http://www.freeabq.com/2017/08/07/berrys-sanctuary-city-hypocrisy/

Mayor Berry is taking major issue with US Attorney General Jeff Session’s characterization of Albuquerque as a “sanctuary city”.

(See August 4, 2017 Albuquerque Journal, page A-1, “Berry: Albuquerque not a ‘sanctuary city’; Mayor fires back at Sessions after AG threatens to withhold federal funds”)

(https://www.abqjournal.com/1042964/abq-mayor-berry-to-jeff-sessions-new-mexico-is-not-a-sanctuary-city.html)

The Trump Administration is threatening to withhold federal law enforcement resources from the high crime cities of Albuquerque, Baltimore, Maryland, and the cities of Stockton and San Bernardino, California.

All four cities have applied for federal funding for a crime fighting assistance program.

The dispute stems from the refusal by local police jurisdictions to house and detain arrestees who are foreign nationals until immigration agents can deport them.

It is the federal government’s responsibility to assume the cost of detaining and deporting those in the country illegally.

The City of Albuquerque does not have a jail.

It is the Bernalillo County Detention Center that houses all arrestees awaiting arraignments, trials and defendants convicted of misdemeanors and serving their jail time.

The truth is that Albuquerque has never been a “Sanctuary City”.

Mayor Berry needs to assume some responsibility for helping to create the false impression that Albuquerque is a “sanctuary city”.

Berry did so to get elected the first time in 2009 and by his subsequent acts and words.

It’s ironic that the right wing administration of Donald Trump is declaring Albuquerque a sanctuary city when eight years ago our right wing Republican Mayor said it was not and even took action to assist immigration laws enforcement.

“SANCTUARY CITY” VERSUS “IMMIGRANT FRIENDLY” CITY

A “sanctuary city” denies cooperation with federal immigration officials and does not use city law enforcement resources to identify or apprehend illegal immigrants and does not use city law enforcement resources to enforce immigration laws.

An “immigrant friendly” city is one that implements “welcoming city” policies and does not provide for city enforcement of federal immigration laws and addresses city services including licensing and housing and the focus is to create inclusive, immigrant friendly and welcoming policies.

In 2001 the Albuquerque City Council enacted a resolution that declared Albuquerque an “immigrant friendly” city.

Albuquerque’s “immigrant friendly” designation welcomes immigrants to the city and is largely symbolic.

In February, 2017, the City Council enacted a symbolic memorial that reaffirmed that Albuquerque’s “immigrant friendly” status, but not as a “sanctuary city”.

BERRY’S 2009 ELECTION PLOY

It has been mostly right-wing Republicans that have ramped up the rhetoric on immigration in the past and it was done in 2009 by none other than candidate for Mayor Richard Berry.

Berry used the issue of “sanctuary city” in 2009 to get elected the first time with his supporters driving a vehicle around the city with a billboard mounted on it.

The roving billboard condemned then Mayor Marty Chavez for making Albuquerque a “sanctuary city” for immigrants.

After his election in 2009, Mayor Berry declared that Albuquerque was no longer a sanctuary city.

In 2010, Berry ordered the implementation of a policy that screened every person who is arrested, no matter the offense, such as misdemeanor DWI, shoplifting, drug possession, to see if the person is in the country legally.

By Berry’s orders, US Immigration and Customs agents (ICE) were allowed into the Albuquerque Prisoner Transport Center to screen virtually all people arrested and brought in by the Albuquerque Police Department and determine their immigration status.

In 2010, Berry said, “If convicted, they will serve their sentence and could be deported. I’m not looking at this as an immigration issue, but more as a public safety issue,” said Berry at the time.

The truth is once ICE determines a person is not in this country legally, it will take that person into custody and institute deportation action.

What Berry endorsed was allowing ICE into city holding facilities to screen people is the deportation of people no matter the offense and no matter their guilt or innocence of people arrested and taken into custody by APD.

Now that “sanctuary city” status has become an issue, Berry points out that the desk at the transport center is rarely staffed by ICE and that the detention center is managed and operated by Bernalillo County and not the City of Albuquerque.

