On September 4, after two months of speculation and hinting that she would call the New Mexico legislature into Special Session, Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham announced by press release that she has called lawmakers back to the capital starting October 1 for a special session. The Special Session will be focused on a state-level response to federal spending reductions to Medicaid and food assistance programs.

Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham began suggesting  the possibility of a special session even before July 4, when President Donald Trump signed H.R.1, the so-called “One Big Beautiful Bill Act.” Trump’s spending bill that contains significant cuts to New Mexico’s  Medicaid and nutrition programs.

Following is the press release:

“As deep federal budget cuts threaten to compound the challenges facing New Mexico communities, Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham announced … that she will call lawmakers into a special session starting Oct. 1 to find solutions and mitigate harm.

“New Mexicans should not be forced to shoulder these heavy burdens without help from their elected officials,” Lujan Grisham said. “After discussions with legislative leaders, we’ve resolved to do everything possible to protect essential services and minimize the damage from President Trump’s disastrous bill.”

 Lawmakers plan to consider a package of measures that could include:

 Funding to the Rural Health Care Delivery Fund to allow stabilization grants for quality health care providers.

• Taking action to make health insurance premiums more affordable in the marketplace and for New Mexicans losing Medicaid coverage.
• New investments in food assistance for children, seniors and families in need.
• Funding for public broadcasting.
• Additional resources to help the Health Care Authority prepare for upcoming Medicaid enrollment changes.

 H.R.1, which Trump signed into law on July 4, will reduce state revenues, and force the state to spend more by shifting costs from the federal government to the states. The reduction in federal Medicaid and SNAP funds alone will result in multi-billion-dollar losses annually that threaten household budgets and the survival of New Mexico’s health care system, particularly in rural areas.

 “New Mexico cannot stand by while Washington’s reckless budget cuts inflict generational harm on families and communities across the state,” Senate Majority Leader Peter Wirth said. “A special session is essential to protect our rural healthcare providers, safeguard Medicaid coverage, and ensure that New Mexicans don’t bear the burden of federal failures.”

 “New Mexico is not going to allow Trump and the radical right to take food off your table or kick your family off your healthcare plan,” Speaker of the House Javier Martínez said. “We have been hard at work evaluating how this federal budget will impact New Mexico and how we can best fight back. Now, we’re ready to roll up our sleeves to protect access to the services you and your families need most.”

 The governor is also in discussions with the legislature to address behavioral health challenges that affect our criminal justice system and community safety in the special session and the upcoming 30-day session.”

The link to the press release is here:

https://www.governor.state.nm.us/2025/09/04/governor-announces-special-session-to-begin-oct-1/

Special sessions are limited to no longer than 30 days under the state Constitution. The October 2025 session will be the seventh special session of the legislature called by Governor Lujan Grisham.  According to the Legislative Council Service  and going back to 2020, the average daily cost of a special session is $57,000. Last year’s single-day special session cost $92,883. That figure includes compensation for necessary session staffers. No one can say for certain how long the October 1 special session will last.  Most special sessions called in recent years have ended after a few days.

The October 1 special session will be the first called by Lujan Grisham since a July 2024 session focused on crime-related issues that ended with the Democratic-controlled Legislature adjourning without taking action on most of the governor’s proposed agenda. In an effort to avoid the same fate with the October 1 session, the Governor’s Office top staffers have been meeting with Democratic legislative leaders in recent weeks about a special session spending package that could exceed $400 million. That funding would come from nearly $3.5 billion in unspent money in state reserve funds, as state revenue levels have surged to record-high levels in recent years.

Trump’s “One Big Beautiful Bill” is in fact a large tax reduction package signed into law that  trimmed close to $1 trillion from Medicaid, Medicare and subsidies from the Affordable Care Act and $230 billion from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, spending over the next 10 years  to pay for the tax reductions.  State health officials are warning that Trump’s “One Big Beautiful Bill” he signed in July  could lead to more than 90,000 New Mexico residents losing health care coverage and the possible closure of rural hospitals. According to state executive and legislative branch economists the federal budget bill is projected to cost the state an average of $206 million per year over the next five years.

HOT BUTTON CRIME  LEGISLATION NOT  INCLUDED

While announcing the special session’s start date of October 1, the Governor’s Office  confirmed that hot-button legislation dealing with crime will be deferred  until the start of the 30-day regular session in January. Bills dealing with juvenile crime and firearm restrictions are  expected to be delayed until next year’s 30-day session. The governor’s office says she is  in discussions with the Legislature to address behavioral health challenges that affect the criminal justice system and community safety in the special session and during the upcoming 30-day session.

Michael Coleman, the governor’s chief spokesperson, said this:

“Lawmakers can expect a comprehensive list of requests from the governor in the 30-day session specific to public safety, such as juvenile justice, increases to penalties for various firearm crimes, and human trafficking changes, among other items.”

Other legislation expected not to be included in the Special Session is legislation targeting New Mexico’s three federal immigrant detention centers, which generated testy debate during a recent interim committee hearing. The three detention centers run by the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement are located in Chaparral, Estancia and Milan.

The governor’s chief general counsel told lawmakers in July that legislation banning New Mexico local governments from entering into contracts with federal agencies to detain immigrants for civil violations could be included in the special session mix.

Rep. Andrea Romero, D-Santa Fe, one of the sponsors of that legislation, said on September 4 there were ongoing discussions about specific bill details. She  said she believes there is growing momentum for such legislation.  Romero said this:

“I feel like our legislative body is definitely seeing the realities of why we need to address ICE detention in our state.”

Lujan Grisham’s Communication Director Michael Coleman confirmed that legislation to ban Immigration and Customs Enforcement detention would not be on the agenda, a possibility previously mentioned by the governor’s chief counsel that prompted renewed debate on the topic among lawmakers.

REPUBLICANS REACT

Republican lawmakers reacted to the Democrat Governor Lujan Grishams’ calling a special session by criticizing the  governor for not including crime-related issues and changes to New Mexico’s child welfare system on the special session agenda.

Senate Republican Leader Bill Sharer issued the following statement in response to the governor’s special session announcement:

“We appreciate any opportunity to provide real solutions for New Mexicans. Just as we did during last year’s failed public safety special session, Republican legislators are prepared to address the pressing issues facing our state. Based on countless conversations with constituents and concerned New Mexicans, our efforts remain focused on restoring the safety of our communities, protecting our state’s vulnerable children, and improving our access to quality health care. Democrats in the legislature have opposed our common-sense proposals to improve public safety, including needed changes to juvenile justice laws and an end to the revolving-door release of repeat violent offenders. Democrats have also refused to hold CYFD accountable for the ongoing abuse and even deaths of children under their care. And, at the urging of their trial attorney friends, Democrats have rejected efforts to reduce medical malpractice costs and to have New Mexico join the interstate medical licensure compact—both actions which would drastically improve health care access in New Mexico. We remain hopeful that Democrat lawmakers will decide to come to the table ready to collaborate on the real issues New Mexicans are concerned about, rather than engage in unproductive political theater.”

Sharer said this in a separate interview:

“It appears to me to be a taxpayer-funded anti-Trump rally. … If we’re going to have a special session and try to solve a problem, then we should try to solve a problem.”

Sharer pointed out most of the federal funding changes to Medicaid and food assistance programs contained in Trump’s “One Big Beautiful Bill” are not scheduled to take effect until 2027 or later showing as he showed no reservations and absolutely no disdain for the cuts that are coming to the state. Republican lawmakers also questioned the extent of the funding cut estimates and cite tax breaks and other provisions in the federal bill that could benefit New Mexico residents.

Leading Republican lawmakers said they still plan to draft bills dealing with criminal penalties, New Mexico’s child welfare system and the state’s medical malpractice system, even if Lujan Grisham does not include the issues on the special session agenda.

House Minority Leader Gail Armstrong, R-Magdalena, described those topics as “real emergencies” facing the state.  Armstrong said this:

“New Mexicans deserve a special session that takes these issues seriously — not another round of political theater dictated by the 4th floor of the Roundhouse.”

Links to quoted or relied upon news sources are here:

https://www.koat.com/article/new-mexico-governor-legislative-special-session-2025/65984999

https://www.kob.com/new-mexico/governor-announces-special-session-to-begin-oct-1/

https://www.krqe.com/news/new-mexico/new-mexico-governor-announces-special-legislative-session-beginning-in-october/

https://www.abqjournal.com/news/article_a8e3e153-84b0-4ac9-8d0c-9c62752e6a6b.html

https://www.santafenewmexican.com/news/local_news/governor-calls-lawmakers-for-special-session-starting-oct-1/article_232cf3ae-a000-465c-b074-76a7a0845f52.html

https://sourcenm.com/2025/09/04/nm-gov-announces-oct-1-for-special-session-tackling-federal-cuts-to-healthcare-nutrition-public-broadcasting/

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

It should come as absolutely no surprise that the Governor is not including any legislation for the special session dealing with crime-related issues. The Governor learned a harsh lesson when she called a special session in July 2024 focused on crime-related issues without a consensus reached before the session with lawmakers and it ended with the Democratic-controlled Legislature adjourning without taking action on any of her proposed agenda. Simply put, unless a clear consensus can be reached on changes to the juvenile justice laws, firearm restrictions and increased criminal penalties, including such measures in a special session would simply be a waste of time.

It is absolutely clear from the Governor’s press release announcing the October 1 Special Session and the comments made by Senate Majority Leader Peter Wirth and New Mexico Speaker of the House Speaker Javier Martínez a strong consensus  has been reached on how to deal with the severe budget cuts and damage done by Trump’s “One Big Beautiful Bill” to New Mexico. The October 1 special session is designed to find ways to offset the impact of federal funding cuts passed by Congress and approved by President Trump in July. The goal is to ensure initiatives like the rural health care delivery fund and food assistance programs can continue operating and make sure Medicaid recipients do not lose health coverage.

What Senate Majority Leader Peter Wirth and Speaker of the House Javier Martínez said about the Special Session is worth repeating.  

Senate Majority Leader Peter Wirth said this:

“New Mexico cannot stand by while Washington’s reckless budget cuts inflict generational harm on families and communities across the state.  …. A special session is essential to protect our rural healthcare providers, safeguard Medicaid coverage, and ensure that New Mexicans don’t bear the burden of federal failures.”

Speaker of the House Javier Martínez said this:

“New Mexico is not going to allow Trump and the radical right to take food off your table or kick your family off your healthcare plan.  … We have been hard at work evaluating how this federal budget will impact New Mexico and how we can best fight back. Now, we’re ready to roll up our sleeves to protect access to the services you and your families need most.”

It is downright pathetic and so very typical of New Mexico Republican lawmakers to try and deflect the actual damage being done to the New Mexico by President Trump. Minority Republican Floor Leader Senator Bill Sharer shows just how out of touch he is with the average New Mexican when he says this:

“I’m confused as to why this burning need for a special session, especially when it doesn’t appear there’s anything special needed.”

It’s nauseating that Sharer and his Republican colleagues totally approve of all things Trump and what Trump is doing to the State and its people. To Sharer and New Mexico Republicans there is nothing special needed to protect rural health care delivery, food assistance programs and make sure Medicaid recipients do not lose health coverage until it actually happens and it’s a crisis and even then they may not act.

New Mexico Republican legislators also harp on the need to increase efforts to deal with public safety to reduce crime, especially violent crime, with those efforts  usually concentrating  on increased penalties and more incarceration and what they refer to as the revolving-door of release of repeat violent offenders. Republicans never acknowledged the need for common sense gun control legislation to reduce  the proliferation of guns used to commit violent crimes. The availability and proliferation of guns must be recognized as a big part of the state’s violent crime problem, something Republicans will never understand or they just choose to ignore.

Governor Lujan Grisham and the Senate and House leadership are correct to concentrate during the Special Session on  how to deal with the severe budget cuts and damage done by Trump’s “One Big Beautiful Bill” to New Mexico during the Special Session. At this point, there is no need complicate a Special Session with crime legislation that no consensus can be arrived at during  what will likely be a short one or two day Special Session.

Following is a guest opinion column written by Jaemes Shanley. Mr. Shanley is the President of the Mark Twain Neighborhood Association located in the mid heights and is the Vice President of the District 7 Coalition of Neighborhoods which boasts membership of 14 neighborhood associations. You can read his full bio in the postscript below. Mr. Shanley gave consent to publish his guest column on www.PeteDinelli.com and he was not compensated for it.

COUNCILOR FIEBELKORN’S “OPT IN” ZONING PROPOSAL REFLECTED WILLFUL IGNORANCE OF OUR CITY’S OBVIOUS NEEDS

Sometimes you get to the point where you “just can’t take it anymore”.

I reached my breaking point in June when I read City Council Resolution R-25-167, sponsored by my City Councilor Tammy Fiebelkorn, concluding she was not acting in the best interests of my District 7 nor of the city.  She was using her perceptions of Albuquerque’s housing needs to promote an agenda that would destroy established neighborhoods in the interest of randomly increasing density to benefit developers at the expense of homeowners.

FIEBELKORN’S OPT IN ZONING

The Councilor’s Resolution 25-167 proposed “Opt-in Zoning” whereby anyone owning a single-family home could apply to “upzone” their R-1 zoned home and redevelop to increase density by converting the home to a duplex or townhouse. If you owned a  corner lot on any block of any neighborhood, you could “upzone” and build 3 story multi-family apartments next to single family homes. The most offensive provision of the “Opt-In” zoning is that adjacent homeowners or neighborhood associations would not be given any notice of the opt-in to increase density and essentially not be able to oppose or appeal the resulting development which would then be “permissive use”.  If they did find an avenue for appeal, adjoining property owners or Neighborhood Associations would risk being penalized $1,000 if they lost, thanks to Ordinance O-24-69 for which Councilor Fiebelkorn voted “yes” in January.

Developers or investors, when judgements go against them, face no corresponding risk or penalty.

The ultimate goal of the Opt-in zoning ordinance was to increase “affordable housing”, however, there is no data to support the theory that upzoning properties creates affordable housing.  The Ordinance was based on out-of-date 2022 population and housing data.  It predicated housing needs on reality-defying projections of 2% annual population growth over the next 20 years. This is a city which has lost 4,500 residents since 2020.  It excluded mention of current vacancy rates over 6% in Albuquerque’s multi-family dwellings and the fact there are presently 3,137 apartments or townhouses now under construction and another 9,593 at various stages of proposal.

Simply put, Opt-in zoning would destroy the character of existing neighborhoods and would have favored developers and investors who could care less about the character of existing neighborhoods.  It was far more likely to lead to gentrification and destabilization of property values as lenders were challenged to determine lending limits on properties no longer located in contiguous context.

Fortunately, this measure was voted down by the Land Use Planning and Zoning Committee on August 13^th, with only Councilor Fiebelkorn voting in favor.

BUS ROUTE TO NOWHERE

Undeterred by the failure of R-25-167, Councilor Fiebelkorn pressed forward with another Resolution that was also ultimately about up zoning. This Resolution proposed amending the Comprehensive Plan to change Menaul from Louisiana west to Rio Grande from a Multi-modal to a Major Transit (MT) corridor. At a meeting this summer organized by the Near North Valley NA, the City Transportation Department clearly stated that this shift is unnecessary for increasing bus frequency. Bus service will increase when the driver shortage is solved. Claims about the need to fix a ‘broken corridor’ also rang hollow.

This proposed change is not about transit, it is about increasing density along the corridor without adequate public notification or input from residents. There are several changes to MT corridors proposed in the 2025 IDO Biennial Update, soon to be submitted to the Environmental Planning Commission (EPC). If this package of amendments passes as currently written, MT corridors will have—permissively—higher allowable building heights and shorter distances for height limits protecting Neighborhood Edges.

A request at Council to defer R-25-175 failed after Councilor Fiebelkorn grilled the Staff Planner about the design standard differences between Multi-Modal and Major Transit, pedantically repeating “so, no change?” after each item noted.

She thus very skillfully, and to my mind duplicitously, managed to avert any airing or discussion of the “hidden agenda” of this legislation.  That hidden agenda being Items 32, 33 and 44 on the Pre-EPC Submittal Spreadsheet for the 2025 IDO Biennial Update (available to view here: https://abq-zone.com/ido-update-2025-citywide-ammendments-pre-epc-submittal ) These amendments, when adopted, will make these changes to MT corridors permissive, thus removing public notification. The network of MT corridors thru-out the city, now including Menaul from Louisiana west, creates wide swaths available for increased density. Where this is in keeping with the long-accepted Comprehensive Plan vision of Centers and Corridors; great! Where it runs across historic areas of established R-1 neighborhoods; not so great!

While Councilor Fiebelkorn will point to the Menaul MRA and other de-invested sections of Menaul as the target zone for higher density development, market reality will drive developer interest to locations in closest proximity to established residential neighborhoods able to contribute to the economic potential of the commercial components of mixed-use development.  Residents of Quigley Park, Bel-Air, Santa Barbara-Martineztown, Wells Park, Near North Valley, and even Los Duranes neighborhoods all face the prospect of living, quite literally, in the shadow Resolution 25-175 will be permitted to cast over our community in the name of an ephemeral bus service that cannot be presently delivered.

DEEP DIVE TAKEN TO UNDERSTAND OUR CITY’S PROBLEMS

What makes Councilor Fiebelkorn’s attempted “Opt-in Zoning” and forcefully promoted “Bus Route to Nowhere” resolutions and actions most offensive are their willful ignorance of the very real problems that afflict our city. We can and must do better.

During the past 10 months, I have engaged in a “deep dive” to seek and to understand our city’s problems, which were not here 40 years ago. My efforts have included the following:

• Riding the entire bus route of the Albuquerque Rapid Transit (ART), to experience the nature of the service and the people who use it, and to observe the reality of its Central corridor, compared to the extravagant projections offered by Mayor Berry when he first proposed it 2014. The salient contribution of the ART Bus project was to degrade Central as business after business shut down never to return.
• Participating in 3 survey teams on the annual Point-In-Time count of homeless people living on the street one night in January.
• Attending since December last year, all the monthly Transformative Neighborhood Planning meetings held at the Gateway Center Homeless facility on Gibson.
• Attending every public meeting regarding the proposed redevelopment of the State Fair Grounds and connecting with the appointed consultant Stantec to ensure their community outreach includes the District 7 neighborhoods, like mine, on or adjacent to the Fairground’s northern border.
• Listening to and learning from numerous organizations, coalitions, non-profits, and committed individuals who work tirelessly to make our city a better and safer place to live.

One of the most informative things I did was a property-by-property survey of five of our major commercial corridors from end to end: Central, San Pedro, Menaul, 4^th Street, and San Mateo.  This project involved confirming by visual inspection the nature and status of 3,816 properties of which 2,223 were commercial premises.  21%, or 626 of those premises were closed, for lease, vacant, or abandoned.

Central, San Pedro, Menaul, 4^th, San Mateo Corridors  

Properties                               Count

• Apartment Complex                        69               1.8%
• Town Houses                                 262               6.9%
• Mobile Home Park                             9               0.2%
• Single Home Lot                             295              7.7%
• Motel / Hotel                                     38              1.0%
• Vacant Lot                                       118              3.1%
• Parking Lot                                       39              1.0%
• Construction Site                              13              0.3%
• Self-Storage                                     24              0.6%
• Total Operating Businesses          2,323            60.9%
• Closed Businesses                          626            16.4%

Total Properties                                    3,816           

% businesses closed                             21%

Access to and download of the full surveys and summaries is available to anyone with a Google enabled email address

ADDRESSING THE CITY’S HOUSING NEEDS

When driving the streets of our city with eyes open, it becomes very obvious where remedy is required.  It is NOT the re-zoning of our neighborhoods to increase development and population density as Councilor Fiebelkorn advocates.

To paraphrase James Carville, “It’s the Corridors, Stupid!”. 

We do have housing needs. To address those housing needs, we need to do the following:

First, we need Transitional Housing/Shelter into which the people residing on our streets and sidewalks can be located, with supportive services and case management, as the first essential step to recovery from the horrific conditions in which they are living. There are people in Albuquerque who know how to “curate” communities of these folks. Stability, security, basic utilities and sanitation should be accessible to anyone living in the state with the 38^th largest total GDP in the richest country on earth.

Second, we need more affordable housing, especially for those earning 60% or less of the Area Median Income. Unfortunately, that cannot be “built” given the cost of building housing today.  It can only be subsidized into existence.  Required financial resources are finite and the federal component is less secure today than ever.  That requires surgical precision in the application of the funds available.

Third, we need housing that can be priced to permit people to get a foot on the ladder of home ownership and equity accumulation as early as possible.  That is crucial to resuscitation of the American middle class dream of upward mobility and it requires higher density residential development, which has been going on all over Albuquerque, and needs to continue.  There are 12,730 units in apartment or townhouse developments at various stages of construction or proposal in Albuquerque right now.  The City is spacious enough to realize them without “blotting out” views of the Sandias or horizons which are such a signature feature and pleasure of living in our Albuquerque.

Fourth, we need to acknowledge that there is an overflowing abundance of available unused property and vacant lots on our major corridors dying for transition from an increasingly obsolete commercial/strip mall model to the kind of mixed-use higher density walkable communities with proximity to bus services and bike lanes for which organizations like StrongTownsABQ and BikeABQ are advocating.  Our neighborhoods also desperately need this, to restore the perimeter corridor connectivity and vitality that was once an integral part of neighborhood character.

Fifth, we need to do whatever we can to promote, support and nurture small locally owned business formation and growth.  We cannot reverse the trends of online shopping and the lower prices allure of national big box retail chain stores, but we can put more priority on and be more engaged in making heroes of locally owned business operations that create jobs at all levels of their organizations including mid-level and executive and, unlike their big national competitors, do not export out of New Mexico’s economy all of their profits, executive salaries, and headquarters investments.

WHAT THE CITY DOES NOT NEED AND NEEDS

In the corporate world where I lived my professional career, the lifespan of failed strategies is measured in quarters, not in years.

Albuquerque does not need an “unhoused industrial/building complex” with a price tag to date of over $300 million and no visible impact observable on the street.

The city does not need a “prison industrial/building complex” that can only result in trauma and distrust that impedes people, brutalized by a lifestyle unimaginable to most of us, from taking an offered hand to assist that first step toward a better life.

Albuquerque does not need to assign the Albuquerque Police Department (APD) the mission impossible task of responding to a criminal element that is able to embed and hide among its victims in a nomadic population numbering in the thousands.  Nor does it need to be perpetually diverted from its core mission by petty criminality, trespass, theft and vandalism that is driven fundamentally by the desperation and behavioral maladies induced by intolerable unsheltered living conditions.

What the city does need is a practical, high priority program, fully measured and accountable, to transition people from the streets into shelter as  quickly as it can be done. That program must be informed, advised, and assisted by the people in Albuquerque who have the experience and insights gained by having done it.

I believe Albuquerque can succeed in ending the crisis of street homelessness. The city can do so by taking a disadvantage and turning into an advantage. Albuquerque has more empty standalone buildings than there are people living on our streets.  That can be the seed for a real solution.  Our City, County, and State Government have the resources and tools to enable faster and more effective action to convert unused commercial properties into functional and transitional housing.

WHAT THE CITY COUNCIL CAN DO

City Council is a representative body.  From my perspective that should also make it a body that is consultative with its constituents. District 7 residents deserve a City Councilor that:

• Prioritizes issues by the scale of their impact on D7 and the City,
• Bases their actions on facts rather than generalities or wishful thinking,
• Proactively communicates with constituents about measures of impact BEFORE voting,
• Commits to Ordinances & Resolutions that clearly and understandably reveal all their provisions and their direct implications for the community,
• Solves or measurably improves real problems,
• Performs rigorous due diligence in advance of voting on measures,
• Demands factual accountability for major expenditures,
• Has an unwavering commitment to a vision of Albuquerque that is economically thriving, socially cohesive, sensibly sustainable, and in visual harmony with its unique heritage.

I have the best motivation to be a more proactively engaged citizen: the inspiration gained in observing, listening to, and learning from the people, remarkable in thought and deed, I have been privileged to meet and observe in my “deep dive” into the reality of Albuquerque.

In doing so, I have also come to understand profoundly why my parents, who moved and retired here in 1970, after living all over the world, believed to the end of their lives they had parachuted into paradise.

Albuquerque does not need to fix what is not broken.

It does need to engage the entire community to fix what is broken.

We can restore Albuquerque’s integrity and vitality with the right vision, strategy, and fully accountable tactical plan of action.

Respectfully for your consideration,

Jaemes Shanley

President Mark Twain Neighborhood Association

Vice-president – District 7 Coalition of N.A.’s

_________________________________

POSTSCRIPT

Jaemes Shanley first arrived in Albuquerque in August 1969, after graduating High School in England, to attend UNM from which he graduated in 1973.  His parents followed a year later, and his father retired in Albuquerque after a 30-year career as a US Naval aviator.  In 1971 they purchased a home in the Mark Twain neighborhood where they resided for the remainder of their lives.  Jaemes worked in the private sector in sales, marketing, and business strategy for U.S. corporations in Australia, Japan, and the United States.  His work required extensive travel throughout Asia Pacific and Latin America, routinely on the ground in more than 30 countries.  Jaemes and his wife returned to Albuquerque in September 2006 to renovate and take up residence in his parent’s Mark Twain neighborhood home where they reside today on their family “compound” along with 5 rescued cats.  Jaemes drives the corridors of Albuquerque on an almost daily basis to deliver carrots to his horse, Rembrandt, who resides in Corrales.

Exactly two months before the November 4 municipal election where voters will be voting on the offices of Mayor and City Council in Districts 1,3,5,7 and 9, two Albuquerque City Council candidates are facing lawsuits with the goal of having them kick off the ballot for their failure to submit the required 500 qualifying nominating petition signatures.

Two separate lawsuits have been filed. One is against  Stephanie Telles  in City Council District 1. The second is against Teresa Garcia in City Council District 3.  Both lawsuits were filed on November 3 by private attorney and former State Senator Jacob Candelaria and Senator Antonio “Moe” Maestas with the  Candelaria Law firm LLC in the 2nd Judicial District Court. In addition to Telles and Garcia, Bernalillo County Clerk Michelle Kavanaugh is identified as a defendant in both cases. Both cases are asking for an expedited hearing within 10 days of filing of the lawsuits which is on or before September13.

Both lawsuits are straight forward challenges to the validity of the signatures collected and contend that several of the signatures accepted by the City Clerk’s Office are invalid for a variety of reasons. Those reasons include being incomplete, duplicative signatures, signatures from people who are not registered to vote in the district or signatures collected after the deadline to collect rendering them invalid.  A person identified in the lawsuits as Nathaniel Sierra, ostensibly a private investigator contracted by Candelaria Law firm, allegedly examined the petition signatures to determine validity.

Both lawsuits  allege in part the following process used by the Albuquerque City Clerk to verify the nominating petition signatures:  In order to determine the validity of the petition signatures submitted, the City Clerk searched the voter registration records of the Bernalillo County Clerk’s office and searched the name and address provided on the petition to determine the eligibility of each listed voter that signed the petitions. The City Clerk also utilized the statewide voter file, the official database of registered voters in New Mexico that is maintained by the Secretary of State. It is known as the “SOS NM Centralized VR” or “Servis.”

Nathaniel Sierra, a contractor of Candelaria Law LLC, used “Servis” and “Vote Builder” which is a software system of registered voters to verify signatures. Each week during the petition process the city clerk would send an email with a spreadsheet that had the results of the verifications of signatures. The spreadsheet included both accepted and rejected entries. If a paper entry was rejected, the reason was listed in the spreadsheet. Candidates were given the opportunity to rehabilitate rejected signatures by submitting a “Rehabilitation Request Form” within seven calendar days of rejection.

Plaintiff attorney Jacob Candelaria said this about filing the lawsuits:

“If you are running for public office to make the law, you should be expected to follow the law. … Being on the other side of petition challenges no one likes it but that’s why our process exists in an adversarial way because if people have the incentive to call each other out hopefully that’s how the rules are enforced and the truth comes out.”

Candelaria said under state law, the court will need to decide on the cases within the next 10 days.

DISTRICT 1 CHALLENGE TO STEPHANIE TELLES

City Council District 1 is the centrally located Westside District between City Council District 5 on the North and City Council District 3 on the South. The geographical borders generally include Central Avenue on the South, Coors and the Rio Grande River on the East and “zig zags” on the North to include  Atrisco Dr., Tesuque Dr. and Buterfield Trail  and with the West border jetting outwards to the city limits and vacant land. City Council District 1 is currently represented by first term Democrat City Councilor Louie Sanchez who did not seek reelection and who is one of 7 candidates running for Mayor.

In the race for District 1 City Councilor, there are  four candidates running: Ahren Griego, Daniel Leiva, Joshua Taylor Neal and Stephanie Telles. Candidates Ahren Griego, Daniel Leiva, Joshua Taylor Neal were found by the City Clerk  to have submitted the required 500 qualifying signatures. However, Stephanie Telles was found by the Albuquerque City Clerk to have failed to collect the required 500 qualifying donations by 7 and she appealed her disqualification to the City Clerk and her appeal was denied.

Notwithstanding the Albuquerque City Clerk’s finding that Telles failed to submit the required number of verified petition signatures, Stephanie Telles filed her Declaration of Candidacy with the Bernalillo County Clerk. On August 28, 2025, Bernalillo County Clerk Michelle S. Kavenaugh notified Stephanie Telles by letter that the Bernalillo County Clerk’s Office qualified her Declaration of Candidacy. The August 28, 2025 letter from the Bernalillo County Clerk to Stephanie Telles states as follows:

Dear Ms.Telles:

“Pursuant to NMSA 1978, §1-22-10 (A), the Bernalillo County Clerks Office has qualified your Declaration of Candidacy. Therefor, you will appear as a candidate for the 2025 Regular Election to be held on Tuesday, November 4, 2025.

You shall appear on the ballot as follows:

                OFFICE:  CITY OF ALBUQUERQUE COUNCIL, DISTRICT 1

                NAME: STEPANIE TELLES

Ballot position is determined pursuant to NMAC 1.10.7, Randomization of Candiate Names on Ballots.  For your convenience, you may view the New Mexico Election alphabet randomization at: [link given deleted]

If you have further questions, please contact Nathan Jaramillo, Bureau of Elections Administrator … [phone number given deleted.]

Sincerely,

Michelle S. Kavenaugh, 

Bernalillo County Clerk

The August 28, 2025 letter from the Bernalillo County Clerk does not mention what efforts were made by the county clerk’s office  to verify the 500  signatures or if in fact they were verified.

ALLEGATIONS CONTAINED IN LAWSUITE

Two men, Danny Gonzales and Vincent C. Sanchez, are named as plaintiffs in the suit against Telles. The lawsuit alleges Telles submitted 581 signatures, but the City Clerk’s Office accepted only 493 as valid, leaving her seven signatures short to qualify for the ballot. According to the lawsuit, Nathaniel Sierra, a contractor of Candelaria Law LLC, identified an additional 42 signatures as invalid. Those people are either not city voters or live outside District 1.

The Telles lawsuit  alleges of the five-hundred, seventy-three (573) signatures turned into the city by Stephanie Telles, the City Clerk rejected eighty (80) of them. Of the eighty (80) that were rejected by the city clerk, the lawsuit alleges  seven (7) were “duplicates”  with her own submissions;  twenty-one (21) were “incomplete” or missing dates or zip codes; twenty-eight (28) were “not in jurisdiction” (verified as voters, but not residing in District 1); and twenty- four (24) were “not registered” at all and could not be found on any voter rolls.  Eight (8) were collected after the deadline and submitted to the County. The lawsuit alleges Nathaniel Sierra discovered forty-two (42) additional signatures that were not rejected by the City Clerk but are duplicates with the other District 1 candidates Daniel Leiva, Joshua Neal and Ahren Griego.

REQUEST FOR RELIEF

The relief the Plaintiffs are requesting from the District Court in their case against Stephanie Telles is as follows:

• Rule that  all the signatures collected by Stephanie Telles that are invalid do not count toward the required number of signatures (500) that she was required to collect
• Enter an order declaring that the number of valid nominating petition signatures submitted by Stephanie Telles is insufficient to qualify her to appear as a candidate for City Council District 1 and that she cannot appear on the ballot on the November 4, 2025
• Enter an order directing Defendant County Clerk Michelle S. Kavanaugh not to certify Stephanie Telles as a candidate or permit his placement on the 2025 local election ballot.

TALLES REACTS TO COMPLAINT

Stephanie Telles  issued the following statement in reaction to the complaint:

“This lawsuit is more politics as usual. West Siders deserve better. That’s why I am running a grassroots campaign focused on ensuring that all West Siders feel safe in their community, making affordable housing a key part of our thriving neighborhoods, and championing government transparency to ensure City Hall works for everyone. I look forward to a robust debate on the issues and to serving as the next City Councilor for District 1.”

DISTRICT 3 CHALLENGE TO TERESA GARCIA

Three candidates are running to represent Southwest Albuquerque’s District 3. The geographic borders are generally “Old Coors Road” on the East and the Valley area, Central on the North, and Dennis Chavez Road on the South, with the West side border jetting out to the city limits and mostly vacant area. In the race for District 3 City Councilor, there are three candidates running:  Incumbent Klarissa Peña, Christopher Sedillo and Teresa Garcia. 

ALLEGATIONS CONTAINED IN LAWSUITE

The sole Plaintiff who filed the lawsuit against Teresa Garcia and Bernalillo County Clerk Michelle Kavanaugh is former Bernalillo County Commissioner Steven Michael Quezada who resides in City Council District 3.

The lawsuit alleges Teresa Garcia turned in six-hundred and ninety nine (699) signatures to the City Clerk. According to the lawsuit the City Clerk identified and rejected one-hundred, sixty-nine (169) signatures as invalid.  These signatures were  alleged to be invalid because the names on these signature lines were names of people registered outside of the district boundaries or were the names of people not registered to vote at all.

Five-hundred thirty (530) signatures were accepted by the city clerk as valid. It is alleged by Nathaniel Sierra, the contractor with Candelaria Law LLC, that of the 530 signatures validated by the City Clerk, sixty-seven (67) additional signatures are invalid because the names on these signature lines are duplicate names found on the signature petitions of another candidate. The complaint alleges Teresa Garcia collected  an additional twenty-nine (29) signatures in the weeks leading up the declaration filing date but well over the legal deadline allowed by the city.  These twenty-nine (29) additional signatures are also alleged to be invalid

The complaint alleges Teresa Garcia turned in seven-hundred twenty-eight (728) lines of names and signatures with her declaration of candidacy to the county clerk with only four hundred, four-hundred sixty-three (463) valid petition signatures which is thirty-seven (37) signatures short of the five-hundred (500) necessary to satisfy the requirements of the City Election Code.

The complaint gives a breakdown and alleges of the five-hundred, ninety-nine (599) signatures that Garcia turned into the city, the clerk rejected one-hundred sixty-nine (169) of them.  Of the ones rejected by the city clerk,  nineteen (19) were “duplicates” (with her own submissions);  seven (7) were “incomplete” or missing dates or zip codes; thirty-three (33) were “not in jurisdiction” (verified as voters, but not residing in District 3); one-hundred eighteen (118) were “not registered” and could not be found on any voter rolls and  two were “not legible.”  Twenty-nine (29) were collected after the city deadline to collect. Nathaniel Sierra discovered sixty-seven (67) additional signatures that were not rejected by the city clerk but are duplicates with the two other District 3 candidates Christopher Sedillo and Klarissa Peña.

Plaintiff Steven Michael said this in a press release about his lawsuit:

“This lawsuit is about upholding the integrity of our elections.  Every candidate must adhere to the same legal standards. Allowing a candidate to bypass the signature requirement undermines the rules, the electoral process, and the voters of District 3.”

REQUEST FOR RELIEF

The relief  Plaintiff  former Bernalillo County Commissioner Steven Michael Quezada is requesting from the District Court in his case against Teresa Garcia is as follows:

• Rule that  all the signatures collected by Teresa Garcia that are invalid do not count toward the required number of signatures (500) that she was required to collect
• Enter an order declaring that the number of valid nominating petition signatures submitted by  Teresa Garcia  are  insufficient to qualify her to appear as a candidate for City Council District 1 and that she cannot appear on the ballot on the November 4, 2025
• Enter an order directing Defendant County Clerk Michelle S. Kavanaugh not to certify Teresa Garcia   as a candidate or permit his placement on the 2025 local election ballot.

TERESA GARCIA  REACTS  TO COMPLAINT

Teresa Garcia reacted to the complaint in a statement saying in part:

“This lawsuit is not about ‘integrity.’ It is about protecting entrenched power and silencing the voices of District 3. I will not be intimidated. I will continue fighting for the hardworking families of the Southwest Mesa who deserve safe streets, real investment, and leadership that listens.”

Links to quoted or relied upon news sources are here:

https://www.krqe.com/news/albuquerque-metro/two-albuquerque-city-council-candidates-face-lawsuits/

https://www.kob.com/new-mexico/2-albuquerque-city-council-candidates-face-challenges-to-candidacies/

https://www.abqjournal.com/news/article_42b8c99d-21ab-4eaa-9451-da10d4e92343.html#tncms-source=home-featured-7-block

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

The biggest problem identified with both challenges to the candidacies of Stephanie Telles and Teresa Garcia is that there is no clarity under the law, or the election rules and regulations, as to who has the ultimate authority between the Albuquerque City Clerk and the Bernalillo County Clerk to decided the validity nominating signatures submitted.

Article 2,  Section 4, of the City of Albuquerque Charter dealing with Elections outlines the qualifications to run for Albuquerque City Council and states in part:

“Persons desiring to become candidates for District Councilor shall, before being placed on the ballot, file with the City Clerk a petition containing signatures of five hundred (500) registered voters residing in the district which the person desires to represent.”

It is clear that all candidates for City Council are required to gather 500 verified nominating petition signatures from registered voters within the city council district the candidate wishes to represent. The nominating petition collection period was from June 2, 2025, at 8:00am to July 7, 2025, at 5:00pm.

The Albuquerque City Clerk reviewed all signatures submitted and verified that those who signed the petitions were registered, qualified voters who live in the City Council District. (Article II, Section 4, of the City Charter. And City Ordinance § 2-4-10(2).)

Under New Mexico State Law, “A signature shall be counted on a nominating petition unless there is evidence presented that the petition is not a voter of the state, district, county or area to be represented by the office for which the person seeking the nomination is a candidate.”  Further, “A signature shall be counted on a nominating petition unless there is evidence presented that the petition signature has signed more than one petition for the same office.” [§ 1-1-7.2(C)(1) NMSA], § 1-1-7.2(C)(2) NMSA]

The Local Election Act (LEA) was passed by the New Mexico Legislature in 2018. It allows for consolidated local elections in nonpartisan municipal elections to be conducted every November of the odd-numbers years with the county clerk to administer the elections. The city’s November 4 election for Mayor and City Council will be conducted and administered by the Bernalillo County Clerk. For that reason, candidates for City Council were required to  file Declarations of Candidacies with the Bernalillo County Clerk as well as the 500 petition signatures collected.

The link to the City Charter and  Local Elections act is here:

https://codelibrary.amlegal.com/codes/albuquerque/latest/albuqcharter/0-0-0-131

https://law.justia.com/codes/new-mexico/chapter-1/article-22/section-1-22-3/

A “Declaration for Candidacy” for Albuquerque City Council along with the requisite signatures on nominating petitions were required to be filed with the Bernalillo County Clerk on August 26, 2025, between the hours of 9:00 am and 5:00 pm. (City Election Code § 1-22-7(A))

https://www.City.gov/vote/candidate-information/candidate-calendar-for-the-2025-regular-local-election

The problem is there is no clarity or rules and regulations agreed to between the City Clerk and the Bernalillo County Clerk as to who has the final  authority to certify municipal candidacies and to certify nominating petition signatures for the ballot.

Ultimately, it will be the District Court who will decide what needs to be done.  The Court could very well conclude that it should not have to do the job of either clerk and simply order the city clerk to go back, again verify the signatures of Stephanie Telles and  Teresa Garcia because its a city election and then tell the County Clerk who goes on the ballot and to administer the election.

The plaintiffs in both cases should consider filing Amended Complaints naming the Albuquerque City Clerk and the City of Albuquerque as necessary and proper parties and move to consolidate the cases to be heard by one judge. This would result in the court having complete jurisdiction over all the parties and issues and enable the court to issue consistent rulings and orders.

Elections for county officials do not require nominating petition signatures. In this day age with so few wanting to run for office, you would think the time has come for the city to get rid of the requirement of mandating nominating petition signatures for office and simply require declarations of candidacy.

A July 2024 study by Root Policy Research found that Albuquerque has a significant shortage of units for low-income renters. It is estimated that Albuquerque is 13,000 to 28,000 units short of meeting the demand for housing.

Click to access albuquerque-region-2024-hna.pdf

The most recent  Point-In-Time (PIT) Report for the number of unhoused PERSONS experiencing homelessness in Albuquerque is 2,740 broken down in 3 categories:

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

Mayor Tim Keller’s office estimates that there are upwards 5,000 people who are unhoused and who are living on the streets in Albuquerque.

Over the past two decades, rent and house prices have risen faster than income nationwide, meaning low-income Americans are getting priced out and spending, at times, more than 30% of their paycheck to keep a roof over their heads, according to the U.S. Treasury Department.

“SUPPLY-SIDE PROGRESSIVISM” FOR HOUSING SHORTAGE

Increasing the supply of housing is considered a critical component to addressing affordability. “Supply-side progressivism” for housing is a concept that argues restrictive regulations and outdated zoning and land-use laws impede development and inflate housing costs. By streamlining permitting processes, reducing fees and restrictions on various housing types, like duplexes and accessory dwelling units, also called “casitas”, and incentivizing denser development near public transit, the housing supply can be expanded.

https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/R47617#:~:text=One%20of%20the%20main%20results%20of%20low,even%20when%20controlling%20for%20inflation%20and%20income.

ELEMENTS OF “SUPPLY-SIDE PROGRESSIVISM” FOR HOUSING

The main elements of “supply-side progressivism” have been described as follows:

Focus on regulatory reform. This emphasizes  the loosening of restrictive zoning and land-use regulations that hinder residential construction.

Allow for diverse housing types in established developments. This is allowing a wider variety of housing options, such as apartments, duplexes, and accessory dwelling units and not exclusively detached single-family homes.

Streamlining permitting and review processes. Eliminating bureaucracy that cause delays that add costs and time to housing development.

Government subsidies dedicated to affordable housing. Using government subsidies(municipal, state or federal) and public-private partnerships to incentivize private investment in housing that serves the public interest, particularly for affordable housing.

ARGUMENTS FOR “SUPPLY-SIDE PROGRESSIVISM” FOR HOUSING

Three main arguments have been made  for supply-side progressivism for housing:

1. Increasing overall housing supply, including market-rate development, can indirectly alleviate pressure on affordable housing markets by reducing competition and potentially leading to price stabilization or even reduction.
2. More efficient production of housing can contribute to broader goals like climate change mitigation and poverty reduction.
3. Government subsidies for housing construction can be a valuable tool to increase supply, especially where local construction industries are underdeveloped.

ARGUMENTS AGAINST  “SUPPLY-SIDE PROGRESSIVISM” FOR HOUSING

Four main arguments have been made against  supply-side progressivism for housing:

1. Focusing solely on private development might not sufficiently address the needs of the lowest-income households and could even result in gentrification in some areas.
2. The argument that increased supply will simply “trickle down” to benefit everyone is overly simplistic and ignores the complexities of housing markets and speculation.
3. Historical examples of using subsidies to incentivize private development have led to negative outcomes like displacement and segregation.
4. Zoning reform alone will not be sufficient to address the root causes of high land prices, particularly in high-demand areas where wealthy renters may drive up the value of potential developments.

“SUPPLY-SIDE PROGRESSIVISM” FOR HOUSING COMES TO ALBUQERQUE

On August 18, the online news agency City Desk ABQ published a news articled with the headline “From red tape to rapid construction: Councilors embrace “supply-side progressivism” to remove red tape delaying housing spending” with the sub-headline “How Albuquerque plans to build more homes faster.” The article was written by City Desk ABQ staff reporter Jesse Jones.

The City Desk ABQ article reports that “supply-side progressivism” has arrive to Albuquerque in the form of passage of city council Bill O-25-95  sponsored by District 2 City Councilor Joaquín Baca, whose district includes downtown Albuquerque, and co-sponsored by District 6 Councilor Nichole Rogers who represents the South East Heights area and includes the International District. What is impressive is that Bill O-25-95 passed unanimously 9-0 at the August 18  City Council meeting.

Quoting in part the City Desk ABQ article:

“Council Bill O-25-95 creates targeted procurement exemptions for affordable and transitional housing projects using state capital outlay funds, including money from [NM Legilature] House Bills 2 and 450, with “critical deadlines.”  The ordinance aims to simplify and streamline the process for getting housing built.

Rather than removing oversight, the measure introduces a “Request for Qualifications” process that can bypass traditional bidding when appropriate. Unlike competitive bids based on lowest cost, the RFQ evaluates contractors on “experience and qualifications,” according to city staff.  Projects over $100,000 still require City Council approval, maintaining democratic oversight while cutting months of bureaucratic delays. 

The ordinance … directs the Health, Housing and Homelessness and Municipal Development departments to review procurement policies and report back to the council within 30 days, identifying changes that would further streamline affordable and transitional housing development.

Instead of helping people afford high housing costs through subsidies, the supply-side progressive model aims to lower prices by increasing supply through regulatory reform.

When asked whether the ordinance prioritizes results over process—a central critique supply-side progressives make of traditional Democratic governance—Baca said, “100% yes, A, I’m a Democrat and B, you know, this is a series of changes.” He described a comprehensive approach to increasing housing supply through regulatory reform.

Baca explained how current procurement processes create delays:

“How it typically would work is the city would say, we’ve got this lump sum of money… And so then developers would apply, and there’d be a scoring process, ranking process, make sure they qualify, then they’d also be like the Development Commission. Oftentimes, you’d have to send it there for approval. It’s just a lengthy process to pick a winner, so to speak.” 

The ordinance clarifies and streamlines this process, allowing projects to move forward without going through the full competitive bidding cycle, cutting months—even up to a year—off typical timelines.

Baca said the changes are part of a three-phase strategy that reflects systematic supply-side thinking. The approach started with “[ordinance] 177 that we just passed [in the] previous council [meeting], that will identify three different projects within the downtown and [other] MRA zones [and] laid out just how much they need in gap financing so that they can… get housing done. And so this is the Procurement Code update to allow for that. Then we’ve got another bill coming, which will be the affordable housing code.”

The link to read the full City Desk ABQ article is here:

https://citydesk.org/2025/08/19/from-red-tape-to-rapid-construction/

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

Bluntly put, the term “affordable housing” is very misleading. It is a term way too often used by elected officials and politicians to simply declare a crisis with inflated numbers that shows there is not enough housing that allows the poor or low-income people to rent or buy a home and call their own. Housing prices and rental costs never come down. The more appropriate term that should be used is “subsidized” housing where it’s clear what is needed is subsidized funding for those who cannot afford to buy outright or rent and need assistance.

Albuquerque’s housing shortage is related to economics, the development community’s inability to keep up with supply and demand and the public’s inability to purchase housing or qualify for housing mortgage loans. The shortage of rental properties has resulted in dramatic increases in rents. It is clear that the City of Albuquerque and the state of New Mexico are suffering from a shortage of housing, but that does not mean it is all affordable housing.

The blunt reality is that it is not at all realistic for the City nor the State to try and attempt to solve the housing shortage on their own with nothing but government financing and construction. Government’s responsibility is to provide essential services, such as police protection, fire protection and utilities and not to directly compete with the housing industry. It’s the market forces that must be relied upon to get the job done when it comes to  housing of all kinds.

The approach that the City, the County and the State has taken in the form of tax deferrals, subsidies and low interest loans to the private sector as incentives to construct housing are the reasonable and responsible approach to help solve the current housing shortage in the city and the state.

City, County and State government can help the private sector to build more housing by eliminating policies and zoning restrictions that unnecessarily drive-up housing costs so long as there is a preservation and respect for adjoining property owners rights and remedies.  The enactment of Bill O-25-95 by the city council on a unanimous vote  is not a panacea to solve the city’s housing shortage, but it is a major step in the right direction.

Albuquerque voters will have five City Council contests to decide in the city’s November 4 election. The city council’s odd-numbered districts of 1, 3, 5, 7 and 9 will all be on the ballot. District 1 is an open seat with 4 running for the seat while the incumbent Democrat has given up his seat to run for Mayor. The three incumbents in Districts 3, 5, and 9 have challengers who have qualified for the ballot. The Incumbent in District 7 has one challenger who will qualify as a write in candidate.

EDITOR’S NOTE: The State law and the Albuquerque City Charter mandates that all municipal elections for elected officials are to be non-partisan where party affiliation is not given after candidates’ names on the ballot. Notwithstanding, the reality is that Albuquerque’s municipal elections for elected officials have become very partisan with the political parties actively  involved.

https://law.justia.com/codes/new-mexico/2011/chapter3/article8/section3-8-29/

https://law.justia.com/codes/new-mexico/chapter-1/article-22/section-1-22-3/

The Local Election Act (LEA) was passed by the New Mexico Legislature in 2018. It allows for consolidated local elections in nonpartisan municipal elections to be conducted every November of the odd-numbers years with the county clerk to administer the elections. The city’s November 4 election for Mayor and city council will be conducted and administered by the Bernalillo County clerk. The link to the City Charter and  Local Elections act is here:

https://codelibrary.amlegal.com/codes/albuquerque/latest/albuqcharter/0-0-0-131

https://law.justia.com/codes/new-mexico/chapter-1/article-22/section-1-22-3/

The candidates listed below have filed Declarations of Candidacies with the City Clerk and the Bernalillo County Clerk with their nominating petition signatures verified and they will appear on the November 4 ballot.

CITY COUNCIL DISTRICT 1

District 1 City Council District is currently represented by first term Democrat  City Councilor Louie Sanchez who did not seek reelection and who is one of 7 candidates running for Mayor. City Council District 1 is the centrally located Westside District between City Council District 5 on the North represented by Republican Dan Lewis and City Council District 3 on the South represented by Democrat Klarissa Peña.The geographical borders generally include Central Avenue on the South, Coors and the Rio Grande River on the East and “zig zags” on the North to include  Atrisco Dr., Tesuque Dr. and Buterfield Trail  and with the West border  jetting outwards to the city limits and vacant land.

Four candidates running in 4 District 1 City Council have qualified for the ballot having collected 500 or more of the nominating petition signatures. The 4 City Council Candidates who have qualified for the ballot are:

AHREN GRIEGO

Democrat Ahern Griego was born and raised in Albuquerque and is a lifelong West Side resident of the city who retired after 23 years of service as a captain and station commander with Albuquerque Fire Rescue. He was educated at John Adams Middle School and is a graduate of West Mesa High School. He  describes himself as a “tough on crime” but “smart on prevention” candidate on his campaign website. Griego hopes to address homelessness, foster small businesses and improve roads and other public infrastructure. Greigo has qualified for public campaign finance.

DANIEL LEIVA

If elected, Democrat Daniel Leiva hopes to address public safety, help small businesses and improve public infrastructure, according to his campaign website. Leiva graduated in May, 2024  from the University of New Mexico School of Law and received his bachelor’s degree from UNM in 2017.  He has taken the New Mexico bar and is still awaiting the results. He is 29 years old, an Albuquerque native and  has lived on the West Side for 25 years. He said on his website that he has worked in roofing with his grandfather and uncle and operates a small business. Leiva has qualified for public campaign funding.

JOSHUA TAYLOR NEAL

Republican Taylor Neal  proclaims in a social media post that  Albuquerque has “serious issues” with crime, homelessness and economic development, all of which would be his focus, if elected. Taylor Neal describes himself on his Facebook page as a Christian, hydrologic engineer and land developer, humanitarian relief worker and outdoorsman. Neal ran as a Republican in 2024 for the New Mexico House of Representatives in District 17, but lost in the general election to Rep. Cynthia Borrego. He ran for the same seat two years earlier, losing the Republican primary. Neal is a privately financed candidate.

STEPHANIE TELLES

Initially, Democrat Stephanie Telles was found by the City Clerk to have failed to collect the required 500 qualifying donations by 7 and she appealed for her disqualification. On August 28, 2025, the Bernalillo County Clerk notified Stephanie Telles by letter that the Bernalillo County Clerk had in fact qualified her Declaration of Candidacy and petition signatures and notified her that her name will appear on the ballot as a candidate for City Council District 1.

Telles has said on her campaign website that  she hopes to improve community safety through civilian intervention programs such as the Albuquerque Community Safety Department, create more affordable housing, support programs for young people and seniors, boost economic development and upgrade roads. Telles describes herself as a caregiver, educator and small business owner. She founded a consulting business that works with nonprofits, businesses and government agencies. Her campaign is privately financed.

CITY COUNCIL DISTRICT 1 PUBLIC AND PRIVATE FINANCE CANDIDATES

The number of qualifying $5.00 contributions to secure public finance in District 1 was 450. The amount of public finance given to candidates by the city and the spending cap for District 1 is $56,311.25.  Ahren Griego and Daniel Leiva have qualified for public finance.  Candidates Joshua Neil  and Stephanie Telles are  privately finance candidates.

CITY COUNCIL DISTRICT  3

Three candidates are running to represent Southwest Albuquerque’s District 3. The district is considered safe democrat. The geographic borders are generally “Old Coors Road” on the East and the Valley area, Central on the North, and Dennis Chavez Road on the South, with the West side border jetting out to the city limits and mostly vacant area.

KLARISSA PEÑA

Democrat Klarissa Peña  is the current District 3 City Councilor and she is running for a fourth term. If re-elected, Peña will focus on neighborhood infrastructure projects, like parks, outdoor spaces and community centers, she said in a social media post announcing her campaign. Peña was the City Council president in 2019 and now serves as the vice president. Prior to her election, Peña served as the executive director for the West Central Community Development Group and was a city of Albuquerque planning commissioner. Peña has qualified for public finance funding.

TERESA GARCIA

Democrat Teresa Garcia is running on the platform of protecting immigrant rights, updating infrastructure and promoting economic development, according to a campaign statement. Garcia is the chair of the Domestic Violence and Sexual Assault Commission, and former chair of the Southwest Community Policing Council. She is a first-generation college graduate of UNM and longtime resident of Albuquerque’s Southwest Mesa. City Council candidate Teresa Garcia is privately finance candidate having failed to collect the required number of qualifying donations resulting in her becoming privately financed.

CHRISTOPHER SEDILLO

Democrat Christopher Sedillo is running for a second time for District 3 city council having run the first time four years ago. Sedillo grew up in the South Valley and graduated from Rio Rancho High School. Sedillo served in the U.S. Navy for 26 years, and since retirement has worked in advocacy for LGBTQ+ service members and other veterans’ groups. According to a campaign statement,  Sedillo hopes to promote equality, community engagement and veteran support if elected.  City Council candidate Christopher Sedillo is privately finance candidate having failed to collect the required number of qualifying donations and thereby becoming privately financed.

CITY COUNCIL DISTRICT 3 PUBLIC AND PRIVATE FINANCE CANDIDATES

The number of qualifying $5.00 contributions to secure public finance in District 3 was 335. The amount of public finance given to candidates by the city and the spending cap for District 3 is $41,865.00. Only incumbent Klarissa Peña qualified for public finance having collected more than the 335 qualifying donations and she has been given $41,865.00 in public finance. Candidates Christopher Sedillo and Teresa Garcia are privately financed candidates.

CITY COUNCIL DISTRICT 5

District 5 is the city’s northwest quadrant council district in the northwest corner of the city and west of the river. The incumbent city councilor for District 5 is Republican City Councilor Dan Lewis. He is being challenged by Democrat Athena Allen.

DAN LEWIS

MAGA Republican Incumbent City Councilor Dan Lewis  was the Founding Pastor of Soul Rio Community Church, where he served for over 15 years. As President of Desert Fuels, Inc., he helped the company become one of Albuquerque’s fastest-growing businesses and one of New Mexico’s top private companies. Lewis later founded Refined Fuels Transport, a successful transportation company that employed over 20 people in New Mexico. After selling the company, Dan Lewis  took on the role of Director of Operations at Davidson Energy in 2019. Most recently, in January 2024, he was appointed Executive Director of the Asphalt Pavement Association of New Mexico, where he works with contractors, producers, and suppliers to improve the state’s roads and highways.

Lewis has served three terms on the city council. Lewis first served two consecutive terms from 2009-2017, then ran for Mayor in 2017 losing to Progressive Democrat Tim Keller in a landslide runoff. In 2021 he ran again and was elected to a third term to city council.  Ahead of a potential fourth term, Lewis has four key priorities: community safety, road improvements, community infrastructure and economic growth, according to his campaign website. The number of qualifying $5.00 contributions to secure public finance in District 5 was 446. Councilor Dan Lewis qualified for public financing and has been given $55,065.10  to run his campaign. 

ATHENEA ALLEN

Democrat Athenea Allen has 18 years’ experience as a Senior Investigator specializing and conducting federal background investigations for numerous federal agencies including the U.S. Department of Homeland Security and the Department of Defense. She has 5 years of experience with Northrop-Grumman as a Security Lead and Program Specialist. She is currently the Site Security Lead/Security Lead Manager at General Dynamics Information and Technology. Allen is  the wife of Bernalillo County Sheriff John Allen and the couple have one son. As an elected city councilor, Athenia Allen hopes to address public safety, improve roads, and help working families. Athenea Allen is privately financed and she is conducting a “grass roots” campaign going door to door and conducting fund raisers.

CITY COUNCIL DISTRICT 7

District 7 is the mid heights city council district currently represented by first term Progressive Democrat City Councilor Tammy Fiebelkorn. The district includes the uptown retail business district including the Commons, Winrock and Coronado Shopping Center. The District boundaries are generally Montgomery Boulevard on the North, I-25 on the West, Lomas on the South and Eubank on the East.

TAMMY FIEBELKORN

Progressive Incumbent Democrat City Councilor Tammy Fiebelkorn was first elected to the City Council in 2021 in a runoff election. Fiebelkorn was born in Grants, NM and has lived in District 7 for over 20 years. She is the current Chair of the City Council’s Land Use, Planning and Zoning Committee despite having no prior experience nor background in land use law and planning and zoning matters. During her tenure, she has concentrated on major initiatives focused on zoning changes to the city’s zoning laws to increase density throughout the city, to increase affordable housing, sponsored ordinances affecting renters and property owners rights and remedies, supported increasing assistance and shelter for the unhoused, including city sanctioned safe outdoor space encampments for the homeless. She is considered a vocal and staunch animal rights advocate on the City Council. Prior to being elected to the City Council, she worked with the City of Albuquerque on numerous projects, including funding and implementing low-income energy efficiency retrofits in disadvantaged neighborhoods, updating the city’s Energy Conservation Code, developing coordinated positions on energy and transportation cases before the New Mexico Public Regulation Commission, and managing the Mayor’s Energy Challenge which helps small businesses reduce their energy burden and environmental impacts.

The number of qualifying $5.00 contributions to secure public finance in District 7 was 466. The amount of public finance given to candidates by the city and the spending cap for District 7 is $58,205.00. Democrat Incumbent City Councilor Tammy Feibelkorn secured the required nominating petitions signatures and the required $5.00 donations for public finance and has been  given  $58,205.00 to run her campaign.

JAEMES SHANLEY

Editor’s Note: New Mexico statutes require elections to allow for write-in candidates, but only if they have properly qualified for the election to allow their votes to be counted. A Declaration of Intent to be a write-in candidate can only be filed on one day and must be filed and accompanied by a nominating petitions containing the same number of signatures or the filing fee required of other candidates for the same office. A write-in candidate must be considered a candidate for all purposes and provisions relating to candidates in the Local Election Act, except that the write-in candidate’s name shall not be printed on the ballot nor posted in any polling place.

Links to review the New Mexico State laws on write in candidates are here:

https://law.justia.com/codes/new-mexico/chapter-1/article-10/section-1-10-13/

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

September 2 is the one day designated for write in candidates for City Council to file with the Bernalillo County Clerk their declarations of candidacies along with 500 nominating petition signatures. Jaemes Shanley will be running as a write in candidate against incumbent City Council Tammy Feiebekorn. Confidential sources have confirmed that Shanley has gathered more than enough nominating petition signatures to qualify as a write in candidate.

Democrat Jaemes Shanley is the President of the Mark Twain Neighborhood Association located in the mid heights and is the Vice President of the District 7 Coalition of Neighborhoods which boasts membership of 14 neighborhood associations. Shanley first arrived in Albuquerque in August 1969, after graduating High School in England, to attend UNM from which he graduated in 1973. His parents followed a year later, and his father retired in Albuquerque after a 30-year career as a US Naval aviator. In 1971 they purchased a home in the Mark Twain neighborhood where they resided for the remainder of their lives. Jaemes worked a lifetime in the private sector in sales and marketing for various corporations in the United States, Australia, and Japan. His work required extensive travel throughout Asia Pacific and Latin America routinely on the ground in more than 30 countries. Jaemes and his wife returned to Albuquerque in September 2006 to renovate and take up residence in his parent’s Mark Twain neighborhood home where they reside today, becoming actively involved with Neighborhood Associations.

Links to two guest columns written by Jaemes Shanley and by published by www.PeteDinelli.com can be found in the postscript.

CITY COUNCIL DISTRICT 9

City Council District 9 is often referred to as the Four Hills area city council district and is currently represented by first term MAGA Republican City Councilor Renee Grout who is seeking a second term. The District is very condensed and is considered safe Republican. The Northern border is Menaul, the West border is Eubank, the Southern border is Dennis Ave, SE and the East border is the Sandia foothills federal land.

Initially, there were a total of three candidates running against City Councilor Renee Grout. Democrat Byron Powdrell failed to secure the 500 qualifying petition signatures thereby failing to make the ballot. On August 25, first-time candidate Democrat Melani Buchanan Farmer dropped out of the race leaving the district’s incumbent and a lone challenger as the only two candidates. Buchanan Farmer cited “personal and family circumstances” as her reason to step back after having collected the 500 nominating petition signatures.

https://www.abqjournal.com/news/article_f99fa519-932b-4e29-b270-bae5fda2b779.html

RENÉE GROUT

According to the city council website, MAGA Republican City Councilor Renée Grout has lived in District 9 for more than four decades. City Councilor Grout has held the District 9 since 2021. She says tackling crime, homelessness and economic development are the city’s biggest priorities. Grout is the owner and operator of auto repair business in Albuquerque. Grout has qualified for public campaign funding. The number of qualifying $5.00 contributions to secure public finance in District 9 was 416 and the amount of public finance given to candidates by the city and the spending cap for District 9 is $51,957.50.

COLTON NEWMAN

Colton Newman is a Democrat. Newman is a business manager for UNM’s Center on Alcohol, Substance Use and Addiction, which oversees research to treat substance use disorder. He graduated from UNM with a bachelor’s degree in communications and a master’s degree in project management.  According to Colton Newman, Albuquerque’s biggest issues are the rising cost of living, community safety and building climate resilience, all of which he plans to address if elected.Newman’s campaign is privately financed.

Links to quoted or relied upon news sources are here:

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

https://www.abqjournal.com/news/article_06124808-fd0a-42f7-b2d5-ac3ad2a2b075.html#tncms-source=home-featured-7-block

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

Since January 1, 2024 the philosophical political breakdown of the city council has been as follows:

DEMOCRATS

District 1 Conservative Democrat Louie Sanchez
District 2 Progressive Democrat Joaquin Baca
District 3 Moderate Democrat Klarissa Peña
District 6 Progressive Democrat Nichole Rogers
District 7 Progressive Democrat Tammy Fiebelkorn

REPUBLICANS

District 5 MAGA Conservative Republican Dan Lewis
District 4 MAGA Conservative Republican Brook Bassan
District 8 MAGA  Conservative Republican Dan Champine
District 9 MAGA Conservative Republican Renee Grout

Although the City Council is split with 5 Democrats and 4 Republicans, Conservative Democrat Louie Sanchez is considered the swing vote and has repeatedly allied himself with conservative MAGA Republicans Dan Lewis, Renée Grout, and Brook Bassan and Dan Champine to approve or kill measures on a 5-4 vote but being unable to override Progressive Democrat Mayor Tim Keller’s veto’s with the required 6 votes.

Four years ago after Keller was elected to his second term, MAGA Republican Dan Lewis and Conservative Democrat Louis Sanchez demanded to reconfirm Keller Department Director appointments in order to have to confirmation hearings and to vote  against Keller’s appointed Chief Administrative Officer, City Clerk and City Attorney. They successfully forced Keller’s Chief Administrative Officer Sarita Nair to resign.

Among the most notable legislation the 5 conservative city councilors attempted to enact to curtail Progressive Mayor Tim Keller’s authority as Mayor were:

• A resolution to repeal or limit mayoral authority during a public health emergency.
• A resolution baring the city from mandating covid-19 vaccines for the municipal government workforce.
• Calling for a series of charter amendments including one that would eliminate runoff elections, an amendment giving the city council more power to affirm or reject a Mayor’s appoints of department directors and one to abolish the Mayor/City Council form of government and to return to a city manager form of Government with a city manager appointed by the City Council.

Over the last two years, the 5  conservative city councilors have shown strong resistance to Mayor Keller’s progressive agenda to change the city’s zoning laws as going too far. Repeatedly, the 5 conservative city councilor’s have voted NO on legislation promoted by Progressive Mayor Tim Keller including legislation sponsored by Progressive Democrat City Councilors dealing with major policy changes and amendments to the city’s zoning laws known as the Integrated Development Ordinance (IDO).

With the departure of conservative Democrat Louis Sanchez, it is  more likely the city council will be more moderate council with the election of any one of 3 Democrats candidates running to replace him. Further, Democrats are making a very strong effort  to replace MAGA Republican incumbents Dan Lewis and Renee Grout, but both are considered by city hall observers as favored to retain their seats.

MISTAKE TO DISCOUNT WRITE IN CANDIDATE

First term Progressive Democrat Tammy Feibelkorn in District 7 is considered highly unpopular within her district given her sponsorship or support of controversial major legislation that has failed to be enacted by the city council during her tenure. The legislation has included her unwavering support of city sanctioned “safe out door spaces” for the homeless and her sponsorship of “opt in” zoning laws to increase density in establish neighborhoods. Feibelkorn’s staunch support and vote for changes to the city’s zoning laws that eliminated adjoining property owners rights to appeal zoning changes and requiring appealing neighborhood associations to pay the attorney fees of developers who prevailed in seeking zoning changes has resulted in voters believing she is not acting in their best interests. When asked to reconsider her positions, she simply says NO and says she has made up her mind even before the legislation is debated by the full city council.

It would be a major mistake to discount the write in candidacy of Jaemes Shamley against Tammy Feibelkorn given her unpopularity within the District and his emerging support from voters who want change and are tired of Feibelkorn’s failure to represent their best interests.

Another major factor is the election will be low voter turnout election. When it comes to city council races, it is expected that only 4,000 to 5,000 votes will be required to win when each district has a population of 60,000 to 65,000 people.  According to the most recent United States census, District 7 has total population of 64,847. In 2021, Tammy Feibelkorn won garnering 5,119 votes to her opponents 3,160 in an extremely low voter turnout runoff election.

https://ballotpedia.org/City_elections_in_Albuquerque,_New_Mexico_(2021)

If the 2025 municipal election is in fact  another low voter turn out election with a little more than a 20% voter turnout, a write in candidate can easily win with people who are motivated to vote who want change.

Please vote on November 4. If you want change, now is the time to vote for it.

Links to related blog articles are here:

Conservative City Council Continues With Personal Vendetta Against Mayor Tim Keller And His Progressive Agenda; Council Proposes Sweeping City Charter Amendments To Impact Mayor Keller Re-Election Chances And To Give City Council More Power Over Appointments If He Is Re Elected, Which Is A Big If

Jaemes Shanley Guest Opinion Column: The Audacity of Contempt

Jaemes Shanley Guest Opinion Column: A Mark Twain Neighborhood Perspective Of Albuquerque

On February 12, 2024 the New Mexico legislature enacted House Bill 129 entitled the Firearm Sale Waiting Period Act. The New Mexico House initially approved a 14-day waiting period but a floor amendment cut the wait time to 7 days before the final passage. Rhode Island, Maryland and New Jersey have adopted a seven-day waiting period, with four states, Colorado, Florida, Illinois and Vermont opting for three days. California has a 30-day waiting period. In New Mexico, supporters argued that the waiting period would help reduce gun violence and gun deaths in New Mexico. On March 4, 2024 Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham signed the legislation into law and it went into effect on May 15, 2024.

Two New Mexico residents, Paul Ortega a gun owner from Albuquerque and Rebecca Scott, a Farmington woman who owns guns, sued Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham and Attorney General Raúl Torrez over the law on May 15, 2024, the day the law  took effect. The National Rifle Association (NRA) and Mountain States Legal Foundation, an advocacy group for gun rights, filed the lawsuit on behalf of Ortega and Scott citing concerns about delayed access to weapons for victims of domestic violence and others.

Plaintiffs Ortega and Scott said they were forced to wait to purchase guns despite quickly passing background checks and contended the New Mexico statute is unconstitutional under the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, as made applicable to the states by the Fourteenth Amendment. Their attorneys argued in part that to keep and bear arms, a prospective gun owner needed to acquire the firearm in the first place and therefore purchasing a gun was covered by the Second Amendment United States Constitution providing for the right to bear arms.

DISTRICT COURT RULING 

On July 22, U.S. District Judge James Browning of Albuquerque refused to grant a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) barring enforcement of New Mexico’s 7 day waiting period for purchasing firearms in New Mexico. Judge Browning sided with attorneys for Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham and state Attorney General Raùl Torrez and ruled against the two-gun owners who contended the state’s 7 day waiting period violated their Second Amendment right to bear arms. The US Supreme Court in June upheld a federal gun control law that is intended to protect victims of domestic violence. Judge Browning’s ruling followed a hearing held on the TRO in June.

Judge Browning found that while gun-related deaths in the United States were higher in 2022 than in any other year on record, he found “the situation is worse” in New Mexico with gun death climbing significantly in the last few years. Judge Browning wrote the age-adjusted gun death rate increased by 87% between 2010 and 2021.  Judge Browning found that “The Defendants adduce significant evidence that waiting period laws may help reduce this tidal wave of gun violence.”  The judge noted that testimony given during the hearing that the Waiting Period Act is likely to save about 37 lives per year.

Browning wrote in part:

“On balance … the harm that the Defendants stand to suffer if the Court were to enjoin the Waiting Period Act — the loss of New Mexican lives — significantly outweighs the Plaintiff’s threatened injury. Moreover, the public’s interest in the preservation of dozens of New Mexican lives cannot be understated.”

Browning wrote that having to wait 7 days, as required by the new law, to purchase a handgun is “minimally burdensome” on the plaintiffs’ ancillary right to acquire firearms.  Browning wrote the waiting period is a “commercial firearm regulation” that is “presumptively Constitutional.” Judge Browning wrote in part:

“… [T]he Court concludes that the Plaintiff’s Second Amendment Claims fails because it doesn’t cover the conduct of purchasing a firearm. … The Supreme Court has repeatedly instructed that the ‘most important rule in constitutional interpretation is to heed the text — that is, the actual words of the Constitution — and interpret that text according to its ordinary meaning as originally understood. …  Today and in 1791, the normal and ordinary meaning of ‘keep’ is to possess and the normal and ordinary meaning of ‘bear’ is to carry. … [The historical understanding of the Second amendment] provides further confirmation that the Second Amendment was not drafted to protect the right to purchase arms.”

Browning denied the NRA’s effort to secure a TRO on three grounds:

1. That the case would not succeed on its merits because the Second Amendment does not cover firearm sales.  The waiting period is not “presumptively unconstitutional” because it is a condition or qualification on firearm commercial sales and the waiting period is “consistent with the Nation’s historical tradition of commercial firearms regulations, which licensed and prohibited the sale of firearms to sections of the populace out of a concern that a purchaser might use the firearm to harm the public.”
2. The NRA and it’s fellow plaintiffs did not show Browning that “they are likely to suffer irreparable injury if the Court does not temporarily enjoin the Waiting Period Act… and the harm that they stand to suffer should they seek to purchase another firearm is slight.”
3. That the plaintiffs did not “establish that the balance of the equities weighs in their favor nor that an injunction is in the public interest, because the Plaintiffs’ interest in purchasing a firearm without delay is minimal compared to the public’s interest in keeping the Waiting Period Act in effect.”

TENTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS REVERSES LOWER COURT

On August 19, the three-member panel of the Denver-based federal Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that New Mexico’s seven-day waiting period on gun purchases infringes on citizens’ Second Amendment rights to keep and bear arms, putting the law on hold pending a legal challenge. In a 2-1 split decision the Appeals Court reversed Federal District Judge Browning’s decision to deny injunctive relief.

Judge Browning, after hearing legal arguments and testimony from historian witnesses, considered the plain language of the Second Amendment. He concluded that the right to acquire a firearm in New Mexico, which mandated the waiting period, didn’t impede the right to “keep and bear” a firearm. However, the appeals court held the opposite view, stating that “the constitutional injury to the Plaintiffs is so broad and clear that they have met their higher burden entitling them to an injunction changing the status quo.” The court reversed Browning’s ruling, and sent the case back for further proceedings.

Court of Appels Judge Timothy Tymkovich wrote in part for the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals majority:

“Even though the potential to reduce impulsive gun violence might be true, once we acknowledge that the Waiting Period Act likely burdens Second Amendment activity, that potential is outweighed. … [The  law applies] a blanket burden across all of society, assuming that everyone is dangerous or unstable before they can exercise their Second Amendment right. … Cooling-off periods infringe on the Second Amendment by preventing the lawful acquisition of firearms. Cooling-off periods do not fit into any historically grounded exceptions to the right to keep and bear arms, and burden conduct within the Second Amendment’s scope. In this preliminary posture, we conclude that New Mexico’s Waiting Period Act is likely an unconstitutional burden on the Second Amendment rights of its citizens.”

In his dissenting opinion, Court of Appeals Judge Scott M. Matheson said New Mexico’s waiting period “establishes a condition or qualification on the commercial sale of arms that does not serve abusive ends.” Matheson noted the majority opinion of the court  ignored a prior Tenth Circuit ruling that upheld Colorado’s law barring gun purchases by anyone under the age of 21, or “a law that requires 18-year-olds to wait three years to purchase a weapon.”

However, the majority opinion acknowledges the precedent and acknowledged that “courts have only partially fleshed out the boundaries of these commercial conditions. … even in this murky territory, the Waiting Period Act falls far short of a presumptively constitutional law.” The “historically grounded exceptions” framework was created by the U.S. Supreme Court in 2022 in a decision that overturned decades of precedent allowing for reasonable regulations on gun purchases.

NEW MEXICO MOVES FOR RECONSIDERATION

On August 26, the online news agency Source NM reported that that New Mexico Attorney General Raúl Torrez, on behalf of the State of New Mexico will be filing with the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals a “Motion To Reconsider” the three-member panel ruling that New Mexico’s seven-day waiting period on gun purchase infringes on citizens’ Second Amendment rights and enjoining the state from enforcing the law.

New Mexico Department of Justice Spokesperson Lauren Rodriguez confirmed to Source NM that Attorney General Raúl Torrez intends to ask the full 19 federal court appeals court to reconsider the ruling “en banc’. Rodriguez said this in an email statement:

“We are actively working with the Governor’s office on the petition for rehearing.”

A request for the  entire 19 member 10^th Circuit Federal Appeals to convene “en banc” is an exceptional request. It refers to the practice where the entire appellate court sits together to hear a case, rather than the usual smaller panel of three judges. This happens in exceptionally important cases of public importance, or when prior decisions need reconsideration or where the circuit court needs to try to keep decisions consistent.

The 3 member panel’s split decision goes against a prior Tenth Circuit ruling that upheld Colorado’s law barring gun purchases by anyone under the age of 21, or “a law that requires 18-year-olds to wait three years to purchase a weapon.”  Federal Court of Appeals Judge Scott M. Matheson’s dissenting opinion also points to this inconsistency. In the meantime, the waiting-period law remains in effect.

As of Tuesday morning, August 26,  New Mexico had not yet filed the petition for rehearing, according to court records.

https://sourcenm.com/briefs/new-mexico-to-ask-appeals-court-to-reconsider-7-day-gun-buy-waiting-period/

COMPREHENSIVE REPORT ON GUNSHOT VICTIMS

Simply put, New Mexico is suffering a major crisis when it comes to gun violence and gun deaths. New Mexico’s  gun violence crisis was laid to bear for all to see on September 28, 2023 when  the New Mexico Department of Health released its “Comprehensive Report on Gunshot Victims Presenting at Hospitals in New Mexico.”  The report spans the time period from 1999 to 2023. The report provides a detailed analysis of firearm-related violent deaths and injuries in New Mexico. It encompasses data from various sources, including New Mexico’s surveillance systems, state behavioral risk factor surveys, and the Center for Disease Control (CDC) data.

The key findings and conclusions detailed in the report are as follows:

INCREASE IN FIREARM-RELATED DEATHS

• Over the past two decades, New Mexico’s firearm death rates rose from 7^th highest nationwide in 1999 to 3^rd highest in 2021 with the age-adjusted firearm death rate increasing by 87% between 2010 and 2021.
• While suicide remains the predominant cause of firearm-related deaths, a notable surge of 70% in the homicide rate is driving the overall increase in firearm fatalities.

DEMOGRAPHIC AND GEOGRAPHIC DISPARITIES

• Men of all age groups were found to be at highest risk for firearm-related injuries and deaths.
• Racial/ethnic inequities: Non-Hispanic American Indian, Non-Hispanic Blacks, and Hispanics, experienced substantial increases in firearm injury death rates between 2017 and 2021.
• The Northeast and Metro Health Regions experienced a substantial increase in firearm injury emergency department (ED) visits over the past two years (Northeast: +30%; Metro: +22%).

INCREASED SEVERITY OF HEALTH OUTCOMES OF FIREARM INJURY

Between 2019 and 2022, there was a 16% increase of patients being admitted to intensive care and a 61% increase in patients being transferred to the operating room.

SIGNIFICANT INCREASE IN ALCOHOL AND SUBSTANCE USE CONTRIBUTING TO INCREASED FIREARMS DEATHS

• Between 2019 and 2020, there was an 89% increase in alcohol dependence for homicides involving firearms. Additionally, from 2018 to 2020, there was a 475% increase non-alcoholic substance dependence for homicides involving a firearm.
• Between 2018 and 2020, there was an 85% increase in alcohol dependence and a 120% increase in non-alcoholic substance abuse for suicides involving a firearm.

LOADED AND UNLOADED FIREARMS AS RISK FACTOR FOR FIREARM INJURY AND DEATH

• In 2022, 37% of New Mexican households have a firearm, 15% of New Mexican households have a loaded firearm, and 8% have a loaded and unlocked firearm.
• In 2022, households with a firearm and a child less than 18 years old, 38% have a loaded firearm and 15% have a loaded and unlocked firearm.

RISING ECONOMIC IMPACT OF FIREARM INJURY TO NEW MEXICO HEALTHCARE SYSTEM

• The annual estimated overall cost of firearms injuries and deaths in New Mexico is $6 billion or $2818 per capita.
• Medicaid claims for firearm injuries in New Mexico increased by 85% from $6.5 million in 2018 to $12 million in 2022 (Figure 12).
• Between January 2023 and September 2023, Medicaid expenditures totaling $5.6 million have been spent on firearm injuries in New Mexico.
• Medicaid was the primary payer for 76% of gun injury hospital discharges in 2022 In 2021, the Department of Health with support of the CDC, developed a Statewide Strategic Plan for the Prevention of Firearm Injury (FASTER Report FINAL (unm.edu)) which is an important supplement to this document. Demographic Data on Firearm Injury.

HEALTHCARE OUTCOMES FOR GUNSHOT VICTIMS

Gunshot injuries have wide-ranging and severe implications on individual well-being, often necessitating immediate and extensive medical care. Delving into the healthcare outcomes for gunshot victims reveals a concerning picture:

SEVERITY OF INJURIES

• Between 2019 and 2022, the number of patients in New Mexico’s trauma centers with firearm injuries has increased by 39%.
• The number of trauma center patients with firearm injuries being discharged from the ED to the intensive care unit has increased by 16%
• There has been a concerning 61% increase in gunshot injuries that required surgical interventions
• New Mexico ranked seventh highest in the U.S. in 1999 and 2011. The rank increased to third highest in the U.S. in 2021
• New Mexico has consistently had a larger age adjusted1 firearm death rate than the rest of the country. Moreover, the age adjusted firearm injury death rate for New Mexico has also increased at a higher rate compared to the U.S. For example, New Mexico’s firearm injury death rate was 48% higher than the U.S. in 2010, compared to being 90% higher in 2021.

TYPE OF FIREARM AND AMMUNITION INVOLVED IN FIREARM DEATHS

The following data was pulled from pooled data in the New Mexico National Violent Death Reporting System (NM VDRS) from 2018 to 2020:

TYPE OF FIREARM IN DEATHS

• Handguns were implicated in 77% of violent firearm-related deaths (Figure 6).
• Rifles and shotguns were involved in 7% and 6% of such incidents.

COMMON FIREARM MANUFACTURERS IN DEATHS

• An unknown manufacturer was noted in 61% of cases of the New Mexico National Violent Death Reporting System (NM VDRS) pooled data from 2018 to 2020.
• Smith & Wesson firearms were linked to 8% of violent deaths, followed by Ruger (6%), Glocks (5%), and Taurus (4%).

AMMUNITION CALIBERS IN VIOLENT DEATHS

• The 9-millimeter (mm) caliber was the most prevalent, associated with 25% of violent firearm deaths. PAGE 7
• Other notable calibers included .38 (10%), .22 (9%), .45 (8%), and .40 (7%)

NUMBER OF VIOLENT CRIMES IN NEW MEXICO

According to FBI statistics, the number of violent crimes in New Mexico for the  11 years available for the “Comprehensive Report on Gunshot Victims Presenting at Hospitals in New Mexico” were reported as follows:

• 2012: 11,660
• 2013: 12,990
• 2014: 12,465
• 2015: 13,672
• 2016: 14,585
• 2017: 16,300
• 2018: 17,637
• 2019: 17,302
• 2020: 16,393
• 2021: 17,373
• 2022: 16,494

Editor’s Note: Final numbers for New Mexico’s overall violent crimes in 2023 and 2024 are not yet available from a single source, but preliminary data for the state shows a high violent crime rate. In 2023, the state’s violent crime rate was 749 per 100,000 people, which is significantly higher than the national average.

According to data released by the New Mexico Department of Health and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, from 2010 to 2021, the age-adjusted death rate from firearms rose by 87%. In the same time span, New Mexico rose from the 7th to the 3rd highest rate of firearm deaths in the country.

Overall, there was a 34% increase in overall firearm fatalities from 2018 to 2021, with a 70% increase in homicides with a firearm in the same time period.

Not only has death from firearms in New Mexico increased, but so have injuries related to firearms. From 2018 to 2022, the rate of people visiting the emergency room from firearm related injuries rose 35%.

According to the latest stats from the FBI, there were 11,550 instances of shoplifting In New Mexico. It’s a trend that’s been increasing since 2018.

FIREARM INJURY – EMERGENCY ROOM VISITS

Emergency room firearms injuries are on the uptick in New Mexico  and are reported as follows for 5 years of available data:

• 2018: 968
• 2019: 914
• 2020: 1,129
• 2021: 1,263
• 2022: 1,306

 https://www.koat.com/article/new-mexico-crime-stats-town-hall/60513537

Following the death of a child near Isotopes Park in 2023, Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham issued a public health order that was aimed to reduce gun violence. Data released by the governor’s office from September 2023 – March 2024 is as follows:

• TOTAL ARRESTS: 7,649
• FELONY ARRESTS: 4,701 (61.46%)
• MISDEMEANOR ARRESTS/ WARRANTS:  2,948 (38.54%)
• FIREARMS SEIZED: 614
• TRAFFIC CITATIONS: 9,669

https://www.nmhealth.org/publication/view/report/8463/

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

It is  clear New Mexico is suffering a major crisis when it comes to gun violence and gun deaths and there is a critical need for gun control legislation, including a waiting period to purchase guns. Given what is at stake, and the lives that could be saved with a 7 day waiting period, requesting the entire 19 member 10^th Circuit Court of Appeals to reconsider the  2 to 1 split ruling is necessary and appropriate.

MORE NEEDS TO BE DONE OTHER THAN WAITING PERIOD

Much more must be done by the New Mexico legislature other than a waiting period to curb and reduce the proliferation of guns in the state of New Mexico and to reduce gun violence. If Governor Lujan Grisham and the New Mexico Legislature are truly concerned about the New Mexico’s violent crime crisis, both need to regroup and take and even more aggressive approach than enacting waiting periods. They should work on building a consensus on the enactment of enhance sentencings for crimes and gun control measures.

The message that must be sent out loud and clear by our elected officials to violent criminals is that New Mexico has a zero tolerance of violent crimes committed with firearms and the only way to do that is with enhanced sentencings. Also, the availability and proliferation of guns must be recognized as a big part of the state’s violent crime problem.

CRIME AND PUNISHMENT MEASURES

The following crime and sentencing provisions should be enacted:

Strengthen penalties for a felon convicted of possessing a firearm, making the crime a second-degree felony, punishable by a minimum of nine years in prison.

Allow firearm offenses used in a drug crimes to be charged separately with enhance sentences.

Making possession of a handgun by someone who commits a crime of drug trafficking an aggravated third-degree felony mandating a 10-year minimum sentence.

Increase the firearm enhancement penalties provided for the brandishing a firearm in the commission of a felony from 3 years to 10 years for a first offense and for a second or subsequent felony in which a firearm is brandished 12 years.

Create a new category of enhanced sentencing for use of a lethal weapon or deadly weapon other than a firearm where there is brandishing  of a deadly weapon in the commission of a felony with enhanced sentences of 5 years for a first offense and for second or subsequent felony in which a lethal weapon other than a firearm is brandished 8 years

Increase the penalty of shooting randomly into a crowded area a second-degree felony mandating a 9-year sentence.

Increase the penalty and mandatory sentencing for the conviction of the use of a fire arm during a road rage incident to a first-degree felony mandating a life sentence.

Update the Children’s Code to deal with charges, increasing penalties and prosecutions of minors as adults as consequences of children using firearms in the commission of violent crimes and aggravated assaults with use of deadly weapon.

Change bail bond laws to statutorily empower judges with far more discretionary authority to hold and jail those pending trial who have prior violent crime reported incidents without shifting the burden of proof from the prosecution to the defense.

GUN CONTROL MEASURES

Gun control measures that should be enacted include an assault weapons ban lawfully regulating the manufacture, possession and sale of weapons of war, most often the gun used in mass casualty events and  prohibiting guns in parks and playgrounds making it illegal to carry a firearm in county or municipal parks, playgrounds, and their accompanying parking lots.

Restrict the sale, manufacture and possession of AR-15-style rifles along with semiautomatic firearms and make it a second-degree felony to purchase, possess, manufacture, import, sell or transfer assault weapons in the state.

Prohibited magazines with more than 10 rounds.

Prohibited the possession of semiautomatic firearm converter that allows the weapon to fire more rapidly.

Enact a  14-day waiting period for the purchase of any firearm and requiring  a prospective seller who doesn’t already hold a valid federal firearms license to arrange for someone who does to conduct a federal background check prior to selling a firearm.

Established a minimum age of 21 for anyone seeking to purchase or possess an automatic firearm, semiautomatic firearm or firearm capable of accepting a large-capacity magazine.

Ban the manufacture, sale, trade, gift, transfer or acquisition of semiautomatic pistols that have two or more defined characteristics.

Revised the state’s Unfair Practices Act to target the sale of illegal firearms and parts, allowing the filing of lawsuits to enforce the act.

Prohibit in New Mexico the sale of “ghost guns” parts. Ghost guns are guns that are manufactured and sold in parts without any serial numbers to be assembled by the purchaser and that can be sold to anyone.

Require in New Mexico the mandatory purchase of “liability insurance” with each gun sold as is required for all operable vehicles bought and driven in New Mexico.

Mandate the school systems and higher education institutions “harden” their facilities with more security doors, security windows, and security measures and alarm systems and security cameras tied directly to law enforcement 911 emergency operations centers.

CONCLUSION

The Governor and the New Mexico legislature need to recognize waiting periods to purchase guns are only one small step. They need to get serious about New Mexico’s gun violence crisis and enact reasonable gun control measures in conjunction with crime and punishment measures. Until then, we can expect our violent crime rates to be out of control.

Links to related articles are here:

Federal Tenth Circuit Court Of Appeals Blocks State’s 7 Day Waiting Period; Appeal To Trump’s US Supreme Court May Be Futile; Governor And Legislature Should Consider Other Measures

NM Federal District Court Denies Temporary Restraining Order Barring Enforcement Of State’s 7 Day Waiting Period; New Mexico’s Gun Violence Crisis; Legislature Should Enact “Omnibus Violent Crime Sentencing And Gun Control Act.”