City Council Finalizes $200 Million Bond Infrastructure Plan For Voters Approval; Gibson Gateway Homeless Shelter Renovations Has Tuned Into $73 Million Renovation Project; City Secures $100 Million In State Funding From 2023 Legislative Session

On April 17, the Albuquerque City Council unanimously approved a $200 million infrastructure bond package that will be placed on November 7 municipal ballot for voter approval.  The approval of the bond package took more time than usual as the city councilors went back and forth on various projects reducing and adding to the bond package.  Also on the November 7 ballot will be the election of the  4  even numbered  City Council District  seats of  2,4,6 and 8.

THE GIVE AND TAKE OF COMPROMISE

Final council votes were taken on diverse projects such as city swimming pools, flood control projects, animal shelter rehabilitation projects, the new Gibson Gateway Homeless Shelter, the Albuquerque and Unser Museums, and APD facilities,  the rail yard development and new road ways. Projects that the Keller Administration initially requested and then were removed were again restored.

The Gibson Health Hub and the Albuquerque Museum’s planned education center were two such projects that were initially removed and then restored by the council. The council restored $5 million for the future Gateway Center homeless shelter. The council  also put back $2.5 million of the $3.25 million the Keller Administration  had sought for the Albuquerque Museum education center.

What has been revealed is that the renovations of the old  Gibson Lovelace Medical Center into the new  Gateway Homeless Shelter  is now a $73 million project inside the old Lovelace hospital. It was on April 6, 2021, Mayor Tim Keller officially announced the city had bought the massive 572,000 square-foot building that has a 201-bed capacity, for $15 million.  Keller announced that the massive facility would be transformed into the Gateway Center Homeless Shelter. Interior demolition and remodeling has been going on months to prepare the facility for a homeless shelter which has yet to open. Recently, asbestos was found during the renovations and asbestos removal has delayed the project further.

During the April 17 bond package debate, Council President Pat Davis questioned the Keller administration about the Gibson Health Hub. Davis wanted to put the $5 million in Gibson money toward boosting the infrastructure package’s $7.5 million affordable housing allocation. Davis said it  was important so people would  have an exit path out of the homeless shelter and services hub. Davis said this:

“We don’t have housing [for them]. We’re not doing those on parallel tracks, and I think that’s my concern”.   

Davis ended up voting to restore the $5 million for Gibson after finding no council support.

The city councilors removed some bond funding for the Albuquerque Police Department and the Albuquerque Fire and Rescue Department but still maintained over $21 million for public safety projects.  The council deleted all $1.7 million it planned to allocate for new city buses  because the Transit Department has millions of dollars already set aside  for bus purchases.

The City Council  reduced the amount of “set-aside” money each city councilor gets for the small projects they identify in their individual districts.  Initially, the Council wanted $2 million in set aside funding for each council district or $18 million total.   The Keller Administration proposed reducing that to $1 million each or $9 million total.  The council ultimately decided on $1.3 million per District or $11.7 Million total.

BREAKDOWN OF  BOND PACKAGE APPROVED

The largest portion of the city bond package approved by the city council for voter approval is for $43.9 million in roadway upgrades.  The specific roadway projects include the following:

■ $7 million total for a series of West Side roadways: Paseo del Norte, Unser and McMahon

■ $2 million for the University/Lomas intersection

■ $2 million for citywide Americans With Disabilities Act sidewalk improvements

■ $2 million for citywide street lighting projects

■ $1 million for Alameda/Barstow

The city council also voted to place on the November 7 bond ballot the following:

■ $5 million for a series of flood control projects in Southeast Albuquerque

■ $5 million for the North Domingo Baca pool planned for the Northeast Heights

■ $4.9 million for Little League field rehabilitation

■ $4 million to move the Unser Museum — currently a nonprofit in Los Ranchos — into the city

■ $4 million for the Westgate Community Center

■ $3.2 million for library materials

■ $3 million for the Cibola Loop Multigenerational Center in Northwest Albuquerque

■ $2.5 million to renovate the city’s animal shelters

■ $2 million for the Rail Yards redevelopment

The link to the quoted news source is here:

https://www.abqjournal.com/2591670/city-councilors-find-agreement-on-200-million-infrastructure-plan.html

CITY ANNOUNCES FUNDING SECURED IN 2023 NEW MEXICO LEGISLATIVE SESSION

On April 7,  declaring “We got more funding than we have ever gotten before”  Mayor Tim Keller held a press conference to announce the funding the city had secured from the New Mexico 2023 legislative session.  In all, Albuquerque was allocated $100 million in state funding for some high priority projects.  The funding can be broken into three categories: public safety, housing and homelessness, and  cultural improvements.

The funding highlights Keller announced included the following:

PUBLIC SAFETY 

Southeast Area APD facilities $1,500,000 

Southwest Public Safety Center -$2,985,000

Coronado Park Fire Rescue Training and Response Center  $5,225,000

Westside & Eastside Animal Shelters – $1,480,000 

Regarding the $5.5 million that will  go toward a new fire rescue training and response center at Coronado Park, was in August of last year that Keller closed down Coronado Park as the city’s de facto homeless encampment where upwards of 150 homeless would camp each night. The camp was closed because of violent crime and ground contamination.

HOUSING AND HOMELESSNESS 

Gateway Center, medical respite facility, sobering center and first responder drop-off – $9,926,490  According to Keller, the $10 million will allow the city to  finish out phase one of the project  and will allow the design for phase two

Construction of affordable housing – $6,460,810* 

Albuquerque Youth Shelter – $1,558,490

Preschool facility construction for families experiencing homelessness – $1,356,490 

$1.5 million for a youth homeless shelter.

CULTURAL IMPROVEMENTS

$1.96  million will go to the redevelop of  the now-vacant Walmart on San Mateo and Central. Walmart wants to take six months to try and sell it, then the city can step in and buy it. Keller claimed  the city will  take the next six months, look at the funding the has , work with the community and come up with a proposal.

Facilities for youth programs – $1,091,490 

Albuquerque Museum Education Center – $1,440,000

Explora Science Center and Children’s Museum – $2,223,114

Performing Arts and Education Center -$2,900,000 

Alameda Pedestrian Trail – $3,000,000

Balloon Fiesta Park landing sites and improvements – $7,315,000

North Domingo Baca Aquatics Center – $6,165,000

The link to the quoted news source is here:

https://www.kob.com/new-mexico/albuquerque-lands-state-funding-for-public-safety-homelessness/

COMMENATARY AND ANALYSIS

$300 million in combined funding for major projects is not too shabby by any means. Now it up to the voters to approve the $200 million in bonds come November 7 and if history is any indication, the funding will be approved.

What is really staggering is the revelation that the Gibson Lovelace Medical Center renovations into the new Gateway Homeless Shelter is now a $73 million project yet nothing is said by the Keller Administration where that money has come from.

Keller’s “Transformative Changes” To Make City “Shanty Town” With Casitas, Duplexes And City Sanctioned Homeless Tent Encampments; Defer Zoning Changes Until After November 7 Municipal Election; Place On Nov Ballot;  Benton, Jones And Davis Should Recuse On IDO Updates

On April 12, the Albuquerque City Council Land Use and Zoning Committee held their first meeting on the yearly amendments to the Integrated Development Ordinance (IDO). The committee of 5 consists of conservative Republicans Trudy Jones, Dan Lewis and Renee Grout, and progressive Democrats Isaac Benton, and Tammy Fiebelkorn.  Progressive Democrat Council President Pat Davis appointed Fiebelkorn committee chair even though she has been a city councilor a mere 16 months and has very little if any understanding of the city’s zoning laws and land use policy.

Among the more controversial amendments considered were Mayor Keller’s proposed zoning code changes to allow the construction of 750 square foot casitas and 750 square foot duplex additions on every single existing residential lot that already has single family house in order to increase density.   According to city officials, there are 120,000 residential lots that have existing homes.  With the construction of “casitas” and “two family home” additions, density could double to 240,000 with casita structures alone or triple to 360,000 with both casitas and duplex home additions.

The zoning code amendments would make both casitas and duplex additions “permissive uses” and not “conditional uses” as they are now and have always been historically.  A “conditional use” requires an application process with the city Planning Department, notice to surrounding property owners and affected neighborhood associations and provides for appeal rights. A “permissive use” would give the Planning Department exclusive authority issue permits for construction without notices and hearings and with a no appeal process. Objecting property owners and neighborhood associations to the permissive casita and duplex  uses would be relegated to filing lawsuits to enforce covenants and restrictions.

The amendments are part of Mayor Tim Keller’s “Housing Forward ABQ Plan.” Keller proclaims the city is in a major “housing crisis” and the city has an immediate demand for 13,000 to 28,000 housing units including rental units.  Keller wants to allow “different forms of multi-unit housing types” on existing residential properties.  It is a “multifaceted initiative” where Mayor Keller has set the goal of adding 5,000 new housing units across the city by 2025 above and beyond what private developments and the construction industry normally creates each year.

The housing shortage is related to economics and the development community’s inability to keep up with supply and demand and the public’s inability to purchase housing and qualify for long term housing mortgage loans. The cost of residential developments impacts what can be developed and the return on investment is reflected by  the market by the rents and  appraised values. The cost of construction has soared the last two years fueled by inflation.  Construction costs in the city  are  driven up further by the city building code requirements.

There is also a shortage of rental properties resulting in dramatic increases in rents. Apartments are currently experiencing a 95% occupancy rate. In November, 2022, it was reported that in the Albuquerque metro area, new building permits for a total of 4,021 new housing units were issued in the metro area in 2021 of which 35.1% are for units in buildings with 5 housing units or more with many currently under construction In Albuquerque, about 2,000 units across 12 properties are already under construction, with an additional 2,485 units planned across 16 properties and 5,143 prospective units proposed.

https://www.apartments.com/markana-uptown-albuquerque-nm/8n8z552/

https://www.krqe.com/news/albuquerque-metro/winrock-finalizing-plans-for-200-unit-high-end-apartment-complex/

KELLER ADMINITRATION PUBLIC RELATIONS CAMPAIGN

In March and April, the Keller Administration held a series of 5 public meetings scheduled for 1 hour and 30 minutes in the Downtown, Southwest, Southeast, Northeast, and the Northwest areas of the city to explain the Housing Foreword ABQ Plan to the public and cultivate public  support.  Mayor Tim Keller and all 9 members of the city council did not attend a single meeting.

The turnouts were considered high with between 50 and 100 people in attendance at each of the locations. Given the nature of the questioning, attendance consisted predominantly of angry property owners. The city’s slide presentations were made to audiences by various city departments including the Mayor’s Office, the Family and Community Services Department and the Planning Department.

CITY COUNCILOR GROUT SHUT OUT BY COMMITEE

During the April 12 LUPZ committee meeting former City Councilor, State Senator and progressive Democrat Eric Griego with the Mayor’s office made the identical presentation to the LUPZ Committee using the same slides and arguments made to the public on Keller’s “Housing Forward ABQ Plan” and the amendments to the Integrated Development Ordinance.

After the presentation by Eric Griego, Republican Councilor Renee Grout spent time questioning Griego.  The Grout line of questioning of Griego included asking what stakeholders, neighborhood associations, developers and charitable organizations were involved with the process of developing the Mayor’s Housing Foreword ABQ Plan. She asked to what extent had the Keller Administration conferred with neighborhood associations and property owners on the plan.  The line of questioning included to what extent had the Keller Administration incorporated, modified or changed the Housing Foreword ABQ Plan to reflect changes asked for at the 5 public forums.

Eric Griego’s responses to Councilor Renee Grouts line of questioning were totally inadequate bordering on being misleading as he hesitated, stammered and deflected answering her questions.  Griego was not able to identify a single stakeholder, neighborhood association, developer or charitable organization involved with the process of developing the Housing Foreword ABQ Plan. There exists in the city upwards of 250 various neighborhood associations, yet Griego could not identify even one that was conferred with to develop the Housing Forward ABQ Plan.  

What was most disappointing is that Griego was not able to say to what extent the Keller Administration incorporated, modified or changed the Housing Foreword ABQ Plan to reflect the desired changes asked for during the 5 public forums. Eric Griego said repeatedly the Keller Administration wants to work with the community and stakeholders to come up with a plan through communication and compromise, but he gave the unmistakable impression that the Keller Administration had changed absolutely nothing and has no intentions of changing anything.

After all public comments, Councilor Renee Grout attempted to amend what was being offered by the Keller Administration on casita and duplex developments.  Grout repeatedly said she was trying to represent “neighborhood association” interests with her amendments, but she was given no support from the other 4 committee members. When Grout offered her amendments for discussion and input, she was not given the courtesy of a second by her colleagues to allow public discussion, not even by fellow Republicans Dan Lewis and Trudy Jones.  Republican Trudy Jones is a cosponsor of Keller’s Housing Foreword ABQ Plan amendments and has announced she is not seeking another term. Republican Dan Lewis, who has made it known privately he is running for Mayor in 2025, given his silence during the April 12 LUPZ committee meeting and his vote to extended the casita allowance to include the city’s residential agricultural zone, ostensibly supports the casita and duplex amendments and the development community efforts.

