INTRODUCTION
The Office of Neighborhood Coordination (ONC) was established in 1985. The City of Albuquerque identifies and recognizes 144 neighborhood associations that are registered with the city and 94 have web sites. Neighborhood Associations serve as a liaison between residents, city government and businesses facilitating community engagement, support and cooperation and communication. The Albuquerque Neighborhood Recognition Ordinance (NARO) establishes a framework for recognizing neighborhood associations within the city. NARO facilitates the recognition of neighborhood associations, registration and charters and requires them to receive notifications about city actions and developments that may impact their areas and neighborhoods. The ordinance outlines specific criteria and processes for neighborhood associations to gain official recognition from the City of Albuquerque.
The link to the City Office of Neighborhood Coordination is here:
https://www.cabq.gov/office-of-neighborhood-coordination
The link to view a map of recognized Neighborhood Associations is here:
DAN LEWIS SPONSORED CITY ORDINANCES AND MEMORIALS
On October 5th, the Albuquerque City Council will consider and vote on four major legislative proposals sponsored by westside Republican City Councilor Dan Lewis that will have major impact eliminating the rights of neighborhood coalitions to challenge developments. Two proposals are ordinances making dramatic changes to the Neighborhood Association Recognition Ordinance (NARO) and two are memorials asking the New Mexico legislature to make changes to zoning laws as they relate to appeals of development projects.
O-26-61 would remove city recognition for neighborhood coalitions, homeowners associations and business groups, and end developer good-faith requirements. Coalitions are defined as groups of neighborhood associations that can represent areas larger than some city council districts. Under the ordinance they could still organize but without a recognized city role. O-26-60 would raise fees to appeal project approvals to $925, up from $190-$265, to cover review costs.
State law governs zoning appeals. Councilor Lewis is sponsoring two memorials asking the New Mexico Legislature to make changes to state law governing zoning appeals. M-26-01 would clarify who qualifies as an “aggrieved” person with legal standing to challenge and sue. M-26-02 would let appellants go directly to District Court.
GUEST COLUMN BY STEVEN HOLMAN
Steven Holman is a resident of City Council District 7 which is the mid heights city council district. The district includes the uptown retail business district including the Commons, Winrock and Coronado Shopping Center. The District boundaries are generally Montgomery Boulevard on the North, I-25 on the West, Lomas on the South and Eubank on the East.
Steven and his husband Jesus decided to permanently set their roots in Albuquerque in 2023 and purchased their first home in the Bel-Air neighborhood. They are both everyday working-class citizens who have overcome obstacles like poverty and homelessness to achieve their home ownership.
Steven is a strong believer in accountability in government, having been involved in progressive marches in Washington DC against the Iraq War, for Women’s reproductive rights, for Marriage Equality, and with the Occupy and BLM Movements. In writing this piece Steven and Jesus want the voices of local communities and their advocates to not be suppressed or silenced.
Steven Holman submitted the below guest column to be published on www.PeteDinelli.com. He was not compensated for it and his column is being published as a public service:
City Council To Vote On Council Lewis Sponsored Legislation That Will “Disempower” Community Coalitions And Neighborhood Associations; City Process Approving Development Projects Is The Problem Creating Litigation
BY Steve Holman
On Monday, October 5th the Albuquerque City Council is set to vote on O-26-60, O-26-61, M-26-1, and M-26-2.
These proposals will completely dismantle not only Community Coalitions but Neighborhood Associations as well by placing increased burden on their already strained and limited resources.
This legislation was introduced because of communities who have come together to fight back against harmful practices that the city rubber stamped. This is retaliation to a history of litigation by Community Coalitions and Neighborhood Associations that has protected indigenous sites and historic low income communities who have been traditionally marginalized by the city.
Have city officials ever stopped to think that the reason the city gets tied up in so much litigation is because the city is the problem?
Neighborhood Associations are largely on the decline as many are severely underfunded or on the verge of disappearing, my own included and I live in one of the largest neighborhoods. If for instance, a hate group decided to set up shop in my community, my Neighborhood Association couldn’t foot the necessary bill to do anything about it. That is why coalitions exist, to help serve communities that are incapable of fighting back.
The good of coalitions is that they can help representation of LGBTQlA, indigenous, and other marginalized groups city wide, but with this legislation they would have no power or ability to stand up to harmful decisions should they be enacted. The ACLU wouldn’t even be able to do anything on behalf of communities because they wouldn’t be recognized by the city. So when people lie and say coalitions are supposedly rooted in racism, maybe they should take several seats and realize they’re hurting marginalized communities in having a means to fight back.
This is all intended to pave the path for developers to do what they want, wherever they want it. They didn’t get what they wanted in zoning changes via Integrated Development Ordinance (IDO) updates, which is all the city’s zoning laws, so instead they’ve changed tactics to dismantle the means of communities to fight back against these policies. This is once again the selling out of our communities to special interests and groups who have no care for history, culture, or preservation. Why do you think the sellouts from StrongTowns and Urbanist shills support this? They are backed by developer and city interests to build baby build.
Worst of all with the advent of data centers, this is a sure fire way to ensure there is no pushback. Remember folks, the city has said publicly that is has 60+ acres they’re willing to annex and update zoning for a data center, yet they aren’t willing or able to do the same for affordable housing. Pay attention, the hypocrisy is ripe.
The fact that this legislation hasn’t even been through the Land Use Planning and Zoning committee due to it changing parts of the IDO and is instead going straight to a general council vote, is very disturbing as well. Looks like someone is not following proper policy and procedure, because IDO changes require community notice and feedback as well as committee vote.
