Mid-Point Tabulation of Eleven 2025 Mayor Candidates Nominating Petition Signatures And Qualifying Public Finance Donations; Daniel Chavez First To Qualify For Ballot, 3 More With Over 50% Of Nominating Signatures; No Candidate Has Qualified For Public Finance; Mayor Keller At 54% Collected Donations; Only 29 Days Left In Collection Process; Changes In Nominating Signature And Public Finance Laws Are In Order

Posted on May 27, 2025

There are a total of 11 candidates who have registered with the City Clerk as candidates for Mayor. All 11 candidates are required to collect 3,000 qualifying nominating signatures. Five of the eleven candidates running for Mayor are “public financed” candidates with 3 others withdrawing as Public Finance Candidates. Public financed candidates must collect 3,780 donations of $5.00 to the city from registered voters to qualify and for the city to give them $755,946 in city financing for their campaigns.

The time frame to collect both nominating petition signatures and $5.00 qualifying contributions is the same and it is from April 19, 2025 to June 21, 2025, a mere 64 days. As of May 23, with 35 days expired, which is over halfway through in the collection process period, following are the tabulations for the candidates nominating petition signature and $5.00 qualifying donations as reported by the City Clerk.

QUALIFYING NOMINATING PETITION SIGNATURES

All eleven candidates must collect at least 3,000 qualifying nominating petition signatures from April 19, 2025 to June 21, 2025, a mere 64 days. Each signature must come from registered voters in the Albuquerque area. The city clerk’s go through each one of the signatures to confirm their registration and candidates can challenge each other’s signatures for disqualification. The signatures of people who sign the nomination petitions and who are not actually registered voters are tossed and are not counted.

Daniel Chavez is the first to secure the required 3,000 signatures to get on the ballot. Following are the processed qualifying nominating petition signatures for each of the 11 candidates as of Friday April 23:

DANIEL CHAVEZ

Required Petition Signatures 3,000
Verified Petition Signatures 3,424
Rejected Petition Signatures 2,336
Remaining Petition Signatures Needed -0-
Percentage of Verified Petition Signatures Met 100%

BRIAN FEJER

Required Petition Signatures 3,000
Verified Petition Signatures 69
Rejected Petition Signatures -0-
Remaining Petition Signatures Needed 2,931
Percentage of Verified Petition Signatures Met 2%

ALPANA ADAIR

Required Petition Signatures 3,000
Verified Petition Signatures 14
Rejected Petition Signatures 11
Remaining Petition Signatures Needed 2,986
Percentage of Verified Petition Signatures Met 0%

ALEXANDER UBALLEZ

Required Petition Signatures 3,000
Verified Petition Signatures 2,066
Rejected Petition Signatures 258
Remaining Petition Signatures Needed 934
Percentage of Verified Petition Signatures Met 69%

ADEO HERRICK

Required Petition Signatures 3,000
Verified Petition Signatures 35
Rejected Petition Signatures 28
Remaining Petition Signatures Needed 2,965
Percentage of Verified Petition Signatures Met 1%

LOUIE SANCHEZ

Required Petition Signatures 3,000
Verified Petition Signatures 1,382
Rejected Petition Signatures 262
Remaining Petition Signatures Needed 1,618
Percentage of Verified Petition Signatures Met 46%

MAYLING ARMIJO

Required Petition Signatures 3,000
Verified Petition Signatures 699
Rejected Petition Signatures 182
Remaining Petition Signatures Needed 2,301
Percentage of Verified Petition Signatures Met 23%

EDDIE VARELA

Required Petition Signatures 3,000
Verified Petition Signatures 1,562
Rejected Petition Signatures 347
Remaining Petition Signatures Needed 1,438
Percentage of Verified Petition Signatures Met 52%

PATRICK SAIS

Required Petition Signatures 3,000
Verified Petition Signatures 413
Rejected Petition Signatures 482
Remaining Petition Signatures Needed 2,587
Percentage of Verified Petition Signatures Met 14%

DARREN WHITE

Required Petition Signatures 3,000
Verified Petition Signatures 1,211
Rejected Petition Signatures 103
Remaining Petition Signatures Needed 1,789
Percentage of Verified Petition Signatures Met 40%

TIMOTHY KELLER

Required Petition Signatures 3,000
Verified Petition Signatures 2,634
Rejected Petition Signatures 410
Remaining Petition Signatures Needed 366
Percentage of Verified Petition Signatures Met 88%

Daniel Chavez said this of being first to qualify for the ballot:

“I’m feeling great. That was our goal, and we did it. When I announced my candidacy, we really weren’t getting very much attention. So, I figured if we could really work hard with volunteers and friends to get enough signatures to get on the ballot before Tim, we might get noticed. And we were able to do it … I made a $100,000 contribution to my campaign. That’s what got me rolling. It doesn’t make sense to me that we’re paying $5 to Tim or whoever it is to get them into office. And then we’re paying them that on principle, I don’t just believe in it.”

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

https://www.koat.com/article/albuquerque-mayoral-candidates-new-mexico/64868853

COMMENTARY AND ANALSIS ON QUALIFYING PETITION SIGNATURES

As of May 23, only one candidate has collected 3,000 qualifying nominating petition signatures over the 35 day period from April 19 to May 23. Republican Daniel Chavez secured 100% of the required qualifying petition signatures of 3,000 with 3,424 verified by the city clerk and a whopping 2,336 signatures rejected by the city clerk. Daniel Chavez is self-financed giving his campaign $100,000. The fact that he collected a total of 5,760 signatures, almost twice of what is needed, with so many rejected, is evidence that he paid people who were inexperienced at collecting qualifying signatures but they got the job done which is what counts.

Democrat Mayor Tim Keller is easily on his was to secure the required 3,000 signatures to get on the ballot with 2,634 signatures secured or 88% with 410 rejected and Keller needs only 336 more signatures which is less than the 410 rejected. Keller has a clear advantage because of his incumbency and the experience from two successful municipal campaigns. Keller is holding a series of “meet the candidate” events at supporters homes to collect both signatures and $5.00 donations.

Democrat Alexander Uballez likewise will likely make the ballot with 2,066 verified petition signatures secured or 69% and 258 rejected and he needs 934 more signatures which is doable with 29 days remaining to collect signatures. Ubabellez, like Keller, is holding a series of “meet the candidate” events at supporters homes to collect signatures and $5.00 donations.

Republican Eddie Varela is on track to secure the required 3,000 signatures to get on the ballot with 1,562 signatures collected or 52% and 347 rejected. Varela needs 1,438 more signatures.

Democrat City Council Louie Sanchez is lagging slightly at mid-point to secure the 3,000 required signatures with 1,382 verified or 46%, 262 rejected and needing 1,618 more signatures to get on the ballot.

Republican Darren White is seriously lagging at mid-point to secure the 3,000 required signatures having secured 1,211 or 40% with 103 rejected and needing 1,789 more verified nominating signatures. Notwithstanding, there still is sufficient time for White to make up the difference.

Democrat Mayling Armijo is seriously underwater with her collection of nominating petition signatures with 699 verified signatures collected or 23%, 182 rejected and 2,301 more needed to get on the ballot. It is surprising she is seriously lagging in collecting signatures given the amount she has raised in seed money and raised by a measured finance committee’s for her which should have been spent on collecting signatures. It must be noted that part of Armijo’s problem is she is not even in the country in that she has been deployed for military service.

Only 29 days, from May 23 to June 21, remain to collect the balance of the qualifying nominating petition signatures. It is painfully obvious that 4 out of 11 candidates for Mayor will not collect the required 3,000 signatures to be placed on the ballot with 4 having less than 15% of the required signatures. Those candidates are: Brian Feger with 2% collected, Alpana Adair with 0% collected, Adeo Herrick with 1% collected and Patrick Sais with 14% collected. There is an outside chance one or more are hoarding signatures collected in order to simply turn them in at the last minute but this is a highly risky proposition given that many signatures may prove to be invalid.

The link to the City Clerk web page is here:

https://www.cabq.gov/vote/candidate-information/2025-candidates-and-committees-1/2025-petition-qualifying-contribution-tally

PROCESSED PUBLIC FINANCE QUALIFYING DONATIONS

Five of the eleven candidates running for Mayor are “public financed” candidates: Darren White, Tim Keller, Louis Sanchez, Alexander Uballez and Adeo Herrick. Three candidates have withdrawn their application for public finance and are now considered a privately financed candidates: Alpana Adair, Eddie Varela and Patrick Sais.

The single most difficult task for candidates who are publicly financed candidates is the collection of 3,780 qualifying donations of $5.00 each to secure $755,946 in city financing. The candidates are given from April 19, 2025 to June 21, 2025, a mere 64 days, to collect the 3,780 qualifying donations from registered Albuquerque voters.

The city clerks will go through each one of the donations to confirm donor registration within the city limits. If a candidate does not collect the full 3,780 qualifying donations, those donations collected revert to the city and not to a candidate’s campaign. The failing candidate to collect 3,780 qualifying donations can declare to be a privately finance candidate and solicit private campaign donation funding until election day November 5.

The following are the processed public finance qualifying donations for 5 candidates who remain publicly financed candidates as of Friday May 23 with 3 candidates withdrawing as public financing:

ALPANA ADAIR (On May 22, Alpana Adair withdrew from public financing thereby becoming a privately finance candidate.)

Required Qualifying Contributions 3,780
Verified Qualifying Contributions 7
Rejected Qualifying Contributions 4
Remaining Qualifying Contributions Needed 3,773
Percentage of Verified Qualifying Contributions Met 0%

ALEXANDER UBALLEZ

Required Qualifying Contributions 3,780
Verified Qualifying Contributions 819
Rejected Qualifying Contributions 122
Remaining Qualifying Contributions Needed 2,961
Percentage of Verified Qualifying Contributions Met 22%

ADEO HERRICK

Required Qualifying Contributions 3,780
Verified Qualifying Contributions 6
Rejected Qualifying Contributions -0-
Remaining Qualifying Contributions Needed 3,774
Percentage of Verified Qualifying Contributions Met 0%

LOUIE SANCHEZ

Required Qualifying Contributions 3,780
Verified Qualifying Contributions 619
Rejected Qualifying Contributions 64
Remaining Qualifying Contributions Needed 3,161
Percentage of Verified Qualifying Contributions Met 16%

EDDIE VARELA (Withdrew application for public finance thereby becoming private financed candidate.)

Required Qualifying Contributions 3,780
Verified Qualifying Contributions 95 Rejected Qualifying Contributions 7
Remaining Qualifying Contributions Needed 3,685
Percentage of Verified Qualifying Contributions Met 3%

PATRICK SAIS (On May 2, Patrick Saiz withdrew from public financing there becoming a privately finance candidate.)

Required Qualifying Contributions 3,780
Verified Qualifying Contributions 2
Rejected Qualifying Contributions -0-
Remaining Qualifying Contributions Needed 3,778
Percentage of Verified Qualifying Contributions Met 0%

DARREN WHITE

Required Qualifying Contributions 3,780
Verified Qualifying Contributions 1,266
Rejected Qualifying Contributions 26
Remaining Qualifying Contributions Needed 2,514
Percentage of Verified Qualifying Contributions Met 33%

TIMOTHY KELLER

Required Qualifying Contributions 3,780
Verified Qualifying Contributions 2,034
Rejected Qualifying Contributions 152
Remaining Qualifying Contributions Needed 1,746
Percentage of Verified Qualifying Contributions Met 54%

The link to the City Clerk web page is here:

https://www.cabq.gov/vote/candidate-information/2025-candidates-and-committees-1/2025-petition-qualifying-contribution-tally

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS ON QUALIFYING DONATIONS

According to the City Clerk, the number of collected $5.00 donations as of May 23 represents donations collected from April 19 to May 23 or collected over a 35 day period. Only 29 days remain from May 23 to June 21 to collect the balance of the $5.00 donations needed to qualify for public finance.

KELLER AND WHITE TWO TOP CANDIDATES FOR PUBLIC FINANCE

Mayor Tim Keller having collected 54% of the required qualifying donations as of May 23, collected over a 35 day period, can be said to be on his way to qualify for the $755,946 in city financing, but it is still going to be close for him with little margin of error. Keller must collect an additional 1,746 $5.00 donations over the remaining 29 days to qualify for public finance. Given Keller’s advantage, his experience in running twice before as a public finance candidate, and his campaign securing 88% of his nominating petition signatures, his percentage of 54% collected in $5.00 donations should be significantly higher. This failure to collect more $5.00 donations is likely attributed to the public’s disdain to making any kind of political contribution as well as Keller’s low approval rating which is said to be at 33%. Keller could conceivably be the only candidate out of 11 who qualifies for public financing, but then again there is an outside chance that no candidates will qualify for public financing given that a mere 29 days remain to collect the $5.00 donations.

Former Bernalillo County Sherriff Darren White comes in a distant second to Keller with White collecting only 1,266 or 33% of the qualifying $5.00 donations over a 35-day period. White must still collect 2,514 more $5.00 donations over the 29 day period remaining, which by any measure is a very daunting task. Given White’s name identification within the Republican Party, he should be doing a lot better and be more competitive. His failure to perform better is likely attributed to his high negatives and being out of office for a considerable amount of time. At this point, White qualifying for Public Financing is in serious doubt. However, if he does not qualify for public finance he could still remain in the race as a privately financed candidate.

UBALLEZ AND SANCHEZ SECOND AND THIRD PUBLIC FINANCE CANDIDATES

Coming in distant 3^rd and 4^th in the collection of $5.00 public finance donations to the city is former US Attorney for New Mexico Alexander Uballez and City Councilor Louie Sanchez. Uballez has 22% of the required $5.00 donations, or 819 collected, and needs to collect 2,961 more $5.00 donation over a 29-day period. Sanchez has collected a mere 619 or 16% of the required $5.00 donations, and needs to collect 3,161 more $5.00 donations over a 29 day period.

With only 29 days remaining in the collection process it is not at all likely Uballez nor Sanchez will qualify for public financing but they can continue with their campaigns as privately finance campaigns unless they do not collect the required 3,000 nominating petition signatures.

Both Uballez and Sanchez would be wise to abandon their efforts to qualify for public finance and concentrate on collecting the required 3,000 nominating petition signature in order to get on the ballot. Uballez has 69% or 2,066 of the nominating petition signatures needed to get on the ballot and needs 934 more. Sanchez has 1,382 or 46% of the signatures needed to get on the ballot and needs 1,618 more nominating petition signatures to get on the ballot .

FOUR CANDIDATES HAVE FAILED TO QUALIFY FOR PUBLIC FINANCE

Adeo Herrick has collected only 6 qualifying $5.00 donations out of the 3,780 required and it can be presumed he will not qualify for public finance.

Three candidates who originally private finance candidates withdrew their applications and have not qualified for public finance: Alpana Adair, Eddie Varela and Patrick Sais.

The link to the City Clerk web page is here:

https://www.cabq.gov/vote/candidate-information/2025-candidates-and-committees-1/2025-petition-qualifying-contribution-tally

DIRE NEED FOR REFORM TO PUBLIC FINANCE LAWS

The fact that only one candidate for Mayor or perhaps two will qualify for public finance this election year is clear evidence that the system has been set up for candidates to fail, that is why so few candidates for Mayor will qualify for public finance. The system favors incumbents who have high name identification and built in campaign organizations. Some have argued it is a system that is supposed to be hard to “weed out” candidates who are incapable of mounting serious campaigns. But making it so hard that no one qualifies makes it a mockery of the purpose and intent of public finance which is to encourage qualified people to run who can not afford to run.

The deficiencies in the city’s public financing have been repeatedly warned about over the last 14 years but have been ignored. Some of the changes advocated is reducing the number of qualifying donations to a more realistic number as well as increasing the time to collect the qualifying donations. Simply put, public finance laws should not be set up to make it too difficult to qualify for public financing and should have sufficient safeguards to police and prevent fraud.

The following changes to the City’s public finance and election are in order:

Double the amount of time from 64 days to 128 days to collect both the qualifying donations and petition signatures, and private campaign donation collection.
Reduce the number of $5.00 qualifying donations of 3,780 to equal the number of nominating petition signatures of 3,000. Simply put, many voters loath making political donations of any kind.
Allow the collection of the qualifying donations from anyone who wants, and not just residents or registered voters of Albuquerque. Privately finance candidates now can collect donations from anyone they want and anywhere in the State and Country.
Once the allowed number of qualifying donations is collected, the public financing would immediately made available, but not allowed to be spent until the date of closure of the collection process.
Permit campaign spending for both publicly financed and privately financed candidates only from the date of closure of the collection process to the November election day.
Return to candidates for their use in their campaign any qualifying donations the candidate has collected when the candidate fails to secure the required number of qualifying donations to get the public financing.
Mandate the City Clerk to issue debit card or credit card collection devices to collect the qualifying donations and to issue receipts and eliminate the mandatory use of “paper receipts”. Continue to allow the collection of both nominating petition signature and $5.00 donations “on line.”
Increase from $1.00 to $2.50 per registered voter the amount of public financing, which will be approximately $900,000, and allow for incremental increases of 10% every election cycle keeping up with inflation.
Allow additional matching public financing available for run offs at the rate of $1.25 per registered voter, or $450,000.
Albuquerque should make every effort to make municipal elections partisan elections to be held along with State and Federal elections by seeking a constitutional amendment from the legislature to be voted upon by the public.
Any money raised and spent by measured finance committees on behalf a candidate should be required to first be applied to reimburse the City for any taxpayer money advanced to a public finance candidate or deducted from a publicly finance candidates account and returned to the city.
City of Albuquerque campaign reporting and finance ordinances and regulations need to define with absolute clarity that strictly prohibit the coordination of expenditures and campaign activities with measured finance committees and individual candidate’s campaigns in municipal elections.
A mandatory schedule of fines and penalties for violations of the code of ethics and campaign practices act should be enacted by the City Council.

CONCLUSION

Until there is real reform of public finance laws, we can continue to expect only one to two candidates qualify for public financing in elections for Mayor.

2025 Memorial Day Dinelli Family Tribute

Posted on May 26, 2025

Each Memorial Day, I am compelled to pay tribute to members of my family who have given so much and sacrificed so much to protect our freedoms and to protect this great country of ours. All these family members were born and lived in New Mexico, two were born in Chacon, New Mexico and the rest born and raised and educated in Albuquerque.

One gave the ultimate sacrifice during time of war.

My father Paul Dinelli and my Uncle Pete Dinelli, for whom I was named after, both served in the US Army during World War II when the United States went to war with Italy, Germany and Japan.

My father and uncle were first generation born Americans and the sons of Italian immigrants who settled in Albuquerque in the year 1900 to live the American dream. My Uncle Pete Dinelli was killed in action when he stepped on a land mine. My father Paul Dinelli was a disabled American Veteran when he returned to Albuquerque after World War II and was honorably discharged because of a service-connected disability. Years after the war, my father met my mother Rose Fresques at the Alvarado Hotel where she had worked as a Harvey girl. After the couple married, my father went to barber school in Denver, Colorado, returned to Albuquerque and opened “Paul’s Barber Shop” which was located at Third and Lomas.

My uncles Fred Fresques and Alex Fresques, my mother’s two brothers, also served in World War II. My Uncle Alex Fresques served in England and was in the Air Force.

My uncle Fred Fresques saw extensive action in the US Army infantry during World War II and was awarded 2 Bronze Star medals and a purple heart for his service. The Bronze Star medal is awarded to individuals who, while serving with the Armed Forces of the United States in combat, distinguish themselves by heroism, outstanding achievement, or by meritorious service. The purple heart is awarded for being injured in combat or dying in combat. My Uncle Fred would never talk to anyone about what he saw. After the war, my Uncle Fred returned to Albuquerque and raised a family in Barelas. Over many years, my Uncle Fred was active in the Barelas Community Center and was a trainer for the “Golden Gloves” competition teaching young adults the sport of boxing.

My father-in-law, George W. Case, who passed away at the age 93, served in the United States Navy during World War II and saw action while serving on a destroyer. My father-in-law George Case was so proud of his service that he wore a World War II Veterans cap every day the last few years of his life. After the war, my father-in-law George Case returned to Albuquerque was married to my mother-in-law Laurel Del Castillo for 50 years, raised a family of 4 girls. George eventually owned a liquor store for a few years and then went on to build, own and operate the Old Town Car wash, which still stands today, and he was in the car wash industry for a number of years.

My nephew Dante Dinelli, the son of my brother Veron and his wife Rosemary, was born and raised in Albuquerque, and he joined the service a few years after graduating from Cibola High School. Dante served 20 + years in the US Navy, retired as a Chief Petty Officer and worked in a civilian capacity for the Navy.

My two nephews, Matthew Barnes and Brandon Barnes, the sons of my younger sister Pauline and her husband Marvin, were born and raised in Albuquerque and went to Bosque Prep . Both Mathew and Brandon are in the United States Marine Corps and both continue to climb the promotion ladder in the Marine Corps. My nephew Major Brandon Barnes is a graduate of the US Naval Academy. My nephew Lt. Colonel Matthew Barnes graduated from UNM with honors and served a tour in Afghanistan.

To all the wonderful and courageous men and women who have served and continue to serve our country to protect and secure the promise of freedom and the ideals upon which the United States was founded upon, and to those who made the ultimate sacrifice, I thank you for your service to our Country.

Your service and sacrifices to this great country of ours will never be forgotten. God bless you all and God Bless this great country of ours!

Keller Administration Seeks To “Give Away” City Owned Lots To Private Developers For Affordable Housing Development; Anti-Donation Clause Allows; Just Because You Can Does Not Mean You Should; There Are Other Viable Options To City Land Give Aways; Keller Shows Poor Stewardship Of City Assets

Posted on May 23, 2025

On May 12, the Keller Administration announced it was issuing what it referred to as “Request for Interest” calling on city developers to share ideas on developing 11 City owned vacant properties into affordable housing. The request for information comes before a bid process that would see the city give away vacant land it owns to developers after first collecting ideas for development.

The “Request for Interest” included a map highlighting eleven city-owned properties that could be developed into housing. Eight of the city owned properties are west of Rio Grande and many are empty lots in residential areas. The Request for Interest closes on May 30, 2025.

According to Joseph Montoya, the Deputy Director of Health, Housing and Homelessness, the goal of the “Request for Interest” is to find new ideas to address the city’s housing crisis. Montoya said this:

“Instead of sitting vacant, these properties could be transformed into homes and communities. … Through this Request for Interest, we are leaning on our strong partners for their valuable insight to add more needed units to our City’s inventory. … We wanted to know if we had people interested in developing affordable housing, and of course, in this case, we can give the property away. … Hopefully, we’ll have interest on all the lots. That’s our hope because there’s such a dire need here. … A lot of them already have infrastructure on them. All of them are already zoned [for residential development] … So, from our perspective, these are lots that we already know are appropriate for the development of affordable housing. … Anytime you’re giving away free land, I think that’s a win-win. … That’s the incentive right there.”

Mayor Tim Keller said this in the city release:

“The housing crisis is now, and we’re fully committed to using every tool at our disposal to address it. … Investing in a range of affordable housing options creates pathways to stability, uplifts families, and prevents more people from falling through the cracks and becoming unhoused.”

https://www.cabq.gov/health-housing-homelessness/news/city-seeks-innovative-ideas-for-affordable-housing-on-vacant-properties

NEW MEXICO ANTI DONATION CLAUSE EXCEPTION

The anti-donation clause in the New Mexico Constitution prohibits state and local governments from making donations to or in aid of private entities. This includes preventing public funds from being used for private benefit, like supporting private businesses or non-profit organizations. The clause’s purpose is to prevent corruption and ensure public funds are used for public purposes.

The initial reaction to the city of Albuquerque giving away 11 vacant lots it owns free and clear is that it violates the “anti-donation clause” of the New Mexico Constitution. According to the New Mexico Anti-Donation Clause, it would generally be considered a violation for a city to give away land without commensurate consideration. It would constitute a “donation” or “transfer without value” to another. However there is an exception when it comes to affordable housing.

The anti-donation clause contains a clear exception and allows a city to give away land for free for affordable housing.

Article IX, Sec. 14 of New Mexico Constitution is the Anti Donation Clause and it provides in part as follows:

Neither the state nor any county, school district or municipality, except as otherwise provided in this constitution, shall directly or indirectly lend or pledge its credit or make any donation to or in aid of any person, association or public or private corporation or in aid of any private enterprise.

… .

[A. through D. Exceptions]

Nothing in this section prohibits the state, or the instrumentality of the state designated by the legislature as the state’s housing authority, or a county or a municipality from:

(1) donating or otherwise providing or paying a portion of the costs of land for the construction on it of affordable housing;

(2) donating or otherwise providing or paying a portion of the costs of construction or renovation of affordable housing or the costs of conversion or renovation of buildings into affordable housing; or

(3) providing or paying the costs of financing or infrastructure necessary to support affordable housing projects.

https://codes.findlaw.com/nm/new-mexico-constitution/nm-const-art-ix-sect-14/

BUYING “SURPLUS PROPERTY” FROM THE CITY

The City of Albuquerque Real Property Division has identified a number of properties that could benefit the community by being developed as future Affordable Housing locations.

The City of Albuquerque owns tracts of land and/or buildings that are sometimes no longer needed to satisfy a public purpose. These types of properties are known as “surplus properties.” The City of Albuquerque has city ordinances regarding the disposal of surplus real property. These ordinances dictate how properties are determined to be surplus, how they are valued, and how they are sold or disposed of. The POSTSCRIPT below provides the ordinances.

Before the City sells, exchanges, or donates real property, it must be determined that the property is not essential for a municipal purpose. The Administrative Real Property Review Board makes the determination that a piece of real property is not essential for a municipal purpose. After property is determined as NOT ESSENTIAL, an appraisal of the value of the property must be made by the city’s Property Management Division or a qualified private appraiser.

Once the City’s Real Property Division identifies a potential surplus property, it seeks to have it declared not-essential by the City Council. Non-essential properties are then marketed for sale in accordance with City Ordinance and are sold through a bidding process.

Real property with a value of $500 or less can be sold for cash at a public or private exchange without notice. Real property with a value exceeding $500 may be sold at a public or private sale to the highest bidder. No real property shall be sold or exchanged for less than 90% of its appraised value.

Real property of any value may be sold to, exchanged with or donated to the state, any of its political subdivisions or to the Federal government after a determination by the Mayor or Council as provided herein that such sale, exchange or donation is in the best interests of the city.

https://www.cabq.gov/municipaldevelopment/city-real-estate-sales-services/surplus-city-properties-for-sale

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

This falls squarely into the category of “Just because you can does not mean you should.” Joseph Montoya, the Deputy Director of Health, Housing and Homelessness shows a real level of arrogance when he said this:

We wanted to know if we had people interested in developing affordable housing, and of course, in this case, we can give the property away. … Anytime you’re giving away free land, I think that’s a win-win. … That’s the incentive right there.”

POOR STEWARDS OF CITY ASSETS

Keller and Montoya are poor stewards of city assets when they simply want to just give away city land to developers. They need to be told in no uncertain terms the city land is NOT theirs to be given away. It’s a “win-win” only for developers and a “lose-lose” for the public. It’s NOT free land. It is land paid for with taxpayer money to become city owned and in turn owned by the taxpayers. It is NOT land that Montoya and Mayor Keller can simply give away to developers as they see fit.

Montoya says “ A lot of [the lots] already have infrastructure on them. All of them are already zoned [for residential development.]” Simply put, vacant land that is already zoned for residential and with infrastructure is a very valuable commodity. Vacant land within the city is also limited, and once it’s developed, it’s developed forever. It also is an asset that will only appreciate in value.

There are other options that Mayor Keller and the Health, Housing and Homelessness Department need to explore other than simply giving away land to local city developers. Those would include long term leases of the land, say for 75 years for the useful life of development, for very minimal consideration, like $100 dollars a year, where the city retains title and ownership of the land. The city could also enter into a joint powers agreement with the state to build affordable housing on the city owned property.

Another major option would be for the City to seek funding from the New Mexico Mortgage Finance Authority to develop the land on its own for affordable housing. On July 24, 2024, the New Mexico Mortgage Finance Authority (NMFA) officials reported on the findings of the state’s most recent housing needs assessment. It outlined how $84.6 million in state funding would be allocated to address those needs. At its May and June meetings, the New Mexico Mortgage Finance Authority Board of Directors approved a $50 million allocation, along with the $34.6 million in state fiscal year 2025 severance tax bond funding. The breakdown includes:

$26.6 million to create more housing.
$20 million for down payment assistance.
$10 million to preserve existing affordable housing.
$1 million to create stable housing environments.
$27 million in reserve to use based on particular demands.

Although time has elapsed, and the funding is likely no longer available, the MFA will continue with its efforts to fund projects for affordable housing.

The link to full, unedited MFA housing needs assessment is here:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1SzAnXnO_nHI5ef3onk_5tPKhKrIaIQLc/view

The Keller Administration needs to withdraw the “Request for Interest” immediately and explore other options.

________________________________________________

POSTSCRIPT

The City of Albuquerque has city ordinances regarding the disposal of surplus property, including real property and personal property. These ordinances dictate how properties are determined to be surplus, how they are valued, and how they are sold or disposed of. Following are the ordinances:

5-2-1 DISPOSAL OF REAL PROPERTY NOT ESSENTIAL FOR A MUNICIPAL PURPOSE.

Prior to the sale, exchange, or donation of real property belonging to the city, such real property shall be determined to be not essential for a municipal purpose as provided herein. After such a determination has been made, the real property may be disposed of by the Mayor in the following manner:

(A) Prior to disposal of real property, the Mayor shall cause an appraisal to be made by the Property Management Division or a qualified private appraiser. No real property shall be sold or exchanged for less than 90% of its appraised value.

(B) Real property having a value of not more than $500 may be sold for cash at a public or private exchange without notice.

(1) Sold at a public or private sale to the highest bidder meeting the published terms and conditions of the sale after publishing a notice of such sale in a local newspaper of general circulation once each week for two consecutive weeks prior to the sale.

(2) Exchange at a public or private exchange after publishing a notice of such exchange in a local newspaper of general circulation once each week for two consecutive weeks prior to the exchange.

(D) Real property of any value may be sold to, exchanged with or donated to the state, any of its political subdivisions or to the Federal government after a determination by the Mayor or Council as provided herein that such sale, exchange or donation is in the best interests of the city.

(E) Real property acquired by the city through lien or mortgage foreclosure may not in the discretion of the Mayor or his designated representative be subject to this article in the event the sale of the property is to the foreclosure owner of same, and it is or was the owner’s residence, and provided further than any such sale shall be for not less than the principal and interest due.

(F) Contracts for disposal of city real property pursuant to divisions (C) and (D) of this section shall be submitted to the Council by the Mayor at the first regularly scheduled Council meeting after their execution when the value of the real property is more than $50,000. Procedure shall be as follows:

(1) All contracts which are submitted to the Council in accordance with the requirements of this section shall be supported by the current appraisal relied upon to determine the value of the city property, the Council’s determination that the property is not essential for a municipal purpose, and a description of the disposal process and the other offers received.

(2) The Council may approve, take no action or disapprove the contract.

(3) If the Council disapproves by majority vote of the members present and voting, the contract shall be void.

(4) The Mayor may withdraw the contract at any time from the Council or may present revisions thereof. In the event of withdrawal, the contract shall be a nullity. In the event of revision, the provisions of this section shall apply to the same extent as if a new contract were being submitted.

(’74 Code, §5-3-1) (Ord. 3-1975; Am. Ord. 36-1976; Am. Ord. 59-1979; Am. Ord. 23-1983; Am. Ord. 22-2007)

5-2-2 DETERMINATION THAT REAL PROPERTY IS NOT ESSENTIAL FOR A MUNICIPAL PURPOSE.

(A) Administrative Real Property Review Board. Prior to making the determination that a piece of real property is not essential for a municipal purpose, the Administrative Real Property Review Board shall analyze said property and make a recommendation regarding whether the property is essential for a municipal purpose to the person who shall make the determination, as provided for in this article. The Administrative Real Property Review Board shall be composed of the Director of the Department of Finance and Management or his designated representative, the Property Manager, the City Attorney or his designated representative, the Director of the Planning Department or his designated representative and, if appropriate, a representative of the department by which the property in question was to have been used. The Review Board shall consider the adopted Albuquerque/Bernalillo County Comprehensive Plan and related master plans and expected city development patterns as a basis for their recommendation. The Review Board shall transmit a written analysis with their recommendation.

(B) For real property owned by the city having a value of not more than $10,000, the determination that the real property is not essential for a municipal purpose shall be made by the Mayor.

(C) For real property owned by the city having a value of more than $10,000, the determination that the real property is not essential for a municipal purpose shall be made by the Council.

(’74 Code, § 5-3-2) (Ord. 3-1975; Am. Ord. 36-1976)

5-2-3 REAL PROPERTY NOT ESSENTIAL FOR A MUNICIPAL PURPOSE TO BE PROPERLY ZONED PRIOR TO SALE.

After real property belonging to the city has been determined not essential for a municipal purpose and prior to its appraisal and disposal, the Planning Department shall review its zoning to determine that the zoning is appropriate in terms of the city’s master plan, in particular the master plan documents which comprise the Albuquerque/Bernalillo County Comprehensive Plan, and the potential use of the property. If the Planning Department determines that the zoning is appropriate, it shall so notify the Mayor. If the Planning Department determines that the zoning is not appropriate, it shall initiate a zone change to an appropriate zone, and it shall notify the Mayor of the final action taken on this request. No real property shall be appraised or disposed of until the Planning Department has notified the Mayor that it is appropriately zoned or until the Planning Department has notified the Mayor of final action on its request for a zone change.

(’74 Code, § 5-3-3) (Ord. 36-1976)

5-2-4 LEASING OF REAL PROPERTY OWNED BY THE CITY.

(A) Leases or other conveyances for a specified term of an interest in real property owned by the city or amendments to such leases or other conveyances shall be submitted to the Council by the Mayor after negotiation or prior to bidding when:

(1) The term of the lease or other conveyance is proposed to be in excess of two years. For the purposes of this division, TERM OF CONVEYANCE shall include not only the initial term but also any option to renew where the option is at the sole discretion of the lessee; or

(2) The term of the lease or other conveyance is proposed to be in excess of one month and the income or other consideration to be received by the city is proposed to be in excess of $500 per month. For purposes of this section, an easement granted to a utility operating under a franchise granted by the city shall not be considered as a lease or other conveyance.

(B) All proposals which are submitted to the Council in accordance with the requirements of this section shall be supported by a message setting out the circumstances, benefits, responsibilities and advantages relative thereto.

(D) If the Council disapproved by majority vote of the members present and voting, the proposal may not be entered into.

(E) The Mayor may withdraw the proposal at any time from the Council and may present revisions thereof. In the event of withdrawal, the proposed lease or other such conveyance shall be a nullity. In the event of revision, the provisions of this section shall apply to the same extent as if a new proposal were being submitted.

(’74 Code, § 5-3-4) (Ord. 71-1976; Am. Ord. 9-1987; Am. Ord. 58-1990; Am. Ord. 22-2007)

5-2-5 ACQUISITION OF REAL PROPERTY.

(A) The Mayor is authorized to enter into contracts for the acquisition of any interest in real property, subject to the approval of the Council as outlined herein. Except in emergencies, the Mayor shall enter into such contracts only when the Council has authorized purchase of the specific parcel or a parcel of its type and location category; such Council authorization is evidenced by the fact that:

(1) Sufficient money, designated for acquisition of the property, has been previously appropriated by the Council; or

(2) Acquisition of such property is specified in the current two-year Capital Improvements Budget; or

(3) The city-owned property to be utilized as consideration in an exchange has previously been declared nonessential for municipal purposes, pursuant to §§ 5-2-1 and 5-2-2, and the Council resolution declaring the property nonessential authorized the city property to be used as consideration to acquire the specific parcel or a parcel of its type and location category.

(B) The contracts, including those accomplishing trades, shall be submitted to the Council by the Mayor at the first regularly scheduled Council meeting after their execution when:

(1) The value of the real property is more than $50,000; and

(2) Sufficient money to be used to acquire the real property has not been previously appropriated by the Council.

(C) All contracts which are submitted to the Council in accordance with the requirements of this section shall be supported by a message setting out the circumstances, benefits, responsibilities and advantages relative thereto.

(D) The Council may approve, take no action or disapprove the contract.

(E) If the Council disapproves by majority vote of the members present and voting, the contract shall be void.

(F) The Mayor may withdraw the contract at any time from the Council or may present revisions thereof. In the event of withdrawal, the contract shall be a nullity. In the event of revision, the provisions of this section shall apply to the same extent as if a new contract were being submitted.

(G) Open Space Acquisitions. The Mayor may from time to time, or shall upon request of the Council, issue solicitations seeking competitive offers to sell the properties on the Council-approved city open space priority acquisition list.

(’74 Code, § 5-3-5) (Ord. 32-1980; Am. Ord. 9-1983; Am. Ord. 22-2007; Am. Ord. 2016-008)

5-2-6 LEASING OF REAL PROPERTY BY THE CITY.

(A) Leases or other conveyances, except construction and utility easements, for a specified term of an interest in real property to the city or amendments to such leases or other conveyances shall be submitted to the Council by the Mayor after negotiation when the term of the lease or other conveyance is proposed to be in excess of six months and the income or other consideration to be paid by the city is proposed to be in excess of $500 per month.

(D) If the Council disapproves by a majority vote of the members present and voting, the proposal may not be entered into.

(’74 Code, § 5-3-6) (Ord. 27-1990; Am. Ord. 22-2007)

5-2-7 HOME AND BUSINESS PROPERTY PROTECTION.

(A) Title. This section shall be entitled the Home and Business Property Protection Ordinance.

(B) Findings. The Council finds that:

(1) In the 2005 decision entitled Kelo, et al. vs. City of New London, Connecticut, et al., 545 U.S. ___ (2005), the United States Supreme Court upheld the taking of private property for uses that would promote job growth and increase tax revenues.

(2) While the revitalization of urban areas, the elimination of blight, and economic development are laudable goals, a municipality’s actions to achieve these goals should not result in taking occupied homes and property occupied by a business from its citizens.

(3) The Kelo case expanded the purpose of eminent domain beyond the purposes contemplated by the State Metropolitan Redevelopment Code, the State Eminent Domain Code, and the city’s Metropolitan Redevelopment Ordinance.