Councilor Grout unsuccessfully tried to change the bill so property owners asking for a permissive use would have to undergo a public hearing process before building a casita and to require that casitas be at least 5 feet away from a property’s rear and side lot lines.  To add insult to injury, the LUPZ Committee ignored Grout and extended the casita allowance to include the city’s residential agricultural zone.

Grout also wanted to strike Keller’s duplex allowance from the legislation entirely.   Grout said this when she sought to strike Keller’s duplex allowance from the legislation entirely:

“I think that it would be odd in a regular neighborhood to all of the sudden have a duplex in the middle of the neighborhood. … When somebody spends their hard-earned money on a single-family home that was their biggest investment they ever made and (then), for the neighborhood to change, it scares some people.”

ACTION TAKEN BY COMMITTEE

The only thing Grout was able to accomplish was to amend the bill to require that casitas be the same color as the primary residence, but not that they be built with the same materials. While the committee did not significantly alter Keller’s duplex and casita allowances, it did change the parking elements. It struck the bill’s original language that drastically eased or, in some cases, eliminated parking-spot minimum requirements in apartment or multifamily housing developments.  The committee added provisions that would lower by 30% the minimum parking spots that multifamily developers must provide and create a 20% parking exemption for certain developments that contain affordable housing.

PUBLIC COMMENTS

The April 12 LUPZ Committee allowed for the first time public comments on the IDO updates.  People were required to sign up an hour and a half before the meeting began. People were given a maximum of 2 minutes each to address the committee, a limitation strictly enforced with a timer and the ringing of a bell by  committee chair Fiebelkorn requiring people to rush through their comments.  Comments were made for and against Keller’s “Housing Forward ABQ Plan.”

NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS SPEAK OUT IN OPPOSITION

The majority of the speakers stated they had  affiliations with neighborhood associations and they argued against the changes. The consensus amongst the neighborhood association representatives is that the zoning proposal is a rush job.  Many of the speakers voiced concern that the changes would alter neighborhood character or invite developers to buy up single family homes and replace them with duplexes and casitas to maximize value.

A major risk that exists with the reclassification zoning of all single family lots to allow residential duplex development and casita development is it  will encourage large private investors and real estate developers, including  out-of-state corporate entities, to buy up distressed properties or lease and covert whole blocks into rental duplexes with substandard rental casitas. This will dramatically degrade the character of neighborhoods and the City as a whole. 

To put the argument in perspective, an individual investor will be able to purchase single family homes for rental, add a 750 square foot two family home addition and build a separate 750 foot free standing casita which will result in a one home rental being converted into 3 separate rental units.  Such development will increase an areas  property values and property taxes. It  will also decrease the availability of affordable homes and raise rental prices even higher. It will  increase gentrification in the more historical areas of the city as generational residents will be squeezed out by the developers and increases in property taxes. 

DEVELOPERS SPEAK OUT IN FAVOR WITH USUAL SUSPECTS

Not at all surprising, many developers spoke in favor of the zoning changes to allow casita and duplex developments on all residential lots in the city.  The argument made by the developers to solve the city’s housing shortage was to simply build more, ignoring the economics of supply and demand and financing and assuming rents and market values will go down with building more housing.

The 2  most prominent speakers representing the commercial real estate development community who spoke in favor of  the amendments and Keller’s Housing Foreword ABQ Plan were Jim Strozier, the President of  the New Mexico Chapter of the National Association of Industrial and Office Parks (NAIOP), and NAIOP’s Executive Director Rhiannon Samuel.  Both Strozier and Samuel proclaimed the city was in a housing crisis and the only way to solve it is to build more housing.  NAIOP is considered the most influential business organizations in the city boasting membership of upwards of 300.  NAIOP membership consistently bids on city construction contracts.

NAIOP is considered by many as very politcal and aggressive with lobbying efforts, its membership funds a Politcal Action Committee (PAC) and its known to make large donations exclusively to Republican candidates for City Council and Mayor even going so far as to host debates and endorse candidates.

Former 2 term  Republican Mayor Richard Berry  (2009 – 2017) was a contractor and member of NAIOP.  Mayor Berry received NAIOP’s endorsements and extensive political contributions from its membership, especially in 2013 when he ran for a second term. In 2013, Berry’s  re election campaign was privately financed and he raised $1.15 million, with large donations made by NAIOP membership, to run against city public financed candidate Democrat Pete Dinelli who was given and capped at $340,000 to finance his campaign. The result was Berry won by a landslide with the lowest voter turnout in the city’s history at 19%.  It was Berry who in 2017 made the massive overall and repeal of all of the city’s zoning laws and sector development plans and the enactment of the Integrated Development Ordinance (IDO) a major priority before he left office. Berry did it within 2 years with the help and lobbying efforts of NAIOP, the Greater Albuquerque Chamber of Commerce, the Economic Forum  and the business community.

In the 2019 municipal election, NAIOP endorsed and contributed to the city council campaigns of Republicans Trudy Jones, Dan Lewis and Renee Grout.  NAIOP is known for its  animosity towards city hall and opposition to city rules, regulation, zoning restrictions and construction codes and enforcement actions.

Also speaking in favor of “Housing Forward ABQ Plan” were people who work with low-income and homeless populations, homeowners interested in building casitas to keep their own family members close by, and college students and young people who said the changes could help make housing more affordable.  College students and young people wanting casitas and duplex developments were particularly eloquent describing their struggles to make a living, often having to work two jobs and share housing with others to afford rent.

The idealistic argument of simply building more and having more housing units will reduce rents is not reality nor free market based. Historically, rents and housing pricing increase or stabilize, they do not ever decline.  Property owners and landlords always charge what the market will bear and they get it.

COMMITTEE VOTES TO DEFER UNTIL APRIL 26

The LUPZ committee voted to defer all the amends and  hear and debate them at least once more during its April 26 meeting before sending it up to the full council with recommendations where it could undergo additional amendments by the city council.

COUNCIL ALREADY VOTED TO ALLOW 18 CITY SANCTION HOMELESS TENT ENCAMPMENTS

Last year on June 6, 2022, the Albuquerque City Council voted on a 5-4 to allow city sanctioned tent encampments for the homeless in all 9 city council districts.  “Safe outdoor spaces” will permit homeless encampments with 40 designated spaces for tents, allow upwards of 50 people, require hand washing stations, toilets and showers, require a management plan, 6-foot fencing and social services offered. The safe outdoor spaces are managed sites where people who are homeless can sleep in tents or automobiles and have on-site restrooms and shower facilities. The Integrated Development Ordinance amend adopted by the city council last year sets a limit of two in each of the city’s nine council districts for a total of 18.

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

A shanty town can be is loosely defined as an area of improvised buildings known as shanties or shacks of poor construction and that lack adequate infrastructure    including proper sanitation, safe water supply, electricity and street drainage and parking. With Mayor Keller’s and the City Councils efforts to allow the                    construction of casitas and duplexes on virtually all residential lots in the city, they are hell bent on transforming the city into a massive “shanty town.”  The City Council has already thrown in for good measure city sanctioned Safe Outdoor Space tent encampment for the homeless to help complete the “shanty town ambiance.

LUPZ CHAIR TAMMY FIEBELKORN 

In a truly remarkable display of class warfare she is known for, mid heights District 7 City Councilor Tammy Fiebelkorn,  who chairs the LUPZ committee, repeatedly challenge the notion and disagreed that the proposed zoning changes allowing casitas and duplex development are dramatic or unnecessary.  Fiebelkorn went out of her way to challenge the critics saying that the officials making these decisions will not be affected. Fiebelkorn said this:

“They live in gated communities with different rules. …If I wanted to live in a gated community, I could not afford to. … I live in a modest home that I literally bought 20 years ago and I could not afford today if I had to buy it again, which is why we’re here today having this conversation.”

Fiebelkorn’s remarks are the very kind of embarrassing “nonsensical blabber” she is known for as she inflames class warfare conflict between the “haves and have nots” and the different socio-economic classes, in this case property owners and renters, in the community.  She did it before with her sponsorship of the “Residential Rental Permit Ordinance” where she falsely claimed her proposed odinanace would protect tenants from “predatory practices such as excessive application fees, clarifying that deposits must be refundable and capping other fees, especially in complexes that accept vouchers”.  Her claims were false because all are already dealt with by existing laws and the courts, especially by a specialized metropolitan  court program Fiebelkorn was motivated to introduced her  ordinance when she wanted rent control and she became angry when rent control  was  rejected by the City Council and the New Mexico State legislature.

Fiebelkorn needs to be reminded who her constituents are and the City Council District she represents. The Northern border is Montgomery, the Eastern border is Eubank, the Southern border is Lomas and the Western border is Carlisle to Menaul and then Menaul to Comanche then to Montgomery.  District 7 is the Mid-Heights City Council District and is one of the most stable districts of single-family residential home developments.  It is known for its diverse neighborhoods.  It includes Coronado Shopping Center, Winrock and the Uptown Commons and all the  surrounding areas and parts of the near northeast heights.  The district does experience more than its fair share of residential burglaries and break ins, a problem Fiebelcorn simply ignored or showed no interest in dealing with when she campaigned for city council in 2021. Fiebelkorn  promoted her own personal agenda of animal rights, class warfare and dealing with the homeless.

The entire District 7 was essentially completely built out from 1952 to 1985 with single family residents.  The entire district has very little if any empty lot infill and the district is decidedly middle class.  Home values have also significantly increase over the last 50 years.  For example, 1,000 to 1,200 square foot Mossman Gladden Homes built in the 1960s and sold for $14,000 to $18,000 are routinely placed on the market today and sell for upwards of $250,000 to $275,000.

Fiebelkorn is a progressive extremist.  She is known for belittling, insulting or ignoring constituents she disagrees with and confers only with a select few of her supporters.  She believes her constituents want or agree with her bogus, extreme argument that the zone changes, she is obviously supporting, are needed and not dramatic.  She did the very same thing with her support of city sanctioned homeless tent encampments.  Increasing density 2 to 3 times by permitting casita construction and duplex development on all residences in District 7 is drastic by any measure and will increase property taxes and destroy neighborhoods that have been very stable for decades.

Councilor Fiebelkorn’s own residence she claims to have owned for 20 years has likely spiked in value and it’s doubtful she would sell it now for what she paid for it.  She has not disclosed if she intends to construct a casita nor duplex on her own property to create 2 rentals thereby joining the likes of developers and NAIOP.

“HOUSING FORWARD ABQ PLAN”

Simply put, Mayor Tim  Keller is using a short-term housing “crunch” to declare it a “housing crisis” in order to shove his “HOUSING FORWARD ABQ PLAN” down the throats of the city residents and property owners. Keller is  declaring  a housing crisis to advocate major zoning changes that will increase density and destroy neighborhoods relying on neighborhoods, investors and developers to increase density by laxing zoning restrictions for developers.

The City Council wants to  empower  the Planning Department to unilaterally issue “permissive uses” for “casitas” and “two family duplex development” on existing structures.  The Planning Department will be allowed to exclude the general public from the permissible use application and deny adjacent property owners the right to object and appeal casitas and duplex remodeling. It essentially will require property owners to sue adjoining property owners to enforce covenants and restrictions, pitting individual neighbors against entire neighborhoods.

REVISITING THE INTEGRATED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE

The Integrated Development Ordinance (IDO) was enacted by the City Council on an 8-1 vote in 2017 a mere few weeks before Tim Keller was elected Mayor the first time.  When then New Mexico State Auditor Tim Keller was running for Mayor he had nothing to say publicly about the IDO and gave no position on it.  He did proclaim he was the most uniquely qualified to be Mayor despite lacking any experience in municipal affairs and city zoning matters.  The likely reason for not taking a position on the IDO was his sure ignorance of municipal land use planning and zoning laws, something he was never exposed to in his career as a State Senator and State Auditor.

Five years later, Keller ostensibly has had some sort of epiphany and education and proclaims the IDO is outdated.  It’s very difficult, if not outright laughable, to take Mayor Tim Keller serious when he proclaimed the city’s Integrated Development Ordinance (IDO), which lays out highly complicated zoning and subdivision regulations, as being outdated given that it was enacted in 2017 by the city council on an 8-1 vote.

What is really happening with Mayor Tim Keller’s “transformative changes” to  the Integrated Development Ordinance and his  “Housing Forward Abq” plan is that Keller is catering to the city’s  development community and business community as he pretends  to be an expert in the field of housing development and zoning matters.  Keller is relying on his exaggeration of  the city’s housing crisis and homeless crisis to seek further changes to the city’s zoning code to help the development community and using city funding to do it.

ANOTHER RUSH JOB TO FAVOR DEVELOPERS

Simply put, the IDO is and has always been an abomination that favors developers and the city’s construction industry. The 2017 rewrite was a rush job.  It took a mere 2 years by Mayor Berry to rewrite the entire zoning code and it emerged as the Integrated Development Ordinance (IDO). It was in late 2017, just a few weeks before the municipal election and the election of Mayor Tim Keller, that the City Council rushed to vote for the final adoption of the IDO comprehensive plan on an 8-1 vote.

