Unhoused 2026 Point In Time Survey Reveals ABQ’s Unhoused Goes From 2,960 (2025) To 3,122 (2026); City Spends Over $452.79 Million To Build 5 Gateway Shelters And To Provide Services To Unhoused; COMMENTARY: Staggering Millions Spent To Help So Few; Civil Mental Health Commitments Needed To Get Unhoused Off Streets

Posted on October 15, 2026 by Pete Dinelli

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

https://www.nmceh.org/pitreports

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

INTRODUCTION

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

…

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

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

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

https://www.nmceh.org/pitreports

SUMMARY OF 2026 PIT STATISTICS

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

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

2026 CITY OF ALBUQUERQUE PIT COUNT BY HOUSING TYPE

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

Persons in Households with at least one Adult and one Child

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

Persons in Households with only Children

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

Persons in Households without children

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

Total PIT Person Count

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

COMPARING 2025 PIT REPORT FOR ALBUQUERQUE

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

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

2026 BALANCE OF THE STATE PIT COUNT BY HOUSING TYPE

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

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

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

Persons in Households with only Children:

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

Persons in Households without children:

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

TOTAL PIT PERSONS COUNTED

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

COMPARING 2025 PIT REPORT FOR THE BALANCE OF THE STATE:

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

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

DEMOGRAPHIC BREAKDOWN

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

GENDER

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

RACE AND GENDER

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

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

AGE

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

DOMESTIC VIOLENCE

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

MILITARY SERVICE

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

ONLY TIME EXPERIENCING HOMELESSNESS

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

LOCATION/WHERE FROM

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

KELLER’S GATEWAY SYSTEM OF SHELTERS

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

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

ALBUQUERQUES FINANCIAL COMITMENT TO UNHOUSED

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

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

Gateway West Shelter:

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

Gateway Gibson Center:

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

Gateway Recovery:

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

Gateway Young Adult:

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

TOTAL CAPITAL OUTLAY FOR 5 GATEWAY SHELTERS: $127.3 Million

HEALTH, HOUSING AND HOMELESS DEPARTMENT BUDGETED CONTRACTS FOR UNHOSED INITIATIVES

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

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

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

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

TOTAL F/Y 2023 HHH CONTRACTS $62.28 Million

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

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

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

TOTAL F/Y 2024 HHH CONTRACTS $63.10 Million

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

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

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

TOTAL F/Y 2025 HHH CONTRACTS $61.55

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

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

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

TOTAL SERVICE CONTRACTS: 116

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

Click to access fy26-approved-final.pdf

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

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

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

TOTAL SERVICE CONTRACTS: 122

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

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

ALBUQUERQUE COMMUNITY SAFETY DIVISION

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

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

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

Total capital outlay for 5 shelters: $127.00 million

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

TOTAL CAPITAL OUTLAY AND SERVICE CONTRACTS: $452.79 MILLION

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

UNHOUSED POPULATION INCREASES UNDER KELLER

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

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

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

METROPOLITAN COURT DIVERSION COURT

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

FORM SPECIALIZED UNIT TO INITIATE MENTAL HEALTH COMMITMENTS

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

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

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

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

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

Links to related articles are here:

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

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

Steven Holman Guest Column: Mayor Tim Keller Should Veto 0-26-61 And “Better Neighborhoods” Package; Veto Will Define Keller’s True Legacy And Future Of City

Posted on October 13, 2026 by Pete Dinelli

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

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

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

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

GUEST COLUMN BY STEVEN HOLMAN

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

DINELLI COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

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

PLAN OF ACTION OPTIONS

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

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

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

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

CONTACT INFORMATION

MAYOR TIM KELLER CONTACT INFORMATION

Department: Office of the Mayor

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

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

Mailing Address:

Office of the Mayor

PO Box 1293

Albuquerque NM 87103

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

CITY COUNCIL CONTACT INFORMATION

CITY COUNCIL PHONE: (505) 768-3100

CITY COUNCILOR AND SUPPORT STAFF EMAILS

stelles@cabq.gov

stephenchavez@cabq.gov

joaquinbaca@cabq.gov

bacajoaquin9@gmail.com

ipadilla@cabq.gov (Director of Council Services)

mmmontoya@cabq.gov (Council Clerk)

BELOW ARE LINKS TO RELATED ARTICLES

Final Albuquerque Journal Poll Finds Haaland Has 7% Lead Over Hull In Governor’s Race: 49% Haaland, 42% Hull; Keys To Haaland’s Lead Over Hull Are Women, Hispanics And Independents; Obama Endorses Haaland; Commentary: Trajectory Of A Haaland Win Over Hull Coincides With Two Previous Polls; Early Voting Started October 6 With Election On November 3; Please Vote!

Posted on October 12, 2026 by Pete Dinelli

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

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

RAW POLLING RESULTS

The raw and demographic poll results are as follows:

PARTY AFFILIATION

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

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

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

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

GENDER

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

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

RACE AND ETHNICITY

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

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

NEW MEXICO REGIONS

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

ANALYSIS OF FINAL JOURNAL POLL RESULTS

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

Female voters
Hispanic voters
Independents
Democratic strongholds

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

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

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

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

FINANCIAL ADVANTAGE

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

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

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

METHODOLOGY

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

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

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

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

RECALLING KOB 4, SURVEY USA POLL

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

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

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

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

RECALLING FIRST ALBUQUERQUE JOURNAL POLL

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

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

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

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

“DEBATING THE DEBATES” THAT NO ONE CARED ABOUT

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

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

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

HULL’S UPHILL BATTLE CONTINUES

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

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

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

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

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

Links to related articles are here:

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

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

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

Posted on October 8, 2026 by Pete Dinelli

INTRODUCTION

The Office of Neighborhood Coordination (ONC) was established in 1985. The City of Albuquerque identifies and recognizes 144 neighborhood associations that are registered with the city and 94 have web sites.

Neighborhood Associations serve as a liaison between residents, city government and businesses facilitating community engagement, support and cooperation and communication. The Albuquerque Neighborhood Recognition Ordinance (NARO) establishes a framework for recognizing neighborhood associations within the city.

NARO facilitates the recognition of neighborhood associations, registration and charters and requires them to receive notifications about city actions and developments that may impact their area neighborhoods. The ordinance outlines specific criteria and processes for neighborhood associations to gain official recognition from the City of Albuquerque.

NARO recognition means receiving notice of permit applications foe developments, information on projects around the city and the standing to appeal. There are eight coalitions in the city, spanning multiple council districts and 140 neighborhood associations, which require members to be residents.

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

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

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

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

THE “BETTER NEIGHBORHOODS” PACKAGE

On October 5, the Albuquerque City Council enacted three out of four measures sponsored by MAGA Republican Dan Lewis misleadingly labeled the “Better Neighborhoods” package under the guise and a false attempt to cut red tape and spur development projects. The “Better Neighborhoods” package benefits the development community to the determent of established neighborhoods. Taken together, the measures will have a major impact eliminating the rights of neighborhood coalitions to challenge developments.The “Better Neighborhoods” package consists of two ordinances directed at neighborhood coalitions and two memorials that request action from the New Mexico legislature to act.

This article is an in depth report on the city councils actions, an analysis of the legislation and a call to action to contact Mayor Tim Keller and the Albuquerque City Council.

CITY ORDINANCES

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

0-26-61 OVERVIEW AND ENACTMENT

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

O-26-61 removes city recognition for neighborhood coalitions, homeowners associations and business groups, and ends developer good-faith requirements. O-26-61 strips standing from neighborhood coalitions, raises appeal fees, and requires coalitions to pay legal fees if they lose a challenge against a developer who has applied for permits. The ordinance limits formal city recognition of neighborhood coalitions, homeowners’ associations and business groups and eliminates automatic development notices to them.

Appeal rights under O-26-61are limited to resident-based neighborhood associations near a project. Neighborhood coalitions can still file appeals but they must prove legal standing. The ordinance caps neighborhood association boundaries to 2 square miles. The ordinance requires neighborhood associations to come into compliance with boundary requirements by July 1, 2027 and allows associations to retain current boundaries until July 1.

Amendments to the ordinance requires associations to approve appeals by a majority vote, changed advance notice of an appeal vote from seven days to two weeks The ordinance encourages outreach to apartment buildings and public spaces. The ordinance adjusts meeting notice rules so associations can act on appeals. An amendment requires approval from at least 10% of an association’s members or 15 confirmed members for any appeal.

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

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

O-26-60 OVERVIEW AND DEFERRAL

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

CITY COUNCIL MEMORIALS

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

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

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

https://www.cabq.gov/council/find-your-councilor/district-5/news/new-better-neighborhoods-package-aims-to-empower-albuquerque-neighborhoods

PUBLIC COMMENT AND DEBATE ON “BETTER NEIGHBORHOODS” PACKAGE

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

The main focus of public comment and debate was on O-26-61 and its removal of neighborhood coalitions from the Neighborhood Association Recognition Ordinance, which were added to the NARO in 2022 by the City Council.

SUPPORTERS SPEAK OUT

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

STATE SENATOR MOE MAESTAS AND CITY COUNCILOR TAMMY FEIBELKORN SUPPORT MEMORIALS AND REPEAL OF CITY ZONING AUTHORITY

EDITORS NOTE: “Up zoning is a land-use planning tool that changes existing zoning regulations to permit more intensive development in specific areas already zoned and fully developed such as residential. Zoning laws govern how property can be used, including housing density, minimum lot sizes, building heights, and parking requirements. Up zoning alters these rules to increase permitted density or intensity of use, allowing more units per acre, taller buildings, or different uses like commercial establishments in residential zones. This process does not directly create new housing but removes regulatory barriers, incentivizing new construction.”

On October 5, 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 in order 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 uniform statewide zoning to allow for more residential development in an effort to increase affordable housing. The legislation was voted down in committee.

Albuquerque Democrat City Councilor Tammy Fiebelkorn voted for both City Council memorials. 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, prompting one legislator to express dismay that and elected city official was advocating repealing the city’s zoning authority and laws.

Senate Bill 131 sponsored by Senator Moe Maestas was nothing more that and attempt to mandate and implement upzoning state-wide by Senator Moe Maestas using the New Mexico legislature to do it. It was nothing more than a power play on his part to repeal virtually all zoning laws in the state to the detriment of local interests and contrary to the self-rule authority of the City of Albuquerque.

The purpose and concept behind SENATE BILL 131 and the upzoning it represented is very straight forward and based on too many false premises. The idea is that if you allow permissive use of townhomes, apartments, duplexes, and retail within existing single family zoning areas without city approval and permits to increase density, it removes restrictions and allows for increased development that will hopefully lower costs and increase affordable housing. Simply put, unzoning will not increase affordable housing. Market forces will prevail as developed properties are sold for the highest value. Upzoning is being touted by Senator Maestas as a solution to the affordable housing crunch despite no mandate for any affordable housing to be built or any legislation to regulate price speculation.

Studies about Upzoning are still emerging and are limited in scope, but the data released is reflecting that Upzoning actually fosters gentrification. It most often impacts low income and non-white communities. It also has been shown to have little impact on housing inventory and price.

Upzoning utilizes many tools of gentrification as does the upzoning proposed in Albuquerque’s Integrated Development Ordinance (IDO). Those upzoning tools include:

Allowing zoning changes for higher density.
Relaxing regulatory measures.
Does not mandate affordable housing of any type.
Excludes community involvement/empowerment by lawsuits being their only recourse.
Includes amenities like retail.
Places no measures against real estate price speculation.
Has no anti-displacement measures for existing residents.
Removes protections of historic neighborhoods and sites like The Petroglyphs via removal of height restrictions.

