Trump’s Executive Order Seeks To Overhaul The Way Cities And States Manage Homelessness; Trump’s Interference Will Exacerbate Problems; Executive Order Enforceability Highly Questionable; POSTSCRIPT: Candidates For Mayor Speak Out On Trump’s Executive Order

Posted on July 30, 2025 by Pete Dinelli

On July 24 President Donald Trump signed an Executive Order that seeks to overhaul the way cities and communities all across the United State manage homelessness. The Executive Order requires cities to take a far more aggressive approach to homelessness, mental illness and drug use. The link to read Trump’s July 24, 2025 Executive Order is here:

https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/07/ending-crime-and-disorder-on-americas-streets/

In conjunction with President Trump signing the Executive Order, the White House issued the following Fact Sheet entitled “President Donald J. Trump Takes Action To End Crime and Disorder On American Streets”:

“ENDING VAGRANCY AND RESTORING ORDER: Today, President Donald J. Trump signed an Executive Order to restore order to American cities and remove vagrant individuals from our streets, redirecting federal resources toward programs that tackle substance abuse and returning to the acute necessity of civil commitment.

The Order directs the Attorney General to reverse judicial precedents and end consent decrees that limit State and local governments’ ability to commit individuals on the streets who are a risk to themselves or others.
The Order requires the Attorney General to work with the Secretary of Health and Human Services, Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, and the Secretary of Transportation to prioritize grants for states and municipalities that enforce prohibitions on open illicit drug use, urban camping and loitering, and urban squatting, and track the location of sex offenders.
The Order redirects funding to ensure that individuals camping on streets and causing public disorder and that are suffering from serious mental illness or addiction are moved into treatment centers, assisted outpatient treatment, or other facilities.
The Order ensures discretionary grants for substance use disorder prevention, treatment, and recovery do not fund drug injection sites or illicit drug use.
The Order stops sex offenders who receive homelessness assistance from being housed with children and allows programs to exclusively house women and children.

ENSURING AMERICANS FEEL SAFE IN THEIR OWN CITIES AND TOWNS: President Trump is taking a new approach focused on protecting public safety because surrendering our cities and citizens to disorder and fear is neither compassionate to the homeless nor to other citizens.

The number of individuals living on the streets in the United States on a single night during the last year of the Biden administration—274,224 —was the highest ever recorded.
The overwhelming majority of these individuals are addicted to drugs, have a mental health disorder, or both.
Federal and state governments have spent tens of billions of dollars on failed programs that address homelessness but not its root causes, leaving other citizens vulnerable to public safety threats.
Shifting these individuals into long-term institutional settings for humane treatment is the most proven way to restore public order.

MAKING AMERICA SAFE AGAIN: President Trump is committed to ending homelessness across America.

In 2023, President Trump said: “We will use every tool, lever, and authority to get the homeless off our streets. We want to take care of them, but they have to be off our streets.”
In March 2025, President Trump signed an Executive Order to beautify Washington D.C., directing the National Park Service to clear all homeless encampments and graffiti on Federal lands.
In May 2025, President Trump signed an Executive Order establishing the National Center for Warrior Independence, a place where homeless veterans can go to receive the care, benefits, and services to which they are entitled.
As part of First Lady Melania Trump’s BE BEST Initiative, the Department of Housing and Urban Development announced a $1.8 million dollar investment to prevent homelessness among young Americans aging out of the foster care system.

The link to review the White House Fact sheet is here:

https://www.whitehouse.gov/fact-sheets/2025/07/fact-sheet-president-donald-j-trump-takes-action-to-end-crime-and-disorder-on-americas-streets/

NATIONAL HOMELESS COUNT

The Executive Order states the number of homeless living on the streets in a single night in the U.S. peaked under the Biden Administration and contends that the majority “are addicted to drugs, have a mental health condition, or both.” According to the U.S. Interagency Council on Homelessness, there has been an 18% increase from the prior year. Of those, about 36% were unsheltered, meaning they were living on the streets, in vehicles, or in encampments, according to the Department of Housing and Urban Development’s Point-In-Time count. Overall, experts believe there are more than 771,000 homeless in America, up from an average of 550,000 pre-pandemic.

CITY’S HOMELESS COUNT

According to the New Mexico Coalition to End Homelessness and the most recent Point In Time count, the city of Albuquerque has an estimated 2,740 persons determined to be experiencing homelessness in Albuquerque is 2,740 reported in 3 categories:

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

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

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

CITY’S MULTIFACETED APPROACH TO DEAL WITH HOMELESS

City budgets for the years 2021 to 2024 reflect the Keller administration has spent a staggering $200,000,000, or upwards of $60 Million a year, to operate shelters and provide homeless services.

The city is taking a multifaceted, all-in approach to get more people into houses and off the streets. The city’s Metro Homelessness Initiative has the goal to provide the unhoused staying at shelters with the opportunity of employment. The city has also overhauled its voucher program and improving collaboration with the nonprofits that do the work.

The city will have a total of 5 centers to deal with the homeless that is intended to be operated as an integrated system:

The Gibson Gateway Shelter
The Gateway West Shelter
The Family Gateway Shelter
The Youth Homeless Shelter
The Recovery Shelter

The Gateway Center which is the former Lovelace Hospital on Gibson is the largest investment the city has ever made in health and homelessness with the goal of providing immediate help and a pathway into housing. The Gateway West shelter is the old westside jail being reshaped with no barriers to entry and wraparound services. The city is adding the Youth Gateway a Recovery Gateway, and the Family Gateway has already helped get 1,200 into permanent housing. The Recovery Gateway is for the unhoused who are struggling with drug abuse. The Family Gateway is a reworked hotel to house more than 50 families a night.

EXECUTIVE ORDER SPECIFICS

Trump’s Executive Order calls on U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi to redirect federal funding into programs that enforce prohibitions on homeless encampments and “open illicit drug use.” It takes aim at harm-reduction and safe-space programs that are intended to prevent diseases, overdoses and reduce violence for people who struggle with substance abuse and homelessness.

Trump said people living in homeless encampments should be directed to facilities for treatment of mental health problems and addiction. He did not mention any plans to expand treatment centers or provide long-term housing.

The Executive Order calls for changes to make it easier for states and cities to remove outdoor encampments and get people into mental health or addiction treatment. The Executive Order proclaims:

“Endemic vagrancy, disorderly behavior, sudden confrontations, and violent attacks have made our cities unsafe.”

The Executive Order seeks to shift federal funding away from longtime policies that seek to get homeless people into housing first, and then offer treatment. Instead, it calls for prioritizing money for programs that require sobriety and treatment, and for cities that enforce homeless camping bans.

The Executive Order directs the departments of Health and Human Services, Housing and Urban Development, and Transportation to assess federal grant programs and prioritize places that actively crack down on illicit drug use, urban camping and loitering, and urban squatting “to the maximum extent permitted by law.”

The Executive Order requires interagency work on grants for states to enforce prohibitions on open illicit drug use, urban camping, loitering and squatting, and to track sex offenders. It requires redirecting funds to ensure people sleeping on streets and causing public disorder, and suffering from serious mental illness or addiction, are moved to facilities like treatment centers.

The Executive Order requires that discretionary grants for substance use prevention, treatment and recovery do not go toward funding “drug injection sites or illicit drug use,” and it aims to stop sex offenders who receive homelessness assistance from being housed with children and allows programs to house women and children exclusively.

The Executive Order is described as an effort “to restore order to American cities and remove vagrant individuals from our streets” in the fact sheet. It aims to redirect federal funds toward tackling substance abuse and the necessity of civil commitment.

CIVIL COMMITMENT OF HOMELESS WHO POSE RISK TO SELVES AND OTHERS

Trump’s order calls for a more vigorous use of the civil commitment process to direct people with mental health and substance abuse problems into treatment facilities. According to the White House, increased use of civil commitment would ensure that people with mental illness “who pose risks to themselves or the public” are committed to “appropriate facilities for appropriate periods of time.”

Civil behavioral health commitment, also called involuntary commitment, allows a judge to commit someone into treatment for mental illness against their wishes. The order directs Attorney General Bondi to end legal barriers that would encourage civil commitment of people with mental illness “who pose a risk to themselves or the public.” The Executive order states:

“Shifting homeless individuals into long-term institutional settings for humane treatment through the appropriate use of civil commitment will restore public order.”

REACTION TO EXECUTIVE ORDER

Critics of Trump’s Executive Order said the sweeping nature of the order does nothing to solve homelessness and could make it worse. Critics of the order say it criminalizes homelessness and punishes people for being poor or mentally ill. Maria Martinez Sanchez, legal director for the ACLU of New Mexico said this:

“Our initial response was probably outrage. … When you put people in jail, you are making things so much worse, and that’s essentially what this executive order is begging states to do.”

Sanchez said the order prioritizes law enforcement over proven housing-based solutions and she said this:

“It expands the use of police to respond to homelessness and law enforcement. It prioritizes funding for states that treat homelessness as a crime.”

The National Coalition for the Homeless condemned the Executive Order, saying it would undermine legal protections for homeless and mentally ill individuals. The group said the Trump administration has “a concerning record of disregarding civil rights and due process” and warned that it would worsen the homelessness crisis.

The National Homelessness Law Center said the order combined with budget cuts for housing and healthcare, will increase homelessness. Jesse Rabinowitz with the National Homelessness Law Center said this:

“This executive order is forcing people to choose between compassionate data driven approaches like housing, or treating it like a crime to have a mental illness or be homeless. Forced treatment is unethical, ineffective, and illegal… these actions will push more people into homelessness and divert resources away from those in need.”

Ann Oliva with the National Alliance to End Homelessness said this in a statement:

“Institutionalizing people with mental illness, including those experiencing homelessness, is not a dignified, safe, or evidence-based way to serve people’s needs.”

Other groups said the order risks criminalizing homelessness by pushing people off the streets without guaranteed housing, worsening the crisis.

Many experts see the origin of the U.S. homelessness crisis in the closure of psychiatric hospitals in the 1960s and 1970s in favor of community care. Advocates say this shift was never fully funded or effectively implemented, leaving many people with serious mental illness without care or housing.

Other contributing causes to homelessness are a severe shortage of affordable housing, rising poverty and cuts to public housing assistance programs, experts say. Trump’s order gives preference in federal grant-making to cities that enforce bans on public camping, drug use and squatting. It also blocks funding for supervised drug-use sites.

Trump’s Executive Order calls on the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration to defund addiction programs that include “harm reduction.” This will disrupt frontline health care programs that work to reduce overdoses from fentanyl and other street drugs.

Addiction experts consider harm reduction, including programs that provide clean needles and other paraphernalia, to be an essential part of helping people survive addiction. Trump’s order repeats the claim that such programs encourage drug use, an argument disproven by years of research, including by federal scientists at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

In New Mexico, advocates for the homeless said Trump’s Executive Order will be impossible to implement in New Mexico because treatment facilities and shelter beds are in short supply. Monet Silva, executive director of the New Mexico Coalition to End Homelessness said this:

“We don’t have a strong enough behavioral health system to accommodate something like what (Trump) is talking about. ”

In a statement released, The National Homelessness Law Center called the order a return to “backwards, expensive and ineffective policies” that expand the use of law enforcement and institutionalization to respond to homelessness and said this:

“This Executive Order is rooted in outdated, racist myths about homelessness and will undoubtedly make homelessness worse.”

A spokesperson for Mayor Tim Keller’s office said this in a statement

“City staff will thoroughly review the executive order to determine its specific impacts and how the City intends to protect our unhoused population.”

STRAIGHT OUT OF THE PAGES OF PROJECT 2025

Project 2025 is a proposed presidential transition project and consists of a series of detailed policy proposals put together by hundreds of high-profile conservatives. Those proposals are laid out in a roughly 900-page book entitled “Mandate for Leadership, The Conservative Promise.” Project 2025 was written by at least 144 people who worked for Trump’s first administration or his campaign.

Project 2025’s policy proposals are dramatic and sweeping and include a wide range of topics from foreign affairs, to public education, to health care, to law enforcement and to immigration. Project 2025 proposes enforcing laws that make it illegal to mail abortion pills over state lines, criminalizing pornography and eliminating the Department of Education. The project also advocates a sweeping elimination of environmental regulations and a crackdown on programs to boost diversity in the workplace, which the project argues are broadly illegal.

Trump Conservatives have spent years envisioning how to concentrate power in Presidency and impose a decidedly ultra rightward shift across the United States Government and society itself. The project calls for a broad expansion in presidential power by boosting the number of political appointees and increasing the president’s authority over the Justice Department and the military.

Over the past few years as homelessness rates have steadily risen to record levels there has been a growing conservative backlash and Trump’s Executive Order reflects the conservative agenda. Devon Kurtz with the conservative Cicero Institute, which has been lobbying for many of the items in the order said “This is a huge step.” Kurtz contends that the housing first strategy made homelessness worse by not doing enough for those who need treatment.

Trump’s order calls for ending support for Housing First policies that don’t promote “treatment, recovery, and self-sufficiency.” Kurtz said this:

“This is really that crucial safety net at the bottom to make sure that [homeless people] don’t continue to fall through the cracks and die on the street.”

The conservative agenda Project 2025 also called for ending housing first. Earlier this year, the Trump administration gutted the U.S. Interagency Council on Homelessness which was the small agency that had coordinated homeless policy across the government and had been an advocate for housing first policies.

QUESTIONABLE IF EXECUTIVE ORDER LEGALLY ENFOCEABLE

With no clear legal precedent and multiple constitutional issues raised, how Trump’s Executive Order will be implemented or whether it can be enforced is uncertain.

Legal experts say the order could face significant challenges in court. KOAT legal analyst John Day said there are questions about how much legal authority an executive order carries and whether it can compel cities to comply. Day said this:

“The issue is going to be: is it enforceable? What does an executive order carry? What sort of weight does it carry? … [The Executive Order] will possibly violate the HIPAA rights, the medical privacy rights of homeless people. … There’s a lot of concern about medical privacy issues, about due process issues. It’s going to require governments to keep track and get information on homeless people.”

Links to quoted or relied upon news sources are here:

https://www.abqjournal.com/news/article_5f2e7177-313e-40a5-a881-6df4f72fae93.html#tncms-source=home-featured-7-block

https://www.koat.com/article/trump-signs-executive-order-on-homelessness/65545025

https://www.npr.org/2025/07/24/nx-s1-5479139/trump-homelessness-executive-order-civil-commitment-camping

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/trump-orders-crackdown-homeless-encampments-nationwide-2025-07-25/

https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/5418729-trump-executive-order-homeless-drug-use-streets/

https://apnews.com/article/trump-order-homelessness-san-francisco-de0beeb87672c8884ab56319c82da055

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2025/07/24/trump-homeless-people-streets-order-housing/85358060007/

RECALLING THE TOTAL DESTRUCTION OF NON-PROFIT MENTAL HEALTH CARE PROGRAMS BY GOVERNOR SUSANA MARTINEZ

One of the cruelest things that Republican Governor Susana Martinez did as governor was order an “audit” of mental health services by nonprofits in New Mexico which devastated New Mexico’s behavioral health system. In 2014, more than 160,000 New Mexicans received behavioral health services with most of those services funded by Medicaid according to the Human Services Department at the time.

In June 2013, under the direction of Governor Martinez, the Human Services Department cut off Medicaid funding to 15 behavioral health nonprofits operating in New Mexico. The Martinez Administration said that the outside audit showed more than $36 million in overbilling, as well as mismanagement and possible fraud. The audit was false. The Martinez Human Services Department agency brought in the 5 Arizona providers to take over.

In early 2016, at least 13 of the 15 nonprofits that were shut down were exonerated of fraud by New Mexico Attorney General Hector Balderas. Even though AG Balderas found no fraud and cleared the nonprofits of fraud the damage had been done to the nonprofits and many just went out of business. Lawsuits ensued and the Governor Lujan Grisham Administration was stuck settling most of the cases out of court to the tune of millions of taxpayer dollars.

Three of the five Arizona providers brought in by Governor Susana Martinez’s administration in 2013 to replace the New Mexico nonprofits pulled up stakes in the state and the states mental health system never fully recovered.

The freezing of Medicaid funding to 15 providers over false fraud and overbilling accusations and intentionally gutting the state’s mental health care system can only be described as cruel and vicious conduct by a political hack in the form of Republican Governor Susana Martinez. The state is still playing catch up to fill the void to provide mental health care services to those who desperately need them.

https://www.abqjournal.com/749923/third-arizona-behavioral-health-provider-to-pull-out-of-state.html

BEHAVIORAL HEALTH REFORM PACKAGE

During the 60-day 2025 New Mexico legislative session, New Mexico lawmakers dealt with the issue of court-supervised treatment for people with mental illness. The 2025 legislature enacted what is referred to as the Behavioral Health Reform Package. Lawmakers earmarked more than $555 million to fund an overhaul the state’s system for mental health and substance abuse treatment programs.

Under the enacted Behavioral Health Reform Package, a new mental health care model placed the State Judiciary in charge of planning while leaving the state Health Care Authority largely in charge of overseeing funding. This is a significant change from the former system which largely fell under the Governor’s executive branch jurisdiction. The legislation enacted increases accountability by requiring regional plans outlining priorities for providing mental health and substance abuse treatment. The new trust fund will provide annual funding to support the regional plans, which would largely be overseen by the state’s judiciary.