CITY OFFICE OF IMMIGRATION AND REFUGEE AFFAIRS

On February 7, 2017, Mayor Berry announced the creation of the city department the “Office of Immigrant and Refugee Affairs”. (See Albuquerque Journal, “City unveils immigrant affairs office”, Metro & NM, Section C-1, February 8, 2017.)

The office is intended to serve Albuquerque’s immigrant and refugee community by acting as a point of contact with other agencies that serve them.

Berry said the new city department will help immigrants and refugees without regard to their legal immigration status and that it will help allay the fears of people in Albuquerque’s immigrant and refugee community.

When asked if the office would serve people who lack legal immigration status, Berry said “It is not our job to check on that. That’s not what this office is about.”

Berry said “There has always been rhetoric from the left and right regarding immigration … But I do not think it has ever been ramped up to the level we’ve seen most recently”.

CONCLUSION

Berry never objected to President Trump ramping things up when Trump said “When Mexico is sending its people, they’re not sending their best … They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists. And some, I assume are good people”.

Mayor Berry has never voiced objections or concerns to Trump’s Muslim travel ban nor the wall he wants to build between the United States and Mexico.

Berry now objects to the Trump administration’s characterization that Albuquerque is a sanctuary city.

Mayor Berry may want to think about traveling to Washington, DC and having a little talk with President Donald Trump and Attorney General Jeff Sessions and to try an educate them on the difference between a “sanctuary city” and an “immigrant friendly” city.

Then again it is very doubtful that President Trump would ever welcome Mayor Berry to the White House seeing as Mayor Berry distanced himself from the President during the presidential election by not even bothering to show up to welcome Trump to Albuquerque the two times Trump visited during the campaign.

All candidates running for Mayor of Albuquerque and City Council need to articulate clearly their position on if Albuquerque should be a sanctuary city and if the policies of mayor Berry should be continued.

http://www.freeabq.com/2017/08/03/what-did-fordo-know/

As reported by the Albuquerque Free Press, the Civilian Police Oversight Agency (CPOA) investigation concluded that public information officers Fred Duran and civilian Celina Espinoza lied when they told a reporter earlier this year that APD detectives had investigated a report that the boyfriend of the child’s mother had tried to kiss t 10-year-old girl Victoria Martens several months before she was brutally murdered in August of 2016.

(See also my August 2, 2017 blog article “Police Oversight Board Investigation Finds APD Lied” at www.PeteDinelli.com)

According to the CPOA investigation, APD officials were told last December that no department personnel investigated the child abuse allegations even though APD officer Fred Duran insisted to an Albuquerque Journal reporter in January that APD investigated the case.

Joanne Fine, the Chair of the Police Oversight Board detailed the investigation’s conclusions before the entire CPOA board when she said:

“The investigation showed that absolutely officer D[uran] did lie, set up and lie[ed] about the involvement of APD” … That Celina Espinoza was not guilty of making up the lie; she was guilty of repeating the lie that she was told by officer D[uran]. But subsequently, she said that when she discovered the truth that she went to the chief and that she called the reporter. I don’t know if she went to the chief, but she did not call the reporter. The reporter called her.” (Emphasis added.)

The CPOA investigation found that APD Chief Gorden Eden was told of the lie in January, but APD waited six weeks to tell the truth and only told the truth after being confronted by an Albuquerque Journal reporter.

It is standard operating procedure for APD public information officers to confer with the Chief of Police and inform the Chief of information and evidence in cases regarding APD’s positions and the status of investigations, especially high-profile cases such as Victoria Marten’s murder.

APD public information officers are ultimately responsible to clear with the Chief and get authorization from the command staff to release information that is accurate in any pending case.

APD public information officers are also responsible to get authorization and clear what is said to the press and public with the Mayor’s office, especially in high profile cases.

The question raised is to what extent did Officer Fred Duran and Celina Espinosa notify Chief Eden that they had lied, did Eden even understand they had lied or did he condone and order the lies?

An even bigger question, did Eden ever advise Mayor Berry or Chief Administrative Officer Rob Perry what was going on in the murder investigation?

