This article is an in-depth report and analysis on the defeat of 3 major legislative initiatives introduced to the City Council at the request of Mayor Tim Keller. The 3 defeats were a major setback to Mayor Tim Keller’s aggressive approach to regulate the residential rental industry, to increase the number of sanctioned homeless encampments and to change the city’s zoning laws to increase density throughout the city by allowing property owners to “opt-in” to increase density. The 3 measures represent Mayor Tim Keller doubling down on his failed policies as he seeks of third 4-year term as Mayor by dividing the city council and ignoring voter’s opposition. It’s time we elect a new Mayor.
KELLER’S “HOUSING NOW” PROGRAM
August 07, 2025, Mayor Tim Keller launched what he dubbed the “Housing Now” Program. It’s a program designed to alleviate Albuquerque’s housing crisis by reducing rents, preventing displacement, and increasing access to stable housing by making changes to the city’s zoning law that will allow for more development in established neighborhoods to increase density.
The first major piece of Keller’s “Housing Now Program” program is the proposed PATCH Program. It is a 0% interest, forgivable loan initiative that helps low-income homeowners make critical health and safety repairs, such as replacing a failing roof or fixing broken plumbing, so they can remain in their homes.
A second major piece of the “Housing Now Program” is to allow property owners to “opted in” to increased zoning of their properties for development and to increase density in shaping the way housing is added. The “opted in” legislation constitutes major zoning reforms to build on previous changes to the city’s zoning laws known as the Integrated Development Ordinance (IDO) that allows “casitas” and will allow expanding housing types like cottage courts and corner duplexes in virtually every quadrant of the city.
The strategy includes a zoning code “rebalance” to double or triple density in established neighborhoods. According to the Keller Administration these zoning changes will expand affordable housing options in existing neighborhoods and helping multigenerational households.
https://www.cabq.gov/health-housing-homelessness/news/mayor-keller-launches-housing-now-campaign
Mayor Keller is proposing the enactment of a “renters rights ordinance” that would increase the duties and responsibilities of property owners to renters. It will mandate enhanced rules and regulations for landlords dealing with fees, leases and living conditions.
Mayor Keller is advocating for the relaxation of rules and regulation governing Safe Outdoor Spaces for the homeless to allow the establishment of 100 Safe Outdoor Spaces by private property owners, charitable organization and churches to accommodate1,000 homeless throughout the city.
LAND USE PLANNING, AND ZONING COMMITTEE
The City Council’s Land Use Planning, and Zoning Committee (LUPZ) reviews all ordinances, resolutions, or other matters pertaining to the city’s Zoning Code known as the Integrated Development Ordinance (IDO) that contains all the city’s zoning laws, land use appeals, historical designation process, annexations, sector development plans, and general land use, planning and redevelopment policies. The committee is appointed by the City Council President. The current members of the LUPZ committee are:
- Progressive Democrat Tammy Fiebelkorn, Chair
- Republican Brook Bassan, City Council President
- Republican Renée Grout
- Republican Dan Champine
- Progressive Democrat Nichole Rogers
THREE MAJOR DEFEATS IN ONE NIGHT FOR KELLER’S “HOUSING NOW” PROGRAM AND ZONING LAW CHANGES
On Wednesday, August 13, the LUPZ committee held its regular scheduled committee meeting. On the agenda were three major items introduced by city councilors at the request of Mayor Tim Keller. All three agenda items failed. Each received a “DO NOT PASS” vote recommendation to the City Council. “DO NOT PASS” recommendations by the committee are routinely adopted by the full City Council thereby killing the legislation.
Following are the three agenda items voted down in the order they were presented to the LUPZ committee:
- Adopting the Renters Empowerment and Neighborhood Transparency (RENT) ordinance, (0-25-88).
