According to the City of Albuquerque web site, there are approximately 5,800 City of Albuquerque employees.

Roughly 5,200 are considered “classified employees” who are covered by the city’s personnel rules and regulations, who have vested rights including retirement benefits, sick leave and annual leave benefits and who can only be terminated for cause.

Disciplinary actions such as suspensions, demotions and termination can be appealed by classified employees to the City Personnel Board.

There are 223 full time “ungraded” positions at City Hall, who are in unclassified positions and “at-will” employees who can be terminated “without cause” and who work at the pleasure of the Mayor or the City Council. (See City of Albuquerque Pay Rate Report, Ungraded Employees on City web site.)

“Ungraded employees” or exempt employees do not have the same vested rights classified employees have and have no appeal rights to the City Personnel Board for disciplinary action so when they are fired, they are in fact gone with little or no recourse.

I was an ungraded or unclassified employee for both the State and City for over 28 years and retired in 2009 from government service.

When you become an “ungraded” employee or unclassified employee, the reward is a much higher salary and the risk is having no real job security, but there is great professional satisfaction in the work you can do and far more job opportunities in government.

Virtually all City Hall Department Directors are “ungraded employees” and serve at the pleasure of the Mayor and can be terminated without cause.

I recall vividly eight years ago during the transition period from the day of the election to when Mayor Berry took office on December 1, 2009, his transition team sent a political operative to walk around the Mayor’s office to get the correct spelling off name plates for those who worked for Mayor Martin Chavez so the designated new Chief Administrative Officer could send out letters to those employees telling them their services to the City would no longer be needed after December 1, 2009.

I found out that I would no longer be employed when Berry held a press conference and announced Darren White as my replacement, but it did not matter because I was retiring.

Mayor Berry has a little over five (5) months left in office, and it’s a sure bet many of the “ungraded” or “unclassified” employees who are staunch Berry loyalists will now try to transfer to positions within city hall to classified positions, even if it means a demotion and a reduction in pay, to be kept employed by the City.

City hall salaries are paid on an hourly rate with 2080 working hours in a year.

Mayor Berry is paid $49.93 an hour or $102, 814 a year.

The next Mayor will be paid $125,000 with the increase approved by a city task force established by a voter approved charter amendment created to set elected officials salaries.

City Councilors are currently paid $8.41 an hour or $17, 492.80 a year.

Following are thirty one (31) “ungraded” or “unclassified” City Hall employees I suspect are either updating their resumes and looking for employment elsewhere outside City Hall or are trying to find classified positions at City Hall to be transferred into before Berry leaves office and the new Mayor is sworn in December 1, 2017:

Chief Administrative Officer Rob Perry, paid $92.29 an hour or $191,963.20 a year.
APD Chief Gordon Eden, paid $81.00 an hour or $168,480 a year.
BIOPARK Chief Executive Officer James Allen, paid $77.48 an hour or $161,158.40 a year.
Director of Behavioral Sciences Nils Rosenbaum, paid $76.50 an hour or $159,120 a year.
Chief Operations Officer Michael Riordan, paid $73.53 an hour or $152,942.40 a year.
City Attorney Jessica M. Hernandez, paid $72.99 an hour or $151,819.20 a year.
Fire Chief David W. Downey, paid $64.09 an hour or $134,992 a year.
Mayor’s Chief of Staff Gilbert A. Montano, paid $61.27 an hour or $127,441 a year.
Director of Solid Waste Department John W. Soladay, $55.99 an hour or $116,459.20 a year.
Assistant APD Chief Robert Huntsman, paid $57.43 an hour or $119,454.40 a year.
APD Executive Director William R. Slausen, paid $53.82 an hour or $111,945.60 a year.
Environmental Health Director Mary L. Leonard, paid $53.46 an hour or $111,196,80 a year.
Parks and Recreation Director Barbara Taylor, paid $53.46 an hour or $111,196,80 a year.
Senior Affairs Director Jorja Armijo -Brasher, paid $52.41 an hour or $109,012.80 year.
Animal Welfare Director Paul R. Caster, paid $53.46 an hour or $111,196.80 a year.
Cultural Services Director Dana N. Feldman, paid $53.46 an hour or $111,196.80 a year.
Planning Department Director Suzanne G. Lubar, paid $53.46 an hour or $111,196.80 a year.
Human Resources Director Mary L. Scott, paid $53.46 an hour or $111,196.80 a year.
Mark T. Leach, Manager of Technology Services, paid $53.04 an hour or $110,323.20 a year.
Family Community Services Director Douglas Chaplin, paid $52.41 an hour or $109,012.80 a year.
Transit Director Bruce A. Rizzieri, paid $52.41 an hour or $109,012.80 a year.
Assistant Transit Director Dayna G. Crawford, paid $45.11 an hour or $93,828 a year.
Economic Department Director Gary L. Oppedahl, paid $51.27 an hour or $106,641.60 a year.
Police Emergency Communications Manager Erika L. Wilson, paid $50.38 and hour or $104,790.40 a year.
Aviation Director (Airport) James D. Hinde, paid $48.46 an hour or $100,796 a year.
City Clerk Natalie Y. Howard, paid $48.46 an hour or $100,796 a year.
Finance and Administrative Services Director Lou Hoffman, paid $48.46 an hour or $100,796 a year.
311 Citizens Contact Center Division Manager Maria C. Prothero, paid $43.71 an hour or $90.916.80 a year.
Mayor’s Director of Constituent Services Alan E. Armijo, paid $39.71 an hour or $82,596 a year.
Director of Office of Emergency Management Roger L. Ebner, paid $39.50 an hour or $82,160 a year.
Real Time Crime Center Manager TJ Wilham, paid $39.50 an hour or $82,160 a year.
APD Major and Academy Director Jessica Tyler, paid $51.26 an hour or $106,620 a year.
(NOTE: Major APD Tyler is not listed as an ungraded employee but is “at will” as an APD Major.)