The legislation signed by the governor took effect June 20, the date specified by state law for legislation approved during this year’s session that does not carry a different effective date. The spending infusion of $555 million is a key part of a new regional-based approach to behavioral health, after state spending in recent years failed to significantly move the needle.

CHANGES IN COMPETENCY LAWS FOR CIVIL MENTAL HEALTH COMMITEMENTS

During the 2025 legislative session, the New Mexico legislature also enacted the Omnibus Crime Package. The crime package passed by lawmakers is House Bill 8 and it too contained various criminal laws enacted. It includes provisions dealing with fentanyl trafficking, auto theft and drugged driving (DWI). It also includes outlawing the devices used to convert semi-automatic firearms into fully automatic weapons.

The crime package also made major changes to how New Mexico handles criminal defendants deemed incompetent to stand trial and adding a dangerousness evaluation in such cases and giving judges more options for treatment programs. House Bill 4 is the criminal competency legislation which was part of the enacted Bill 8 Omnibus Crime Package. It gives prosecutors more options to involuntarily commit people into a locked psychiatric facility if they are found to be dangerous to themselves or others and unable to stand trial. The courts will now have more options when dealing with suspects who are deemed incompetent to stand trial instead of simply releasing them back on the streets.

Under House Bill 4, when a court determines that a defendant is not competent to proceed in a criminal case the court shall determine if the defendant is dangerous and with a process for evaluating whether criminal defendants are competent to stand trial established. House Bill 4 specifically requires that “competency evaluators” determine whether defendants are dangerous to themselves or others. After a competency hearing, and if a defendant is found not to be competent, a judge then decides whether the defendant poses a threat. Based on that determination, a defendant is either ordered to attend an assisted outpatient treatment program or be sent to the state Behavioral Health Institute in Las Vegas, New Mexico.

State Representative Christine Chandler, sponsor of House Bill 4, said this:

“What we created was a pathway, two pathways. One for those who are seriously ill and potentially dangerous, and the other pathways for individuals who may get treatment and have their issues addressed in a more appropriate way than it has been over the many years.”

The link to review House Bill 4 is here: https://legiscan.com/NM/text/HB4/2025

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

Trump’s Executive Order that seeks to overhaul the way the cities and communities all across the United State manage the unhoused amount to nothing more than President Trump’s interference with State and Cities efforts to deal with the country’s homeless crisis and with his unfunded federal mandates. Not at all surprising, the interference is being done with vindictiveness from the Trump Administration if the States and cities do not comply with what he wants.

Simply put, the State of New Mexico and the City of Albuquerque are way ahead of the curve and are committed to deal with the homeless crisis without Trump’s power play or his interference.

Since 2014, the state of New Mexico has had a broken mental health care system. The passage of the Behavioral Health package comes more than a decade after former Republican Governor Susana Martinez gutted New Mexico’s behavioral system in 2013. Enactment of the Behavioral Health Package makes sweeping changes to the state’s health care system to deal with mental illness and drug abuse was long overdue.

The void to address the mandatory civil commitment of those who are to be danger to themselves, and others are addressed with the enactment of House Bill 4. House Bill 4 specifically requires that competency evaluators determine whether defendants are dangerous to themselves or others. Under House Bill 4, after a civil competency hearing, and if a defendant is found not to be competent, a judge would then decide whether the defendant poses a threat. Once a person is determined not to be competent and determined to be a threat to themselves and others, the court could order mandatory treatment.

The City of Albuquerque is also making progress without Washingtons help nor rump’s interference with the Metro Homelessness Initiative.

In all likelihood it will take at least two years to four years before we can expect the measures taken by the City and State to show any success. Until then, the last thing the City and New Mexico needs is for Trump to interfere with his Executive Orders that do nothing and will have no real impact.

_______________________________

POSTSCRIPT

On July 30, the online news agency City Desk posted a news article entitled “Albuquerque mayoral candidates split on Trump homelessness order threatening $167M in federal funding” written by Jesse Jones, with nm.news . Jesse Jones is a reporter covering local government and news for nm.news.

Following with the link is the edited article:

HEADLINE “Albuquerque mayoral candidates are sharply divided over President Trump’ Executive Order threatening to cut off federal funding to cities that don’t enforce civil commitment laws for homeless individuals.”

The stakes are high for Albuquerque. The city receives about $92 million a year in federal funding for homeless services, plus another $75.4 million in long-term grants for affordable and transitional housing.

CANDIDATES SUPPORT FEDERAL MANDATE

Several mayoral candidates said they support the order’s push for more enforcement and civil commitment to address homelessness in the city.

Alpana Adair, a write-in candidate and a former hotel HR executive who now works in the film industry, spoke with CityDesk ABQ, said she agrees with Trump’s order and believes “it’s time to take our streets back.”

“We can’t just hand out tents and then turn a blind eye,” Adair said. “It’s not safe, it’s a health hazard, and it’s not humane. Nobody should be living on the street. We have a duty to get them off the street, and they have a duty to pay us back once we get them back on their feet.”

Adair, who lives in the International District, said she often sees homeless encampments near her home and believes the city has little to show for all the money it’s spent. She criticized Health, Housing and Homelessness Director Gilbert Ramirez’s leadership and said Albuquerque deserves to lose federal funding because “we’ve mismanaged it.”

“In business, you have to make a return on your investment,” Adair said. “If people fail in business, they don’t get a second chance. They might get the door, depending on how egregious it is.”

Patrick Sais, a write-in candidate and former state policy analyst and community outreach coordinator, said he backs the executive order but wants the focus to be on support, not punishment.

“I believe in everything that it says there,” Sais said in a phone interview. “Let’s get these people the help that they need. Let’s get him off the street. If they have mental problems, physical problems, get them the help, because putting the band-aid on them doesn’t work.”

He said the city should distinguish between long-term homeless individuals and families displaced by the pandemic.

“There’s a lot of homeless families out there that need a hand up to get back to living properly,” he said.

Eddie Varela, a retired paramedic and firefighter, said he supports the executive order and regularly visits a homeless encampment to talk with people living there.

“I have been actively studying this situation for two years,” Varela said in a phone interview. “I actually go to the homeless encampment on First Street and I-40 a minimum of twice a week, and I actually talk to the homeless.”

He said the city’s current strategy is failing, estimating Albuquerque spends $200 million a year on homelessness while the crisis continues to grow. He believes the real number of unhoused residents is closer to 10,000—far higher than official counts.

“The city of Albuquerque is spending $200 million a year on homeless, and the city is failing dramatically,” he said. “We’re having more and more homeless in the city, and that will continue.”

Former Bernalillo County Sheriff Darren White said he “will enforce the laws, including the camping ban,” and follow the U.S. Supreme Court ruling that gives cities authority to clear encampments.

“Albuquerque has incredible resources for those in need, and we will encourage the homeless to take advantage of that help,” White said in a written statement. “However, those who refuse assistance and insist on operating illegal tent encampments — which are essentially open-air drug markets — will be dealt with in accordance with the law.”

City Councilor Louie Sanchez, who has a law enforcement background and pushed to close the Coronado Park encampment, said he strongly supports following the federal order.

“Albuquerque cannot afford to jeopardize $92 million in annual federal funding or the $75.4 million in multi-year grants that support our homelessness programs,” Sanchez said in a written statement. “I would work to ensure compliance with the executive order while also demanding local flexibility in how we implement it.”

He criticized Keller’s record, saying the city has spent “hundreds of millions of dollars with little to show for it.” Sanchez pointed to a rising homeless count, a still-not-fully-open Gateway Center and growing encampments as signs the current strategy isn’t working.

He said the order “aligns closely with what I’ve been saying for years” about focusing on structured intervention instead of allowing open-air camps. He proposed creating a special outreach unit that includes APD’s Crisis Intervention Team, behavioral health clinicians and social workers to help with civil commitment.

“I would end the lawsuits” against the federal requirements, Sanchez said. “Fighting the federal government is costly, politically driven and counterproductive. Compliance keeps federal dollars flowing while giving us leverage to advocate for local solutions.”

CANDIDATE SEEKS MIDDLE GROUND

Mayling Armijo, former Bernalillo County economic development director and deputy county manager for Sandoval County, criticized both the federal order and Keller’s leadership while outlining a local path to compliance.

“Albuquerque should respond with leadership and accountability — something that’s been missing under Mayor Keller,” Armijo said in a written statement. “While I disagree with heavy-handed federal overreach, I believe Albuquerque can meet expectations by enforcing no-sleep zones around schools, parks and public transit while expanding housing and treatment services.”

She said the city’s $92 million in annual federal funding isn’t worth risking but blamed the Keller administration for putting it in jeopardy.

“We also have to be honest about why that funding is at risk. The Keller administration has failed to provide safe, accountable solutions,” she said. “As mayor, I will protect those dollars by taking decisive steps that satisfy federal compliance — without criminalizing homelessness or outsourcing our values.”

Armijo called for a local, outcomes-focused strategy, including safe, sanctioned camping areas with sanitation and mental health services, and more mobile outreach through Albuquerque Community Safety.

“Civil commitment should be used when clinically necessary, not to satisfy a blanket policy from Washington,” she said. “What would help is real investment in mental health outreach, substance abuse recovery and housing — led locally with accountability and urgency.”

CANDIDATE OPPOSES FEDERAL APPROACH

Former U.S. Attorney Alex Uballez criticized the executive order as a misguided policy that won’t improve public safety.

“The President’s directive equates homelessness and crime and, if it’s anything like his other pronouncements, will help fill prisons and his friends’ pocketbooks but won’t make our cities safer or help the people who need it,” Uballez said in a written statement.

Uballez, who served under the Biden administration, said the city needs “an approach that provides both care and consequences,” not one focused solely on enforcement and civil commitment.

“Those of us who live in reality understand that we get safer streets when we focus our enforcement and we expand initiatives that address root causes, treat addiction and end poverty in order to prevent crime,” he said.

MAYOR KELLERS RESPONSE

Keller called the executive order a misguided federal policy that ignores local realities.

“This federal mandate is misguided and ignores the realities on the ground, particularly in New Mexico, where our behavioral health system was dismantled by a previous governor,” Keller said in a statement. “Despite these hurdles, we have made progress with the Gateway System of Care, which helps people connect to housing, behavioral health treatment and other essential services.”

Keller acknowledged ongoing challenges with people who refuse services.

“The federal mandate also fails to acknowledge that not everyone is willing to accept services. We are working to intervene where we can while addressing public safety concerns,” he said.

The link to the full unedited article is here:

Albuquerque mayoral candidates split on Trump homelessness order threatening $167M in federal funding

Links to related article’s are here:

City Files “Writ Of Superintendent Control” Against State District Judge Who Ruled US Supreme Court Decision On The Unhoused “Flawed”, Does Not Apply To City; US Supreme Court Ruled Outdoor Camping Bans Displacing Homeless Are Legal And Do Not Constitute Cruel And Unusual Punishment Nor Unreasonable Search And Seizure; New Mexico Supreme Court Must Decide Application Of US Supreme Court Ruling

City Has Upwards Of 2,740 Unhoused, Balance Of State Has 1,907 Unhoused; Numbers Should Be Manageable But Only Getting Worse; Survey Includes Data On ABQ’s Efforts To Dismantle Encampments And Personal Belongings Of Unhoused; City Should Enforce Vagrancy Laws

Mayor Tim Keller Creates 5 Separate Gateway Shelters To Deal With “Challenge Of Our Lifetime”; City’s $200 Million Financial Commitment To Unhoused; Keller Embellishes By Doubling Unhoused Numbers As He Fails To Deal With Those Who Refuse Services And Getting Them Off Streets

City Files “Writ Of Superintendent Control” Against State District Judge Who Ruled US Supreme Court Decision On The Unhoused “Flawed”, Does Not Apply To City; US Supreme Court Ruled Outdoor Camping Bans Displacing Homeless Are Legal And Do Not Constitute Cruel And Unusual Punishment Nor Unreasonable Search And Seizure; New Mexico Supreme Court Must Decide Application Of US Supreme Court Ruling

Posted on July 28, 2025 by Pete Dinelli

On March 18, 2024, State District Court Judge Joshua Allison ruled the landmark United States Supreme Court case of Grants Pass v. Johnson that gives cities the green light to enforce criminal laws against the homeless for living and sleeping outside on public property does NOT apply to the City of Albuquerque and it is “flawed.” On July 11, the City of Albuquerque filed with the New Mexico Supreme Court a “Petition for Writ of Superintending Control” against Judge Joshua Allison requesting the New Mexico Supreme court reverse Allison’s ruling to prevent the “proliferation” of homeless encampments within the city and other municipalities and towns in New Mexico.

This article in an depth analysis of the case giving a history of the case and where the case now stands.

CLOSURE OF CORONADO PARK AND RESULTING CIVIL RIGHTS CLASS ACTION LAWSUITE AGAINST CITY

It was on August 18, 2022, the City of Albuquerque closed Coronado Park because it had become a de facto city sanctioned homeless encampment with the city evicting up to 100 unhoused who camped there nightly. The city cited numerous reasons for closure of the park including lack of sanitation posing a severe health risks, overall damage to the park and extensive drug trafficking and violent crime, including rapes and murders at the park having reached crisis proportions. The city was spending upwards of $50,000 a month to clean up Coronado Park.

The city park had an extensive history lawlessness including drug use, violence, murder, rape and mental health issues. In 2020, there were 3 homicides at Coronado Park. In 2019, a disabled woman was raped, and in 2018 there was a murder. APD reported that it was dispatched to the park 651 times in 2021 and 312 times in 2022. There had been 16 stabbings at the park in 2 years. In 2023, APD had seized from the park 4,500 fentanyl pills, more than 5 pounds of methamphetamine, 24 grams of heroin and 29 grams of cocaine. APD also found $10,000 in cash. All the seized drugs were tied to a single bust that occurred at a nearby motel, not the park, though an APD spokeswoman said the suspect was “mainly doing all their distributions [at the park].”

On December 19, 2022 the American Civil Liberties Union of New Mexico, the NM Center on Law & Poverty, and the law firms of Ives & Flores, PA and Davis Law New Mexico filed a “Class Action Complaint For Violations of Civil Rights and for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief” against the City of Albuquerque on behalf 4 men and 4 women identified to be homeless. All 8, along with upwards of 100 unhoused, were evicted by the city from Coronado Park. Not one of the 8 plaintiffs allege they were charged nor arrested for refusing to leave Coronado Park on the day it was closed nor were they jailed. The lawsuit contends it is unconstitutional to punish or threaten to punish unhoused people for the “crime of being in an outdoor public space when there are inadequate indoor spaces for them to be.”

The Plaintiffs allege they were displaced from Coronado Park when the city closed it and that the city did not provide satisfactory shelter options to them. The city said it did give notice and offered shelter and services, including vouchers. According to the ACLU the lawsuit was filed to stop the City of Albuquerque from destroying encampments of the unhoused all over the city and preventing the city from seizing and destroying personal property and jailing and fining people for being unhoused.

The lawsuit alleges the city unlawfully seized personal property, denied due process of law, and violated constitutional rights by destroying property and forced all the unhoused at Coronado Park out with nowhere for them to go and with the city not providing shelter for them. The lawsuit sought court orders that required the city to cease and desist enforcement actions to stop the unhoused from camping in public spaces which include public streets, public rights of ways, alleyways, under bridges and city parks unless the city has shelter or housing for them.

STATUTES AND ORDINANCES ENUMERATED

The class action lawsuit against the city specifically enumerates New Mexico Statutes and City Ordinances that have been enacted to protect the general public health, safety, and welfare and to protect the public’s peaceful use and enjoyment of property rights. The lawsuit does not challenge the constitutionality of any of the state statutes nor city ordinances.

The lawsuit makes the very broad allegation that “the City regularly enforces City ordinances and state laws against unhoused people in a manner that criminalizes their status as homeless … [and] … Unhoused people who erect tents or makeshift shelters around the City are routinely cited and/or arrested for violations of [the state laws and city ordinances]. Violations of these statutes and ordinances are punished as misdemeanors.”

All the laws cited have been on the books for decades and are applicable and are enforced against all citizens and not just the unhoused. The specific statutes cited in the lawsuit are:

NMSA 1978, Section 30-14-1 (1995), defining criminal trespass on public and private property.
NMSA 1978, Section 30-14-4 (1969), defining wrongful use of property used for a public purpose and owned by the state, its subdivisions, and any religious, charitable, educational, or recreational association.
Albuquerque City Ordinance 12-2-3, defining criminal trespass on public and private property.
Albuquerque City Ordinance 8-2-7-13, prohibiting the placement of items on a sidewalk so as to restrict its free use by pedestrians.
Albuquerque City Ordinance 10-1-1-10, prohibiting being in a park at nighttime when it is closed to public use.
Albuquerque City Ordinance 12-2-7, prohibiting hindering persons passing along any street, sidewalk, or public way.
Albuquerque City Ordinance 5-8-6, prohibiting camping on open space lands and regional preserves.
Albuquerque City Ordinance 10-1-1-3, prohibiting the erection of structures in city parks.

All the above laws are classified as “non-violent crimes” and are misdemeanors. The filing of criminal charges by law enforcement are discretionary when the crime occurs in their presence. The City of Albuquerque and the Albuquerque Police Department have agreed that only citations will be issued, and no arrests will be made for violations of the 8 statutes and city ordinance as part of a court approved settlement in a decades old federal civil rights lawsuit dealing with jail overcrowding.

JUDGE ISSUES PRELIMINARY INJUCTION AGAINST CITY

On September 21, 2023 State District Court Judge Josh Allison entered a Preliminary Injunction against the City of Albuquerque from “enforcing or threatening to enforce” statutes and city ordinance to displace the homeless from public spaces. The preliminary injunction, which limited the circumstances under which the city could require people camping outside to leave or could seize their belongings, went into effect November 1, 2023.

The Court enjoined the city from seizing and destroying homeless belongings and mandated a warrant and post deprivation hearings regarding personal belongings seized. The injunction required that campers be given a 72-hour notice to vacate and be offered storage for belongings and transportation to a shelter. It also required an opportunity for belongings to later be reclaimed.

Judge Allison issued a preliminary injunction ruling that given a shortage of shelter beds, the city of Albuquerque cannot “punish” homeless people for their “mere presence” on public properties. The injunction, which was later modified, was put in place and restricted how the city can ask people camping on public property to move. The injunction cited both the Eighth Amendment, which prohibits cruel and unusual punishment, and the Fourth Amendment, which prohibits unreasonable search and seizure of the United States Constitution.

Quoting the Preliminary Injunction, Judge Allison made the following 4 major rulings:

CRUEL AND UNUSUAL PUNISHMENT FOR OCCUPYING OUTDOOR PUBLIC SPACES RULINGS

“… [P]unishing a homeless person’s innocent behavior of merely existing in outdoor public spaces when there is insufficient shelter within the City of Albuquerque violates the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment. For identical reasons, the City cannot threaten to arrest, cite, or otherwise punish unhoused people for their mere presence in outdoor public spaces in order to forcibly move them from one outdoor public place to another. Those threats of prosecution also criminalize otherwise innocent behavior. … As long as the homeless plaintiffs do not have a single place where they can lawfully be, the challenged ordinances, as applied to them, effectively punish them for something for which they may not be convicted under the eighth amendment—sleeping, eating and other innocent conduct.”

2. UNREASONABLE SEARCH AND SEIZURE RULINGS

Article II, Section 10 of the New Mexico Constitution provides that “[t]he people shall be secure in their persons, papers, homes and effects, from unreasonable searches and seizures . . . .” This provision “guarantee[s] that people will not be subjected to unreasonable searches and seizures.” Thus, a “seizure” occurs when the government deprives a person of (i.e., takes) their property. … However, a seizure also occurs when the government “meaningfully interferes” with a person’s possession of their property; a seizure may be nothing more than a “brief detention of [the person’s] personal effects.”

Simply put, the government cannot seize a person’s property just because that person is in a public space with their property. More is required for a seizure to be lawful. … [I]t is simply not reasonable for the City to seize the property of homeless people for the sole reason that they are living in outdoor public spaces, and it is even less reasonable that the City would not provide a process for those homeless persons to reclaim their property once it had been seized. … On balance, and without any additional reasons other than the homeless person is living in an outdoor public space when there are inadequate indoor spaces for them to be, the City’s interest is insufficient to allow for the seizure of homeless persons’ property just because they are occupying public spaces. … It is … unreasonable for the City to permanently deprive homeless people of their property solely because they are living in outdoor public spaces, without allowing them the opportunity reclaim that property after it has been seized.

Due Process Rulings

Article II, Section 18 of the New Mexico Constitution provides that “[n]o person shall be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law[.]” …At best, the evidence shows that the City has, at times, provided at least some process, but at other times it has provided essentially no process at all. This is especially true with respect to the destruction of homeless persons’ personal property. … In sum, homeless people, just like people with homes, have a right against unreasonable seizures of their unabandoned property, even if that property is left in outdoor public spaces. … [T] the Court concludes that even if the City had complied with the constitutional prohibition against unreasonable seizures (and the evidence shows it has not), principles of constitutional due process require the City “to take reasonable steps to give notice that the property has been taken so the owner can pursue available remedies for its return.” … The City simply is not doing this for some number of homeless people living in Albuquerque.

CITY’S ENCAMPMENT POLICY RULINGS

“The Encampment Policy allows for the City to destroy at least some homeless persons’ items of personal property when the City, in its sole discretion, does not have the capacity to store them. …The evidence … shows that the City has in fact destroyed homeless persons’ property without storing it as the Encampment Policy provides. Thus, the Encampment Policy may provide no actual or constructive notice to a homeless person that the person’s property will be destroyed, and it most certainly provides no opportunity for a homeless person to reclaim property that the City already threw away. … Although the Encampment Policy applies by its own terms to a singular tent or other structure used as a dwelling on outdoor public property, the evidence in the record shows that the City has not applied the notice and storage provisions of Encampment Policy in many situations involving the relocation of just a few homeless people from one outdoor public place to another. The Encampment Policy is not being applied consistently and is therefore insufficient as a matter of law.”

EDITORS NOTE: A link to a related article is provided in the postscript below. The article is entitled in part “Judge Enjoins City From “Enforcing Or Threatening To Enforce” Laws Against Homeless To Displace Them From Public Spaces, Seizing And Destroying Homeless Belongings Without Warrant, Mandates Post-Deprivation Hearings”. The article provides Judge Allison’s complete finding of Fact and Conclusion of Law rulings against the city as to cruel and unusual punishment, unlawful seizure, procedural due process and injunctions against the city.

In May 2024, the District Court lifted the preliminary injunction pending United States Supreme Court ruling in the case of Grants Pass v. Johnson which was anticipated to impact the case regarding the homelessness and public camping bans. The city said even though the injunction was dropped in May, it has been giving campers appropriate notice and offering resources. The city said it would continue to send staff to conduct welfare checks at encampment sites and offer a list of services for campers. A trial date was scheduled for August of 2024, but it was vacated as a result of the pending United States Supreme Court case Grants Pass v. Johnson.

US SUPREME COURT CASE GRANTS PASS V. JOHNSON

On June 28, 2024 the United State Supreme Court announced its ruling in the case of Grants Pass v. Johnson where the court held that local laws effectively criminalizing homelessness do not violate the U.S. Constitution and do not constitute cruel and unusual punishment. The link to the Supreme Court opinion is here:

Click to access 23-175_19m2.pdf

The case challenged a municipality’s ability to bar people from sleeping or camping in public areas, such as sidewalks and parks. Local governments wanted to enforce ordinances making it a crime to sleep on public sidewalks, streets and alleyways, camp on public property as a temporary place to live, or camp or park overnight in the city’s parks. The case is strikingly similar in facts and circumstances and laws to the case filed against the City of Albuquerque over the closure of Coronado Park.

The case came from the rural Oregon town of Grants Pass, which appealed a ruling striking down local ordinances that fined people $295 for sleeping outside after tents began crowding public parks. The homeless plaintiffs argued that Grants Pass, a town with just one 138-bed overnight shelter, criminalized them for behavior they couldn’t avoid: sleeping outside when they have nowhere else to go.

The U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, which has jurisdiction over the nine Western states, ruled in 2018 that such bans violate the Eighth Amendment, which prohibits cruel and unusual punishment, in areas where there aren’t enough shelter beds. Municipalities across the western United States argued the court rulings hampered their ability to quickly respond to public health and safety issues related to homeless encampments. The United States Supreme Court considered whether cities can enforce laws and take action against or punish the unhoused for sleeping outside in public spaces when shelter space is lacking.

In a 6-3 decision along ideological lines, the Supreme Court reversed the ruling by the San Francisco-based appeals court that found outdoor sleeping bans amount to “cruel and unusual punishment” under the United States Constitution. The majority found that the 8th Amendment prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment does not extend to bans on outdoor sleeping in public places such as parks and streets. The Supreme Court ruled that cities can enforce bans on homeless people sleeping outdoors, even in West Coast areas where shelter space is lacking.

Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote for the majority:

“Homelessness is complex. Its causes are many. So may be the public policy responses required to address it. … A handful of federal judges cannot begin to ‘match’ the collective wisdom the American people possess in deciding ‘how best to handle’ a pressing social question like homelessness. … Cities across the West report that the 9th Circuit’s involuntary test has crated intolerable uncertainty for them.”

Gorsuch suggested that people who have no choice but to sleep outdoors could raise that as a “necessity defense,” if they are ticketed or otherwise punished for violating a camping ban.

A bipartisan group of leaders had argued the ruling against the bans made it harder to manage outdoor encampments encroaching on sidewalks and other public spaces in nine Western states. That includes California, which is home to one-third of the country’s homeless population.

Homeless advocates argue that allowing cities to punish people who need a place to sleep would criminalize homelessness and ultimately make the crisis worse. Cities had been allowed to regulate encampments but couldn’t bar people from sleeping outdoors.

Progressive Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan and Ketangi Brown Jackson dissented. Sotomayor read from the bench the dissent and said this:

“Sleep is a biological necessity, not a crime. … Punishing people for their status is ‘cruel and unusual’ under the Eighth Amendment. … It is quite possible, indeed likely, that these and similar ordinances will face more days in court. … It is possible to acknowledge and balance the issues facing local governments, the humanity and dignity of homeless people, and our constitutional principles. … [But the majority instead] focuses almost exclusively on the needs of local governments and leaves the most vulnerable in our society with an impossible choice: Either stay awake or be arrested.”

Attorney Theane Evangelis, who represented Grants Pass before the high court, applauded the ruling, saying the 9th Circuit decision had “tied the hands of local governments.” Evangelis said this:

“Years from now, I hope that we will look back on today’s watershed ruling as the turning point in America’s homelessness crisis.”

The Supreme Courts ruling comes after homelessness in the United States had peaked and grown 12% the year before to its highest reported level, as soaring rents and a decline in coronavirus pandemic assistance combined to put housing out of reach for more people. More than 650,000 people are estimated to be homeless, the most since the country began using a yearly point-in-time survey in 2007. Nearly half of them sleep outside. Older adults, LGBTQ+ people and people of color are disproportionately affected, advocates said. In Oregon, a lack of mental health and addiction resources has also helped fuel the crisis.

The Link to a quoted and relied upon news sources are here:

https://www.abqjournal.com/news/article_d708fdd6-3593-11ef-bb6d-8350d9880c72.html

https://www.koat.com/article/supreme-court-oregon-homelessness/61453397

DISTRICT JUDGE RULES UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT RULING FLAWED AND DOES NOT APPLY TO CITY

The city of Albuquerque’s handling of what District Court Judge Allison described homelessness as one of the most challenging social problems in the past 40 years is at issue in the three-year-old civil rights lawsuit pending in Allison’s court in the 2nd Judicial District. The lawsuit contends it is unconstitutional to punish or threaten to punish unhoused people for the “crime of being in an outdoor public space when there are inadequate indoor spaces for them to be.”

The lawsuit was filed two years before the U.S. Supreme Court in the Grants Pass vs. Johnson case concluded in June 2024 that the protections of the Eighth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution against cruel and unusual punishment do not prohibit local governments from enforcing certain ordinances against involuntarily unhoused people.

Plaintiffs contend their claims against the city are not made under the U.S. Constitution and that Grants Pass is not controlling law. They sought to bar the city from enforcing certain criminal laws against them because they violate the New Mexico Constitution, which plaintiffs argue provides them more protection than the U.S. Supreme Court determined was available in the Grants Pass case.

On March 18, 2024, District Court Judge Joshua Allison ruled the United States Supreme Court case of GRANTS PASS V. JOHNSON that gave cities the green light to enforce criminal laws against the homeless for living and sleeping outside on public property did not apply to the City of Albuquerque. Judge Joshua Allison specifically found the high court ruling was “flawed”. Judge Allison concluded and ruled the New Mexico Constitution provides greater protections against such cruel and unusual punishment than the U.S. Supreme Court considered in its decision.

In his March 18 ruling, Allison wrote that the plaintiffs are challenging what they say are the city of Albuquerque’s unconstitutional practices of relocating them, and involuntarily unhoused people like them, from “place to place, taking and destroying their belongings in the process.”

Plaintiffs in their class action lawsuit against the City allege that the city intentionally deprived them, as involuntarily unhoused people, of the belongings they need to survive. In his March 18 ruling, Judge Allison wrote the allegations, if proven during the course of the case, would be “sufficient to demonstrate the City’s deliberate indifference” to the precarious existence of homeless individuals when they live outside.

Judge Allison wrote:

“Accepting Plaintiff’s allegations as true, as the Court must at this stage in the proceedings, the City’s alleged actions of destroying the means that homeless people need to survive outside, actions that are taken in the course of seeking to enforce criminal laws against homeless people, shock the conscience of the Court.”

CITY FILES “PETITION FOR WRIT OF SUPERINTENDING CONTROL” AGAINST DISTRICT JUDGE JOSH ALLISON

Rule 12-504 NMRA of the rules of Appellate Procedure governs the original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court of New Mexico, specifically in cases of writs of mandamus and superintending control. Writs of Superintending Control are considered an extraordinary measure. A Writ of Superintending Control is a legal tool used by the Supreme Court to oversee lower courts and ensure the proper administration of justice. It allows the Supreme Court to correct errors made by lower courts, particularly when those errors cause significant harm or when there is no other adequate remedy available.

On July 11, the City of Albuquerque filed with the New Mexico Supreme Court a “Petition for Writ of Superintending Control” against Judge Joshua Allison requesting the court to reverse Allison’s ruling to prevent the “proliferation” of homeless encampments within the city and other municipalities and towns in New Mexico. A city spokesperson said this in a statement:

“We filed this appeal because we dispute the judge’s ruling. This is the only judge in the country to make this ruling, and we are the only city in America having to live under these rules. … The city will keep doing everything in its power to get people the support they need and to manage illegal encampments promptly. We will continue sending staff to conduct welfare checks at encampments and offer support services.”

John Anderson, a Santa Fe lawyer who is a former United State Attorney for New Mexico, is defending the city of Albuquerque in the class action lawsuit, states this in the petition:

“[The issues involving the prevention of illegal encampments have] serious public safety implications and, the district court’s decision flouts the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent guidance. … The City needs this Court’s direction in weighing how to enforce its laws … to resolve legal questions of statewide importance. If allowed to stand, the district court’s decision will leave the City of Albuquerque and cities and towns throughout New Mexico, with no means to prevent the proliferation of encampments within their borders.”

In its “Petition for Superintending Control” filed with the New Mexico Supreme Court, the city of Albuquerque contends that nearly two years ago, “a large group of cities and states put out a clear and forceful call” by asking the U.S. Supreme Court “to relieve them of the burdens imposed by a misguided interpretation of the Eighth Amendment by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, which left cities unable to clear encampments from, or otherwise maintain order in, public property.”

The “Petition for Superintending Control” asserts in part:

“[Judge Allison’s] novel and unprecedented standard cannot stand. The City simply does not know, at this time, when or how it can enforce its laws.”

CLASS ACTION LAWSUITE STILL PENDING

The class action lawsuit against the city is still pending and it still may go to trial, unless the parties settle the case. Lawyers representing the City of Albuquerque want the New Mexico Supreme Court to rule on District Court Allison’s legal ruling that the United States Supreme Court Ruling in the case of GRANTS PASS V. JOHNSON does not apply to the city before money is spent to defending the rest of the case.

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

https://www.abqjournal.com/news/article_3fab4698-cd86-4936-967f-61d8f204d367.html#tncms-source=home-featured-7-block

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

The City is correct in seeking a Writ of Superintendent Control against Judge Allison to compel him to apply the principals announced in the Supreme Court case of Grants Pass vs. Johnson. With the filing of the Writ of Superintendent Control, the New Mexico Supreme Court will likely be forced to address head on the issue if the banning of outdoor camping by the unhoused is “cruel and unusual punishment” and to what extent all municipalities can enforce state and municipal laws.

It is very difficult to understand or even try to comprehend Judge Joshua Allison’s ruling that the Supreme Court case of Grants Pass v. Johnson does not apply to the class action lawsuit filed against the city given the fact that the case is essentially identical to the issues the US Supreme Court decided in GRANTS PASS V. JOHNSON. Judge Allison essentially bends over backwards to declare that the Supreme Court Ruling is “flawed” in order not to apply it to the case brought against the city and to prevent the city from enforcing state law and municipal ordinances.

District Judge Josh Allison’s injunction and ruling that the city “cannot threaten to arrest, cite, or otherwise punish unhoused people for their mere presence in outdoor public spaces in order to forcibly move them from one outdoor public place to another” is a clear usurpation and interference with the city’s legitimate law enforcement authority. Judge Allison usurped and interfered with the city’s right to take necessary action to protect the public health, safety and welfare with the enforcement of public safety laws, both state laws and city ordinances.

Judge Allison’s rulings and findings simply do not make sense on many levels and needs extensive clarification. The Preliminary Injunction he issued is confusing and contradictory. Judge Allison’s orders were sweeping in nature and enjoined the city “from enforcing, or threatening to enforce as a means of seeking compliance with, any statutes and ordinances against involuntarily unhoused people that prohibit a person’s presence in, or the presence of a person’s belongings on, outdoor, public property”.

The order did not make it clear that “outdoor, public place” includes vacant, open space land owned by the city, county, state or federal government nor if it includes outdoor open space areas of government owned buildings such as city hall and the various courts. As examples, the Second Judicial Court had to fence off the outside of the District Court House entry way to stop the homeless from encamping there at night and the city repeatedly has to take action to have the homeless removed from outside of City Hall and Plaza Del Sol.

The court order provides the city is not enjoined from “enforcing any statutes, ordinances, or other laws affecting private property or the rights of others”. The city has property rights that are equal to private property rights when it comes to real property it owns and manages including government buildings such as city hall and court houses, as does the county and state, yet Judge Allison makes a distinction and gives preference in enforcement of private real property rights. The court also ruled that the city is not enjoined from enforcing any statutes or ordinances concerning any other criminal acts of the unhoused people, but that is very limited because APD has a no arrest policy when it comes to the misdemeanor crimes of trespass and camping on public property.

The Albuquerque Police Department is currently under a court approved settlement in the federal lawsuit of McClendon v. City of Albuquerque wherein the city has agreed not to make arrests for nonviolent crimes, such as trespass on public and private property, illegal camping on all city parks and streets, rights of way, alleyways and open space. As a result, APD is relegated to merely encouraging or telling the homeless to move on and camp elsewhere falling short of making an arrest and taking them to jail. Judge Allison enjoined such conduct.

The glaring defect of the injunctions issued by Judge Allison against the city is that the Court essentially ruled that the unhoused, because of their status of being unhoused and because there is insufficient housing available and offered by the city, they have the right to violate the law and illegally camp wherever they want for how long as they want without government interference or threat of arrest. While Judge Allison says “the City is not constitutionally obligated to provide housing for homeless people” he rules the city cannot “threaten” to enforce the laws against the homeless until the city provides sufficient satisfactory shelter and housing to them implying the city is not doing much of anything, which is completely false.

CITY’S MULTIFACED APPROACH TO DEALING WITH UNHOUSED

According to the most recent “Point in Time” survey, which is the annual federal count of the unhoused, the total count of PERSONS determined to be experiencing homelessness in Albuquerque is 2,740 reported in 3 categories:

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

According to the latest Point in Time survey the biggest problem the city encounters when it comes to the chronic unhoused is that 75% of them absolutely refuse to accept services offered by the city.

According to the City budgets for the years 2021 to 2024, the Keller administration has spent a staggering $200,000,000, or upwards of $60 Million a year, to operate shelters and provide homeless services.

The city will has a total of 5 centers to deal with the homeless that is intended to be operated as an integrated system:

The Gibson Gateway Shelter
The Gateway West Shelter
The Family Gateway Shelter
The Youth Homeless Shelter
The Recovery Shelter

FINAL COMMENTARY

The City has the obligation and every right to enforce its criminal laws on behalf of its citizens, whether it be felony or misdemeanor. The city cannot simply ignore those laws that have the purpose of preserving and protecting the public health, safety and welfare and the rights of all its citizens.

Unlawful encampment homeless squatters who have no interest in any offers of shelter, beds, motel vouchers from the city or alternatives to living on the street and who want to camp at city parks, on city streets in alleys and trespass in open space give the city no choice but to take action and force them to move on or for that matter make arrests for other crimes identified other than vagrancy crimes.

Links to related articles are here:

Judge Enjoins City From “Enforcing Or Threatening To Enforce” Laws Against Homeless To Displace Them From Public Spaces, Seizing And Destroying Homeless Belongings Without Warrant, Mandates Post-Deprivation Hearings; Injunction Usurps And Interferes With City’s Legitimate Enforcement Of Public Safety Laws; City Will And Should Appeal; County Sheriff Should Start Arresting And DA Should Start Prosecuting

US Supreme Court Rules Laws Prohibiting Camping By Unhoused In Public Spaces Are Not Cruel And Unusual Punishment; Albuquerque Should Seek Immediate Dismissal Of ACLU Class Action Lawsuit Filed Over Closure Of Coronado Park

State’s Mental Health Care Rankings Continue Worsen; State Will Spend Millions To Rebuild Mental Health Care System Destroyed In 2014 By Governor Susana Martinez; New Mexico’s “Behavioral Health Care Reforms” Will Take Time To Implement

Posted on July 24, 2025 by Pete Dinelli

During the 60-day 2025 New Mexico legislative session, the legislature enacted what was referred to as the Behavioral Health Reform Package. Lawmakers earmarked more than $555 million to fund an overhaul the state’s system for mental health and substance abuse treatment programs.

On February 27, 2025 Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham signed the Behavioral Health Reform Package into law. The legislation consists of 3 Senate Bills that make sweeping changes to how New Mexico’s mental health and drug abuse treatment programs are run statewide.

The following is a description of each of the enacted Senate Bills signed into law by Governor Lujan Grisham:

Senate Bill 1: This bill creates the Behavioral Health Trust Fund for the state of New Mexico to support mental health and substance abuse treatment, prevention, and intervention programs throughout the state. The behavioral health trust fund will be invested by the State Investment Council. The trust fund will distribute 5% of its annual value to fund programs and support investments in necessary infrastructure, technology, and workforce development to facilitate the expansion of services. The fund could also help New Mexico unlock matching funds from federal, local, and private sources.

One major change made to Senate Bill 1 was removing a $1 billion appropriation for the new proposed trust fund. Money for the new fund was provided in a separate budget bill during the 60-day session and was for $555 million. The Behavioral Health Trust Fund, created by Senate Bill 1, aims to provide a sustainable funding source for regional behavioral health initiatives.

Senate Bill 2: This bill allocates $200 million to expand regional behavioral health services such as crisis response and outpatient care. The bill appropriates the funding to the New Mexico Administrative Office of the Courts and various state agencies to set up a new framework for behavioral health programs statewide. Senate Bill 2 was not part of the signing ceremony but never the less is part of the behavioral health reform package and became a part of general fund appropriations by the legislature.

Senate Bill 3: This bill requires regional plans be crafted for providing mental health and substance abuse treatment. The plans would be overseen by the state judicial branch and would include time lines and regional funding priorities. Senate Bill 3 aims to improve oversight and accountability for how behavioral health funds are spent.

NEW MENTAL HEALTH CARE MODEL

Under the enacted Behavioral Health Reform Package, the new mental health care model will put the State Judiciary in charge of planning while leaving the state Health Care Authority largely in charge of overseeing funding. This is a significant change from the former system which largely fell under the Governor’s executive branch jurisdiction. The legislation enacted increases accountability by requiring regional plans outlining priorities for providing mental health and substance abuse treatment. The new trust fund will provide annual funding to support the regional plans, which would largely be overseen by the state’s judiciary.

Top judicial branch officials during the 2025 legislature said New Mexico’s courts were willing to shoulder a larger role under a legislative plan to overhaul the state’s mental health and substance abuse treatment system. During a February 12, 2025 meeting of the Senate Finance Committee, Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC) Director Karl Reifsteck acknowledged the judicial branch was not a key player in the state’s behavioral health system. Reifsteck said the court system was willing to take on a larger role and had already begun preliminary work on how it would implement the changes proposed by the legislative package of bills. Reifsteck said this:

“This is not a role the courts requested, but it’s one we’re happy to accept if that’s the Legislature’s decision”.

Reifsteck said the judicial branch would act “very, very quickly” to implement the legislation.

CHANGES IN COMPETENCY LAWS FOR CIVIL MENTAL HEALTH COMMITEMENTS

During the 2025 legislative session, the New Mexico legislature also enacted the Omnibus Crime Package. The crime package passed by lawmakers is House Bill 8 and it too contained various criminal laws enacted. It includes provisions dealing with fentanyl trafficking, auto theft and drugged driving (DWI). It also includes outlawing the devices used to convert semi-automatic firearms into fully automatic weapons. The crime package also made major changes to how New Mexico handles criminal defendants deemed incompetent to stand trial and adding a dangerousness evaluation in such cases and giving judges more options for treatment programs.

House Bill 4 is the criminal competency legislation which was part of the enacted Bill 8 Omnibus Crime Package. It gives prosecutors more options to involuntarily commit people into a locked psychiatric facility if they are found to be dangerous to themselves or others and unable to stand trial. The courts will now have more options when dealing with suspects who are deemed incompetent to stand trial instead of simply releasing them back on the streets.

Under House Bill 4, when a court determines that a defendant is not competent to proceed in a criminal case the court shall determine if the defendant is dangerous and with a process for evaluating whether criminal defendants are competent to stand trial established. House Bill 4 specifically requires that “competency evaluators” determine whether defendants are dangerous to themselves or others. After a competency hearing, and if a defendant is found not to be competent, a judge then decides whether the defendant poses a threat. Based on that determination, a defendant is either ordered to attend an assisted outpatient treatment program or be sent to the state Behavioral Health Institute in Las Vegas, New Mexico.

State Representative Christine Chandler, sponsor of House Bill 4, said this:

The link to review House Bill 4 is here: https://legiscan.com/NM/text/HB4/2025

NEW MEXICO HEALTH CARE RANKINGS WORSEN

On June 25, the New Mexico Legislative Finance Committee convened in Taos, New Mexico. Amongst the topics on the committee agenda were New Mexico’s Mental health care system and the impending changes mandated by the Behavioral Health Reform Package legislation and signed into law.

Amid the impending changes in the State Mental Health Care system discussed by the committee, a legislative report was presented to the Legislative Finance Committee. The legislative report comes a mere few months after the 60-day legislative session which ended on March 22 in which lawmakers focused on improving the state’s behavioral health system, including establishing a trust fund to spin off money annually for initiatives. It also follows the inaugural meeting the week of June 23 of the new Behavioral Health Executive Committee tasked with overseeing an overhaul of the system, an effort aimed at addressing regional gaps and barriers in care.

The report showed the state’s rankings in key behavioral health measures decreased from 2023 to 2024. Those measures include overall mental illness prevalence, in which New Mexico dropped from 36th to 44th in the nation, and an increase in substance abuse disorder among both adults and minors. According to the legislative report, the state’s behavioral health rankings have become worse despite significant investments by the Legislature in recent years. The Legislature approved a $100 million advance for the new Behavioral Health Trust Fund and other allocations for the year during the session. It also approved more than $2.3 billion in Medicaid provider rate increases, including close to $90 million for behavioral health providers, to improve access.

Notwithstanding all the funding, the report given to the Legislative Finance Committee found that New Mexico’s rankings nationally in key outcomes dropped between 2023 and 2024. The declines reported were:

New Mexico dropped from 36th to 44th among states when it comes to overall mental illness prevalence.
For adult substance use disorder, the state dropped from 32nd to 49th.
For youth with major depressive disorder, the state dropped from 42nd to 46th.
For youth with substance use disorder, the state dropped from 47th to 51st.

The report states:

“Even with the significant investment in the last few years, there is little evidence that outcomes are improving,”

Las Cruces Democrat Representative Nathan Small, a who chairs the Legislative Finance Committee, said a key takeaway from the report is that the need for behavioral health services in New Mexico is “rapidly increasing” and “really reaching crisis levels.” Small said this:

“For me, one of the most important things is that we face up to our challenges. … We don’t run from our problems.”

Asked whether taxpayers should be concerned about the drop in behavioral health rankings despite the Legislature’s investments, Small said he shared the “bedrock expectation” to see results.

Representative Small noted that in the past 12 months, nearly 2,500 new behavioral health care providers enrolled to deliver Medicaid services in New Mexico. He said it probably occurred because of increased Medicaid reimbursement rates. Small said this:

“We’re beginning to see some improvements, but I share the frustration and the expectation that these increasing investments need to yield better outcomes.”

The report notes access to providers via Medicaid is key to improving outcomes. The report states:

“With about 38% of the state enrolled, Medicaid is the greatest lever available to the state to reduce the prevalence of mental illness and substance use disorders and improve physical health for women and children.”

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

https://www.santafenewmexican.com/news/local_news/despite-significant-investment-new-mexicos-behavioral-health-rankings-slip/article_e0747600-b4b6-4e76-9233-44cc3c35306a.html

MEASURABLE PROGRESS

Tim Fowler, a spokesperson for the state Health Care Authority, said in a statement New Mexico is making measurable progress on behavioral health outcomes even as some metrics in the report to lawmakers may suggest otherwise. Key achievements noted include the following:

“9% reduction in overall suicide rates.
17% decline in alcohol-related deaths from 2021-23, marking the second year of improvement.
17% reduction in high school students experiencing persistent feelings of sadness or hopelessness between 2021 and 2023.
38% drop in alcohol-related deaths in McKinley County, which Fowler said demonstrates targeted interventions can work.
8% decline in overdose deaths since 2021.”

Fowler said this:

“Higher reported mental illness prevalence often indicates success, not failure. … It means more people are getting identified and treated rather than suffering in silence. Our investments have reduced stigma and expanded access to care, bringing hidden cases into care.”

Fowler added that mental health investments take two to three years to show population-level results and he said this:

“We’re already seeing this work in our suicide and substance abuse programs, with measurable lives saved and improved youth outcomes.”

The report notes the Legislature has continued to invest in behavioral health services. Although it wouldn’t have affected the rankings listed in the report, the Legislature appropriated more than $555 million for behavioral health earlier this year. The report states:

“The Health Care Authority received $347.9 million, and the state enacted legislation to revamp the behavioral health system. … While these steps are intended to improve access, the most recent efforts are just starting, and there is little available data to show whether funding appropriated during the 2023 and 2024 sessions have made a difference.”

The state Health Care Authority serves more than 814,500 Medicaid members, or 39% of New Mexicans. The state is seeing growth in its provider network. Cabinet Secretary Kari Armijo told Legislative Finance Committee members this:

“We are the largest payer of health care in our state. [With growth in the provider network] … Things are really moving in the right direction. … We’ve seen over 4,000 net new providers into our network over the past 11 months. That’s across all provider types. … More than half of the provider network growth, or 57%, has been in behavioral health. … New Mexico ranks 16th in access to behavioral health care overall, so not at the top, which is where we all want to be, but it’s showing that these interventions are working.”

Armijo noted that while New Mexico struggles with newer issues, including substance abuse disorder, “things are really improving in terms of access to care.”

Armijo said an increase in Medicaid reimbursement rates to 150% of the Medicare rate in January is making a difference. Armijo said this:

“We are getting ready to launch in just a few days our new justice-involved pilot program where we’re really connecting people who are transitioning out of prison and jail to services so that they don’t have gaps in care.”

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

https://www.santafenewmexican.com/news/local_news/despite-significant-investment-new-mexicos-behavioral-health-rankings-slip/article_e0747600-b4b6-4e76-9233-44cc3c35306a.html

LEGISLATORS EXPRESS CONCERN

During the June 25 meeting of the Legislative Finance Committee several lawmakers expressed concern about state agencies’ previous use of allocated behavioral health funds and the recent trends. Representative Tara Lujan, D-Santa Fe said this:

“I’m not happy with the rankings I’m seeing … when we invested $2.2 billion over the past few years.”

State Health Care Authority Secretary Kari Armijo emphasized there have been positive developments even as state officials brace for the potential impacts of a congressional budget bill. That includes the possibility of an estimated 90,000 New Mexicans losing Medicaid benefits, in part due to increased work requirements that would start in 2027.

Specifically, Armijo cited an increase in behavioral health services provided over the last nine years and said 57% of the 4,000 or so of the new health care providers licensed in New Mexico since July 2024 are in the behavioral health field. Armijo said this:

“Things are really moving in the right direction. … The state has done a lot of work to rebuild the behavioral health system.”

The overhaul approved during the 2025 legislative session calls for regional plans for providing substance abuse and mental health treatment. The state’s judicial branch is playing a larger role under the new system, which officially took effect June 20.

Both the Administrative Office of the Courts and the Health Care Authority have hired new top-level staffers to lead the revised system, while a new executive committee tasked with reviewing and approving the regional plans held its first meeting this week. Even as the new system takes shape, Armijo said the number of behavioral health crisis centers around New Mexico has increased, with five such centers now operating.

However, some of the proposed federal funding changes could impact New Mexico’s revised behavioral health approach, as some treatment programs are covered under Medicaid.

Representative Mark Duncan, R-Kirtland, questioned whether the state’s goal should ultimately be to increase or decrease its Medicaid enrollment. Duncan told Secretary Armijo this during the hearing:

“My goal is to get people off [the Medicaid rolls], your goal is to get people on.”

Committee members questioned Children, Youth and Families Secretary Teresa Casados about whether $20 million in state funds intended to pay for behavioral health services for children had been misspent. CYFD utilized some of the money to fund the operations of group home facilities, which some legislators said does not qualify for federal matching funds.

In response, Casados said the budgetary language was made more restrictive by the Legislature from when the funding was first earmarked in 2022 to when it was reauthorized two years later. Casados said this:

“We believe the initial language allowed us to do that.”

But an LFC subcommittee voted before adjourning to approve a letter from the committee’s two chairmen. Senator George Muñoz, D-Gallup, and Representative Nathan Small, D-Las Cruces, requesting that State Auditor Joseph Maestas and Attorney General Raúl Torrez review the appropriateness of the spending. Such a review could trigger an investigation into whether the funding was misspent by CYFD.

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

https://www.abqjournal.com/news/article_540c310d-47f4-4854-87cc-b75833ada57e.html

NEW MEXICO SUPREME COURT ALSO SOUGHT FUNDING FOR BEHAVIORAL HEALTH

On January 23, 2024 New Mexico Supreme Court Chief Justice David Thomson of addressed New Mexico lawmakers to discuss the financial needs of the state’s court system. Thomson highlighted several areas requiring funding. One area he expressed concern over was new efforts and court outpatient treatment programs for individuals with mental illness.

During his State of the Judiciary Address Supreme Court Chief Justice David Thomson said this:

“The judiciary is committed to doing the hard work to support the policy initiatives of the Legislature and the executive on behavioral health. … We will do our part. … My request to you is that we are not asked to do more to the detriment of our core judicial function.”

Thomson asked lawmakers to make the $3 million in funding approved during a special session last year recurring to ramp up court-ordered assisted outpatient treatment programs for individuals with mental illness in three judicial districts. Judge Thomson said this:

“We need that extended if this is a program that is of value to you so we can be consistent in its application.”

Behavioral health remains a priority for the court’s with the $3 million pilot program underway for Assisted Outpatient Treatment (AOT). While early results show some success, comprehensive outcomes are yet to be determined. Thomson stressed funding not only courts but also criminal justice partners like law enforcement and public defenders.

A treatment program in the Santa Fe-based 1st Judicial District was recently launched using Legislature’s initial start-up funding, though Thomson said he did not yet have information about the number of participants. Judge Thomson told law makers “We literally turned on the switch” .

Senate Majority Leader Peter Wirth told judicial officials during a Senate Committee hearing he’s committed to securing recurring funding for the assisted outpatient program, which connects defendants with counseling, medication and other services for up to one year. Wirth also said it’s important for such court programs to be in place and fully staffed as legislators consider changes to the state’s approach to assisting individuals found not to be competent, both in criminal and civil cases. Wirth referring to the state’s assisted outpatient treatment programs said this:“This law has been on our books since 2016 and we just weren’t using it.”

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

https://www.abqjournal.com/news/article_aa158e90-d9c9-11ef-aa34-477662558954.html

https://newmexicosun.com/stories/669238888-new-mexico-chief-justice-seeks-funds-for-court-modernization-and-security

RECALLING THE TOTAL DESTRUCTION OF NON-PROFIT MENTAL HEALTH CARE PROGRAMS BY GOVERNOR SUSANA MARTINEZ

One of the cruelest things that Republican Governor Susana Martinez did as governor was order an “audit” of mental health services by nonprofits in New Mexico which devastated New Mexico’s behavioral health system. In 2014, more than 160,000 New Mexicans received behavioral health services with most of those services funded by Medicaid according to the Human Services Department at the time.

https://www.abqjournal.com/749923/third-arizona-behavioral-health-provider-to-pull-out-of-state.html

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

Simply put, since 2014, the state of New Mexico has had a broken mental health care system largely in part because of the actions of former Republican Governor Susana Martinez when she ordered an “audit” of mental health services by nonprofits in New Mexico which devastated New Mexico’s behavioral health system.

The passage of the three behavioral health bills by the Senate in a bi partisan vote was a major victory and a reflection of just how far the state has come to fix its broken health care system. The passage of the 3 bills comes more than a decade after former Republican Governor Susana Martinez gutted New Mexico’s behavioral system in 2013. Enactment of all 3 Senate bills making sweeping changes to the state’s health care system to deal with mental illness and drug abuse was long overdue. However, all 3 Senate Bills only address programs and facilities.

The void to address the mandatory civil commitment of those who are to be danger to themselves, and others will now be addressed with the enactment of House Bill 4. House Bill 4 specifically requires that competency evaluators determine whether defendants are dangerous to themselves or others. House Bill 4 essentially contains the very same provisions that were mandated in Senate Bill 16 that was rejected in 2024. Under House Bill 4, after a civil competency hearing, and if a defendant is found not to be competent, a judge would then decide whether the defendant poses a threat. Once a person is determined not to be competent and determined to be a threat to themselves and others, the court could order mandatory treatment.

Simply put, the Behavioral Health Package and changes to the State’s civil mental health commitment process occurred in March, 2025. In all likelihood it will take at least two years to four years before we can expect the reforms to show any measures of success.

Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Arrest Of Venezuelan Man In Country Legally Leads To Mayor Keller Signing Executive Order To Protect Immigrant Rights; Keller Engages In Political Plagiarism Of Opponent Alexander M.M. Uballez Advocacy To Protect Immigrant Rights; ICE Should Take The Damn Masks Off, Identify Self And Secure Warrants

Posted on July 22, 2025 by Pete Dinelli

Increasing and aggressive enforcement actions by the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) brought on by President Trump’s efforts to expel and deport 16 million undocumented people has become a major flash point in Albuquerque city politics as ICE raids in Albuquerque ramp up. The ICE raids in Albuquerque are making immigration and public safety big campaign issues in the 2025 Albuquerque Mayor’s race.

JULY 7 ICE ENFORCMENT ACTION

On July 7 an altercation occurred between U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents detaining and tasing a man inside the Albuquerque Walmart located at 2550 Coors Blvd. NW. The video taken of the incident reveals three ICE agents, two of whom are masked, subdue the man with a Taser. The man can be heard screaming on the video. At one point the man falls backwards to the ground and hits his head.

While the federal agents stand over the man, a Walmart official enters the video frame shouting at one person to “get back to work” and approaches the female filming. He orders her to leave the store, telling her she is on “private property.” The 20-second video ends as private security officers begin to escort the woman who filmed the incident out of the store.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/video-ice-uses-taser-detain-182811140.html

The female customer who filmed the July 7 incident posted the video the same day on FACEBOOK. Since then, the video of the incident has gone viral, has drawn national attention and amassed huge numbers of online views, along with comments expressing shock at the violent nature of an unarmed man’s arrest.

https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/5396461-watch-ice-agents-taser-albuquerque-walmart/

On July 11, an ICE spokesperson identified the man taken into custody by ICE as Deivi Jose Molina-Peña and said he was in the United State illegally. ICE claimed the man fled from agents on July 7, running into the Walmart at Coors and I-40, leading to them to tase him. The ICE spokesperson said the Venezuelan man had recently been arrested by the APD for DWI, resisting arrest, evading police and obstructing an officer. In an email to KRQE News 13 an ICE spokesperson said this about the arrest:

“Given this pattern of behavior this individual is considered a danger to the community. These decisions are never made lightly, but officer safety and the protection of the public remain top priorities. … ICE agents deployed the taser while attempting to detain the man to mitigate that threat and prevent further escalation. … U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents and officers are trained to employ force judiciously and in accordance with agency policy and federal standards.”

Links to quoted or relied upon news sources are here:

https://www.krqe.com/news/albuquerque-metro/man-in-viral-ice-walmart-tasing-video-identified/

On July 11, the online news agency Source NM, reported that family and friends of Deivi Jose Molina-Pena said he arrived in the United States legally under Temporary Protected Status two years ago from Venezuela and he was employed as a Spanish-speaking “deliverista” for Spark Driver, a delivery service for Walmart. Source NM reported that that it was a feud between American-born delivery drivers for Walmart’s grocery service and Spanish-speaking “deliveristas” that may have led to the federal immigration arrest at the Walmart on July 7. The link to the Source NM report is here:

https://sourcenm.com/2025/07/11/resentment-against-albuquerque-deliveristas-may-have-sparked-viral-walmart-ice-arrest/

“BURQUE OVER BILLIONAIRES”

The arrest sparked a protest on Sunday, July 20 which drew at least a hundred anti-ICE demonstrators to the front doors of the retail store off Coors Boulevard NW and I-40. Protesters appeared outside the Walmart where the incident occurred to protest the arrest and yelling “Burque Over Billionaires.” Organizers of the protest said they have not been able to locate Molina-Pena. Jayce Cardenas, New Mexico campaign manager for Organized Power in Numbers, said Walmart, like all businesses, should protect its workers. Cardenas said this in a speech at the end of the demonstration:

“All business owners should be protecting their workers by making and designating private space that has clear signage so [that] if and when ICE agents come, workers are protected, their Fourth Amendment right is protected.”

According to the Immigration Law Center, Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents can enter private spaces without permission if they have a judicial warrant signed by a judge. Without that warrant, private property owners may decline immigration enforcement access to their property.

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

https://www.abqjournal.com/news/article_5e224ef7-390a-4417-9ca8-10df141c112c.html#tncms-source=home-featured-7-block

MAYOR TIM KELLER SIGNS EXECUTIVE ORDER

On July 22, in part as a reaction to the arrest of Deivi Jose Molina-Pena and with the video of the arrest going viral along with the protest, Mayor Tim Keller signed an executive order that has the goal to protect immigrant rights amid reports of increased U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement raids in Albuquerque. The executive order consists of both new and preexisting directives. Some of the executive orders are being criticized for being unenforceable. Keller said that his motivation for the executive order started in June during Los Angeles’ ICE raids and subsequent protests, and continued when a social media clip showed ICE agents tasing and detaining a SPARK delivery driver inside a local Walmart.

CONTENTS OF EXECUTIVE ORDER

“The directives contained in Keller’s Executive Order conform with the City Council 2001 resolution and the 2018 amendments that declares the city to be an “Immigrant-Friendly City”. The Executive Order forbids city personnel from working with ICE except when required by a court order. City personnel have been forbidden to share information about immigration status, except when presented with a court order, since the 2018 resolution.

Other directives expand on the “Immigrant-Friendly City” resolution. The order requires the city attorney to routinely file Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests about ICE activities within the city. It mandates the city’s child wellbeing officer, and the Office of Equity and Inclusion develop “trauma-informed” training for all city departments that work with children impacted by immigration enforcement, including those who have been separated from their parents. The order additionally warns that anyone caught impersonating an ICE agent will be prosecuted “to the highest degree allowable.”

A few items contained in Keller’s Executive Order conflict with one another, especially where ICE and the Albuquerque Police Department overlap. While the executive order states that ICE agents “must not disrupt the wellbeing of City public spaces through violent or harmful detainment actions,” it also states that “the Albuquerque Police Department cannot legally interfere with ICE activity.”

One of the provisions in the executive order is that it aims to prosecute people impersonating law enforcement. It also reiterates that Immigration and Customs Enforcement must clearly identify its officers and avoid harmful or disruptive tactics in public spaces. However, when asked to clarify this part of the directive, an Albuquerque Police Department spokesperson said that the executive order does not address masks, which are a policy for ICE to determine.

The order does instruct APD to verify the identity of suspected ICE agents if asked to by a member of the public. The public can report suspected ICE raids to APD’s non-emergency line, (505) 242-2677, for verification.”

The link to the quoted news source is here:

https://www.abqjournal.com/news/article_d698f3d9-2c89-4aae-9007-f97417c1443d.html#tncms-source=home-featured-7-block

KEY PROVISIONS OF THE EXECUTIVE ORDER

Following are the key provisions of Mayor Keller’s Executive Order to protect immigrant rights:

Protection of Immigration Due Process

Reaffirms that no City department, agency, or employee shall use City resources to assist in federal civil immigration enforcement, including raids, detentions, or information-sharing, unless legally required.

Implementation and Oversight

Designates the Office of Equity and Inclusion (OEI) to lead implementation.
Directs the Immigrant and Refugee Affairs (OIRA) Steering Committee to gather community feedback and coordinate support services with legal providers, schools, and non-profits.
Requires all departments to designate liaisons and report progress to the Mayor.

Transparency in City Services

Prohibits City staff from supporting secret ICE activity in public facilities.
Requires departments to report any ICE activity at City facilities to the Mayor’s Office and OEI.
Allows APD to confirm ICE activity only when requested by the public.
Commits to prosecuting individuals who impersonate law enforcement to defraud or harm residents.

Transparency in Federal Immigration Enforcement

Directs the City Attorney to file regular Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests to DHS and ICE and share findings with the public and City departments.
Reiterates that ICE must clearly identify its officers and avoid harmful or disruptive detainment tactics in public spaces.

Protection of Children, Including Migrant Youth

Instructs all departments serving youth to develop trauma-informed protocols to support children affected by immigration enforcement.

Support for Working Families

Directs departments to identify services and assistance for families impacted by federal actions, particularly related to housing, healthcare, employment, and education.
Expands virtual access to services to support safe interaction with government systems.

In a statement, Mayor Keller said this of his Executive Order:

“From day one, I made it clear that we will not be intimidated by harmful federal policies—and we’ve never wavered from our commitment to civil rights and public safety. … This Executive Order makes it clear that we will not stand by silently as our neighbors and friends are living in fear, and we will protect due process for all people living in our City. Albuquerque is a community rooted in diversity and strength, and we will not use our resources to support raids, detentions, or information-sharing that we are not legally required to do.”

https://www.cabq.gov/mayor/news/mayor-keller-issues-executive-order-to-protect-immigrant-rights-in-albuquerque-city-councilors-plan-legislation-to-further-codify-immigrant-protections

FORMER U.S. ATTORNEY ALEX UBALLEZ WEIGHS IN ON KELLER’S EXECUTIVE ORDER

After the July 7 arrest of Deivi Jose Molina-Peña, former U.S. Attorney for the District of New Mexico Alexander M.M. Uballez, who is also running for Mayor against Keller, called on the city to do more to protect immigrant rights. Several of the directives contained in Keller’s executive order appeared a week earlier in a letter of recommendations for immigration reform sent to the city by Uballez.

Uballez’s letter contained 11 policies of his own that he also posted on social media under the tag line “there’s more we can do”. His policy proposals include the following substantive recommendations:

Require federal agents to wear visible identification, ban the use of masks during enforcement actions and require ICE to identify themselves during enforcement actions. Uballez calls for federal agencies to give advance notice before enforcement actions.
Require local law enforcement to verify federal agents’ identity when and if deployed to sites of enforcement activity.
Establish a formal designation restricting ICE enforcement near schools , churches, shelters and other sensitive sites. The move responds to a January directive from the Department of Homeland Security that tossed out long-standing policies and now lets officers make arrests in these places. For over a decade, ICE and Border Patrol were told to avoid enforcement at sensitive sites—a rule the Trump administration reversed
Facilitate virtual access to services and the courts. Uballez calls for turning “Know Your Rights” outreach into a full-blown public education campaign and expanding virtual access to city services and courts.
Create city emergency response infrastructure and give city 911 and 311 operators tools and the resources to support families who have been impacted by ICE and are in crisis. This would mean training 911 and 311 operators to flag when extra help is needed, coordinating housing, counseling, and legal aid, and creating quick-response teams.
Restricting data sharing with the federal government. Uballez wants to ban sharing city data without a judge’s order and requires companies working with the city to train employees on their rights during immigration raids.
Paying the legal fees of those facing deportation with public funds. Uballez wants the city to fund deportation defense so immigrants don’t lose their rights just because they can’t afford a lawyer.
Passing an Immigrant Civil Rights Act. Uballez wants to lock in protections with an Immigrant Civil Rights Act that would guarantee rights for all residents, regardless of immigration status.

See July 22 City Desk article “Uballez criticizes Keller’s ICE policy, calls for stronger immigrant protections” by Jesse Jones.

Uballez issued the following statement to KOAT TV in response to Keller’s Executive Order:

“I’m glad to see the Mayor responding to the proposals we’ve made, but it shouldn’t take a competitive election to light a fire under him to protect our city. Today’s reaffirmation fell far short of the solutions our community deserves, prioritizing the optics of safety instead of actually operationalizing it. Our immigrant communities and their advocates are working so hard in this moment, they deserve a mayor who will match their energy with the power at his disposal. Instead, there’s still more that can be done to better protect our rights and our communities. That was true before the incumbent’s press conference and is still true after the fact.”

https://www.koat.com/article/executive-order-issued-to-protect-immigrant-rights-in-albuquerque/65468478

When Keller was asked if his Executive Order was in was in reaction to the Uballez letter that made recommendations to protect immigrant rights, Keller was very dismissive and said that the two were unrelated and that the city began drafting the order in June. Keller said this after the news conference:

I’m not familiar with the specifics [of the Uballez letter], but as I understand it, we were already doing most of those things.”

A city spokesperson took a petty, little swipe at Uballez and lied about Uballez and said this in a statement:

“While Alex’s newfound interest in immigrant rights is refreshing, where were these suggestions while he was working for Donald Trump?”

The truth is Uballez was appointed by and worked for the Justice Department under President Joe Biden and he served as New Mexico’s United State Attorney until Trump was elected. Uballez and more than 20 other U.S. attorneys, were fired in the first month of Trump’s second term as part of a purge of political appointees in the Justice Department. Uballez announced his bid for the mayor’s office in April.

