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

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

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

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

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

Mayor Tim Keller said this at a press conference:

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

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

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

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

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

CITY COUNCIL ENACTS “DISTRESSED LODGING PROPERTY ORDINANCE”

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

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

TARGETS OF THE NEW ORDINANCE

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

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

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

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

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

DISTRESSED PROPERTIES DEFINED

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

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

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

TRIGGERS CREATED

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

Those triggers are:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

LINKS TO QUOTED OR RELIED UPON NEWS SOURCES

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

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

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

WORK OF SAFE CITY STRIKE FORCE RECALLED

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

Seventy (70) to one hundred fifty (150) properties a week, both residential and commercial properties would be reviewed by the Safe City Strike Force. The Albuquerque City Council would be given weekly updates on the progress made in their districts on the nuisance properties identified by the Strike Force. The Safe City Strike Force routinely prepared condemnation resolutions for enactment by the Albuquerque City Council to tear down substandard buildings, including commercial buildings.

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

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

CENTRAL MOTELS

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

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

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

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

VIOLENT BARS

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

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

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

CONVENIENCE STORES

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

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

FLEA MARKETS

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

HOARDERS

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

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

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

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

TEAR-DOWNS AND BOARD UPS

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

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

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

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

KELLER’S ADAPT PROGRAM

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

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

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

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

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

Residential
Multifamily
Non Residential
Undeveloped

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

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

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

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

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

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

FAILURE OF THE CITY IN COURT

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

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

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

PLANNING DEPARTMENT CODE ENFORCEMENT CAN DO MORE

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

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

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

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

CONCLUSION

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

______________________

POSTSCRIPT

NEW MEXICO STATUTES ON NUISANCE ABATEMENT

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

“A municipality may:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

ALBUQUERQUE CITY ORDINANCES DEFINING NUISANCE

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

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

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

Albuquerque’s Nuisance Abatement Ordinance states:

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

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

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

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

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

The city’s nuisance abatement ordinance defines nuisance as:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

“(1) Any nuisance known at common law …

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

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

NEW MEXICO CASE LAW ON DEFINING A NUISANCE

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

https://palletshelter.com/products/

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

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

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

$5 MILLION FOR “GATEWAY RECOVERY” PALLET SHELTER PROJECT

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

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

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

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

STAGGERING DATA

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

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

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

NO TENANTS YET

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

AN INTEGRATED SYSTEM

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

• Annual Impact: 987 Individuals
• Open Since 2020

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

• Annual projected Impact: 50 – 100
• Opening Early 2025

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

• Annual projected Impact: 120 Individuals
• Opening Late 2025

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

The services provided are:

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

The Tenants are:

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

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

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

CITY’S UNHOUSED NUMBERS

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

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

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

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

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

 PERSONS COUNTED IN ALBUQUERQUE

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

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

TOTAL PERSONS: 2,740

HOUSEHOLDS COUNTED IN ALBUQUERQUE

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

The breakdown of HOUSEHOLDS  is as follows:

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

TOTAL HOUSEHOLDS: 2,248

CITY HEALTH, HOUSING AND HOMELESSNESS DEPARTMENT

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

NUMBER OF HOMELESS PEOPLE PROVIDED EMERGENCY SHELTER FROM CITY

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

CITY’S FINANCIAL COMMITMENT TO HOMELES UNDER KELLER 

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

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

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

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

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

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

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

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

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

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

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

CIVIL MENTAL HEALTH COMMITMENTS VIABLE OPTION

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

NINETEEN LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS FROM 3 AGENCIES IMPLICATED

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

16 APD OFFICERS IMPLICATED,  CHARGED OR PLEAD GUILTY

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

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

THREE BERNALILLO COUNTY SHERRIFF DEPUTIES

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

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

ONE MEXICO STATE POLICE OFFICER

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

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

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

FIVE LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS PLEAD GUILTY AS CHARGED

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

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

TWO RING LEADERS PLEAD GUILTY AS CHARGED

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

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

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

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

2,490 DWI CASES OVER 30 YEARS

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

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

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

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

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

IMPACT ON LAW ENFORCEMENT AND PUBLIC SAFETY

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

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

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

INVESTIGATION OSTENSIBLY CONTINUES

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

https://www.krqe.com/news/new-mexico/a-conversation-with-fbi-special-agent-in-charge-raul-bujanda-as-he-steps-down/#:~:text=NEW%20MEXICO%20(KRQE)%20%E2%80%94%20For,enforcement%2C%20Bujanda%20is%20stepping%20down

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

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

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

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

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

On April 28, President Trump signed an Executive Order to enforce federal law with respect to sanctuary jurisdictions to protect their citizens from what he calls “dangerous illegal aliens.”

The Order directs the Attorney General and Secretary of Homeland Security to publish a list of States and local jurisdictions obstructing federal immigration law enforcement and notify each sanctuary jurisdiction of its non-compliance, providing an opportunity to correct it. Sanctuary jurisdictions that do not comply with federal law may lose federal funding.

The Order directs the Attorney General and Secretary of Homeland Security to pursue all necessary legal remedies and enforcement measures to bring non-compliant jurisdictions into compliance. It instructs the Attorney General and Secretary of Homeland Security to develop mechanisms for proper eligibility verification in sanctuary jurisdictions to prevent illegal aliens from receiving federal public benefits.

Trump’s Executive Order is supposed to ensure illegal aliens are not being favored over American citizens by directing the Attorney General to address state or local laws that unlawfully prioritize aliens. This includes in-state tuition benefits for aliens or criminal sentencing factors that favor aliens.

https://www.whitehouse.gov/fact-sheets/2025/04/fact-sheet-president-donald-j-trump-protects-american-communities-from-criminal-aliens/

IMMIGRANT FRIENDLY CITY VERSUS SANCTUARY CITY

Trump’s Executive Order instructs the departments of Justice and Homeland Security to compile a list of sanctuary jurisdictions across the United States, targeting them for potential cuts to federal funding. According to the Center for Immigration Studies, a conservative think tank, the two New Mexico cities Santa Fe and Las Cruces are already on that list. Albuquerque, notably, is not. The likely reason for that is the  Albuquerque City Council has enacted an ordinance declaring the city an “immigrant friendly city.”

It was in 2001, long before Trump was President, 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. In 2018, Albuquerque passed amendments to the original ordinance affirming the city was an “immigrant-friendly city,” again carefully avoiding the term “sanctuary city.”

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.”

Former City Councilor Pat Davis, who co-authored the measure, said the distinction was deliberate. 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.

HIGH-PROFILE CRIMES AMPLIFY DEBATE

The sanctuary city debate is fueled by high-profile crimes involving immigrants lacking permanent legal status that have shocked the city.  One such crime was the 2009 killing of a Denny’s employee by three Salvadoran nationals. A second murder was the 2019 murder of Jackie Vigil, the mother of a state police officer, who was shot and killed in her driveway in the early morning hours as she was on her way to the gym by a Mexican national in the country illegally. Her husband, Sam Vigil, later spoke at the White House about the killing and he endorsed then Bernalillo County Sheriff Manny Gonzales who was running against Mayor Tim Keller who was  running for his second term.

$68 MILLION IN FEDERAL AID AT STAKE

The stakes are high if the Trump Administration in fact labels Albuquerque a sanctuary city. If that happens, the city risks losing more than $68 million in federal funding, roughly five percent of the city’s annual budget. The potential loss of funding includes:

• $26 million for the Sunport and Double Eagle airports
• $11 million for housing programs
• $8 million for public transit
• $6 million for the Albuquerque Police Department

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

https://www.koat.com/article/mayoral-candidates-divided-on-albuquerques-immigrant-friendly-status-amid-federal-funding-threats/64707080

KELLER MAKES TRUMPS CUTS ISSUE IN MAYOR’S RACE

Mayor Tim Keller for his part is being very aggressive in taking on President Trump and his threats to cut federal funding to the city.

On Sunday, March 24, Mayor Tim Keller spoke to upwards of  250 people seated in the gymnasium at the city’s Monzano Mesa Multigenerational Center located two blocks South East of Central and near Costco. The event was billed as “DEFEND ABQ, Standing Strong For Families”.

The entire program was Mayor Tim Keller discussing and outlining in detail the impact Trump budget cuts and other actions taken by the Trump administration will have on the city.  Keller emphasized the need for “steady and experienced” leadership and said this:

“It’s real here. … It’s real in every city in America. That’s what is so terrible about this. … What they are doing is destroying every aspect of our community, including the business community. … These dangerous cuts are very real for every city in America and would have huge consequences for our families in Albuquerque. But this is not our first rodeo with Donald Trump, and we will keep fighting for our families and defend our city against anyone trying to tear us apart. … These potential cuts are, pure and simple, dangerous to our city. Regardless of our party or feelings about the White House, no one in Albuquerque is better off when kids go without child care, a crime lab is without officers, streets and neighborhoods are without trees, or seniors go without meals. …  Like during Trump’s first term and the COVID pandemic, I will use all the tools we have, create new ones, and work with local and state government partners to keep our city running. I will stand up for every resident as we prepare for what could be exceptionally tough times.”

Keller touched on topics ranging from budget cuts to immigration. Keller outlined Trump Administration major cuts that will affect the city services. The Trump cuts include federal affordable housing funding, cutting vouchers for the unhoused, and cutting funding for homeless shelters. Cuts to transportation include cutting federal funding for road improvements, bike lanes and trails, bus routes and for the city’s multimillion dollar “rail trail” development.

Keller noted that 39% of New Mexico families are enrolled in Medicare and the Trump Administration is talking about making cuts to the program. Keller noted that there are 44,000 New Mexicans who are employed by the Federal Government and how blanket layoffs are already occurring in the city and New Mexico.

Keller outlined how federal funding cuts will impact other areas including:

PUBLIC SAFETY: The city could see an impact to a number of areas in law enforcement including drug enforcement, crime fighting technology and a decrease in the size of the police force with federal funding for 50 police officers cut. Keller asked “Can you imagine how detrimental that would be, especially given the challenges we’re having with crime?”