The average salaries paid Department Directors under the previous administration were around $91,000 a year, so Berry has paid 25% to 45% percent more to his unclassified Department Directors, at will employees, while rank and file classified employee’s were given 1% to 3% raises over the last eight (8) years.

When first elected, Berry unilaterally decided not to pay union negotiated pay raises such as police and fire raises declaring a budget shortfall and the Republican controlled city council refused to increases taxes while Berry cut essential services.

Three years into his first term, Berry ordered pay reductions, but did allow for a 1% pay raise to city workers making under $30,000, all the while his Department Directors were paid their hefty salaries.

The foregoing figures are base hourly pay only.

The final figures for wages paid would include wages, both regular and overtime, as well as longevity, shift differential, incentive pays, and other “special pays” for the employees.

My only hope is that when the new Mayor is elected, that person’s transition team shows a little more class than Berry did and some respect in terminating people.

My best wishes to any of those leaving the Berry Administration in five months and I wish them well on their future endeavors outside of City Hall.

The nine (9) candidates running for Mayor need to start thinking about exactly how and who they will want to replace and who they want to surround themselves with if they are elected Mayor.

It’s a lot easier to run for office and far more difficult to govern and find competent people who can do the job who are qualified and not just political operatives, supporters and campaign workers.

I remember listening to Mayor Berry a few years ago speaking at an annual economic development conference sponsored by the Albuquerque Chamber of Commerce and Berry referred to New Mexico as the “donut” hole of economic development in the Southwest.

Berry’s message was that we could not do much to turn our economy around and we could not compete with surrounding states with no mention of really trying in any meaningful way and no suggestion of any kind of an economic development plan for Albuquerque.

Berry referred to his appointed Economic Development Director Gary Oppedahl as a “serial entrepreneur” when he appointed him and Berry was confident that his Economic Development Department would get the job done to help diversify our economy, get away from our reliance on the federal government spending and 20,000 jobs would be created by his efforts which never materialized.

During the last eight (8) years, Albuquerque’s Economic Development Department has been a failure and has not attracted a single new industry to Albuquerque.

The only bright spot for Albuquerque’s Economic Development Division has been the promotion of “the film industry”, which was started under the previous administration.

The New Mexico film industry is a major and emerging industry in Albuquerque and New Mexico that is a key to diversifying our economy, and one which the Mayor and the Governor have failed to recognize, especially our Governor when she called for a major reduction in film industry tax subsidies.

Mayor Berry, his supporters and in particular his political operatives at the Economic Forum, Chamber of Commerce, the New Mexico Business Coalition and all of his NAIOP construction buddies have done well for themselves during the last eight (8) years thanks to Berry and have done very little or next to nothing to help diversify our economy and attract new industry and jobs as they watch Albuquerque and New Mexico continue in an economic death spiral.

Organizations like NAIOP and its membership can always count on Berry to deliver government construction contract work to them like the ART Bus project and not try to even attract private investors and industries to diversify our economy.

Smiles and public statements of false hopes and inflated expectations of Berry’s government funding for entrepreneurial projects like “Innovate Albuquerque ” and “ABQid” have not and will not end our downward economic spiral.

Political insiders and pundits are saying Berry is running for Governor of New Mexico.

My hope is that Berry and Oppedhal get a Dunkin Donuts franchise so they can make all the worthless donut holes they want and get out of City and State Government once and for all.

Following is an article published on May 17, in the Albuquerque Free Press written by reporter Dennis Domrzalski that explains how New Mexico has become the “donut hole” for economic development in the Southwest.

NM Left In The Dust While Other States Boom

• May 17, 2017
• BY: Dennis Domrzalski, Albuquerque Free Press

State’s Economy Relies Less on Market Sector

So just how bad has New Mexico’s economic growth been over the years, especially when compared to surrounding states?

The simple answer: awful and dead last.

Population figures help tell the story because population growth is based on economic growth and opportunity.

In 1950, New Mexico, Utah and Arizona had roughly the same populations, and Nevada had almost no one.

But by 2016, those states had left New Mexico in the dust.

Arizona’s population had increased nine-fold, while Nevada’s population has increased by more than 18 times.

New Mexico saw a threefold population hike during that time.

So why have other those other states, especially Arizona, boomed while New Mexico has basically stood still?

According to Matt E. Ryan, an associate professor of economics at Duquesne University in Pittsburgh, it’s because New Mexico decided to focus on the public sector for its economic growth.

The other states relied on the private sector and market forces to drive their economies.

Ryan laid out the differences between New Mexico’s and Arizona’s divergent paths in a column last year for ABQ Free Press.

The piece was based on his 2010 study of the two states.

“Fifty years ago, Arizona’s economy was roughly 50 percent larger than New Mexico’s. Today, the size difference is over 230 percent,” Ryan wrote. “How could remarkably similar states within the same country experience such a disparity in economic fortunes?

“In short, one possible explanation for the difference in economic outcomes between the two areas is a difference in the degree to which each state’s economy relies on markets to coordinate economic activity.”

Here’s more of Ryan’s 2016 column:

“The original study showed a persistent and distinct gap in the percentage of each state’s economic activity derived from private sector, with Arizona relying on the private sector to generate growth to a larger degree than New Mexico.

“The most recent data shows that this gap has remained since the original study; in fact, with updated data on the years included in the original analysis, the reported discrepancy in private sector dependence was, if anything, understated.

In short: Arizona’s economy relies more heavily on the market sector than does New Mexico’s.

“Another means of assessing the degree to which economies embrace markets are economic freedom indices.

The Fraser Institute releases annually ‘The Economic Freedom of North America,’ a three-pronged analysis of every American state and Canadian province that, through assessing the size of government, state-specific taxation, and labor market freedom, yields a single number that captures the degree to which states and provinces embrace the market system relative to the rest.

“In 1981, the first year of their rankings, Arizona was rated as the eighth freest state and province of the 60 in the survey, while New Mexico was 36th. The bad for New Mexico only got worse.

New Mexico steadily regressed relative to the rest of America and Canada, and ranked 46th in North America in 2013, the most recent data available.

“By comparison, Arizona, which saw its ranking slide into the mid-20s by the early 1990s, has since regained its standing and sits at 9th.

While New Mexico’s rating specific to taxation only trails Arizona’s by a relatively slight margin, the size of government rating along with the labor market freedom rating contribute to New Mexico’s low result.

“Markets are how people become rich.

The economic story of Arizona and New Mexico, and their divergence over the last half-century, is yet another example of this persistent economic truth.”

http://www.freeabq.com/2017/05/16/cop-union-rips-pay-boost-as-a-joke/

(See also May 17, 2017 Albuquerque Journal article, “Budget may eliminate police longevity pay; Amendment ties current and future incentives to revenue, Mayor’s office says”)

The Albuquerque City Council has adopted the 2017-2018 city budget and it contains a longevity pay plan for police officers where essentially bonuses are given to APD police officers with so many years of experience to stay with the department or not retire.

City Councilor Pat Davis sponsored the longevity pay budget amendment and the council voted 5-4 to give officers longevity pay of up to $13,000 a year, but only if the city meets its quarterly revenue projections.