SUPPORTERS OF EXECUTIVE ORDER

There was a show of support for the Executive Order with members of local immigrant advocacy groups and members of the New Mexico legislature attending the signing of the order.

Fabiola Landeros, a community organizer with El Centro de Igualdad y Derechos, lauded Mayor Keller for taking action and spoke of the fear running through the immigrant community, whom she lovingly called “mi gente” or my people. Landeros said this:

“Imagine feeling afraid every time you left your home that you will be disappeared, separated from your children, that nobody will know where you are, or that you could be held in a detention center in a country you’re not from.”

State Senator Cindy Nava, D-Bernalillo, and House Speaker Javier Martínez, D-Albuquerque also attended the signing of the Executive Order. They reflected on the struggles their families endured as immigrants.

State Senator Cindy Nava called the executive order “personal” to her. Nava is a former Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, or DACA, recipient. Nava said

“Thank you to everyone here for your continued fight, your work, and your strength in being here, because I know the fear that lives inside us. … As the daughter of a construction worker and a lady who cleans houses for a living and now sitting in the state senate, things are surreal. … When we think of the folks that are being targeted, you’re talking about my family.”

New Mexico Speaker of the House Javier Martinez did not hold back on his views of ICE agents donning full-face masks during arrests. Speaker Martinez said this:

“Can we collectively say, ‘Take off the mask? Take off the damn mask.’ What are they afraid of? ….On Amazon you can get this jacket, it says ‘ICE Border Patrol’ for 30 bucks. You can get the hat for another $15. That’s how easy it is to become one of these imposter thugs going around our community, terrorizing our families.”

DETRACTORS OF EXECUTIVE ORDER

Not everyone saw the executive order as a step in the right direction, or a step forward. Republican City Councilors Dan Lewis, Renée Grout, and Dan Champine issued the following joint statement:

“These executive orders are nothing more than dangerous political theater by the Mayor. If a resolution comes before the Council to codify orders that interfere with federal law enforcement’s pursuit of criminals, we will introduce an amendment requiring that federal authorities be given access to the Prisoner Booking Center – the location all criminals are taken when arrested. Mayor Keller specifically prohibited federal law enforcement access to this location when he took office. Public safety should never be compromised for political posturing. The people of Albuquerque are tired of this Mayor playing games while violent criminals roam our streets and terrorize our neighborhoods. We will not stand by and allow this administration to continue undermining the safety of our city.”

Republican Party of New Mexico Chairwoman Amy Barela sent the following statement to KOAT TV:

“Less than two weeks ago, ICE officers in Texas were ambushed and shot at, yet Mayor Tim Keller has chosen to prioritize illegal immigrants over the federal law enforcement officers that protect and serve our communities. Unfortunately for the people of Albuquerque, Mayor Keller’s executive order does nothing to improve public safety or increase the number of good paying jobs available, but it does ensure he receives media attention. Voters would be wise to remember his priorities at the ballot box and oppose his reelection.”

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

https://www.abqjournal.com/news/article_d698f3d9-2c89-4aae-9007-f97417c1443d.html#tncms-source=home-featured-7-block

https://www.koat.com/article/executive-order-issued-to-protect-immigrant-rights-in-albuquerque/65468478

https://www.kob.com/new-mexico/mayor-signs-new-executive-order-focused-on-immigration-rights-and-safety-in-albuquerque/

https://www.krqe.com/news/albuquerque-metro/albuquerque-mayor-signs-executive-order-for-immigrant-safety-rights/

OTHER CANDIDATES FOR MAYOR ISSUE STATEMENTS

The following statements were sent to KOAT TV by the other candidates for Mayor:

DANIEL CHAVEZ STATEMENT

“Now that it is politically beneficial for him, Tim Keller has decided safety for Albuquerque residents is important after years of letting chaos, crime and law enforcement corruption exist. I believe it is critical to implement law enforcement transparency and to make sure our communities are not suffering or living in fear. I’ll make it a priority all the time, not just when it’s politically convenient.”

LOUIE SANCHEZ STATEMENT

“This executive order does nothing to protect law-abiding members of the immigrant community in Albuquerque. Mayor Keller is doing what he does best: grandstanding and using fear-mongering in order to accumulate more power to himself. Further, this signals to the violent criminal element of this city that Tim Keller sides with them. In fact, this harms, not helps, the immigrant community because the immigrant population bears the brunt of this lawlessness and violence. If he really cared about immigrants he would want to make their community safe, as well.”

DARREN WHITE STATEMENT

“This is nothing more than Mayor Keller doubling down on his dangerous policy of providing sanctuary to illegal immigrants who have committed serious crimes, rather than prioritizing the safety and well-being of our law-abiding residents. He’s veering further to the radical left, using fear-based rhetoric and divisive language to score political points while placing federal law enforcement officers in danger.”

MAYLING ARMIJO STATEMENT

“I believe every family in Albuquerque — regardless of where they’re from — deserves to feel safe. But let’s be honest: signing an executive order doesn’t fix our broken police department. Mayor Keller says he wants to build trust, but under his watch, response times are unacceptable, recruitment is down, and we still haven’t seen real leadership from the top. If we want a city where everyone feels protected, we need to start by hiring a new police chief, boosting APD staffing, and restoring accountability to a system that’s failing too many residents. Immigrant safety begins with a city that works — and right now, it doesn’t.”

https://www.koat.com/article/executive-order-issued-to-protect-immigrant-rights-in-albuquerque/65468478

NEW POLICY APPROVED BY HOMELAND SECURITY TO DISCLOSE ICE ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS

On July 12, Mayor Keller and the Albuquerque Police Department (APD) announced a new policy saying the federal officials have agreed to share more information with police about immigration operations in the city. According to a statement issued by APD, the public can call 242-COPS, which is APD’s non-emergency number, to inquire about “a specific presence in the city and whether that is an ICE operation.”

APD spokesman Gilbert Gallegos said this in the statement.

“Our dispatchers can call ICE and verify whether that is the case, and the dispatcher can relay that verification to the caller. … We will not know or pass along any operational details to members of the public. … The process is similar to that used in SWAT activations in the city.”

APD Chief Harold Medina said in a statement that he has communicated with Homeland Security Investigations, which oversees ICE, about public concerns. Medina said this:

“While APD does not enforce federal immigration laws, [I] emphasized to federal law enforcement leaders that there must be more transparency around their operations in Albuquerque … As a result, federal officials have agreed to share information with APD when people have questions about operations.”

Medina also said that federal agents must wear markings identifying themselves as law enforcement officials and said this:

“APD is not in the business of immigration enforcement. At the same time, I want to keep lines of communication open to avoid misunderstandings. We want the community to be safe and trust that we are looking out for them.”

Chief Harold Medina said it doesn’t matter if the resident is a legal citizen or not. He says when they break the law, they’ll be sought out by APD.

“At the end of the day, if someone is a criminal, I don’t care if they were born in Albuquerque or another country. Criminals, people breaking the law, endanger our citizens in Albuquerque—regardless, citizens or not—should be in jail.”

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

“Political plagiarism” of ideas is one of the highest forms of flattery but anyone who engages in it without quoting the source risks being called out on it. It is very difficult to accept Keller’s statement as truthful when he said “I’m not familiar with the specifics [of the Uballez letter], but as I understand it, we were already doing most of those things.” The truth is that it is more likely than not Keller is very familiar with the Uballez letter, he was likely briefed on it, given that many of the Uballez proposals contained in his letter appear in Keller’s Executive Order.

It is doubtful Keller has ever had an original idea of his own during his entire tenure as Mayor. This is not the first time Keller during a campaign has pilfered the ideas of an opponent and claiming them as his own. Keller did so when he first ran for Mayor in 2017 as he adopted the ideas of Mayoral candidate Gus Pedrotty to dispatch social workers and psychologists to deal with the unhoused and those suffering from psychotic episodes instead of first responders such as police and firefighters. Pedrotty’s idea later became Keller’s Albuquerque Community Safety Division. Since running for Mayor in 2017, Gus Pedrotty graduated from UNM and went on to become an Albuquerque Firefighter and he is rising up through the ranks of Albuquerque Fire and Rescue and serving the city with distinction.

Instead of inviting and conferring with Uballez on his ideas on how to protect immigrant rights, and taking advantage of Uballez’s expertise as a former New Mexico United States Attorney, Keller simply incorporated them into his own Executive Order so that he can take credit in an election year. You would think after almost 8 year’s in office, Keller would have enough self confidence in his own accomplishments to acknowledge the hard work and ideas of others as opposed to engaging in political plagiarism and theatrics.

CONDEMNATION OF UNCONSTITUTINAL ICE ENFORECEMENT ACTIONS

ICE agents wearing masks, tactical vests and armed without identifying themselves to apprehend and arrest people without arrest warrants is as shocking and authoritarian and as fascist as it gets. It’s what happens in countries like Russia and North Korea. It should not be tolerated nor be happening in a democracy such as ours. It’s an affront to our constitutional rights, civil rights and due process of law guaranteed to all, including undocumented immigrants.

With any luck, the new policy approved by Homeland Security to disclose ICE enforcement actions to APD along with Keller’s Executive order will help reduce the inevitable havoc on the community as a direct result of ICE enforcement actions. ICE should take the damn masks off, identify themselves, secure warrants and follow due process of law.

The link to a related article is here:

Candidates For Mayor Spar Over City’s New Policy Approved By Homeland Security To Disclose ICE Enforcement Actions To Public; Sanctuary City Becomes Nasty, Divisive Issue In Mayor’s Race; Darren White Shoots Big Mouth Off Demanding US Attorney To Investigate City As He Seeks To Divide City To Win An Election; POSTSCRIPT: Journal Guest Opinion Column By Louie Sanchez

Candidates For Mayor Spar Over City’s New Policy Approved By Homeland Security To Disclose ICE Enforcement Actions To Public; Sanctuary City Becomes Nasty, Divisive Issue In Mayor’s Race; Darren White Shoots Big Mouth Off Demanding US Attorney To Investigate City As He Seeks To Divide City To Win An Election; POSTSCRIPT: Journal Guest Opinion Column By Louie Sanchez

Posted on July 21, 2025 by Pete Dinelli

Increasing and aggressive enforcement actions by the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) brought on by President Trump’s efforts to expel and deport 16 million undocumented people has become a major flash point in Albuquerque city politics. It is making immigration and public safety big campaign issues in the 2025 Mayor’s race. It is highlighting the bigger fight between local and federal roles in immigration. It is the result of a July 7 incident at a Walmart store and a subsequent policy announcement by Mayor Tim Keller designed to let Albuquerque residents know if ICE is operating in their neighborhood.

This article is an in-depth report on the controversy. It has a postscript containing a Albuquerque Journal guest opinion column by City Councilor Louie Sanchez.

JULY 7 ICE ENFORCMENT ACTION

https://www.yahoo.com/news/video-ice-uses-taser-detain-182811140.html

https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/5396461-watch-ice-agents-taser-albuquerque-walmart/

Albuquerque City Councilor Klarissa Peña, who represents the area, showed up at the Walmart a few hours later after the incident. People stopped her, showed her the video, and expressed their concerns. Peña said she talked to the Walmart management and Walmart management said the ICE actions were not within their policy. Peña said this:

“Seeing the video, I was just in there, and I could have been there with my grandchild, and for them to witness something like that would be traumatic.”

MAN IN COUNTRY LEGALLY

On July 11, an ICE spokesperson told KRQE News 13 that the incident happened and identified the man as Deivi Molina-Peña and said he was in the country illegally from Venezuela. However, on July 11, the online news agency Source NM, reported that family and friends of Deivi Jose Molina-Pena said he arrived in the United States legally under Temporary Protected Status two years ago from Venezuela and he was employed as a Spanish-speaking “deliverista” for Spark Driver, a delivery service for Walmart. Source NM reported that that it was a feud between American-born delivery drivers for Walmart’s grocery service and Spanish-speaking “deliveristas” that may have led to the federal immigration arrest at the Walmart on July 7. The link to the Source NM report is here:

https://sourcenm.com/2025/07/11/resentment-against-albuquerque-deliveristas-may-have-sparked-viral-walmart-ice-arrest/

On July 11, an ICE spokesperson told KRQE News 13 that Molina-Peña fled from agents on July 7, running into the Walmart at Coors and I-40, leading to them to tase him. The ICE spokesperson said the Venezuelan man had recently been arrested by the APD for DWI, resisting arrest, evading police and obstructing an officer. In an email to KRQE News 13 an ICE spokesperson said this about the arrest:

Links to quoted or relied upon news sources are here:

https://www.krqe.com/news/albuquerque-metro/man-in-viral-ice-walmart-tasing-video-identified/

“BURQUE OVER BILLIONAIRES”

On Sunday, July 20 over 100 protesters appeared outside the Walmart where the incident occurred to protest the arrest and yelling “Burque Over Billionaires.” Organizers at the protest said they have not been able to locate Molina-Pena. Jayce Cardenas, New Mexico campaign manager for Organized Power in Numbers, said Walmart, like all businesses, should protect its workers. Cardenas said in a speech at the end of the demonstration:

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

https://www.abqjournal.com/news/article_5e224ef7-390a-4417-9ca8-10df141c112c.html#tncms-source=home-featured-7-block

MAYOR KELLER ANNOUNCES NEW POLICY

On July 12 Mayor Tim Keller sent out the following FACEBOOK post announcing a new policy:

Dear ABQ Neighbor,

You’ve seen the headlines—Trump officials are ramping up immigration raids and threatening to cut critical funding from cities like Albuquerque. These federal cuts target our police, housing programs, and most vulnerable residents. I’m not staying silent while that happens.

That’s why we just joined two national lawsuits to fight back. These cases challenge the Trump administration’s efforts to slash funding for our police officers, law enforcement tools, affordable housing, and homelessness programs—just because we won’t turn local law enforcement into immigration agents.

We’re standing up for our values and for what keeps our city safe.

At the same time, I announced a commonsense step to improve public safety and transparency right here at home. After a troubling ICE incident at a local Walmart, we created a new way for residents to call APD directly and ask: “Are those federal immigration agents in my neighborhood?” No sensitive details are disclosed—just confirmation of the agency, like we do with SWAT calls. This helps reduce confusion, prevent panic, and protect public trust.

Let me be clear: APD does not and will not enforce immigration laws. But when armed agents show up without clear identification, people get scared—and that fear can escalate into danger. We’re not going to let confusion make our communities less safe.

Unfortunately, Republican mayoral candidate Darren White is attacking this effort. Instead of backing transparency and safety, he’s playing politics with people’s fear. He wants secrecy. We’re choosing clarity.

Public safety is built on trust. When families know APD isn’t acting as an arm of ICE, they’re more likely to report crimes, call for help, and work with officers. That makes every neighborhood safer. And when federal overreach threatens our housing and policing resources, we won’t back down—we’ll go to court and fight for Albuquerque.

I’m choosing facts over fear, leadership over posturing, and standing with our communities instead of dividing them. That’s how we protect Albuquerque.

— Mayor Tim Keller

APD CLARIFIES NEW POLICY

The Albuquerque Police Department (APD) issued a statement saying the federal officials have agreed to share more information with police about immigration operations in the city. According to a statement issued by APD, the public can call 242-COPS, which is APD’s non-emergency number, to inquire about “a specific presence in the city and whether that is an ICE operation.”

APD spokesman Gilbert Gallegos said this in the statement.

APD Chief Harold Medina said in a statement that he has communicated with Homeland Security Investigations, which oversees ICE, about public concerns. Medina said this:

Medina also said that federal agents must wear markings identifying themselves as law enforcement officials and said this:

Chief Harold Medina said it doesn’t matter if the resident is a legal citizen or not. He says when they break the law, they’ll be sought out by APD.

DARREN WHITE DEMANDS INVESTIGATION

Darren White is a former APD Officer, former Bernalillo County Sheriff, former NM Cabinet Secretary for Homeland Security and former City Chief Public Safety Officer. White is one of 6 candidates running against Tim Keller for Mayor. On July 13, Darren White reacted to Keller’s FACEBOOK post by calling for U.S. Attorney for New Mexico Ryan Ellison to investigate the legality of the hotline that would identify if ICE were taking enforcement actions.

White announced on FACEBOOK that he sent a letter US Attorney Ryan Ellison and proclaimed “this reckless move could put federal agents and the public at risk.” The following is the contents of White’s letter to US Attorney Ryan Ellison:

Dear U.S. Attorney Ellison

I am writing to express my deep concern regarding a policy recently announced by Albuquerque Mayor Tim Keller that directs the Albuquerque Police Department (APD) to facilitate illegal immigrants’ ability to verify where federal immigration agents are operating within the city.

As stated in a public post by mayor Keller, “You can call APD directly to get answers” regarding the presence of federal immigration agents. This statement was made alongside a broader announcement that the city has created “a new way to verify” the operations of federal agents in Albuquerque. If Mayor Keller doesn’t want ICE making apprehensions in public, he can rescind the Sanctuary Cit law and can once again allow ICE access to the Prisoner Transport Center. That would be safe for law enforcement, the public and even the criminals being apprehended.

As a former law enforcement officer, I am alarmed by the implications of the directive. Publicizing or confirming the presence and locations of federal agents – especially those involved in immigration enforcement, creates a dangerous situation. It risks compromising sensitive operations, places federal personnel in imminent danger, and could even endanger members of the public. Moreover, this policy may have the unintended effect of aiding illegal immigrants, involved in criminal activity, who are actively attempting to evade lawful apprehension.

I respectfully urge you to review the specifics of this APD initiative to determine whether it violates any federal law, including those relating to obstruction of justice or interference with the duties of federal officers. Also, I strongly urge you to release the identities and criminal records of all the illegal immigrants arrested by ICE. This will certainly provide the public with the clarity necessary to avoid any confusion over these federal enforcement activities – confusion ironically exacerbated by a mayor demonizing federal law enforcement at every town hall he attends.

I have attached a copy of the mayor’s public post for your review.

Thank you for your attention to this important matter.

Sincerely,

Darren White

https://x.com/darrenPwhite/status/1944524068000256405/photo/1

In interviews with the media after he sent his letter to U.S. Attorney Ellison, White called Keller’s new policy “dangerous” for federal law enforcement officers. White said this about Keller’s FACEBOOK post:

“I know that his post may have been his way of trying to cater to a certain segment of our community. … But you don’t do that at the risk of endangering federal law enforcement officers and the public. I thought that was reckless. … I’m very concerned about the police department establishing some type of a tip line for people to call to verify whether (ICE) is working in certain neighborhoods. You are providing information about legitimate law enforcement operations. That could be dangerous.”

In an interview with the online news outlet City Desk, White said this:

“We have enough of our own criminals. … We don’t need to let illegal immigrants who are in our country committing crimes stay here to commit more. I don’t think that’s a common-sense position to take. I think it’s a radical approach by the mayor to say ‘Well, we don’t care that illegal immigrants who are committing crimes are here’ and to provide them a shield from apprehension. That, to me, is radical. … As a former law enforcement officer, I’m very alarmed by the implications of that.”

White called the city’s use of APD to confirm federal agent’s enforcement actions in the city “very dangerous” and he said this:

“Anyone with APD has to realize that publicizing the presence of federal agents creates a very dangerous situation. Why create a system to alert potential illegal immigrants who may be committing crimes and are being sought by ICE? That puts agents and the public at risk.”

“I can assure you that there are many people who are illegal immigrants who have committed violent crimes — including murder — that ICE is not aware of because we have not informed them. … What I’m simply saying is, let us know the people you’re apprehending — post what crimes that they’ve been charged with.”

WHITE’S BETTER WAY RARELY USED

White said there is a better way to balance public safety with community concerns. He wants changes that would include letting ICE verify arrestee information at the Prisoner Transport Center instead of conducting street arrests, something he believes is safer and still respects local laws.

White said the public has a right to know who ICE is arresting and what crimes those individuals are accused of committing. In his letter to the U.S. attorney, he urged federal officials to release the names and criminal records of undocumented immigrants taken into custody, saying it would clear up confusion fueled by what he called Mayor Keller’s “demonizing” of federal law enforcement.

White said that if elected mayor, he would look for legal ways to share arrest records with ICE and said this:

“Obviously, we cannot violate the city law, but we will find a way to allow ICE to check the records of those people who have been arrested. … That’s what law enforcement agencies do — they share information — we’ll find a way that we can provide that information to them, where they look it up and they can make that determination.”

https://citydesk.org/2025/07/16/mayor-kellers-ice-policy-sparks-backlash-from-mayoral-challenger-darren-white/#:~:text=In%20his%20letter%20to%20the,demonizing%E2%80%9D%20of%20federal%20law%20enforcement.

White called on Albuquerque officials to reestablish access for federal officials at the city’s Prisoner Transport Center at Fourth and Roma NW to check on the immigration status of people arrested by APD. It was a practice allowed under former Mayor Richard Berry when White was Berry’s appointed Chief public Safety Officer. The practice was ended soon after Keller was elected mayor in 2017. White said this:

“We just let [federal officials] set up a laptop and they could check people who were coming in. … [Today] some of these people are being charged with very serious felony crimes, violent crimes. It makes no sense to me that we wouldn’t want ICE to apprehend them and have them deported once they serve their sentence.”

APD officials responded to White saying that ICE officials rarely used their access to the Prisoner Transport Center when it was available to them. APD Spokesman Gilbert Gallegos said this:

“[APD Chief Medina] … recalls that ICE had a desk in the [Prisoner Transport Center] several years ago under [the Berry] … administration but rarely staffed it. … ICE currently does not have access to the Prisoner Transport Center, where we are focused on arresting and booking people who break local and state criminal laws.”

“Darren White should be asked to be specific about why he thinks an open line of communication would endanger law enforcement and the public. … As it stands, it sounds like he is promoting secrecy and keeping the public in the dark about what’s happening in their own community.”

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

https://www.abqjournal.com/news/article_62afcc63-3175-4316-8533-de0ade6e8bd5.html#tncms-source=home-featured-7-block

MAYOR KELLER AND APD CHIEF MEDINA RESPOND TO WHITE

Mayor Keller responded to White’s criticism by saying this during a press conference:

“He’s just wrong. … This was arranged with our chief of police, and with … Homeland Security. They were OK with transparency, and we [are] … just a go between to identify operations. So yeah, he’s just misinformed and way off base.”

APD Chief Harold Medina confirmed that he communicated with Homeland Security Investigations, which oversees ICE, about public concerns. Medina said this:

“While APD does not enforce federal immigration laws … [I] emphasized to federal law enforcement leaders that there must be more transparency around their operations in Albuquerque. … As a result, federal officials have agreed to share information with APD when people have questions about operations. … APD is not in the business of immigration enforcement. … At the same time, I want to keep lines of communication open to avoid misunderstandings. We want the community to be safe and trust that we are looking out for them. … At the end of the day, if someone is a criminal, I don’t care if they were born in Albuquerque or another country. … Criminals, people breaking the law, endanger our citizens in Albuquerque—regardless, citizens or not—should be in jail.”

https://www.abqjournal.com/news/article_62afcc63-3175-4316-8533-de0ade6e8bd5.html#tncms-source=home-featured-7-block

FORMER U.S. ATTORNEY ALEX UBALLEZ WEIGHS IN ON CONTROVERSY

Mayoral candidate and former U.S. Attorney Alex Uballez watched the spectacle unfold between Keller and White on social media. Uballez said both Keller and White stances on the issue are inadequate, and he said this:

“That’s a little too little too late. Public safety is a thing that has to be done smart. … We don’t have to choose between the cruel and the ineffective in this city.”

Uballez has proposed 11 policies of his own on social media under the tag line “there’s more we can do” in opposition to both Keller and White. His policy proposals include the following 5 major points:

Require federal agents to wear visible identification, ban the use of masks during enforcement actions and require ICE to identify themselves during enforcement actions.
Require local law enforcement to verify federal agents’ identity when and if deployed to sites of enforcement activity.
Establish a formal designation restricting ICE enforcement near schools , churches, shelters and other sensitive sites.
Facilitate virtual access to services and the courts.
Create city emergency response infrastructure and give city 911 and 311 operators tools and the resources to support families who have been impacted by ICE and are in crisis.

OTHER CANDIDATES WEIGH IN

Four candidates running for Mayor sent the following statements to Channel 4 news:

DANIEL CHAVEZ:

“The sweeping raids we have seen across the country are alarming for Hispanic families who are just trying to live their lives. Law enforcement transparency is necessary, and while it’s not comfortable to fully trust the APD when they say they’ve got the public’s best interest after years of failing to keep our city safe, I’m not going to agree with Darren White who resigned in disgrace after the police union gave him a vote of “no confidence.”

LOUIE SANCHEZ:

“Tim Keller continues his tenure as a failed leader, prioritizing political posturing with his sidekick, Chief Medina, over real leadership. The Albuquerque Police Department’s sole responsibility is to keep our streets safe. Grandstanding and misrepresentations about Albuquerque’s immigrant-friendly policy simply doesn’t serve the best interests of the people of this city. As mayor, I will create a safer community by working with all law enforcement partners and community members to ensure Albuquerqueans can thrive.”

EDITOR’S NOTE: The postscript below provides a guest opinion column written by City Councilor Louie Sanchez and published on July 20 by the Albuquerque Journal.

ALEXANDER UBALLEZ:

“The people of Albuquerque deserve a better choice than the cruel and the ineffective. Workers are being tased at Walmart in our city. Farmworkers are dying. What we are facing from Trump’s attacks makes urgent action to protect our neighbors necessary. What’s been put in place before is not enough for what we are facing now. That’s why I put together 11 policies to show Albuquerque families that the city is fighting for them and to strengthen what the city can do in response to ICE’s targeting our residents.”

MAYLING ARMIJO:

“As a Navy veteran, I know real leadership means building trust, not playing political games. Mayor Keller and Chief Medina aren’t standing up to ICE — they’re using a hotline as a political maneuver while doing nothing to make Albuquerque safer. We need to rebuild trust between law enforcement and the community, not feed fear. As mayor, I’ll bring in a new police chief, boost officer recruitment, and invest in real community policing that enforces the law fairly and focuses on criminals regardless of their immigration status.”

https://www.kob.com/news/top-news/where-do-albuquerque-mayoral-candidates-stand-on-ice-raids/

EDDIE VARELA said the city should cooperate with federal agencies.

PATRICK SAIS only sent the answer “comply.”

https://www.kunm.org/local-news/2025-07-15/mayoral-candidate-uballez-keller-white-spat-over-immigration

“SANCTUARY CITY” VERSUS “IMMIGRANT FRIENDLY” CITY

For the last 23 years, Albuquerque has had a hands-off approach to immigration enforcement by officially labeling itself “immigrant-friendly” city and limiting local police cooperation with Immigration and Customs Enforcement. APD does not enforce immigration laws nor detain people for ICE without a warrant.

It was in 2001, long before Trump was President and Keller was Mayor, that the Albuquerque City Council declared the city to be an “Immigrant-Friendly City” by City Council ordinance. The ordinance was originally sponsored by former Republican City Councilor Hess Yntema who represented the South East Heights area, including the International District that has the highest concentration of immigrants. Councilor Yntema’s wife is also naturalized citizen of the United States. The ordinance provides that the City of Albuquerque “welcomes and encourages immigrants to live, work and study in Albuquerque and to participate in community affairs, and recognizes immigrants for their important contributions to our culture and economy.”

In 2018, the Albuquerque City Council passed amendments to the original ordinance affirming the city was an “immigrant-friendly city,” again carefully avoiding the term “sanctuary city.” The 2018 legislation was sponsored by Albuquerque City Councilor Klarissa Peña. Then City Councilor Pat Davis asked to co-author the measure and Peña allowed it. Davis said this:

“We were really clear about being sure that we didn’t use sanctuary language. …We wanted to ensure transparency and cooperation, but also protect vulnerable residents.”

A “Sanctuary City” requires local government to essentially shield the undocumented from federal authorities and federal arrests. “Immigrant Friendly” cities on the other hand enact policies that are favorable to undocumented people to allow them city services like all other residents and its local law enforcement personnel do not make arrests for violations of federal immigration laws and only make arrests of undocumented people for violations of local ordinances and state laws.

Albuquerque does allow the sharing of arrest records of municipal and state violations with federal immigration agents. However, the city does not compile any information on immigration status of suspects and prohibits Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) from using municipal facilities or resources. This balance distinguishes the city’s approach from more overt sanctuary city policies.

The Office of Immigrant and Refugee Affairs manages the Immigrant Friendly City Resolution. It requires city departments to review policies for compliance and report back to the council. Key provisions as reported by the online news agency City Desk include:

“City entities cannot collect citizenship or immigration status unless required by law for federal or state program eligibility or city employment.
City employees must keep personal information confidential unless needed to provide services, comply with public records requests, or required by law. Personal information includes Social Security numbers, birth details, addresses, sexual orientation, disability status, religion and national origin.
City resources cannot be used to aid immigration investigations or detentions based on immigration status.
Federal immigration agents cannot access non-public city areas, such as the Prisoner Transport Center, without a judicial warrant.
Everyone in Albuquerque has the right to city services with respect and dignity, regardless of race, disability, national origin, gender identity, religion, sex, sexual orientation, ethnicity, economic or immigration status.”

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

Mayor Keller and Chief Medina were right to seek better cooperation with Homeland Security to implement a program for ICE to share information with APD it can disseminate when people have questions about ICE operations in the city.

Alexander Uballez’s proposed policies to deal with ICE merit serious consideration. He is a former United States Attorney who understands the limitations that should be imposed on federal law enforcement officers to ensure constitutional practices are followed and that there is respect for constitutional rights and due process of law.

SICKENING TURN OF EVENTS

It is absolutely sickening that in 2025 the lie that Albuquerque is a sanctuary city is once again becoming an issue in the race Mayor of Albuquerque. Voters can thank Republican Darren White for it as he seeks to use one of the most divisive issues in the country to divide the community he wants to lead as Mayor and be damned the truth.

White wants to be Mayor of a city with a 49% Hispanic population and a strong Hispanic cultural influence. It’s clear Darren White is appealing to and is attempting to consolidate the Republican MAGA base as he runs against five Hispanics and a very unpopular, Anglo, progressive Democrat Mayor.

White’s divisive ploy just might work because it has worked in the past. White is essentially using the same tactic Richard Berry used to defeat Mayor Marty Chavez and former State Senator Richard Romero. In 2009, Berry and the Republicans used a billboard mounted on a truck that drove through the streets of Albuquerque denouncing Albuquerque as a Sanctuary City and to proclaim Berry would end the city’s sanctuary city policies.

White proclaims himself to be a “proven leader,” “tough on crime” and a “champion for change.” White argues that there have been 660 murders during Keller’s years in office, that an alarming number of businesses have had to close because of crime and that Keller has made Albuquerque a “sanctuary city.” White proclaimed this in his announcement:

“Mayor Keller has presided over the most murders in Albuquerque’s history. His weak approach to crime and homelessness has failed and it’s time for change.”

In a fund-raising letter, White falsely proclaimed this:

“One of Keller’s first acts as Mayor was too make Albuquerque a Sanctuary City for illegal immigrants who commit crimes. Now we have case after case of violent crimes being committed by illegal immigrants, many of who have been arrested multiple times but turned back onto the streets by this Mayor’s backward policies. As Mayor, I will end the Sanctuary City law immediately.”

Simply put, former APD Officer Darren White knows better, unless he flunked “Constitutional Law” at the APD Police Academy which is a real possibility given the inflammatory rhetoric that repeatedly comes out of his big mouth. White knows Keller has no authority to simply “turned back onto the streets” people arrested for a violent crime as White claims. White knows it’s the courts that make such decisions following due process of law.

White is following Donald Trump’s game plan of sowing hostility and mistrust of minorities to win an election. White is using the issue of sanctuary city to “gin up” anti-immigrant fever and animosity as Trump has done on the national level. White throws in the homeless to add to people’s resentments and fears to win votes.

Ostensibly, White has absolutely no problem with ICE agents wearing masks, tactical vests and armed without identifying themselves to apprehend and arrest people without arrest warrants because he does not condemn it. White paints with the broadest of brush when he proclaims “I can assure you that there are many people who are illegal immigrants who have committed violent crimes — including murder — that ICE is not aware of because we have not informed them.” His “assurance” is made without offering a scintilla of evidence to back up his claim. White wants to become Mayor by appealing to voter’s darkest fears of “illegal immigrants committing crimes” in a city known for its diversity and tolerance.

White throws in for good measure a healthy dose of self-righteousness. It’s false when White accused Keller of a saying “we don’t care that illegal immigrants who are committing crimes are here and to provide them a shield from apprehension.” He denounces a program approved by the Department of Homeland Security to share more information with police about immigration operations in the city. It’s false when White says it’s dangerous to law enforcement and public safety. It is simply a lie when White says that the City is a Sanctuary City when it never has been and likely will never be.

Voters would be damn fools to vote Republic Darren White as Mayor given his controversial history of public service which includes votes of no confidence by APD and the State Police who he oversaw at the time, interference with APD’s investigation of his wife’s car accident on suspicion of DWI, interference and rummaging through the civil rights attorney Mary Han’s death scene with APD brass, and his flip flop over marijuana legalization by becoming a license medical marijuana provider. Then there is the matter of White claiming he was a Florida full time resident to secure a property tax exemption on a Florida home he owns.

Voters need to reject in no uncertain terms White’s hate speech and his vile use of anti-immigrant fever that appeals to voter’s dark side of resentment, prejudice, hostility and mistrust that has no place in a city as diversified as Albuquerque. Voters should say NO to White as Mayor so he can return to and retire to his Florida home and feel more comfortable living in a Republican red state.

______________________________

POSTSCRIPT

On Sunday, July 20, the Albuquerque Journal published the below guest opinion column by City Councilor Louie Sanchez who is also running for Mayor of Albuquerque:

HEADLINE: Albuquerque’s immigration policy needs clarity, not politics

“For more than two decades, Albuquerque has been — by ordinance and by practice — an immigrant-friendly city. That’s not just a slogan. It’s a reflection of our community’s values and a bipartisan policy first championed in 2000 by Republican City Councilor Hess Yntema. His resolution recognized immigrants’ vital contributions to our culture, economy and neighborhoods. It also made clear that while Albuquerque welcomes immigrants, we are not and have never claimed to be a “sanctuary city.” The difference matters.

An immigrant-friendly city ensures all residents have access to city services, are treated with dignity and most important, local law enforcement is not subject to acting as federal immigration agents. Whereas, a sanctuary city, by contrast, often refuses cooperation with federal immigration enforcement outright, sometimes in defiance of federal law. Albuquerque’s long-standing policy strikes a careful balance between community trust, legal responsibility and its commitment to law and order as it was intended to do so since the inception of the ordinance.

Yet today, this thoughtful approach is being hijacked for political theater. The mayor’s recent announcement about “calling APD” to check on federal immigration agents is a prime example of virtue signaling without real solutions. The idea sounds good until you realize it simply reroutes people through a bureaucratic loop from APD officers to dispatchers to federal agencies that aren’t going to give out operational information. It offers no real clarity or accountability for the outcomes of these inquiries.

On the other extreme, we have political opponents demanding federal investigations, inflaming fear rather than fostering understanding of the ordinance. Neither approach serves Albuquerque’s best interest.

We should stick to the facts: Albuquerque remains an immigrant-friendly city under a policy that originated with a Republican, was reaffirmed in 2018 under ordinance R-24-45 and continues today. We respect our immigrant neighbors. But we also respect all law enforcement agencies both local or federal and allow them to operate within the law and with transparency. And we must ensure city leaders provide clear, honest information, not political gestures or partisan stunts.

As your mayor, I’ll stand for policies that reflect our values, follow the law, and actually work to inform the public and hold our city to higher standards, not just sound good in a press release.”

The link to the guest column is here:

https://www.abqjournal.com/opinion/article_302aa639-4fb2-4d25-9475-50e3957d0028.html

The link to a related article is here:

Stakes Are High To Answer Trump’s Question: Is Albuquerque A “Sanctuary City” Or “Immigrant Friendly City”; Sanctuary City Becomes Issue In 2025 Mayor’s Race; 7 Out Of 11 Candidates Respond To KOAT TV 7 Line Of Questioning On Issue

Measured Finance Committees (MFC’s) Formed To Promote 3 Candidates For Mayor; Keller’s MFC Raises $107,700; Armijo’s MFC raises $120,080.00; Varela’s MFC Raises $7,500.00; “ANYONE BUT KELLER” Movement Is Real And All The Money Spent To Elect Keller To Third Term May Not Matter; Write In Candidates Still Possible

Posted on July 17, 2025 by Pete Dinelli

On Friday, June 20 the City Clerk verified that 7 candidates out of 11 total candidates for Mayor successfully gathered 100% of the 3,000 qualifying nominating petition signatures from Albuquerque registered voters. All seven will appear on the November 4 municipal ballot. If no one of the 7 candidates secures 50% plus one of the vote, the two top vote getters will face each other in a run off election which must be held within 45 days of the November 4 election.

All 11 Candidates for Mayor had from April 19, 2025 to June 21, 2025 by 5:00 pm, 64 days, to collect the required 3,000 verified signatures. The seven candidates who have qualified for the ballot gathering more than 3,000 nominating signatures are:

Incumbent Mayor Tim Keller qualified for the ballot after securing 4,786 signatures, the most of all the candidates.
Eddie Varela, a retired Albuquerque firefighter and former California fire chief, qualified after securing 3,973 signatures, the second most among candidates.
Alex Uballez, the former U.S. attorney for the District of New Mexico, qualified after securing 3,643 signatures.
Louie Sanchez, a former police officer and current city councilor, qualified after securing 3,588 signatures.
Darren White, the former sheriff of Bernalillo County and CEO of cannabis company PurLife, qualified after receiving 3,562 signatures.
Daniel Chavez, president of Parking Company of America was the very first to qualify for the ballot after securing 3,427 signatures.
Mayling Armijo, the former director of Economic Development for Bernalillo County and deputy county manager for Sandoval County, qualified after securing 3,370 signatures.

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

https://www.abqjournal.com/news/article_a6f5a27d-e7d3-4ea0-b0f2-87a2b96431c5.html#tncms-source=home-featured-7-block

The city link to review the City Clerk’s total raw data tabulations of verified petition signatures and rejected petition signatures for each of the 11 candidates is here:

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

On July 14, all 7 of the candidates for Mayor file with the City Clerk their fourth Mayoral Campaign Finance report on campaign contributions raised. Following are the total amounts reported by each candidate:

Tim Keller total contributions: $23,179.57
Mayling Armijo total contributions: $38,136.65
Eddie R Varela total contributions: $6,089.96
Darren White total contributions: $73,999.95
Alexander M.M. Uballez total contributions: $79,320.46
Louie Eusebio Sanchez total contributions: $215,741.88
Daniel Chavez total contributions: $113,875.00

EDITOR’S NOTE: City Councilor Louie Sanchez contributed $160,000 to his own campaign and Daniel Chavez contributed $100,000 to his own campaign.

The link where you can review the candidates finance statements is here:

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

On June 20, the City Clerk determined that Mayor Tim Keller was the only candidate to qualify for public finance and he was given $755,946 in city financing for his campaign which has yet to be reflected in Keller finance statements.

The links where you can review the city clerks tabulations for public finance s is here:

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

MEASURED FINANCE COMMITTEES FORMED TO PROMOTE KELLER, ARMIJO VARELLA CANDIDACIES

Under the City of Albuquerque’s campaign finance laws, a Measure Finance Committee (MFC) is a political action committee (PAC), person or group that supports or opposes a candidate or ballot measure within the City of Albuquerque. Measure Finance Committees are required to register with the City Clerk. Measure finance committees are not bound by the individual contribution limits and business bans like candidates. No Measure Finance Committee is supposed to coordinate their activities with the individual candidates running for office, but this is a very gray area as to what constitutes coordination of activities, and it is difficult to enforce.

The fact that measure finance committees are not bound by the individual contribution limits and business bans like candidates is what makes them a major threat to warping and influencing our municipal elections and the outcome. Any Measure Finance Committee can raise and spend unlimited amounts of money and can produce negative ads to destroy any candidate’s reputation and candidacy.

All Measure Finance Committees must register with the Albuquerque City Clerk, regardless of the group’s registration as a political action committee (PAC) with another governmental entity, county, state or federal. Measure finance committees must also file financial “Campaign Finance Reports” reporting monetary contributions, loans, in kind donations and expenditures. Under existing law, it is illegal for any candidate for office or their campaign committee to coordinate their campaign efforts with any measured finance committee.

Three measured finance committees (MFA) to promote 3 candidates for Mayor have been formed. On July 14 the 3 committees filed finance reports with the City Clerk as follows:

Safer Albuquerque Committee (Safer ABQ)

Safer Albuquerque Committee (Safer ABQ) is the measured finance committee formed to “advocate for Mayling Armijo’s candidacy for mayor during the Albuquerque 2025 mayoral race and align with values that reduce crime, reduce homelessness, and promote job growth.”

COMBINED FINANCIAL TOTALS

Total Contributions: $120,080.00
Total Expenditures: $61,321.63
In-Kind Contributions: $0.00
In-Kind Expenditures: $0.00
Current Cash Balance: $58,758.30
Current Debt Balance: $0.00

TOP CONTRIBUTORS

Tracy, Katrina $40,000
Armijo, Chauling Mary $40,000
Four Winds Mechanical HTC/AC Inc $40,000
Rolison, Charles $80.00

CIPGAW: Committee to Elect Eddie Varela Mayor of Albuquerque

CIPGAW: Committee to Elect Eddie Varela Mayor of Albuquerque is the measured finance committee which has been formed “for the purpose
to Elect Eddie Varela Mayor of Albuquerque.”

COMBINED FINANCIAL TOTALS

Total Contributions: $7,500.00
Total Expenditures: $5,524.83
In-Kind Contributions: $ -0-
In-Kind Expenditures: $-0-
Current Cash Balance: $1,975.00
Current Debt Balance: $-0-

TOP CONTRIBUTORS

Day, Bradley William $7,500

https://campaignfinance.cabq.gov/#/exploreCommitteeDetail/feXJuXAYkFJVGJBhl95rMZP4048PFnxLXRUfdOLcQk01/null/null/2/2025

ASEND ALBUQUERQUE MEASURED FINANCE COMMITEE

Ascend Albuquerque is the measured Finance Committee which has been formed for the sole purpose “to support the election of Tim Keller as Mayor of Albuquerque.” On July 14, 2025, Ascent Albuquerque filed it fourth financial disclosure statement as required by the City’s election code. Following is a summary of the Financial Report for Ascend Albuquerque:

COMBINED FINANCIAL TOTALS

Total Contributions: $101,700.00
Total Expenditures: $26,175.68
In-Kind Contributions: $ -0-
In-Kind Expenditures: $ -0-
Current Cash Balance: $75,524.32
Current Debt Balance: $0.00

TOP CONTRIBUTORS

Western States Regional Council of Carpenters, United Brotherhood of Carpenters & Joiners of America: $20,000
New Mexico Building and Construction Trade Council: $20,000
Fresquez Concessions Inc: $15,000
Sangre De Cristo Hotel Investment LLC $10,000
IBEW PAC Voluntary Fund $10,000

The city link to review the Financial Disclosure Statement for Ascend Albuquerque is here:

https://campaignfinance.cabq.gov/#/exploreCommitteeDetail/VMQvJiHXaP1z-Iz2eL_papP4048PFnxLXRUfdOLcQk01/null/null/2/2025

SEPTEMER 2 ONLY DAY FOR WRITE IN CANDIDATES TO FILE

Although the time frame for candidates to announce and qualify for the ballot for Mayor has come and gone, there is still an option for people to declare as write in candidates. In 2023, the New Mexico Legislature enacted a law that allows for write in candidates in all regular local elections which includes municipal elections. The link to the statute is here:

https://law.justia.com/codes/new-mexico/chapter-1/article-22/section-1-22-8-1/

A person desiring to be a write-in candidate for Mayor must file with the Bernalillo County Clerk a declaration of intent to be a write-in candidate because it is the Bernalillo County Clerk who oversees the election and counts the ballots under the Local Election Act. Write in candidates are given only one day to file a “declaration of intent to be a write in candidate” for Mayor. The City Clerk’s Candidate Calendar published on the City Clerk’s web page states the filing date for write-in-candidates is Tuesday, September 2.

The “declaration of intent to be a write in candidate” must be accompanied by a nominating petition containing the same number of signatures required of candidates for Mayor which is 3,000 signatures. Under the law, a write-in candidate is considered a candidate for all purposes and provisions relating to candidates in the Local Election Act, except that the write-in candidate’s name shall not be printed on the ballot nor posted in any polling place.

City of Albuquerque nominating petition forms to collect signatures to nominate a candidate for Mayor as a write in candidate may be obtained from City Clerk Ethan Waston whose email address is ewatson@cabq.gov. The City Clerk’s office is located in the Plaza Del Sol Building, 600 2nd St NW, Albuquerque, NM 87102 and the phone number is (505) 924-3650.

Instructions on how to use the petitions can be found at this link:

How to use the Petition Form for Mayoral Candidates

There are examples of petitions on the City Clerks training page which can be found here:

https://www.cabq.gov/vote/training-videos

EDITORS NOTE: Alpana Adair, who failed to secure qualifying nominating signatures and the qualifying $5.00 donations, is now claiming she is a write in candidate. Adair will have to file her declaration to be a write in candidate with the Bernalillo County Clerk on September 2 and also submit 3,000 verified nominating signatures from registered voters who reside within the city limits.

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

Mayor Tim Keller is seeking a third consecutive four-year term despite the fact he has a very low approval rating. Keller’s approval rating is believed to be in the 30% to 33% range based on past polls. Notwithstanding Keller’s low approval ratings, he will likely make it into a run off, either first or second, because of his loyal base of progressive Democrats he has relied upon every single time he has run for office including New Mexico State Senate, New Mexico State Auditor and twice as Mayor.

The fact that Keller is the only candidate to secure $755,946 in public finance and a measured finance committee that has raised another $101,700.00 to promote him for a grand total of $857,646 is a testament of the power of incumbency and is clear evidence Keller is running against a very weak field of candidates given that Keller was the only one to qualify for public finance. Given the involvement of two well-known, respected progressive Democratic fundraisers, the measured fiancé committee will likely raise thousands more to promote Keller and to tear down his opponents.

Some politcal pundits and columnists are saying that if Keller’s opponents are unable to raise sufficient campaign donations, there is a possibility that Keller could capture 50% of the vote and avoid a runoff election between the top two finishers. That is likely wishful thinking. Keller will need every penny of his public finance and the measured finance committee promotion to deal with his low approval ratings as the campaign drags on over the summer and into the fall and his opponents hit him hard on the issues until November 4.

Mayor Keller is a known quantity with extremely low approval ratings and no amount of money spent on his behalf to get him elected to a third term may be enough to reform his image in the eyes of voters who have simply had enough of him and his self promotion ways with very little results to point to. Notwithstanding, all of Keller’s opponents are relegated to scrambling for private financing unless they are wealthy enough to self-finance. Only Daniel Chavez is believed to be able to self finance.

FINAL COMMENTARY

Eight years of Tim Keller as Mayor has been more than enough. Simply put, Albuquerque needs a new Mayor. Keller is completing 8 years as Mayor and he is still struggling with the very issues he dealt with 8 years ago: high violent crime rates, drugs, the homeless crisis and a corrupt APD. Things have not gotten any better under his leadership and some would say the city is worse off today than when he was first elected in 2017. What can he really accomplish with another 4 more years when he has had 8?

“ANY ONE BUT KELLER”

There exists a serious undercurrent of dissatisfaction with all 7 candidates, especially Mayor Tim Keller. Although City Hall observers and political pundits are saying the election is Keller’s to lose, what they fail to take into account is the “any one but Keller movement”. It can also be called “Keller Fatique” which is what happened with “Chavez Fatique ” when Democrat Mayor Marty Chavez attempted to seek a third consecutive four year term in 2009 and he lost to Republican Richard Berry. Simply put, people want change.

The “any one but Keller movement ” comes into sharp focus when the local news stations publish stories on FACEBOOK where Keller is interviewed at length about his candidacy and literally hundreds of public comments are made that are all negative and berating Keller for his failure to address and solve the city’s problems. Candidates who are running for city council and who were going door to door to collect nominating signatures and $5.00 for their own candidacies reported they were encountering strong anti-Keller sentiment at the doors with them being asked questions if they support Keller for reelection.

It is doubtful any of the 6 running against Keller will be able to raise the kind of money that will be spent to get Keller elected to a third term. But that may not matter given Keller’s high negatives. No amount of public finance money spent by Keller and the Ascend Albuquerque MFC may be able to overcome his high negatives and reform his image. Simply put, Keller has overstayed his welcome and voters want change. Hope springs eternal that over the course of the campaign that one of the six running against Keller will in fact raise enough money to emerge as a viable candidate and succeed in removal of an entrenched politician.

Given the overall dissatisfaction and disappointment with the six candidates running against Keller, and the overall voter dissatisfaction with Keller himself, there is a chance that there will be one or more write in candidates that could take advantage of the “any one but Keller movement”. There is still time to collect the 3,000 signatures needed to be a recognized write in candidate and to file a declaration of candidacy as a write in on September 2.

It’s fully understood that write in candidacy’s are considered long shots, but given the nature of the times and voter dissatisfaction in general with city hall, success could be achieved by a write in candidate. With the new state law, community leaders, neighborhood associations, civic organizations, activists and those in the business community who are dissatisfied with the 7 candidates now still have the option to recruit one of their own of like mind.

If not, it is likely we will have another 4 years of disastrous policies, either under Mayor Tim Keller as he continues with his disastrous policies or one of the 6 others running against him who will implement their own disastrous policy’s.

The link to a related article is here:

4th Mayoral Campaign Finance Report Filed; Candidates Contribute Significant Amounts To Own Campaigns; Councilor Louie Sanchez Contributes $160,000 To Own Race; Daniel Chavez Contributes $100,000 To Own Race; Tim Keller Only Candidate To Secure Public Finance Of $755, 946; Public Finance Favors Incumbents

NEWS AND COMMENTARY

Monthly Archives: July 2025

Trump’s Executive Order Seeks To Overhaul The Way Cities And States Manage Homelessness; Trump’s Interference Will Exacerbate Problems; Executive Order Enforceability Highly Questionable; POSTSCRIPT: Candidates For Mayor Speak Out On Trump’s Executive Order

State’s Mental Health Care Rankings Continue Worsen; State Will Spend Millions To Rebuild Mental Health Care System Destroyed In 2014 By Governor Susana Martinez; New Mexico’s “Behavioral Health Care Reforms” Will Take Time To Implement

See July 22 City Desk article “Uballez criticizes Keller’s ICE policy, calls for stronger immigrant protections” by Jesse Jones.

OTHER CANDIDATES FOR MAYOR ISSUE STATEMENTS

LOUIE SANCHEZ STATEMENT