HOUSING: Trump federal  funding cuts will affect projects like the “Uptown Connect” project which is a federally funded mixed-use development that will replace the  the Uptown Transit Center. Included in the development are almost 200 affordable housing units. Keller said this: “We will never see it if Trump keeps doing what he’s doing.”

MINORITY BUSINESSES: Trump also issued an executive order laying out plans to eliminate government entities, including the Minority Business Development Agency.

One area Keller claimed the city is fighting back against Trump relates to “diversity, equality and inclusion” (DEI).  Keller said the city will continue promoting DEI as Trump tries to crackdown on DEI programs across the country. Keller pledged to continue with the city’s Office of Equity and Inclusion, the Office of Civil Rights, and the Office of Financial Empowerment, all 3 which Keller created, and continue with the city’s Climate Action Plan.

KELLER MAKES MISTAKE CALLING CITY “SANCTUARY CITY”

Keller made the mistake or misspoke when he declared during his March 24 event that the city is a “Sanctuary City” when in fact it is an “Immigrant Friendly” city as decreed by a city council ordinance. Notwithstanding the mistake, Keller went on to discuss the city’s immigrant friendly policies in great detail.  Keller pledged to protect immigrant rights and went so far as to say “We’re not going to work with ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement). … We are not going to change now.”

Keller said the city plans to continue with its current immigration policies, which are immigrant friendly policies. The immigrant friendly policies enacted by city council ordinance limits or denies cooperation with federal immigration authorities, prevents city resources from being used for immigration enforcement or for sharing information about an individual’s immigration status, unless legally required.

The city does not collect or retain information on a person’s immigrant status and APD makes arrests only for violations of local ordinances and state laws allowing law enforcement resources to be used for city and state laws. APD does not make arrests for violations of federal immigration laws and leaves that responsibility to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and other federal law enforcement agencies such as the FBI and the Drug Enforcement Administration.

SANCTUARY CITY DEBATE BECOMES ISSUE IN MAYOR’S RACE A SECOND TIME

The divisive issue of Sanctuary City is not new to Albuquerque. In 2009, Mayor Richard Berry ran on a tough on crime and a tough-on-immigration platform and defeated incumbent Mayor Martin Chávez. Once in office, Berry allowed ICE to use city resources and operate out of the city’s prisoner transport center. The practice was reversed after Mayor Tim Keller took office in 2017.

Berry defended the policy of allowing ICE to utilize city resources at the time, saying it allowed local police to focus on public safety rather than immigration enforcement. Berry said this at the time:

“It keeps APD officers from doing immigration work, which is important while they’re fighting crime in the streets.”

In 2025, the accusation that the city of Albuquerque is a sanctuary city is once again becoming an issue in the race Mayor of Albuquerque as Mayor Tim Keller seeks a third 4 year term.

Republican Darren White is one of 11 candidates running for Mayor.  White is the controversial former Cabinet Secretary of the Department of Public Safety for then Republican Governor Gary Johnson. White is a former two term Bernalillo County Sheriff and former Albuquerque Chief Public Safety Officer under Republican Mayor Richard Berry.

White is essentially running on the same platform Richard Berry used to defeat Mayor Marty Chavez. White proclaims himself  to be a “proven leader,” “tough on crime” and a “champion for change.” White asserts that there have been 660 murders during Keller’s years in office, that an alarming number of businesses have had to close down because of crime and that Keller has made Albuquerque a “sanctuary city.” White proclaims  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.”

EDITOR’S COMMENTARY: 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 some of the things that come out of his mouth. White knows Keller has no  authority to simply “turned back onto the streets” people arrested for a violent crime as White claims and White knows its the courts that makes such decisions following due process of law. He is using the issue of sanctuary city to “gin up” anti immigrant fever as Trump has done on the national level. 

SIX OUT OF ELEVEN CANDATES RESPOND TO CHANNEL 7

The immigration debate has resurfaced with intensity in the 2025 Albuquerque Mayors Race. KOAT TV Channel 7 reached out to the 11 candidates running for mayor in 2025. Only six candidates responded to KOAT’s inquiry on whether they would retain the immigrant-friendly ordinance.

The 4 candidates running for Mayor who did NOT respond to Channel 7 are:

1. Daniel Chavez
2. Adeo Herrick
3. Louie Sanchez
4. Timothy Keller

The 7 candidates who did respond to Channel 7’s line of questioning  are:

1. Alexander Uballez
2. Darren White
3. Mayling Armijo
4. Eddie Varela
5. Patrick Sais
6. Brian Fejer
7. Alpana Adair

On May 7, KOAT TV Channel 7 published on its web page the following line of questions and candidate responses:

1. ALEX UBALLEZ

Channel 7 Question: Are we an immigrant-friendly city or a sanctuary city?

Alex Uballez Answer: By city ordinance [R-18-7], the people of Albuquerque have declared Albuquerque to be immigrant friendly.

Channel 7 Question: Can you define the difference between the two?

Alex Uballez Answer: Neither is a legal term, so we rely on context for definition. An immigrant friendly city is defined in ordinance as a city that “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 the President’s Executive Order, he has defined sanctuary jurisdictions as a “local jurisdiction that obstruct[s] the enforcement of Federal immigration laws.” The operative word is “obstruct.”

To put it in plain terms, if a person ran a marijuana shop in violation of federal law, a civilian witness (or a city) would violate federal law if they physically blocked the way of FBI agents as they executed an arrest warrant on the owner. “[W]elcoming and encouraging immigrants to live, work and study in Albuquerque,” does not “obstruct the enforcement of Federal immigration laws” and so it appears that the President did not include cities like Albuquerque in the scope of his Executive Order.

Channel 7 Question: If we are an immigrant-friendly city, does that mean we will not help provide information to ICE agents about the immigration status of the people living here?

Alex Uballez Answer: By ordinance, “no City agency, department, officer, employee, or agent shall collect, make, or initiate any inquiry regarding the citizenship or immigration status of an individual,” (with enumerated exceptions). This means that the City of Albuquerque is not collecting information regarding immigration status, and therefore, none will be available upon request of ICE agents.

Channel 7 Question: If we are not going to provide that information to ICE agents, Albuquerque is threatened with losing federal funding. What would you do without that federal funding?

Alex Uballez Answer: Because Albuquerque does not obstruct federal immigration law, there are no grounds in the current Executive Order to defund the City of Albuquerque. Even if the DOJ and DHS misinterprets the President’s words, they would have no legal basis to force compliance—the federal government cannot force local officials to enforce federal laws (Printz v. United States).

Furthermore, the federal government has enough immigration resources, having conscripted the federal agencies tasked with keeping us safe from violence and drugs, like the DEA and US Marshals, to instead enforce federal immigration law. We need our police to pick up the slack and keep us safe from violent crime and drug trafficking in the absence of federal attention. This right to prioritize the people of Albuquerque is enshrined in the Tenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution: the federal government “may neither issue directives requiring the States to address particular problems, nor command the States’ officers, or those of their political subdivisions, to administer or enforce a federal regulatory program.”

Furthermore, the President does not have the power to impose conditions on federal grants—only Congress does. Even if the President wanted to defund Albuquerque, it would take an act of Congress to achieve it. We’ve won this in Court before (City and County of San Francisco v. Trump) and will win again. Finally, we are strong enough to withstand a President who would ignore his own words and the law.

As United States Attorney, I led the USAO through the single largest budgetary shortfall in DOJ history and kept us in the black the entire time all while fighting violent crime, drug trafficking, and unearthing thirty years of corruption in the Albuquerque Police Department. The City budget has ballooned by nearly 50% from just under $1B in 2018 to $1.4B today, far outpacing inflation and population growth. Just as I did in the U.S. Attorney’s Office, we would go line-by-line through the budget and the organization chart finding every extra dollar to keep our city afloat all while improving the service we provide to the people.

Channel 7 Question: If elected, are you going to push to have the city declared immigrant-friendly, a sanctuary city, or neither?

Alex Uballez Answer: I will fight to protect the people of Albuquerque. We do that by getting to work here at home: driving down violent crime, building solutions to homelessness, and growing a vibrant economy. If we care about violent crime, that means we care about victims and witnesses being brave enough to call for help and testify in court and not fear that they or their family members will be deported. If we care about the unhoused, that means we care about lowering the barriers to getting people into houses. If we care about our economy, it means we care about the massive contributions of the tens of thousands of undocumented immigrants in Albuquerque—from their innovation, to their hard work, to the taxes they contribute, to their vibrant role in our culture and our community. At the end of the day, I will never trade lives in Albuquerque for statistics in D.C.

2. DARREN WHITE

Channel 7Question: Are we an immigrant-friendly city or a sanctuary city?

Darren White Answer: Albuquerque is clearly a Sanctuary City, which was enacted by Mayor Keller in 2018.

Channel 7 Question: Can you define the difference between the two?

Darren White Answer: The difference is that Mayor Keller’s Sanctuary City law specifically prohibits ICE from being present in the Prisoner Transport Unit to determine if those arrested for crimes in Albuquerque are here illegally. This prevents ICE from being able to put detainers on illegal immigrants who are arrested for crimes, which leads to them being released back onto our streets.

Channel 7 Question: If we are an immigrant-friendly city, does that mean we will not help provide information to ICE agents about the immigration status of the people living here?

Darren White Answer: We have had an immigrant-friendly policy for years, and the Albuquerque Police Department has never enforced federal immigration law against witnesses, victims, etc. What Tim Keller did was specifically provide protection for illegal immigrants arrested for crimes. This has led to numerous tragedies involving illegal immigrants who have been released back onto our streets and commit more crimes, including murder.

Channel 7 Question: If we are not going to provide that information to ICE agents, Albuquerque is threatened with losing federal funding. What would you do without that federal funding?

Darren White Answer: I will repeal the Sanctuary City Law immediately upon taking office.

Channel 7 Question: If elected, are you going to push to have the city declared immigrant-friendly, a sanctuary city, or neither?

Darren White Answer: If elected, I will not allow Albuquerque to be a Sanctuary City for illegal immigrants who commit crimes and we will fully cooperate with federal law enforcement. We will continue to protect witnesses and crime victims, but we will not shield illegal immigrants from ICE when they are arrested for crimes. I will ensure that ICE can once again maintain a presence in the Prisoner Transport Unit. Under Mayor Keller, Albuquerque has been plagued by a historic crime crisis, including over 750 murders. Police already have more than enough to deal with from local criminals who are preying on our community — we don’t need more who are here illegally.

