what will make a profit. Feiblekorn and Telles both ignore the millions, if not billions of dollars, that are already being spent and  invested by the city and state to build and address affordable housing.

A  SIGN OF THINGS TO COME

Simply put, the enacted ordinances and memorials are the very first step in seeking the 2027 New Mexico Legislature to repeal all the city zoning laws and home rule authority during the 2027 legislative session in the interest of promoting affordable housing.

During the  October 5 City Council meeting, West Side State Sen. Antonio “Moe” Maestas appeared at City Council and spoke in support of the measures. Maestas  said City Council memorials M-26-01 and M-26-02 will help him advance city zoning reform in Santa Fe which he has advocated for to increase affordable housing.

It was during the 30-day session of the 2026 New Mexico Legislature that Senate Bill 131 was introduced and  sponsored by Democrat Senators Antonio “Moe” Maestas and Heather Berghmans. Senate Bill 131 would have repealed and eliminated all real property zoning authority and regulation authority from local governments, including all municipal governments, including Albuquerque, and county governments and mandate a uniform statewide zoning to require more residential development in an effort to increase affordable housing. The legislation was voted down in committee. Notwithstanding, it is expected the failed legislation will be introduced during the 2027 legislative session.

During the 30-day session of the 2026 New Mexico Legislature, Fiebelkorn testified during the legislative committee hearing that she “strongly” supported Senate bill SB-131 that would have repealed and eliminated all zoning authority of the City of Albuquerque. Her testimony prompting one legislator to express dismay that and elected city official was advocating repealing the city’s zoning authority and laws.

It is a false narrative that increasing density in established neighborhoods will  create affordable housing or allow for needed commercial  development when it will not. Market forces will prevail and developers will build high end housing to make a profit and not build affordable housing. It is a false narrative that increasing density in established neighborhoods will somehow create affordable housing and allow for needed commercial development when it will not. Instead, it will lead to gentrification as investors buy up established neighborhoods or historical neighborhoods to develop into high end housing. Market forces will prevail and developers will build to make a profit and not build affordable housing. What is totally ignored with proposing to change zoning law is the millions, if not billions of dollars, that are already being spent and  invested by the city and state to build and to address affordable housing.

CITY COUNCIL REPEAL“BETTER NEIGHBORHOODS” PACKAGE

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

Contact your City Councilor and tell them to repeal O-26-61 and protest the underhanded way it was enacted.

CITY COUNCIL CONTACT INFORMATION

CITY COUNCIL PHONE: (505) 768-3100

CITY COUNCILOR AND SUPPORT STAFF EMAILS

stelles@cabq.gov

stephenchavez@cabq.gov

joaquinbaca@cabq.gov

bacajoaquin9@gmail.com

namolina@cabq.gov

kpena@cabq.gov

cquezada@cabq.gov

bbassan@cabq.gov

dawnmarie@cabq.gov

danlewis@cabq.gov

galvarez@cabq.gov

nrogers@cabq.gov

district6@cabq.gov

tfiebelkorn@cabq.gov

seanforan@cabq.gov

dchampine@cabq.gov

eromero@cabq.gov

rgrout@cabq.gov

rrmiller@cabq.gov

ipadilla@cabq.gov  (Director of Council Services)

mmmontoya@cabq.gov (Council Clerk)

The links to two related blog articles are here:

City Council Removes Formal Recognition, Standing For Neighborhood Coalitions And Eviscerates Coalitions On A 5 to 4 Vote; Council Asks Help From Legislature To Remove City Authority Over Zoning; COMMENTARY: Mayor Keller Should Veto Or City Council Should Immediately Repeal O-26-61 Denying Recognition Of Neighborhood Coalitions

Loretta Naranjo Lopez Guest Column: Mayor Tim Keller And City Council Betrayed And Disenfranchised Neighborhood Associations, Coalitions, Citizens And Voters To Empower Developers And Investors To Detriment Of City; City Council Must Repeal Enacted City Ordinances And Memorials

INTRODUCTION

The Albuquerque City Council has enacted  four measures sponsored by Republican Dan Lewis misleadingly labeled the “Better Neighborhoods” package under the guise and falsehood to cut red tape and spur development projects.  The “Better Neighborhoods” package consists of two ordinances directed at neighborhood coalitions and associations and two memorials that request action from the New Mexico legislature.