Given the serious nature of the findings that APD lied, you would think our Mayor and our Chief Administrative Officer would hold someone accountable, but that would go against their own standard operating procedure and how they have conducted themselves during their entire tenure in office, especially when it comes to APD command staff.

Eden should have been terminated long ago, and asking that he be removed now when he and the Mayor will be gone in a few months is an exercise in futility.

Notwithstanding, the City Inspector General should investigate what happened and determine if Chief Eden was at all involved with instructing the APD pubic information officers to lie to the public and press.

http://www.freeabq.com/2017/08/02/apd-lied-about-victoria-martens-case/

The City’s Police Oversight Agency (CPOA) has completed its investigation against Albuquerque Police Department’s (APD) public information officers Celina Espinoza and Fred Duran for providing false information to the news media and to the public about APD’s contact with nine (9) year old Victoria Martin and her family prior to the child’s brutal murder.

The details of the investigation were released during a meeting of the Police Oversight Board’s Case Review Committee.

Victoria Martens is the nine (9) year old child that was drugged, raped, murdered, mutilated, dismembered and burned allegedly by her mother, her mother’s boyfriend and his cousin.

The murder is one of the most heinous crimes in Albuquerque history of an innocent child, and the three (3) defendants are in custody pending a trial on multiple felony charges.

Five months before the child was killed, the Children Youth and Families Department (CYFD) had received a complaint that one of the mother’s boyfriends tried to kiss the nine (9) year old child which at the very least merited consideration and investigation for possible assault on a child or even child abuse.

CYFD said it did not investigate the allegation because the boyfriend was not a relative and did not live in the child’s home but CYFD reported the complaint to APD and turned it over to APD.

The CPOA investigation specifically found that no APD personnel ever visited nine (9) year old Victoria or her mother to investigate the allegations.

The CPOA investigation concluded that officer Fred Duran and civilian Celina Espinoza lied when they told a reporter earlier this year that APD detectives had investigated a report that the boyfriend of the child’s mother had tried to kiss the 10-year-old girl several months before she was murdered in August of 2016.

Joanne Fine, the Chair of the Police Oversight Board detailed the investigation’s conclusions before the entire board when she said:

“The investigation showed that absolutely officer D[uran] did lie, set up and lie[ed] about the involvement of APD” … That Celina Espinoza was not guilty of making up the lie; she was guilty of repeating the lie that she was told by officer D[uran]. But subsequently, she said that when she discovered the truth that she went to the chief and that she called the reporter. I don’t know if she went to the chief, but she did not call the reporter. The reporter called her.”

According to the CPOA investigation, APD officials were told last December that no department personnel investigated the child abuse allegations even though APD officer Fred Duran insisted to an Albuquerque Journal reporter in January that APD investigated the case.

What is very disturbing is that the CPOA investigation found that APD Chief Gorden Eden was told of the lie in January, but APD waited six weeks to tell the truth and only told the truth after being confronted by an Albuquerque Journal reporter.

The CPOA probe also found that it was a civilian APD employee who made the decision to not investigate the complaint regarding the boyfriend after the state’s Children Youth and Families Department made the referral to APD last year.

What the CPOA investigation found was that APD has no written policy on how to handle referrals about potential child abuse from CYFD and no one oversees the civilian who to determine whether the referral decision is the proper one.

INCONSISTENCIES IN TAPED INTERVIEWS

When you listen to the Albuquerque Journal interview tapes with the APD Public Information Officers, you quickly understand why so many people do not trust APD and why it has a serious credibility problems with the community.

There are six (6) major inconsistencies in the taped Journal interviews:

FIRST: Public Information Officer (PIO) Celina Espinoza told the Albuquerque Journal reporter that APD had investigated the CYFD report which was not true and was a total fabrication.

SECOND: Officer Fred Duran told the Journal reporter that APD detectives interviewed the child and her mother about the CYFD complaint.

Specifically, Fred Duran said “Detectives went and talked to the family and that’s where we got the information that the mother had taken care of the situation by telling the boyfriend to leave and not come back.”