(4) The Council will not support the use of its powers of eminent domain to take an occupied residence or property occupied by a business that is not blighted or a public nuisance for a purpose that is justified only by “economic development.”

(C) Council approval required. Any eminent domain action initiated by the city justified only by economic development that would result in the total taking of an occupied residential property, or property occupied by a business, under the Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution and state law must be approved by the City Council prior to its initiation.

(D) Conditions for approval. The Council shall not approve a taking of an occupied residence or property occupied by a business unless it first finds that the eminent domain action is for a public purpose as set forth in the State Metropolitan Redevelopment Code or the State Eminent Domain Code.

“Distressed Lodging Property Ordinance” Enacted; Pathetic Attempt To Replicate Work Of “Safe City Strike Force” Dismantled By Mayor Tim Keller; City Should Concentrate On Enforcing City And State Nuisance Abatement Laws; Reinstate Safe City Strike Force

Posted on May 21, 2025

On Thursday, May 1 it was reported that the City of Albuquerque shut down, boarded up and posted as “substandard” with yellow signs the Court John Motel. City Planning Department Code Inspectors found several housing code violations including:

Numerous plumbing and sanitation failures like non-functional or missing toilets, sinks, and showers, leaking plumbing fixtures, and unsanitary drainage conditions.
Electrical hazards, including overloaded circuits, recessed and exposed wiring, and damaged outlets in several units.
Fire code violations, including the lack of proper fire detection and hazardous waste storage.
Unsanitary conditions with pest infestations and water leaks.
Operating without a valid Certificate of Occupancy.
Unpermitted construction and serious structural damage

Fifteen people were living in the motel at the time the motel was closed and boarded up, including a 97-year-old veteran. Fourteen of them accepted help from Albuquerque Community Safety.

It was reported that last year, Albuquerque Police responded to 940 calls for service within a two-block radius of the motel. Incidents at the motel itself include:

16 calls involving assault or battery
26 reports of auto theft or stolen vehicles
2 shooting incidents
3 rape cases
6 narcotics-related offenses
10 ShotSpotter activations in the immediate area, with 35 rounds detected

Mayor Tim Keller said this at a press conference:

“This property has been a challenge for many years, if not decades. …This essentially has just become a hotbed for drug trafficking, violence and prostitution.”

Because of the numerous code violations and the calls for service to APD, the city had the legal authority to declare the property a nuisance, that the motel had become a magnet for crime allowing the city to shut the motel down and board it up.

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

https://www.koat.com/article/albuquerque-shuts-down-problematic-property-court-john-motel-crime/64646421

Since October 2024, City of Albuquerque code enforcement has shut down the Tewa Lodge, Loma Verde Motel, Bow and Arrow Lodge, the Motel 6 and Days Inn on Iliff Rd, and the Court John Motel on 4^th St. Each of the motels were deemed unsafe with unsanitary living conditions, high numbers of calls for service, and criminal activity that put the tenants and surrounding neighborhoods at risk. The City actions are an effort to hold negligent property owners accountable and prioritize public safety. Angelo Metzger, the Planning Department Code Compliance Manager, said that many of the motel properties are repeat code violators, leading to potentially dangerous conditions for tenants.

CITY COUNCIL ENACTS “DISTRESSED LODGING PROPERTY ORDINANCE”

On May 5, 2025 as a continuation of the city efforts to address nuisance properties along central and other parts of the city, the Albuquerque City Council voted to enact City Ordinance O-25-75 known as the “Distressed Lodging Property Ordinance” on a 5 to 4 vote. Voting YES for the Ordinance were Republican City Councilors Brook Bassan, Dan Lewis, Renee Grout, and Democrats Klarissa Pena and Tammy Fiebelkorn. Voting NO were Democrat Councilors Joaquín Baca, Nichole Rogers and Louie Sanchez and Republican Dan Champine. A spokesperson for Mayor Tim Keller’s office said he intended to sign the bill into law and once signed it would take effect within the month.

The City Council adopted the ordinance primarily to address deteriorating motels, or lodging properties, that have become magnets for crime plagued with calls for service to the Albuquerque Police Department (APD), the Fire Department (AFR) and complaints to the Planning Department for code violations. It is intended to address issues like unregistered lodgings and public nuisances associated with certain lodging establishments. By clarifying regulations and providing a framework for enforcement, the Distressed Lodging Property Ordinance aims to improve community safety and quality of life in Albuquerque.

TARGETS OF THE NEW ORDINANCE

The new city ordinance targets establishments with a history of tax evasion, city code violations, or nuisance activity. The nuisance activity is tied to nefarious conduct like drug trafficking, violence, and dangerous living conditions. Under the enacted ordinance hotels and motels meeting any of the following criteria will face enhanced oversight:

Skipping hospitality tax payments for three straight months
Repeated violations of the Nuisance Abatement Ordinance
Three or more separate City ordinance violations in a year

Properties in violation of the ordinance will be required to log guest stays, retain vehicle info, and maintain records for at least 45 days. Failure to comply can result in a fine of $500 per day for each violation of the ordinance, a lien being filed against the property, or closure of the establishment.

Mayor Tim Keller said the new ordinance is part of a broader public safety strategy and said this:

“This is about holding bad actors accountable and going after problem properties who allow crime and unsafe conditions to fester. … We’re sending a clear message: crime-friendly properties have no place in our city…. We’re also understanding that not necessarily the hotels, but the individuals using these hotels seem to be connected.”

DISTRESSED PROPERTIES DEFINED

The ordinance defines what constitutes a “distressed lodging property”. The definition is based on factors like safety hazards, public nuisance, or city code violations or violations of housing code regulations. The ordinance outlines requirements for all lodging establishments, including record-keeping for guest identification, which now includes a photo ID or a clear, discernable photo if a photo ID is unavailable.

The new ordinance requires the retention of guest photo identification or alternative clear images for a minimum of 45 days and mandates that these are made available to the city upon request. The ordinance includes provisions for enforcement, such as inspections, fines, or other penalties for violations. It also affords procedure for appealing decisions made under the ordinance by objecting property owners and managers.

TRIGGERS CREATED

It is the Planning Department, Code Enforcement Division, that will be primarily responsible for enforcement of the “Distressed Lodging Property Ordinance”. The ordinance creates “three triggers” for a motel to be subjected to “enhanced operational requirements” by the Planning Department Code Enforcement.

Those triggers are:

Failure to make lodgers’ tax or hospitality fee payments to the city for three consecutive months,
At least three violations of any city ordinance within a 12-month period, or
At least one violation of the city’s Nuisance Abatement Ordinance.

Planning Director Alan Varela said the 3 triggers were chosen because they’re often warning signs for motels with problematic activity. Varela said this:

“The ordinance is very clear. It is targeted at problematic properties. This, hopefully, is a small minority of properties out there. … Most hotels operate legally, but the few who do not will be subject to these basic rules that will help protect their guests and the community. … What we’ve noticed, especially in the last year when we’ve started shutting down these most problematic hotels in town — all of them at one point were very legitimate operations, probably in very good condition and a good and safe place for guests to stay. … Code enforcement does all its investigations based on complaints. We do not drive around the city, putting our noses into businesses that are not on the complaint list.”

Varela said the city does not know how many motels might meet the criteria, and added that it will not seek out problematic motels.

Once on the list for “enhanced operational requirement” enforcement, the city can issue civil fines of up to $500 per day, place liens on the property or prohibit occupancy. Additionally, motels on the list must keep information about their guests for 45 days, so the city can review it. That information includes

A copy of the guest’s photo identification if available, or if not available, a picture of the guest’s full face;
Vehicle information like make, model and license plate number and
Information about the source of payment.

The rationale behind this, Varela said, is to give police information. Varela said this:

“Each of the hotels that have been shut down so far has had some elements, whether it’s a large element or maybe to just a minor degree, of human trafficking. … And some of these items are designed entirely to help prevent human trafficking or make it much more difficult to do.”

LINKS TO QUOTED OR RELIED UPON NEWS SOURCES

https://www.cabq.gov/planning/news/albuquerque-continues-to-crack-down-on-problem-motels-with-new-law#:~:text=ALBUQUERQUE%2D%20The%20City%20has%20passed,chronic%20nuisances%20in%20their%20neighborhoods.

https://www.koat.com/article/new-law-problem-motels-albuquerque-crime/64686528#:~:text=ALBUQUERQUE%2C%20N.M.%20%E2%80%94&text=in%20the%20city.-,The%20Distressed%20Lodging%20Ordinance%20(Ordinance%20O-25-75),ordinance%20violations%20in

https://www.abqjournal.com/news/article_48afa289-1b7e-44c1-9fda-be934524f991.html#tncms-source=home-featured-7-block

WORK OF SAFE CITY STRIKE FORCE RECALLED

From 2002 to 2009, the Safe City Strike Force was created and formed under then Mayor Marty Chavez to combat blighted commercial and residential properties that had become magnets for crime. Mayor Chavez appointed then Deputy City Attorney Pete Dinelli as Director of the Strike Force who organized the program from the ground up. Thirty (30) to forty-five (40) representatives from the City Attorneys office, Albuquerque Police Department, the Albuquerque Fire Department, the Fire Marshal’s Office, the Planning Department residential and commercial code inspectors division, the Family Community Services Department and the Bernalillo County District Attorney’s Office participated and comprised the Safe City 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 Safe City Strike Force routinely prepared condemnation resolutions for enactment by the Albuquerque City Council to tear down substandard buildings, including commercial buildings.

In 2010, Republican Mayor Richard Berry and his appointed Chief Public Safety Officer Darren White began to dismantle and reduce funding for the Safe City Strike Force. Confidential sources reported the Real Estate community objected to the aggressive code enforcement. In 2018, newly elected Mayor Tim Keller continued with dismantling the Safe City Strike Force despite efforts to restore it. In 2019, the Safe City Strike Force was fully dismantled and defunded by the Keller Administration.

Over 8 years, the Safe City Strike Force took civil enforcement action against some 6,500 properties, both commercial and residential. The success of the Safe City Strike Force is clear and unmistakable and can be summarized in part as follows:

CENTRAL MOTELS

The Safe City Strike Force required commercial property and motel owners to make repairs and they were required to reduce calls for service and address security on their properties.

The Safe City Strike Force took code enforcement action against 48 of the 150 motels along central and forced compliance with building codes and mandated repairs to the properties. The Central motels that were demolished were not designated historical and were beyond repair as a result of years of neglect and failure to maintain and make improvements. Central motels that had historical significance to Route 66 were purchased by the City for renovation and redevelopment.

The Central motels that the Safe City Strike Force took action against include the Gaslight (demolished), The Zia Motel (demolished), The Royal Inn (demolished), Route 66 (demolished), the Aztec Motel (demolished), the Hacienda, Cibola Court, Super-8 (renovated by owner), the Travel Inn (renovated by owner), Nob Hill Motel (renovated by owner), the Premier Motel (renovated by owner) the De Anza (purchased by City for historical significance), the No Name Motel, the Canyon Road (demolished), Hill Top Lodge, American Inn (demolished), the El Vado (purchased by City for historical significance), the Interstate Inn (demolished).

The Safe City Strike Force was responsible for the demolition of at least seven (7) blighted motels that were beyond repair. When people were displaced by enforcement actions taken by the Safe City Strike Force, the City’s Family and Community Services Department would provide vouchers to the displaced and assist in locating temporary housing for them.

VIOLENT BARS

The Safe City Strike Force acted against violent bars on Central that were magnets for crime. Many Central bars have hundreds of calls for service a year placing a drain on law enforcement resources.

A few of the bars located on or near Central that were closed or torn down by the Safe City Strike Force include the Blue Spruce Bar, Rusty’s Cork and Bottle, the Last Chance Bar and Grill and Club 7. The Safe City Strike Force closed Club 7 and the owner was convicted of commercial code violations.

The city attorney’s office in conjunction with the Bernalillo County District Attorney’s office brought criminal charges against and convicted the Club 7 downtown Central Avenue bar owner that hosted a “rave” that allowed under age participants to mingle with adults and where a young girl was killed.

CONVENIENCE STORES

The Safe City Strike Force took enforcement action against a number of convenience stores on Central that had substantial calls for service to APD. In 2005, The Safe City Strike Force identified convenience stores that had an unacceptable number of “calls for service” which resulted in the convenience stores being considered a public nuisance by the Albuquerque Police Department (APD). Outdoor phones at the convenience stores used for illicit drug transactions were identified.

APD felt the convenience stores were relying upon APD to provide security at taxpayer’s expense rather than hiring their own private security company. In 2005, the Strike Force negotiate a stipulated settlement agreement with three major convenience store corporate owners of seventeen (17) convenience stores throughout Albuquerque and they agreed to pay for private security patrols.

FLEA MARKETS

The Safe City Strike Force was responsible for the closure of Louie’s Flea Market and the Star Flea Market, two Westside flea markets both on Old Coors Road South of Central. The flea markets brought down property values. Both flea markets had been around for decades and caused extreme traffic congestion on weekends they operated causing problems for the established or developing residential areas. Both flea markets were found by the Albuquerque Police Department to be locations where stolen property was being sold and both had an excessive number of calls for service.

HOARDERS

Some of the most tragic and heart-breaking cases that the Safe City Strike Force dealt with involved “hoarders”. Hoarding is not classified as a mental illness but rather is a pattern of behavior that is characterized by excessive acquisition and an inability or unwillingness to discard large quantities of objects or animals that cover the entire living areas or exterior of a home or property. Being an “eccentric” or different is a good description of a hoarder.

The Strike Force dealt with a number of cases of hoarders.

The saddest case the Safe City Strike Force City dealt with was an elderly woman who was housing over 60 cats in her 1,400 square foot, three bedroom home. The home was not fit to be lived in as a result of contamination by the animals. Dead cats who she could not part with were found in her kitchen freezer. The main bathroom was found to be storage space for stacks of used feminine napkins stacked floor to ceiling used to urinate in while the main bath tub was used as a cat litter box and the tub was a quarter full of feces. The City removed the cats, cleaned up the property and placed a $40,000 lien on the home for the cleanup of the contamination. The house had to be completely gutted to the studs throughout and sanitized and remodeled and placed on the market for sale.

Another hoarder had accumulated an extensive number of items in his front and backyards to the extent that the area had become rat infested and the City was forced a cleanup op the area. Still another hoarded accumulated papers, magazine and printed material floor to ceiling to the point you literally had to crawl through pathways in the house to get around.

TEAR-DOWNS AND BOARD UPS

The Safe City Strike Force was responsible for the tear down of an entire residential block of homes located at 5th Street and Summer in the Wells Park neighborhood area located north of downtown Albuquerque. There were a total of 21 abandoned and vacant, boarded up properties that could not be repaired, owned by one elderly woman who agreed allowed a tear down of the structures by the City. The city tore down all 21 structures and placed a lien on the property. A few years later, the woman paid cash to release the lien. A few years later the woman sold the property to the city and the property is now part of the Wells Park.

A voluntary tear down of an entire strip mall was negotiated by the Strike Force. The strip mall had been boarded up for years, beyond repair, located near the former Octopus Car Wash on Menaul Street and Eubank. The strip mall was constantly being broken into, with fires being set by the homeless, and at one time a dead body was found at the location.

Two long vacant and vandalized restaurants, the Purple Plum and a Furr’s cafeteria, both on far North-East heights Montgomery, were torn down by the Safe City Strike Force.

One year, Albuquerque experienced a large spike in meth labs where almost 90 meth labs were found and identified and where the Safe City Strike Force was asked for assistance with contamination cleanup.

KELLER’S ADAPT PROGRAM

It was six years ago in July, 2019 that Mayor Tim Keller completed dismantling and defunding the Safe City Strike Force despite the fact that it was nationally recognized as Best Practices program. Keller announced the creation of the “Addressing Dilapidated and Abandoned Property Team” (ADAPT) which was a far more conciliatory approach to code enforcement. Sources confirmed at the time that Mayor Keller felt the Strike Force was “too aggressive” and the work of the Strike Force did not fit in with his “One Albuquerque” philosophy and slogan that he promoted.

The ADAPT program relies on new data to target the worst 100 properties in the city while the Strike Force concentrated on all commercial and residential properties that had become magnets for crime. ADAPT is a program in the Fire Marshal’s Office that focuses on abandoned and dilapidated properties that have a pattern of serious criminal activity or pose an immediate threat to public health, safety and welfare.

https://www.kob.com/albuquerque-news/program-targeting-nuisance-properties-sees-early-success-/5636532/

According the city’s web site for the ADAPT Program:

“Utilizing the ArcGIS mapping system, ADAPT will compile and filter information from the data systems of Albuquerque Fire Rescue, Albuquerque Police Department, the Code Enforcement Division of the Planning Department, 311, and other referrals. ADAPT will assign a point value to each specific response type based on the severity. Properties [are] in four sub- categories:

Residential
Multifamily
Non Residential
Undeveloped

Each category has a different point value threshold that will be considered critical. This point system will be a fair and equitable way to help identify criminal nuisance properties that will be placed into the ADAPT program.

ADAPT … leads a full inspection of the property with other City departments. The first step is to attempt to work with property owners to clearly identify the source of the criminal activity, and to assist in establishing a plan of action to correct any violations and to improve the property. If the owner cannot improve the property or fails to meet the plan of action goals, ADAPT will move to legal action.

Nuisance properties that do not rise to the level of the ADAPT program are referred to the Code Enforcement Division of the Planning Department to address the deficiencies or problems affecting it. Suspected criminal activity may also be referred to APD.”

https://www.cabq.gov/fire/adapt-program

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

The “Distressed Lodging Property Ordinance” as well as Keller’s ADAPT program are nothing more than a pathetic attempt to replicate the work of the Safe City Strike Force that was so successful for a full 8 years under then Mayor Marty Chavez. The truth is the City of Albuquerque, and the State of New Mexico have some of the strongest nuisance abatement laws in the county that simply need to be enforced. A summary of those laws are provided in the postscript below.

FAILURE OF THE CITY IN COURT

The problem is that under Mayor Tim Keller the city, the planning department and the City Attorney for the last 8 years have been reluctant to go to court and have been a failure to secure court orders to shut down nuisance properties, board them up and even tear them down with condemnations. The City Council is likewise reluctant to initiate condemnation proceeding against substandard properties.

Confidential sources have confirmed that the City Attorney’s office under Keller has been extremely ineffective in going to court and have been unable to secure court orders for temporary restraining orders, preliminary injunctions and even permanent injunctions and been unable to prove their cases in court. This failure is in sharp contrast to the work of the Safe City Strike Force when it went to court.

The Safe City Strike Force had a 100% success rate in court and that is because the Strike Force was organized and headed up for 8 years by trial attorney and Deputy City Attorney Pete Dinelli who was also the Director of the Safe City Strike Force. Planning Code Inspectors and the APD Code Teams were just as successful out of court with administrative actions know as “Notice and Orders” where code inspections were conducted and orders were issued to close and board up properties. Crime rates can be brought down with civil nuisance abatement actions that protect the public health, safety and welfare of the public and force property owners to take action to bring their properties into compliance.

PLANNING DEPARTMENT CODE ENFORCEMENT CAN DO MORE

Planning Director Alan Varela said this about the “Distressed Lodging Property Ordinance”:

“Code enforcement does all its investigations based on complaints. We do not drive around the city, putting our noses into businesses that are not on the complaint list”

Varela’s comments reflect sure laziness on the part of the Planning Department Code Enforcement, and it reflects to an extent a dereliction of duty.

Inherent in housing code enforcement is the duty to be very proactive to protect the general public health and safety and welfare. It is the responsibility of the Planning Department Code Enforcement to make sure that all properties, residential and commercial alike, are in compliance with city codes and not just those properties people complain about. All too often, tenants are fearful to complain, especially about slum lords, for fear of eviction.

CONCLUSION

If Mayor Tim Keller the City Council are truly serious about targeting nuisance properties, both residential and commercial, they would not hesitate to reinstate and fully fund the Safe City Strike Force and reinstate the APD code teams to enforce existing nuisance abatement ordinances and state laws. That is not at all likely because Mayor Keller would have to admit how wrong he was to defund the Safe City Strike Force in favor of his ADAPT program that goes easy on and promotes cooperation and communication with slum lords and derelict property owners who have no intention of bringing their properties in compliance.

______________________

POSTSCRIPT

NEW MEXICO STATUTES ON NUISANCE ABATEMENT

New Mexico statute defines a “public nuisance” as consisting “of knowingly creating, performing or maintaining anything affecting any number of citizens without lawful authority which is either:

“A. Injurious to public health, safety and welfare; or
B. Interferes with the exercise and enjoyment of public rights, including the right to use public property.

Whoever commits a public nuisance for which the act or penalty is not otherwise prescribed by law is guilty of a petty misdemeanor.”

(30-8-1, NMSA 1978, Public Nuisance defined).

The New Mexico legislature has also empowered municipalities very broad authority to define a nuisance, abate the nuisance and impose penalties and initiate civil causes of action.

State statute provides that “A municipality may by ordinance … define a nuisance, abate a nuisance and impose penalties upon a person who creates or allows a nuisance to exist. …”

(3-18-17 Nuisances and Offenses; Regulation or prohibition)

State statute also grants municipalities with broad powers and provides that:

“A municipality may:

A. sue or be sued; ….
F. protect generally the property of its municipality and it inhabitants;
G. preserve peace and order within the municipality; …”

(3-18-1 General Powers (of Municipality)”

Note that the creating, performing or maintaining a public nuisance is a crime under state law, which would be prosecuted in a magistrate court or metropolitan court. Under New Mexico law, a petty misdemeanor is the very least serious crime for which a person can be sentenced to time in jail. The sentence for a petty misdemeanor in New Mexico can never be more than six months in jail or a fine up to $500, is usually up to 30 days in jail and a $100 fine or both, depending on the offense and the penalties can also be suspended by the court.

Notwithstanding being a criminal charge, actions to abate a nuisance are civil actions that must be filed in state district court. New Mexico statutory law provides that any action for the abatement of a public nuisance shall be governed by the general rules of Civil Procedure.

(30-8-8, NMSA 1978 Abatement of a public nuisance.)

Under New Mexico law, “a civil action to abate a public nuisance may be brought, by verified complaint by any public officer or private citizen, in state district court of the county where the public nuisance exists, against any person, corporation or association of persons who shall create, perform or maintain a public nuisance.”

(30-8-8, B, NMSA 1978, Abatement of a public nuisance, emphasis added)

Editor’s Note: A “public officer” under the State Statute inherently includes the City Attorney, Bernalillo County District Attorney or even the County Attorney.

When a plaintiff prevails and proves that a nuisance exists and a judgment is given against a defendant in an action to abate a public nuisance, the district court can order the defendant responsible for the nuisance to pay all court costs and attorney fees for the plaintiff’s attorney.

(30-8-8, C, NMSA 1978, Abatement of a public nuisance, emphasis added)

The huge significance is that both public officials as well as private citizens can bring an action for nuisance abatement.

Another major distinction is the burden of proof between a criminal charge and a civil cause of action. A criminal charge requires the state to prove a defendant is guilty “beyond a reasonable doubt”. A civil case requires proof by “preponderance of the evidence” by a plaintiff.

In general, with few exceptions, only law enforcement or state prosecutors can bring petty misdemeanor charges for public nuisance. However, any private citizen or public official, such as a District Attorney or City Attorney, or any lay person with money for the court filing fee, can initiate a civil nuisance abatement action for injunctive relief and if they prevail can be awarded attorney’s fees and costs.

ALBUQUERQUE CITY ORDINANCES DEFINING NUISANCE

In 1994, exercising the authority granted to it by the state, the City of Albuquerque enacted its nuisance abatement ordinance and then amended it 2006 to add offenses under the state criminal code and city housing and construction codes.

The City of Albuquerque ordinance defines a nuisance property as “any parcel of real property, commercial or residential, on which …illegal activities occurs, or which is used to commit conduct, promote, facilitate, or aide the commission of … any … [crimes or housing code violations].” (See 11-1-1-3, city ordinance defining Public Nuisance)

The nuisance abatement ordinance lists misdemeanor and felony statutes and housing and commercial codes.

Albuquerque’s Nuisance Abatement Ordinance states:

“It shall be unlawful for any owner, manager, tenant, lessee, occupant, or other person having any legal or equitable interest or right of possession in real property … or other personal property to intentionally, knowingly, recklessly, or negligently commit, conduct , promote, facilitate, permit, fail to prevent, or otherwise let happen, any public nuisance in, on or using any property in which they hold any legal or equitable interest or right of possession.” (See 11-1-1-10, Public Nuisance Prohibited)

The City’s Uniform Housing Code defines a nuisance in part as “Any nuisance known at common law …” or “whatever is dangerous to human life or is detrimental to health, as determined by the health officer” or “any violation of the housing standards” required by the building and housing codes. (See 14-3-1-4, ROA 1994, Housing Code defining Nuisance).

In 2004 the city enacted the Vacant Building Maintenance Act which requires property owners to register their vacant buildings, repair them and keep them maintained. Albuquerque’s housing and commercial codes define substandard structures and there are provisions that allow inspections and civil code enforcement actions.

Under existing city ordinances, property owners can be cited for code violations for not maintaining their properties in compliance with city codes.

Under the nuisance abatement ordinance, aggressive code enforcement action against blighted properties, both residential and commercial, can be taken where it is found that that the properties have become a nuisance and magnets of crime resulting in calls for service to the Albuquerque Police Department.

The city’s nuisance abatement ordinance defines nuisance as:

“Any parcel of real property, commercial or residential, … on which
any of the following illegal activities occurs, or which is used to commit
conduct, promote, facilitate, or aide the commission of … any of
the following activities: …

At this point, the ordinance lists crimes in the state’s criminal code as well as the city’s building and construction codes.

(City of Albuquerque Nuisance Abatement Ordinance, Section 11-1-1-1, Section 11-1-1-3 of ordinance defining “Public Nuisance”)

The city’s nuisance abatement ordinance prohibits “public nuisances” as follows:

“It shall be unlawful for any owner, manager, tenant, lessee, occupant, or other person having any legal or equitable interest or right of possession in real property …or other personal property to intentionally, knowingly, recklessly, or negligently commit, conduct , promote, facilitate, permit, fail to prevent, or otherwise let happen, any public nuisance in, on or using any property in which they hold any legal or equitable interest or right of possession.”

(11-1-1-10 PUBLIC NUISANCES PROHIBITED, City of Albuquerque.)

The City of Albuquerque’s Uniform Housing Code also defines “nuisance” as:

“(1) Any nuisance known at common law …

(2) Any attractive nuisance which may prove detrimental to children whether in a building, on the premises of a building, or upon an unoccupied lot. This includes any abandoned wells, shafts, basements or excavations; abandoned refrigerators; or any structurally unsound fences or structures; or any lumber, trash, fences or debris which may prove a hazard for inquisitive minors.
(3) Whatever is dangerous to human life or is detrimental to health, as determined by the health officer.
(4) Overcrowding a room with occupants.
(5) Insufficient ventilation or illumination.
(6) Inadequate or unsanitary sewage or plumbing facilities
(7) Any violation of the housing standards set forth in this code.”

(14-3-1-4 ROA 1994 of Housing Code, Definitions)

NEW MEXICO CASE LAW ON DEFINING A NUISANCE

The New Mexico Supreme Court and the Court of Appeals has issued opinions and rulings on what constitutes a nuisance.
Under New Mexico court case law nuisances are classified as nuisances per se and nuisances in fact.

“A nuisance per se is generally defined as an act, occupation, or structure which is a nuisance at all times and under any circumstances, regardless of location or surroundings … [A] nuisance in fact is commonly defined as an act, occupation, or structure not a nuisance per se, but one which may become a nuisance by reason of circumstances, location, or surroundings.” (Koeber v. Apex-Albug Phoenix Express, 72 N.M. 4; 380 P.2d 14; 1963, New Mexico Supreme Court).

Further, it is well settled that a court may enjoin a threatened or anticipated nuisance, public or private, where it clearly appears that a nuisance will necessarily result from the contemplated act or thing which it is sought to enjoin. (Koeber v. Apex-Albug Phoenix Express, 72 N.M. 4; 380 P.2d 14; 1963, New Mexico Supreme Court).

A public nuisance must affect a considerable number of people or an entire community or neighborhood. (Environmental Improvement Div. v. Bloomfield Irrigation Dist., 108 N.M. 691, 778 P2d 438, New Mexico Court of Appeals 1989).

A common law “public nuisance” which is similar to the public nuisance statute, is the unreasonable interference with the right common to the general public, belonging to all members of the general public. It is not necessary that the entire community be affected by a public nuisance. If the nuisance will interfere with those coming in contact with the exercise of a public right or if the nuisance otherwise affects interests of the community at large. (State, ex rel, Village of Los Ranchos de Albuquerque v. City of Albuquerque, 889 P.2d 185, 119 NM 150.)

A public nuisance is a wrong that arises by virtue of unreasonable interference with the rights common to the general public. The Public nuisance statute applies to anything affecting “any number of citizens” meaning a considerable number of people or an entire community or neighborhood. (NMSA 1978, 30-8-1 and State, ex rel, Village of Los Ranchos de Albuquerque v. City of Albuquerque, 889 P.2d 185, 119 NM 150.

Public nuisance is one which adversely affects public health, welfare, or safety. A public nuisance affects the rights of citizens as part of the public and must affect a considerable number of people or an entire community or neighborhood. A continuing nuisance is one which occurs so often that it can fairly be said to be continuing although it is not constant and unceasing. (Padilla v. Lawrence, 101 NM 556, cert. denied 683 P.2d 1341, 101 NM 419.

The fact that acts constituting a public nuisance are punishable criminally does not deprive a court of its power to enjoin a public nuisance where there is ample proof of irreparable injury to public health, welfare, or safety. (Town of Clayton v. Mayfield. 82 NM 596, (involved operation of a junk yard that was unfenced and contained old cars). See also, State, ex rel, Marron v. Compere, 103 P.2d 273, 44 NM 414.

“Gateway Recovery” Micro-Community Made Up “Pallet Shelters” To Help City’s Homeless And Addicted; Keller’s 5 Shelter Approach To Homeless Crisis Is Unsustainable, Financial Black Hole Creating Wards Of The City; Audit Of 116 Service Contracts Involving $325 Million In Funding Over 4 Years For Homeless Services Is In Order

Posted on May 20, 2025

Gateway Recovery is a micro-community made up of “Pallet Shelters” the city bought for the unsheltered homeless community and people experiencing substance use disorder. The micro-community is located in the industrial area of the 3400 block of the Pan American Freeway just south of the Comanche exit to house 50 people in 46 Pallet Shelters. This includes 42 single-occupancy shelters of 70 square feet each and four double-occupancy shelters for couples. People will be able to stay up to 24 months or until they are connected to longer-term recovery housing. Two on-site community rooms will be dedicated to behavioral health treatment, case management, and housing navigation. The City intends to contract with a provider to operate Gateway Recovery.

EDITORS NOTE: Pallet Shelters is an Everett, Washington based company that manufactures shelters. Pallet shelters are prefabricated, rapid response shelters designed to provide temporary, safe housing for individuals experiencing homelessness or in disaster situations. They are built with aluminum frames and composite panels and materials like fiberglass reinforced plastic and insulated cores, making them weather-resistant and energy efficient. The shelters are shipped on a pallet, making them easy to assemble on-site with minimal tools. The shelters are often deployed in “villages” and offer private living spaces with features like locking doors, storage, and climate control with the units wired for electricity and with heating and air conditioning combination units. The link to Pallet Shelters and its product line is here:

https://palletshelter.com/products/

A report commissioned by the Department of Health, Housing, and Homelessness found there is a shortage of low-barrier recovery housing in our city. The study indicated there are only 800 recovery beds available throughout Albuquerque, and further analysis of the data recommended the City find innovative approaches to expanding housing options. The Recovery Gateway will add critical services.

The link to the city website describing the Gateway Recovery project is here:

https://www.cabq.gov/health-housing-homelessness/gateway-network/gateway-recovery

$5 MILLION FOR “GATEWAY RECOVERY” PALLET SHELTER PROJECT

On May 3, the Mayor Tim Keller unveiled the “Gateway Recovery” project. At a cost of $5 million, the city of Albuquerque installed 46 pre fabricated Pallet Shelters along with several bathrooms and utility stations meant to serve 50 people.

Some of the Pallet Shelters allow couples, and the campus features a small dog park for pet owners and a dozen raised garden beds also dot the facility, expected to be used if not this spring, then next year. Gateway Recovery also has several security cameras, which, according to one of the program managers, cannot be accessed by police. Residents will not be allowed to use drugs on the property but will be offered treatment and therapy services, as well as connected to employment opportunities, over a 12 to 18 month stay.

Albuquerque’s Health, Housing and Homelessness Director Gilbert Ramírez said that the “Gateway Recovery” project of shelters is not a walk-up facility. It is meant to serve individuals who have completed detox and need a safe, stable environment to maintain sobriety and continue their recovery and receive a referral to be there. At the unveiling of Gateway Recovery, Ramírez said the project’s goal is nothing short of saving lives. Ramírez said this:

“Going into detox, that’s a huge step for a person to make that commitment. … But what happens when you get out? Do we just walk away and say you’re done, and you should be fine? That’s not the case. The reality is that you need the next step of help. This is that next step.”

STAGGERING DATA

The most recent data from the New Mexico Department of Health reported 948 drug overdose deaths and 1,896 alcohol-related deaths in 2023, the most recent available data. The Department of Health report argued that recovery housing was a critical community asset for individuals recovering from substance use disorders. It also detailed the levels of support offered, such as peer-led homes to residential treatment centers, and emphasizes the value of a safe community residence that promotes recovery.

Ramírez said Gateway Recovery will be well-positioned to help unhoused people in the throes of addiction because the city has done its homework. He cited a 2024 report commissioned by the city examining recovery housing in Albuquerque. Ramirez said this:

“Everything around this was evidence-based. We understand the need in our community, how many units we have available, and what the gap is.”

NO TENANTS YET

Gateway Recovery hasn’t begun accepting residents. Mayor Tim Keller for his part said filling the units is the first step. Keller said this:

“The demand for this is so high. I mean, it’s, I’m not exaggerating, it’s probably in the thousands.”

Keller said Gateway Recovery will take a few months to complete. Once it’s up and running, Keller said the city will measure success based on the number of people who enter permanent housing, either with a family member or independently, and maintain sobriety. The providers will report that information to the city.

And if successful, Albuquerque should expect more such facilities. Keller said this:

“Addiction is the number one problem facing Albuquerque and the rest of the country. And so the more facilities for folks to get help, the better. … We’ve got to start somewhere.”

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

https://www.abqjournal.com/news/article_3286c956-cf9c-4bcc-b097-8408e080e49d.html

AN INTEGRATED SYSTEM

The Keller Administration has attempted to take a comprehensive approach to address homelessness, behavioral health, and addiction treatment with an integrated system. Over the past few years, the City has taken critical steps to build out a network of support known as the Gateway Network. The City is now providing shelter and services to more than 1,000 men, women, and children nightly through the Gateway Network, with more programs and services coming online this year.

On April 1, the Keller Administration submitted its proposed Fiscal Year 2026 budget to the City Council that must adopt it by June 30. The 2026 fiscal year begins on July 1, 2025 and ends June 30, 2026. The proposed fiscal year 2026 budget “reinforces funding compassionate, effective solutions to homelessness and provides expanded behavioral health and addiction treatment resources to address the needs of our community’s most vulnerable residents.”

The priorities contained in the F/Y 26 budget include:

Leveraging opioid settlement funding to get hundreds more people off our streets and connected to the treatment, housing, and services they need to recover.
$8 million for permanent supportive housing vouchers to support the City’s Housing First model. Full funding for service contracts for mental health, substance abuse, early intervention and prevention programs, domestic violence shelters and services, sexual assault services, health and social service center providers, and services to abused, neglected and abandoned youth.
$6.9 million for Gateway West, which is the old west side jail that has been extensively remodeled and which operates at close to full occupancy for much of the year.
$500 thousand to continue the funding for Albuquerque Street Connect, a program that focuses on people experiencing homelessness who use the most emergency services and care, to establish ongoing relationships that result in permanent supportive housing.

The Gateway Network of support for people struggling with homelessness and addiction includes the following:

Gateway Center: This is the Lovelace Hospital on Gibson acquired by the city remodeled it into a campus facility providing medical, behavioral, and social services including overnight beds, first responder intake, medical sobering and respite.

Annual Impact: 20,200 Individuals
Open Since 2022, more services coming in 2025

Gateway West: This is the remodeled West Side Jail that provides safe, supportive 660-bed facility for individuals experiencing homelessness, offering specialized resources and case management.

Annual Impact: 5,700 Individuals
Open 24/7 Since 2019

Gateway Family: Supportive housing center for families with overnight beds, meals, and case management to help achieve stable housing.

Annual Impact: 987 Individuals
Open Since 2020

Gateway Recovery: 50-resident micro-community offering low-barrier beds, recovery services, and support for 18 – 24 months.

Annual projected Impact: 50 – 100
Opening Early 2025

Gateway Young Adult: Housing and support for young adults ages 15-25 experiencing homelessness, tailored to their unique needs.

Annual projected Impact: 120 Individuals
Opening Late 2025

The Gateway Center on Gibsson, SE, houses critical services and seven tenants.

The services provided are:

First Responder Receiving Area – 20 people/night
Medical Sobering Center – 50 people/night
Medical Respite Center – 50 people/night
Women’s Navigation Center – 50 people/night plus additional 50 coming on line
Men’s Navigation Center – 92 people/night with the beds coming on line
Engagement Center – providing connection/access services to more than 1,000 people per year

The Tenants are:

Turquoise Lodge Behavioral Hospital
Haven Behavioral Hospital
Ideal Option Substance Use Disorder Treatment
AMG Hospital
National Alliance on Mental Illness
Vizionz-Sankofa Resource Center
Albuquerque Community Safety – Trauma Recovery Center

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

https://www.cabq.gov/mayor/news/city-administration2019s-budget-prioritizes-safety-jobs-families

CITY’S UNHOUSED NUMBERS

The Point-In-Time (PIT) count is the annual count of individuals and families experiencing sheltered and unsheltered homelessness within a community on a single night in January. The PIT count is the official number of homeless reported by communities to the federal Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to help understand the extent of homelessness at the city, state, regional and national levels and for the award of federal funding.

On July 31, the New Mexico Coalition to End Homelessness released the 2024 Point-In-Time (PIT) Report for the numbers of unhoused in Albuquerque. The 2024 PIT count occurred on the night of January 29. The 2024 Point-In-Time homeless survey of homeless people in a 24 hour period found a whopping 18% increase in Albuquerque’s homeless numbers.

The link to review the entire 62-page 2024 PIT report is here:

https://www.nmceh.org/_files/ugd/ad7ad8_4e2a2906787e4ca19853b9c7945a4dc9

The 2024 Point-In-Time homeless survey found an 18% increase in Albuquerque’s homeless numbers. Whenever the Point In Time survey is released, the city and service providers proclaim it is only for one night and that it is a serious under count of the homeless.

PERSONS COUNTED IN ALBUQUERQUE

The 2024 PIT survey reported that the total count of PERSONS experiencing homelessness in Albuquerque on January 29, 2024 was 2,740 broken down in 3 categories.

Emergency Shelters: 1,289
Transitional Housing: 220
Unsheltered: 1,231

TOTAL PERSONS: 2,740

HOUSEHOLDS COUNTED IN ALBUQUERQUE

The 2024 PIT survey reported that the total count of HOUSEHOLDS experiencing homelessness in Albuquerque on January 29, 2024 was 2,248. (Households include those with or without children or only children.)

The breakdown of HOUSEHOLDS is as follows:

Emergency Shelters: 1,018
Transitional Housing: 174
Unsheltered: 1,056

TOTAL HOUSEHOLDS: 2,248

CITY HEALTH, HOUSING AND HOMELESSNESS DEPARTMENT

The City of Albuquerque budget is referred to as a “performance based budget.” A performance-based budget requires the departments to submit statistics of work performed to justify budgets submitted.

The Health, Housing and Homelessness (HHH) Department provides a wide range of services to assist the homeless. The services offered by the department directly or by contract with community providers include the following:

Behavioral health services which include mental health and substance abuse treatment programs
Homeless services
Domestic violence support
Health care
Gang/violence intervention and prevention
Public health services
Rental assistance; and
Affordable housing developments

HHH also operates four Health and Social Service Centers. Services are incorporated within programs to allow for performance measures and to align specifically to city goals and desired community conditions.

The proposed FY/26 General Fund budget for HHH totals $53.3 million, including $8 million for housing vouchers budgeted in City Support for the transfer to Operating Grant Fund (265), an increase of $2.1 million above the FY/25 original budget. The FY/26 proposed budget for the department’s grants are estimated at $4.2 million in the Community Development Fund and $2.5 million in the Operating Grants Fund.

The F/Y 26 proposed budget for HHH includes funding for a total of 100 full time employees (FTE) which is identical to F/Y 25.

The link to review the entire 234 page proposed 2026 fiscal year budget with bars and graphs and the individual 27 departments proposed budgets is here with the budget for the HHH Department on page 121 listing service contracts:

Click to access fy26-proposed-budget-web-version.pdf

Notable performance measures reported in the proposed budget for the HHH department for 2026 reflecting the following statistics on the homeless for the past 3 years:

NUMBER OF HOMELESS PEOPLE PROVIDED EMERGENCY SHELTER FROM CITY

Actual F/Y 2023: 6,103
Actual F/Y 2024: 7,420
Target F/Y 2025: 7,257
Mid F/Y 2025: 3,576
2026 F/Y Budget Target: 8,439

NUMBER OF FORMERLY HOMELESS HOUSEHOLDS PROVIDED WITH RENTAL ASSISTANCE PLUS SUPPORTIVE SERVICES FROM

Actual F/Y 2023: 1,004
Actual F/Y 2024: 1,233
Target F/Y 2025: 1,114
Mid F/Y 2025: 853
2026 F/Y Budget Target: 998

NUMBER OF YOUTH AND ADULTS WHO RECEIVE SUBSTANCE USE TREATMENT SERVICES FROM CITY

Actual F/Y 2023: 562
Actual F/Y 2024: 1,120
Target F/Y 2025: 655
Mid F/Y 2025: 692
2026 F/Y Budget Target: 1,270

NUMBER OF PEOPLE WITH A SERIOUS MENTAL ILLNESS DIAGNOSIS OR A DEMONSTRATED NEED FOR INTENSIVE LEVEL OF SERVICES WHO RECEIVE INTENSIVE CASE MANAGEMENT OR ASSERTIVE COMMUNITY TREATMENT SERVICES FROM CITY

Actual F/Y 2023: 341
Actual F/Y 2024: 287
Target F/Y 2025: 409
Mid F/Y 2025: 219
2026 F/Y Budget Target: 332

CITY’S FINANCIAL COMMITMENT TO HOMELES UNDER KELLER

Keller has spent upwards of $275 million in the last 3 years on homeless shelters, programs, and the city purchasing and remodeling motels for low-income housing. On April 6, 2021 Keller announced that the city acquired the old Lovelace Hospital on Gibson for $15 million and then spent an additional $90 million to remodel it into the Gateway shelter. In the last two years, the Keller Administration has spent $25 million to purchase and remodel motels for low-income housing which would also be used for the unhoused.

Originally, it was the city’s Family Community Services Department (FCS) Department that provided assistance to the homeless. In fiscal year 2021-2022, the department spent $35,145,851 on homeless initiatives. In 2022-2023 fiscal year the department spent $59,498,915 on homeless initiatives. On June 23, 2022 Mayor Tim Keller announced that the city was adding $48 million to the FY23 budget to address housing and homelessness issues in Albuquerque.

The proposed FY/26 General Fund budget for the HHH Department is $52.2 million, which includes $48 million for strategic support, health and human services, affordable housing, mental health services, emergency shelter, homeless support services, Gibson Health HUB operating, and substance use services from Family and Community Services Department, and $4.2 million for a move of Gibson Health HUB maintenance division form General Service Department.

The Keller Administration in its F/Y 2026 budget is seeking funding for 116 separate services contracts to pay for services provided to the unhoused:

$30,381,000for 32 Affordable Housing contracts,
$6,347,619for 12 Emergency Shelter contracts,
$1,962,480for 16 Health Service Contracts,
$5,746,188for 29 Homeless Support Service Contracts,
$3,864,500for 5 Gateway Shelter Operating contracts,
$2,825,400for 11 Mental Health Service Contracts,
$2,573,526million for 11 Substance Abuse Treatment Contracts

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

Notwithstanding all the millions being spent each year, homelessness continues to surge and it has spiked by 18% as Mayor Keller allows the unhoused to proliferate city streets, parks and open space declining to aggressively enforce city and state vagrancy laws. The problem is 75% of the chronic, emergency unhoused refuse to accept city services offered by the city yet Keller continues to throw city resources at the crisis. $325 mullion over four years is an astonishing amount of funding for the actual number of people being provided services.

Keller has taken an “all the above approach” to deal with the city’s homeless crisis by establishing 5 shelters to deal with the homeless that should be operating as an integrated system. The blunt reality is that Mayor Keller has essentially proclaimed the unhoused as “wards of the city” to provide food and lodging and medical care support services when such a responsibility should be undertaken by the state or federal government.

The most recent released 2024 annual Point-In-Time homeless survey count found an 18% increase in the homeless with upwards of 3,000 chronic homeless in the city. It has been reported by those who participated in taking this year’s 2025 PIT survey that 75% of those in need immediate and urgent shelter refuse city services preferring to be left alone to continue living on the streets. The city’s performance measures reports that the city’s emergency shelter needs are between 6,103 as reported in 2023 and 7,420 as reported in 2024.

Despite Keller’s spending efforts to assist the unhoused, the city’s homeless numbers continue to spike as the crisis worsens and as the unhoused refuse services and as they take over our streets and parks. The upwards of $300 million already spent by the Keller Administration over the last 3 years with another $52.2 million for F/Y 2026 to help 3,000 to 7,400 is unsustainable and must be justified for so few who actually accept the services. $300 million in funding would have gone a long way to finance community centers, senior citizen centers, police and fire substations, preschool or after school programs, senior citizen programs, and police and fire programs.

The City Council needs to exert itself and call for a complete and thorough audit by the City’s Internal Audit or the Inspector General’s Office of all the 116 contracts issued by the city to assist the unhoused and determine what is being accomplished and the extent of services actually being provided and the actual number being served. The city should not continue down the road Mayor Tim Keller has lead them of an unsustainable financial black hole creating wards of the city. The city must demand more from the state and the federal government to assume more costs.

CIVIL MENTAL HEALTH COMMITMENTS VIABLE OPTION

The 2024 legislature enacted the Behavioral Health package that will fund half billion trust fund to build behavioral health facilities an hire personnel in 3 regions. The county also has behavioral health tax where facilities are also being built. Mayor Keller and the city was misguided to convert the old Lovelace hospital to a 24/7 shelter and should have kept it as a hospital and use the 200 patient rooms for civil mental health commitments. Part of the enacted behavioral health package expands definition of serious danger to self and others an DA can get people committed for longer periods of time and compel treatment. The Courts will be in charge and they are committed to getting this done.

A viable solution to deal with the mentally ill and drug addicted homeless who refuse city services is the initiation of civil mental health commitments by the state to mandate mental health care or drug addiction counseling in a hospital setting after a court hearing that determines a person is a danger to themselves or others. Such approach would in fact get the mentally ill and drug addicted the health care they desperately need and off the streets.

Former 35 + Year APD Veteran Steve Hindi Implicated In DWI Corruption Scandal; CORRUPTION SCORECARD: 16 APD Officers, 3 Sherriff Deputies, 1 State Police Officer Implicated; 5 Cops and 2 Ring Leaders Plead Guilty As Charged; US Attorney For New Mexico Replaced, FBI Special Agent In Charge Steps Down; Will Aggressive Prosecutions Continue?

Posted on May 16, 2025

On May 13, it was widely reported that Bernalillo County District Attorney’s Office has placed former Albuquerque Police Department Officer Steve Hindi on the “Giglio List.” The “Giglio” list is a public listing of law enforcement officers whose credibility is compromised and where evidence exists that could be used to impeach their credibility as a prosecution witness. Hindi joins 16 other APD officers, 3 Bernalillo County Sheriff’s Office Deputies, and one New Mexico State Police Officer, whose credibility has now become suspect in DWI cases they handled and tied to the long-running criminal scheme known as the DWI Enterprise in which officers took bribes from DWI Defense Attorney Thomas Clear and his investigator Ricardo “Rick” Mendez to sabotage DWI cases.

At this point, Hindi has not been federally charged. Hindi worked on and off for APD starting in 1980. APD fired him in December 2015 after he tried to intimidate an investigator with the Civilian Police Oversight Agency over a complaint against him. Court records show that in the late 1990s and early 2000s, Hindi had more than 50 cases with defense attorney Thomas Clear III, who admitted to being the ringleader of the criminal scheme. Two-thirds of those cases were dismissed.

https://www.krqe.com/news/crime/albuquerque-police-department-dwi-investigation/albuquerque-police-officer-fired-in-2016-now-tied-to-dwi-corruption-scandal/

https://www.krqe.com/news/newsfeed/officer-tied-to-dwi-scandal-trial-for-teen-murder-suspect-windier-weather-lawmaker-salaries-unm-grad-emmy-nominee/

https://www.kob.com/new-mexico/former-apd-officer-steve-hindi-added-to-brady-giglio-list/

NINETEEN LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS FROM 3 AGENCIES IMPLICATED

A total of nineteen (19) law enforcement officers have resigned, retired, been terminated or federally charged or indicted since the FBI executed five searches in January 2024 at three APD officers’ residences, the home of a private investigator, and the law office of prominent DWI attorney Thomas Clear III. Fifteen APD Officers, three Bernalillo County Sherriff Officers and one New Mexico State Police Sergeant thus far have been implicated in the bribery racketeering enterprise.

16 APD OFFICERS IMPLICATED, CHARGED OR PLEAD GUILTY

During the past year, a total of 16 APD Police officers have been implicated in the largest corruption scandal in APD’s history. APD Commander Kyle Hartsock is overseeing the Internal Affairs investigations. One by one, the accused APD officers have been turning in their badges and resigning or retiring rather than talking to Internal Affairs investigators about an alleged public corruption scheme involving DWI cases. The names and dates of the 15 officers who have resigned, placed on leave, who have been terminated, retired, charged or plead guilty are:

On February 7, 2024 Justin Hunt, who started at APD in 2000, resigned.
On February 29, 2024, Honorio Alba, who started at APD in 2014, resigned. On February 7, 2025 he plead guilty to racketeering, bribery, extortion and conspiracy.(Article link: Took a plea deal on February 7, 2025.)
On March 13, 2024, Harvey Johnson, who started at APD in 2014, resigned.
On March 15, 2024, Nelson Ortiz, who started at APD in 2016, resigned. On March 24, Nelson Ortiz admitted to his role in the DWI Enterprise bribery scandal and pleaded guilty in federal court to one count of Conspiracy to Commit Interference With Commerce By Extortion Under Color of Official Right. He faces 20 years in prison.
On March 20, 2024 Joshua Montaño, who started at APD January 2005, resigned. On Friday, February 8, Montaño plead guilty as charge to racketeering, bribery, extortion and conspiracy. (Article link: Took a plea deal on February 7, 2025.)
On May 2, 2024 Daren DeAguero, who started with APD in 2009, resigned.
On May 9, 2024, Matthew Trahan was placed on paid leave as the investigation playsout. Trahan has been with APD since 2006, was with the DWI unit from 2014-16 and recently worked as a detective.
On July 30, 2024 APD Officer Neill Elsman, who had worked in the DWI unit within the past several years, resigned before returning to work from military leave. On February 12, Elsman plead guilty as charged to 5 counts of conspiracy, extortion, and bribery. (Article: February 12, 2025.)
On August 1, APD announced that it fired Mark Landavazo, the APD Commander of Internal Affairs for Professional Standards, who started with APD in 2007 and was with the DWI unit from 2008 through 2013.October 16, Deputy
Commander Gustavo Gomez placed on paid administrative leave. Gomez was with the DWI unit from 2010 to 2013.
On January 24, 2025 APD announced they placed officers Matthew Chavez on leave.
On February 28, Kyle Curtis announced his retirement after he was placed on leave on February 24 amid being targeted in the Internal investigation involving DWI arrests.
In 2022, Timothy McCarson retired from the Albuquerque Police Department and he has been implicated in the DWI scandal. The last week of January, 2025, the FBI asked that he be added to the Bernalillo County District Attorney’s Office‘s Giglio list, which classifies potential court testimony as unreliable.
On March 7, 2025 BCSO Jeffry Bartram was placed on leave on March after he was involved in the DWI Enterprise to dismiss cases. He has been with BCSO since February 2010 and was on the BCSO DWI Unit from July 2014 to August 2020.
On March 24, the Albuquerque Police Department (APD) announce it has placed Lucas Perezon leave as a part of its internal investigation into its DWI unit and the federal investigation. Perez has been with the department since 2016 and served in the DWI unit to become the unit sergeant.
On May 12, former APD officer Steve Hindi was placed on the Giglio list of officers whose credibility is compromised after being implicated in the scandal

THREE BERNALILLO COUNTY SHERRIFF DEPUTIES

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

On February 25, 2025 BCSO Deputy Jeff Hammerel resigned from BCSO and plead guilty to one count of conspiracy to commit extortion, two counts of extortion and two counts of bribery.
On February 24, 2025, BCSO Undersheriff Johann Jarenowas asked to resign by Bernalillo County Sheriff John Allen.
March 7^th, Deputy Jeffry Bartramwas placed on leave on after early findings that he may have been involved in the scheme. He has been with BCSO since February 2010 and was on the BCSO DWI Unit from July 2014 to August 2020.

ONE MEXICO STATE POLICE OFFICER

On February 14, 2025 the New Mexico State Police announced it placed Sgt. Toby LaFave on administrative leave after he was implicated by the FBI as accepting bribes in the DWI Enterprise to dismiss cases. Sgt. Toby LaFave is on paid leave as the agency does its own internal investigation into allegations. LaFave was featured for years in state ENDWI campaigns and was referred to as the DWI King.

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

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

FIVE LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS PLEAD GUILTY AS CHARGED

The five APD officers and one Bernalillo County Sheriff’s Office Deputy that have plead guilty to taking bribes are:

On February 7, 2025 former APD Officer Honorio Alba plead guilty to racketeering, bribery, extortion and conspiracy.(Article link: Took a plea deal on February 7, 2025.)
On February 7, former APD Officer Joshua Montañoplead guilty as charge to racketeering, bribery, extortion and conspiracy.(Article link: Took a plea deal on February 7, 2025.)
On February 12, former APD Officer Neill Elsman plead guilty as charged to 5 counts of conspiracy, extortion, and bribery. ( February 12, 2025.)
On February 25, 2025 BCSO Deputy Jeff Hammerel resigned from BCSO and plead guilty to one count of conspiracy to commit extortion, two counts of extortion and two counts of bribery. (Took a plea deal on February 25, 2025.)
On March 24, former APD officer Nelson Ortiz admitted to his role in the DWI Enterprise bribery scandal and pleaded guilty in federal court to one count of Conspiracy to Commit Interference With Commerce By Extortion Under Color of Official Right. He faces 20 years in prison.
On April 29, former APD Police Officer Harvey Johnson plead guilty to one count of conspiracy to commit “Interference With Commerce By Extortion Under Color Of Official Right”. He is facing 20 years in jail.

TWO RING LEADERS PLEAD GUILTY AS CHARGED

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

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

On February 12, DWI defense attorney Thomas Clear III, 67 plead guilty as charged to nine federal charges including racketeering (RICO) conspiracy, bribery, and extortion. Clear faces up to 130 years in prison and $2 million in fines. Clear admits in his Plea Agreement that for nearly 30 years he led a criminal racketeering enterprise that paid off generations of law enforcement officers to get his clients’ DWI cases thrown out. Clear admits to running the “DWI Enterprise” since at least 1995. The DWI Enterprise scheme was run out of Clear’s law office.

According to Clear’s plea agreement, prior to 2022, Clear and his investigator Ricardo “Rick” Mendez would arrange for officers to intentionally fail to appear at required pretrial interviews involving DWI offenders the officers arrested. Clear would file motions to dismiss the proceedings, claiming the officers were necessary witnesses who didn’t show up as required. The courts would dismiss the cases as a sanction against the prosecution. Clear has been permanently disbarred from the practice of law by the New Mexico Supreme Court and the Federal Court and a forfeiture action against a home Clear used as his offices has been taken as an asset and as part of the racketeering charge

2,490 DWI CASES OVER 30 YEARS

On February 29, KOAT TV Target 7 filed the following report which has been edited by this blog:

Thomas Clear was the attorney of record for 2,490 DWI cases over 30 years. 15 APD officers accounted for nearly 100 DWI arrests connected to Clear, over the past five years.

Court records and law enforcement data reveals staggering numbers that suggest the DWI enterprise’s reach extends far beyond what was initially suspected.

Over the past five years, 15 APD officers accounted for nearly 100 DWI arrests connected to Clear.
Clear was the attorney of record for 2,490 DWI cases over 30 years.
On average, he handled about 85 DWI cases per year.
At least 150 people he represented were repeat offenders, arrested multiple times for DWI.
Roughly 60% of Clear’s cases over the past five years were dismissed.

While the full scope remains unknown, federal investigators believe many more APD officers who worked in the DWI unit could have been involved at some point.

IMPACT ON LAW ENFORCEMENT AND PUBLIC SAFETY

The scandal could also affect current DWI enforcement efforts in Albuquerque. APD made 884 DWI arrests in 2024, a nearly 14% drop from the 1,026 arrests made in 2023. Some fear the scandal has left a chilling effect on officers, reducing proactive policing efforts.

Court documents indicate that the corruption may extend beyond those already charged. An FBI interview with Rick Mendez, a private investigator who worked for Clear, revealed claims that another attorney was involved in the scheme. Federal authorities have not disclosed the identity of this individual, but the investigation remains ongoing.

According to the New Mexico Regulations and Licensing Department, Mendez does not hold a license with the Private Investigations Advisory Board. Additionally, their records indicate there isn’t an individual with the name Ricardo “Rick” Mendez who has held a license with the board in the past.

INVESTIGATION OSTENSIBLY CONTINUES

The investigation into APD’s DWI unit [ostensibly] continues, with prosecutors working to uncover the full extent of the enterprise. Multiple high-ranking officers have been linked to dismissed DWI cases connected to Clear but have yet to be named.

As the case unfolds, authorities warn that more arrests could be on the horizon. Prosecutors are expected to continue identifying those who participated in or turned a blind eye to the corruption, ensuring that those responsible are held accountable.

On April 29, after the plea of guilty by Harvey Johnson, FBI Special Agent in Charge Raul Bujanda said the investigation into the scheme and possible suspects is not over. Bujanda said this:

“We’re not done yet. It’s an ongoing investigation. I’d like to be able to say, I really actually would, and that’s sincere, like I would really want to say that this was over, it’s done, we’ve found them all, there’s no more to follow up on, you know everyone can feel good that we got all the bad apples out. Unfortunately, I can’t say that.”

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

https://www.koat.com/article/dwi-scandal-enterpise-albuquerque-new-mexico/63834129

https://www.krqe.com/news/crime/albuquerque-police-department-dwi-investigation/were-not-done-yet-fbi-discusses-future-of-dwi-scandal-as-another-apd-officer-takes-a-plea/

US ATTORNEY FOR NEW MEXICO REPLACED, FBI SPECIAL AGENT IN CHARGE STEPS DOWN

It was on February 14, the New Mexico Department of Justice announced U.S. Attorney Alexander Uballez for New Mexico had resigned at the request of President Donald Trump. Uballez biggest claim to fame as US Attorney for New Mexico was the bringing federal charges against law enforcement officers and the ring leaders involved in the DWI bribery and conspiracy scandal to dismiss hundreds of DWI cases. Uballez negotiated 5 plea agreements in the case before he was terminated by Trump.

https://www.koat.com/article/new-mexico-us-attorney-uballez-leaves-albuquerque/63822383

https://www.kob.com/new-mexico/us-attorney-for-new-mexico-resigns-at-trumps-request/

On April 18, the United States Attorney’s Office for the District of New Mexico announced that Ryan Ellison was appointed as the new United States Attorney for the District of New Mexico by U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi to replace former US Attorney Alexander Uballez. Newly appointed United State Attorney Ryan Ellison made absolutely no mention if his office will continue with the aggressive prosecution of the Federal DWI Enterprise Bribery Case to dismiss DWI cases and the largest corruption case in APD’s history. What Ellison did say was “the United States Attorney’s Office will do its part to stem the unlawful flow of people and drugs into our country”. What this means is US Attorney Ellison and his office will be concentrating on President Trump’s prosecution and expulsion of undocumented immigrants in New Mexico.

https://www.justice.gov/usao-nm/pr/ryan-ellison-appointed-united-states-attorney-district-new-mexico

The lead agency investigating the DWI bribery and corruption scandal is the FBI. On April 29, it was reported that Raul Bujanda, the Special Agent in Charge of the FBI in Albuquerque has left his position. Bujanda stepped down after 27 years in law enforcement. It was On April 21, 2021, then FBI Director Christopher Wray named Raul Bujanda as the special agent in charge of the Albuquerque Field Office in New Mexico. Mr. Bujanda joined the FBI as a special agent in 2002. Nothing was reported on what his departure means for the DWI bribery and corruption scandal. There has been no announcement who will be replacing Bujanda.

https://www.krqe.com/digital-shows/insiders/leader-of-albuquerque-fbi-steps-down/

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

The blunt reality is that with the appointment of a new United States Attorney for New Mexico and the departure of the FBI Special Agent in Charge of the Albuquerque office, it is difficult to gage what impact there will be on the DWI Enterprise investigation and prosecutions and if there will be more charged. There has been absolutely NO assurances made by either New Mexico’s new United State’s Attorney nor the FBI with the departure of Special Agent in Charge Raul Bujanda what will now happen to the case.

The DWI bribery and conspiracy score card is scandalous as it gets with 16 APD officers, 3 Sherriff Deputies, 1 State Police Officer implicated, 5 Cops and 2 ring leaders pleading guilty as charged in the largest bribery and corruption scandal in the city’s history involving the 3 largest law enforcement agencies in the state. Simply put, both the New Mexico United State Attorney’s Office and the FBI could decide very easily the case has run its course. They could decide to do nothing further given that priorities for both offices have shifted dramatically on a national level with President Trump concentrating on prosecuting and deporting the undocumented in the country and closing the border with Mexico. The United States Attorney for New Mexico and the Albuquerque FBI office have absolutely no obligation to tell the public what will now happen to the largest bribery and corruption case in Albuquerque’s history involving the three law enforcement agencies in the state, but they should not keep people guessing.

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

The only way that any semblance of faith can be restored and for people to begin trusting APD and law enforcement in general again is if all the police officers involved in this scandal are held accountable and the lawyers involved are held accountable. That will only happen with aggressive prosecutions, convictions, and lengthy prison sentences for the law enforcement officers and attorneys involved in the “DWI Enterprise” scheme.

NEWS AND COMMENTARY

Monthly Archives: May 2025

2025 Memorial Day Dinelli Family Tribute

Keller Administration Seeks To “Give Away” City Owned Lots To Private Developers For Affordable Housing Development; Anti-Donation Clause Allows; Just Because You Can Does Not Mean You Should; There Are Other Viable Options To City Land Give Aways; Keller Shows Poor Stewardship Of City Assets

“Distressed Lodging Property Ordinance” Enacted; Pathetic Attempt To Replicate Work Of “Safe City Strike Force” Dismantled By Mayor Tim Keller; City Should Concentrate On Enforcing City And State Nuisance Abatement Laws; Reinstate Safe City Strike Force