3. MAYLING ARMIJO

Channel 7 Question: Are we an immigrant-friendly city or a sanctuary city?

Mayling Armijo Answer: Albuquerque is an immigrant-friendly City. Albuquerque officially became an immigrant-friendly City in 2000 with the passage of Resolution R-00-151.

Channel 7 Question: Can you define the difference between the two?

Mayling Armijo Answer: The term “Sanctuary City” is not legally defined. However, it refers to cities that limit cooperation with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and protect individuals from being questioned or detained based solely on their immigration status. Because the terms (Immigration-friendly and Sanctuary) are often used interchangeably, there are no specific differences other than Albuquerque officially declares itself an Immigrant-friendly City and legally sets forth the rights and privileges of immigrants.

The Twenty-third City Council (Bill R18-7) enacted a Resolution regarding the City’s status as an Immigrant-friendly City. It more specifically provides as follows:

• “ The City 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;”
• The City shall not discriminate on the basis of a person’s national origin and will treat all persons with respect and dignity, regardless of immigration status”
• The City resolution reaffirms that “no municipal resources shall be used to identify individuals’ immigration status or apprehend persons on the sole basis of immigration status, unless otherwise required by law to do so”
• Further the Resolution acknowledges that the Tenth Amendment of the Constitution of the United States recognizes the sovereign status of the states and their political subdivisions and precludes the federal government from attempting to compel state and local governments, either directly or by their use of threats to withhold federal funding, to assist the federal government in enforcing federal laws, including immigrations laws.”

Channel 7 Question: If we are an Immigrant-friendly City, does that mean we will not help provide information to ICE agents about the immigration status of the people living here?

Mayling Armijo Answer: Immigrant-friendly Cities do not report undocumented immigrants to Border Patrol or ICE. They do not impede federal law enforcement. They do not assist with federal law enforcement. They do not shelter or conceal immigrants from detection. They do not gather immigration status of the people living in their cities. However, it is imperative to understand that an immigrant-friendly city will prosecute an undocumented immigrant if they commit a crime.

Channel 7 Question: If we are not going to provide that information to ICE agents, Albuquerque is threatened with losing federal funding. What would you do without that federal funding?

Mayling Armijo Answer: Federal funding is imperative for the continued success, betterment, and safety of the citizens in Albuquerque. My expertise and experience in economic development provide me with the skills necessary to attract new businesses to the community to diversify our tax base. We would work to improve infrastructure, promote the community’s strengths and unique characteristics, and request participation from the State and the County. I would like us to explore tapping into new revenue streams such as opioid settlements and marijuana tax revenue, implementing budget cuts to streamline spending, and encouraging partnerships with private organizations and philanthropists to secure more funding for specific initiatives. Also, I would work closely with the New Mexico Federal Delegation to advocate for continued federal funding.

Channel 7 Question: If elected, are you going to push to have the City declared immigrant friendly, a sanctuary city or neither?

Mayling Armijo Answer: Albuquerque is already well-established as an immigrant-friendly City, and under my administration, if elected, will remain so. On April 28, the current president issued an executive order titled “Protecting American Communities from Criminal Aliens.” Based upon research by the University of New Mexico, there is no correlation between immigrant-friendly/Sanctuary Cities and crime. In fact, research shows that cities with sanctuary policies have lower crime rates than cities without them.

Sanctuary policies encourage participation in community policing by all members of the community and engagement with social services and community and economic development initiative that mitigate poverty. Immigrants have always played a vital role in New Mexico’s economy. I believe that involvement in federal civil immigration laws would undermine our already limited community policing, hinder a productive and trusting relationship with the immigrant community, and divert public safety resources in addition to violating constitutional rights of the citizens of New Mexico under the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution of the United States.

4. EDDIE VARELA

Channel 7 Question: Are we an immigrant-friendly city or a sanctuary city?

Eddie Varela Answer: Albuquerque is both an immigrant-friendly and a sanctuary city. Albuquerque passed a policy in 2018 which prevents local government and law enforcement from questioning or disclosing a person’s immigration status or using city resources to enforce federal immigration laws. This law also aligns with the definition of a sanctuary city, which limits cooperation with federal enforcement.

Channel 7 Question: Can you define the differences between the two?

Eddie Varela Answer: Cities that are friendly to immigrants generally support them in many ways but might still follow federal rules on immigration. Sanctuary cities, on the other hand, go a step further by limiting how much they help federal immigration officials, aiming to protect undocumented immigrants.

Channel 7 Question: If we are an immigrant-friendly city, does that mean we will not help provide information to ICE agents about the immigration status of the people living here?

Eddie Varela Answer: We will cooperate with all federal agencies.

Channel 7 Question: If we are not going to provide that information to ICE Agents, Albuquerque is threatened with losing federal funding. What would you do without federal funding?

Eddie Varela Answer: If elected Mayor of Albuquerque, we will not lose federal funding under my administration for any reason.

Channel 7 Question: If selected, are you going to push to have the city declared immigrant-friendly, a sanctuary city, or neither?

Eddie Varela Answer: Neither.

5. PATRICK SAIS

Note: Sais only replied to the first three questions.

Channel 7 Question: Are we an immigrant-friendly city or a sanctuary city?

Patrick Sais Answer: We are called immigrant-friendly.

Channel 7 Question: Can you define the difference between the two?

Patrick Sais Answer: No defense

Channel 7 Question: If we are an immigrant-friendly city, does that mean we will not help provide information to ICE agents about the immigration status of the people living here?

Patrick Sais Answer: Yes, I will comply.

6. BRIAN FEJER

Channel 7 Question: Are we an immigrant-friendly city or a sanctuary city?

Brian Fejer Answer: Neither – Albuquerque has been an autonomous city since 1706.

Channel 7 Question: Can you define the difference between the two?

Brian Fejer Answer: The phrases “immigrant-friendly city” or “sanctuary city” are partisan talking points, just like #HousingFirst or #BuildTheWall.

Channel 7 Question: If we are an immigrant-friendly city, does that mean we will not help provide information to ICE agents about the immigration status of the people living here?

Brian Fejer Answer: According to the United States Constitution, the Tenth Amendment limits the federal government’s power, preventing it from “commandeering” state and local governments to enforce federal laws #ReadingIsFundamental

Channel 7 Question: If we are not going to provide that information to ICE agents, Albuquerque is threatened with losing federal funding. What would you do without that federal funding?

Brian Fejer Answer: The State of New Mexico has always been too dependent on Federal spending. We need to diversify. Given that our state is sitting on $53.407 billion dollars in financial reserves from oil, gas, and investments for a rainy day, maybe it’s time to realize that we’re up to our necks in flood waters.

Channel 7 Question: If elected, are you going to push to have the city declared immigrant-friendly, a sanctuary city, or neither?

Brian Fejer Answer: Neither. Our current immigration system in the United States is rooted in the atrocities of WW2. Given that we supposedly live under a system of Constitutional Checks and Balances, to update and change immigration laws, the United States legislative branch would have to pass immigration reforms. The GOP has been killing reforms for two decades. The Democrats are too feckless to counter the GOP’s subhuman immigration rhetoric. The right to seek asylum emerged from the atrocities of World War II, leading to its incorporation into international law through the 1951 Refugee Convention and its 1967 Protocol. The U.S. recognized this right and incorporated it into domestic law with the Refugee Act of 1980.

The link to the quoted news source is here:

https://www.koat.com/article/mayoral-candidates-divided-on-albuquerques-immigrant-friendly-status-amid-federal-funding-threats/64707080

7. ALPANA ADAIR

On May 11, Alpana Adair sent the following answers to the  KOAT TV 7 questions:

Channel 7 Question:  Are we an immigrant-friendly city or a sanctuary city?

Alpana Adair Answer: While Albuquerque is officially designated as an “immigrant-friendly” city, it’s largely a matter of semantics. Both policies discourage local law enforcement from cooperating with federal immigration officials & prohibit police from actively engaging in immigration enforcement.

Channel 7 Question: Can you define the difference between the two?

Alpana Adair Answer: Sanctuary city policies are more concerned with having a clear demarcation between state law enforcement and federal immigration enforcement.  Immigrant-friendly policies welcome and incentivize illegal immigration, potentially transforming a city’s culture, language, voting demographics, and societal norms.

Channel 7 Question: If we are an immigrant-friendly city, does that mean we will not help provide information to ICE agents about the immigration status of the people living here?

Alpana Adair Answer: Albuquerque’s current immigrant-friendly ordinance prohibits local law enforcement from cooperating with ICE or from inquiring about immigration status, even when it may be relevant to public safety. It can be argued that restricting communication with federal authorities can allow individuals with criminal backgrounds to avoid detection, potentially putting communities at risk.

Channel 7 Question:  If we are not going to provide that information to ICE agents, Albuquerque is threatened with losing federal funding . What would you do without that federal funding?

Alpana Adair Answer: I believe Albuquerque will lose federal funding given our incumbent mayor’s instruction not to cooperate with ICE officials.  U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi recently paused federal funding to over 200 sanctuary jurisdictions with the intent to enforce compliance with federal immigration laws. Her aim is to restrict grants to local governments and organizations that provide services to undocumented immigrants, and to increase legal accountability for jurisdictions obstructing immigration enforcement. To combat this financial loss, I would seek NEW federal funding dollars for things like border safety, opportunity zones, and charter schools.

Channel 7 Question: If elected, are you going to push to have the city declared immigrant friendly, a sanctuary city or neither?