Duran on the audio taped interview with the Journal reporter specifically says he was confident APD went out to the home, says he actually talked to the detectives and no reports were filed because no probable cause was found of a crime.

The truth is APD detectives never went to the child’s home, never interviewed the child and never interviewed the mother.

Had there been interviews, a written report would have been required and any statements given would have to be transcribed and attached to the written report as per APD standard operating procedures.

THIRD: When Fred Duran was asked specifically why APD Detectives made no police offense report about the investigation and interviews, Duran said no report was made because making such a report would violate the child victim’s rights and amount to “police surveillance”.

This is absolute nonsense. Interviews of potential victims and witnesses in a case by police is standard operating procedure in any criminal investigation and are not surveillance.

FOURTH: PIO Celina Espinoza contradicted PIO Fred Duran on her audio interview with the Journal by saying that no APD detectives went to the home and that they did not follow up on the CYFD complaint because APD policy dictates that APD officers only follow up on criminal allegations and that “a kiss in not a crime”.

Espinoza also said there were no reports filed because there was no evidence of a crime.

How would APD know if no crime was committed if APD Detectives never had contact or interviewed the child or the mother in the first place?

FIFTH: When the Journal asked about the contradicting information, a conference call was set up with Espinoza, Duran and the Journal reporter.

The Journal was told APD detectives did interview the family, the detective dealt with the reported kiss, but that they did not make any reports because there was no evidence of a crime.

The CPO Chair Fine specifically took issue that there was no evidence of a crime when it was pointed out that Officer Duran is a sworn officer, he should know the difference between not completing a kiss and an assault and they should have gone forward and done an investigation.

The Journal was told that the names of the detectives could not be released because they work on FBI high profile cases and releasing the detective’s names would jeopardize pending cases.

In the audio recording, Espinoza opines that “attempted kissing” is not a crime and there was no evidence of criminal sexual penetration.

Espinoza states that because there was no probable cause of a crime, no reports were required to be written by the detectives.

The truth is that police offense reports are public record, they contain the names of investigating officers, and the CYFD complaint had nothing to do with any federal charges.

SIXTH: PIO Espinoza says in the conference call “Everybody did everything they were suppose to” even though previously Espinoza had said APD detectives had not followed up on the complaint from CYFD.

PROPOSED DISCIPLINE

Disciplinary recommendations made by the CPOA board include an 80-hour suspension for Officer Fred Duran and a reprimand for Public Information Officer Espinoza.

The CPOA investigation recommends that APD develop a written policy on how to deal with referrals from CYFD.

Given the serious nature of the allegations that APD failed to provide accurate information and lied to the public and the press, you would think the CPOA recommendations would be more serious.

What is tragic is that a child had to suffer and her life was taken in such a brutal manner when she possibly could have been saved had the CYFD Department and APD been a little more vigilant and dedicated to doing their jobs.

https://www.abqjournal.com/1040086/sick-leave-proponents-file-motion-to-change-ballot.html

Almost two (2) months before the October 3, 2017 municipal election, advocates supporting the Healthy Workforce Ordinance are trying to block the City Clerk and the City from using what they are calling an illegal ballot for the municipal election.

(See July 20, 2017 Albuquerque Journal article, METRO & New Mexico Section, page C-1, “Motion filed to block city on sick leave ballot; Group says plan to use 7-type will make initiative illegible”.)

The Healthy Workforce Ordinance would require the payment of sick leave or “sick time off” for full-time, part time and temporary workers by any business within the Albuquerque city limits.

A State District Court Judge ordered the city to print the entire seven-page ordinance on the ballot.

To print the ordinance on the ballot, the City Clerk must print the initiative in 7 point font in order to make it fit with all the others items on the ballot, including the Mayor and City Council races.

The “emergency motion” filed by supporters say the ballot is made “illegible” and unreadable with the use of seven (7) point font thereby making it “illegal”.

Supporters of the ordinance want the City Clerk to place a “summary” of the ordinance on the ballot which is done when bonds are put on the ballot.

Supporters also want the city to provide a legible, large text copy of the entire ordinance in each of the voting booths so voters can read it if they want at the time they vote.

Mayor Richard Berry opposes the proposed measure as he did the increase in the minimum wage initiative enacted by voter a few years ago.

The organizing groups that were able to get it on the ballot claim that the Mayor, city councilors and city hall are excluding the more readable summary about the ordinance on the ballot as a way of defeating the law.

HEALTHY WORK FORCE ORDINANCE REQUIREMENTS

The ordinance will require business owners to pay one (1) hour of sick leave for every thirty (30) hours worked.

Part time workers normally are not afforded paid sick leave and will likely be the biggest beneficiary from the ordinance.

Large employers would be required to offer seven sick days per year after working 40 hours a week for a full year.

Workers with smaller businesses would earn five sick days per year.

The “paid sick leave” initiative will help the working class who have no rights, who are mostly “minimum wage” or low hourly wage workers and who are overwhelmingly “at will” employees in the private sector.

“At will” employees can be terminated without any cause or notice by their employers.

“At will” employees have little or no employment rights and no real vested rights in their jobs except those already required by law such as being paid the minimum wage.

Federal and state laws governing working conditions also provide protections to workers and prohibit sexual harassment and retaliation.

The sick leave ordinance is in a real sense is an extension of increasing the minimum wage initiative passed by voters three years ago.

It is a first step toward a living wage.

THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL COULD ACT

It is a sad commentary that the city refuses to accommodate or agree with use of a summary or provide copies of the ordinance in the voting booth for an initiative that took so much work to get on the ballot.

In the summer 2016, supporters of “Healthy Workforce Act” gathered enough valid petition signatures from registered voters to get it on the ballot.

The campaign needed 14,218 signatures of registered voters but at least 24,000 valid signatures were gathered and submitted for verification.

Even though a court order mandates that the City place the entire seven-page ordinance on the ballot, it does not mean the Mayor or the City Council are prohibited from taking further action to educate the public on its content.

The Mayor by executive order could instruct the City Clerk to provide legible copies of the ordinance to voters to read before or at the time of voting, but there is no way he would do that seeing as that he opposes the ordinance as he did the increase in the minimum wage voter initiative.

The City Council still needs to approve and vote on the definitive version of the ballot and the council could vote to give the City Clerk further instructions that would not violate the court order.

It is the responsibility of the City Clerk to educate the public on the ballot.

The District Court will have one last opportunity to give further instructions to the City and the City Clerk and perhaps order the Mayor and the City Clerk to do their jobs on educating the public on the contents of the ordinance.

ORGANIZED OPPOSITION

A coalition of 27 businesses and business organizations was formed last year to oppose the Healthy Workforce ordinance in court and includes:

• Apartment Association of New Mexico
• Associated Builders and Contractors
• Associated General Contractors New Mexico
• Albuquerque Economic Forum
• Albuquerque Hispano Chamber of Commerce
• American Subcontractors Association of New Mexico
• Commercial Association of Realtors New Mexico
• Greater Albuquerque Association of Realtors
• Greater Albuquerque Chamber of Commerce
• Home Builders of Central New Mexico
• National Association of Industrial and Office Parks (NAIOP)
• New Mexico Association of Commerce and Industry
• New Mexico Restaurant Association
• New Mexico Utility Contractors Association.

A “measured finance” committee called “ALBUQUERQUE COALITION FOR A HEALTHY ECONOMY” has also been formed to mount a campaign to fund and oppose the ordinance.

It is anticipated that both the business coalition and the measured finance committee will be expending considerable resources to defeat the measure.

CONCLUSION

It is important that the City do whatever it can to inform the public on the content of the ordinance.

Candidates for Mayor need to articulate where they stand on the ordinance and if elected say if they will enforce it.

A silver lining is that the ordinance may increase the 2017 Municipal election voter turnout.

However, the fact that it is on the ballot will cut both ways.

Progressives Democrats and conservative Republicans may turn out in force to vote.

The business coalition may be able to get more conservative business owner’s and Republicans to the polls which will ultimately skew in Republican candidates favor.