The Davis amendment to the budget places the entire $4 million for longevity pay into a reserve fund, the city would spend $1 million a quarter on longevity pay, with payment to officers contingent on the city meeting revenue forecasts over the next 15 months.

The City’s Budget Officer Gerald Romero says “If revenues don’t pick up [then the money for the longevity pay] stays in reserves. … The way I read it, it doesn’t give us much wiggle room.”

Arguably, an APD officer could decide to stay and work with APD or not retire because of the promised longevity pay and then the City could turn around and say it has not met its revenue forecast and decide not pay the officer the promised longevity pay.

The Albuquerque Police Officers Association Union has called foul and is very critical of the plan given that there is no guarantee that the longevity pay will materialize.

Sean Willoughby, the President of the Union says “Every city police officer considering retirement needs to run because they don’t care about us. … They [councilors] don’t care about solving the problem. This is not going to get ratified [by union members]. This is a joke. They should be embarrassed even talking about it.”

Albuquerque City Councilor Pat Davis says in responding to the police union criticism “Never has the progressive wing of the council and the mayor’s office agreed on so many sort of different strategies to deal with public safety in a comprehensive way, but the APOA [police union] has not been a good partner. You can’t do anything nice.”

Davis argues that the union should be thankful because “In the two years since I have been on the council, this will have been the third increase for raises and bonuses and longevity to keep retiring officers on the force, and it is working.”

No its not working Councilor Davis because for the last three (3) years, APD has been funded for 1,000 full time officers but has only employed about 850 full time sworn with the police academy unable to keep up with retirements.

The police union may not be “playing nice”, but you cannot blame the police union for reacting the way they did given the eight year history with the Berry Administration and the City Council.

Eight years ago, the Berry Administration abolished the longevity program that kept experienced police officers from retiring, unilaterally decided not to pay a 5% negotiated pay raise, abolished the APD take home car policy for APD, eliminated sign on bonuses and mortgage down payments for new recruits, all policy changes implemented by Chief Public Safety Officer Darren White with the Albuquerque City Council remaining silent and not voicing any objections.

When the longevity pay was abolished 8 years ago, moral within APD plummeted and the mass exodus of experienced officers began.

Pat Davis and the City Council are being disingenuous when it comes to any real commitment to bring back the longevity pay for experienced officers.

If the City Council really wants a longevity pay program they should fund it without any strings attached.

Pat Davis has not been on the City Council for two years as he proclaims but a year and six months, and he has a whole lot to learn about city finances and budgets.

Albuquerque City Councilor Pat Davis is now running for the US Congress as a progressive Democrat to replace Michell Lujan Grisham less than two (2) years into his City Council four (4) year term.

Davis proclaims to be a “progressive” but his actions and votes on the City Council for the past year and a half seem to indicate otherwise.

Pat Davis has agreed with the Berry Republican Administration and Republican City Councilors on so many other strategies and other issues you would think Davis was a conservative.

Some specifics regarding Pat Davis’s voting record:

1. Davis refused to put the ART Bus project on the ballot, voted to fund and support ART and saying there was nothing he could do.
2. When he served on a task force to overhaul our public fiancé law, Davis declined to advocate meaningful changes to our public finance laws making it easier for candidates to qualify for public finance.
3. Davis has done nothing when it comes to Albuquerque Police Department (APD) reforms and has never challenged the APD command staff in any meaningful way demanding compliance with the Department of Justice (DOJ) consent decree reforms.
4. Davis has never demanded the City Attorney’s office to enforce the existing Albuquerque minimum wage ordinance.
5. Davis voted for over $63 million dollars over the past two years in revenue bonds to build pickle ball courts, baseball fields and the ART bus project down Central not seeking public input and bypassing the capital improvements process (CIP) that mandates public votes.
6. Davis voted to award Taser International, a five-year, $4.4 million contract for 2,000 on-body cameras for police officers, and cloud storage despite the fact the New Mexico Attorney General’s Office is investigating the $2 million no-bid contract the city entered with Taser.
7. Davis attempted to privatize certain law enforcement functions with the hiring of a private security company that would employ 25 retired law enforcement personnel who would do field service work and reports for APD, but Davis withdrew the bill after it was reported that the no bid contract for $1 million dollars would go to co sponsor Republican City Councilor Brad Winter’s former campaign manager.
8. Davis called for the City to select and hire an “outside investigator” to investigate the allegations made by a former APD records custodian that there was erasing, altering, corrupting or tampering and withholding of evidence of police officer lapel camera video in police officer involved shooting cases. The allegations included that high ranking APD command staff and the City Attorneys office ordered the altering or withholding of lapel camera video. The allegations are criminal in nature and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) has announced that there is a criminal investigation going on.