Remember these are public servants and if constituents have to file lawsuit over a decision an elected official has backed, then maybe that official should re-examine why they ran for office to begin with. At the end of the day, the city should be asking “Maybe I am the problem?” and begin working to rebuild community partnerships instead of further stripping away community empowerment.
RESPECTFULLY
Steven Holman
DINELLI ANALYSIS AND COMMENTARY
It is clear that the four proposed city council actions sponsored by Dan Lewis are politically motivated. Lewis has an extensive history of tangling and disagreeing with the West Side Coalition of Neighborhood Associations (WSCONA) who have often objected to many of his efforts on the city council and development projects that may affect their homes.
During the last five years Dan Lewis he has been an Albuquerque City Councilor, he has exhibited a pattern of downright hostility towards his own constituents who oppose or who disagree with his votes on policy and legislation. Lewis has a reputation during city council meetings of berating, insulting or ignoring members of the public who disagree with him. Lewis is known to text on his cell phone or be on his phone during city council public comments. Lewis is known to go out of his way to offend citizens by leaving meetings very early on not to return.
Since his return to the city council in 2021, Lewis has engaged in obstruction tactics to carry out a very personal vendetta against Mayor Tim Keller. His tactics include demanding additional confirmation hearings on already council approved Keller Department Director appointments, such as the City Clerk and Chief Administrative Officer, so he could disparage their job performance and insult them during public hearings he presided over with the full intent not to vote for their confirmation. In 2021, immediately upon being sworn in, Lewis introduced legislation to repeal pandemic era legislation he disagreed with and that was enacted after he left the council in 2017, with all 4 of his efforts to repeal failing to his chagrin.
It is clear from his conduct and his hostility towards his own constituents, Dan Lewis has overstayed his welcome on the city council and is more interested in promoting his own personal agenda over the interests of his own constituents.
LEWIS HAS BEEN SUCCESSFUL IN PAST GUTTING NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION RIGHTS AND REMEDIES
The four legislative actions sponsored by City Councilor Dan Lewis are not the first time that Lewis has attempted to gut the rights and remedies of neighborhood associations and coalitions when it comes to appealing zoning changes and development projects.
In 2025, the City of Albuquerque lost a lawsuit in District Court that the Westside Coalition Of Neighborhood Associations filed against it when Dan Lewis acted improperly on behalf of developers to gut scenic protection rules near Petroglyph National Monument. His behavior was specifically cited in the Opinion and Order in that case (No. D-202-CV-2023-03961). The City appealed and lost again in the Court of Appeals. (See related article in postscript.)
It was on January 23, 2025 that Council Bill No. O-24-69, sponsored by Councilor Dan Lewis, was enacted by the city council on a 7 YES to 2 NO vote. It blatantly limits the standing of Neighborhood Associations to appeal zoning changes and development projects approved by the city. Specifically, Council Bill No. O-24-69 as enacted Limit the standing of Neighborhood Associations and provides as follows:
- It excludes an individual’s use of public lands as a basis for standing to appeal.
- It eliminates the failure to notify Neighborhood Associations as a basis for appeal or remand.
- It requires Neighborhood Associations to pay attorney fees and costs to developers when their appeals of approvals are denied, but developers have no liability to pay attorney fees of Neighborhood Associations when developers appeal a denial, regardless of the decision. If the appellant Neighborhood association loses their appeal, they are responsible for paying up to $1,000 for reasonable costs.
- It allows amendments by the request of a developer or other unknown party to bypass the EPC or LUPZ and go straight to the City Council;
- It adds the burdensome requirement for a Neighborhood Association to file a petition in order to have standing in any appeal;
- It allows a City Councilor to NOT be recused even when that councilor sponsors an amendment
The link to review the enacted O-24-69 is here:
https://www.cabq.gov/clerk/documents/o-2025-004.pdf
FINAL COMMENTARY
One major consequence of the Dan Lewis legislation, both on the city and state levels, would be that neighborhood coalitions would not have the standing to object to major developments, such as Data Centers, that would have a negative impact on the entire city.
The most glaring problem with the introduction of all four measures sponsored by Lewis is the fact that they were not referred to the City Council Land, Use and Planning Committee for a hearing and recommendations, but instead the full City Council will be voting on all four measures on October 5. Its clear that Lewis and perhaps the entire city council is once again takin steps to opposition opposition of neighborhood associations and coalitions.
Taken together, the four city council actions are nothing more than a continuation of Dan Lewis vicious attempt to eviscerate or disembowel neighborhood coalitions and neighborhood associations and their influence to speed up development and silencing their influence with help from the New Mexico legislature.
CONTACT CITY COUNCILORS
On Monday, October 5, the City Council meeting will be held in the Vincent E. Griego Council Chambers, basement level of the City of Albuquerque Government Center, 1 Civic Plaza NW, Albuquerque, New Mexico 87102. The meeting is open to the public. The meeting will begin at 5:00 p.m., and to speak during the meeting on the resolution during public comments, you must sign up beginning at 4:30 p.m.
Voters and residents are urged to attend the meeting or contact and voice their opinion and tell all city councilors or their city council service assistants to VOTE NO on O-26-60, O-26-61, M-26-1 and M-26-2.
CITY COUNCIL PHONE: (505) 768-3100
CITY COUNCILOR AND SUPPORT STAFF EMAILS
mmmontoya@cabq.gov (Director of Council Services)
____________________________
POSTSCRIPT
Links to related articles are here: