On April 30, Governor Lujan Grisham announced a phased in opening plan for the State. The Governor’s timeline for the state’s phased in reopening plan is dependent on when certain criteria are met. The Governor’s “phase in” business reopening plan included 3 major phases:

Preparation Phase

– All individuals instructed to stay home
– Industry Councils to develop COVID safe practices (CSP)
– Define how businesses will protect employees and customers

Phase One

– Vulnerable individuals instructed to stay home
– Some non-essential businesses permitted to reopen in compliance with CSPs.
– Certain businesses will still be closed

Phase Two and Beyond

– Additional businesses permitted to reopen in compliance with CSPs.
– Larger gatherings and events still restricted for the foreseeable future
– Other changes to be announced

GOVERNOR LUJAN GRISHAM ANNOUNCES MODIFIED PUBLIC HEALTH ORDERS

On Wednesday, May 13, Governor Michell Lujan Grisham announced that on Saturday, May 16, New Mexico, with a few exceptions will take the next steps to slowly reopen. The change does not apply to the counties of Cibola County, McKinley County or San Juan County due to the high rate or COVID-19 cases. The three counties will, instead, enter the “preparation phase.”

According to the governor, New Mexico is on track with enough data to begin easing into re-opening and move into Phase 1. During the briefing at the state capital, the Governor had this to say:

“We’re going to demand in New Mexico that science guide every decision we make. … We don’t want to go backwards and shut everything down.”

One major goal is to get the state’s coronavirus transmission rate down to 1.15, which means each infected individual transmits the virus to 1.15 other people. , According to the state’s statistical modeling, the state’s overall transmission rate now stands at 1.16. Three of New Mexico’s five regions have reduced the spread rate below the 1.15 standard. But the northwestern and southwestern regions of New Mexico are above the 1.15 target goal.

MASKS NEED TO BE WORN BY ALL

The Governor announced she will require New Mexicans to wear masks in all public spaces, starting Saturday May 16. Lujan Grisham said everyone, including children, should wear masks when leaving their homes. Exceptions include eating, drinking and exercising.

According to the Governor, the face mask mandate is necessary to help limit the spread of COVID-19, the respiratory disease caused by the coronavirus. Individuals who refuse to wear a mask in public may face stern words from a police officer but the state doesn’t intend to take a punitive approach to enforcing the mandate. Governors of several other states, including New York, Massachusetts and New Jersey, have implemented similar face covering requirements. Enforcing the mandates has proven to be very difficult to the point it has resulted in confrontations.

The Governor said she hoped “positive peer pressure” would encourage people to wear face coverings, but urged New Mexicans to refrain from “negative attacks” or anger at police officers. If you get made, she said express your anger at her, not public employees, saying “I can take it. … If I can’t get folks to do this … we can’t stay open.”

Human Services Secretary David Scrase said research shows that mask-wearing is incredibly effective at reducing the spread of the disease and said:

“All of us wearing masks could save thousands of lives. It’s critical to learn to live in a COVID world.”

In the event that “positive peer pressure” or law enforcement warnings to people who fail to wear a mask, the Governor could issue directives to law enforcement for people to be charged for violation of the executive order. The Public Health Act does have a criminal penalties provision as follows:

NMSA§ 24-1-21. Penalties

Any person violating any of the provisions of the Public Health Act or any order, rule or regulation adopted pursuant to the provisions of the Public Health Act is guilty of a petty misdemeanor and shall be punished by a fine not to exceed one hundred dollars ($100) or imprisonment in the county jail for a definite term not to exceed six months or both such fine and imprisonment in the discretion of the court. Each day of a continuing violation of Subsection A of Section 24-1-5 NMSA 1978 after conviction shall be considered a separate offense. The department also may enforce its rules and orders by any appropriate civil action. The attorney general shall represent the department.

To date, the virus has killed 231 people in New Mexico.

RESTRICTIONS FOR BUSINESSES TO OPEN

The Phase I of reopening the state that begins on MAY 16 includes limited in person operations for offices and retailers. According to the Governor:

“We expect you to have COVID-safe practices. Your employees and staff are wearing masks and anything else that works at stopping the spread of the virus.”

All retailers may operate at 25% of fire code capacity; COVID-safe practices must be in place to operate. According to the Governor Office, the definition of a retailer is “any business that sells goods directly to the ultimate consumer or end-users. Retail spaces do not include wholesalers or suppliers. Retails spaces also do not include entertainment venues such as movie theaters, concert halls or amusement parks.”

Other Non-essential businesses, such as offices and call centers, may operate with up to 25% of pre-crisis staffing levels. Employers should require employees to continue to work from home and telework policies whenever possible.

Churches for religious services may hold religious services at 10% occupancy.

WHAT CANNOT REOPEN

Stay at home orders remain if you are sick or in a vulnerable category except for emergencies.

Congregating in groups of more than 5 remains prohibited

If you must go out, maintain physical distance of at least 6-feet from others

Retail spaces do not include wholesalers, suppliers, movie theaters, concert halls or amusement parks which must remain closed.

Gyms, salons, indoor malls dine-in at restaurants and movie theaters are not allowed to reopen. The goal is to open high-contact businesses, including gyms and salons, in June. According to the Governor, it’s too soon to allow dine-in restaurants, gyms, salons and movie theaters to reopen. Restaurants might partially reopen in early June.

Big-box stores can continue to operate at 20% capacity

SUMMER YOUTH PROGRAMS WILL BE ALLOWED WITH RESTRICTIONS

Summer youth programs will be allowed this year but with the following restrictions:

In-person summer programs and sports camps are restricted to a 5-to-1 child to adult ratio.

Student and staff groupings must be self-contained meaning the same children staying with the same staff and no mixing between groups.

High-risk staff and children must be informed on the need for additional actions such as not attending or having additional restrictions, including contact with high-risk family members.

Sports programs will be allowed but restricted to contactless sports only and non-competitive play.

Dr. David Scrase of the Human Services Department also says they are learning more about how the virus affects children. He says kids up to the age of 19 are accounting for 13% of coronavirus cases in New Mexico. “Pay particular attention to abdominal symptoms, or nausea or committing or diarrhea. Those symptoms are more prominent in kids,” said Dr. Scrase.

EARLY JUNE OPENING TARGET

The governor says the spread of the virus dictates the timeline of when the state can move into the next phase of reopening. Officials hope that is by early June, which means they can slowly start to reopen salons, gyms, indoor malls and limited dine-in at restaurants.

REPUBLICAN CHAIRMAN STEVE PEARCE

State GOP Chairman Steve Pearce said that the governor’s latest plans infringe on New Mexican’s “civil rights” and unfairly target certain business owners and said:

“Our position has been to safely and responsibly get New Mexico back to work. The Democratic administration has not only destroyed our economy, but peoples’ lives and livelihoods. … By her continuing to favor national chains over our small business, the governor has inflicted economic and personal hardship on hundreds of thousands of her constituents.”

NEW MEXICO’S TESTING CAPACITY

New Mexico’s testing capacity for COVID-19 IS ranked among the nation’s highest, on a per capita basis. New Mexico has now conducted more than 115,000 tests and has 5,364 confirmed cases, including 155 new cases that were announced during the Governor’s May 13 briefing. About 4.7% of all tests yield a positive result.

The New Mexico Department of Health announced that all state residents can get free tests to determine whether they have the disease, regardless of whether they have symptoms. Notwithstanding the testing, state officials are still concerned about possible virus outbreaks stemming from New Mexico’s borders with other states and with Mexico. Testing has been expanded in New Mexico’s prison system, with the goal of testing all corrections officers and at least one-quarter of inmates. Testing will have to be done on a recurring basis, likely weekly, in order to ensure the virus is under control.

Below are links to news coverage:

https://www.kob.com/albuquerque-news/governors-new-order-allows-some-businesses-to-reopen-requires-new-mexicans-to-wear-mask/5728922/?cat=500

https://www.krqe.com/health/coronavirus-new-mexico/gov-lujan-grisham-to-hold-covid-19-news-conference-on-wednesday/

https://www.abqjournal.com/1455269/lujan-grisham-to-address-public-health-orders.html

NATIONAL POLL FINDS 74% MAJORITY TO 25% SAY GO SLOW ON REOPENING

On May 12, it was reported by the Washington Post that a Post-Ipsos poll found that a 74% majority of Americans overall say the United States should keep trying to slow the spread of the coronavirus even if it means keeping many businesses closed. In contrast, 25% say the country should open up businesses and get the economy going again, even if the result would be more infections. Across 12 states with the largest populations from Pennsylvania to Texas to California, at least 7 in 10 say they prefer focusing on slowing the virus’s spread rather than beginning to reopen businesses.

Nationally, 56% of Americans say their state government has handled restrictions on businesses “about right,” with 28% saying restrictions have been lifted “too quickly” and 16% saying they have not been lifted quickly enough. But nearly half of Floridians (48%) and majorities in both Texas (59%) and Georgia (65%) say their state government is “lifting restrictions too quickly”.

The Washington Post poll found a significant partisan divide on the question of reopening. More than 9 in 10, or 92 percent, of Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents say they favor closures to deal with the virus. Republicans and Republican-leaning independents are split almost evenly, with 49% saying closures should be the top priority and 50% saying businesses should be opened up again.

The poll of more than 8,000 adults was conducted from April 27 to May 4.

POLL NUMBERS ON GOVERNORS

Governors across the country taken as a whole have secured widespread support from the public for their handling of the coronavirus pandemic. The bipartisan approval of the Governors is in sharp contrast to that President Trump who has failed to secure bipartisan support. The poll also found that some Republican governors who have embraced reopening their states quickly are struggling to achieve the same level of approval as Democrats taking it slow.

Overall, 71% of Americans approve of their governors’ performances, with majority approval from people in both major parties. A much smaller 43% approve of President Trump’s handling of the crisis. In Trump’s case, assessments are dramatically partisan, with more than 8 in 10 Republicans and Republican-leaning independents approving of his handling of the crisis and almost 9 in 10 Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents disapproving of Trump’s performance.

As a group, governors across the country appear to have won substantial approval among those from their rival party. In states led by Democratic governors, 75% approve of their handling of the outbreak, including 91% of Democratic-leaning residents, as well as 54% of those who lean Republican. In Republican-led states, 67% of people give positive ratings to governors, including 80% of Republicans and 55% of Democrats.

According to the Washington Post poll, the disparities appear to be linked to the differing paths the governors have adopted as they seek to balance efforts to contain the spread of the virus while trying to limit the damage to their economies. The contrast is widest in the states of Ohio and Georgia, states won by Trump in 2016. In Ohio, 86% approve the way Republican Governor Mike DeWine moved aggressively to close down his state and has been cautious about lifting the restrictions to deal with the crisis. In Georgia, 39% of adults approve of the performance of Republican Governor Brian Kemp who moved slower than other governors to mitigate the spread of the virus and has been aggressive in reopening his state’s economy.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/many-governors-win-bipartisan-support-for-handling-of-pandemic-but-some-republicans-face-blowback-over-reopening-efforts/2020/05/11/8e98500e-93d2-11ea-9f5e-56d8239bf9ad_story.html

GOVERNOR LUJAN GRISHAM POLLS HIGH

On Apr 24, 2020, “The Majority Institute – Public Policy Polling” released its newest New Mexico survey. It found that Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham has a 62% approval rating for her handling of the coronavirus, to only 26% who disapprove for a net +36 rating. By contrast Donald Trump has a net -15 approval rating for his handling of the virus, with just 40% approving of the job he’s doing to 55% who disapprove.

63% of voters in the state think the state’s response to the coronavirus has been ‘about right. Only 27% think it’s overreacting. By contrast just 35% of voters think the federal response to the virus has been about right, with 49% saying that the Trump administration’s response has been an under reaction.

Lujan Grisham’s overall approval rating shows a high degree of popularity, with 59% approving and just 32% disapproving of the job she’s doing. By contrast Trump has only a 40% approval rating, with 56% of voters disapproving of him. According to the poll, Lujan Grisham received an overwhelming support from both Democrats, 83% to 9%, and independents, 60% to 28%, for her handling of the virus and receives good marks from 32% of Republicans as well.

https://majorityinstitute.com/latest/lujan-grisham-bests-trump-51-points-coronavirus-response?fbclid=IwAR096gVrXyx0nfAiOKOE7Jb7DF_IVKT9OVxEoB4p6bN1x60TyQcwHXo0xCA

ANALYSIS AND COMMENTARY

OUR WOULD BE REPUBLICAN GOVERNOR STEVE PEARCE

It is not all surprising that armchair constitutional expert GOP Chairman Steve Pierce is shooting his mouth off about constitutional rights being violated. When it comes to business closures, the Governor has been given the authority by the legislature to issue the executive order to close businesses during a health crisis. It is well settled United States Supreme Court constitutional law that the legislature can give the Governor the authority to close businesses in time of a health crisis. The New Mexico legislature did just that in 2003 with the enactment of the Public Health Emergency Response Act. The act empowers the Governor to issue executive orders to respond to a health emergency that threatens the public health, safety and welfare, such as the corona virus pandemic. The link to the New Mexico statute is here:

https://law.justia.com/codes/new-mexico/2006/nmrc/jd_ch12art10a-712b.html

When Steve Pearce claims that the Governor is “continuing to favor national chains over our small business” he shows his ignorance or apparently never travels to Albuquerque to go retail shopping nor goes to restaurants because if he did he would see thousands of empty parking spaces at Coronado Shopping Center, Winrock Shopping Center and ABQ Uptown, Cotton Wood Mall on the West Side where all the “big box” stores are closed. He would also see the empty parking spaces at big chain restaurants like Chile’s, Season’s 54, Olive Garden, Red Lobster, the Cheese Factory just to mention a few who now offer only curbside service. The New Mexico State Police has also closed down the big box stores of Total Wine and a Hobby Lobby, both part of a national chain. All new and used car dealerships are also closed, with the New Mexico Auto Dealers Association running ads on how to do business with the franchise dealerships.

Least anyone forget, Steve Pearce ran for Governor as the Republican nominee against Democrat Michelle Lujan Grisham and he lost in a landslide. Based on his words and actions, there is little doubt he would have done absolutely NOTHING during this deadly pandemic to “flatten the curve”. A Republican Governor Steve Pearce would have ignored the spread of the disease allowing it to run its course resulting in even more deaths of many New Mexicans. Steve Pearce apparently believes that commerce and the economy TRUMP’s the rights of “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness” just as much guaranteed under the constitution as the right to commerce.

THE FACE MASK MANDATE REQUIRES PEER PRESSURE

The Governor raised a few eyebrows when she said everyone needs to wear a mask, including children, when they venture out in public. The truth is the Governor said that the “face mask” enforcement will not be punitive. In other words, she is not ordering arrests by law enforcement but likely warnings or admonishments to exercise caution. She made it clear that she hoped “positive peer pressure” would encourage people to wear face coverings when we venture out. In the event that “positive peer pressure” or law enforcement warnings to people who fail to wear a mask, the Governor could issue directives to law enforcement issue petty misdemeanor citations resulting in a $100 fine or up to 6 months in jail or a combination with penalties at the discretion of the judge.

CONCLUSION

Well, it’s a start. The approach Governor Michelle Lujan has taken is to first move aggressively to close down New Mexico and she now being cautious about lifting the restrictions to deal with the crisis. The clear and unmistakable message Governor Lujan delivered with the limited opening of the state is that all of what she has ordered is indeed “flattening the curve”.

The state is making significant progress, but we still have a long ways to go given the fact that increases in cases is still occurring. New Mexico is now inching closer to reopening over perhaps the next 2 months.

The Governor has sent the clear message that in a real sense, it’s all on use to make sure we do are part and follow the social distancing rules.

TAKE PRECAUTIONS TO PROTECT YOURSELF AND FAMILY

Older adults and those with chronic illnesses are most at risk to contract the virus that could result in death from complications. Even healthy young people not worried about getting sick should take steps to protect themselves and others in that they could still carry the virus but not show signs of it. The strategy must be to limit the chance of transmitting the disease to persons who are more vulnerable.
Health and government officials urged people to protect themselves by:

1. Self-quarantine as much as possible
2. Honoring the “quarantine” and staying home and avoid large crowds and public events
3. Wash your hands frequently with soap and water for at least 20 seconds and do not touch your face
4. Clean “high-touch” surfaces daily with regular household cleaners
5. When coughing, use a tissue or cough into the forearm of your elbow
6. Avoiding the sharing of personal household items
7. Stay at home when sick
8. Practice “social distancing” when talking to others in person by standing 6 feet away from them
9 Wear face masks if available that seals around mouth and nose when out in public
10.Limit activities to grocery shopping, filling your car with gasoline and medical appointment.

Please be safe and use the precautions outlined.

For a related blog article see:

GOP Party Chair Steve Pearce And Cibola County Sheriff Tony Mace Show Ignorance Of Law Asking US Attorney Barr To Review Gov. MLG’s Health Orders; Governor Empowered By Legislature To Issue Health Orders; Once Vaccine Found, Will They Oppose Mandatory Inoculation?

Since being elected Mayor, Tim Keller has made it known that building a city operated homeless shelter is one of his top priorities. Keller deemed that a 24-hour, 7 day a week temporarily shelter for the homeless critical towards reducing the number of homeless in the city. The city owned shelter was projected to assist an estimated 300 homeless residents and connect them to other services intended to help secure permanent housing. The new facility would have served all populations of men, women, and families. Further, the city wanted to provide a place anyone could go regardless of gender, religious affiliation, sobriety, addictions, psychotic condition or other factors.

The city facility was to have on-site case managers that would guide residents toward counseling, addiction treatment, housing vouchers and other available resources. According city officials, the new homeless shelter would replace the existing West Side Emergency Housing Center, the former jail on the far West Side. The west side facility is unsustainable costing over $1 million in transportation costs a year for the homeless. The goal was for the new homeless shelter to provide first responders an alternative destination for the people they encounter known as the “down-and-out” calls.

Notwithstanding Mayor Keller’s desire for a city run shelter, there were many critics of the proposal. The critics included downtown business organizations such as the Greater Albuquerque Business Association (GABA) and neighborhood associations that mounted strong opposition. Critics argued against mixing populations and argued that a large facility would unduly burden any one neighborhood or business area of the city. Bernalillo County officials, homeless service providers and residents of neighborhoods surrounding potential locations seriously questioned the city’s efforts for a one centralized shelter.

FUNDING APPROVED BY VOTERS; SITES SELECTED

On November 5, voters approved a general obligation bond package of $128 million which included $14 million for the city operated 24-7 homeless shelter. The actual cost was to be $32 million. The City asked the 2020 New Mexico Legislature for an additional $14 million to complete phase two of the project, but the funding request failed.

In December, the Albuquerque City Council approved Keller’s request to hire an architect to design a 300-bed shelter.

On February 27, the City of Albuquerque released a report and analysis announcing the top 3 preferred locations for the new 24/7 Gateway homeless shelter. The 3 locations were:

1. University of New Mexico land next to the state laboratory, near Interstate 25 and Camino de Salud
2. Coronado Park at 3rd Street and Interstate 40
3. The former Lovelace hospital on Gibson

On Friday, February 28, Mayor Tim Keller held a press conference with local church leaders at the vacant strip of University of New Mexico land and made it clear that the UNM cite was his preferred cite. It was not meant to be. Keller’s press conference was viewed by the University of New Mexico Community as a guilt trip tactic to shame the higher education institution in providing the location free of charge.
On March 12, the University of New Mexico announced it was no longer interested in offering the empty lot they own off the I-25 Frontage Road for consideration as the possible site for the Gateway Center.

Mayor Tim Keller for his part issued the following statement about UNM’s decision:

“For all our public institutions, there is a moral opportunity to come together and make a difference on a growing problem that affects the entire community. With this option now off the table, we are convening elected officials from the City and [Bernalillo] County, as well as UNM, to work with us on the remaining options, or a possible combination of sites. We are continuing our collaborative efforts and are also dedicated to doing all we can with the funds we have to make a dent in all of our homelessness challenges.”

UNM’s March announcement that it would not provide the location resulted in Keller creating a “working group” as he called it for a “regrouping” phase.

KELLER ABANDONS GATEWAY CENTER CONCEPT

On Wednesday, May 7, Mayor Tim Keller conducted one of his daily briefings on the City’s response to the Corona Virus. He dedicated most of the briefing to report on the “Gateway Center.” Participating in the briefing were City Council President Pat Davis, County Commissioner Jim Collie and the city’s Chief Operating Officer Lawrence Rael.

The FACEBOOK video link to the press briefing is here:

https://www.facebook.com/MayorKeller/videos/290814465247439/UzpfSTEwNTQ4MTY4OTY6MTAyMjAwNDA5NDYxMDgwMTQ/

In a surprise announcement, Keller said that the city for now is abandoning the development concept of a single, 300-bed homeless shelter. He announced the city will be proceeding with a “multi-site approach” to the city’s homelessness crisis. Mayor Tim Keller went so far as to state that the 300 bed Gateway Center was “off the table”.

For the past few months, the working group has been meeting regularly with the goal to reach a collective decision on how best to tackle both the city and county’s homeless problem. According to Keller, the City, Bernalillo County Commission, the University of New Mexico Hospital along with homeless service providers are pursuing other strategies to serve the upwards of 5,000 persons a year who are homeless in the city and county each year.

Keller said during a media briefing said:

“We are, I think, in a regrouping phase, but one I think is in many ways better with an eye toward a comprehensive solution and with an eye toward collaboration.”

Mayor Keller had made it known he wanted to start construction on the Gateway Center this winter. Now there is no clear timeline on the construction any type of facility because the shift in strategy and because of the corona virus pandemic. Notwithstanding, Mayor Keller made it clear that the corona pandemic will not stop the city from developing some version of a Gateway Center plan.

Keller said the virus crisis has highlighted the need for an alternative to the city’s existing shelter, which is the former jail 20 miles from downtown and he said:

“The coronavirus has also shown us how important this is. … The amount of funding and logistics we have to deal with going back and forth to the West Side … is extremely hard.”

MULTI-SITE MODEL

According to Mayor Keller the working group is open to a “multi-site” model. Such a model could still involve using the Lovelace Hospital or Coronado Park sites. The difference is no 300-bed facility would be built. Smaller facilities of between 50 to 100 scale would be considered along with other locations throughout the city. Regardless of the final strategy adopted by the working group, the $14 million approved by city voters is enough to move forward with a project, no doubt scaled back and at different locations.

During the May 7 press briefing, Mayor Keller said:

“Costs go up the more sites you have, by definition; however, we might be able to utilize some existing sites and existing facilities, which means costs can go down. … I think we’re all confident we have enough money for a Phase One concept as per what the voters voted on, but what that looks like and how big it is depends on what the working group will be doing this summer.”

City Council President Pat Davis, who is a member of the working group, said during the May 7 press briefing, that the goal is to have a “joint governance group” and would include subject-matter experts and multiple public agencies to decide together on the best path forward. According to Davis:

“This is exactly what we ought to be doing. … People want to see the city, the county and UNM and all the government working together.”

County Commissioner Jim Collie said during the May 7 press briefing that he and the other 4 members of the County Commission were pleased with the collaboration efforts by saying:

“We’re delighted to be involved in this process and believe that what we come out with is a product that will be amplified by our working together.”

Commissioner Collie said it was unclear whether the county would contribute financially to Gateway Center construction but that it will assuredly be involved in some way given its mandate to provide behavioral health services.

https://www.abqjournal.com/1452203/city-exploring-new-path-to-gateway-center.html

COUNTY BEHAVIORAL HEALTH TAX

On February 26, 2015, the Bernalillo County Commission approved a 1/8 % gross receipts tax increase on a 3-2 vote to fund new behavioral and mental health services to improve access to mental and behavioral health care services in the county. The tax generates approximately $20 million annually. When the Bernalillo County Commission approved the tax, it failed to develop a plan on how all the money would be used, including not identifying services to be provided, location of facilities and qualifiers to obtain the services offered.

When enacted, the county commission announced the intent for the tax was to invest the funding “in proven ways to better manage the high cost of addiction, homelessness and mental health problems”. According to a county commission announcement, “these issues impact families throughout the community and drive up the cost of public services, especially at the Metropolitan Detention Center.”

https://www.bernco.gov/uploads/files/BH%20news%20release%20PDF.pdf

The gross receipts tax costs shoppers one cent on a $10 purchase of goods and services. Since enactment of the tax in 2015, the tax has generated $91.6 million. The county has spent $20 million of the money but has earmarked the bulk of what it amassed for one-time expenditures. Those expenditures include $30 million for a new crisis triage center, $12 million for supportive housing and $4 million for the Bernalillo County CARE campus, formerly known as the Metropolitan Assessment and Treatment Services center, or MATS. The renovations to the CARE campus when complete will create an outpatient behavioral health clinic and living room space for peer-to-peer counseling sessions.

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

When it comes to city projects the term “NIMBY” stands for “Not In My Back Yard”. It describes opposition to proposed projects by home owners, property owners, and business owners. Two of the biggest issues that generate public outcry are the location of methadone clinics and homeless shelters. Mayor Keller’s desire to build a 24-hour, 7 day a week, 300-person, city built and run homeless shelter is a case of NIMBY.

KELLER’S “SHAMING TACTICS” WERE MISTAKE

Mayor Keller made the political mistake of not listening to those who will have to deal with a centralized shelter long after he is gone as Mayor. Mayor Tim Keller is now perceived as mishandling the site selection process for the shelter, especially with his shaming, guilt trip press conference to force UNM’s hand, and his failing to build true consensus on what the city should do and where the shelter should go. Keller essentially had a survey performed to come up with 3 finalists and before all 3 could be fully vetted as the city promised, he made a decision as to his preference and people saw right through his tactics.

Soon after UNM made the announcement it was taking its land off the list, Mayor Keller announced he was creating a working group that includes UNM, county administrative leaders and elected officials to work out details on a site, design, construction, and operation for the Gateway Center. The working group of city, county, UNM and elected officials should have been done from the get-go. Keller wanted to go it alone seeking voter approved funding and even funding from the legislature that he failed to secure.

Keller has now said that he and the working group have decided to abandon the development concept of a single, 300-bed homeless shelter and proceed with a “multi-site approach”. The problem is that there is still the need for the city to operate a centralized 24-7 facility to target the most chronic of the homeless and connect them to other services and to help secure permanent housing.

THE NEED FOR CENTRALIZED LOCATION STILL EXISTS

The needs are still there:

1. There is still a need for a facility to serve populations of men, women, and families and to provide a place anyone can go regardless religious affiliation, sobriety, addiction or other factors, such as suffering from a psychotic event, that prevent the homeless from being eligible for services and assistance.

2. There is still a need for a centralized location to assist the homeless getting signed up for assistance such as EBT cards, Medicaid, interviews for housing options, and counseling and medical care and immediate medical care and treatment.

3. There is still a need for a triage center very close to UNMH where police can take people to other than to the emergency room at UNMH or to jail.

The 1/8th% county behavioral gross receipts tax is supposed to be used for the purpose of providing more mental and behavioral health services for adults and children in the Albuquerque and Bernalillo County area. The intent is to provide a safety net system for those in need of mental health not otherwise funded in New Mexico. After 5 years, the monies collected from the 1/8th% gross receipts behavioral tax, the lion’s share of the tax revenues remains in a bank account benefiting no one. The Gateway Center fits as originally proposed into the intent and purpose of the behavioral tax.

THE “ONE ALBUQUERQUE” SLOGAN MEANS “KELLER’S ALBUQUERQUE”

Keller will never admit it in public, but he essentially abandoned his efforts to continue with the Coronado Park and the former Lovelace Hospital locations because of the strong and coordinated opposition to both by many downtown businesses, business organizations, residents and neighborhood associations. The blunt truth is that Keller ignored them and they in turn reacted with hostility and turned on him. Following is a link to two very hostile guest columns regarding Keller published in the Albuquerque Journal opposing the Coronado Park and former Lovelace Hospital:

https://www.petedinelli.com/2020/04/21/abq-journal-guest-columns-coronado-park-and-lovelace-medical-opposed-for-city-homeless-shelter-mayor-keller-has-failed-to-build-consensus/

Keller has made it known he is seeking a second term in 2021. He no doubt now realizes that his push for the 300 person Gateway Center went too far for many and that he offended way too many voters. Keller, for all of his “One Albuquerque” slogan, failed to listen to the concerns of businesses, residents and other government entities who objected to the concept and to the 3 proposed locations. One elected official critic went so far as to say the “One Albuquerque” slogan means “Keller’s Albuquerque” because he thinks he has the only answers to the City’s homeless crisis.

A ROUGH ROAD OF OPPOSITION AHEAD

One thing is for certain. Keller is going to have to convince the Bernalillo County Commission to step up to the plate with funding for the “multi-site model” with at least matching funding from the county behavioral tax fund revenues. With Mayor Keller and the City faced with a $27 million dollar deficit and likely budget cuts because of the reduction in gross receipts tax revenues, the $14 million in voter approve bonds is likely all the city will have for the “multi-site model.”

Now that Mayor Keller and the working group have decided to go forward with a “multi-site model”, they need to realize that resistance will no doubt emerge and be just as great as to each site that will be considered by them. They also need to realize the need for a centralized facility, albeit not as big as a 300 facility, is still exists in one form or another.

It was very disappointing that newly appointed County Commissioner Jim Collie said it was unclear whether the county would contribute financially to Gateway Center construction. Collie was appointed by Governor Lujan Grisham and committed to serve only the remaining one year of a term. Collie will be leaving the commission on January 1, 2021 and be replaced by an elected commissioner. He has 7 months left to make a difference, and perhaps he can leave a lasting impression and push for matching funds from the county to the city’s $14 million for the “multi-site” model.

For related blog articles see:

UNM Site Off The Table For City Homeless Shelter; PR Pressure Tactic Failed; Mayor Keller Caught “Flat Footed”; BERNCO Has Funding

Mayor Tim Keller “Jumps The Gun” On Homeless Shelter Site Selection Identifying UNM Site As His Preference; UNM President And Regents Have Yet To Announce Any Backing

Compromise, Consensus And Concessions Needed For City Homeless Shelter; Vote YES On Bond Question 2

Ever since Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham issued her Executive Orders to close the state there have been major outcry’s and complaints of “executive abuse of power” and arguments that the orders are violating people’s civil rights protected by the United States and New Mexico State Constitutions. The New Mexico Republican Party and the New Mexico Sheriff’s Association have now joined the 3 ring Republican Circus of Criticism against Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham.

This blog article is a deep dive analysis of the recent developments and a discussion of the law when it comes to the constitutional arguments made against the Governor’s public heath orders.

RECENT NEWS DEVELOPMENTS

On Sunday, May 10, it was reported that New Mexico Republican Party Chairman and the President of the County Sherriff’ Association are asking United States Attorney General William Barr to look into Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham’s health orders aimed at stopping the spread of COVID-19. State Republican Party Chairman Steve Pierce and Cibola County Sherriff President Tony Mace each sent letters to Barr last week seeking a review into the health orders that have shuttered some businesses since late March. They say the orders, which have closed several small businesses, violate resident’s civil rights.

Pearce wrote Barr:

“We want to express our fears and frustrations regarding New Mexico Governor Lujan Grisham’s public health order, a policy many in our state believe to be a blatant violation of peoples’ civil rights, liberties and their right to conduct free commerce … The situation in New Mexico is one that is unjust and inequitable.”

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2020/may/10/new-mexico-gop-sheriffs-appeal-william-barr-over-m/?utm_campaign=shareaholic&utm_medium=facebook&utm_source=socialnetwork&fbclid=IwAR0K3Qd0rdBPwvrNBVaSEeJvN5A2vVEQMLHiBhnBVGq0Bo2VFVji_ECov9Y

Sheriff Tony Mace wrote Barr:

“The governor has been discriminatory in her policies, keeping big box corporate giants open, draining New Mexico dollars out of state, while shutting down mom and pop locally owned establishments. … This is not only preferential treatment for the big box stores but a violation of the civil rights of our small business owners whose livelihoods are now in free fall.”

https://www.kob.com/new-mexico-news/sheriffs-ask-ag-barr-to-review-new-mexico-health-orders/5724610/?cat=500

BOTH “BITCHING IS NOT FIXIN” NOR MAKES IT TRUE

Republican State Party Chairman Steve Pearce and the New Mexico Sheriff’s Association President Tony Mace can bitch all they want to whoever they want about the Executive Health Orders of Governor Mitchell Lujan during the corona virus pandemic, but what they say does not make it true. Both are dead wrong when they think the Governor has no authority to issue the health orders. The only thing that both Chairman Pierce and Sheriff Mace are revealing to the United States Attorney General and the public is just how ignorant they are of the law unless it’s just pathetic grandstanding on their part.

Apparently, Cibola County Sherriff Mace never travels to Albuquerque to go retail shopping nor goes to restaurants because if he did he would see thousands of empty parking spaces at Coronado Shopping Center, Winrock Shopping Center and ABQ Uptown where all the “big box” stores are closed. He would also see the empty parking spaces at big chain restaurants like Chile’s, Season’s 54, Olive Garden, Red Lobster, the Cheese Factory just to mention a few who now offer only curbside service. The New Mexico State Police has also closed down the big box stores of Total Wine and a Hobby Lobby, both part of a national chain.

If the arguments being made by Sheriff Mace sound familiar, they are. They are very similar to the constitutional arguments Mace and the New Mexico Sheriffs association made to oppose the “red flag” law enacted by the 2020 New Mexico legislature allowing the seizure of guns by court order from individuals deemed an imminent danger and threat to themselves or others. Then, as now, Mace argues there is an unreasonable taking of property and a denial of due process of law.

It’s downright embarrassing and hypocritical that the likes of former US Congressman Steve Pierce would send a letter to Attorney General Barr. Pierce is a former member of the ultra-right-wing Congressional Freedom Caucus and he is a strong supporter of President Donald Trump. Pierce has yet to criticize any of the executive orders President Trump has issued during the pandemic.

Least anyone forget, Steve Pearce also ran for Governor as the Republican nominee against Democrat Michelle Lujan Grisham and he lost in a landslide. Based on what Steve Pierce wrote and his actions now, there is little doubt he would have done absolutely NOTHING during this deadly pandemic to “flatten the curve”. A Governor Pierce would have ignored the spread of the disease allowing it to run its course resulting in even more deaths of many New Mexicans.

Both Steve Pearce and Tony Mace apparently believe that commerce and the economy Trump’s the rights of “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness” just as much guaranteed under the constitution as the right to commerce. Their actions now call into question what they will do if a vaccine is found and if mandatory inoculation is authorized by congress or state governments which has in fact happened in the past.

BACKGROUND

On March 11, Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham became the first New Mexico Governor to invoke the 2003 Public Health Emergency Response Act (PHERA), issuing an Executive Order declaring a “public health emergency” giving her administration broad powers to deal with the coronavirus . The governor urged people to avoid public gatherings, sanitize common surfaces and minimize contact with other individuals, even if it means staying home from church or going out less often in order to slow transmission of the virus.

On March 12, New Mexico Health Secretary Kathy Kunkel announced a ban on public mass gatherings of 100 people or more, as the state’s efforts to slow the spread of the coronavirus rapidly intensified. The ban announced applies to facilities such as auditoriums, stadiums, arena, large conference rooms, meeting halls, theaters, or any other confined indoor or outdoor space. The ban was later modified to prevent gatherings of more than 5 and require social distancing of 6 feet.

https://www.abqjournal.com/1430774/nm-health-secretary-issues-ban-on-large-public-gatherings.html

On April 30, Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham announced that she was extending the quarantine orders another two weeks to May 15. The order was set to expire May 1. Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham extended and the announced closures of all “non-essential” businesses statewide until May 15. The mandated closures included all retail stores, including malls, offices, work-spaces, retailers, except curbside-delivery will be allowed, dine-in restaurants and bars, except curbside-delivery, liquor establishments, malls, gyms, barber shops and salons, theaters and the 14 day quarantine order for out-of-state airport travelers Social distancing was mandated as was the limitation of people gathering to 5 or less.

You can read more the Executive Orders here:

https://www.governor.state.nm.us/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/COVID-19-DOH-Order-fv.pdf

http://www.rld.state.nm.us/uploads/PressRelease/b88957513a09474898000e52177885b3/UPDATED_DOH_PHO.pdf

ACCELERATED EFFORTS TO FIND A VACCINE

News agencies are reporting that the medical research to find a vaccine for the corona virus is being expedited by medical researchers, and a vaccine just may be a few months away.

According to the Milken Institute, an independent economic think tank in California, there are currently more than 40 clinical trials around the word attempting to find a vaccine for the corona virus. A joint $1 billion collaboration agreement has been announced by the U.S. government and Johnson & Johnson on March 30 to develop a vaccine. The approaches are varied, but all involve training the body’s immune system to recognize and remember the virus and produce antibodies to fight the disease.

https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2020/04/harvards-coronavirus-vaccine-efforts/

A vaccine would normally take years, if not decades, to develop. Researchers hope to achieve the same amount of work in only a few months. Most experts think a vaccine is likely to become available by mid-2021, about 12-18 months after the new virus, known officially as Sars-CoV-2, first emerged. That would be a huge scientific feat and there are no guarantees it will work.

https://www.bbc.com/news/health-51665497

MOST NOTABLE ACT OF DEFIANCE RESULTS IN NM SUPREME COURT COMPLIANCE ORDER

The most notable act of defiance thus far has come from Democrat Grants Mayor Martin Hicks, who has reopened city hall and ordered city workers back to work. On Monday, April 27, Hicks vowed in defiance to allow all small businesses in Grants to reopen and he encouraged businesses in his city to defy the governor’s orders and reopen to the public. Governor Lujan Grisham for her part said the mayor’s plan makes “absolutely no sense whatsoever” and warned that State Police would continue enforcing the health orders.

When asked about possible legal action against him, Hicks said:

“Bring it on baby, she is violating the Constitution of the United States of America and if she writes me a ticket I am going to sue her. I’m not going to sue her in state court, I’m going to sue her in federal court, where the U.S. Attorney General can look at it.”

https://www.cibolacitizen.com/breaking-news-news/mayor-determined-stand-his-ground

Mayor Hicks was given a cease and desist order by the New Mexico Attorney General and the Attorney General took the matter to New Mexico Supreme Court. On April 30, the New Mexico Supreme Court ordered Grants Mayor Martin “Modey” Hicks to comply with the state’s emergency public health orders and to obey the state’s pandemic-related restrictions on business operations. If Mayor Hicks fails to honor the Supreme Court orders, he could wind up jailed for contempt of court and the Attorney General could seek his removal from office.

NEW MEXICO REPUBLICANS MAKE CONSTITUTIONAL ARGUMENTS

On Tuesday, April 28, New Mexico House Republican legislators sent a letter to the Governor urging her to accelerate the lifting of restrictions and also made arguments that the Governor exceeded her authority. They argued that many businesses won’t survive if restrictions last through mid-May. They also said New Mexicans are growing restless and may take matters into their own hands. The lawmakers wrote there is a need “to keep the situation from devolving into social chaos.”

In a conference call with the media to release the letter, the New Mexico Republican law makers went so far as to suggest that civil unrest and “social chaos” will soon occur if the state is not reopened for business soon. Republican House Minority Whip Rod Montoya of Farmington told reporters that the state needs to avoid a “Kent State situation”. Kent State was where the Ohio National Guard shot Viet Nam war protesters in 1970.

TRUMP INCITES INSURRECTION AND CIVIL DISOBEDIENCE

President Donald Trump has gotten into the act of promoting civil disobedience like that of Mayor Hicks against Governor Lujan Grisham. On April 17, in a dangerous series of tweets, President Trump incited citizen insurrection against the duly elected Democratic governors of the states of Michigan, Minnesota and Virginia where the Governors are doing their best to “flatten the curve” of the pandemic with little or no help from Trump. One day after Trump issued guidance for re-opening America that clearly deferred decision-making to the Governors of the states, Trump undercut his own guidance by calling for criminal acts against the Democratic governors for not opening fast enough.

Trump tweeted, “LIBERATE MINNESOTA!” followed immediately by “LIBERATE MICHIGAN!” and then “LIBERATE VIRGINIA, and save your great 2nd Amendment. It is under siege!” The day before there were demonstrations in Michigan where armed protesters surrounded the state capitol building in Lansing chanting “Lock her up!” in reference to Democratic Governor Gretchen Whitmer, and “We will not comply,” in reference to her extension of the state’s coronavirus-related stay-at-home order. Smaller armed groups protested on the state capitol grounds in Richmond, Virginia, and outside the governor’s mansion in St. Paul, Minnesota.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2020/04/17/liberate-michigan-trump-constitution/

On Monday, May 11, President Trump accused without evidence Democratic Governors of moving to reopen their states too slowly amid the coronavirus pandemic to hurt his chances of reelection. In a tweet, Trump singled out the battleground state of Pennsylvania, where officials in four counties are threatening to defy Gov. Tom Wolf’s stay-at-home order, which was extended for most of the state through June 4. Trump tweeted:

“The great people of Pennsylvania want their freedom now, and they are fully aware of what that entails. … The Democrats are moving slowly, all over the USA, for political purposes. They would wait until November 3rd if it were up to them. Don’t play politics. Be safe, move quickly!”

A recent Yahoo News/YouGov poll found 59% of Americans believe states such as Georgia, Florida, Minnesota and Texas are “moving too fast” to reopen. while only 33% say the pace is “about right.” Just 8% say it’s “too slow.” Public health experts, including members of the White House coronavirus task force, have warned that reopening too soon could lead to more death and economic damage. Trump has acknowledged that “there will be more death” as states move to relax their stay-at-home mandates in the coming months.

https://sports.yahoo.com/trump-pennsylvania-coronavirus-reopening-death-know-what-that-entails-161047736.html

GOVERNOR GETS HIGH MARKS FOR HANDLING PANDEMIC

On Apr 24, 2020, “The Majority Institute – Public Policy Polling” released its newest New Mexico survey. It found that Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham has a 62% approval rating for her handling of the coronavirus, to only 26% who disapprove for a net +36 rating.

Lujan Grisham secured overwhelming support from both Democrats (83% to 9%) and independents (60% to 28%) for her handling of the virus and received good marks from 32% of Republicans as well. 63% of voters in the state think the state’s response to the coronavirus has been ‘about right.’ Only 27% think it’s overreacting.

By contrast just 35% of voters think the federal response to the virus has been about right, with 49% saying that the Trump administration’s response has been an under reaction. Lujan Grisham’s overall approval rating shows a high degree of popularity, with 59% approving and just 32% disapproving of the job she’s doing. By contrast Trump has only a 40% approval rating, with 56% of voters disapproving of him.

https://majorityinstitute.com/latest/lujan-grisham-bests-trump-51-points-coronavirus-response?fbclid=IwAR096gVrXyx0nfAiOKOE7Jb7DF_IVKT9OVxEoB4p6bN1x60TyQcwHXo0xCA

CONSTITUTIONAL ARGUMENTS MADE AGAINST PUBLIC HEALTH ORDERS

Five major arguments have been made that the Governor’s Executive Orders violate rights protected by the United States and State Constitutions:

1. Executive Orders are not law and only a legislative body can enact laws and prescribe remedies under those laws enacted. According to this argument, Executive Orders are not law over the “private citizen” and an Executive Order only has force and effect of law within the executive branch and all agencies in that branch.

2. Executive Orders mandating the closure of gun stores violate the Second Amendment right to bear arms under the United State Constitution.

3. Executive Order mandating the closure of businesses violates a person’s Fourth Amendment right under the United State Constitution against unreasonable search and seizure and that property can only be seized with a court approved warrant. According to one argument offered, a seizure in not just the physical property but includes prohibiting the labor people who own the business and the loss of income from the closure of the business. A “seizure” of property occurs when “there is some meaningful interference with an individual’s possessory interests in that property.” United States v. Jacobsen, 466 U.S. 109, 113 .

4. Executive Order mandating the closure of businesses violates the 14th Amendment of the United States constitution by depriving “any person of life, liberty and property, without due process of law.

5. Executive Orders deprive citizens of “equal protection” under the law and no special privilege, under law can be given to one entity, person or business, that does not give equally to all others. Where one business is order closed by law enforcement, while a similar business selling merchandise is allowed to stay open, the closed business is deprived of equal protection under the law.

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

The blunt truth is that virtually all the listed 5 constitutional arguments made against the Governor’s Public Health Executive orders are outright wrong or seriously misplaced with application. The United States Supreme court has said in rulings that it is constitutional in a public health crisis for the government to require people to do certain things or to prohibit certain things that they normally would not do or could do.

US SUPREME COURT HAS RULED IN PAST GOVERNMENT CAN ORDER MANDATORY VACCINATION

Given Trump’s and the GOP’s denial of scientific and medical research, such as in their denial of global warming, it is highly likely that it will not matter to them if a vaccine is developed for the corona virus. Trump himself did not take the warnings of the pandemic seriously when told of it repeatedly for 3 months and he even refuses to wear a protective mask. Trump did nothing to prepare the country for the pandemic which resulted in the country being totally unprepared for it. Trump also wanted the virus to run its course believing it would pass within a few months.

If Trump and the Republicans are still in power after the 2020 November general election, it is doubtful they will compel mandatory vaccination if in fact a vaccine is developed for the corona virus, even though there is historical precedent where the United State Supreme has ruled that the government has the authority to order vaccination of the public to curb disease. Trump will no doubt promote civil disorder once again for his base to resist vaccinations and perhaps Steve Pierce, Sheriff Mace and Mayor Hicks will do the same in New Mexico.

The first legal precedent where it was held government can mandate vaccinations dates backs to 1905 during the small pox epidemic. In the United State Supreme Court case of Jacobson v. Massachusetts, 197 U.S. 11 (1905), the Supreme Court upheld the authority of states to enforce compulsory vaccination laws. The United States Supreme Court upheld the authority of Cambridge, Massachusetts, to require smallpox vaccinations when a Massachusetts minister refused to get a vaccination for the disease.

The US Supreme Court’s decision was that the freedom of the individual must sometimes be subordinated to the common welfare and is subject to the police power of the state. The court ruled that the state did have a right to legally require the vaccinations with the United State Supreme Court coming down in favor of state governments being allowed to mandate vaccinations so long as it is reasonable to protect the public health, safety and welfare of citizens.

EXECUTIVE ORDERS CAN BE ISSUED TO THE EXTENT ALLOWED BY LEGISLATIVE BRANCH

In 1952, the United States Supreme Court ruled in the case of Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer, 343 U.S. 579 (1952) that the authority to issue executive orders is whatever authority the legislative branch gives to the executive.

On April 8, 1952, to avert a nationwide strike of steel workers, which he believed would jeopardize national defense, President Harry Truman issued an Executive Order directing the Secretary of Commerce to seize and operate most of the steel mills in the United States. The Executive Order was not based upon any specific statutory authority. It was based generally upon all powers vested in the President by the Constitution and laws of the United States and as President of the United States and Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces.

The Secretary of Commerce issued an order seizing the steel mills and directing their presidents to operate them as managers for the United States. The steel companies sued the Secretary of Commerce in Federal District Court asking for a “declaratory judgment” and an injunction to prevent the Secretary of Commerce from enforcing Truman’s Executive Order.

The United States Supreme Court ruled that the President’s power, if any, to issue such an emergency orders must stem either from an act of Congress or from the Constitution itself . The United States Supreme Court ruled that Truman’s Executive Order was not authorized by the Constitution nor laws of the United States. There was no congressional statute which expressly or implicitly authorized the President to take possession of the steel mills.

The power Truman sought was found by the Supreme Court to be and exercise of lawmaking power, which the Constitution vests in the Congress alone. Absent congressional authority granted by statute, or a provision in the Constitution, the President of the United States has no inherent power to assume the role of lawmaker in times of emergency. In other words, the power of the President and by extension state governors to issue executive orders is whatever power the congress or the state legislators gives to them.

Since the 1952 Supreme Court ruling, Congress has enacted many laws giving the President executive order authority to take action. A good example is the Defense Production Act. Trump has invoked the Defense Production Act (DPA). Invoking this act gave Trump broad authorities to order domestic manufacturing industries to make products the nation needs in a time of crisis, such as masks and ventilators. The DPA was is modeled after the laws from 1941 and 1942 that gave the White House the ability to tell private companies what to make for war time Ford Motor Company made nearly 300,000 vehicles, including tanks, for World War II.

NEW MEXICO LEGISLATURE HAS EMPOWERED GOVERNOR

In New Mexico, the legislature has empowered the Governor issue the executive orders to respond to a health emergency that threatens the public health, safety and welfare, such as the corona virus pandemic with the enactment of the Public Health Emergency Response Act. On March 11, Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham became the first New Mexico Governor to invoke the 2003 Public Health Emergency Response Act (PHERA), issuing an Executive Order declaring a “public health emergency” giving her administration broad powers to deal with the coronavirus.

The link to the New Mexico statute is here:

https://law.justia.com/codes/new-mexico/2006/nmrc/jd_ch12art10a-712b.html

You can read the Executive Orders here:

https://www.governor.state.nm.us/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/COVID-19-DOH-Order-fv.pdf

http://www.rld.state.nm.us/uploads/PressRelease/b88957513a09474898000e52177885b3/UPDATED_DOH_PHO.pdf

PATHETIC GRANDSTANDING

The actions of Democrat Grants Mayor Martin “Modey” Hicks vowing in defiance to allow all small businesses in Grants to reopen is about as pathetic as it gets seeing as he does not have that authority and the Governor does. The interviews Mayor “Modey” Hicks gave to the news media looked like that of an unhinged fool of New Mexico proportions. His confrontation with a constituent taking issue with him said it all and can be viewed here:

https://www.kob.com/new-mexico-news/emotions-run-high-as-mayor-of-grants-defies-governors-order-allows-businesses-to-reopen/5711810/

It appears that Republican lawmakers and Republican Chairman Steve Pearce cannot handle the fact that Governor Lujan Grisham is getting high marks for her handling of the pandemic by the public. The Governor has said that it’s time for New Mexico to consider slowly relaxing its restrictions even though she has extended the current public health orders through May 15, yet Pearce and Sheriff Mace want the United States Attorney General to interfere with state’s rights. Governor Lujan Grisham has made it clear that her administration is working on detailed plans for reopening the state in phases.

But none of that matters to the Republican law makers nor to Pearce and they could not care less. Both Steve Pearce and New Mexico Republican House leadership choose to promote a right-wing agenda more concerned about commerce and profits and not people’s lives nor the public health, safety and welfare. Steve Pearce made it clear that making money “Trumps” life when he wrote in part to Barr that the Governor’s orders interfere with the “right to conduct free commerce.” They apparently want to reopen the state sooner rather later for business too soon and risk another spike or another wave of reported corona virus cases.

CONCLUSION

Cool heads must prevail during these very difficult times, but the antics of some elected officials, such as Democrat Grants Mayor Martin “Modey” Hicks Mayor and the Republican House leadership shows the opposite. It was totally irresponsible for the Republican law makers to say civil unrest and “social chaos” will soon occur if the state is not reopened for business soon.

The Republican elected officials and Republican Party Chairman Steve Pearce ignore that New Mexico citizens and businesses are in fact doing their very best to honor the restrictions placed upon them and are making the sacrifice to ensure the state does not re open too soon.

Republican State Chairman Steve Pearce and Sheriff Mace need to “shut the front door” and get the hell out of the way and let the Governor lead and exercise the authority she has been given by the legislature. New Mexico lives are at stake.

For a related blog article see:

Political Grand Standing At Its Worst By Elected Republicans; Gov. MLG Gets High Marks; Mistake For Economic Recovery Council Not To Be Open To Public

City finances have been totally upended as a result of the corona virus pandemic and its impact on the city economy and in turn city gross receipts tax returns have dramatically declined. On March 16, 2020, the New Mexico Department of Finance, Local Government Division, issued Memorandum authorizing the New Mexico municipalities to submit their last year’s fiscal budget for 2019-2020 budget as their fiscal budget for year 2020-2021 until reliable tax revenue projections can be determined. That is exactly what the City Council did when it enacted the budget.

For this year’s fiscal year 2019-2020 which ends on June 30, 2020, APD has an approved general fund budget of $188.9 million dollars, which represents an increase of 10.7% or $18.3 million above last year’s budget. According to the approved budget, APD has 1,560 approved full-time positions with 1,040 sworn police budgeted positions and 520 budgeted civilian positions. The links to city hall budgets are here:

http://documents.cabq.gov/budget/fy-19-approved-budget.pdf (Page 209)

https://www.cabq.gov/dfa/budget/annual-budget

2020-2021 OPERATING BUDGET ENACTED

On April 13, 2020, on a unanimous vote of 9-0, the Albuquerque City Council enacted R-20-31 which is the city’s operating budget for fiscal year 2020-2021. The City Council’s operating budget, R-20-31, enacted is a “bare bones budget” resolution consisting of only 7 pages of line item appropriations for each of the city departments. There is no explanation or elaboration on the actual use of the millions appropriated in the budget. No public hearings were conducted that would have allowed comment and input from the public. The 2020-2021 APD operating budget goes into effect on July 1, 2020 and ends June 31, 2021. The City Council can still decide to follow the normal process and have the Keller Administration submit a “performance based” budget and conduct public hearings.

APD STRUCTURE AND PERSONNEL

The Albuquerque Police Department (APD ) has five major bureaus:

1. The Field Services Bureau
2. Investigative Bureau
3. The Compliance Bureau
4. The Administrative Support Bureau
5. The Support Services Bureau

Each bureau has a Deputy Chief appointed by the APD Chief of Police

APD divides the city into six geographical areas called “area commands.” Each area command is managed by an APD Commander (formerly called Captains) and staffed with between 82 and 119 officers, depending on size of the area command and level of calls for service. All officers are dispatched through the police communications operators by calling (505) 242-cops for non-emergency calls or 911 in an emergency.

APD also has 3 divisions that are separate from the other divisions and they are:

1. The Bike Patrol
2. Operations Review
3. Others

https://www.cabq.gov/police/contact-the-police/area-commands

On August 1, 2019, the Albuquerque Police Department (APD) issued what it entitled “Staffing Snapshot” providing a report on the number of sworn police officers APD has and where they have been assigned. This is the most recent “snapshop” available, the actual numbers may have changed. According to the report, APD has a total of 972 sworn officers with 600 officers in the field patrolling 6 area commands and neighborhoods in 3 seperate shifts. The snapshot does not account for time delays from Human Resources and Payroll that have effective dates into the futur and it does not account that APD had spring graduating class and it has been reported that it now has upwards of 1,000 sworn police.

TOTAL SWORN APD STAFFING

The staffing of APD by sworn polic officers is as follows:

FIELD SERVICES BUREAU — TOTAL STAFFING: 600

The field service bureau’s primary function is to provide uniformed police officers throughout the city and at the six police substations and area commands. Officers assigned to field services handle calls for service and patrol the area commands in 3 separate shifts. These are the sworn police in uniform that are on the front line of law enforcement dealing with hundreds of thousands of calls for service a year. This is where the “rubber hits the road” when it comes to keeping neighborhoods safe and community-based policing. The number of sworn officers assigned to each area command is somewhat fluid and based on the number of calls for service in the area command. Area commands with higher crime rates have always had far more officers assigned than those that have lower crime rates. One Deputy Police Chief is appointed to oversee and manage the Field Services Bureau.

AREA COMMAND STAFFING LEVELS

There are 6 area commands. Following is a breakdown of sworn police assigned to each one of the area commands:

SOUTHWEST AREA COMMAND: 58 Patrol Officers, 1 Commander, 3 Lieutenants, 7 Sergeants

The Southwest Area Command is bordered by Interstate 40 the north, the Rio Grande to the east, the South Valley to the south, and Albuquerque city limits to the west.

VALLEY AREA COMMAND: 67 Patrol Officers , 1 Commander, 3 Lieutenants, 6 Sergeants, 2 School Resource Officers

The Valley Area Command is bordered by the Albuquerque city limits to the north and south, Interstate 25 to the east, and the Rio Grande, Los Ranchos de Albuquerque, and the North Valley to the west. This Area Command has an extensive history of having the second highest crime rates in the City.

SOUTHEAST AREA COMMAND: 89 Patrol Officers, 4 Lieutenants, 9 Sergeants, 2 School Resource Officers

The Southeast Area Command is bordered by Interstate 40 to the north, Eubank Boulevard to the east, Kirtland Air Force Base and Albuquerque city limits to the south, and Interstate 25 to the west. This Area Command has an extensive history of having the highest crime rates in the city. Following is the staffing reported:

NORTHEAST AREA COMMAND: 78 Patrol Officers, 1 Commander, 3 Lieutenants, 8 Sergeants, 2 School Resource Officers

The Northeast Area Command is bordered by Albuquerque city limits to the north, Eubank Boulevard to the east, Interstate 40 to the south, and Interstate 25 to the west. This Area Command has a more recent history of increasing crime rates in the city, especially residential break-ins and robberies. Following is the staffing reported:

FOOTHILLS AREA COMMAND: 57 Patrol Officers, 1 Commander, 2 Lieutenants, 8 Sergeants, 3 School Resource Officers

The Foothills Area Command is bordered by San Antonio NE to the north, the Sandia Foothills to the east, Kirtland Air Force Base to the south, and Eubank Boulevard to the west. This Command Area has some of the lowest crime rates in the City. Following is the staffing reported:

NORTH WEST AREA COMMAND:59 Patrol Officers, 1 Commander, 3 Lieutenants, 7 Sergeants, 1 School Resource Officers
The Northwest Area Command is bordered by Albuquerque city limits to the west and north, the west bank of the Rio Grande to the east, and Interstate 40 to the south. This Command Area has some of the lowest crime rates in the City.

OTHER BUREAU STAFFING AREAS

Following is the breakdown of staffing in the remaining bureaus and units of APD:

INVESTIGATIVE BUREAU – TOTAL STAFFING: 173

The Investigative Bureau consists of Criminal Investigations Division, the Special Investigations Division, Scientific Evidence Division and the Real Time Crime Center. This bureau deals primarily with the completion of felony investigations and prepares the cases, including evidence gathering and processing scientific evidence such as DNA, blood and fingerprints, for submission to prosecuting agencies, primarily the Bernalillo County District Attorney’s Office. Units in the bureau include homicide and auto theft. Following is the staffing reported:
142 Detectives, 1 Deputy Chief, 3 Commanders, 6 Lieutenants, 10 Sergeants

COMPLIANCE BUREAU – TOTAL STAFFING: 61 (40 Detectives, 1 Deputy Chief, 3 Commanders, 1 Deputy Commander, 6 Lieutenants, 10 Sergeants)

The Compliance Bureaus consists of the Internal Affairs Professional Standards Division, Policy and Procedure Division, Accountability and Oversight Division, Internal Affairs Force Division and the Behavioral Health and Crisis Intervention Section. One of the major concentrations of this bureau is the ongoing cooperation with the Department of Justice (DOJ) consent decree (CASA) and its implementation of its terms and conditions. Internal Affairs deals with investigation police misconduct cases. Crisis Intervention deals with the crisis intervention teams who deal with the mentally ill. Policy and Procedures deals with the review and writing of standard operating procedures.

SUPPORT SERVICES BUREAU – TOTAL STAFFING: 116 (68 Officers, 1 Deputy Chief, 2 Commanders, 8 Lieutenants, 20 Sergeants, 6 Cadets/Pre-hires)

The Support Services Bureau is comprised by the Homeland Security and Special Events Division, the Metro Traffic Division, the Records Division, the APD Police Academy, and the Public Safety Districts such as the Downtown Public Safety Division.

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPORT BUREAU – TOTAL STAFFING: 43 (34 Officers, 1 Deputy Chief, 1 Commander, 2 Lieutenants, 4 Sergeants)

This bureau provides clerical, secretarial, administrative, budgetary preparation and grant application support to the entire APD Department.

SPECIAL OPERATIONS AND TACTICAL UNIT – TOTAL STAFFING: 30 (24 Officers, 1 Commander, 2 Lieutenants, 3 Sergeants)

This unit consists of the Special Weapons and Tactics Unit (SWAT). SWAT is trained to deal with situations of unusual danger, especially when requiring aggressive tactics or enhanced firepower, as in rescuing hostages, thwarting terrorist attacks or assassinations, and subduing heavily armed suspects.

BIKE PATROL- TOTAL STAFFING: 16

The bike patrol is what the name implies: Uniformed police ride on bikes an patrol the areas assigned to show a police presence such as in the Downtown Central Area, the City Plaza and Nob Hill. A total of 16 officers are assigned to the Bike Patrol.

OPERATIONS REVIEW: TOTAL STAFFING 16 (7 Officers, 4 Lieutenants and 5 Sergeants)

Police operations is generally defined as standard operating procedures, review of job duties, responsibilities, and activities that law enforcement agents complete in the field.

OTHER SWORN POLICE: TOTAL STAFFING 51

There are 41 APD recruits, laterals and sergeants assigned to on-the-job training.
10 sworn APD are assigned to Metro Court officers to provide security to the Metropolitan Court and Mayor’s security detail that provides protection to the Mayor and security to the Mayor’s Office.

https://www.kob.com/albuquerque-news/apd-staffing-numbers-how-many-officers-are-in-your-neighborhood-/5449523/?cat=500

GROWING APD

Since Mayor Tim Keller has taken office on December 1, 2017, APD has added 116 sworn police officers to the force. APD’s goal is to spend $88 million dollars starting in the 2018-2019 fiscal year, over a four-year period, with $32 million dollars of recurring expenditures, to hire 322 sworn officers and expand APD from 878 sworn police officers to 1,200 officers.

The massive investment is being done in order to full fill Mayor Tim Keller’s 2017 campaign promise to increase the size of APD return to community-based policing as a means to reduce the city’s high crime rates and to implement the Department of Justice mandated reforms under the CASA. Last year’s 2018-2019 fiscal year budget provided for increasing APD funding from 1,000 sworn police to 1,040. This year’s 2019-2020 fiscal year budget has funding for 1,040 sworn police.

APD 2020-2021 OPERATING BUDGET

Following is the 2020-2021 Albuquerque Police Department (APD) line item budget enacted by the City Council on March 16, 2020 without any budget hearings:

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPORT: $18,835,000. This funding is presumably for the Administrative Support Bureau which includes case management reports, clerical staff, the forensic lab and police dispatch (911).

INVESTIGATIVE SERVICES: $45,622,000. This funding is presumably for the Investigative Bureau and various specialized detective units.

NEIGHBORHOOD POLICING: $104,730,000. The funding is presumably for the Field Services Bureau and 640 sworn police, assigned to 3 shifts and the 6 area commands for community-based policing

OFF-DUTY POLICE OVERTIME: $2,225,000. This funding is to pay for police overtime and for years the actual funding has always exceeded budget and has approached $10 to $14 Million a year.

PRISONER TRANSPORT: $2,423,000. This funding is used to transport all arrestees to the Westside Jail and presumably part of the Support Services Bureau.

PROFESSIONAL ACCOUNTABILITY: $34,042,000. This funding is essentially funding for the Compliance Bureau and the 5 divisions it consists of and includes APD Academy training associated with the Department of Justice Consent Decree reforms and enforcement.

TOTAL APD OPERATING BUDGET: $207,877,000

APD REQUIRED STAFFING FOR DOJ CONSENT DECREE

According to the August 1, 2019 “Staffing Snapshot”, the Compliance Bureau has total staffing of 61 sworn police consisting of 40 Detectives, 1 Deputy Chief, 3 Commanders, 1 Deputy Commander, 6 Lieutenants, 10 Sergeants. The Professional Accountability budget line item is essentially for and the Compliance Bureaus consisting of the Internal Affairs Professional Standards Division, Policy and Procedure Division, Accountability and Oversight Division, Internal Affairs Force Division and the Behavioral Health and Crisis Intervention Section and includes funding for training provided by the APD Academy for constitutional policing practices.

One of the major concentrations of the Compliance Bureau is the ongoing cooperation with the Department of Justice (DOJ) consent decree (CASA) and its implementation of its terms and conditions. Internal Affairs deals with investigation police misconduct cases. Crisis Intervention deals with the crisis intervention teams who deal with the mentally ill. Policy and Procedures deals with the review and writing of standard operating procedures.

The city currently employees one Assistant City Attorney who is the former United State Attorney for New Mexico paying $150,000 and one retired Federal Magistrate billed and paid for on contract to review and write APD Policy.

ANALYSIS AND COMMENTARY

The most critical functions of the Albuquerque City Council is the oversight authority over city finances, all appropriations, the job performance of the various departments and enacting a balanced budget. The oversight authority includes having public hearings on the city’s budget to allow public the opportunity to give input on how the city spends taxpayer money. Further, the budget process is critical to force all city departments to justify their budgets and to adjust department’s budgets as the need mandates it.

The City Budget is a “performance based” budget where each department prepares an analysis of accomplishments from the previous years. The statistics and accomplishment analysis are submitted to the City Council in the Mayor’s proposed budget. Normally, a massive detailed budget analysis document, called the Mayor’s Proposed Budget, is submitted along with the enabling legislation making the city budgetary appropriations. The council, acting as a committee as a whole, normally schedules and conducts hearings on each of the City Departments, but that did happen this year.

The approach to enact the 2020-2021 city budget was a dramatic departure from all previous years. The 2020-2021 city budget was sponsored by Council Isaac Benton at the request of the Keller Administration. What this means is that the 7-page line item budget resolution was actually prepared by the Keller Administration and not by City Council Services. The 2020-2021 budget year does not begin until July 1, 2020, yet the city council felt it was necessary to enact an operating budget on April 13, without any public hearings.

The City Council was essentially too damn lazy to hold any hearings on the budget enacted and refused to exercise their budgetary oversight authority and chose to ignore the general public. Not a single hearing on the APD 2020-2021 budget nor any other Department budget, was convened by the City Council. The City Council President tried to justify the council’s failure to have hearings by saying that the budget enacted was a “month to month” budget which was an outright falsehood. When you read the resolution itself, millions are appropriated to each department reflecting funding for the entire year and there is no mention of “month to month” allocations. Further, city government cannot operate on “month to month” appropriation and is mandated to operate based on a fiscal year budget and it must be a balanced budget by law with no deficit spending allowed.

The Albuquerque City Council also plays a crucial oversight role of the Albuquerque Police Department (APD) including controlling its budget. Another critical responsibility of the City Council is to demand that APD be in compliance with the Department of Justice (DOJ) Court Approved Settlement Agreement mandated reforms. Each time the Federal Court appointed Monitor presented his critical reports of APD to the City Council, the City Council has essentially remained silent. Over the last 5 years, the City Council has declined to demand accountability from both Mayors and hold the APD command staff responsible for dragging their feet on the reforms.

The City Council has now enacted a $207,877,000 million dollar APD operating budget without any questions or budget hearings that includes a whopping $34,042,000 for CASA mandated functions, 61 sworn police to enforce the CASA mandates. The $207 million dollar plus APD budget ostensibly does not include the additional millions being paid to the Federal Monitor whose only function is to compile data and who has no management nor control over APD and who can not order or make changes within APD to get the department into compliance with the reforms.

The Court Approved Settlement Agreement was negotiated to be fully implemented within 4 years and after a full two years of compliance, the case is supposed to be dismissed. It has now been over 5 years and pushing 6 years since the settlement with the DOJ was negotiated. The $34 million plus line item contained in the 2020-2021 budget for Professional Accountability and the 61 sworn police assigned to enforce the CASA reforms demands a full explanation as to why complete compliance with the CASA has not been achieved by the APD command staff after a full 5 years. Without the holding of public hearings on the APD budget enacted, there is no way for the council nor the public to get a detailed explanation why the Keller Administration is still having problems with the Department of Justice Consent Decree.

The biggest complaint of all the DOJ consent decrees in the country is implementation and enforcement “go on and on” for years, costing millions in taxpayer dollars. It appears that is what happening in Albuquerque courtesy of the Albuquerque City Council. Apparently, the Albuquerque City Council is not even remotely curious as to why another $34 million dollars is needed for another one year for APD’s compliance bureau believing it’s easier to rush a budget and not do their job of oversight.

The 2020-2021 enacted operating budget goes into effect on July 1, 2020. The only decent thing to do at this point is for the City Council to go ahead and convene a few “committee of the whole meetings” and demand the Keller Administration to at least give an overview of how and where taxpayer money will be used and discuss their plans as to where the budget will be modified if at all.

For related blog articles see:

Federal Monitor Files 11th Compliance Audit Report Of APD Reforms; “Counter Casa Effect” Still Problematic; Order 100% Operational Compliance Within 6 Months Or Replace Chief Or Deputy Chiefs To Get Job Done

ABQ City Council Enacts 2020-2021 Operating Budget Without Public Hearings; City Faces Major Deficit, Budget Cuts And Furloughs; Hopes Pinned On Federal Bail Out And Economy Rebound

On May 4, 2020, the Federal Court Appointed Monitor James Ginger filed with the Federal Court his 11th Compliance Audit Report of the Albuquerque Police Department (APD) reforms mandated under the Court Approved Settlement Agreement (CASA). The report covers the eleventh monitoring period from August 1, 2019 to January 31, 2020.

The Federal Monitor’s report is 307 pages long and follows the format as all the previous 10 reports. Its a detailed audit of every paragraph of the consent decree and for that reason it is difficult to follow. This blog article highlights major finding of the report but in no way should it be considered as all inclusive. The blog article also covers the city’s pending motion to suspend portions of the CASA and the accomplishments under the CASA. The article concludes with “Analysis and Commentary”.

The entire 11th Federal Monitors report can be found at this link:

https://www.justice.gov/usao-nm/file/1274006/download

OPERATIONAL COMPLIANCE LEVELS

The CASA was negotiated to be fully implemented over a four-year period. It has now been over 5 full years. Under the terms and conditions of the CASA, once APD achieves a 95% compliance rate in 3 compliance areas, and maintains compliance for 2 years, the case can be dismissed.

For the purposes of the APD monitoring process, “compliance” consists of three levels: primary, secondary, and operational compliance levels.

The 3 compliance levels are:

1. 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.

2. SECONDARY COMPLIANCE: Secondary compliance is attained by implementing supervisory, managerial and executive practices designed to and be 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.

3. 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.

Page 9 of 307, Case 1:14-cv-01025-JB-SMV Document 578 Filed 05/04/20

11th FEDERAL AUDITORS REPORT COMPLIANCE STATUS ASSESSMENT

In the 10th Federal Monitor’s Report, APD was reported to have met 100% of CASA-established primary compliance requirements during the reporting period. To quote the audit “This means, in effect, that policy requiring compliance actions and processes are complete, and are reasonably designed to achieve the articulated goals of the CASA.” Secondary compliance rates (training) were reported at 81%, up from 79% and overall compliance rates are at 63%, the same as the 9th audit report.

In the 11th audit report that covered the time period of August 1, 2019 and ended in January 31, 2020, the federal monitor found APD was 100% in primary compliance, no change from 10th report, a 93% in secondary compliance, a change of 14.8% from the 10th report, and 66% in operational compliance, a change of 3%.

Primary Compliance relates mostly to development and implementation of acceptable policies and conforming to national practices.

APD is now in 93% Secondary Compliance as of the 11th reporting period, which means that effective follow-up mechanisms are beginning to be taken to ensure that APD personnel understand the requirements of promulgated policies in the areas of training, supervising, coaching, and disciplinary processes to ensure APD personnel understand the policies as promulgated and are capable of implementing them in the field.

APD is in 66% Operational Compliance with the requirements of the CASA, which means that 66% of the time, field personnel either perform tasks as required by the CASA, or that, when they fail, supervisory personnel note and correct in-field behavior that is not compliant with the requirements of the CASA.

POSITIVE NEWS REPORTED IN 11TH AUDIT REPORT

The Executive Summary reported news on the “administrative and operational fronts” of the settlement in 4 major areas:

1. “Policy development and promulgation has improved markedly … with proffered policies requiring little or no pressure from the monitoring team to move them to an acceptable level of specificity, applicability, and conformance with CASA requirements.”

2. “Training processes … have improved markedly; moving from old style lecture-memorize-test with multiple choice questions, to a more modern, … more effective interactive process that requires the ability to identify problems, analyze those problems, and create solutions to those problems by working in small collaborative groups and demonstrating skills actually needed to manage: listening, assessing, analyzing, decision-making, and implementation management. As a result, learning has evolved to skills-level processes instead of an ability to memorize and parrot back information via multiple-choice tests.”

3. “Some levels of supervision and management have begun to pay meaningful attention to critical tasks involving specific components of the CASA: use of force, preparation of valid reports of in-field incidents, effective supervision and oversight, and well-focused managerial review and assessments … .”

4. “Compliance with the CASA is broadly seen as important at command levels and is beginning to be perceived positively by mid-management and supervisory ranks.”

Page 4 of 307, Case 1:14-cv-01025-JB-SMV, Document 578, Filed 05/04/20

According to the report, these 4 “key changes have taken years to have an impact on APD management systems, and more importantly, internal belief systems. These belief systems are, at times, not fully supportive of the change demanded by the CASA. The type of strategic change required by the CASA is difficult to instill and takes longer to implement the desired change than other more “old-style” management and leadership processes. However, we see signs that this perspective is in the nescient stages of taking hold and engendering initial change, albeit in the face of strong resistance in some quarters at APD.”

FAILURES AND “COUNTER CASA EFFECT” STILL NOTED IN 11TH REPORT

Despite all the progress made in training at the APD Academy, it was reported that APD personnel “were still failing to adhere to the requirements of the CASA found in past monitoring reports, including some instances moving beyond the epicenter of supervision to mid- and upper management levels of the organization.” The monitor found that “some in APD’s command levels continue to exhibit behaviors that “build bulwarks” [or walls] preventing fair and objective discipline, including a process of attempting to delay and in some cases successfully delaying the oversight processes until the timelines for administering discipline had been exceeded. [The] delays prevented an effective remedial response to behavior that is clearly in violation of established policy.”

Page 4 of 307, Case 1:14-cv-01025-JB-SMV, Document 578 Filed 05/04/20
Page 303 of 307, Case 1:14-cv-01025-JB-SMV Document 578 Filed 05/04/20

The Federal monitor reported that “since the beginning of the CASA compliance process that there were a few at APD who were overtly resistant to the CASA. [The Monitor] in the past [has] found evidence of a “counter-CASA effect” among some at the supervisory, mid-management, and command levels at APD. Those who knowingly or subconsciously count themselves in this group are beginning to face pressure to change their assessment of the value of the CASA. In some cases [they] have faced reasonably prompt and appropriate corrective efforts from the current executive levels of the APD for behavior that is not congruent with the CASA.” According to the report, “this as an essential “way forward” if APD is to move into full compliance. The remaining issue is that this pressure is neither uniform nor persistent.”

COUNTER CASA EFFECT EXPLAINED

It was on September 10, 2018, at a status telephone conference call held with US District Court Judge Robert Brack who at the time was presiding over the Court Approved Settlement Agreement (CASA) reforms that Federal Monitor Dr. James Ginger first told the federal judge that a group of “high-ranking APD officers” within the department were trying to thwart reform efforts.

The Federal Monitor revealed that the group of “high-ranking APD officers” were APD sergeants and lieutenants. Because sergeants and lieutenants are part of the police bargaining unit they remained in their positions and could not be removed by the Chief. APD Chief Michael Geier also reported last year to Judge Brack that he had noticed some “old-school resistance” to reforms mandated by the CASA. At the time, Chief Geier reported he replaced a number of commanders with others who agree with police reforms. However, Chief Geier reported he could not replace the sergeants nor lieutenants who were resisting the reforms because of the union contract.

Federal Monitor Ginger referred to the group as the “Counter-CASA effect”.

According to the Federal Monitors 10th report:

“Sergeants and lieutenants, at times, go to extreme lengths to excuse officer behaviors that clearly violate established and trained APD policy, using excuses, deflective verbiage, de minimis comments and unsupported assertions to avoid calling out subordinates’ failures to adhere to established policies and expected practice. Supervisors (sergeants) and mid-level managers (lieutenants) routinely ignore serious violations, fail to note minor infractions, and instead, consider a given case “complete”.

Under “Counter CASA Effects” in his 10th report the Federal Monitor reported:

“Some members of APD continue to resist actively APD’s reform efforts, including using deliberate counter-CASA processes. For example:

• Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) disciplinary timelines, appear at times to be manipulated by supervisory, management and command levels at the area commands, letting known violations lie dormant until timelines for discipline cannot be met;”

MONITOR NOTES STRONG, REASONED, AND EFFECTIVE COMPLIANCE EFFORTS IN 11TH REPORT

“Over the years, APD has improved its policy development process, training process, and has markedly improved the administrative oversight process. What remains is attaining mastery of the supervisory and operational management processes at the street level. While policy, training, and administration are certainly on the critical path for the APD reform project, the proof of process is observing, in practice, routine success at the operational and street level. Until those two processes are moved into operational compliance, there remains much to be done.”

During the reporting period, the monitor reported observing examples of strong, reasoned, and effective compliance efforts at APD as follows:

“• The Accountability and Oversight Division’s (AOD) and Performance Metrics Unit (PMU) has expanded both scope and capacity, and is providing meaningful, reasoned, and fact-based oversight of an expanding portion of the CASA’s requirements.

• While policy, training and administration are certainly on the critical path for the APD reform project, the proof of process is observing, in practice, routine success at the operational and street level. Until supervisory and mismanagement processes are moved into compliance, there remains much to be done.”

Page 304 of 307, Case 1:14-cv-01025-JB-SMV Document 578 Filed 05/04/20
Page 5 of 307, Case 1:14-cv-01025-JB-SMV , Document 578, Filed 05/04/20,

POSITIVE STRIDES MADE WITH HANDLING USE OF FORCE

The monitor reported “positive strides by APD with respect to handling uses of force, including instances where the chain of command reviewing use of force incidents has documented performance issues, policy violations, and mis-categorized uses of force. However, there still exists cultural and systemic issues that could impact Operational Compliance moving forward. Timeliness of use of force investigations are of particular concern, and proper staffing of units responsible for CASA related paragraphs needs to be monitored closely.”

The report found that “based on the recent positive strides that APD’s Training Academy has made providing training on its new use of force policies, it was determined that APD achieved Secondary Compliance in [a number of areas and paragraphs of the CASA.] This is an important milestone for the APD organization, as it now becomes possible to make Operational Compliance assessments for APD’s ability to report, investigate, and oversee uses of force. The true measure of its success is whether the training is being implemented by officers and supervisors in the field.”

Page 13 of 307, Case 1:14-cv-01025-JB-SMV Document 578 Filed 05/04/20

MONITOR RECOMMENDS STRATEGIC APPROACH TO COMPLIANCE EFFORTS

In the 11th Report, the federal monitor recommends that APD utilize a strategic approach to its compliance efforts as follows:

“We continue to recommend that APD take a more strategic approach to its CASA compliance efforts, by reviewing the strategic factors leading to compliance, the internal and external weaknesses in APD’s compliance efforts, opportunities for advancement of compliance efforts, and threats to the organization’s compliance statuses. To fail to adapt this modality will lead to the “fireman’s approach” to compliance—rushing from pressure point to pressure point; applying less-than-well-thought-out “solutions” via ad hoc responses instead of thoughtful, planned responses, such as leveraging strengths against identified weaknesses; and clearly, thoughtfully assessing threats to compliance goals and objectives, and taking reasoned approaches to minimize or eliminate those threats.

APD has done an effective job, for the most part, in addressing prefatory requirements of effective organizational response to threats: policy development and training. The next step is more difficult: building processes into systems and fine-tuning those systems to address effectively identified threats. These higher-level processes are commonly known as “SWOT” analyses, and using these analyses the organization can, in effect, predict the future and build systems to address critical issues before these issues actually occur.”

Page 304 and 305 of 307, Case 1:14-cv-01025-JB-SMV Document 578 Filed 05/04/20

SUMMARY OF APD ACCOMPLISHMENTS OVER 5 YEARS UNDER THE CASA

It was in November 2014, that the City and the Department of Justice entered into the Court Approved Settlement Agreement (CASA). The link to the CASA is here:

https://www.cabq.gov/mental-health-response-advisory-committee/documents/court-approved-settlement-agreement-final.pdf

As of November, 2019, a full 5 years has expired since the city entered into the CASA with the DOJ. From all appearances and practical purposes, and from review of the Federal Monitor’s reports, the City and APD have completed the following mandated reforms under the Court Approved Settlement Agreement:

1.After a full year of negotiations, new “use of force” and “use of deadly force” policies have been written, implemented and all APD sworn have received training on the policies.

2. All sworn police officers have received crisis management intervention training.

3. APD has created a “Use of Force Review Board” that oversees all internal affairs investigations of use of force and deadly force.

4. The Internal Affairs Unit has been divided into two sections, one dealing with general complaints and the other dealing with use of force incidents.

5. 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.

6. “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 having received training.

7. 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.

8. APD has revised and updated its policies on the mandatory use of lapel cameras by all sworn police officers.

9. The Repeat Offenders Project, known as ROP, has been abolished.

10. Civilian Police Oversight Agency has been created, funded, fully staffed and a director hired.

11. The Community Policing Counsels (CPCs) have been created in all area commands and the CPCs meet monthly.

12. The Mental Health Advisory Committee has been implemented.

13. The CASA identified that APD was understaffed. The City and APD are in the process of spending $88 million dollars, over a four-year period, with 32 million dollars of recurring expenditures, to hire 322 sworn officers and grow the department to 1,200 officers. As of January 1, 2020, APD has 949 full time police officers, up from 878 sworn police. The expansion thus far is attributed primarily to hiring from other departments and returning to work APD retirees.

14. In November, 2018 APD achieved 99.6% compliance with primary tasks, 75.4% secondary compliance and 59.5% operational compliance with APD making significant progress in overall compliance.

15. According to the Use of Force Report for the years 2017 and 2018, APD’s “use of force” and “deadly force” is down dramatically , which was one of the primary objectives of the CASA reforms.

CITY MOTION TO SUSPEND PORTIONS OF THE CASA STILL PENDING

On Friday, January 10, 2020, the City of Albuquerque filed a Motion to have certain portions of the federal Court Approved Settlement Agreement (CASA) suspended and placed into “sustained compliance” and “suspend monitoring” of those requirements by the Federal Court approved monitor. The city’s Motion highlights the progress made by the Albuquerque Police Department (APD) in implementing the court mandated reforms under the CASA. You can read the entire 25-page e-filed Motion on the United States District Court for the District of New Mexico docket Case 1:14-cv-01025-JB-SMV, Document 503 Filed 01/10/20, United States of America, Plaintiff v. The City of Albuquerque, Defendant v. The Albuquerque Police Officer’s Association, Intervenor. A hearing on the Motion has yet to be scheduled.

The city wants the federal court to suspend the monitoring activity with respect to “certain requirements” of the CASA and to put other requirements into the two-year “sustained compliance” phase. There are 3 primary areas the city is seeking that sustained compliance be found suspending further monitoring:

1. Behavioral health training of APD officers

2. APD recruitment and

3. APD specialized units.

According to the motion, APD will take steps to remain “vigilant” in preserving the progress that has already be made under the CASA. The “center piece of these efforts is that APD shall conduct regular self-assessments of compliance and shall file self-assessment reports with the court every 6 months.” (Page 3 of Motion.)

If the federal court grants the motion and allows suspension of the monitoring in the identified areas, the federal monitor will suspend the monitoring in those areas but will review APD’s self-assessment reports for compliance. The federal monitor will also evaluate whether the self-assessment reports reveal any significant concerns threatening continuing compliance with the requirements of the CASA. Further, the monitor will continue reviewing media accounts and other evidence provided to the monitor to determine whether there has been any substantial and significant lapse in compliance with the requirements of the CASA.

Page 305 of 307, Case 1:14-cv-01025-JB-SMV Document 578 Filed 05/04/20

ANALYSIS AND COMMENTARY

The City was to reach full compliance with the CASA within 4 years and its now been over 5 years pushing on a full 6 years. Once APD achieves a 95% compliance rate in all 3 compliance areas, and maintains compliance for 2 years, the case can be dismissed. According to the 11th progress report, APD is now at 100% in primary compliance, 93% in secondary compliance and at 66% in operational compliance.

It is clear from the 11th Federal Court Monitors report that “Operational Compliance” and the “counter casa effect” have been and continues to be the biggest sticking point for APD and presenting the biggest obstacles for the department under the consent decree. Operational Compliance is attained at the point that the adherence to policies is apparent in the day-to-day operation of the agency. In other words, 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.

REMOVE MANAGEMENT FROM APD UNION

There is a definite “chain of command” when it comes to APD. All Commanders, Deputy Chiefs and the Chief are “at will” positions that serve at the pleasure of the Administration, either the Mayor or Chief. APD has a clear line of authority that separates management from rank and file sworn police officers. The problem is that APD sergeants and lieutenants, even though they are part of management with supervisory authority over sworn police officers, they are not “at will” employees and they are allowed to join the police union. Including sergeants and lieutenants the union bargaining unit creates a clear conflict within management and sends mixed messages to rank and file sworn police officers.

APD police sergeants and lieutenants are on the front line to enforce personnel rules and regulations, standard operating procedures, approve and review work performed and assist in implementing DOJ reforms and standard operating procedures policies. In other words they are the point personnel for “operational compliance” under the court settlement and they still are not getting the job done when it comes to “operational compliance.” This point was repeatedly made by the Federal Monitor when he said “until the sergeants are in harness and pulling in the same direction as the chief, things won’t get done as quickly”. In other words, without the 100% support of the sergeants and lieutenants to the CASA and mandated reforms, there will be little or no progress made with “operational compliance” and reaching a 95% compliance rate will take years.

Sergeants and lieutenants need to be made at will employees and removed from the union bargaining unit in order to get a real buy in to management’s goals of police reform and the CASA. APD Police sergeants and lieutenants cannot serve two masters of Administration Management and Union priorities that are in conflict when it comes to the CASA reforms. The city should demand that the management positions of APD sergeant and lieutenant be removed from the APOA Union bargaining unit. Further, the Keller Administration should seek to have the APOA Union removed as a party to the federal lawsuit, the consent decree and CASA negotiations.

ENOUGH IS ENOUGH

After review of all 11 Independent Monitors Report and the 15 major reforms accomplished by of APD under the CASA a major conclusion that can be reached is the spirit and intent of the CASA has been fully attained. The City’s Motion To Suspend Portions Of The CASA must be amended to include the progress that has be reported in the 11th Federal Monitor’s Report. After over five years of implementing the mandating DOJ reforms, APD has made significant progress in implementing the reforms. The motion should be considered precursory to dismissal of the entire case sooner rather than later.

The biggest complaint of all the DOJ consent decrees in the country is implementation and enforcement “go on and on” for years, costing millions in taxpayer dollars. It appears that is what happening in Albuquerque. With expected, continued implementation of the DOJ reforms a 95% to 100% compliance with all 3 of the CASA primary, secondary and operational compliance goals should be demanded of the APD command and management staff within 6 months.

The role of the federal monitor needs be reduced, as is being requested in the motion, as well as the continued costs of the monitoring team reduced. The city should commence negotiations with the DOJ for a stipulated “Order of Complete Compliance and Dismissal” of the CASA, and all causes of action the DOJ has against the city and APD. Otherwise, the city and taxpayers will be sucked into “year after year” of expenses and costs associated with a consent decree whose primary objective has been achieved and whose federal monitor wants another $4 million to audit progress.

The time has come for the city to be cut lose from the Federal Court Approved Settlement Agreement. Mayor Tim Keller needs to hold the APD Command Staff totally responsible to perform under the CASA. If the APD command staff can not get the job done within 6 months when it comes to “operational compliance” that is still is holding APD back, Mayor Tim Keller should replace them and find a new Chief and Deputy Chiefs who can get the job done.

Then again, Mayor Keller has a bad habit of allowing APD to do what ever they want and he refuses to hold his command staff accountable for any and all mismanagement. Some good examples are:

1. His defense of APD in their refusal to gather and tag evidence of a child’s blood stained underwear in a case
2. The paying of an APD spokesman $150,000 a year because of overtime.
3. Allowing APD to spend millions in overtime exceeding their budget.
4. Using faulty statistics and representing to the public that our violent crime rates were going down when in fact they were spiking.
5. More recently, remaining totally mum on 40+ police officers and Chief Geier participating in a private event without social distancing or wearing protective gear.

Mayor Tim Keller has shown the identical unquestionable loyalty to Chief Michael Geier that former Mayor Richard Berry showed to Chief Gordon Eden. Mayor Tim Keller can no longer blame his predecessor for a troubled APD department or their failure to implement the DOJ reforms seeing as Keller has replaced all of APD’s top command staff with a Chief and Deputy Chief’s of his own choosing that are being viewed just as inept as former Chief Gordon Eden and his appointed Deputies.
_________________________________

POSTSCRIPT

The link to the full 106-page CASA containing 276 mandated reforms can be read here:

https://www.cabq.gov/mental-health-response-advisory-committee/documents/court-approved-settlement-agreement-final.pdf

All documents related to the CASA can be downloaded and reviewed at the city web site link:
https://www.cabq.gov/police/documents-related-to-apds-settlement-agreement

The documents include:

The Settlement Agreement between City and the DOJ
APD Progress Reports
Independent Monitor’s Reports
Compliance Reports
Use of Force Annual Reports
Use of Force Reports
Studies
Audits

For a related blog articles see:

City Moves To Be Released From Portions Of DOJ Consent Decree And Monitoring; Commentary: Intent And Purpose Of CASA Accomplished, Dismiss Case

Glossing Over Or Ignoring APD’s “Counter Casa Effect” Does Not Make Problem Go Away

APD Staffing Levels: 970 Sworn Police; 300 More Needed

The Lincoln Project is an American political action committee. It was formed in late 2019 by several prominent Republicans. The goal of the committee is to prevent the reelection of Donald Trump in the 2020 presidential election. The committee was announced on December 17, 2019, in a New York Times op-ed by George Conway, Steve Schmidt, John Weaver, and Rick Wilson.

In April 2020, the committee announced their endorsement of Joe Biden, shortly after Bernie Sanders announced the suspension of his campaign. George Conway is the husband of Kellyanne Conway, an advisor to Trump; Schmidt and Weaver are political strategists, and Wilson is a media consultant. All four are the traditional conservative Republicans but are outspoken critics of Trump.

The following opinion piece was published om April 15, in the Washington Post:

HEADLINE: We’ve Never Back A Democrat For President, But Trump Must Be Defeated
By
George T. Conway III, Reed Galen, Steve Schmidt, John Weaver and Rick Wilson
April 15, 2020

“This November, Americans will cast their most consequential votes since Abraham Lincoln’s reelection in 1864. We confront a constellation of crises: a public health emergency not seen in a century, an economic collapse set to rival the Great Depression, and a world where American leadership is absent and dangers rise in the vacuum.

It is our hope that when the next president takes the oath of office in January, Joseph Robinette Biden Jr., will be the president for a truly united America. The stakes are too high to do anything less.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/04/15/weve-never-backed-democrat-president-trump-must-be-defeated/?fbclid=IwAR1JpSTfhmClhOX2OfnuLTGrDJ0D7BMB5AUyapWvkATmCeKwR7q_z4-9hls

NEW YORK TIMES ARTICLE

On Wednesday April 29, the New York Times reported that Trump is frustrated by a faltering economy that is out of his control, and facing sharp criticism for his suggestion that disinfectants could potentially combat the coronavirus. According to the report, Trump has sunk to one of his lowest points in recent months. He directed his anger toward the one area that is most important to him: his re-election prospects.

It was reported Trump erupted during a phone call with his campaign manager, Brad Parscale, two days after he was presented with polling data from his campaign and the Republican National Committee that showed him trailing former Vice President Joe Biden. Typically, Trump “lashed out at Mr. Parscale and said it was other people’s fault that there had been fluctuations in a race they had all seen as his to lose just two months ago. At one point, Mr. Trump said he would not lose to Mr. Biden, insisted the data was wrong and blamed the campaign manager for the fact that he is down in the polls.”
…

“The lack of easy options to reset his political trajectory has been deeply unsettling to Mr. Trump, who began the year confident about his re-election prospects because of a thriving economy, but whose performance on the virus has Republicans nervous about losing the White House and the Senate in November.”

Below is the link to the entire New York Times report:

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/29/us/politics/trump-campaign-reelection-polls.html?smid=fb-share&fbclid=IwAR2ko9kFBJ3o50YD5XiUUWFVI__cLlH4JkHipHTkbiiLeghy9guGvdI1dBQ

RECENT POLLS

On April 24, it was reported that former Vice President Joe Biden is leading President Donald Trump in multiple presidential polls in battleground states amid the US coronavirus crisis.

“Even though Biden hasn’t gotten as much of the national spotlight as Trump, or even some governors, in the age of Covid-19, these polls suggest it might not matter much. Biden is ahead in most surveys conducted in states where Trump won in 2016, states that will likely be key to a Democratic victory in November. …

There are some important takeaways from all the polls. Even with record unemployment and a recession, Trump isn’t being judged as harshly on the economy as he is for his handling of the coronavirus. The Fox poll in Michigan found that 59% of voters surveyed said the president’s response to the coronavirus was too slow, compared with 38% who said it was appropriate. And Fox’s Florida poll found 55% of respondents agreed Trump’s coronavirus response was too slow, compared with 41% who said it was appropriate.”

A link to the full article is here:

https://www.vox.com/2020/4/24/21234425/trump-biden-battleground-states-polls-2020-election

WASHINGTON POST PUNDIT POWER RANKINGS

In late April, The Washington Post “Power Rankings” also offered the follow analysis of all the polls:

“Trump is behind no matter what set of polls one looks at. He trails Biden by 6.3 points as of Thursday April 30 morning in the RealClearPolitics average. His job approval rating has sunk in recent days to a mere 44.9 percent, down from a recent high of 47.3 percent on March 31. Though his job approval is still higher than his share of the vote in ballot tests against Biden, he would still trail by more than 3 points even if he did as well as those ratings. There’s no plausible path to winning the electoral college if he loses the popular vote by that much on Election Day.

It’s not hard to see why Trump is in this predicament. He has never received more than 48 percent job approval in the RCP polling average, the first president in polling history to do so poorly. While virtually every other world leader has seen their ratings rise in response to the coronavirus pandemic, Trump has not. It’s true that Trump has faced a critical press corps during this crisis, but it’s also true that his performances during the White House daily press briefings have been at best uneven. He might blame his staff, but he ultimately has no one to blame but himself.”

TRUMP INCITES INSURRECTION AND CIVIL DISOBEDIENCE

On April 17, in a dangerous series of tweets, President Trump incited citizen insurrection against the duly elected governors of the states of Michigan, Minnesota and Virginia where the Democratic Governors are doing their best to “flatten the curve” of the pandemic. One day after Trump issued guidance for re-opening America that clearly deferred decision-making to the Governors of the states, Trump undercut his own guidance by calling for criminal acts against the governors for not opening fast enough.

Trump tweeted, “LIBERATE MINNESOTA!” followed immediately by “LIBERATE MICHIGAN!” and then “LIBERATE VIRGINIA, and save your great 2nd Amendment. It is under siege!” The day before there were demonstrations in Michigan where armed protestors surrounded the state capitol building in Lansing chanting “Lock her up!” in reference to Democratic Governor Gretchen Whitmer, and “We will not comply,” in reference to her extension of the state’s coronavirus-related stay-at-home order. Smaller armed groups protested on the state capitol grounds in Richmond, Virginia , and outside the governor’s mansion in St. Paul, Minn.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2020/04/17/liberate-michigan-trump-constitution/

TRUMP ADMITS DEATH TOLL WILL DOUBLE OR TRIPLE

It was on April 20 that Trump first estimated that the number of death from the corona virus would be 50,000 to 60,000. As of May 4, the death toll is approaching 70,000. During a May 4 televised fox News Town-hall, Trump revised his estimate dramatically and said:

“I used to say 65,000. Now I’m saying 80 or 90 [thousand], and it goes up and it goes up rapidly. But it’s still going to be, no matter how you look at it, at the very lower end of the plane if we did the shutdown. ”

Trump was alluding to the 100,000 to 200,000 death estimate cited in late March by public health experts like Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.

https://www.vox.com/2020/5/4/21246342/trump-fox-news-town-hall-coronavirus-death-toll-upward

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

Before the pandemic, Trump was relying upon the booming economy to give him a certain reelection victory. The disastrous way Mr. Trump and his administration have been handling the pandemic crisis is no doubt a major reason his popularity is going down and voters are seeing what he is: a pathological liar and a totally inept fool.

Trump’s staunches supporters will no doubt say all the polls were wrong last time, they are wrong now, and that Trump will win again by a landslide. What Trump supporters always downplay or just ignore is that Trump lost the national popular vote to Hillary Clinton by 3 million votes and won the election in the electoral college. Biden is not Clinton and he does not have the extent of political baggage Clinton had. What Trump supporters also ignore is Trump must now run on his record of broken promises and irrational, unhinged behavior. Bullying opponents and critics and outright lying to the public will not cut it this time around.

Trump can no longer have his political rallies to gin up his base because of the pandemic. He now is saying he wants to start the rallies up again before the November election. There will be no “social distancing” at such rallies and the disease will spike once again. Trump has taken to daily news briefings and updates as a substitute for his rallies, and its backfiring in that he cannot control the questions asked nor correct the lies he reports as news. Trump refuses to accept the fact that he does not know what he is talking about. Trump consistently contradicts his medical advisors and lies to the public with what is going on. He also lashes out against his critics and the news media during his daily briefings.

Trump has an uncanny ability to make things worse with his daily tweeting and self-absorbed, self-center arrogance. His false proclamation that the decision to reopen the country’s ailing economy ultimately rests with him, not the governors, is the best example of how delusional President Trump is. After over 3 years of constant daily news coverage and twitters from Trump creating crisis, after crisis, after crisis of his own making, even bringing the country close to nuclear war with North Korea, the United States is now faced with a major pandemic revealing a man who is totally unfit, incompetent and totally unprepared to be President.

Trump supporters look upon him as the messiah that is cult like. As the crisis continues, the odds are high that he will only complicate the crisis, making things MUCH worse and create another crisis within a crisis. More people will likely die because of his mishandling of the pandemic. Trump now has acknowledged that the number of deaths caused by the pandemic will not be 50,000 but more like 200,000. Trump will make things worse because he just cannot help it.

Trump has now taken to promoting civil disobedience in states where Democratic Governors are doing their best to deal with the pandemic. Tweeting “LIBERATE MINNESOTA!” , “LIBERATE MICHIGAN!” and “LIBERATE VIRGINIA” and stoking civil disorder among his supporters is essentially throwing gas on a fire. Burning down the country is no way to govern, but Trump sure sees it as a hellfire way to get elected to another 4 year term.

For a related Dinelli blog article see:

Our Corona Virus “War Time President” Has Created His Own “Fog of War”; Trump Is A Cancer On Our Body Politic That Must Be Removed On November 3.