The recent defeat of the Santa Fe “soda tax” shows how effective a well funded opposition campaign can be in a municipal election.

Statistics show that more young people are leaving the city each passing year seeking employment and upward mobility elsewhere which means Albuquerque is getting older and more conservative.

http://krqe.com/2017/07/27/residents-invite-mayoral-candidates-on-tour-of-citys-troubled-areas/

Channel 13 is reporting that a group of people who are fed up with crime in their neighborhood are going straight to the eight candidates for Mayor.

The group invited the candidates running for mayor to go on a “walking tour” through some of Albuquerque’s downtown neighborhoods which are dealing with our rising crime rates.

The tour should be a real eye opener for the candidates for Mayor.

When they attend candidate’s forums, they tend to give their canned answers to questions sounding like they know what they are talking about but not really understanding what the problem is associated with the question.

When I was Director of the Safe City Strike force dealing with crack houses, meth labs, slumlords and properties that had become magnets for serious crimes, I had to go out and interact and meet with the neighborhoods and citizens affected by crime.

As an Assistant District Attorney and prosecutor, I interviewed and interacted with victims of violent crimes.

When you see fear, anger, desperation and hopelessness in people’s faces, eyes, and voices, and they are asking for help, you listen and learn.

You become determined to find solutions to the problems and forge a desire to help.

Any candidate for Mayor who does not participate in the tour has no business running for Mayor.

http://www.freeabq.com/2017/07/24/dan-klein-column-command-staff/

This article by retired APD Sergeant Dan Klein appearing in the Albuquerque Free Press really gives major insight on just what the new Mayor as well as any new Chief of Police will be up against when it comes to changing the culture within the Albuquerque Police Department (APD).

The article describes the difficulty newly appointed APD Chief Gerry Galvin had when he was appointed by Mayor Jim Baca.

Mayor Baca did a national search and bought Chief Galvin in without allowing him to bring in his own management team.

I worked with Chief Galvin in my capacity as Bernalillo County Chief Deputy District Attorney, we had our disagreements, but by and large I got along with him.

Chief Galvin knew how to run a law enforcement department having come from the Cleveland Police Department.

The fact that Chief Galvin was recruited from out of state resulted in real resentment from the existing command staff.

Chief Galvin was basically left to fend for himself with many of his captains feeling they were the ones that should have been appointed Chief of Police and they had a sense of entitlement.

In a very real sense, Chief Galvin was set up failure by his own command staff.

The command staff who created, contributed or who did not stop the “culture of aggression” need to be replaced.

The entire APD chain of command must be removed and replaced with a new generation of leadership and not from within the ranks of APD.

A national search must be conducted to identify and hire a new management team to take over APD, including a new Chief of Police, new Deputy Chiefs and a new chain of command to assume control of APD and who are truly committed to the Department of Justice consent decree reforms.

Finding and replacing the command staff is just the first step to address the “culture of aggression” found by the Department of Justice.

APD has consistently shown over many years it cannot police itself which contributed to the “culture of aggression”.

The APD Internal Affairs Unit needs to be abolished and its functions absorbed by the Office Independent Council.

The investigation of police misconduct cases including excessive use of force cases not resulting in death or nor serious bodily harm would be done by “civilian” personnel investigators.

The function and responsibility for investigating police misconduct cases and violations of personnel policy and procedures by police would be assumed by the Office of Independent Council in conjunction with the City Human Resources Department and the Office of Internal Audit where necessary.

The Office of Independent Council would make findings and recommendations to the Police Chief for implementation and imposition of disciplinary action.

Every candidate for Mayor needs to articulate a clear platform on what they will do with APD.

Until aggressive action is taken with APD command staff and the Department of Justice mandated and agreed to reforms, APD will continue to spin out of control, crime rates will continue to rise and Albuquerque will continue to see dramatic spikes in violent crime.

Please see my July 14, 2017 blog article “A Plan To Reform And Restructure APD: Appoint Police Commissioner And Abolish APD Internal Affairs” at www.PeteDinelli.com.