As Pat Davis campaigns for the US Congress as a progressive and talks like a progressive, he needs to be asked if once elected to congress will he vote and act like a conservative as he has done so many times during his very short tenure on the Albuquerque City Council.

http://www.freeabq.com/2017/05/15/what-is-the-future-of-apds-reforms/

As I said in this Albuquerque Free Press article “The number one worry that I have is that the current command staff, including the chief, will tell the monitor and the federal judge that so much progress has been made that it would be ill-advised to replace them and that they need to stay and complete the work that they started.”

Another scenario I envision is that before Mayor Berry leaves office, the City will seek dismissal of the Department of Justice case arguing that there has been a substantial compliance of the federal court order, substantial compliance in the implementation of the DOJ reforms and a reduction in officer involved shootings and excessive use of force cases.

Mayor Berry will want to say “Mission Accomplished” when it comes to the APD reforms when he runs for Governor.

In his fifth report, Federal Monitor James Ginger says the lack of scrutiny given by the department’s highest ranking officer’s in use of force cases is “mystifying” and “startling”.

The report is very critical of APD’s high ranking supervisors and command-level officers, accusing them of “deliberate non-compliance”.

The most damning and disturbing findings made by the federal monitor are that APD “subverted” the reform process by issuing “covert special orders,” denying the existence of the orders, and APD exhibiting a “near total failure” to accept civilian oversight.

The federal monitor lays direct blame on the APD command staff for the “deliberate non-compliance” with the city’s settlement agreement with the U.S. Department of Justice.

During the May 10, 2017 status hearing, many in the courtroom were stunned when Assistant United State Attorney Luis Saucedo with the DOJ’s Civil Rights Division in Washington, D.C., praised APD’s “tremendous progress” with writing policy and ignored the federal monitor’s findings of intentional noncompliance by the command staff.

After listening to Saucedo, you would have thought he was representing the City and APD.

Court rules are very clear that when you or your client intentionally violate a court order or you lie to a court, you can be held in contempt of court and sanctions and fines can be imposed, including jail time.

ENOUGH ALREADY

How many times does the Federal Monitor have to tell the Court that APD is not complying with the court order, or has mislead or lied to the monitor, before the DOJ files a “Motion for Contempt of Court” and seeks sanctions against the City and the APD command staff for “deliberate non-compliance” of the stipulated settlement order?

In his second report to the federal court, Federal Monitor James Ginger accused the City Attorney of what he called, “delay, do little and deflect” tactics saying his relationship with her was “a little rougher than most” compared with attorneys in other cities where he has overseen police reform.

In the July 1, 2016 third progress report the federal monitor found “Across the board … the components in APD’s system for overseeing and holding officers accountable for the use of force, for the most part, has failed … the serious deficiencies revealed point to a deeply-rooted systemic problem. … The deficiencies, in part, indicate a culture [of] low accountability is at work within APD, particularly in chain-of-command reviews.”

In November 1, 2016 fourth progress report, the federal monitor found that when “excessive use of force” incidents are investigated by the APD Critical Incident Team, it “[deploys] carefully worded excuses, apparently designed not to find fault with officer actions” and “[uses] language and terminology apparently designed to absolve officers and supervisors of their responsibility to follow certain CASA related provisions”.

It’s apparent from the Federal Monitor’s 5th report that the only thing that has changed at APD is the passage of time and paying the Federal Monitor another hefty sum of money for another report that he could have just as easily cut and pasted from his last report.

For the fifth time in three (3) years, the Federal Monitor’s report reflects that you get failed law enforcement management when you appoint a Chief of Police who has absolutely no prior experience managing a municipal police department and who is considered a “political operative” and when you keep or return people who created participated or did not stop the culture of aggression and the “deeply-rooted systemic problems” found by the Department of Justice.

DUMP THEM ALL

The entire chain of command of APD must be removed and replaced by the next Mayor 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 Chief of Police, to hire new Deputy Chiefs and a new chain of command to assume control of APD.

The City Council can implement complete civilian authority and management control over APD with a civilian Police Commissioner to assume responsibility for implementation of the DOJ mandated reforms and create a Department of Public Safety.

APD has repeatedly shown it cannot police itself and the APD Internal Affairs Unit must be abolished.

There is a need to “civilianize” the APD Internal Affairs functions to investigate police misconduct cases and use of force cases, and to implement the Department of Justice reforms.

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

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

Until there is a real change in the entire APD command staff, we can expect to continue to be “mystified” and “startled” by the lack of progress and implementation of the DOJ consent decree mandated reforms and the disappearance of the DOJ reforms into the “black hole” known as APD.

Albuquerque City Councilor Don Harris suffers from “political amnesia” in an election year when it comes to public safety and the Albuquerque Police Department (APD).

The Albuquerque City Council Finance Committee has voted a “do not pass” recommendation to the Albuquerque City Council on the proposed charter amendment requiring a public vote to mandate the hiring of 375 sworn officers for the Albuquerque Police Department (APD) with the Charter Amendment sponsored by City Councilors Don Harris and Ken Sanchez.

(See May 15, 2017 Albuquerque Journal, Metro & NM Section, page A-6, Panel votes “do not pass” on APD mandate; Charter amendment sent to full City Council”.)

The proposed charter amendment would require the city to have 25 sworn police officers for every 11,500 residents in effect mandating that APD have 1,215 sworn officers.

APD is currently funded for 1,000 sworn police but only employs 844.

Police staffing levels should be tied to work load and case load demands and not tied to population levels.

There is no need for such the charter amendment and it is ill advised.

There is an element of hypocrisy with City Councilor Don Harris sponsoring the charter amendment calling for a public vote on APD staffing levels.

Harris voted for the ART Bus Project and refused to put the ART Bus project on the ballot for a public vote, despite complaints from his constituents, so why does he feel the public needs to vote on APD staffing levels?

The Albuquerque City Council plays a crucial oversight role of the Albuquerque Police Department including controlling APD’s entire budget.

When Mayor Berry took office in 2009, he appointed Darren White Chief Public Safety Officer and the City Council unanimously approved the appointment of White with Councilor Harris voting for the appointment without any objection.

The same year, the Berry Administration abolished the longevity program that kept experienced police officers from retiring, unilaterally decided not to pay a 5% negotiated pay raise, abolished the APD take home car policy for APD, eliminated sign on bonuses and mortgage down payments for new recruits, all policy changes implemented by Darren White with City Councilor Don Harris saying absolutely nothing and not voicing any objections to the changes.

Moral within APD plummeted and the mass exodus of experienced police officers began when the longevity pay program was abolished.

In November 2009 when Don Harris was on the City Council, APD had 1,098 sworn police officers and Don Harris voted for full funding for 1,100 sworn police.

Harris now says in an election year “For three years, we’ve been at 800 plus (sworn officers) and the Department of Justice says 1,000 is a passing grade. … I do not think we’re passing. I think we have to treat this as an urgent situation.”

Is it urgent now because it’s an election year?

In eight (8) years, APD went from 1,100 sworn police to 844 all under the watchful eye of the Albuquerque City Council, including Harris, pretending they supported public safety.

The City Council could act to increase APD staffing levels on its own if it wanted to, because it has in the past and Councilor Harris has voted for it.

The City Council has the ultimate and final authority to fund APD to whatever level it wants with a simple majority vote and historically has done so for many years.

From 2007 to 2009, APD aggressively recruited to get to the 1,100-level using sign on bonuses, mortgage down payments, tuition payoffs and lateral hires to get to the 1,100 level.

Eight (8) years ago, APD was fully staffed with 1,100 officers, and Don Harris voted for the APD staffing and funding for 1,100 sworn officers.

From 2010 to 2014, the city council fully funded 1,100 positions despite the mass exodus of sworn police and the APD Police Academy’s failure to recruit and keep up with retirements.

Three years ago, the City Council voted to reduce funding from 1,100 sworn officers to 1,000 sworn officers because of the Berry Administration’s failure to recruit and keep up with retirements and Harris voted for the reduction in staffing and as of today APD employs 844 sworn officers.

A city council resolution could be enacted calling for the increase in APD personnel and giving raises and calling for retention and incentive bonuses and sign on and education pay to help with recruitment.

Over the last eight (8) years, Harris has said nothing about APD management, not even when the Department of Justice found a ”culture of aggression” that lead to a federal consent decree and mandated reforms.