Alpana Adair Answer: Neither, for the following reasons:

1. Undermines Federal Law Enforcement – Sanctuary policies limit local cooperation with federal immigration agencies and create law enforcement gaps, making it more difficult to detain or deport those who violate immigration laws.
2. Public Safety Concerns – Some argue that restricting communication with federal authorities can allow individuals with criminal backgrounds to avoid detection, potentially putting communities at risk.
3. Risk of Losing Federal Funding – Albuquerque may face the withholding of federal grants, including funds for public safety, housing, and emergency services, impacting city budgets and essential programs.
4. Legal and Constitutional Challenges – Local policies that restrict cooperation with immigration enforcement may lead to legal conflicts over compliance with federal statutes like 8 U.S.C. § 1373 and raise broader constitutional questions.
5. Erosion of Accountability and Transparency – Prohibiting city agencies from inquiring about or tracking immigration status hinders data collection and reduces transparency in local governance and law enforcement practices.  It also doesn’t allow us to “learn from our losses.”
6. Creates Policy Inconsistency – When local policies contradict federal immigration priorities, it can lead to confusion among law enforcement, courts, and the public, complicating the justice system’s ability to function effectively.
7. Perceived Incentive for Unlawful Presence – Critics argue sanctuary policies may unintentionally encourage undocumented immigration by signaling that immigration laws will not be actively enforced within certain jurisdictions.

While compassion and inclusion are important civic values, public safety and legal integrity must remain our top priorities. Policies that prohibit city departments from even tracking immigration-related data raise concerns about whether our leaders are prioritizing law-abiding behavior and community safety—or creating loopholes that make it harder to protect the public.

It’s time to re-examine policies that may unintentionally weaken law enforcement’s ability to protect our neighborhoods and ensure that our city operates in alignment with both state and federal law. Albuquerque must strive for policies that are both fair and firm—welcoming those who contribute positively while holding all residents to the same legal standards.

FINAL COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

There is no doubt that crime and the city’s homeless crisis will be the two biggest issues in the 2025 Mayor’s race. Should Trump’s Executive Order result in the city being declared a Sanctuary City and it loses millions in federal funding the fallout will no doubt  revive immigration as a political flashpoint in the 2025 municipal elections where the Mayor and 5 City Council seats will be on the ballot.

More than a decade and $40 million later, the Albuquerque Police Department is officially done with the Department of Justice.  On Monday, May 12 U.S. District Court Judge James O. Browning dismissed the Court Approved Settlement Agreement, or CASA ending federal oversight of APD. The dismissal ruling comes a mere 3 days after the City of Albuquerque and the DOJ filed a “Joint Motion to Terminate” the CASA and to dismiss the case.  The CASA was entered to by the City and DOJ in 2014 after a DOJ investigation showed a pattern of officers using excessive force and deadly force and a “culture of aggression” within APD and mandates 276 reforms of APD.

Under the watchful eye of the DOJ, APD has undergone new training emphasizing constitutional policing, meaning treating suspects equally regardless of race or gender, restructured multiple divisions for more supervision and oversight, appointed a superintendent to oversee officer discipline, expanded community outreach, and made its data available to the public to increase transparency.

Mayor Tim Keller said this in a statement:

“This ruling finalizes what the department and our community have worked tirelessly for over the last decade: we have earned back the right to run our own police department. I made it clear from day one, we would meet our challenges head-on, making hard changes, building new systems, and proving APD can uphold the highest standards on its own. This moment shows that reform and strong policing can go hand in hand, and that trust, accountability, and safety are not competing values — they’re connected. It’s also the beginning of the next generation of our police department, one that is transparent, admits mistakes, holds itself accountable and is fully capable of learning and continuing reforms as needed.”

Chief Harold Medina said this in a statement:

“It wasn’t an easy road, but we continued to push forward and slowly this team and all of our officers became accustomed to what was necessary to get into compliance. …This is a victory for the men and women of the Albuquerque Police Department who have changed their culture. They are the ones that have put the most blood, sweat and tears into this, faced the most scrutiny. They have done a wonderful job at changing the culture of the Albuquerque Police Department.”

https://www.cabq.gov/mayor/news/it2019s-official-judge-dismisses-casa-ending-doj-oversight-in-abq#:~:text=U.S.%20District%20Judge%20James%20O,Albuquerque%20Police%20Department%20(APD).

The Court Approved Settlement Agreement was agreed to in  2014 following a DOJ investigation that revealed patterns of excessive force and deadly force by APD officers and a “culture of aggression” within APD.  Since then APD underwent a rigorous transformation, embracing new policies, increasing transparency, and embedding accountability into its daily operations.

Mayor’s Office spokesperson Staci Drangmeister said this in a news release:

“This has been accomplished through the adoption of policies and training concerning the constitutional application of the use of force on suspects driven by the specific circumstances of that officer’s encounter.”

Drangmeister stated that other changes include:

• Restructuring multiple divisions — including the APD Academy, Special Operations Division and Special Investigations Division — to provide additional supervisory oversight, and creating new units like the Performance Metrics Unit and Compliance Bureau.
• Appointing a superintendent  of police reform to oversee officer discipline, removing this function from the chief.
• Expanding community outreach via the ambassador program to better communicate with entities and groups impacted by pre-CASA policing.
• Ensuring that APD data is transparent and publicly available, furthering goals of maintaining the community’s trust in law enforcement. Officers are required to use recording devices to capture their interactions with the public. APD has created and maintained numerous dashboards showing underlying data to support its efforts.

With the changes, Drangmeister said the city and APD “reaffirm their pledge to continue building a modern, community-focused police department grounded in constitutional policing and public trust.”

Shaun Willoughby, the President of the Police Officer’s Association said this about the oversight coming to an end:

“The DOJ can’t leave fast enough. This has been a rollercoaster of destruction.”

It was in April when Shaun Willoughby told KOB 4 that a lot of officers only complied with the new training and regulations to keep their jobs. Willoughby said this:

“These officers have been dealing with this consent decree for more than a decade and it’s going to take time to train a lot of this craziness out of them”

EDITORS COMMENTARY:  The words spoken by Police Union President Shaun Willoughby are pure political garbage and should be discarded as such. The union early on became an intervenor in the case, something the City failed to object to and should never had consented to. Willoughby was at the negotiating table when new use of force and deadly force policies were negotiated. It was the union that engaged in obstruction and delay tactics in the writing and implementation of the use of force and deadly force policies and the CASA reforms.

Willoughby spread the “big lies” that crime rates were up because of  the consent decree and that cops were “handcuffed” and could not do their jobs. On April 27, 2021, it was widely reported by local news media that the Albuquerque Police Officers Association (APOA) launched a $70,000 political hit job ad campaign, which included  33 billboards, urging  the community to speak out against the DOJ oversight and to discredit the DOJ mandated reforms saying the police reforms were preventing police officers from doing their jobs and combating crime.

 Links to quoted or relied upon news sources are here:

https://www.abqjournal.com/2384284/apd-union-launches-campaign-against-doj-oversight.html

https://www.kob.com/new-mexico-news/albuquerque-police-union-starts-campaign-to-push-back-against-doj-requirements/6087348/

https://www.koat.com/article/as-murder-rate-climbs-apd-union-launches-campaign/36257496

https://www.kob.com/news/top-news/federal-oversight-of-apd-officially-comes-to-an-end/

https://www.abqjournal.com/news/article_c971445d-aef4-4e22-b9a9-8bafa8c477d8.html#tncms-source=home-featured-7-block

JOINT MOTION FOR TERMINATION

It was on  May 9, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) and the City of Albuquerque filed a “Joint Motion For Termination” seeking U.S. District Court approval to terminate the federal consent decree known as the Court Approved Settlement Agreement (CASA) covering the Albuquerque Police Department (APD) since 2015. The joint motion asserts that the Federal Monitor has determined APD is in  full compliance with the consent decree and that the case can be dismissed.  The Federal Court Appointed Monitor James Ginger and the Intervenor Albuquerque Police Officers’Association (APOA) concurred with the “Joint Motion To Terminate” and the dismissal of the case.

You can read the 22 “Joint Motion For Termination” at this link:

https://www.justice.gov/opa/media/1399851/dl?inline

The 22-page Joint Motion to Terminate highlights the history of the litigation including major reports  of the federal monitor and reaching compliance levels. As alleged in the Joint Motion to Terminate, the stated  purpose of the CASA was: “[To] ensure that [APD] delivers police services that comply with the Constitution and laws of the United States and to further their mutual interests. …The provisions of [the CASA] Agreement are designed to ensure police integrity, protect officer safety, and prevent the use of excessive force, including unreasonable use of deadly force, by APD.”

Primarily, the CASA established requirements related to the use of force by APD officers. To achieve these goals, APD was required to “implement force policies, training, and accountability systems to ensure that force is used in accordance with the Constitution and laws of the United States, and that any use of unreasonable force is identified and responded to appropriately.”  In addition, APD was required to “ensure that officers use non-force techniques to effectively police, use force only when objectively reasonable under the circumstances, and de-escalate the use of force at the earliest possible moment.”

The Joint Motion for Termination states in part:

“[After 10 years] APD has become a self-assessing and self-correcting agency. These characteristics have enabled APD to demonstrate sustained and continuing improvement in constitutional policing. In the most critical area covered by the CASA—force— the data shows that APD uses force at a much lower rate than when this case began, and that the vast majority of force used meets constitutional standards. When it does not, APD has the systems and processes in place to ensure that the necessary review, training, and discipline take place.

The Motion to Terminate goes on to state in part:

“[APD has] vastly improved its use of force in a constitutional manner. … the City has shown its ability to conduct its own use of force investigations without outside assistance. … The City has achieved operational compliance with all of the requirements that measure use of force outcomes. …  The City also achieved operational compliance of the reforms that help recruit, retain, train, and care for high-quality officers. Additionally, the City established systems for reliable, timely, and fair investigation of lower-level force, higher-level force, and misconduct and achieved operational compliance with paragraphs regarding application of discipline, including implementation of a disciplinary matrix. Finally, the City achieved operational compliance with paragraphs related to non-force issues such as citizen and community engagement, as well as paragraphs addressing officers’ response to especially vulnerable citizens through behavioral health training and specialized units.

The City and APD have devoted thousands of working hours and spent millions of dollars over the last 10 years to implement the CASA reforms.  The Joint Motion to Terminate signifies that the DOJ is satisfied that APD has met its demands and has met all the requirements mandated by the CASA.

APD was forced to create entire management teams and Internal Affairs oversight divisions and rewrite use of force and deadly force policies. The city was required to implement police training in constitutional policing practices and de-escalation tactics to meet the 276 mandated reforms in the CASA. The city was also required to pay the Federal Independent Monitor and his monitoring team to oversee the progress of APD which cost the city taxpayers $13 million.