The rush job on city zoning to favor developers is happening again. This time, Mayor Tim Keller has City Councilors Isaac Benton, a retired architect, and Republican Trudy Jones, a retired realtor, to carry his water for him by sponsoring the legislation. Both agreed to sponsor the legislation before they announced that they will not be seeking reelection this year and are anxious to push through the legislation before they depart on January 1, 2024.

EXPECT LITIGATION AND CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT

Absent from all the discussions empowering the Planning Department to unilaterally issue “permissive uses” for “casitas” and “two family duplex development” on existing structures is the fact that there will be a deprivation of notice and “due process law” rights and the  denial of appeal rights to property owners by the city process in  awarding permits to construct casitas and duplex additions.

City officials said at the 5 public meeting that covenants and restrictions contained in warranty deeds prohibiting construction of casitas and two-family duplex construction on existing housing were not the city’s concern when it came to issuing permits for a casita or a two-family duplex development even when covenants and restrictions prohibit such development.

The city officials proclaimed enforcement of real property covenants and restrictions were a private matter for enforcement between adjoining property owners by means of litigation. Simply put, the city cannot just ignore covenant and restrictions in real property ownership and deny notice and due process for the sake of allowing development.  The city will be a necessary and proper party to any such litigation subject to the award of damages.

Since day one of enactment of all city comprehensive zoning codes and subdivision residential development plans, notice and appeal rights of have been an integrate component. Case law has also been established over decades. The city council has already enacted amendments that limit public input on amendments to the Integrated Development Ordinance thanks to Republican City Councilor Trudy Jones.  The City Council cutting out notice and appeal rights of property owners and stake holders for the issuance of permissive uses allowing casitas and duplex development is an invitation for costly litigation and class action lawsuits where the city will be named a party.

BENTON, JONES AND DAVIS SHOULD RECUSE SELVES

At the Downtown area meeting presenting  Keller’s “Housing Forward ABQ Plan” and the IDO amendments, city officials essentially admitted that all the public meetings and city council meetings and hearings on the amendments to the Integrated Development Ordinance will be completed in the matter of weeks with a final vote to be taken before the November 8 municipal election where at least 3 new city councilors will be elected.  This fact justifies the need for Democrats Isaac Benton, Pat Davis and Republican Trudy Jones to do the ethical thing and seek to defer the updates and amendments to the Integrated Development Ordinance and updates until after the November municipal election.  This will  allow their successors to make the final decision and deal with the fallout of their decision.

Additionally, the so called  “transformative changes” to the Integrated Development Ordinance to allow the construction of casitas and duplexes on all residential lots should be placed on the November ballot as an “advisory vote” to allow for a healthy debate amongst the candidates seeking to replace Benton, Davis and Jones. Such advisory votes have occurred in the past (i.e. construction of a soccer stadium for United New Mexico) with Mayors and City Councils respecting the opinion of the voters and not going forward.

At a bare minimum, the public should tell their City Councilors to oppose “casitas”“two-family duplex” additions  and denounce them for the zoning abominations that they are which is a threat to established neighborhoods and historical areas of the city.

CONTACT YOUR CITY COUNCILOR

 Voters and residents are urged to contact and voice their opinion and tell all city councilors to vote NO on the amendments.

CITY COUNCIL PHONE: (505) 768-3100

CITY COUNCIL AND SUPPORT STAFF  EMAILS

lesanchez@cabq.gov
louiesanchez@allstate.com
bmaceachen@cabq.gov
ibenton@cabq.gov
namolina@cabq.gov
kpena@cabq.gov,
rmhernandez@cabq.gov
bbassan@cabq.gov
danlewis@cabq.gov
galvarez@cabq.gov
patdavis@cabq.gov
seanforan@cabq.gov
tfiebelkorn@cabq.gov
lrummler@cabq.gov
trudyjones@cabq.gov
azizachavez@cabq.gov
rgrout@cabq.gov
rrmiller@cabq.gov
LEWISABQ@GMAIL.COM
nancymontano@cabq.gov
cortega@cabq.gov
cmelendrez@cabq.gov

The link to an in depth related Dinelli blog article is here:

An In-Depth Analysis of Mayor Keller’s “Housing Forward ABQ Plan”; Plan Met With Hostility And Mistrust by Public; Viewed As Destroying Neighborhoods To Benefit Developers

 

Doug Peterson Abq Journal Guest Column: “With crime and cost, it’s well past time for Department of Justice to leave”; KOAT TV Reports Federal Monitor Continues To Be Paid $1,596,000 A Year On Case That Was Supposed To Be Dismissed 4 Years Ago

Doug Peterson is the President Peterson Properties. Established in 1971, Peterson Properties has developed 5 million square feet of commercial real estate and owns a portfolio of 36 properties totaling over 1.2 million square feet.  The company is the largest commercial real estate company in Albuquerque.   The company owns 100% of its properties and manages each property in house, so it can maintain strong relationships with its tenants from the beginning.

On April 9, the Albuquerque Journal published the below guest column written by Doug Peterson.

DISCLAIMER: The opinions expressed in this guest column written by Doug Peterson are those of Mr. Peterson and do not necessarily reflect those of the www.petedinelli.com blog. Mr. Peterson has not been paid any compensation to publish his guest column and he has given his consent to publish on www.PeteDinelli.com

HEADLINE: “With crime and cost, it’s well past time for Department of Justice to leave”

BY DOUGLAS PETERSON / ALBUQUERQUE RESIDENT
SUNDAY, APRIL 9TH, 2023 

For nine years, the city of Albuquerque Police Department (APD) has been under the thumb of the United States Department of Justice (DOJ) via a settlement agreement. Citizens of our city have paid an extraordinary price both in terms of the millions of dollars spent on federally mandated monitoring and overwhelming “reforms” to every aspect of how APD operates as well as the more tragic price of skyrocketing crime in the Duke City.

The DOJ settlement agreement micromanages APD: the word “shall” appears in it 630 times and applies in nearly every instance to APD. Moreover, the settlement agreement mandates bureaucracy, allocating responsibility to 11 different committees, boards or task forces. The agreement has resulted in such poor morale at APD that, despite a record budget and compensation, recruitment is so hard Mayor Tim Keller recently admitted the city will not hit its target number of police officers despite his promises during two campaigns. Meanwhile, homicides have hit record levels year after year, culminating in a high mark of 120 in 2022.

As DOJ dominance over APD continues to exacerbate the crisis of lawlessness in Albuquerque, citizens wonder in desperation whether our DOJ overlords will ever leave and let our community have its police department back. Sadly, a look at similar DOJ oversight of other law enforcement organizations around the United States suggests the end may never come.

Over the past three decades, the DOJ has conducted more than 70 investigations of local police departments, and many of those investigations have resulted in agreements like that in place in Albuquerque. Oakland, California, leads the pack with DOJ oversight that has been in place for 20 years. Seattle is at 11 years – check out the YouTube documentary “Seattle is Dying.” New Orleans is at 10 years.

Each of the long-suffering communities under DOJ supervision has something in common: Their government leaders have perpetually sought to appease the DOJ through continual concessions regarding their police operations. Albuquerque itself has amended its settlement agreement with DOJ nine times. But these cities, including Albuquerque, never challenged the DOJ investigation results in court. Albuquerque did not even make the DOJ file a lawsuit; the city just threw up its hands and abdicated control of APD.

Meanwhile, Maricopa County, Arizona, pushed back against the DOJ and ended up with a settlement agreement that never yielded control.

It is time for Albuquerque to push back, too. A mechanism exists in the current agreement: Section 343 lets the city motion the court when it determines it is in “full and effective” compliance with the agreement. Absent the DOJ’s concurrence with that motion, perhaps the court will agree with the city. Or maybe an appellate court, all the way through the United States Supreme Court, will agree.

Our leaders owe it to our citizens to try. Beyond those measures, the city could simply ignore the agreement and let DOJ take over our police department. The city and our county could then simply terminate our funding of APD and turn over all law enforcement responsibility and APD’s former budget to the Bernalillo County Sheriff’s Department, which is not subject to a federal overlord but instead, rightly, is governed by the people it serves.

The link to the Albuquerque Journal column is here:

https://www.abqjournal.com/2589097/apd-crime-department-of-justice.html

TERMINATION AND SUSPENSION PROVSIONS OF SETTLEMENT

The terms and condition of the Court Approved Settlement Agreement (CASA) that allow for suspension and termination of the settlement identified by Doug Peterson in his opinion column merit review.  They are as follows:

“Termination of the Agreement

 342.  The City will endeavor to reach full and effective compliance with this Agreement within four years of its Effective Date. The Parties agree to jointly ask the Court to terminate this Agreement after this date, provided that the City has been in full and effective compliance with this Agreement for two years. “Full and Effective Compliance” shall be defined to require sustained compliance with all material requirements of this Agreement or sustained and continuing improvement in constitutional policing, as demonstrated pursuant to the Agreement’s outcome measures.

 343. If after six years from the Effective Date the Parties disagree whether the City has been in full and effective compliance for two years, either Party may seek to terminate this Agreement. In the case of termination sought by the City, prior to filing a motion to terminate, the City agrees to notify DOJ in writing when the City has determined that it is in full and effective compliance with this Agreement and that such compliance has been maintained for no less than two years.”

 The CASA does have a provision that allows suspension of the monitoring. Specifically, Paragraph 302 of the CASA provides:

 “302. Where the Parties agree, the Monitor shall refrain from conducting a compliance review of a requirement previously found by the Monitor to be in sustained compliance for at least two years pursuant to audits or reviews, or where outcome assessments or other information indicate that the outcome intended by the requirement has been achieved.”

The link to the 118-page CASA is here:

https://documents.cabq.gov/justice-department/settlement-agreement.pdf

Under the terms and conditions of the Court Approved Settlement Agreement (CASA), once APD achieves a 95% compliance rate in the 3 identified compliance levels and maintains it for 2 consecutive years, the case can be dismissed.  APD was to have come into full compliance in the 3 categories within 4 years and the case was to be dismissed in 2020.  Instead, Court Approved Federal Monitor James Ginger has  found APD failed to come into compliance.  As Doug Peterson noted, the case has now been pending 9 years, more than double the time originally agreed to by the city and the Department of Justice.

On November 19, 2022, Federal Court Appointed Independent Monitor James Ginger filed his 16th Independent Monitors Report (IMR) on the Compliance Levels.  The Federal Monitor reported that as of the end of the IMR-16 reporting period, APD’s compliance levels are as follows:

Primary Compliance: 100%
Secondary Compliance: 99%
Operational Compliance: 80%. (10% increase from 70%)

The link to review the entire 16th Federal Monitors report is here:

https://www.cabq.gov/police/documents/959-221109-imr-16.pdf

On April 14, KOAT TV, Target 7 reported the city continues to pay the court appointed Federal Independent Monitor James Ginger and his team of 14 experts the same salary it has paid since 2019, four years after the court-mandated reforms with the DOJ were established. Albuquerque originally was paying Ginger $120,000 a month for his services as an independent monitor. Since 2019, Ginger is being paid another $13,000 more or a total of $133,000 a month or $1,596,000 a year to continue with the monitoring.

The link to the Channel 7 report is here:

https://www.koat.com/article/albuquerque-police-doj-settlement-agreement-update/43594805

It’s clear that based on the compliance levels that the spirit and intent of the settlement have been achieve and the city should move immediately to dismiss the case as argued by Doug Peterson in his Albuquerque Journal opinion column.

The links to a related Dinelli blog articles published on the DOJ consent decree can be found here:

“Dinelli Blog Articles On The DOJ Reforms, Federal Monitor’s Reports, APD And The Police Union”

https://www.petedinelli.com/2021/12/23/dinelli-blog-articles-on-the-doj-reforms-federal-monitors-reports-apd-and-the-police-union/

Gov. MLG Signs 3 Crime Fighting Measures; Pledges Gun Control Legislation In 2024; Different Approach Needed For 2024 Legislative Session

On April 6, Governor Lujan Grisham signed 3 bills into law enacted by the 2023 New Mexico legislature with strong bipartisan support. The 3 bills are:

House Bill 234 targets organized retail crime. It creates new crimes and penalties to ease the prosecution of gangs or other groups of people stealing from grocery, big box and retail stores in an organized way, terrorizing customers and employees. Albuquerque has had a huge spike in  aggressive shoplifting by well organized, violent  shoplifting gang crews.

House Bill 306 that is directed at “straw purchases” of firearms. It makes it illegal to buy a firearm on behalf of someone who’s not allowed to have it or intends to use in a crime.  It was noted that Albuquerque had to rely on federal prosecutors to step in when officers arrested a man they said was responsible for the purchase of nine weapons tied to 18 shootings.

Senate Bill 133 deals with the theft of catalytic converters that has spiked. The bill requires second hand metal dealers to track from whom they buy used catalytic converters. The vehicle catalytic converters are anti-pollution devices that contain valuable metals, making them favorite targets  of thieves.