The Renter’s Empowerment and Neighborhood Transparency (RENT) Ordinance is sponsored by Progressive Democrat City Councilor Tammy Feiblekorn at the request of Mayor Keller. The ordinance will give renters more rights and remedies over landlords and property owners. The Keller Administration argued that RENT Ordinance builds on the requirements outlined in the state’s Uniform Owner-Resident Relations Act. It does not. It expands the rights of tenants to the detriment of property owner rights. It will increase the rules and regulations for landlords, prohibit hidden fees, mandate terms in the lease contracts, and mandate further maintenance of rental properties.
Some key provisions of the RENT Ordinance include:
- Require landlords to be upfront and clear about the rental application process, including what could disqualify someone, using plain language.
- Make all costs transparent, so renters know exactly what they’re paying for: base rent, fees, and any charges before or during the lease.
- Create a fairer application process, where landlords must review applications in the order they’re received: first-come, first-served.
- Ensure landlords accept all types of rent payment and ban fees for paying rent online.
- Stop landlords from charging “pet rent” or banning pets unfairly.
- Hold landlords accountable if they don’t maintain rental properties. Renters may be eligible for relocation assistance if housing isn’t up to legal standards as decided by the city.
- Require landlords to register their rentals with the City, including contact info and basic details about each unit.
Mayor Keller said this about his proposed “Renters Rights” Ordinance:
“Renters deserve clear information, safe homes, and protection from exploitation — nothing less. … This renters’ bill of rights is how we show that Albuquerque stands up for working families, seniors, and everyone who calls a rental home.”
https://www.cabq.gov/mayor/news/city-introduces-renters-bill-of-rights-to-protect-tenants
RENT ORDINANCE FAILS ON A 2 TO 3 VOTE
The RENT ordinance failed on a 2 to 3 vote with Progressive Democrats Tammy Fiebelkorn and Nichole Rogers voting “YES” and Republican Council President Brook Bassan, Renée Grout and Dan Champine voting “NO”. The committee then voted 3 to 2 to send the ordinance on to the full city council with a “DO NOT PASS” RECOMMENDATION which will likely be approved by the council thereby killing the legislation.
COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS ON RENTER’S EMPOWERMENT AND NEIGHBORHOOD TRANSPARENCY ORDINANCE
Simply put, the new RENT Ordinance is a sneaky and pathetic rewrite and rebranding of the failed 2022 Residential Tenant Protection Ordinance sponsored by Progressive Democrat Tammy Fiebelkorn that was ultimately rejected and voted down by the previous City Council. The postscript below contains the link to an article that analyzes Fiebelkorn’s Residential Tenant Protection Ordinance. The key provisions of Keller’s new RENT ordinance are identical to the requirements that were in Fiebelkorn’s Residential Tenant Protection Ordinance. The RENT ordinance is a major step towards rent control which was rejected by New Mexico legislature in 2023.
There is no need for the RENT Ordinance. The NM Legislature’s enacted Uniform Owner-Resident Relations Act enumerates the duties, responsibilities, rights and remedies of both owners and tenants which are enforced by the Bernalillo County Metro Court. Requiring more of property owners and landlords and less of tenants amounts to interference with property rights and contract rights and obligations between tenants and property owners. The proposed RENT ordinance is too burdensome and constitutes classic government overreaching. The RENT Ordinance is a clear interference with the operation and management of rental properties and it will have a detrimental impact on the rental industry. It will have the unintended consequence of increasing already high rents as property owners and landlords scrambled to take repeated steps to implement and comply with the ordinance each and ever time a new lease is negotiated or renewed.
There is no need to require registration with the city of rental properties in that the city already has much of the information that would be required. The city only needs to consolidate the information on its own from the various city departments. Further requiring disclosure of lease contract information for tenants, property owners and landlords and basic details about each unit amounts to nothing less than interference with private contract rights and privacy rights. One point of major contention was that renters should not be mandated by landlords to carry “renters insurance” and not be subject to extensive background and credit checks. These requirements are reasonable and necessary to manage rental properties and to protect the property owners and renters.