INVESTIGATION, LAWSUIT AND COURT APPROVED SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT

The DOJ began investigating excessive force by APD in November 2012 after the Albuquerque City Council and police oversight advocates requested the federal government to investigate APD’s officers’ use of force and deadly force.  An 18-month long investigation by the Department of Justice (DOJ) found that the Albuquerque Police Department engaged in a pattern of “excessive use of force” and “deadly force”, especially when dealing with the mentally ill. The DOJ investigation found a “culture of aggression” existed within APD. Department of Justice investigators reviewed 20 fatal shootings by APD between 2009 and 2013 and found that in the majority of cases the level of force used was not justified because the person killed did not present a threat or danger to police officers or the public and were more of a danger to themselves.

The lawsuit was filed in 2014 after the Department of Justice (DOJ) determined that APD had engaged in a pattern or practice of use of excessive force and deadly force in violation of the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution.   It was on November 14, 2014, the City of Albuquerque, the APD and DOJ entered into a stipulated Court Approved Settlement Agreement (CASA).

The CASA contains 276 paragraphs that mandate police reforms, the appointment of a Federal Monitor and the filing of Independent Monitor’s reports (IMRs) on APD’s compliance with the reforms. The ultimate goal of the settlement was to implement constitutional policing practices, and it was aimed at making sure police officers follow policy and do not  use excessive force and deadly force.

The link to the 118-page CASA is here:

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

It was the Republican Mayor Richard Berry Administration who negotiated the terms and conditions of the CASA in 2013. They did so by hiring two out of state negotiators to the tune of $1 Million dollars. The outside contractors had little to no understanding of APD nor of Albuquerque as a community and its diverse culture. The net result was a one-sided agreement in favor of the DOJ as the Bery Administration simply agreed to all the demands of the DOJ and rolled over. An agreement that was supposed to be implemented in 4 years and then dismissed lasted over 10 years. For the last 7 years the Keller Administration has been saddled with the CASA and implementing the reforms.

21^ST INDEPENDENT MONITORS REPORT

On April 14, 2025,  federal court appointed  Independent Monitor James D. Ginger issued his sixty page 21st Independent Monitor’s Report (IMR) on the three compliance levels the APD has achieved under the CASA.  The report covers the compliance efforts made by APD during the 21st reporting period, of  August 1, 2024, through January 31, 2025.

Federal Monitor James Ginger’s 21^st report found that the city of Albuquerque was at 99% operational compliance, which tracks whether officers follow policies and are corrected when they don’t.

Ginger found in his 21^st report that the only remaining requirements to achieve 100% operational compliance is the Civilian Police Oversight Agency (CPOA), which investigates civilian complaints against officers and is not under APD’s control. Ginger found the timeliness of investigations by the CPOA  was seriously deficient. However, Ginger reported  that the CPOA was making progress toward compliance and had developed a “triage protocol” to prioritize cases that were “more likely to have sustained findings.”

https://www.abqjournal.com/news/article_a70f7874-02e7-40bd-9e13-2eebaf2a0c24.html#tncms-source=home-featured-7-block

Ginger’s 21^st report also found APD recorded a 45% drop in annual use-of-force incidents since 2020. Although officers shot, or shot at, a record number of people in recent years, almost all of which were found in policy.

According to the Monitors Executive Summary, the City and APD have completed the majority of the requirements established by the CASA. At the end of the reporting period, APD’s compliance levels are as follows:

• Primary Compliance 100%
• Secondary Compliance 100%
• Operational Compliance 99%

For purposes of the APD monitoring process, there are 3 “compliance” levels:  Primary Compliance, Secondary Compliance , and Operational Compliance. The 3 Compliance Levels are defined in  the Monitors Reports as follows: .

PRIMARY COMPLIANCE

Primary compliance is the “policy” part of compliance. To attain primary compliance, APD must have in place operational policies and procedures designed to guide officers, supervisors, and managers in the performance of the tasks outlined in the CASA. As a matter of course, the policies must be reflective of the requirements of the CASA, must comply with national standards for effective policing policy, and must demonstrate trainable and evaluable policy components.

SECONDARY COMPLIANCE

Secondary compliance is attained by providing acceptable training related to supervisory, managerial, and executive practices designed to (and effective in) implementing the policy as written, e.g., sergeants routinely enforce the policies among field personnel and are held accountable by managerial and executive levels of the department for doing so. By definition, there should be operational artifacts such as reports, disciplinary records, remands to retraining, follow-up, and even revisions to policies if necessary, indicating that the policies developed in the first stage of compliance are known to, followed by, and important to supervisory and managerial levels of the department.

OPERATIONAL COMPLIANCE

Operational compliance is attained at the point that the adherence to policies is apparent in the day-to-day operation of the agency, e.g., line personnel are routinely held accountable for compliance, not by the monitoring staff, but by their sergeants, and sergeants are routinely held accountable for compliance by their lieutenants and command staff. In other words, the APD “owns” and enforces its policies.

https://www.cabq.gov/police/documents/doc-1095-imr-21-april-2025.pdf

REFORMS ACHIEVED UNDER THE CASA

On November 16, 2024, it was a full 10 years that expired since the city agreed to the CASA with the DOJ. It was originally agreed that implementation of all the settlement terms would be completed within 4 years. Because of delay and obstruction tactics by APD management and the police officers’ union which was found by the Federal Monitor it has taken another 5 years to get the job done.

After over 10 full years, the federal oversight and the CASA have produced results. Reforms achieved under the CASA can be identified and are as follows:

• New “use of force” and “use of deadly force” policies have been written, implemented and all APD sworn have received training on the policies.
• All sworn police officers have received crisis management intervention training.
• APD has created a “Use of Force Review Board” that oversees all internal affairs investigations of use of force and deadly force.
• The Internal Affairs Unit has been divided into two sections, one dealing with general complaints and the other dealing with use of force incidents.
• Sweeping changes ranging from APD’s SWAT team protocols, to banning choke-holds, to auditing the use of every Taser carried by officers and re-writing and implementation of new use of force and deadly force policies have been completed.
• “Constitutional policing” practices and methods, and mandatory crisis intervention techniques an de-escalation tactics with the mentally ill have been implemented at the APD police academy with all sworn police also receiving the training.
• APD has adopted a new system to hold officers and supervisors accountable for all use of force incidents with personnel procedures implemented detailing how use of force cases are investigated.
• APD has revised and updated its policies on the mandatory use of lapel cameras by all sworn police officers.
• The Repeat Offenders Project, known as ROP, has been abolished.
• Civilian Police Oversight Agency has been created, funded, fully staffed and a director was hired.
• The Community Policing Counsels (CPCs) have been created in all area commands.
• The Mental Health Advisory Committee has been implemented.
• The External Force Investigation Team (EFIT) was created and is training the Internal Affairs Force Division on how to investigate use-of-force cases, making sure they meet deadlines and follow procedures.
• Millions have been spent each year on new programs and training of new cadets and police officers on constitutional policing practices.
• APD officers are routinely found using less force than they were before and well documented use of force investigations are now being produced in a timely manner.
• APD has assumed the self-monitoring of at least 25% of the CASA reforms and is likely capable of assuming more.
• The APD Compliance Bureau has been fully operational and staffed with many positions created dealing directly with all the reform efforts and all the duties and responsibilities that come with self-assessment.
• APD has attained a 100% Primary Compliance rate, a 100% Secondary Compliance rate and a 99% Operational Compliance rate.

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

The “Motion To Terminate” has been expected for some time and did not come as any surprise. Likewise, the federal Court Order granting the motion and dismissing the case was expected given that the motion was also agreed to by the Intervenor Albuquerque Police Officers Association and the Federal Monitor. What was not expected is the fact that U.S. District Court Judge James O. Browning entered the order granting the Motion To Terminate the CASA and dismiss the case without a hearing and a mere 3 days after a weekend.

The blunt reality is APD was expected to be found in compliance after the 19^th Federal Monitors report came out saying APD fell 2% short of being in full Operational Compliance and at 100% Primary and Secondary Compliance.

What called into question if APD would finally reach compliance and the case dismissed, at least in the public’s mind, was the DOJ and the FBI investigation into allegations that DWI officers took bribes to miss court dates which led to hundreds of pending DWI cases being dismissed by the Bernalillo County District Attorney’s Office.

It turns out that the biggest corruption scandal in the history of  APD did not even merit an acknowledgement nor a mention by the Federal Monitor in his 19^th, 20th or 21st monitor’s reports. What is truly  down right pathetic is that for the past 10 years APD management and the entire APD department was supposed to be the  under the watchful eye of the Department of Justice, the Federal Court and a Federal Monitor, yet the bribery and conspiracy scandal to dismiss DWI cases ostensibly went totally undetected by the Federal Monitor over the last 10 years during which it occurred.

Under Secondary Compliance, the Federal Monitor and his so-called team of experts were required to review supervisory, managerial and executive practices and the enforcement of policies among field personnel and how they were held accountable by management and executive levels for wrongdoing. Accepting bribes to get cases dismissed has never been a policy of APD. No doubt the monitor will argue it was not his job to ferret out scandal, nefarious or illegal conduct of APD officers other than use of force and deadly force, but that sure damn well was the responsibility of the Department of Justice.

Despite all that has been accomplished by the CASA as noted above, the public perception is that the DOJ reform process really has not accomplished much other than making the Federal Monitor a wealthy man.

Excessive use of force and deadly by APD is what brought the Department of Justice to this City in the first place and damaged APD’s reputation to a great extent. The reforms were an attempt to restore public confidence in APD to an extent.

There is absolutely no doubt that APD’s reputation has been trashed to a major extent by APD’s history of excessive use of force and deadly force as well by the corruption, bribery and DWI dismissal scandal. APD is viewed by many as nothing more than a bastion of “violent, dirty and corrupt cops” who have brought dishonor to their department and to the department’s professed values of “Pride, Integrity, Fairness and Respect”. 

There is little doubt that the killings of civilians and the bribery corruption scandal has shaken the public’s faith in our criminal justice system and APD to its core. The only way that any semblance of faith can be restored and for people to begin trusting APD again is if all the police officers involved in corruption and wrongful death actions are held accountable. That will only happen when there is aggressive prosecutions and convictions, the police officers are terminated, and they lose their law enforcement certification.

REVERTING BACK TO OLD WAYS OF DOING BUSINESS BIGGEST THREAT

The announcements that APD, after almost 10 years, is now in full compliance with the Court Approved Settlement Agreement (CASA) and the case has been dismissed by a federal judge is long overdue and are major milestones for the beleaguered department plagued by scandal and corruption.

The implementation of all the reforms took over twice as long as was originally agreed. It required the expenditure of millions of dollars and oversight by an outside independent monitor.

The Federal Monitor and his team have been paid upwards of $13 Million for their services and reports. The city has also spent over $40 to implement the reforms.

The  words of union President Shaun Willoughby need to be considered a threat by the police union to APD management of its intent to undermine the reforms now that the DOJ and the Monitor will be gone:

“[Officers only complied with the new training and to keep their jobs.] These officers have been dealing with this consent decree for more than a decade and it’s going to take time to train a lot of this craziness out of them.”

Willoughby’s garbage attitude and words reflect the real danger and the biggest risk that APD leadership and management are now faced with. They need to emphasize to the rank and file, especially the union, that the reforms will remain in place, training in constitutional policing practices will continue and violations will result in disciplinary action including and up to suspension or termination. APD management cannot afford to become lazy or complacent as it has been in the past and allow APD rank and file to fall back into the old ways, habits and attitudes that created the “culture of aggression” in the first place and brought the DOJ to the city.

The link to a related article is here:

Department Of Justice And City File “Joint Motion For Termination” Of Court Approved Settlement Agreement; Federal Monitor Files 21st Report With Compliance Level Findings; Reforms Achieved Under CASA; Dismissal Long Overdue; Largest APD Bribery And Corruption Case Ignored; Biggest Danger APD Faces Now With Dismissal

On Friday May 9, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) and the City of Albuquerque filed a “Joint Motion For Termination” seeking U.S. District Court approval to terminate the federal consent decree known as the Court Approved Settlement Agreement (CASA) covering the Albuquerque Police Department (APD) since 2015. The joint motion asserts that the Federal Monitor has determined APD is in  full compliance with the consent decree and that the case can be dismissed. The Federal Court Appointed Monitor James Ginger and the Intervenor Albuquerque Police Officers’ Association (APOA) concurred with the “Joint Motion To Terminate” and the dismissal of the case.

You can read the 22 “Joint Motion For Termination” at this link:

https://www.justice.gov/opa/media/1399851/dl?inline

Assistant Attorney General Harmeet K. Dhillon of the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division issued the following statement:

“This consent decree has run its course successfully. … We are proud to stand by the men and women of the Albuquerque Police Department and ask the court to terminate this consent decree. Albuquerque Police operate constitutionally. It is now appropriate to end federal oversight and return full control of local law enforcement to the city. The Albuquerque Police Department has made meaningful progress toward constitutional policing and a culture of accountability. This progress builds on nearly a decade of hard work and partnership with the community, laying a strong foundation for the future and opening the door to a new chapter. This chapter demands leadership that listens, a community that stays engaged, and a department committed to doing what is right, even when it is difficult, in service of a safer, more just Albuquerque for all.”

The link to read the statement is here:

https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-and-city-albuquerque-seek-termination-consent-decree-covering-albuquerque

In a statement, newly appointed U.S. Attorney for New Mexico Ryan Ellison, who was appointed by President Trump on April 18 , said this:

“[APD] has made tremendous progress toward constitutional policing and a culture of accountability.  This progress builds on nearly a decade of hard work and partnership with the community, laying a strong foundation for the future and opening the door to a new chapter of local control of law enforcement. … The U.S. Attorney’s Office will stand shoulder to shoulder with the men and women of the APD to make Albuquerque a safer place to live, work, raise a family, and run a business.”

JOINT MOTION FOR TERMINATION

The CASA was filed on November 14, 2014. It contains 276 paragraphs containing police reforms overseen by a Federal District Judge and audited by Federal Court Approved Monitor James Ginger. The CASA was agreed to after an 18-month long DOJ investigation finding APD engaged in a pattern of “excessive use of force” and “deadly force” and finding a “culture of aggression” existed within APD.

The 22-page Joint Motion to Terminate highlights the history of the litigation including major reports  of the federal monitor and reaching compliance levels. As alleged in the Joint Motion to Terminate, the stated  purpose of the CASA was: “[To] ensure that [APD] delivers police services that comply with the Constitution and laws of the United States and to further their mutual interests. …The provisions of [the CASA] Agreement are designed to ensure police integrity, protect officer safety, and prevent the use of excessive force, including unreasonable use of deadly force, by APD.”

Primarily, the CASA established requirements related to the use of force by APD officers. To achieve these goals, APD was required to “implement force policies, training, and accountability systems to ensure that force is used in accordance with the Constitution and laws of the United States, and that any use of unreasonable force is identified and responded to appropriately.”  In addition, APD was required to “ensure that officers use non-force techniques to effectively police, use force only when objectively reasonable under the circumstances, and de-escalate the use of force at the earliest possible moment.”

The Joint Motion for Termination states in part:

“[After 10 years] APD has become a self-assessing and self-correcting agency. These characteristics have enabled APD to demonstrate sustained and continuing improvement in constitutional policing. In the most critical area covered by the CASA—force— the data shows that APD uses force at a much lower rate than when this case began, and that the vast majority of force used meets constitutional standards. When it does not, APD has the systems and processes in place to ensure that the necessary review, training, and discipline take place.

The Motion to Terminate goes on to state in part:

“[APD has] vastly improved its use of force in a constitutional manner. … the City has shown its ability to conduct its own use of force investigations without outside assistance. … The City has achieved operational compliance with all of the requirements that measure use of force outcomes. …  The City also achieved operational compliance of the reforms that help recruit, retain, train, and care for high-quality officers. Additionally, the City established systems for reliable, timely, and fair investigation of lower-level force, higher-level force, and misconduct and achieved operational compliance with paragraphs regarding application of discipline, including implementation of a disciplinary matrix. Finally, the City achieved operational compliance with paragraphs related to non-force issues such as citizen and community engagement, as well as paragraphs addressing officers’ response to especially vulnerable citizens through behavioral health training and specialized units.

The City and APD have devoted thousands of working hours and spent millions of dollars over the last 10 years to implement the CASA reforms.  The Joint Motion to Terminate signifies that the DOJ is satisfied that APD has met its demands and has met all the requirements mandated by the CASA.

APD was forced to create entire management teams and Internal Affairs oversight divisions and rewrite use of force and deadly force policies. The city was required to implement police training in constitutional policing practices and de-escalation tactics to meet the 276 mandated reforms in the CASA. The city was also required to pay the Federal Independent Monitor and his monitoring team to oversee the progress of APD which cost the city taxpayers $13 million.

REACTION TO MOTION TO TERMINATE

Not at all surprising, Mayor Tim Keller and APD leadership are delighted with the filing of the Motion to Terminate seeking a dismissal of the case.

APD Chief Harold Medina said this:

“This is a victory for the men and women of the Albuquerque Police Department who have changed their culture. They are the ones that have put the most blood, sweat and tears into this. … I hope and I pray that the future leaders of this department continue to respect what was built and that we must always be looking to see how we could improve. … That sometimes in order to be able to improve, we must admit that we were wrong.

This is not the end of reform. Reform should always be reoccurring. We should always be looking how we’re going to get better. How are we going to improve communications with the community? How are we going to reduce use of force? How are we going to ensure that a bad incident does not repeat itself?””

 Notwithstanding his delight over the dismissal of the case, APD Chief Harold Medina said the consent decree didn’t fix “the system in its entirety” referring to resource and continuum lapses in the state’s behavioral health system.

Unlike when the CASA was first entered, recent years have seen more people armed at the time they were killed by police. In some cases, those killed threatened suicide and told police to shoot them, even pointing cellphones and other objects at officers, as if they were guns, before being shot. Medina said this:

“I remember in 2013, 2012 … we had some horrible shootings … we had a lot of incidents that were just very tough for us to explain … I think there’s a vast change in what we’ve done and how we handle situations. I watch videos and I see the patience and the understanding of our officers, and it’s unbelievable how patient and understanding they are today compared to the past. We need places for people to get intervention early, for people to get help early, and it cannot rely on an officer being dispatched to deal with these individuals.”

Medina said he has seen change in his officers’ behavior in such situations and gives credit to the CASA. Medina said he believes the changes mandated by the CASA and implemented by the city will stand the test of time. Medina said this:

“There’s going to be some fine-tuning and some streamlining of the processes, but the fundamentals of this settlement agreement are what every department should strive for: constitutionally policing the community and holding people accountable and making sure force is only used when it has to be used. … So, I just want to make sure that we don’t start messaging that the intent is, ‘We’re going to go back to the way it was.’ That’s not the right message.”

Mayor Tim Keller for his part recognized the possibility of problems still appearing within the police department, but expressed optimism on how they would be dealt with in the future. Keller said this:

“If you look at the old footage of when this started and what we did to get here, no one would’ve believed we would have actually gotten to this place. … Will there be bad actors in the police department? That will also happen. The difference is that we will hold them accountable, and we will efficiently get the bad actors out of the department.  … [T]he work itself, the reform, the self-improvement, the accountability, the transparency absolutely continues. Officers are still going to be held accountable.”

APD Superintendent of Police Eric Garcia said this:

“We’re still going to investigate officer misconduct, and we’re still going to investigate all uses of force.”

APD Police Union President Sean Willoughby, a constant critic of the DOJ Consent decree and of the reform effort, said the only benefit from the CASA was more emphasis on training, although he did not agree with the training nor the way it was handled. He blamed the consent decree on the city’s issues with crime and having more police shootings than before the reforms began. Willoughby said this:

“The DOJ can’t leave fast enough. This has been a rollercoaster of destruction.”