CITY ORDINANCES PASSED BY CITY COUNCIL

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

O-26-61 EXPLAINED

Ordinance O-26-61 was introduced and moved forward within 2 weeks for a full council vote without a committee hearing and no community discussion. O-26-61 strips standing from neighborhood coalitions, raises appeal fees, and requires coalitions to pay legal fees if they lose a challenge against a developer who has applied for permits. The ordinance eliminates formal city recognition of neighborhood coalitions and eliminates automatic development notices to them.

Appeal rights under O-26-61are limited to resident-based neighborhood associations near a project. Neighborhood coalitions to a limited extent can still file appeals but they must prove legal standing. The ordinance caps individual neighborhood association boundaries to 2 square miles.

The ordinance requires individual neighborhood associations to come into compliance with boundary requirements by July 1, 2027 and allows  associations to retain current boundaries until July 1. Amendments to the ordinance requires associations to approve appeals by a majority vote and change advance notice of an appeal vote from seven days to two weeks. An amendment requires approval from at least 10% of an association’s members or 15 confirmed members for any appeal.

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

On October 19, Mayor Keller signed 0-26-61 making it law.

0-26-60 EXPLAINED

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

CITY COUNCIL MEMORIALS

State law gives “home rule” authority to municipalities  when it comes to zoning and governs zoning appeals. Councilor  Dan Lewis sponsored two memorials asking the New Mexico Legislature to make changes to state law governing zoning appeals. The two memorials ware M-26-01 and M-26-02.

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

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

LORETTA NARANJO LOPEZ GUEST OPINION COLUMN

Loretta Naranjo Lopez is a life-long resident of Albuquerque and 6th generation Martinez from Martineztown in Albuquerque, New Mexico. She has a Master of Community and Regional Planning and a Bachelor of Business Administration from the University of New Mexico. Ms. Naranjo Lopez was employed with the City of Albuquerque for 25 years of which 15 years was in the City Planning Department. She retired as a City Planner and worked as a staff planner. She serves as the President of the Santa Barbara Martineztown Neighborhood Association (SBMTNA). Loretta Naranjo Lopez submitted the following guest column for publication. She has not been compensated for the article, and it is being published as a public service.

GUEST COLUMN

Mayor Tim Keller And City Council Betray And Disenfranchise Neighborhood Associations,  Coalitions, Citizens And Voters To Empower Developers And Investors To Determent City; City Council Should Repeal Enacted City Ordinance Zoning Amendments

BY Loretta Naranjo Lopez

Albuquerque residents have a legitimate interest in how development decisions affect their neighborhoods, from traffic congestion and infrastructure to building heights, land use, open space, and the preservation of established residential communities.

Neighborhood associations and coalitions provide an important connection between residents and City Hall. They allow communities to organize, share information, communicate concerns, and advocate for development that respects the identity and needs of existing neighborhoods.

Recent changes to Albuquerque’s Neighborhood Association Recognition Ordinance by the City Council make it clear that Mayor Tim Keller  and the City Council are making it far more difficult for residents to influence development decisions that affect their communities.

Ordinance O-26-61, sponsored by Councilor Dan Lewis and signed by Mayor Tim Keller, changes the City’s Neighborhood Association Recognition Ordinance (NARO) and the formal role of neighborhood coalitions. When considered alongside the separate Ordinance 0-26-60 governing development appeal fees, these changes raise serious concerns about the ability of volunteer neighborhood organizations to participate effectively in the development process.