- Safe Outdoor Spaces (0-25-89, Amending “Safe Outdoor Space Operators Permits and 0-25-90 amending the Integrated Development Ordinance relating to Safe Outdoor Spaces, sponsored by City Councilor Nichole Rogers at the request of Mayor Tim Keller.)
Under the City’s Zoning laws collectively known as the Integrated Development Ordinance (IDO), “Safe Outdoor Spaces” are organized, managed homeless encampments. It was on June 6, 2022 that the City Council enacted a series of amendments updating the Integrated Development Ordinance (IDO). One of the amendments was for “Safe Outdoor Spaces.” The legislation passed on a 5 to 4 vote despite very angry opposition from citizens and neighborhood associations. Voting YES to allow Safe Outdoor Spaces were 3 councilors who did not seek reelection. Mayor Tim Keller signed off on the legislation allowing for Safe Outdoor Spaces.
The enacted legislation allows for 2 homeless encampments in all 9 city council districts with 40 designated spaces for tents. The Safe Outdoor Spaces allow upwards of 50 people, require hand washing stations, toilets and showers, require a management plan, 6-foot fencing and dedicated space for social service providers to offer food, mental and physical health services. Although the Integrated Development Ordinance (IDO) amendment sets a limit of two in each of the city’s 9 council districts, the cap does not apply to those hosted by religious institutions.
After being repeatedly confronted by angry constituents at neighborhood association meetings and functions, Republican City Councilor Brook Bassan, who voted to allow them, issued a formal apology to her constituents saying after her initial support of Safe Outdoor Spaces she had serious doubts. She went so far as to say that the city was not ready to implement them and that they would not provide the type of relief she initially had hoped for.
After tremendous public anger and objections to Safe Outdoor Spaces, Republican City Councilor Brook Bassan did an about face and changed her mind. On June 22, 2022 just a few weeks after helping pass the Safe Outdoor Space amendment, Bassan introduced legislation to repeal the IDO amendment. She introduced two bills. One bill introduced would stop the city from accepting or approving safe outdoor space applications and the other would have eliminated safe outdoor spaces from the zoning code altogether. The legislation eliminating Safe Outdoor Spaces passed the City Council on a 5-4 vote, but Mayor Keller vetoed it and Safe Outdoor Spaces are allowed.
After over 3 years since the passage of the Safe Outdoor Spaces legislation, upwards of 8 applications have been made. Only one Safe Outdoor Space has been approved by the city. The primary reason given for the failure to establish more Safe Outdoor Spaces are what have been dubbed as onerous rules and regulations for them and the ultimate cost of providing 24/7 security.
On June 28, 2025 Mayor Tim Keller held a news conference to announce the legislation to make major changes to the city’s Integrated Development Ordinance governing Safe Outdoor Spaces. The legislation is sponsored by Progressive Democrat City Councilor Nichole Rogers at Mayor Keller’s request. Mayor Keller said he wants to ease costly rules that have stalled efforts to open more Safe Outdoor Spaces saying churches, nonprofits and others should be able to create legal encampments without facing any major financial barriers.
Mayor Keller said he wants to ease Safe Outdoor Space requirements to allow expansion of the program with the goal of increasing the number. Mayor Keller said the city needs to “scale up” by allowing smaller encampments all over the city. Keller said there are individuals either who are not ready for traditional shelters or can’t find available housing. Keller said to meet the need, the city may need as many as 100 smaller Safe Outdoor Spaces to accommodate 1,000 homeless.
According to Keller, there are many unhoused who would accept a Safe Outdoor Space and who have already turned down traditional shelters. Keller said this:
“This kind of option could make a huge difference on our streets. … It’s always worth it to help 10 people. … [Helping] even 10 people makes a huge difference in their lives and that’s never lost on me. … We think there’s at least 1,000 people on the street who would say yes to a Safe Outdoor Space and who currently say no to the Gateway system. … If you do the math, we’d need around 100 Safe Outdoor Spaces. … That’s a lot, but if each one shelters 15 or 20 people, the numbers add up fast.”