Commentary Note: The words spoken by Police Union President  Shaun Willoughby are pure political garbage and should be discarded as such. The union early on became an intervenor in the case, something the City failed to object to and should never had consented to. Willoughby was at the negotiating table when new use of force and deadly force policies were negotiated. It was the union that engaged in obstruction and delay tactics in the writing and implementation of the use of force and deadly force policies and the CASA reforms.

Willoughby spread the “big lies” that crime rates were up because of  the consent decree and that cops were “handcuffed” and could not do their jobs. On April 27, 2021, it was widely reported by local news media that the Albuquerque Police Officers Association (APOA) launched a $70,000 political hit job ad campaign, which included  33 billboards, urging  the community to speak out against the DOJ oversight and to discredit the DOJ mandated reforms saying the police reforms were preventing police officers from doing their jobs and combating crime.

 Links to quoted or relied upon news sources are here:

https://www.abqjournal.com/2384284/apd-union-launches-campaign-against-doj-oversight.html

https://www.kob.com/new-mexico-news/albuquerque-police-union-starts-campaign-to-push-back-against-doj-requirements/6087348/

https://www.koat.com/article/as-murder-rate-climbs-apd-union-launches-campaign/36257496

“HORRIFICALLY PREDICTABLE”

Peter Cubra, a now retired civil rights attorney who defended people with disabilities in the reform effort for years, called the DOJ’s decision “horrifically predictable.” Cubra was quick to point out the Motion to Terminate  has “zero signature lines” of any DOJ members on the case prior to 2025, including Deputy Chief Paul Killebrew, with the DOJ’s Civil Rights Division, who worked years on the reform effort.

Cubra believed the termination request was ultimately motivated by the Trump administration, which, according to The Washington Post, has shaken up the division and reassigned DOJ Civil Rights staffers overseeing a variety of cases, including police brutality. The national DOJ office in Washington, DC did not respond to questions on the matter. Cubra said this:

“[APD’s] practice of shooting people when they should not is unlikely to change in the foreseeable future. … And the only thing that might influence that would be new litigation brought by people who don’t work for the government and a courageous judge.”

As APD  has come closer to the dismissal of the case, Cubra and other advocacy groups, including the New Mexico Chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union and APD Forward have decried spikes in APD police shootings, particularly those involving people in the grips of a behavioral health crisis. APD Forward includes 19 organizations who became  affiliated with each other to reform APD and implement the DOJ consent decree terms and reforms.

Data from 2022 shows that, despite the increase, officers used force in less than 1% of behavioral health and suicide calls, and 3% of those calls violated policy. Daniel Williams with the ACLU of New Mexico pointed out a disconnect between APDs compliance with the DOJ, and the experience on city streets. Williams said this:

“We’ve seen the last couple of years APD really starting to check those boxes and get into technical compliance with the CASA. … Unfortunately, New Mexico still leads the nation in terms of per capita people killed by police and APD does account for a big part of that.”

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

https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-and-city-albuquerque-new-mexico-seek-partial-termination-consent-decree

https://www.kob.com/new-mexico/apd-files-joint-motion-with-doj-to-end-oversight/

https://www.krqe.com/news/albuquerque-metro/city-of-albuquerque-doj-file-joint-motion-to-end-apd-oversight/

https://www.koat.com/article/final-steps-in-doj-settlement-agreement-being-taken-by-apd-koat/64734921

https://www.abqjournal.com/news/article_9e85d3ed-269c-423b-83b7-1f7af2043a5d.html#tncms-source=home-featured-7-block

https://www.abqjournal.com/news/article_a70f7874-02e7-40bd-9e13-2eebaf2a0c24.html#tncms-source=home-featured-7-block

 21^ST INDEPENDENT MONITORS REPORT

On April 14, 2025, federal court appointed  Independent Monitor James D. Ginger issued his sixty page 21st Independent Monitor’s Report (IMR) on the three compliance levels the APD has achieved under the CASA. The report covers the compliance efforts made by APD during the 21st reporting period, of  August 1, 2024, through January 31, 2025.

Federal Monitor James Ginger’s 21^st report found that the city of Albuquerque was at 99% operational compliance, which tracks whether officers follow policies and are corrected when they don’t.

Ginger found in his 21^st report that the only remaining requirements to achieve 100% operational compliance is the Civilian Police Oversight Agency (CPOA), which investigates civilian complaints against officers and is not under APD’s control. Ginger found the timeliness of investigations by the CPOA  was seriously deficient. However, Ginger reported  that the CPOA was making progress toward compliance and had developed a “triage protocol” to prioritize cases that were “more likely to have sustained findings.”

https://www.abqjournal.com/news/article_a70f7874-02e7-40bd-9e13-2eebaf2a0c24.html#tncms-source=home-featured-7-block

Ginger’s 21^st report also found APD recorded a 45% drop in annual use-of-force incidents since 2020. Although officers shot, or shot at, a record number of people in recent years, almost all of which were found in policy.

According to the Monitors Executive Summary, the City and APD have completed the majority of the requirements established by the CASA. At the end of the reporting period, APD’s compliance levels are as follows:

• Primary Compliance 100%
• Secondary Compliance 100%
• Operational Compliance 99%

For purposes of the APD monitoring process, there are 3 “compliance” levels:  Primary Compliance, Secondary Compliance , and Operational Compliance. The 3 Compliance Levels are defined in  the Monitors Reports as follows: .

PRIMARY COMPLIANCE

Primary compliance is the “policy” part of compliance. To attain primary compliance, APD must have in place operational policies and procedures designed to guide officers, supervisors, and managers in the performance of the tasks outlined in the CASA. As a matter of course, the policies must be reflective of the requirements of the CASA, must comply with national standards for effective policing policy, and must demonstrate trainable and evaluable policy components.

SECONDARY COMPLIANCE

Secondary compliance is attained by providing acceptable training related to supervisory, managerial, and executive practices designed to (and effective in) implementing the policy as written, e.g., sergeants routinely enforce the policies among field personnel and are held accountable by managerial and executive levels of the department for doing so. By definition, there should be operational artifacts such as reports, disciplinary records, remands to retraining, follow-up, and even revisions to policies if necessary, indicating that the policies developed in the first stage of compliance are known to, followed by, and important to supervisory and managerial levels of the department.

OPERATIONAL COMPLIANCE

Operational compliance is attained at the point that the adherence to policies is apparent in the day-to-day operation of the agency, e.g., line personnel are routinely held accountable for compliance, not by the monitoring staff, but by their sergeants, and sergeants are routinely held accountable for compliance by their lieutenants and command staff. In other words, the APD “owns” and enforces its policies.

https://www.cabq.gov/police/documents/doc-1095-imr-21-april-2025.pdf

The next hearing on Ginger’s 21^st Monitors report is scheduled for May 15 in front of the CASA assigned U.S. District Judge James Browning. It is unclear if he will take up the motion to dismiss the CASA.

INVESTIGATION, LAWSUIT AND COURT APPROVED SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT

The DOJ began investigating excessive force by APD in November 2012 after the Albuquerque City Council and police oversight advocates requested the federal government to investigate APD’s officers’ use of force and deadly force.  An 18-month long investigation by the Department of Justice (DOJ) found that the Albuquerque Police Department engaged in a pattern of “excessive use of force” and “deadly force”, especially when dealing with the mentally ill. The DOJ investigation found a “culture of aggression” existed within APD. Department of Justice investigators reviewed 20 fatal shootings by APD between 2009 and 2013 and found that in the majority of cases the level of force used was not justified because the person killed did not present a threat or danger to police officers or the public and were more of a danger to themselves.

The lawsuit was filed in 2014 after the Department of Justice (DOJ) determined that APD had engaged in a pattern or practice of use of excessive force and deadly force in violation of the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution.   It was on November 14, 2014, the City of Albuquerque, the APD and DOJ entered into a stipulated Court Approved Settlement Agreement (CASA).

The CASA contains 276 paragraphs that mandate police reforms, the appointment of a Federal Monitor and the filing of Independent Monitor’s reports (IMRs) on APD’s compliance with the reforms. The ultimate goal of the settlement was to implement constitutional policing practices, and it was aimed at making sure police officers follow policy and do not  use excessive force and deadly force.

The link to the 118-page CASA is here:

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

It was the Republican Mayor Richard Berry Administration who negotiated the terms and conditions of the CASA in 2013. They did so by hiring two out of state negotiators to the tune of $1 Million dollars. The outside contractors had little to no understanding of APD nor of Albuquerque as a community and its diverse culture. The net result was a one-sided agreement in favor of the DOJ as the Bery Administration simply agreed to all the demands of the DOJ and rolled over. An agreement that was supposed to be implemented in 4 years and then dismissed lasted over 10 years. For the last 7 years the Keller Administration has been saddled with the CASA and implementing the reforms.

HIGH PROFILE KILLINGS

Two very high-profile shootings involving the mentally ill that occurred also contributed to Berry Administration rushing into and agreeing to all  the terms of the CASA.

Kenneth Ellis was and Iraq War Veteran suffering from PTSD who was armed with a handgun that he pointed to his head and threatened to commit suicide, while he was also on his cell phone with his mother, and when he was confronted by APD. The officers shot and killed him when he took one step forward to them. A jury found that Ellis was more of a threat to himself and not police and it resulted in an $8 million judgment against the city.

James Boyd was a homeless man camping illegally in the Sandia foothills who was confronted by dozens of APD officers who attempted to arrest him and he was shot and killed by SWAT. Mayor Richard Berry called the shooting a “game changer.”  The shooting of Boyd led to protests that saw crowds overturning cars as tear gas wafted in the streets and another Judgement against the City for $5 million.  The two SWAT officers who killed Boyd were charged with murder and their trial resulted in a hung jury and the charges were dismissed.

ROCKY HISTORY OF IMPLEMENTATION OF REFORMS

The implementation of the CASA reforms has been very difficult at times over the past 10 years. Severe setbacks were found by the monitor. Two such times were when the federal monitor reported APD was on the brink of “catastrophic failure” and when APD failed to investigate 667 Use of Force cases.