2024 CRIME AND GUN CONTROL MEASURES DISCUSSED

After signing the trio of crime fighting measures, Governor Lujan Grisham took the opportunity to be clear she intends to pursue crime and gun measures during the 2024 legislative session.  The 2024 session, unlike the 2023 60 day session, is  a 30 day short session where  lawmakers face restrictions on what non-budgetary bills they may introduce.  During 30 sessions, only legislation the Governor  places on the “Governor’s Call”  agenda are  considered.

The Governor said she intends to pursue at least three firearms proposals during the 2024 session that failed in the 2023 session. The measures listed were:

  1. Raising the minimum age to 21 for the purchase of certain firearms.
  2. Imposing a 14-day waiting period on the purchase of guns.
  3. Banning AR-15-style rifles. Not at all surprising given New Mexico’s pro-gun philosophy,  the assault weapons ban had the fiercest opposition during the 2023 session even among Democrats. Opposition centered on its legality in the wake of recent U.S. Supreme Court decisions and technical questions over how to define what qualifies as an assault weapon.

All 3 gun control measures were fiercely opposed by Republican lawmakers, contending they would target law-abiding gun owners while doing nothing to deter crime.

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

It should come as no surprise that Governor Lujan Grisham is already discussing gun control measures, she intends to pursue in the 2024 thirty day legislative session. It is very likely that Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham was very disappointed on how little was accomplished by the 2023 New Mexico legislature with only 2 out of 10 gun control measures making it through, but  she simply does not want to admit it.

In the 2023 New Mexico 60 day legislative session, upwards of 40 gun control measures were introduced, but only 10 were seriously considered and of those 10, only 2 made it through the session to become law.

When the session began on January 17, Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham in  her  “State of the State” address  announced  her support of the following 4 gun control measures:

  • Banning the sale of AR-15-style rifles.
  • Allowing crime victims to sue gun manufacturers.
  • Making it a crime to fail to properly secure a firearm that’s accessible to an unsupervised minor.
  • Closing a loophole in state law to allow prosecution when a person buys a gun for a someone who isn’t legally able to make the purchase themselves, a transaction known as a straw purchase.

Only two of the four measure’s the Governor endorsed were enacted by the legislature. The two measures enacted and signed into law were:

House Bill  9,   the Bennie Hargrove Gun Safety Act also know as “Bennies Bill” makes it a misdemeanor to negligently allow a child access to a firearm and would make it a felony if that negligence resulted in someone dying or suffering great bodily harm.

House Bill 306 that is directed at “straw purchases” of firearms and making it illegal to buy a firearm on behalf of someone who’s not allowed to have it or intends to use in a crime. During the March 6 signing of House Bill 306 making it law, Lujan Grisham highlighted the role of House Republican Leader Ryan Lane of Aztec in getting the bill passed.  Lane was the lead sponsor of the measure resulting in other Republican support which is an absolute  a rarity for any  firearms legislation.

GUN CONTROL MEASURES THAT FAILED

There were 10 major gun-control measure bills introduced and seriously considered in the New Mexico House or Senate.  Eight of

House Bill 50 would have prohibited magazines with more than 10 rounds.

House Bill 72 would have prohibited the  possession of semiautomatic firearm converter that allows the weapon to fire more rapidly.

House Bill 100 would have  establish a 14-day waiting period for the purchase of any firearm and requires a prospective seller who doesn’t already hold a valid federal firearms license to arrange for someone who does to conduct a federal background check prior to selling a firearm.

House Bill 101 as written would have  made it a fourth-degree felony to purchase, possess, manufacture, import, sell or transfer assault weapons in the state.  It would restrict the sale, manufacture and possession of AR-15-style rifles along with semiautomatic firearms.

Senate Bill 44 would have  made  it a misdemeanor to carry a firearm within 100 feet of a polling location on election day or during early voting. On-duty law enforcement officers and security personnel would be exempt.

Senate Bill 116 would have established  a minimum age of 21 for anyone seeking to purchase or possess an automatic firearm, semiautomatic firearm or firearm capable of accepting a large-capacity magazine. The bill would have  effectively raised the minimum age for buying an AR-15-style rifle from 18 to 21.

Senate Bill 171 sought to ban the manufacture, sale, trade, gift, transfer or acquisition of semiautomatic pistols that have two or more defined characteristics.

Senate Bill 428 would have revised the state’s Unfair Practices Act to target the sale of illegal firearms and parts, allowing the filing of lawsuits to enforce the act.

The failure of the legislation is very difficult to accept.  Democrats in the 2023 legislative session hold a 45-25 majority in the House and a 27-15 in the Senate. It’s a damn shame more was not done and Democrats do look foolish on the issue of failing to enact reasonable and responsible gun control measure that will bring down crime and save lives.

“OMNIBUS VIOLENT CRIME AND GUN CONTROL ACT”

If Governor Lujan Grisham is indeed sincere about reintroducing legislation that did not  make it through the 2023 legislative session  and that it be reintroduced in the 2024 legislative  session, a much different approach needs to be taken because the State’s  crime crisis is very real and will remain until something is done.  All the gun control legislation in the 2023 legislative session  was piecemeal at best. It failed to strike a balance between gun control and enhanced penalties for the commission of crime with guns.

Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham should seek the enactment  of  “Omnibus Violent Crime and Gun Control Act” that could be enacted  by the 2024 legislative session.

The “Omnibus Violent Crime and Gun Control Act would include the following gun regulation measures:

  • Outlaw possession and sale assault weapon style weapons such as AR-15-style rifles and pistols with magazines of 10 rounds or more making it a third degree felony with a 6 year mandatory sentence.
  • Outlaw the sale of “ghost guns” parts.
  • Outlaw possession of semiautomatic firearm converters.
  • Limit all retail gun purchases of all types of guns per person to one gun per month.
  • Institute mandatory extended waiting period to a full month for gun purchases.
  • Outlaw the straw purchase of guns for someone who isn’t legally able to make the purchase themselves.
  • Outlaw the sale in New Mexico of “bump-fire stocks” and other accessories.
  • Allow crime victims to sue gun manufacturers for actual and punitive damages.
  • Require the mandatory purchase of “liability insurance” with each gun sold.
  • Implement in New Mexico mandatory handgun licensing, permitting, training, and registration requirements.
  • Expand gun ownership age limitation to 19 for rifles and shotguns.
  • Expand the prohibition of deadly weapons from a school campus to school zones making it a third-degree felony.
  • Call for a constitutional amendment to repeal the New Mexico Constitutional provision that allows the “open carry” of firearms. This would require a statewide vote and would ensure a healthy debate.

The following crime and sentencing provisions should be included in the “Omnibus Gun Violence And Gun Control Act”:

  • Making possession of a handgun by someone who commits a crime an aggravated third-degree felony mandating a 6-year minimum sentence.
  • Increase the firearm enhancement penalties provided for the brandishing a firearm in the commission of a felony from 3 years to 10 years for a first offense and for a second or subsequent felony in which a firearm is brandished 12 years.
  • Create a new category of enhanced sentencing for use of a lethal weapon or deadly weapon other than a firearm where there is blandishment of a deadly weapon in the commission of a felony with enhanced sentences of 5 years for a first offense and for second or subsequent felony in which a lethal weapon other than a firearm is brandished 8 years
  • Make it a third-degree felony for failure to secure a firearm mandating a 3-year sentence. Gun owners would have to keep their firearms in a locked container and make them inaccessible to anyone but the owner or authorized users.
  • Increase the penalty of shooting randomly into a crowded area a second-degree felony mandating a 9-year sentence.
  • Allow firearm offenses used in a drug crime to be charged separately.
  • Change bail bond to statutorily empower judges with far more discretionary authority to hold and jail those pending trial who have prior violent crime reported incidents without shifting the burden of proof from the prosecution to the defense.
  • Mandate public school systems and higher education institutions to “harden” their facilities with more security doors, security windows, security measures, including metal detectors at single entrances designated and alarm systems and security cameras tied directly to law enforcement 911 emergency operations centers.
  • Make organized retail crime a specific offense punishable by felony charges when value of goods stolen exceeds certain threshold.
  • Cases of juveniles arrested in possession of a weapon are to be referred the District Attorney for automatic prosecution as an adult for sentencing.
  • Make it a 3rd degree felony if a person recklessly stores a firearm and a minor gains access to it to threaten or harms someone.

The Omnibus Violent Crime and Gun Control Act must include funding for the criminal justice system. This would include funding District Attorney’s Offices, the Public Defender’s Office, the Courts and the Corrections Department.

Until the New Mexico Legislature, especially Democrats, get serious and aggressive about responsible gun control and crime and punishment, the State will continue to suffer high violent crime rates.

An In-Depth Analysis of Mayor Keller’s “Housing Forward ABQ Plan”; Plan Met With Hostility And Mistrust by Public; Viewed As Destroying Neighborhoods To Benefit Developers

This blog article is an in-depth, point by point, analysis of Mayor Tim Keller’s “Housing Forward ABQ Plan.” It ends with Commentary and Analysis concluding that Keller’s “Housing Forward Plan” and the accompanying amendments to the Integrated Development Ordinance allowing “casitas, two-family duplex” additions and “motels conversions” are  faux solutions to Keller’s inflated housing crisis shortage. It’s a plan that has been met with extreme public hostility and mistrust and should be rejected by the City Council.

 “HOUSING FORWARD ABQ” PLAN.

On October 18, Mayor Tim Keller announced his “Housing Forward ABQ Plan.” It is a “multifaceted initiative” where Mayor Keller has set the goal of adding 5,000 new housing units across the city by 2025 above and beyond what private industry normally creates each year.  According to Keller, the city is in a major “housing crisis” and the city needs as many as 33,000 new housing units immediately.

During his October 18 news conference announcing his “Housing Forward ABQ Plan” Keller Keller himself used the 33,000 figure to declare a housing crisis.  He emphasized the importance of amending the city’s Integrated Development Ordinance (IDO).  Keller said this:

“Right now our zoning code will never allow us to meet the housing demand in the city … If you want a place to advocate, if you want a place to change policy, if you want a place to argue, it’s all about the IDO [Integrated Development Ordinance] .  …  The proposed changes are intended to be transformative, which is fitting for the crisis facing our local government, thousands of families in our community, and our housing partners.”

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

https://www.abqjournal.com/2541186/mayor-sets-goal-of-5k-housing-units-by-2025.html

https://www.kob.com/new-mexico/city-leaders-propose-major-changes-to-albuquerques-zoning-laws/

https://www.abqjournal.com/2548502/keller-seeks-transformative-changes-to-zoning-code.html

KELLER EXAGGERATS A HOUSING “CRUNCH” INTO  A HOUSING “CRISIS”

When Keller first announced his plan, he said the city has an immediate 33,000 unit need for housing and there is a housing shortage crisis. However city materials distributed to the public say the city needs 13,000 to 28,000 more units. Keller and his city hall minions have never elaborated exactly how the statistics were determined and what surveys or reports were relied upon to declare a “housing crisis.”

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  The housing shortage is related to economics and the development community’s inability to keep up with supply and demand and the public’s inability to purchase housing and qualify for long term housing mortgage loans. There is also a shortage of rental properties, but there is an apartment construction boom going on in the city.

HOMELESS CRISIS USED TO PROMOTE “HOUSING FORWARD ABQ” PLAN

At  two of the public meetings, Keller Administration officials have used the homeless crisis and numbers to promote the “HOUSING FORWARD ABQ Plan ” ignoring that it really has nothing to do with the homeless crisis but everything to do with increasing housing density for all income levels. Over the last 2 years, the Keller Administration has spent $100 million on homeless programs including 2 shelters and city government  subsidized housing.

INFLATING THE NUMBERS

Keller declaring that the city needs 33,000 housing units immediately was an exaggeration based on the City’s actual growth population and what is needed for that population growth. Keller also ignores the apartment construction spike that is going on in the city.

The current metro area population of Albuquerque in 2023 is 955,000, a 1.38% increase from 2022 population of 942,000 or 13,000 increase.

The metro area population of Albuquerque in 2022 was 942,000, a 1.4% increase from 2021 of 929,000.

https://www.macrotrends.net/cities/22908/albuquerque/population#:~:text=The%20metro%20area%20population%20of,a%201.53%25%20increase%20from%202020.

Alan LeSeck, Apartment Association of New Mexico executive director, recently  told the Albuquerque Journal  the current market is “very hot,” due partially to the lack of apartment development dating back to before the pandemic.  Since 2013, and prior to 2020, LaSeck said Albuquerque was averaging about 500 new units a year, below what the city needed to accommodate new residents. LaSeck said that, for every 10,000 new residents, there needs to be about 3,400 apartments since about 34% of people typically rent. 

Keller has never discussed nor revealed to what extent the residential development and apartment development are going on in the city.  Keller simply  declares there is a housing crisis.  At all 5 of the public meetings, city officials did not discuss the extent of residential construction going on in the city.

In November, 2022, it was reported that in the Albuquerque metro area, new permits issued by the city for apartment building construction have spiked dramatically.  Building permits for a total of 4,021 new housing units were issued in the metro area in 2021 of which   35.1%  are for units in buildings with 5 housing units or more with many currently under construction.  

Five years ago only 20.3% of all permits for new housing units were for buildings with at least five units.  The 14.8% point change for new apartment construction from 2016 to 2021 ranks as the 10th largest increase among all U.S. metro areas.

In Albuquerque, about 2,000 units across 12 properties are  already under construction, with an additional 2,485 units planned across 16 properties and 5,143 prospective units.

https://www.apartments.com/markana-uptown-albuquerque-nm/8n8z552/

https://www.krqe.com/news/albuquerque-metro/winrock-finalizing-plans-for-200-unit-high-end-apartment-complex/

PUBLIC MEETINGS HELD

In March and April, the Keller Administration held a series of 5 public meetings scheduled for 1 hour and 30 minutes in the Downtown Area, Southwest Area, Southeast Area, Northeast Area, and the Northwest Area  of the city in order to explain the Housing Foreword ABQ Plan to the public with 4 attended by Pete Dinelli for reporting on www.PeteDinelli.com. The public meetings were open to the public but the city asked that reservations be made on line.

The link to review slide presentation used by the Mayor’s office and city officials is here:

https://documents.cabq.gov/planning/IDO/2022_IDO_AnnualUpdate/LUPZ/HousingForward-Presentation-2023-03-08.pdf

Mayor Tim Keller and all 9 members of the city council did not attend a single meeting. The turnouts were considered high with between 50 and 100 people in attendance at each of the locations. Given the nature of the questioning, attendance consisted predominantly of angry property owners. The city’s slide presentations were made to audiences by various city departments including the Mayor’s Office, the Family and Community Services Department and the Planning Department. A representative of the Albuquerque Police Department attended only the Decemeber meeting.

The presentations were broken down into two sperate areas of concentration. The two areas were:

  1. The city’s overall efforts and goals to increase housing supply in the city and promoting access to housing for all income levels and increasing low-income rentals units which would include “motel conversions”. The city wants to acquire existing motels and remodel them and create 1,000 low-income housing units.

 

  1. The major proposed zoning change amendments to the Integrated Development Ordinance (IDO) that will allow the construction of “Casitas” and/or “Two Family Home” additions as “permissive uses” and not “conditional uses” and changes increasing height restrictions and eliminating parking restrictions. “Casitas” and “Two Family Home” additions would be allowed on every single existing residential lot that already has single family housing in order to increase density.  According to city officials, there are 120,000 residential lots that have existing residential structures.  With the construction of “casitas” and “two family home” additions, density could double to 240,000 with casita structures alone or triple to 360,000 with both casitas and two family home additions.

The city officials emphasized that the “Housing Forward ABQ Plan” was merely a proposal and ultimately the City Council will decide what to do when it came to amendments to the Integrated Development Ordinance (IDO).

Throughout the presentations, the audiences were advised by the city officials present they were only there to gather information. Notwithstanding what they said, the appearance was that the city officials were promoting  Mayor Keller’s plan and not interested in what the public really had to say.

After the presentations, the audience was allowed to ask questions during the limited amount of time remaining.  Because of time constraints, only those called upon by the City presenters during the allotted time remaining were allowed to ask questions.

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

A “conditional use” requires an application process with the city, notice to surrounding property owners with appeal rights. A “permissive use” would give the Planning Department exclusive authority issue permits for construction without notices and hearings. 

City officials said at the public meeting that covenants and restrictions contained in warranty deeds prohibiting construction of casitas and  two family duplex construction on existing housing  were not the city’s concern when it came to issuing permits for  a casita or a  two family duplex development even when covenants and restrictions prohibited such development. The city officials proclaimed enforcement of real property  covenants and restrictions were a private matter for enforcement between adjoining property owners by means of litigation.   

One very offensive argument made by the city official outlining the zoning changes is that many covenants and restrictions  are racist preventing people of color from buying and purchasing real property and living in residential developments. The blunt truth is those covenants and restrictions based on race were declared back in the 1940’s and 1950’s as unconstitutional by the United States Supreme Court and are totally unenforceable and were set aside by the court.  Construction, set back restrictions and use covenants are very much enforceable and have absolutely nothing to do with race despite what was being implied by the city official. 

KELLER’S HOUSING FOREWARD ABQ PLAN OUTLINED

The following information was gleaned by the author of this blog article from attending the 4  public meetings sponsored by the Keller Administration and handout materials provided to the public:

To add the 5,000 new housing units across the city by 2025, Keller is proposing that the City of Albuquerque fund and be involved with the construction of new low-income housing.  The strategy includes “motel conversions” and  a zoning code “rebalance” to increase population density. It includes allowing “casitas” which under the zoning code are formally known as “accessory dwelling” units.

Keller wants to allow “different forms of multi-unit housing types” on existing residential properties.  City officials said that 68% of the city’s existing housing is single-family detached homes with 120,000 existing residential lots with already built residences.  The amendment will allow one “casita” and  one “accessory dwelling” unit on all built out lots which could double density to 240,000  housing units  or triple density to 360,000 housing units.

According to Keller’ plan, the city wants to  convert commercial office space into to residential use. The Keller administration is proposing $5 million to offset developer costs with the aim of transitioning 10 commercial  properties  and creating 1,000 new housing units.  The new plan also includes “motel conversations” where the city will purchase,  remodel and update old and existing motels into low income housing.  Keller “Housing Forward ABQ” plan includes  bolstering  the construction workforce and  address current renter concerns.

RESIDENTIAL RENTAL PERMIT ORDINANCE

The Keller Administration made a part of the “Housing Forward ABQ  Plan” the “Residential Rental Permit Ordinance” sponsored by District 7 Albuquerque City Councilor Tammy Fiebelkorn to protect tenants from “predatory practices such as excessive application fees, clarifying that deposits must be refundable and capping other fees, especially in complexes that accept vouchers”. 

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                                                On March 6 the “Residential Rental Permit Ordinance” failed on a 4-5 vote after strenuous and organized  objections from property owners and the apartment industry.  The private sector argued successfully that  property rights and ownership and contract rights were being infringed upon, that the ordinance and the mandatory fee schedule was excessive and  the ordinance was not needed because of existing state law, including the Unfair Trade Practices Act,  and that ordinance was a form of and  promoted rent control with existing state law protecting both tenant and property owner rights to contract. The New Mexico State legislature has voted NO on enacting rent control legislation. 

INCREASING THE SUPPLY OF HOUSING FOR ALL RESIDENTS

According to materials prepared by the Keller Administration and handed out at the 5 public meetings, the city launched the Housing Forward ABQ Plan  initiative as “an urgent initiative to strengthen access to housing and spur conversion and construction of much-needed new housing for all income levels. The city argues that  addressing the availability of housing is key to the safety of prosperity of residents, to ensuring multigenerational families always have a place … [to] call home …].

The Keller Administrations specific proposals to increasing the city’s housing supply include the following 6  proposals:

  1. The city acquiring and allowing the conversion of existing hotel or motel properties for affordable housing. According to the Family and Community Services Department, the city already owns and operates 8 apartment complexes that provides upwards of 500 low income or affordable housing units. The Family Community Services Department is in the process of acquiring the Sure Stay Motel  at Hotel Circle and plans to convert it into low income housing. (SEE MORE BELOW.)                                                                                                                                                                                                                             COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS:                                                                                                                                                                                                           On March 1 it was reported that the City of Albuquerque is moving forward with its plans to transform hotels and motels into housing units for low-income housing by issuing a Request for Information (RIF) from any and all property owners who might be interested in selling their motels or renovating them into affordable housing units. The city is moving forward with the plan despite objections from the private sector, affected business owners, neighborhood associations and  community activist organizations such as “Woman Taking Back Our Neighborhoods”. The city has yet to disclose how many responses they have received to the RIF. The link to the full news report is here:                                      https://www.kob.com/new-mexico/albuquerque-moves-forward-with-plan-to-transform-hotels-motels-into-housing-units/

 

  1. Converting existing vacant commercial office buildings to housing. City officials have acknowledged that this will be “heavy lifting” by the city. According to the City, the short supply of housing in Albuquerque is in stark contrast to the large supply of vacant or underutilized commercial and office properties. The city is proposing a $5 million housing conversion fund using city, state and federal funding to facilitate the conversion of at least 10 commercial, office buildings into housing, creating at least 1,000 new residential units by 2025.

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

Keller pushing to convert commercial office space into to residential is misplaced and presumes that commercial property owners are amenable to replacing their more lucrative commercial property with residential property which is a complete reversal from what happens.  It is far more common for residential property owners to seek commercial zoning changes for their properties. The city has failed to identify what interest commercial property owners have in converting commercial properties into residential property.

  1. EXPANDING NUISANCE ABATEMENT LAWS. Under the “Housing Forward Plan” properties that are magnets for crime including drug trafficking, human trafficking and gun violence will be the focus of stronger enforcement of nuisance abatement laws. Where possible and appropriate, these properties will be converted to housing units.

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

City Councilor Pat Davis is the sponsor of 023-75 which will amend the city’s current nuisance abatement ordinance to include additional crimes to be added to determine if a property is a nuisance and a city administrative hearing officer component will be added without having to go to court. The current city nuisance abatement ordinance is one of the strongest in the country, it was amended extensively even before City Councilor Davis was elected.  It does not need amending nor strengthening but needs to be enforced as written.

The City of Albuquerque already has one of the strongest nuisance abatement ordinances in the country.  The State of New Mexico has one of the strongest nuisance laws on the books.

Normally, a  nuisance is defined in terms of an “activity” that endangers the public health and safety and welfare. The New Mexico state legislature has enacted a statute that empowers  all municipalities to define and abate a nuisance as they see fit.  Under the Albuquerque  nuisance abatement ordinance, the City Council defines a nuisance in terms of real property, not an activity, both commercial or residential, that is used to assist, promote, facilitate or involved with criminal activity and the real property can be declared a nuisance by a court of law.   The city Planning Department can also take administrative  enforcement action known as a “Notice and Order” where the property is inspected then posted substandard when code violations are found and ordered vacated and boarded up. Property owners are given notice of city code violations and order to make repairs at their own expense.

In 2004, the city’s Nuisance Abetment Ordinance was amended extensively to include all state  felony and misdemeanors as well as all city code violations (plumbing, electrical, gas and construction) in order to be included for consideration to determine that a property is  nuisance.  Reliance is made on the number of calls for service to APD to declare a property a nuisance.

Under state law, a nuisance is defined as a  single act or activities that endangers the public health, safety and welfare.  A public nuisance is a misdemeanor but a civil District Court  injunctive court action under the rules of civil procedure is used to abate such nuisances.

Both the city and state laws are enforced through the State District Courts relying the Rules of Civil Procedure to secure injunctive relief in the form of Temporary, Preliminary or Permanent Injunctions.  Injunctive relief actions are fast tracked by the courts and a temporary restraining order can be secured in within 10 days at the outset.

From 2002 to 2009, the Safe City Strike Force was formed to combat blighted commercial and residential properties and Deputy City Attorney Pete Dinelli was the Director the full 7 years.  Existing city nuisance abatement ordinances and state laws were enforced by filing civil lawsuits in State District Court to abate the nuisances. Thirty (30) to forty-five (40) representatives from the Albuquerque Police Department, the Albuquerque Fire Department, the Fire Marshal’s Office, the Planning Department Code residential and commercial code inspectors, Family Community Services and the Bernalillo County District Attorney’s Office participated and comprised the strike force.

Seventy (70) to one hundred fifty (150) properties a week, both residential and commercial properties,  would be reviewed by the Safe City Strike Force. The Albuquerque City Council would be given weekly updates on the progress made in their districts on the nuisance properties identified by the Strike Force. The City Attorney’s office routinely conducted interventions with property owners along with their attorneys and would negotiate nuisance abatement agreements as well as voluntary tear down agreements.  The city would contract a private company to do the tear downs and clean ups and a lien would be placed on the property. The Planning Department  Code Enforcement Division component of the Safe City Strike Force routinely prepared condemnation resolutions for enactment by the Albuquerque City Council to tear down substandard buildings, including commercial buildings and private residences.

Over 8 years, the Safe City Strike Force took civil code enforcement action and went to court  against some 6,500 residential property owners and slum lords and commercial property that were nuisance properties and magnets for crime. The net result was that the city was cleaned up on many levels.   Administrative actions and court action were  taken against slum lords, residential home owners , motel and hotels along central, violent bars and convenience stores and flea markets.  8 motels were torn down. The Strike Force had  success rate of 100% when it went to court to enforce the city and state nuisance abatement laws.

It was Mayor Keller who totally defunded and eventually completely disbanded the Safe City Strike Force in 2019, despite  being a nationally recognized best practice,  replacing it with his ineffective Problem Properties Program (PPP) and the “Addressing Dilapidated and Abandoned Property Team” (ADAPT) Program.  The success of these 2  Keller created programs have fallen short of the success of the Safe City Strike Force.

It’s more likely than not that the unintended consequences of the changes proposed by City Councilor Pat Davis and his 023-75 will undermine the city’s enforcement authority and efforts in that there will be less reliance on the District Courts which is a major mistake.  State District Courts have primary jurisdiction, known as in rem jurisdiction, over real property matters and rights. The city’s creation of an administrative “in house” proceeding dealing with property owners and rights will likely be viewed as a conflict of interest and will be a failure and likely challenged in court, as was the case with the city’s now defunct DWI vehicle forfeiture program created  under the city’s nuisance abatement ordinance.

 

  1. EXPANDING THE HOUSING WORKFORCE.                                                                                                                                                                              According to the city, one of the biggest challenges to bringing more new or repurposed housing on line is the limited availability of construction crews to complete projects. To expand capacity to carry out needed housing initiatives, Albuquerque will need to attract, train and incentivize more construction crews to carry out small, medium and large projects. Using the Job Training Albuquerque program as a model, as well as other state workforce development programs, the City will work with industry and building trades leaders to ramp up workforce capacity for building additional housing. The goal is to help train at least 250 new housing and construction workers by 2025.

 

  1. ALLOWING MORE OPTIONS IN HOUSING TYPE IN CITY ZONING CODE.                                                                                                                                   According to the city, 63% of all housing in Albuquerque is single family detached. The Keller Administration wants to removing barriers to the construction and renovation of more diverse housing types and views it as critical to accommodating the needs of the various populations in our city, from seniors to families and students. One goal of the HOUSING FOREWARD ABQ PLAN is to amend the Integrated Development Ordinance to provide more options and make it more flexible and easier for developers. Three proposed zoning changes are:

 

        A.  INCREASING AVAILABILITY OF CASITAS (ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS ADUS).                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          The city is  proposing  modifications to the Integrated Development Ordinance to allow more construction and conversion projects in appropriately zoned areas for smaller living area conversions or “casitas.”  The Keller Administration argues allowing more construction of these units will increase the supply of affordable housing while providing additional income for current property owners. With this change the city hopes the number of ADUs will increase by at least 1,000 units by 2025.

https://www.krqe.com/news/albuquerque-metro/proposed-zoning-changes-could-mean-more-casitas-in-albuquerque/

    B. INCREASING AVAILABILITY OF DIVERSE HOUSING OPTIONS.                                                                                                                                                       According to city officials, the number of multi-unit housing options is far below needed levels to provide residents with the needed range of options in housing type, regardless of whether they are renters or home owners. The city claims that by amending the Integrated Development Ordinance to allow developers more options for housing conversion and construction, residents will be able to find housing that meets their financial and family needs. With the proposed zoning changes, the city is hoping the number of multi-unit housing options will increase by at least 1,000 units by 2025.

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

The proposals of increasing availability of casitas and increasing availability of diverse housing options were received at all 5 area meetings with noticeable hostility and mistrust by the general public.  At the Southeast Area public meeting, one known progressive activist declared that Keller’s proposal of casitas was akin to Mayor Richard Berry’s disastrous ART Bus project that has destroyed Central.  She said that Keller’s proposal will destroy the city even  further.  Additional commentary and analysis on casitas and  two family dwellings is below.

        C. ADJUSTING PARKING REQUIREMENTS.                                                                                                                                                                                            Another modification to the Integrate Development Ordinance proposed by the Keller Administration is to allow housing developers to adjust parking requirements in appropriately zoned areas to promote higher density and more infill housing. With this change, the Keller administrations is hoping the number of diverse new housing options increase by at least 1,000units by 2025.

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

Make no mistake about it. Less parking means more rental units. Developers will always do whatever they can to reduce the availability of needed parking in order to have more land to build upon and to increase their over all profit margins.

  1. Creating a Housing Stability Fund with $750,000 funding for a landlord mitigation fund to help Albuquerque landlords rent to prospective tenants who might be considered higher risk based n credit history, income, or other concerns.

MOTEL CONVERSIONS

Mayor Keller’s “Housing Forward ABQ” places great emphasis on “motel conversions”.  A zoning change already enacted by the city council in early 2022 year eased the process for city-funded motel conversions by allowing microwaves or hot plates to serve as a substitute for the standard requirement that every kitchen have a cooking stove or oven. “Motel conversions” includes affordable housing where the City’s Family & Community Services Department will acquire and renovate existing motels to develop low-income affordable housing options. Keller’s plan calls for hotel or motel conversions to house 1,000 people by 2025.

The Keller Administration proclaims that motel conversions are a critical strategy for addressing the city’s housing shortage. The city proclaims motels conversions are a simpler, lower-cost alternative to ground-up construction. It will require city social services to regularly assist residents. The homeless or the near homeless would be offered the housing likely on a first come first served basis and with rules and regulations they will have to agree to.

The existing layout of the motels makes it cost-prohibitive to renovate them into living units with full sized kitchens.  An Integrated Development Ordinance amendment provides an exemption for affordable housing projects funded by the city, allowing kitchens to be small, without full-sized ovens and refrigerators. It will require city social services to regularly assist residents. The homeless or the near homeless would be offered the housing.

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

The city offering motel conversion accommodations to the unhoused will likely be just as futile as offering shelter to the unhoused. The city will likely place restrictions on those accommodations such as not having a criminal record or engaging in illicit drug use. Rules and regulations are often rejected by the unhoused.

CITY BUYS “SURE STAY” HOTEL

One area of the city that has been targeted in particular by the Keller Administration for motel conversions is “Hotel Circle” in the North East Heights. The area is considered a “high crime” volume area because of the thousands of APD calls for service to deal with crime at the motels. Located in the area are not only a number of motels but it is also the largest shopping area in SE and NE Albuquerque near I-40. The businesses in the area include Target, Office Depot, Best Buy, Home Store, PetCo and the Mattress Store and restaurants such as Sadies, the Owl Café, and Applebee’s and other businesses.

On February 11 it was reported that the City of Albuquerque has executed a purchase agreement for the purchase of the Sure Stay Hotel located at 10330 Hotel NE for $5.7 million to convert the 104-room hotel into 100 efficiency units. The $5.7 million purchase price for the 104-unit complex translates into $53,807.69 per unit ($5.7 Million ÷ 104 = $53,807.69 per unit).

At a December 6, 2022 meeting on motel conversions, city officials said that the city’s estimated cost is $100,000 per unit to fix up or remodel existing motels. Using the city’s own estimated remodeling costs for the Sure Stay Motel, an additional $10 Million will be needed to remodel the motel for low income housing. ($100,000 per unit X 100 efficiency apartments = $10 Million). Therefore, the entire Sure Stay conversion project will have an estimated cost of $15,700,000.  ($5.7 purchase cost + $10 Million remodeling cost = $15,700,000)

City officials have said the purchase should close this spring and said the project’s total cost, including necessary renovations of the Sure Stay hotel will not be known until later this year as the city still must put the work out to bid. The goal is to have the converted motel open for  housing within a year. City officials have said funding is available for at least one additional motel purchase.

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

Mayor Tim Keller has given his Family and Community Services Department an astonishing amount of authority and funding to acquire existing motels and hotels and they are doing so with little or no oversight by the Albuquerque City Council. At one of his recent telephone town hall meeting, Keller proclaimed that if he had it his way, the city would purchase all derelict motels along Central and convert them into low-income housing.

Simply put, this is the acquisition of private property to promote a politcal agenda to supplement the housing market and the private sector when the city should be concentrating on providing basic essential services. The biggest issue is does the city have any business getting involved with the motel-hotel conversion business and should there be any limit on the number of housing units the city can have  in its inventory for low-income housing?  The city already owns and operates 8 existing housing facilities with 500 units managed by the Family Community Services Department and Keller wants to triple that number by adding 1,000 units to the city’s inventory of low-income housing.

CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCE 0-22-54

The most controversial provision of Keller’s Housing Forward ABQ” plan is the introduction and pending consideration by the City Council of City Council Ordinance 0-22-54.  Mayor Keller has called the legislation “transformative” updates to Albuquerque’s Integrated Development Ordinance (IDO) to carry out his “Housing Forward ABQ”.  The one thing transformative about it is that it will transform existing neighborhoods into something unrecognizable.

0-22-54 AMENDMENT HIGHLIGHTS

EDITOR’S SIDEBAR

Under the Integrated Development Ordinance,  a “conditional use”  requires an application process with the city, notice to surrounding property owners with appeal rights. A “permissive use” would give the Planning Department exclusive authority issue permits for construction without notices and hearings. Both Casitas and Two Family Home additions are now “conditional uses” and with the amendment would be “permissive uses”.  Adjoining property owners of or neighborhoods would no longer have appeal rights and would be required to go to court to enforce covenants and restrictions.

Mayor Keller’s  “Housing Forward ABQ” involves  six major amendments embodied in city council resolution  0-22-54  to Albuquerque’s Integrated Development Ordinance (IDO) which is the City’s Zoning laws and now pending before the city council.  The amendments are:

1) Allow two family dwellings (duplexes)  in R-1 residential zones, permissively, with no  public hearing, citywide. 

One of the key proposed zoning amendments to the Integrated Development Ordinance (IDO) is  to allow two-family homes in all R-1 zones citywide, except in small areas where distinct rules apply. Today, two-family homes are allowed in a small fraction of the R-1 zones in Albuquerque. However, the combined total of R-1 zones amount to  68% of zoned properties in Albuquerque.  The Keller Administration argues that by opening up the current restrictive zoning code two-family homes, housing density can increase throughout the city and add more housing options for all income levels.

Currently two-family homes are allowed in R-1A zone. The proposed change would allow two-family homes in all R-1 zones, which would allow conversions and new construction at the scale of single-family houses in neighborhoods throughout the city. Under the proposed amendments, going forward those would be called “two-family homes”.  750 square foot additions would be allowed on  existing residence as a “permissive use” to create a “duplex” or “two family” home.

2) Allow Accessory Dwelling units (ADUs) known as “casitas”  with kitchens in all R-1 residential zones, permissively citywide.

Casitas are small, detached residential homes located on the same lot as an existing single family home.  The amendment as proposed will allow 750 square foot “casitas”  in the R-1 zones citywide, except in small areas where distinct rules apply. Currently casitas with kitchens are only allowed in small areas and just two corridors in R-1 zones. Under the zone change, casitas would be allowed only in the side or rear yard on lots with enough room to meet all setbacks and other requirements. They would be limited to 750 square feet and would require one off-street parking space.

 COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

“R-1” zoning  is  single family home lot zoning.  Upwards of 68% of all residential property zoned in the city is zoned R-1 encompassing 23% of the city’s total geographic area. Currently, only R-1 properties, or single-family home lots, are  allowed to build a casita and those properties are downtown and along parts of Central meeting the proper requirements. The proposed legislation to  allow  both casitas and “two family homes”  will dramatically increase options in “R-1” residential zones. This is speculative and will be contingent on private funding.

The proposed legislation will allow both detached “casitas” up to 750 square feet and 750 square  foot “duplex construction” additions on all existing  residential lots.  This amendment will impact areas zoned for single-family homes by allowing duplexes and “casitas” accessory dwelling units on lots with sufficient available space.

According to city officials, there are 120,000 residential lots that have existing residential structures. With the construction of “casitas” and “two family home” additions, density could double to 240,000 with casita structures alone or triple to 360,000 with both casitas and two-family home additions which will be allowed.  This plan is just plain nuts and it will have a dramatic, negative impact on all existing neighborhoods by increasing density to unacceptable levels.

The Keller Administration is claiming two-family homes are created most often when people convert part of their homes into a separate dwelling units. During the public meetings, Keller City Officials went to great lengths to characterize casitas as “mother in law” quarters, when in fact experience shows such casitas normally are not used personally by the property owner but used for rental income including and small businesses.

A major risk that exists will the  reclassification zoning  of all single family lots  to allow  residential duplex development and  casita development  will  encourage large private investors and real estate developers, including  out-of-state corporate entities, to buy up or lease and covert whole blocks into rental duplexes with substandard rental casitas. This will dramatically degrade the character of neighborhoods and the City as a whole. 

An individual  investor will be able to purchase single family homes for  rental, add a 750 square foot two family home addition and build a separate 750 foot free standing casita and which will result in a one home rental being converted into 3 separate rental units.  Such development will decrease the availability of affordable homes and raise rental prices even higher.

3) Exempt office and hotels that convert to multifamily apartments from having to put in a full kitchen.   The city claims his will simplify plans to convert hotels into affordable housing. It would loosen restrictions that require each unit to have a stove or oven inside with city planners saying there’s a market for it.  This zoning change will make it easier to convert commercial office space into residential dwellings and in particular efficiency apartments or loft apartments with no bedrooms and a single  combined living,  cooking  and sleeping area.

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

Developers converting non-residential buildings to multi-family housing would not have to meet the existing kitchen standard of having a cooking stove, range or oven in each unit. They would only have to provide a microwave, hotplate or warming device. The bill seeks to extend the existing exemption that currently applies only to city-funded projects to developers to replace the standard kitchen oven or stove with a microwave or hot plate when turning hotels or other commercial buildings into permanent housing.

4) Eliminate building height limits in R-ML and MX(mixed use zones). This would  affect much of the west side, as well as the rest of the City.

Ordinance O-22-54 aims to eliminate building height maximums for multi-family residential development and mixed-use development, except in small areas where distinct  rules apply.  Any commercial or apartment building within 100 feet of a single-family home, townhouse, or duplex can only be a maximum of 30 feet tall. At more than 100 feet away the building height maximum is determined by the zoning.

COMMENTARY AND ANALYIS:

It’s simply astonishing that this proposal gets rid of building height restrictions for multi-family developments. The amendment relaxes rules for apartment development and eliminates height limits for mixed-use development and for multi-family housing such as apartments in the highest-density residential zone. What is happening now is that neighborhoods are already taking issue with multi story apartment complexes being built obstructing views and increasing density affecting traffic patterns and lack of parking.

Currently, height limits in those areas vary. In the high-density residential zone today, caps range from 48 to 65 feet, though certain types of projects earn bonuses that raise the limit to 77 feet. In mixed-use zones, present limits range from 30 to 75 feet, though they could reach 111 feet with structured parking and other project bonuses.

Casitas build in the backyard of existing residents must be the same height of the existing residence. However the building of “casitas”  that are taller than the primary structure will  be allowed  on side lot areas of the property. Eliminating maximum building heights on the side area of a lot  removes a regulatory barrier to development projects as an attempt to increase density and ultimately will have a dramatic impact on existing neighborhoods. 

 5) Exempt affordable housing from parking requirements.

This  would reduce or eliminate street parking requirements for multi-family and affordable housing developments. The city argues the practice of mandating adequate parking spaces contributes significantly to the cost of housing projects and claims mandated parking minimums increase rent or mortgage by $200-$500 per month.   The city argued that reducing parking requirements would allow developers to build more housing for all income levels and allow housing developers to provide what they feel is an appropriate amount of parking for development in mixed-use zones to promote higher density and more infill housing.

COMMENTARY ANALYSIS

The false presumption with this zone change is that low income housing residents do not have their own vehicles they rely upon for transportation to and from work. Eliminating mandatory parking availability is a recipe for disaster.

6) Reduce parking requirements for multi-family/apartments by 75 %.

This sixth proposal also loosens and reduces parking restrictions at affordable housing and apartment complexes.  The amendment will change parking requirements and will exempt projects where at least 20% of the residential units will be affordable housing from providing off-street parking and reduces current requirements for other multi-family and mixed-use developments by 75%.  Under existing zoning requirements, a multi-family development needs 1-1.8 off-street parking spaces per dwelling unit generally based on the number of bedrooms per apartment.

COMMENTARY AND  ANALYSIS

The false presumption with this zone change is that low-income housing residents do not have their own vehicles they rely upon for transportation to and from work. Eliminating mandatory parking availability is another recipe for disaster.

https://www.kob.com/new-mexico/city-leaders-propose-major-changes-to-albuquerques-zoning-laws/

CAPPING SHORT TERM RENTAL UNITS

 Another controversial provision of Keller’s Housing Forward ABQ” plan is the introduction and pending consideration by the City Council of City Council Ordinance 0-23-69 seeking to regulate and cap short term rentals, also known as “Bed and Breakfast” rental units. The Keller Administration argues that there is a need to  protect  existing housing stock to make it available to all permanent residents and future residents so that they will always have access to a safe, stable home. Enacting the proposed changes of Council Bill No. 0-23-69 will:

  1. Require all short-term rental units to have a local property manager (or Short-Term Rental Manager, “STRM”) available (within 20 miles of the City limits) to respond to maintenance and security concerns.
  2. Limit short-term rental permits to three per natural person.
  3. Limit the number of Short-Term Rental permits issued citywide to no more than 1,200, based on current monthly average of active STRs.
  4. Increase the civil penalties for non-compliance with the ordinance.

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

EDITOR’S DISLOSURE: The below commentary was provided by  Associate Broker Carl Vidal with the Irvie Homes Property Management.

Despite Mayor Keller’s claims that short-term rentals reduce available housing to permanent residents, there is no evidence that  banning  or capping the number  will increase  the city’s overall  housing supply to permanent residents.   AirDNA, a leader in short-term rental data, reports that 66% of short-term rentals in Albuquerque are part-time units. These homes are rented out periodically by locals to support their families and cover monthly bills.  The locals often reside in these homes while they’re not rented. In Albuquerque, short-term rentals account for only 0.007% of the housing inventory, and only 0.003% if we consider just full-time rentals.

Short-term rentals have significantly contributed to Albuquerque’s economy, generating an impressive $216 million in economic impact and creating over 2,280 jobs locally. Moreover, the city, state, and county have collected around $14 million in taxes in 2022 alone from these rentals. With over 2,500 hosts leasing short-term rentals across the city, last year’s 431,000 guests spent an average of $361 per overnight visit. These figures demonstrate the essential role of short-term rentals in the city’s economy, making them a vital asset that should be allowed to exist and thrive..

Short-term rentals play a crucial role in providing housing for transient  workers in various industries, including healthcare traveling nurses and locum doctors, traveling contractors, actors, directors, film workers, and staff from Intel, Facebook, Sandia Labs, and Kirtland Airforce Base. These rentals serve as a lifeline for workers who would otherwise struggle to find affordable housing during their stay. Without short-term rentals, many of these workers simply will not be able to find housing locally, highlighting the critical role these rentals play in supporting the local economy and workforce.

Short-term rentals provide an accessible investment opportunity for local Albuquerque residents, with over 2,000 hosts across the city relying on the income they generate. In contrast, building hotels requires a vast amount of funding that is typically only accessible to the wealthiest members of our society. For instance, a mid-tier 100 room hotel costs an estimated $22.5 million, with a minimum down payment of $4.5 million, making it unaffordable for the vast majority of New Mexicans. As a result, out-of-state corporations often finance these projects, taking profits out of our state. Short-term rentals serve as an investment vehicle for the 99%, ensuring that the income generated stays within our community and benefits local residents.

Limiting short-term rentals to only 1,800 units will strip future generations of New Mexicans of their opportunity to benefit from this innovative and growing sector.   The “Housing Forward ABQ” plan  to limit short term rentals  is a restriction on  commerce and interfere with property owners’ rights.  It  will give an unfair advantage to out-of-state owned hotels in supply and demand economics.  By limiting the number of licenses available, the city is undermining a vital source of income for thousands of locals. Short-term rentals offer a valuable opportunity for the future and should be given a chance to thrive.

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

Simply put, Keller is using a short-term housing “crunch” to declare it a “housing crisis” in order to shove his “HOUSING FORWARD ABQ PLAN”  down the throats of the city residents and property owners. Keller is using a housing crunch to declare a housing crisis to advocate major zoning changes that will increase density and destroy neighborhoods relying on neighborhoods, investors and developers to increase density by laxing zoning restriction for developers.

Keller’s “HOUSING FORWARD ABQ PLAN” empowers the Planning Department to unilaterally issue “permissive uses” for “casitas” and “two family duplex development” on existing structures.  The Planning Department will be allowed to exclude the general public from the permissible use application and deny adjacent property owners the right to object and appeal  casitas and duplex remodeling. It essentially will require property owners to sue adjoining property owners to enforce covenants and restrictions.

“HOUSING FORWARD ABQ” is an aggressive approach to allow the city Family and Community Services department to become alarmingly involved with acquisition of private property to promote Keller’s politcal agenda to supplement the housing market with low income housing  when the city should be concentrating on providing basic essential services. The Keller Administration is emphasizing the homeless crisis as a rues to promote the  “HOUSING FORWARD ABQ” when the plan has nothing to do with housing the homeless and everything to do with increasing housing density in established neighborhoods

Mayor Tim Keller’s Housing Foreward Abq Plan is a city policy abomination that favors developers and the city’s construction industry.  Given the public’s reaction at all 5 of the public meetings, there exists strong public hostility and mistrust.  Keller’s Housing Foreward Abq Plan is being  rejected outright by city residents and the Albuquerque City Council should do the same.  Keller boldly proclaims his  Housing Foreward Plan is  “transformational.”  The only thing transformational about it is that it will destroy historic neighborhoods and the character of established neighborhoods.

KELLER CATERING TO DEVELOPERS

The IDO was enacted a mere few weeks before Tim Keller was elected Mayor the first time in 2017. When then New Mexico Auditor Tim Keller was running for Mayor he had nothing to say publicly about the IDO and gave no position on it.  He did proclaim he was the most uniquely qualified to be Mayor despite lacking any experience in municipal affairs and city zoning matters.   The likely reason for not taking a position on the IDO was his sure ignorance of municipal land use planning and zoning matters, something he was never exposed to in his career as a State Senator and State Auditor.

Five years later, Keller ostensibly has had some sort of epiphany and education and proclaims the IDO is outdated. It’s very difficult, if not outright laughable, to take Mayor Tim Keller serious when he proclaimed the city’s Integrated Development Ordinance (IDO), which lays out highly complicated zoning and subdivision regulations, as being outdated given that it was enacted in 2017 by the city council on an 8-1 vote.

What is really happening with Mayor Tim Keller’s “transformative changes” to  the Integrated Development Ordinance and his  “Housing Forward Abq” plan is that Keller is catering to the development community as he  pretends  to be an expert in the field of housing development and zoning matters.  Keller is relying on his exaggeration of  the city’s housing crisis and homeless crisis to seek further changes to the city’s zoning code to help the development community and using city funding to do it.

ANOTHER RUSH JOB TO FAVOR DEVELOPERS

Simply put, the IDO is and has always been an abomination that favors developers and the city’s construction industry. The 2017 rewrite was a rush job.  It took a mere 2 years to rewrite the entire zoning code and it emerged as the Integrated Development Ordinance (IDO). It was in late 2017, just a few weeks before the municipal election and the election of Mayor Tim Keller, that the City Council rushed to vote for the final adoption of the IDO comprehensive plan on an 8-1 vote.

The rush job on city zoning to favor developers is happening again. This time, Mayor Tim Keller has City Councilors Isaac Benton, a retired architect, and Republican Trudy Jones, a retired realtor to carry his water for him by sponsoring the legislation.  Both have announced that they will not be seeking reelection this year and are anxious to push through the legislation before they depart on January 1, 2024.

At the Downtown area meeting, city officials essentially admitted all the public meeting and city council meetings and hearings on the amendments to the Integrated Development Ordinance will be completed in the matter of months and a final vote will be taken before the November 8 municipal election where at least 3 new city councilors will be elected.

At a bare minimum, the public should tell their City Councilors to oppose “casitas”, two-family duplex” additions and  “motel conversions” and denounce them for the zoning abominations that they are which is a threat to established neighborhoods and historical areas of the city.

CONTACT CITY COUNCIL

Voters and residents are urged to contact and voice their opinion and tell all city councilors to vote NO on the amendments.

CITY COUNCIL PHONE: (505) 768-3100

CITY COUNCIL AND SUPPORT STAFF  EMAILS

lesanchez@cabq.gov
louiesanchez@allstate.com
bmaceachen@cabq.gov
ibenton@cabq.gov
namolina@cabq.gov
kpena@cabq.gov,
rmhernandez@cabq.gov
bbassan@cabq.gov
danlewis@cabq.gov
galvarez@cabq.gov
patdavis@cabq.gov
seanforan@cabq.gov
tfiebelkorn@cabq.gov
lrummler@cabq.gov
trudyjones@cabq.gov
azizachavez@cabq.gov
rgrout@cabq.gov
rrmiller@cabq.gov
LEWISABQ@GMAIL.COM
nancymontano@cabq.gov
cortega@cabq.gov
cmelendrez@cabq.gov

 

 

 

 

Gov. MLG Vetoes Major Tax Reform Measures, Leaves In Place Rebates; Vetoes 35 Other Measures; Noteworthy Vetoes; Lost Long Term Opportunity For Short Term Rebates

Friday, April 7, was the last day Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham had to sign into law or veto legislation enacted by the 2023 New Mexico legislature. By the end of the day, the Governor  had veto 36 major legislative initiatives including most of the massive tax reform and reduction package but leaving intact rebates.

TAX PACKAGE LINE-ITEM VETOS

Democrat Governor Lujan Grisham  gutted the  massive tax package carefully crafted by the House describing it as “bloated and fiscally unstable”. Using her line item veto power, she vetoed from the bill a phased-in reduction of the gross receipts  tax New Mexico consumers pay on goods and services, a 20% alcohol tax increase, an electric vehicle tax credit and changes to the state’s personal income tax system aimed at benefiting low-income residents and vetoing 20 other major provisions from the tax bill. Notwithstanding the line item vetoes, the tax package nears $1 billion.

What the Governor left intact was the  $500 tax rebate for individuals and the  $1,000 rebated for married couples filing jointly, expanded child tax credit of up to $600 per child, and  changes to the state’s film incentive program. The child tax credit provides more than $100 million in tax relief for around 214,000 New Mexico families. Those families will be able to claim a larger credit of up to $600 per child after the tax credit was expanded.

The rebates will cost the state upwards of  $670 million in one-time funding and will be available to all taxpayers who filed 2021 tax returns.  New Mexico adults who do not qualify for the tax rebates, either because they did not file tax returns or for another reason, will be able to apply for similarly sized financial relief payments under a separate $15 million appropriation.

The Governor said this of the tax package she signed:

“Every one of these provisions directly helps New Mexicans through supporting working families, bolstering the health care workforce and fostering continued economic growth. …  Expanding the Child Tax Credit will help over 200,000 New Mexico families and broaden our successful effort to reduce child poverty rates, which dropped by a full percentage point between 2019 and 2021.”

According to the state Taxation and Revenue Department, by trimming most of the tax changes from the bill, the recurring cost will drop to $150 million as of the 2024 budget year.  It will then gradually increase to $246 million by 2027, primarily due to the changes to the film incentive program. The  figures do not include the tax rebates, which will be sent out starting in the next several weeks.

The line item vetoes came as a surprise seeing as she had previously advocated for some of the vetoed tax provisions.  She had advocated for the reduction in the gross receipts tax rate that would have gradually dropped the state’s base tax rate from 4.875% to 4.375% over a four-year period.  Notwithstanding her previous support of the tax reduction measures, she expressed concern that the tax package’s recurring annual cost of $1.1 billion to be fully implemented  by 2027  could lead to future spending cuts.

Lujan Grisham said she preferred more gradual changes to the tax code and said this:

“I just want us to be more pragmatic. …  I didn’t think it was prudent to do it all at once.”

As to the proposed alcohol tax increase that was pushed by backers as a way to decrease consumption in a state with the nation’s highest rate of alcohol-related fatalities, the governor simply said the “numbers weren’t quite right” without elaboration.

In her executive  message to lawmakers announcing the veto, the Governor said  the tax bill contained many “laudable tax reform measures,” but said she had “grave concerns about its future sustainability”. The governor said this:

“Given the unpredictable nature of the economy and our state’s reliance on oil and gas revenues, I am not confident this package is fiscally responsible.” 

LEGISLATOR’S REACT

Many  lawmakers and advocates who had pushed for the tax changes amid an unprecedented state revenue windfall expressed irritation with the Governor’s  line item vetoes.

Santa Fe  Democrat Senate Majority Leader Peter Wirth who  helped craft the tax package called the vetoes disappointing, but said lawmakers would continue working to improve the state’s tax code. Wirth said this:

“There were a lot of things in there that I believe are important to the state … and it’s frustrating when those get taken away.” 

Notwithstanding his disappointment, Senator Wirth said the  Senate  would not pursue a veto override on the tax package.  Since taking office in 2019, the Democratic-controlled Legislature has not tried to override any of Lujan Grisham’s vetoes, but threatened to do so and came close when she vetoed 2 years ago the legislatures capital improvement bill.

Sandia Pueblo Democrat Representative Derrick Lente,  the chairman of the House Taxation and Revenue Committee also expressed dissatisfaction with the vetoes  saying  this year’s tax package was carefully crafted. Lente said this:

“It is disappointing that we will not be able to reduce the tax burden on local businesses, educators, veterans and everyday New Mexicans, or help our state improve access to rural health care and reach our climate goals.”

Links to quoted news sources are here:

https://www.koat.com/article/new-mexico-2023-tax-rebates/43541723

https://www.krqe.com/news/new-mexico/new-mexicans-to-get-another-round-of-tax-rebates-in-2023/

https://www.abqjournal.com/2588887/governor-leaves-500-rebates-intact-but-slices-tax-cuts-and-other-changes-from-massive-package.html

NOTEWORTHY VETOES

In addition to the tax package line item vetoes, Governor Lujan Grisham issued 35 vetoes. Among the most noteworthy vetoes included vetoing the  bipartisan proposals to revise high school graduation requirements and establishing  a civil rights office under the  state Attorney General and overhauling  New Mexico’s dysfunctional Game Commission.

The high-profile vetoes included the following:

Senate Bill 426: Establish a civil rights office under the state attorney general. The bill was one of several bills aimed at strengthening oversight of the Children, Youth and Families Department all of which either failed to pass the Legislature or were blocked by the governor.  The governor did not sign the bill thereby  killing it through a pocket veto without a public explanation.  The Governor said she had mixed feelings about  the bill describing the concept as valid but saying prosecutors already have tools to investigate neglect and abuse. Attorney General Raul Torrez for his part had pushed for creation of the office as a way to protect the rights of children in state custody, such as foster care. Torrez argued his office could investigate broader patterns of abuse or address problems that aren’t solved through civil litigation.

House Bill 126: Revise school graduation requirements. The proposal would’ve lowered the total credits needed to graduate from 24 to 22. It also got rid of the Algebra 2 requirement. This bill was jointly sponsored by Albuquerque Democrat Representative G. Andrés Romero, an APS teacher, and House Minority Leader Ryan Lane, R-Aztec.  The bill would have given students more flexibility to pursue off-campus learning, such as career and technical education. Local teacher union leaders disagreed with the veto. Whitney Holland, president of American Federation of Teachers New Mexico, said this:

“I think we’re approaching this in two really different perspectives. … Our approach to this was the removal of Algebra 2, that was what made this bill so enticing, and I think for families we heard and from educators, practitioners, that has been a barrier to high school graduation. So I think that was overlooked a little bit in the message.”

House Bill 184: Overhaul appointment and removal process for Game Commission which sets hunting and fishing regulations.  The commission has had extensive turnover as a result of the Governor removing appointees to the extent that vacancies have left it without a quorum.  The bill was intended to stabilize and strengthen the commission by  prohibiting the removal of a member except for incompetence, malfeasance or neglect.

Senate Bill 2: Raise judges’ pay.  This was a rejection to boost judicial salaries for the second consecutive year. It would have brought NM Supreme Court justice pay to $214,000, equal to a federal magistrate. Supporters argued the pay increase  would have helped diversify the court and expand the pool of applicants.

Senate Bill 84: Change system for probation and parole violations.  The bill would have reduced the number of people imprisoned for technical violations of parole.

Senate Bill 187: Exclude drug possession from sentencing enhancements for habitual offenders.  This bill would have  ended  sentencing enhancements for drug possession in certain cases.

https://www.abqjournal.com/2589075/with-uptick-in-vetoes-lujan-grisham-blocks-legislation-on-graduation-requirements-parole-violations.htmlBottom of Form

https://www.kob.com/new-mexico/what-did-gov-lujan-grisham-veto-from-the-legislative-session/

WHAT THE GOVERNOR DID SIGN

The governor signed the enacted  $9.6 billion budget plan for the fiscal year that begins on June1.  The budget will boost state spending to record-high levels for the third consecutive year amid a revenue windfall.  The Governor did line item  veto  $21 million from the spending plan before signing it and vetoed  some budget language that she said intruded into the executive branch’s authority.

The signed budget bill includes $100 million to bolster a law enforcement officer recruitment fund,  $100 million to set up two new funds for conservation programs and upwards of  $90 million to increase reimbursement rates for Medicaid providers. The budget also provides funding to give 6% pay raises to state employees and teachers, starting in July.

The states historic oil and gas revenue surplus allowed lawmakers to increase state spending and approve the tax package.  The historic revenue surge was  fueled by an uptick in consumer spending and surging oil production in the Permian Basin.  New Mexico is now  the nation’s second-highest oil producer in the country.

The governor also signed bills intended to expand access to health care in a state that’s long struggled with a provider shortage.  The measures include emergency legislation to revise New Mexico’s medical malpractice law to ensure independent outpatient clinics can obtain the insurance they need to keep operating next year. Also approved were bills intended to help rural hospitals and address high prescription drug costs.

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

The Governor’s line-item veto’s of the massive tax package and leaving intake the tax rebates amount to a lost opportunity.  The $500 and $1,000 tax rebates make a terrific sound bite for a political add or political reelection flyer but in the long-term amount to a negligible amount of money for the individual taxpayer. The upwards of $1 Billion distributed to some 214,000 New Mexico family’s and taxpayer’s for a one time financial gain is short sighted and the money could have been better spent on projects that could have made a real difference in the state’s quality of life.

NO TAX  “PYRAMIDING” PROPOSAL

What was glaring from review of  the massive tax bill that was hailed as tax reform was any provision on eliminating tax pyramiding.  The widely discussed  proposed tax exemption for accountants, architects and other professional services that had been proposed as a way to reduce tax “pyramiding,” or taxes being levied several times on the same goods or services was nowhere to be found.  The tax “pyramiding” legislation had bipartisan support and the Governor’s support. The tax pyramiding provision proposal drew  fierce opposition from Albuquerque and other New Mexico cities and counties, as city officials argued it would reduce their revenue streams and complicate efforts to hire more police officers.

LOST OPPORTUNITY

When  the Legislative Finance Committee released its Consensus Revenue Estimate for fiscal year 2024 it was reported that New Mexico’s revenues  ballooned with the  state’s revenues from oil and gas production increasing at record levels.  The estimates released projected the state would have an astonishing $3.6 billion in “new” money available for the budget year that starts on July 1, 2023.

When the record amount of surplus revenue was reported, top budget and finance officials in Lujan Grisham’s administration and the Legislative Finance Committee finance officials urged the Governor and lawmakers to use the windfall on one-time expenditures due to the risk of future revenue dips.  They urged that the surplus be used for one-time major capital outlays that could be transformative. Instead, the Governor concentrated on tax reform and rebates costing upwards of $1 Billion. The Governor after first supporting tax reductions now claims the tax cuts were not sustainable but she keeps the rebates with little to no explanation.

There is a lengthy list on what the surplus could have been spent upon, but instead will now go to rebates. The list includes major infrastructure needs such as roads and major bridge repair across some of the most rural parts of the state with an estimated cost of $500 million, funding for wastewater projects, dams and acequia projects, the courts, law enforcement and the criminal justice system, funding for our behavioral health care system, job creation endeavors, economic development programs, funding for the Public Employee Retirement funds to deal with underfunded liabilities and benefits.

Not at all surprising, lawmakers called for spending restraint and tax reform despite the revenue windfall, saying a drop in oil prices and a possible global recession could mean a big drop in state revenue collections within the next several years.  What is also not at all surprising are fiscal conservatives, especially Republicans, calling for tax cuts and rebates.  Whenever surpluses in state revenues occur, such as this year especially, Republicans always begin to salivate and proclaim all taxation is bad and that rebates and tax reform are desperately needed and the only way to go.

The Republican tired and old political dogma has always been that tax revenues are the people’s money and anything in excess of what is actually needed over and above essential government services should be returned to the taxpayer.  Governor Lujan Grisham bought into the political rhetoric. It is a short-sighted philosophy believing that only essential, basic services should be funded with taxpayer money such as public safety or that rebates should be made.  If that were the case, there would be no public libraries, no museums, no zoos no mass transit expansions and no outdoor sculptures and  art exhibits.

The reality is that all of the major new  programs now funded by the enacted 2023 budget will require reoccurring funding and revenues from taxation  which is probably one of the biggest reasons the Governor declared the tax cuts were not sustainable.  What all too often is totally ignored because lack of revenues are major capital outlay projects that are for the benefit of the general public and that improve the overall quality of life. Roads and water projects are such priorities, but are not exclusive.

It is very disappointing that Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham and the New Mexico legislature totally ignored advocating for major capital outlay projects that could be transformative for the state.  Projects that could improve the overall quality of life.

Given the sure magnitude of the surplus, municipalities, citizens and interest groups asked for funding for special capital projects such as swimming pools, parks, recreation facilities, sport facilities, such soccer stadiums, and entertainment venues. Some lawmakers put forward different ideas on how to spend some of the state’s budget surplus, including the building of a high-speed train crisscrossing New Mexico from north to south. The Governor and the legislature pretty much ignored funding such projects.  This year, Albuquerque area Democrat State Senator Bill Tallman suggested a state funded Albuquerque downtown stadium or arena to revitalize the area and he was given the cold shoulder.

For the last two years, the New Mexico United soccer team has been trying to get taxpayer money to build a soccer stadium. In 2020, the soccer team was able to secure $4 million in state funds.  In 2021, Albuquerque taxpayers were asked to support a bond to pay for the stadium, but it was rejected. With a $3.8 in surplus revenue, the legislature could have fully funded the facility which will be around $16 million.

Other major capital outlay facilities and projects that has been discussed for decades is improving the New Mexico State Fair and all of its aging facilities.  In particular, demolishing the 60-year-old Tingly Coliseum and building a multipurpose entertainment and sports facility with the capacity of upwards of 20,000 has been a dream of many a Governor, State Fair Commission and Fair Managers.

On February 25, 2019 it was reported that there is a need for such a facility and EXPO New Mexico was in  the final stages of conducting a feasibility study on the construction of a new arena on the state fairgrounds.  Tingley Coliseum has been around since 1957 with capacity for 11,000. Over the years it’s been remodeled and upgraded but it is still a state fair rodeo venue. The state and Albuquerque for decades has needed a large capacity, multipurpose entertainment venue of upwards of 20,000.

Now that the 2023 legislative session has come and gone, preparations are now on the way for the 2024 legislative session with the Governor already indicating priorities she will seek in the 30 day short session where she will set  the agenda. It is very likely that the state revenue historic surpluses will continue. The Governor should seek to identify major transformative capital improvement projects that will have long term impacts on the states quality of life and not on another round of short term benefit tax rebates.