There are four major changes to the Integrated Development Ordinance governing Safe Outdoor Spaces Keller wants to make them more affordable and practical. The four changes are:
FIRST: This change would ease the rule requiring 24/7 on-site security. Currently, sites must always have someone on duty. It’s a cost that eliminates 99% of people who establish safe outdoor spaces on their property.
SECOND: This change would drop the rule requiring on-site showers 24/7. Instead, mobile trailers would rotate between locations throughout the week.
THIRD: This change would eliminate the requirement for a dedicated space for service providers.
FOURTH: This change would establish $100 application fees and $50 renewal fees, with permits lasting 12 months before requiring renewal.
RELAXING SAFE OUTDOOR SPACES REGULATIONA FAILS ON A 2-3 VOTE
On August 13 upwards of thirty people attended the LUPZ committee hearing with many in support of the legislation. The Safe Outdoor Space legislation failed on a 2 to 3 vote with Progressive Democrats Tammy Fiebelkorn and Nichole Rogers voting “YES” and Republican Council President Brook Bassan, Renée Grout and Dan Champine voting “NO”. The committee then voted 3 to 2 to send the legislation on to the full city council with a “DO NOT PASS” recommendation which will likely be approved by the council thereby killing the legislation.
COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS ON SAFE OUTDOOR SPACES
Keller’s original legislation to allow two Safe Out Door spaces in each of the 9 city council districts has been an absolute failure with only one established. After doing nothing for 3 years to get more established, Keller wants to get rid of the rules and regulations. He calls for100 Safe Out Door spaces scattered throughout the city to accommodate1,000 homeless people. Keller’s proposal to relax rules and regulations of Safe Outdoor Spaces and eliminate restrictions on them reflects a Mayor who has learned absolutely nothing from his failures as he doubles down on his failure.
According to the 2024 Point In Time survey, there are 2,394 individuals experiencing homelessness. Therefor Keller wants to provide Safe Outdoor Spaces for 1,000, or 42%, of the chronic unhoused. This defeats and ignores the integrated shelter system of 5 shelters Keller has established at a cost of upwards of $300 million with annual operating costs and service contracts of $56 Million. The city’s goal should be to get the homeless off the streets into shelter or permanent housing and not into tents.
The Safe Outdoor Space restrictions are required to limit the proliferation of homeless encampments in virtually every nook and cranny of the city. The restrictions are designed to prohibit and prevent illegal activity, such as drug use, with criminal activity and even violent crime being a major problem within the unhoused community.
Safe Outdoor Spaces are Mayor Keller’s symbols and legacy of failure as the city deals with its most vulnerable population, its homeless. If Keller had a lick of sense, he would abandon his efforts to establish Safe Outdoor Spaces. He needs to acknowledge and understand that there is very little to no public support for such homeless tent encampments. Keller needs to cease his efforts to cram them down neighborhood’s throats.
“Safe Outdoor Spaces” represent disaster for the city. “Safe Outdoor Spaces” will destroy neighborhoods, make the city a magnet for the homeless and destroy the city’s efforts to manage the homeless through shelters and permanent housing.
- Opt-In Zoning Ordinance (R 25- 167 entitled Establishing An Opt-In Process For Legislative Zoning Conversions for Properties Zoned R-1, R-T, or R-ML To Increas Housing Options Citywide And Allow Mixed-Use Development Along Collector And Aterial Streets And Within Established Metropolitan Redevelopment Areas.)
R 25-167 was sponsored by Progressive Democrat Tammy Fiebelkorn, the LUPZ Chair, at the request of Mayor Tim Keller. The Resolution will let property owners voluntarily rezone for higher-density or mixed-use development by simply applying for the rezoning with the Planning Department.