The issue is not whether Albuquerque should grow or whether developers should be allowed to build. The issue is whether residents have a meaningful opportunity to influence that growth and challenge development decisions when they believe those decisions conflict with the City’s adopted plans and regulations.

THE CHANGING BALANCE OF POWER BETWEEN DEVELOPERS AND NEIGHBORHOODS

Developers, investors, and land speculators often have access to professional attorneys, consultants, and substantial financial resources. Neighborhood associations, by contrast, typically depend on volunteers who donate their time to protect their communities.

When the costs and procedural requirements of challenging a development decision increase, the burden can fall disproportionately on the residents who have the fewest resources.

A neighborhood association may have legitimate concerns about a proposed development’s impact on traffic, infrastructure, building height, land use, or nearby residential properties. Yet having a legitimate concern is not enough if the association cannot afford to pursue an appeal or satisfy the requirements within the prescribed timeframe.

A right that exists on paper, but is difficult to exercise in practice may offer little protection to a volunteer organization.

The Mayor and City Council should explain how the revised rules ensure that residents have a fair opportunity to challenge development decisions, regardless of their neighborhood association’s financial resources.

THE COST OF APPEALING DEVELOPMENT DECISIONS

The financial burden of development appeals is a central concern for neighborhood associations.

Ordinance O-26-60 addresses fees associated with development appeals. Reported fees include a $925 filing fee and a $75 notice fee for an appeal of an approved application, totaling $1,000. This does not include the fee if the neighborhood association loses and has to pay $1000 to the City including lawyer fees to the developer.

For a well-funded developer, these amounts may be a routine business expense. For a volunteer neighborhood association operating on limited funds, they can represent a substantial barrier.

Neighborhood associations should not have to choose between preserving their limited resources and challenging a development decision they believe violates the Integrated Development Ordinance (IDO) or threatens their neighborhood.

The issue is not whether every appeal should succeed. It is whether every eligible community has a realistic opportunity to bring forward a legitimate challenge.

The City should consider reasonable fee structures, hardship provisions, or other safeguards that prevent the appeals process from becoming accessible primarily to those who can afford it.

WHY NEIGHBORHOOD COALITIONS MATTER

Neighborhood coalitions bring individual neighborhood associations together to share information, coordinate their efforts, and address development proposals that may affect multiple communities.

A development project does not always stop affecting residents at an association’s boundary. Increased traffic can spill into surrounding residential streets. Commercial development can change the identity of nearby neighborhoods. Taller buildings can affect adjacent properties, and development on open space can have consequences extending well beyond the project site.

Coalitions allow associations to work collectively on these issues rather than forcing each neighborhood to confront complex development proposals in isolation.

O-26-61 changes the formal recognition of neighborhood coalitions and their associated automatic notice and appeal rights under the City’s framework. Although coalitions can continue to organize and advocate, losing formal recognition and automatic appeal standing can reduce their ability to participate collectively in the City’s development process.

The City has argued that individual neighborhood associations should provide authorized representation for their own communities and that no outside group should automatically represent a neighborhood without its consent. The coalition only represents the neighborhood Associations that agree to join the coalition.  In addition, protecting a neighborhood’s right to choose its representatives does not require eliminating meaningful opportunities for recognized associations to work together.

A better approach would preserve individual associations’ authority over their own representation while allowing them to authorize coalitions to coordinate advocacy and, where legally appropriate, pursue matters affecting their communities.

The City is making it harder for willing, recognized neighborhood associations to work together to protect their communities.

HOW NEW REQUIREMENTS MAKE IT HARDER TO APPEAL

Another concern is the additional procedural burden placed on neighborhood associations seeking to challenge development decisions.

Under the revised framework, associations face requirements concerning member support, voting, and documentation before pursuing qualifying appeals. The precise voting threshold, deadline, and recordkeeping requirements should be evaluated against the final ordinance.

Requiring an association to demonstrate that it has the support of its members must also be workable for volunteer organizations. Short deadlines, meeting requirements, and documentation rules can create practical obstacles, particularly when residents must be notified, a meeting or vote must be organized, and records must be submitted within a limited period.

The City Council should explain why the requirements are necessary, how they accommodate the realities of volunteer organizations, and whether less burdensome methods could achieve the same accountability goals.  The current process is working why are we asked to change the process.

If neighborhood associations must meet strict procedural requirements to demonstrate member support before exercising an appeal right, the City should be transparent about why those requirements are appropriate and how they serve the public interest.  Accountability should strengthen community participation, not make it unnecessarily difficult.

THE DANGERS OF RESTRICTING NEIGHBORHOOD BOUNDARIES

The revised neighborhood recognition framework also raises concerns about geographic boundaries. For associations whose existing boundaries exceed the two miles, the practical consequences deserve careful examination. 

Neighborhood boundaries can reflect established communities, shared concerns, historical development patterns, and the areas residents organize to represent. Changing those boundaries can affect the number of residents an association serves and its ability to coordinate issues across a larger area.

The City should explain how existing associations will be affected, what options they have to adjust their boundaries, and how the revised rules will protect residents whose community concerns extend beyond a smaller geographic area.

A boundary restriction should not inadvertently fragment established historical communities or make it more difficult for residents to organize around shared development concerns.

THE REASON FOR THE DECLINE IN RECOGNIZED NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS

The history of neighborhood associations in Albuquerque also deserves attention.

Historical figures cited by neighborhood advocates indicate that the City once had approximately 318 neighborhood associations under Mayor Jim Baca in 2000, compared with approximately 144 in 2024.

If confirmed, the comparison would raise important questions about the long-term health of Albuquerque’s neighborhood participation system.

Why has the number of recognized associations changed? What barriers do residents face when forming and maintaining associations? How will additional administrative requirements affect volunteer recruitment and organizational continuity?

The City should examine these questions before adopting policies that could further complicate neighborhood organization and coalitions.

Neighborhood associations depend on residents who are willing to serve on boards, attend meetings, communicate with neighbors, and review complicated development proposals. If the process becomes increasingly demanding, some communities may struggle to maintain the volunteer leadership necessary to represent their interests.

When neighborhood organizations become less effective or disappear, residents can lose an important means of communicating collectively with local government.

THE CONSEQUENCES FOR ALBUQUERQUE’S ESTABLISHED NEIGHBORHOODS

These concerns are particularly important when development proposals involve commercial uses, taller residential buildings, changes in density, traffic impacts, or the loss of open space near established residential areas.

Residents may worry about increased traffic on residential streets, the capacity of existing infrastructure, parking, building compatibility, or whether a proposed project complies with the City’s development regulations.

Those concerns do not automatically mean that a development should be rejected. Development can provide housing, services, investment, and economic opportunities. Nor should neighborhood opposition automatically determine the outcome of a land-use decision.

But residents should have a meaningful opportunity to identify potential problems, provide relevant evidence, and challenge decisions through established procedures when they believe applicable rules have not been followed.

The City should also consider how new development interacts with existing infrastructure and who bears the costs of addressing increased demand.

A balanced development process should consider the interests of developers, future residents, existing homeowners, renters, and the broader community. It should not leave volunteer organizations at a structural disadvantage when they seek to raise legitimate concerns.

THE LONG-TERM IMPACT ON PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

The combined effects of changes to coalition recognition, geographic boundaries, voting procedures, and appeal costs deserve scrutiny.

Each provision may have its own stated rationale. Taken together, however, they raise a broader policy question: Will neighborhood associations and coalitions retain a meaningful ability to organize, communicate, and challenge development decisions that affect their communities?

The concern is not that the Mayor and City Council have necessarily set out to eliminate neighborhood organizations. Without documentary evidence, that intention should not be assumed.

The concern is that the cumulative effect of the changes could make neighborhood representation more difficult, particularly for communities with limited financial and volunteer resources.