ON THE BRINK OF A CATASTROPHIC FAILURE

October 6, 2020, Federal Monitor Ginger told Federal Judge James Browning, who oversees the case, this in open  court:

“We are on the brink of a catastrophic failure at APD. … [The department] has failed miserably in its ability to police itself. … If this were simply a question of leadership, I would be less concerned. But it’s not. It’s a question of leadership. It’s a question of command. It’s a question of supervision. And it’s a question of performance on the street. So as a monitor with significant amount of experience – I’ve been doing this since the ’90s – I would have to be candid with the Court and say we’re in more trouble here right now today than I’ve ever seen.”

In his 12th Federal Monitors Report filed with the Court on November 2, 2020 and covering the period of February 1, 2020 to July 31, 2020, Independent Monitor James Ginger wrote a scathing condemnation of APD’s ability to police itself and hold officers accountable when they improperly used force. Ginger reported:

“[The federal monitor] identified strong under currents of Counter-CASA effects in some critical units on APD’s critical path related to CASA compliance. These include supervision at the field level; mid-level command in both operational and administrative functions, [including] patrol operations, internal affairs practices, disciplinary practices, training, and force review). Supervision, [the] sergeants and lieutenants, and mid-level command, [the commanders] remain one of the most critical weak links in APD’s compliance efforts.” 

During this reporting period, the monitoring team often found in its reviews of management and oversight practices, a near myopathy at APD when it comes to assessing actions in the field against the requirements of APD policy and the CASA. Supervisors and command level personnel have a deleterious tendency to ignore the requirements of policy and training, and at times to even support processes to hide or circumvent internal systems designed to ensure compliance to established policy.
…

Many of the instances of non-compliance seen in the field are a matter of “will not,” instead of “cannot”! The Monitor reports he see actions that transcend innocent errors and instead speak to issues of cultural norms yet to be addressed and changed by APD leadership.” 

Supervision, which includes Lieutenants and Sergeants in the union, needs to leave behind its dark traits of myopia, passive resistance, and outright support for, and implementation of, counter-CASA processes.” 
…

Most importantly, line officers need to engage in actions as designed by policy, law, and best practice, not past customs.

FAILURE TO INVESTIGATE 667 POLICE OFFICER OF USE OF FORCE CASES

On February 26, 2021 the External Force Investigation Team (EFIT) was created by an agreed court order after the Federal Monitor found that APD intentionally did not investigate 667 Police Officer of Use of Force cases.  The Court Order was agreed to by the City and APD after the Department of Justice made it know it was prepared to seek “Contempt of Court” for willful violation of the CASA and seek sanctions against the city and APD.

The EFIT is an outside team of experienced law enforcement investigators on contract with the city that was responsible for training APD’s Internal Affairs Force Division (IAFD) on how to properly investigate use-of-force cases.  Independent Monitor James Ginger was highly critical of APD creating a backlog of 667 Use of Force Cases saying it had “failed miserably in its ability to police itself.” Another function of EFIT was to clear the backlog of cases.

In July 2021, the EFIT began training the Internal Affairs Force Division to investigate use-of-force cases, making sure they meet deadlines and follow procedures.  The EFIT team has since turned investigations back over to APD, paving the way for it to reach full compliance.

REFORMS ACHIEVED UNDER THE CASA

On November 16, 2024, it was a full 10 years that expired since the city agreed to  the CASA with the DOJ. It was originally agreed that implementation of all the settlement terms would be completed within 4 years. Because of delay and obstruction tactics by APD management and the police officers’ union which was found by the Federal Monitor it has taken another 5 years to get the job done.

After over 10 full years, the federal oversight and the CASA have produced results. Reforms achieved under the CASA can be identified and are as follows:

• New “use of force” and “use of deadly force” policies have been written, implemented and all APD sworn have received training on the policies.
• All sworn police officers have received crisis management intervention training.
• APD has created a “Use of Force Review Board” that oversees all internal affairs investigations of use of force and deadly force.
• The Internal Affairs Unit has been divided into two sections, one dealing with general complaints and the other dealing with use of force incidents.
• Sweeping changes ranging from APD’s SWAT team protocols, to banning choke-holds, to auditing the use of every Taser carried by officers and re-writing and implementation of new use of force and deadly force policies have been completed.
• “Constitutional policing” practices and methods, and mandatory crisis intervention techniques an de-escalation tactics with the mentally ill have been implemented at the APD police academy with all sworn police also receiving the training.
• APD has adopted a new system to hold officers and supervisors accountable for all use of force incidents with personnel procedures implemented detailing how use of force cases are investigated.
• APD has revised and updated its policies on the mandatory use of lapel cameras by all sworn police officers.
• The Repeat Offenders Project, known as ROP, has been abolished.
• Civilian Police Oversight Agency has been created, funded, fully staffed and a director was hired.
• The Community Policing Counsels (CPCs) have been created in all area commands.
• The Mental Health Advisory Committee has been implemented.
• The External Force Investigation Team (EFIT) was created and is training the Internal Affairs Force Division on how to investigate use-of-force cases, making sure they meet deadlines and follow procedures.
• Millions have been spent each year on new programs and training of new cadets and police officers on constitutional policing practices.
• APD officers are routinely found using less force than they were before and well documented use of force investigations are now being produced in a timely manner.
• APD has assumed the self-monitoring of at least 25% of the CASA reforms and is likely capable of assuming more.
• The APD Compliance Bureau has been fully operational and staffed with many positions created dealing directly with all the reform efforts and all the duties and responsibilities that come with self-assessment.
• APD has attained a 100% Primary Compliance rate, a 100% Secondary Compliance rate and a 99% Operational Compliance rate.

APD BRIBERY AND CORRUPTION SCANDAL

It was on Friday January 19, 2024 that the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) executed search warrants and raided the homes of 3 Albuquerque Police officers and the home and law offices of prominent DWI criminal defense attorney Thomas Clear, III and his investigator Ricardo “Rick” Mendez. All those targeted with a search warrant are accused of being involved in a bribery and conspiracy scheme to accept bribes and dismiss DWI cases.

Over the last year and four months, the investigation has evolved into the single largest law enforcement corruption case in the city’s history involving APD, the Bernalillo County Sheriff’s Office and the New Mexico State Police with no end in sight.

Bernalillo County District Attorney Sam Bregman has had to dismiss more than 272 DWI cases involving law enforcement officers linked to the federal case and due to police officer credibility being called into question in the cases where they made the DWI arrests.

More than a year into their investigation, the FBI continues to seek out those who participated in the near 30-year criminal enterprise in which law enforcement officers coordinated with defense attorney Thomas Clear, III and his investigator Ricardo “Rick” Mendez to get drunken driving cases thrown out of court by paying  bribes to arresting officers.

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

Five APD officers and one Bernalillo County Sheriff’s Office Deputy have plead guilty to taking bribes.  Former DWI Criminal defense attorney Thomas Clear III and his investigator Ricardo “Rick” Mendez have also plead guilty as charged to paying bribes to law enforcement to get their client’s DWI cases get dismissed. Clear has been disbarred from the practice of law by the New Mexico Supreme Court and the Federal Court.

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

The “Motion To Terminate” has been expected for some time and should not come as any surprise. The truth is APD was expected to be found in compliance after the 19^th Federal Monitors report came out saying APD fell 2% short of being in full Operational Compliance and at 100% Primary and Secondary Compliance.

What called into question if APD would finally reach compliance and the case dismissed, at least in the public’s mind, was the DOJ and the FBI investigation into allegations that DWI officers took bribes to miss court dates which led to hundreds of pending DWI cases being dismissed by the Bernalillo County District Attorney’s Office.

It turns out that the biggest corruption scandal in the history of  APD did not even merit an acknowledgement nor a mention by the Federal Monitor in his 19^th, 20th or 21st monitor’s reports. What is truly  down right pathetic is that for the past 10 years APD management and the entire APD department was supposed to be the under the watchful eye of the Department of Justice, the Federal Court and a Federal Monitor, yet the bribery and conspiracy scandal to dismiss DWI cases ostensibly went totally undetected by the Federal Monitor over the last 10 years during which it occurred.

Under Secondary Compliance, the Federal Monitor and his so-called team of experts were required to review supervisory, managerial and executive practices and the enforcement of policies among field personnel and how they were held accountable by management and executive levels for wrongdoing. Accepting bribes to get cases dismissed has never been a policy of APD. No doubt the monitor will argue it was not his job to ferret out scandal, nefarious or illegal conduct of APD officers other than use of force and deadly force, but that sure damn well was the responsibility of the Department of Justice.

Despite all that has been accomplished by the CASA as noted above, the public perception is that the DOJ reform process really has not accomplished much other than making the Federal Monitor a wealthy man.

Excessive use of force and deadly by APD is what brought the Department of Justice to this City in the first place and damaged APD’s reputation to a great extent. The reforms were an attempt to restore public confidence in APD to an extent.

There is absolutely no doubt that APD’s reputation has been trashed to a major extent by APD’s history of excessive use of force and deadly force as well  by the corruption, bribery and DWI dismissal scandal. APD is viewed by many as nothing more than a bastion of “violent, dirty and corrupt cops” who have brought dishonor to their department and to the department’s professed values of “Pride, Integrity, Fairness and Respect”. 

There is little doubt that the killings of civilians and the bribery corruption scandal has shaken the public’s faith in our criminal justice system and APD to its core. The only way that any semblance of faith can be restored and for people to begin trusting APD again is if all the police officers involved in corruption and wrongful death actions are held accountable. That will only happen when there is aggressive prosecutions and convictions, the police officers are terminated, and they lose their law enforcement certification.

REVERTING BACK TO OLD WAYS OF DOING BUSINESS BIGGEST DANGER

The announcement that APD, after almost 10 years, is now in full compliance with the Court Approved Settlement Agreement (CASA) is long overdue and a major milestone for the beleaguered department plagued by scandal and corruption.

The implementation of all the reforms took over twice as long as was originally agreed. It required the expenditure of millions of dollars and oversight by an outside independent monitor.

The Federal Monitor and his team have been paid upwards of $13 Million for their services and reports. The city has also spent over $40 to implement the reforms.

The biggest risk is that APD leadership and management will become lazy or complacent as it has been in the past and allow APD rank and file to fall back into the old ways, habits and attitudes that created the “culture of aggression” in the first place.