Residential zoning covers 27% of the city’s land and 68% of its properties. City officials have said that 68% of the city’s existing housing is single-family detached homes with 120,000 existing residential lots with already built residences. According to city officials, zoning law allowing only single-family homes has contributed to exclusionary patterns and limits housing options for lower-income households. The new rezoning process is designed to loosen those restrictions and support more housing development to increase density in already established neighborhoods.
According to the Pew Charitable Trust, last year there were about half as many homes available to buy as there where in 2018, driving up home prices by 78% in Albuquerque. According to a 2024 Roots Policy Research study, the city has a deficit of nearly 22,000 affordable units for low-income renters.
The new city ordinance would create a voluntary rezoning process that would let property owners switch to higher-density zoning if they want to build more housing on their residential properties, allowing duplexes, townhomes and small apartment buildings in single-family neighborhoods. The Opt-In plan focuses on corner lots and busy streets to make room for more housing. The application process does not allow adjoining property owners to object or challenge the “opt in” application.
The proposed resolution will let property owners in certain zones apply to change their zoning for more diverse development and increase density. Participation would be voluntary. Single-family homes zoned R-1 would have several options. Corner lots could switch to low-density multifamily zoning, raising the height limit from 26 to 38 feet. Properties on busy collector or arterial streets could move to mixed-use transit zoning allowing apartments and businesses up to 30 feet tall.
The resolution gives the Planning Department very broad authority to increase density in a neighborhood as they ignore adjoining property owner’s rights and remedies. The resolution requires the city’s Planning Department to establish a process and recommend requests, focusing on properties along busy streets and in designated redevelopment areas. Only eligible property owners who apply and agree to participate will have their zoning updated. Residential property owners must complete a participation form confirming eligibility and acknowledging that the new zoning could make existing uses nonconforming.
The city Planning Department would act as the official entity to accept applications. Residential property desiring to “opt-in” for increasing their properties density would be responsible for providing documents including surveys, site plans or easement agreements and covering costs. If property owners don’t qualify or disagree with the outcome, they would be allowed to request a zoning change through the Integrated Development Ordinance (IDO) that regulates land use, building standards and development procedures.
According to the Planning Department, eligible properties can apply to rezone based on their current zoning and location to allow more housing options and mixed uses. Under the new ordinance if passed by the city council, single-family homes zoned R-1 will have several options. Those options include:
- Corner lots on local streets could be converted to low-density multifamily which would allow duplexes, townhouses, and small apartments, and increase the maximum building height from 26 to 38 feet.
- R-1 homes along busier collector or arterial roads which are defined as streets that move traffic from neighborhoods to major routes would be allowed to “switch” to mixed-use development, allowing apartments and businesses with buildings up to 30 feet tall.
- Townhouses on busy streets would be allowed to convert to mixed-use low-intensity, focusing on townhouses and apartments but no longer allowing single-family homes or duplexes. Buildings could be built up to 38 feet to support more housing and businesses.
- Low-density multifamily properties would also increase. Corner lots may convert to high-density multifamily, while properties on collector or arterial streets could switch to medium-intensity mixed-use.
- The rezoning process would apply to Neighborhood Retail Properties zoned Neighborhood Retail Commercial Neighborhood Retail Business Park, Neighborhood Retail Light Manufacturing or Neighborhood Retail General Manufacturing and would allow conversion to high-intensity mixed-use.
On August 12, Mayor Keller held a press conference outside the former Range Cafe on Menaul Boulevard to promote passage of R 25-167. Keller said this in part:
“The idea is that if you have your own private property, that you should have a mechanism to choose what you want to do with that property. That maybe the government should not be the one telling you, you can only do one thing on your property. … Vacancy rates are still low and rents are too high. … If passed, this resolution will encourage development that expands housing options for a range of incomes and lifestyles.”