The City should demonstrate that its revised framework preserves meaningful participation and does not unintentionally privilege well-funded development interests over residents seeking to protect their neighborhoods.

WHAT NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS ARE REQUESTING

Neighborhood associations and coalitions should ask the Mayor and City Council to reconsider the effects of O-26-61 and the related changes to the development appeals process. 

Specifically, the City Council should repeal 0-26-60 and 0-26-61.  When meeting with the association the City Council needs to reconsider the ordinance impact on coalition recognition.  Allow Coalitions to have standing.  The Council should ensure meaningful and affordable appeal rights and consider that volunteer neighborhood associations have limited financial resources.  While working neighborhood associations make voting requirements workable.

CONTINUE THE CURRENT HISTORICAL BOUNDARIES OF NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS

The City Council should preserve meaningful development notifications.  The associations and coalitions should receive timely information that allows residents to participate before consequential decisions are finalized.  The City Council should engage directly with neighborhood organizations in order that affected associations receive timely information that allows residents to participate before consequential decisions are finalized. These measures are to help ensure that residents have a fair opportunity to participate in decisions affecting their communities.

BRING GOVERNMENT BACK TO THE PEOPLE

Albuquerque needs housing, investment, economic development, and essential public services. But growth and meaningful neighborhood participation should not be treated as competing goals.

Neighborhood associations and coalitions are part of the civic infrastructure that allows residents to organize, share knowledge, identify local problems, and hold government accountable. Their role should not be measured solely by whether they agree with the Mayor, the City Council, or a proposed development.

The fundamental question is whether Albuquerque’s development process gives residents a meaningful opportunity to influence decisions before those decisions permanently change their communities.

When the costs of challenging a decision are substantial, procedural requirements are difficult to satisfy, and the formal role of neighborhood coalitions and neighborhood associations is reduced, the City must explain how residents’ interests will continue to be represented effectively.

The Mayor and City Council should reconsider these policies, work directly with affected neighborhood organizations, and restore a framework that supports meaningful neighborhood participation, accountable representation, and a fair opportunity to challenge development decisions.

A city that values its neighborhoods must do more than allow residents to speak. It must provide a fair and practical process through which their concerns can be heard, considered, and addressed.

Albuquerque residents deserve a development process that encourages investment while respecting established communities, protects the public interest, and gives neighborhood associations and coalitions a meaningful place at the table.

The goal should be growth with accountability, development with community participation, and local government that remains responsive to the people it serves.

Respectfully submitted,

Loretta Naranjo Lopez

President of the Santa Barbara Martineztown Neighborhood Association

DINELLI COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

Passage of the Better Neighborhoods ordinance O-26-61  within two weeks of its introduction and without public hearings was as underhanded as it gets by City Councilor Dan Lewis with the City Council going along with it to shut out public input. Enactment continues with the City Council’s dangerous practice of amending the city’s zoning laws to prohibit or limit extensive public input and to stifle public opinion.

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

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

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

The Better Neighborhoods package benefits the development, real estate and investment community to the determent of established neighborhoods it will lead to displacement of residents and gentrification. It will have a major impact eliminating the rights of neighborhood coalitions to challenge developments.

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

Passage of the Better Neighborhoods package is an effort to deconstruct guardrails and protections. It  marginalizes the voices of neighborhoods and city residents. Simply put, the passage of  the Better Neighborhoods package on a 5 to 4 vote was a sellout by Mayor Tim Keller and the Albuquerque City Council of the citizens of Albuquerque, property owners and neighborhood associations and coalitions in favor of the development community.

CITY COUNCIL CAN  REPEAL“BETTER NEIGHBORHOODS” PACKAGE

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

Contact your City Councilor and tell them to repeal O-26-61 and protest the underhanded way it was enacted.

CITY COUNCIL CONTACT INFORMATION

CITY COUNCIL PHONE: (505) 768-3100

CITY COUNCILOR AND SUPPORT STAFF EMAILS

stelles@cabq.gov

stephenchavez@cabq.gov

joaquinbaca@cabq.gov

bacajoaquin9@gmail.com

namolina@cabq.gov

kpena@cabq.gov

cquezada@cabq.gov

bbassan@cabq.gov

dawnmarie@cabq.gov

danlewis@cabq.gov

galvarez@cabq.gov

nrogers@cabq.gov

district6@cabq.gov

tfiebelkorn@cabq.gov

seanforan@cabq.gov

dchampine@cabq.gov

eromero@cabq.gov

rgrout@cabq.gov

rrmiller@cabq.gov

ipadilla@cabq.gov  (Director of Council Services)

mmmontoya@cabq.gov (Council Clerk)

The link to a related article is here:

Mayor Keller And City Council Betray And Sellout Neighborhood Associations, Coalitions, Residential Property Owners And Citizens In Favor Of Developers; They Enact Ordinance Eviscerating City Recognition Of Neighborhood Coalitions; Commentary: Excessive Burdens Placed On Those Wishing To Oppose Developments To Stifle Opposition; City Council Should Repeal Measures

The November 3 ballot is one of the lengthiest ballots voters will be dealing with in some time. The ballot includes the elected federal offices of one United States Senator, United States House Representatives, all state wide offices (Governor and Lt. Governor, Attorney General, Secretary of State, State Treasurer, State Auditor, Commissioner of Public Lands and Court of Appeals Judge), County Officials (Two County Commissioners, County Assessor) and numerous Judge races and Judge Retentions. The public has been inundated with political advertising by the candidates.

On the November 3 ballot after all candidates for office are 3 constitutional amendments, City of Albuquerque Charter Amendments and State, County and Municipal Bonds seeking funding for projects. This article deals with the various ballot  measures on the ballot in Bernalillo County only. The link to the Secretary of State’s office to look up sample ballots for all other counties in the entire state is here:

nmvote.org

CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS

On Nov. 3, New Mexicans will vote on four amendments to the state Constitution. These are bipartisan proposals, passed by the Legislature in 2025 and 2026. The intent of the 4 measures is to strengthen democratic representation.

“The first amendment … [was] unanimously approved by the Legislature. [It] would end the governor’s power to reject bills without giving a reason. Today, if the governor does not sign or veto a bill within 20 days after session ends, the bill dies without explanation [a practice commonly referred to as the “pocket veto.”] . From 2014 to 2024, 143 bills met that fate. This amendment would require an explanation, helping legislators improve proposals the following year without limiting the governor’s veto power.”

https://www.koat.com/article/new-mexico-voters-to-decide-whether-to-end-governors-pocket-veto/74288340

 “The second amendment … would remove the constitutional requirement that school elections be held separately from other elections. It would allow the Legislature to move school board races to even-year general elections, where turnout is higher, and reduce costly special elections for school bonds and other ballot questions.”

 “The third amendment … would make university regent nominations more democratic. Regents shape university policy, finances and decisions that affect students’ futures. Currently, student nominees must come from a list provided by the university president. This amendment would shift that role to student government, create a similar nominating commission for non-student regents and strengthen guardrails against partisanship. The goal is to ensure qualified applicants can be considered without needing insider connections.”

 “[The fourth amendment]  would establish a legislative salary in New Mexico for the first time, equal to the state’s median household income of $64,140, according to the Federal Reserve. Median income better reflects a typical household than extremely high incomes, helping align lawmakers’ incentives with everyday realities. A modest salary would also make public service possible for more New Mexicans and reduce reliance on lobbyists by giving legislators more time for independent research.”

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

https://www.abqjournal.com/opinion/opinion-amendments-will-strengthen-democratic-representation/3131843

ALB CITY CHARTER AND TAX MEASURES

At the bottom of the ballot and after federal, state and local leadership elections and constitutional amendments are three questions voters must decide. The three questions determine how Albuquerque City government operates, what taxes it raises and which projects it completes.  The questions include a tax and multiple amendments to the City Charter, the City of Albuquerque’s governing document. Following is a description of the two measures:

CITY CHARTER AMENDMENTS

 Two questions ask Albuquerque voters to weigh amendments to the Albuquerque City Charter.

“The first question asks voters whether to repeal a section of the City Charter that forbids the city from spending more than $10 million on a performing arts center. This charter amendment is a remnant from the early 1990s dealing with the 1987  City Council enacted 10-year “quality-of-life” tax to build the balloon museum, the science museum, aquarium, the botanical gardens, a performing arts center and the acquisition of critical open space in the foothills to complete the city’s acquisition of open space.

(EDITOR’S FULL DISCLOSURE: In 1987, then Albuquerque City Councilor Pete Dinelli was the sponsor or co-sponsor of 3 out of 4 city council initiated measures that were consolidated and became the “Quality of Life Tax” enacted by the city council. The 10 year Quality of Life Tax was enacted on a 9-0 bipartisan vote after numerous and lengthy public hearings conducted throughout the city at various venues to identify the need and to secure public support for major projects needed for a growing city).

Voters very unhappy with the city council enacted “quality of life tax” and approved an amendment to the charter in 1991 that required any “large building projects” to be put to a public vote. The initiative was directed exclusively  at the building of a “performing arts center” without a public vote.  The charter amendment  about the performing arts center remained largely forgotten until it became a roadblock for Councilor Joaquín Baca and others who hoped to build  a large-scale venue in Albuquerque.  The question was intended to go out to voters last year, but it was never placed on the ballot due to a “clerical error,” according to the City Clerk’s Office. The mistake wasn’t noticed until early voting had already begun. This year the question is now on the ballot.”

The second question will determine public safety leadership. In April, the council voted 7-2 to add a question about whether the position of Albuquerque Community Safety director should be elevated to Albuquerque Community Safety (ACS) Chief, joining the ranks of the Alb. Fire and Rescue Chief and the Albuquerque Police Chief.  The Albuquerque Community Safety Chief would be an appointed position that both the mayor and City Council will have to agree on.  Critics oppos elevating the ACS director, citing that while the Albuquerque Police Department and Albuquerque Fire Rescue are established public safety forces, the  ACS program has yet to prove its efficacy. Proponents, however, argued that the rank change would lend legitimacy to the civilian-response program they see as vital.”

TAX REVENUE QUESTION

“The final question asks voters to decide how money from the Public Safety Tax should be spent. Voting yes on this question would not raise the tax rate, as the tax was initially implemented in 2004. Last year the tax, a portion of the city’s gross receipts tax earnings, raised $58 million for public safety.  Currently, that $58 million is divided four ways:  among police, fire and emergency response, corrections and crime prevention and intervention.

This ballot question proposes raising APD’s share of the tax by 1%, from 34% to 35%. It also proposes adding 4% to AFR’s budget, moving from 34% to 38%. The most significant change, however, is in breaking down the broad crime prevention and intervention category, currently 26% of the tax revenue, into defined departments.

The ballot question proposes spending 8% on ACS, 8% on the city’s Health, Housing and Homelessness Department and 5% on Code Enforcement.

Revenue for corrections remains the same, at 6%, which will be spent on prisoner transport.”

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

https://www.abqjournal.com/news/the-whats-what-on-albuquerque-municipal-ballot-questions/3147578

STATE, COUNTY AND CITY BONDING INITIATIVES

On November 3, voters will have to approve or deny several general obligation bonds. If approved, the money will go to state and local governments for infrastructure and public services. The state of New Mexico, Bernalillo County and the Albuquerque Metropolitan Arroyo Flood Control Authority all have bond packages on the ballot for voter approval.

STATE BONDS

“The projects included in the state general obligation bonds were included in New Mexico  House Bill 248, which passed unanimously in the state Legislature in February.”  Ashley Leach, director of the State Board of Finance, said this about the general obligation bonds:

“Should the questions be approved by the voters, the State Board of Finance will conduct due diligence review of the projects to ensure they are ready to be included in the bond sale. ”

SENIOR CITIZEN FACILITIES

 “A “yes” vote authorizes $21.6 million to the state of New Mexico to construct and remodel senior citizen facilities. The measure will allot more than $6 million to several projects in Albuquerque, including the Barelas Senior Center, the Cibola Loop Multigenerational Center, the Los Volcanes Senior Center, the Manzano Mesa Multigenerational Center, the North Domingo Baca Multigenerational Center, the North Valley Senior Center and the Palo Duro Senior Center.”

LIBRARIES

The state of New Mexico seeks $19.3 million for books and other materials for academic, public school, higher education, public and tribal libraries.

HIGHER EDUCATION

 “A “yes” vote authorizes the sale of up to $352.2 million in bonds for improvements to colleges, universities, special schools and tribal schools.

The biggest chunk of the funding ($116 million) will go to the University of New Mexico for construction of its new medical school. UNM will receive a total of $125.5 million for renovations at its main and branch campuses.

New Mexico State University will receive $98.7 million for six construction projects at its main campus in Las Cruces and other branch campuses throughout the state. The rest will be distributed to the state’s other public and tribal colleges.”

COUNTY BONDS

“Bernalillo County’s bond package is $45 million which is a  standard amount, according to Kathy Korte, the county’s capital improvement program director. Bernalillo County has a triple-A bond rating, meaning the county has the highest level of credit for issuing bonds. If approved, there would be no changes to the property tax rate.”

LIBRARIES

“Bernalillo County seeks $2.5 million to buy materials and resources for any library within the county library system. Eligible materials include books, e-books, technology and other resources.”

PUBLIC SAFETY

“Bernalillo County seeks $8.9 million to improve the county’s health and public safety departments, police and fire stations, jail and detention centers, courthouses, youth and family service center, visitor center and learning facilities. The money will be used to construct and refurbish buildings, replace vehicles or heavy machinery and make county facilities more accessible as required by the Americans with Disabilities Act.”

PARKS AND RECREATION

“The county is asking for roughly $20.4 million for building and refurbishing parks and recreational facilities, including swimming pools, community centers, playgrounds, ball fields, open spaces and cultural and educational facilities. Around $3.5 million will fund the completion of the Mesa del Sol Regional Outdoor Sports Facility. Some of the money will be used for the East Mountain and Ed Sandoval North Valley baseball complexes, Rio Bravo Park, Tom Tenorio Park and West Gun Club Park.”

TRANSPORTATION

 “Bernalillo County is seeking around $6.2 million for building and repairing roads, sidewalks, bridges, bike paths, bike lanes, guard rails, paving, landscaping, traffic signals and other street improvements. 

The bonds will fund, in part, construction on Atrisco Vista Boulevard North, Condershire Drive in the South Valley, Isleta Boulevard and roads in the East Mountains.”

STORM DRAINAGE

“Bernalillo County is seeking $1 million for building and repairing flood management systems, storm drainage facilities and sewer infrastructure.”

 HOUSING

A “yes” vote will authorize $6 million to Bernalillo County for building and repairing affordable housing projects. The county does not yet have specific projects in mind, Korte said, but some of the funds will be used to refurbish housing for senior citizens.

ALBUQUERQUE MUNICIPAL BONDS

FLOOD CONTROL

A “yes” vote would authorize $30 million to the Albuquerque Metropolitan Arroyo Flood Control Authority for construction and repair on the city’s storm drainage and flood control systems.

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

https://www.abqjournal.com/news/these-go-bond-packages-will-appear-on-the-ballot/3138088

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

There is little doubt that the November 3 election will be one of the most consequential elections nationwide and in New Mexico. Voters must also recognize the importance of down the ballot measures that get very little attention.

Voters are urged to study the proposals on the ballot, consider their merits, and are urged to vote YES on all the ballot measures.

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