In essence, upzoning is a “deregulatory developers handout” that removes many of the guardrails of zoning allowing developers and speculators to build what they want, however they want and wherever they want.

OPPOSITION SPEAKSOUT

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Don’t sell us out!

SPONSOR LEWIS LASHES OUT AT NEIGHBORHOOD COALITIONS

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

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

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

Lewis pointed out that his package of legislation did not mean coalitions “would disappear.” Lewis recalled a time when neighborhood association were “thriving” despite not having formal recognition. Lewis argued falsely that his ordinances strengthens neighborhood associations and falsely claimed that no one in his district opposed the bill and many “have left the coalition.” Lewis said this:

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

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

City Councilors passed the amended version of O-61 on a 5-4 vote. Council President Klarissa Peña and Councilors Brook Bassan, Nichole Rogers and Joaquin Baca voted against. In voting against, Rogers and Bassan said they felt the coalitions in their districts were very beneficial and could not vote against them. Bassan suggested legislation that relegated one coalition per district and Rogers said she wants to make coalitions “accountable” but not obsolete.

MAYOR KELLER MUST DECIDE

City spokesperson for the Mayor Dan Mayfield said this in a statement after Council action:

“We haven’t received the final bill which had several amendments from last night. Once we do, we’ll review it and the Mayor will make a decision [to sign the legislation into law or veto it.]”

Mayfield seem to signal Mayor Keller will sign O-61 into law when he said this:

“Neighborhood voices need to be heard, but one person shouldn’t be able to stand in the way of something that’s good for the whole neighborhood or our city.”

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Links to quoted or relied upon news sources are here:

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

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

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

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

A POLITICALLY MOTIVATED AND VINDICTIVE DAN LEWIS

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

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

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

SENATOR MOE MAESTAS AND CITY COUNCILOR TAMMY FEIBLEKORN

Neighborhood Associations, Coalitions, private property owners and voters need to take special note of the actions of West Side State Senator Moe Maestas and City Councilor Tammy Feibelkorn when it comes to their support of the city council enacting “Better Neighborhoods” package as well as their efforts to take away the City of Albuquerque “home rule” authority on zoning matters in the legislature.

Maestas and Feiblekorn falsely hold themselves out as Progressive Democrats and advocates for progressive causes, but the reality is they both promote the interests of the City of Albuquerque real estate, investment and development communities and they do not act in the best interests of their constituents and voters. They ignore real property rights of homeowners and promote their own personal agenda. They both have bought into the false narrative that increasing density in established neighborhoods will somehow create affordable housing when it will not as market forces will prevail and developers build to make a profit. They 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.

The term “affordable housing” is about as misleading as it gets. It is a term way too often used by elected officials and politicians to simply declare a crisis with inflated numbers that shows there is not enough housing that allows the poor or low-income people to rent or buy a home and call their own. Housing prices and rental costs never come down. The more appropriate term that should be used is “subsidized” housing where it’s clear what is needed is subsidized funding for those who cannot afford to buy outright or rent and need assistance.

The housing shortage is related to economics, the development community’s inability to keep up with supply and demand and the public’s inability to purchase housing or qualify for housing mortgage loans. The shortage of rental properties has resulted in dramatic increases in rents. It’s clear that the City of Albuquerque and the state of New Mexico are suffering from a shortage of housing, but that does not mean it is all affordable housing.

NEIGHBORHOOD COALITIONS

Simply put, when a new apartment complex, business or other commercial development is proposed in neighborhoods that will have a dramatic, 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. Rather than strengthen and empowering neighborhood associations as Dan Lewis claims, the passage of O-26-61 eviscerates 13 neighborhood associations across the west side and the north valley.

The Office of Neighborhood Coordination (ONC) lists 155 currently “unrecognized” entities including neighborhood associations, business/community groups, and Home Owner Associations (HOA’s.) The “notification requirements” listed in the Integrated Development Ordinance, which is all the city’s zoning laws, would have provided notification through neighborhood coalition points of contact, but that no no longer will happen because of passage of Ordinance O-26-61.

The Dan Lewis “Better Neighborhoods Package” of bills are misleading and a false claim of transparency, accountability, and clearer standards. Surprisingly, many affordable housing advocates, such as Strong Towns, have sold out and are convinced that the“Better Neighborhoods Package” of bills will create affordable housing, which it will not.

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

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

The two memorials sponsored by Lewis and enacted by the city council do not officially end Albuquerque’s “Home Rule” authority, but they do alter the “quasi legal” review process for appeals. By inviting the State legislature to alter 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 develops.

Passage of the “Better Neighborhoods” package within two weeks of its introduction and without hearings by the City Council Land Use, Planning and Zoning Committee was and underhanded as it gets by Dan Lewis. It continues with the City Council’s now common practice of amending the Integrated Development Ordinance (IDO) without review and without allowing more extensive public input. Passage of the “Better Neighborhoods” package is in reality an effort to deconstruct guardrails and protections, and marginalize the voices of neighborhoods and city residents. Ultimately, the “Better Neighborhoods” package is the culminations of vindictiveness against neighborhood associations by by City Councilor Dan Lewis.

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

PLAN OF ACTION OPTIONS

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

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

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

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

CONTACT INFORMATION

MAYOR TIM KELLER Contact Information

Department: Office of the Mayor

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

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

Mailing Address:

Office of the Mayor

PO Box 1293

Albuquerque NM 87103

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

CITY COUNCIL CONTACT INFORMATION

CITY COUNCIL PHONE: (505) 768-3100

CITY COUNCILOR AND SUPPORT STAFF EMAILS

stelles@cabq.gov

stephenchavez@cabq.gov

joaquinbaca@cabq.gov

bacajoaquin9@gmail.com

ipadilla@cabq.gov (Director of Council Services)

mmmontoya@cabq.gov (Council Clerk)

_______________________

POSTSCRIPT

The link to a related article is here:

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

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

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

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

Posted on October 6, 2026 by Pete Dinelli

POLL RESULTS

The poll reveals that Democrat Deb Haaland leads Republican Gregg Hull 47% to 41% in the race for Governor with 12% of likely voters undecided.

Deb Haaland, the former Secretary of the Interior under President Joe Biden and a former US Representative for New Mexico’s 1st congressional district, leads with 69% among both Liberals and Democrats. Republican Gregg Hull, the former Rio Rancho Mayor leads by 69% among Conservatives and by 75% among Republicans.

Moderates stated they will vote for Deb Haaland by a 20% margin and Independents stated they will vote for Deb Halland by a 10% margin.

Deb Haaland has a 21% advantage among women, while Gregg Hull leads by 8% among men which represents a 29% gender gap.

Deb Haaland leads by 13% among voters under age 50, but has just a mere 1% edge over Greg Hull among those age 50+.

White voters back Greg Hull by a 3% margin. Latino voters back Deb Haaland by 15%. “Other” race categories back Haaland by 18%.

Regionally, Deb Haaland leads Gregg Hull by 17% in Bernalillo County and by 16% in Doña Ana County. Greg Hull leads Deb Haaland by 3% in the remainder regions of the state.

On the issues, Hull leads Haaland with 53% among the 13% of likely voters who say crime is the issue which will most influence their vote this year, and with 35% among the 15% most-focused on immigration and border security.

On the issues, Deb Haaland leads Gregg Hull by 50% among the 12% who say national politics is most important, by 34% among the one-third of voters who say inflation is most important, by 26% among the 5% who say it’s the job market, and by 6% among the 6% listing abortion and reproductive rights is their top issue.

FAVORABILITY RATINGS

KOB 4 and the Survey USA poll also looked at the “favorability ratings” of the two candidates. SurveyUSA asked 673 registered voters whether they viewed each candidate favorably or unfavorably.

The poll revealed 31% viewed Deb Haaland favorably while 35% view her unfavorably. Another 19% said they are neutral and 16% said they are unfamiliar with her. Among independent voters, 21% view Haaland favorably and 32% view her unfavorably.

The poll revealed 29% viewed Gregg Hull favorably and 21% said unfavorable. Another 24% said they were neutral and 27% said they are not familiar with Greg Hull.

SURVEY USA POLL METHODOLOGY

SurveyUSA interviewed 800 adults during the time period from September 25 to September 30, 2026. Of those polled, 673 were identified as being registered to vote. Of the registered voters, 567 were determined by SurveyUSA to be likely to vote in the November election. The poll was conducted using blended sample with a mixed mode. 45% of likely voters were interviewed on their smartphone, tablet or other electronic device using non-probability sample of internet panel members. 55% were interviewed using probability-based telephone sample of adults with 30% interviewed on their landline telephones in the recorded voice of a professional announcer. 25% were interviewed using a live operator hand-texted respondents on their mobile phones, secured their cooperation, and linked them to an online version of the survey. The combined pool of survey respondents was weighted to targets for gender, age, race, education, and home ownership.

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

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

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

RECALLING ALBUQUERQUE JOURNAL POLL

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

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

PRIMARY ELECTION RESULTS RECALLED

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

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

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

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

The Channel 4 poll and the Albuquerque Journal Poll showing that Deb Haaland is leading Greg Hull by 6% in both polls but falling short of the 50% plus one margin to win reflects that the race for Governor is not over but that the trajectory of the race remains the same with Deb Haaland expected to win on November 3. The 6% Haaland lead in both polls is identical to the margin Democrat Governor Michelle Lujan defeated Republican Mark Ronchetti in her bid for a second four year term. In 2022, Governor Lujan Grisham did not garner 50% in polling until late in October, 2022.

Of major concern in the Channel 4 poll for Democrat Deb Haaland is that she has unfavorable rating of 35% compared to a 31% favorable,19% neutral and 16% unfamiliar. By comparison Republican Gregg Hull is the lesser known candidate and Hull’s favorability was at 29%, 21% unfavorable, 24% neutral and 27%.

Thus far, Gregg Hull has refused to go negative on Haaland. With less than a month before the election, that may change. Going negative can only happen if Hull is capable of raising enough campaign donations. According to the most recent campaign finance reports, Haaland has upwards of $3.5 million left to Hull’s $600,000 to spend in the last month of the campaign

Haaland remains the clear front runner in the Governor’s race. Republican Hull is facing an uphill battle in a Democratic leaning state. Democrat Deb Haaland is still well-positioned to win the November election even though the election may be closer than expected. Haaland is the former U.S. Interior secretary under President Joe Biden and a former congresswoman. Simply put, Haaland is a national figure with respect to her fundraising ability and the historical nature of her candidacy and the possibility of being the first native American who would be elected a governor.

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

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

The link to a related article is here::

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

Trump Endorses MAGA Republican Greg Cunningham For Congress To Represent “New America”; Gabe Vasquez Denounces Cunningham’s Extreme Agenda; COMMENTARY: Trump’s Endorsement Of Cunningham Is Reason Alone To Vote To Reelect Gabe Vasquez To Congress; Vote To Reelect Gabe Vasquez To Represent New Mexico And Not Trump!

Posted on October 5, 2026 by Pete Dinelli

On Saturday, October 3, President Donald Trump gave 2nd Congressional District MAGA Republican candidate Greg Cunningham his “complete and total endorsement” over two term Democrat Gabe Vasquez for New Mexico’s Second Congressional District. Cunningham was handpicked by Trump to run against Vasquez. In his endorsement, Trump doubled down on renaming the state “New America” and completely mispronounced or butchered the last name “Vasquez” .

Following is a transcript of Trump’s endorsement video of Cunningham:

Hello, New America, formerly known as New Mexico.

I’m asking you to get out and vote for Greg Cunningham to be your next representative for New Mexico’s second congressional district. Here’s my complete and total endorsement. Greg is a retired United States Marine who bravely served his country in combat, respected by everybody. He then served over 20 years in the Albuquerque Police Department. He’ll always fight to keep America strong and keep New Mexico safe and free. And I do like the change, by the way, to New America, what a beautiful change that would be! Up to you, I’m not going to push it, but a lot of people are liking it a lot.

Greg is running against radical left Democrat Gabe Vasquez, who supports defunding the police, a $5 trillion tax hike, and destroying New Mexico’s oil and gas industry, which means your state taxes will soar and your school budgets will be totally destroyed.

Greg Cunningham will never ever let you down. He’s outstanding in Congress. Greg will vote for the strong borders and total American energy dominance that we’ve created, we are bigger than any country in the world in energy dominance times three. He will vote to keep your taxes low, and he’ll always protect your Second Amendment. That means he’ll protect your right to keep and bear arms.

The link to the Trump endorsement video of MAGA Republican Greg Cunningham is here:

https://www.facebook.com/reel/1643109807546573

GABE VASQUES REPONDS TO TRUMP ENDORSMENT

Patricia Socarras Santiago, campaign manager for Gabe Vasquez, immediately responded to the Trump of endorsement of Greg Cunningham and said this in a statement:

“A vote for Greg is a vote for President Trump’s disastrous policies that have already made life harder for every working New Mexican. Greg wants to go to Washington to happily be a rubber stamp for Trump if it means keeping himself bankrolled. This election, New Mexicans will fight back against higher costs, less access to healthcare, and unlawful deportation raids by rejecting Greg at the ballot box.”

In a press release, the Gabe Vasquez campaign said this:

“Today, President Trump doubled down on his support for his obedient MAGA-extremist candidate Greg Cunningham, who has repeatedly said Trump’s agenda is his “number one priority.” Trump’s — and Cunningham’s — extreme agenda includes continuing the reckless war in Iran (which has caused gas to hit over $4 a gallon for more than six months and diesel prices to soar to over $6 a gallon), pushing 89,000 New Mexicans off their healthcare, slashing food benefits for 10,000 New Mexican children, and putting American soldiers at risk in careless wars, already senselessly costing American lives.

Greg Cunningham has consistently sided with the President over New Mexicans, including attending Trumpapalooza in Texas after the president’s absurd “New America” comments, saying Americans feeling the pain of higher prices should just “hang on,” and declaring that his “number one priority” would be pushing forward the President’s agenda.”

Greg Cunningham has shown New Mexico time and time again that his loyalty is to President Trump and his extreme agenda, NOT New Mexicans:

Trump is Greg Cunningham’s “number one priority”: Greg has stated that his “number one priority” in Congress would be carrying out President Trump’s extreme agenda — that includes the reckless $100 billion war in Iran, crippling tariffs, surging gas and diesel prices, major cuts to healthcare, and violent immigration enforcement tactics. He has reiterated that stance in interviews and campaign materials since.
Greg Cunningham supports Trump’s war in Iran: When asked about the Iran war, Greg has said that he “applaud[s] the president for doing the right thing,” confirmed he does support the war, and has said that New Mexicans just need to “hang on” and deal with higher prices.
Greg Cunningham supports Trump’s cuts to healthcare and food assistance: When asked about hardworking New Mexicans who rely on healthcare programs like Medicaid and food assistance like SNAP, Greg has called them “enslaved,” saying, “When you accept government acceptance, I mean assistance as a way of life, you’re enslaved.”
Greg Cunningham wants a complete and total ban on abortion – with no exceptions for rape or incest: Greg Cunningham signed Abortion Free New Mexico’s “Pro-Life Pledge,” committing himself to “ending all abortion” in New Mexico and defending life “from conception to natural death.”
Greg Cunningham is bankrolled by MAGA Inc. He has received $403,000 in right-wing extremist PACs and an additional $816,000 from No Going Back PAC – a Trump-directed dark money group.
Greg defends Trump’s violent immigration crackdown: When federal agents shot and killed two people during Trump’s violent immigration surge in Minnesota, Greg Cunningham blamed the victims, calling them “ideologically opposed…intent on disrupting…and that’s why happened in both cases.” Greg Cunningham has also said “immigration without assimilation is an invasion.”
Greg defends renaming New Mexico “New America.”

While 2nd Congressional District has said supporting Trump’s extreme agenda in Congress is his “number one priority,” Gabe Vasquez will always put New Mexicans first. He has consistently been ranked one of the most bipartisan members of Congress for his commitment to working across party lines to deliver commonsense solutions for New Mexicans.”

Links to quoted or relied upon news sources are here:

https://www.koat.com/article/trump-gives-cunningham-complete-and-total-endorsement-in-new-video/74009092

https://gabeforcongress.com/2026/10/03/breaking-trump-makes-it-official-in-new-endorsement-video-a-vote-for-cunningham-is-a-vote-for-trump/

https://abq.news/2026/10/in-social-post-trump-endorses-cunningham-mispronounces-vasquezs-name-and-doubles-down-on-renaming-new-mexico/

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

The race for the 2nd Congressional District of New Mexico between two term Incumbent Democrat Gabe Vasquez and MAGA Republican Greg Cunningham has become the nastiest election in New Mexico and one of the closest watched races in the country. The MAGA Republicans believe that two term Congressman Gabe Vasquez is vulnerable because he has won his two elections by a few hundred votes, while Trump did better in the district when he ran in 2024. At stake in the 2026 election in part is control of congress. MAGA Republicans are going all out to flip the district, so much so that Republican Speaker of the House Mike Johnson was dispatched to New Mexico to campaign for Greg Cunningham.

MAGA Republican Greg Cunningham and Political Action Committees that support him are outspending Democrat Gabe Vasquez by a 3 to 1 margin. The negative ads against Vasquez have been vicious, negative and unrelenting. Many of the political ads against Vasquez contain at best very misleading and at worst very false statements when it comes to support by law enforcement, holding police accountable and “defunding the police”. The political action committee ads assailing Vasquez support of immigration reforms and pathways to citizenship by undocumented residents are the most negative, misleading or false ads. Those ads falsely state Vasquez wants to give felony convicted DWI, violent criminals and child molesters citizenship when the truth is convicted felons are disqualified from becoming US citizens.

Democrat Gabe Vasquez for his part in his politcal ads has highlighted just how extreme MAGA Republican Greg Cunningham is and how he will be a rubber stamp supporting all that is Donald Trump. It is now crystal clear with Trump’s endorsement, that Cunningham is indeed indebted and tied to the hip with Trump and the MAGA political ideology.

Nationally, Republican candidates for Senate and Congress are no fools and are distancing themselves from Trump because they know just how toxic he is to the point that Republicans may well lose control of both the Senate and the House of Representatives, but not Greg Cunningham who says Trump’s agenda is his number one priority. The Trump endorsement has backfired big time on social media as Trump turned off New Mexico voters and confirms that Cunningham is in Trumps back pocket.

The Trump endorsement of Greg Cunningham should be viewed as a reason to vote for Gabe Vasquez. Vote to reelect Gabe Vasquez to Congress to represent NEW MEXICO’s Second Congressional District and not Trump!