Keller made absolutely no mention of adjoining property owners or neighborhood association rights and remedies to deal the application process.
STRONG NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION OPPOSITION
The August 13 LUPZ Committee meeting, after taking a 20-minute break at 7:30 pm, continued late into the night with upwards of 40 people speaking during public comment. Opponents clearly outnumbered supporters by at least a 2-to-1 ratio. Neighborhood association representatives from across the city turned out in force to oppose the R 25- 167 in no uncertain terms.
Past president of the Victory Hills Neighborhood Association Patricia Willson criticized the lack of neighbor notification and told the committee this:
“This resolution should be rejected out of hand. … Rather than continuing to pass crisis legislation… the city could do more to increase housing by providing casita grants.”
Willson aggressively pushed back on claims about current zoning rules. In particular, she pushed back on what Strong Towns ABQ volunteer Joseph Greenwald said at Keller’s August 13 press event that many housing types are “literally illegal to build” under current codes. Willson called that “disingenuous,” saying the city “completely rewrote” its zoning codes in 2018. Willson said under the usual zoning amendment process “neighbors within 100 feet get written notice. This has no written notice, no yellow sign.”
Willson said the city should focus on new development rather than altering existing neighborhoods. Wilson told the committee this:
“If the city is really serious about us being less car centric and having less single family homes, they should concentrate on convincing developers to do better new development … [instead of] targeting longtime homeowners who bought their house 50 years ago, have it paid for [and could see their most valuable asset change] with no ability for them to have any input.”
Willson blamed high rents on corporate investment, not zoning rules and said this:
“Rents are high because private equity moved in the last 20 years from investing in commercial real estate to investing in multifamily real estate to investing in single-family homes. … We have become bulldozer bait for out-of-state investors.”
Jaemes Shanley, the president of the Mark Twain Neighborhood Association questioned the proposal’s underlying data. Shanley said this:
“Albuquerque has not grown. Our population decreased since 2020. … The city’s projection of housing needs based on 2% annual growth through 2045 is pure fantasy. Albuquerque is not actually growing right now. It’s actually shrinking. … And yet the mayor and members of council insist we have an urgent need for 50,000 housing units by 2045. There’s no basis in fact to support that. … What we have is a desperate need for affordable housing, particularly affordable for people earning 50% or less than the area median income. … But that kind of housing cannot be built. It can only be subsidized. ”
Shanley told the committee he did a survey of major city corridors that showed 21% commercial vacancy rate. He argued the city should focus on repurposing empty commercial properties instead of changing residential zoning.
Both Willson and Shanley noted that 62% of Albuquerque residents live in single-family homes zoned R-1 that could be affected.
Jill Yeagley, president of the Molten Rock Neighborhood Association, said her board voted to unanimously oppose R 25-167. Yeagley told the committee this:
“We do not dispute the need for affordable housing. However, we do object to a shotgun approach that relies on inaccurate data. [This proposal] does not meet the state-required process of notification for residents. … We sincerely want to increase affordable housing, and I applaud that. … One of the things that I think we need to look at is zoning changes in large developments, such as we have going on in the Westside. That’s an ideal place where major developers can very easily plat the lots to incorporate town homes and duplexes and deepen those four plexes and do it in a way that creates a coherent and visually pleasing neighborhood.”
Evelyn Rivera, a residential appraiser, called R 25-167 “an attack on single-family homeowners [that] will not provide affordable housing.” Rivera criticized the city’s outdated data and said she was “insulted as a multi-generational Hispanic New Mexican to be called a racist for wanting to protect my home and my value of my home.”
Not all neighborhood association representatives opposed R 25-167. Marit Tully, speaking for the Near North Valley Neighborhood Association, said the group “has supported increases in density” and “supports affordable housing,” but asked for a deferral because “none of us on our board thinks we have a handle on the impacts of this resolution.” Tully told the LUPZ committee that his association had tried to educate members about the proposal but got little response, suggesting that “few of our neighborhood residents and other city residents understand its scope.”