City Councilor Don Harris has done nothing when it comes to Albuquerque Police Department (APD) reforms and has never challenged the APD command staff in any meaningful way demanding compliance with the Department of Justice (DOJ) consent decree reforms.

Each time the Federal Monitor has presented his critical reports of APD to the City Councilor, Harris has essentially remained silent and declined to demand accountability in any meaningful way from the Mayor and hold the APD command staff responsible for dragging their feet on the reforms, let alone staffing levels.

APD cannot recruit enough officers now to reach the 1,000 level, so what makes Harris think that a charter amendment approved by voters will do any good to add 375 more sworn officers to APD?

If Harris feels so strongly that we need 375 more officers, then he should just introduce and city council resolution calling for it along with the $16 million funding, instead of calling for a charter amendment, but that would require a political backbone in a re-election year.

Harris is part of the problem with City Hall.

For the first time in eight (8) years, the Albuquerque City Council is exerting its independence and performing its oversight authority over the city’s budget to the Berry Administration’s chagrin.

(See May 12, 2017 Albuquerque Journal, “Police wage boost sought in city budget; Increase in longevity pay aimed at retaining officers” page A-1)

In this year’s budget, public safety has suddenly become a top priority for the Albuquerque the City Council, with City Councilor Don Harris saying that there is an “urgent situation” and the council is trying to address it.

In a major understatement, Councilor Harris said crime has become a significant problem in Albuquerque and people are worried.

I hate to break the news to the Albuquerque City Council, but increased crime rates have been a problem in Albuquerque for the last eight (8) years and the City Council has done little to address it.

The urgent situation no doubt is the fact that it is an election year for five (5) of the City Councilors including City Councilors Ken Sanchez and Don Harris who are seeking reelection to their 4th and 3rd terms respectively and no doubt they are worried about their reelections.

The City Council is setting aside $4 million dollars for longevity pay for experienced police officers as an incentive to keep them from retiring or leaving APD to go elsewhere.

For an extended number of years, longevity pay was relied upon by APD and it was a proven and successful program to keep experienced police officers from retiring.

The City Council longevity pay program funding consists of $13,000 for APD officers who have been with APD for 18 years or more, $5,200 for officers who have been with APD 15 to 17 years, $3,250 for officers who have been with APD 10 to 14 years, and $2,600 for officers that have been with APD for less than 8 years.

The Albuquerque Police Officers Association (APOA) praised the city councils longevity pay as “refreshing” saying the $4 million was a step in the right direction.

It’s good to have the police union on your side when your up for reelection seeking an endorsement.

It’s noteworthy that no other city employees are offered longevity pay.

The Berry Administration has expressed strong objections to the longevity pay to APD as a major change to the budget it submitted to the city council on April 1, 2017.

The Berry Administration claims it submitted “a balanced and common sense” budget and does not like the City Council’s changes claiming the councils budget is not “structurally balanced” as proposed, whatever that means.

The Berry Administration strong objections to the longevity pay program should not come as any surprise seeing that they went out of their way to get rid of the program eight (8) years ago and the City Council did not object to it and went along with it.

An additional $6.2 million in spending increases for public safety priorities are being proposed by the city council.

$1.2 million is being set aside for 25 additional police service aides who assist with APD calls and prepare reports.

$2.5 million is being set aside for police vehicles, when normally such funding comes from the capital improvements bonding program.

$960,000 is being budgeted for a 3% raise for firefighters, who are always good to have on your side in an election year.

Eight years ago, when Berry took office he appointed Darren White Chief Public Safety Officer, both Harris and Sanchez had no objections to the appointment and voted to approve White.

The same year, the Berry Administration abolished the longevity program that kept experienced police officers from retiring, unilaterally decided not to pay a 5% negotiated pay raise, abolished the APD take home car policy for APD, eliminated sign on bonuses and mortgage down payments for new recruits, all policy changes implemented by Darren White.

Moral within APD plummeted and the mass exodus of experienced police officers began when the longevity pay program was abolished.

In eight (8) years, APD went from 1,100 sworn police to 856 all under the watchful eye of the City Councilors Sanchez and Harris and an Albuquerque City Council that rubber-stamped every single city budget submitted by the Berry Administration.

The City Council is part of what is wrong with city hall today.

Hopefully voters will not “rubber stamp” the reelection of incumbents on October 2, 2017.