STRONG TOWNS ABQ SUPPORT FOR “OPTED IN” ZONING
Strong Towns ABQ is the local chapter of the national Strong Towns movement. It advocates for a bottom-up approach to community development, emphasizing walkable neighborhoods, affordable housing, and responsible infrastructure spending. The group works to address issues like housing affordability, transportation infrastructure, and local government finances through community engagement and policy advocacy. Strong Towns ABQ has emerged as a major advocate to increase density throughout the city by changing or repealing the city zoning laws. A link for more information on Strong Towns ABQ is here: https://www.strongtownsabq.org/
A representative from Strong Towns ABQ attended the LUPZ meeting and voiced strong support for R 25-16. Jordon McConnell, communications chair for Strong Towns ABQ, said the group collected supportive comments “from every zip code and council district in the city” without actually providing the hard data. McConnell called R 25-16 “a practical, bottom-up approach that allows property owners to opt into the next step up in zoning. It’s not a top-down mandate.”
“OPT IN” ORDINANCE FAILS ON 4-1 VOTE AGAINST
The opt-in zoning legislation failed on a 4 to 1 vote with Progressive Democrats Tammy Fiebelkorn voting “YES” and Republican Council President Brook Bassan, Renée Grout and Dan Champine and Progressive Demoocrat Nichole Rogers voting “NO”. The committee then voted 4 to 1 to send the legislation on to the full city council with a “DO NOT PASS” recommendation which will likely be approved by the council thereby killing the legislation.
The links to relied upon or quoted news sources are here:
https://www.cabq.gov/planning/news/opt-in-zoning-conversion-critical-for-more-housing
https://citydesk.org/2025/08/14/opt-in-zoning-proposal-suffers-decisive-defeat-in-committee/
COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS ON “OPTED-IN” RESOLUTION
R-25-167 zoning opt-in resolution is nothing more than the same old scam and a sneaky rebranding of Mayor Keller’s failed “Housing Forward ABQ Plan” to help developers and destroy existing neighborhoods by increasing density. Keller wants to increase density by simply ignoring adjoining property rights and objections.
Keller is advocating for the increase in the city’s density in established neighborhoods by allowing for mixed use development on single residential homes and allowing duplexes, townhouses, and small apartments, and increasing the maximum building on the false premise that it will increase affordable housing. It will not. Keller’ and Fiebelkorn, the resolution’s sponsor, have a Field of Dreams zoning philosophy of “if we rezone it, they will build it” discarding the limited resources of residential property owners and the likelihood of invertors on the prowl.
Should R-25-167 pass the full 9 member city council, every single R-1 zoned lot in Albuquerque will be able to be up-zoned increasing density. What this means is that any single family home along or in the middle of any street, not just a corner, not just on arterial or collector roads, can have a Townhouse built on it and it will be permissively enabled. Adjacent property owners, residents and neighborhood associations will just have to just shut up and accept it, regardless of its visual impact on the character of their neighborhood.
R-25-167 plan is clearly “overkill” that would affect all quadrants of the city. It will destroy the character of established neighborhoods and lead to gentrification. It will be developers and investors who will purchase existing homes for the development of duplexes, townhomes and small apartment buildings in single-family neighborhoods.
FINAL COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS
Mayor Tim Keller selected and promoted the 3 most controversial pieces of legislation that divided the City Council and the community and were designed to destroy established neighbors by increasing density.
Voters need to remember on election day November 4 Mayor Keller’s promotion of all three pieces of legislation that have divided the city council and the community. Voters must decide if Mayor Tim Keller is acting in their best interest and in the best interests of the city or if he is acting in his own best interests and simply promoting and doubling down on his failed policies. Voters need to decide if Keller should be elected to a third four-year term. It’s time we elect a new Mayor that will take the city in a new direction.
Links to related articles are here: