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.”

Bernalillo County District Attorney Sam Bregman, the city of Rio Rancho and lawyers representing unhoused Plaintiffs have filed briefs with the New Mexico Supreme Court in a pending lawsuit which seeks class action status on behalf of the homeless.  The lawsuit stems from the August 18, 2022 city closure of Coronado Park and the eviction of upwards of 150 homeless.

The lawsuit alleges in part that the city of Albuquerque is denying the unhoused rights to due process of law, and that their right to be free from cruel and unusual punishment is being violated. The lawsuit is a major test before the New Mexico Supreme Court of all municipalities authority to enforce municipal and state of public camping laws, trespassing laws and vagrancy laws against the homeless.

The City of Albuquerque has filed a Petition for a “Writ of Superintending Control” against District Judge Joshua Allison, the judge assigned to the case, who ruled a  US Supreme Court case allowing cities to enforce criminal laws against the homeless was faulty and did not apply to the city. Judge Allison has also filed a responsive pleading to the “Writ of Superintending Control”.

The link to the relied upon news source is here:

https://www.abqjournal.com/news/article_86c9bee1-645b-41bf-84d5-3121316bc170.html#tncms-source=home-featured-7-block

EDITORS NOTE: The postscript to this article contains information on the Coronado Park closure, summary of the class action lawsuit and a link to the US Supreme Court case of GRANTS PASS V. JOHNSON.  

DISTRICT COURT RULING  

On March 18, 2024, District Court  Judge Joshua Allison ruled the United States Supreme Court case of  GRANTS PASS V. JOHNSON that gave cities the green light to enforce criminal laws against the homeless for living and sleeping outside on public property did not apply to the City of Albuquerque. Judge Joshua Allison specifically found the high court ruling was “flawed”. Judge Allison concluded and ruled the New Mexico Constitution provides greater protections against such cruel and unusual punishment than the U.S. Supreme Court considered in its decision.

In his March 18 ruling, Allison wrote that the plaintiffs are challenging what they say are the city of Albuquerque’s unconstitutional practices of relocating them, and involuntarily unhoused people like them, from “place to place, taking and destroying their belongings in the process.”

Plaintiffs in their class action lawsuit against the City allege that the city intentionally deprived them, as involuntarily unhoused people, of the belongings they need to survive. In his March 18 ruling, Judge Allison wrote the allegations, if proven during the course of the case, would be “sufficient to demonstrate the City’s deliberate indifference to the precarious existence of homeless individuals when they live outside.”

Judge Allison wrote:

“Accepting Plaintiff’s allegations as true, as the Court must at this stage in the proceedings, the City’s alleged actions of destroying the means that homeless people need to survive outside, actions that are taken in the course of seeking to enforce criminal laws against homeless people, shock the conscience of the Court.”

PETITION FOR “WRIT OF SUPERINTENDING CONTROL”

On July 11, the City of Albuquerque filed with the New Mexico Supreme Court  a “Petition for Writ of Superintending Control” against Judge Joshua Allison requesting the court to reverse Allison’s ruling to prevent the “proliferation” of homeless encampments within the city and other municipalities and towns in New Mexico. A city spokesperson said this in a statement:

“We filed this appeal because we dispute the judge’s ruling. This is the only judge in the country to make this ruling, and we are the only city in America having to live under these rules. … The city will keep doing everything in its power to get people the support they need and to manage illegal encampments promptly. We will continue sending staff to conduct welfare checks at encampments and offer support services.”

John Anderson, a Santa Fe lawyer who is a former United State Attorney for New Mexico, is defending  the city of Albuquerque in the class action lawsuit, states this in the petition for the  “Writ of Superintending Control”:

“[The issues involving the prevention of  illegal encampments have] serious public safety implications and, the district court’s decision flouts the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent guidance. … The City needs [ the New Mexico Supreme Courts] … direction in weighing how to enforce its laws … to resolve legal questions of statewide importance.  If allowed to stand, the district court’s decision will leave the City of Albuquerque and cities and towns throughout New Mexico, with no means to prevent the proliferation of encampments within their borders.”

In its “Petition for Superintending Control” filed with the New Mexico Supreme Court, the city of Albuquerque contends that nearly two years ago, “a large group of cities and states put out a clear and forceful call” by asking the U.S. Supreme Court “to relieve them of the burdens imposed by a misguided interpretation of the Eighth Amendment by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, which left cities unable to clear encampments from, or otherwise maintain order in, public property.”

The “Petition for Superintending Control” asserts in part:

“[Judge  Allison’s] novel and unprecedented standard cannot stand. The City simply does not know, at this time, when or how it can enforce its laws.”

ARGUMENTS MADE BY THE PARTIES

According to the cities of Albuquerque and Rio Rancho, and Bernalillo County District Attorney Sam Bregman, the stakes involve “serious public safety implications” involving the ability of New Mexico municipalities to protect public property and public welfare. The city of Albuquerque is asking the state Supreme Court to reverse Allison’s ruling in its filing for a “Petition for Writ of Superintending Control” against Judge Joshua Allison.

Attorneys for eight plaintiffs in the case who are involuntarily homeless and live outdoors say the city’s attempt to regulate homelessness is violating their civil rights. Those attorneys asked the Supreme Court to deny the City of Albuquerque’s request for reversal of Judge Allison’s ruling.

DISTRICT JUDGE JOSHUA RESPONDS

District Judge Joshua Allison filed a response to the writ and said he wanted to clarify that his ruling was only denying a motion to dismiss filed by the city,  despite the city’s contention that he had adopted a novel and unprecedented legal standard. Allison wrote in his response:

“The legal basis for those constitutional claims survived a motion to dismiss. It did not adopt a specific legal standard.”  He added that the suggestion he would grant the relief the plaintiffs seek in the future is “premature.”

DISTRICT ATTORNEY SAM BREGMAN’S BRIEFING

DA Bregman and city officials believe that Judge Allison’s ruling will make it more difficult for Albuquerque and other New Mexico cities to manage public health and safety concerns tied to growing number of encampments. Bregman said this in an August 12 press release:

“This is about giving cities the ability to maintain safe and accessible public spaces while still respecting individual rights. … Many of our crime victims are people who are living on the streets. We not only want to protect them, but also the public and businesses.”

District Attorney Sam Bregman’s brief filed with the NM  Supreme Court contains the following conclusion:

“The [March 18, 2025 ruling of District Judge Josh Allison]  inexorably embraces a striking usurpation of policymaking authority from the City of Albuquerque in that it accepts the validity of a legal landscape in which City must surrender the vast majority of its outdoor public spaces to occupation by unhoused individuals – and the teachings of Grants Pass make clear that the consequences for public health and safety will be devastating.  The Petition and the Amicus briefs from the Grants Pass litigation collectively and consistently explain the disastrous impact that such a regime had on the ability of localities to implement policy-based solutions to address problems associated with homelessness and homeless encampments in public spaces.

The Grants Pass filings also describe a resulting proliferation of homeless encampments on public lands as authorities became powerless to disperse them, and a resulting down spiral into jaw-dropping, heart-wrenching conditions within the encampments and the areas surrounding them.  The localities reported being hamstrung in their ability to address conditions associated with the growing encampments such as: (1) drug overdoses (from fentanyl, meth, and heroin, among other drugs); (2) deaths from hypothermia and excessive heat; (3) a high volume of calls for medical help; (4) increasingly volatile behavior; (5) murders; (6) sexual assaults; (7) subjugation to sex work and physical abuse; (8) fights, assaults, thefts, and armed robberies; (9) fires; (10) filthy and unsanitary living conditions, including massive amounts of debris such as needles and human excrement polluting the environment; (11) heightened risks of disease transmission, and a resurgence of “medieval” diseases such as typhus and tuberculosis; and (12) for areas surrounding the encampments – increased crime, the flight of businesses, decreasing property values, and an overall loss of habitability. …  

The City of Albuquerque already faces many challenges in addressing issues surrounding homelessness.  … The lessons of Grants Pass teach that an approach such as what the district court has adopted in this case will ultimately worsen [Albuquerque’s] …  ability to implement policy based choices to address homelessness and to regulate the use of public spaces.

Although crime affects everyone whether housed or unhoused, [the Bernalillo County District Attorney] is painfully aware that the homeless that the district court seeks to protect with its ruling are a subset of the population that is at least as vulnerable as any other to criminal victimization.  The unhoused and housed alike must not be subjected to additional criminal victimization due to the adverse effect the district court’s ruling will have on public safety.”

CITY OF RIO RANCHO

The city of Rio Rancho’s brief states that as the third-largest municipality in New Mexico, Rio Rancho will be “significantly impacted by the recent decision of the Second Judicial District Court.”

The City of Rio Rancho states in its brief:

[As it presently stands, the ruling] inserts confusion into how (Rio Rancho) can legally address the health, wealth, and safety of its citizens when dealing with the difficult circumstances surrounding involuntarily unhoused persons and their use of public places. …  The potential for different district courts to reach different decisions relating to the application of Grants Pass creates uncertainty and will result in the ineffective use of public bodies’ limited resources across New Mexico.”

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

https://www.abqjournal.com/news/article_86c9bee1-645b-41bf-84d5-3121316bc170.html#tncms-source=home-featured-7-block

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

The City was 100% correct in seeking a Writ of Superintendent Control against Judge Allison to compel him to apply the principals announced in the Supreme Court case of Grants Pass vs. Johnson. It is very difficult to understand or even try to comprehend Judge Joshua Allison’s ruling that the Supreme Court case of Grants Pass v. Johnson does not apply to the class action lawsuit filed against the city given the fact that the case is essentially identical to the issues the US  Supreme Court decided in GRANTS PASS V. JOHNSON. Judge Allison essentially bends over backwards to declare that the Supreme Court Ruling is “flawed” in order not to apply it to the case brought against the city and to prevent the city from enforcing state law and municipal ordinances.

District Judge Josh Allison’s injunction and ruling that the city “cannot threaten to arrest, cite, or otherwise punish unhoused people for their mere presence in outdoor public spaces in order to forcibly move them from one outdoor public place to another” is  a clear usurpation and interference with the city’s legitimate law enforcement authority. Judge Allison usurped and interfered with the city’s right to take necessary action to protect public health, safety and welfare with the enforcement of public safety laws, both state laws and city ordinances.

Judge Allison’s rulings and findings simply do not make sense on many levels and need extensive clarification. The Preliminary Injunction he issued is confusing and contradictory. Judge Allison’s orders were sweeping in nature and enjoined the city “from enforcing, or threatening to enforce as a means of seeking compliance with, any statutes and ordinances against involuntarily unhoused people that prohibit a person’s presence in, or the presence of a person’s belongings on, outdoor, public property”.

The order did not make it clear that “outdoor, public place” includes  vacant, open space land owned by the city, county, state or federal government nor if it includes outdoor open space areas of government owned buildings such as city hall and the various courts. The court order provides the city is not enjoined from “enforcing any statutes, ordinances, or other laws affecting private property or the rights of others”.

The city has property rights that are equal to private property rights when it comes to real property it owns and manages including government buildings such as city hall and court houses, as does the county and state, yet Judge Allison makes a distinction and gives preference in enforcement of  private real property rights. The court also ruled that the city is not enjoined from enforcing any statutes or ordinances concerning any other criminal acts of the unhoused people, but that is very limited because APD has a no arrest policy when it comes to the misdemeanor crimes of trespass and camping on public property.

The Albuquerque Police Department is currently under a court approved settlement in the federal lawsuit of McClendon v. City of Albuquerque wherein the city has agreed not to make arrests for nonviolent crimes, such as trespass on public and private property, illegal camping on all city parks and streets, rights of way, alleyways and open space.  As a result, APD is relegated to merely encouraging or telling the homeless to move on and camp elsewhere, falling short of making an arrest and taking them to jail. Judge Allison enjoined such conduct.

The glaring defect of the injunctions issued by Judge Allison against the city is that the Court essentially ruled that the unhoused, because of their status of being unhoused and because there is insufficient  housing available and offered by the city, they have the right to violate the law and illegally camp wherever they want for how long as they want without government interference or threat of arrest.  While Judge Allison says “the City is not constitutionally obligated to provide housing for homeless people” he rules the city cannot “threaten” to enforce the laws against the homeless until the city provides sufficient satisfactory shelter and housing to them implying the city is not doing much of anything, which is completely false.

FINAL COMMENTARY 

District Attorney Sam Bregman is commended for intervening in the case.   All municipalities, and for that matter District Attorneys, have the obligation and every right to enforce the  criminal laws on behalf of its citizens, whether it be felony or misdemeanor. No municipality and no District Attorney should be forced to simply ignore those laws that have the purpose of preserving and protecting the public health, safety and welfare and the rights of all its citizens.

Unlawful encampment homeless squatters who have no interest in any offers of shelter, beds, motel vouchers from the city or alternatives to living on the street and who want to camp at city parks, on city streets in alleys and trespass in open space give the city no choice but to take action and force them to move on or for that matter make arrests for other crimes identified other than vagrancy crimes.

With the filing of the Writ of Superintendent Control, the New Mexico Supreme Court is now forced to address head on the issue if the banning of outdoor camping by the unhoused is “cruel and unusual punishment” and to what extent all municipalities can enforce state and municipal laws.

 ___________________________

POSTSCRIPT

CORONANDO PARK CLOSURE

It was on  August 18, 2022, the City of Albuquerque closed Coronado Park because it had become a de facto city sanctioned homeless encampment with the city evicting up to 100 unhoused who camped there nightly.  The city cited numerous reasons for closure of the park including lack of sanitation posing a severe health risks, overall damage to the park and extensive drug trafficking and violent crime, including rapes and murders at the park having reached crisis proportions. The city was spending upwards of $50,000 a month to clean up Coronado  Park.

The city park had an extensive history lawlessness including drug use, violence, murder, rape and mental health issues. In 2020, there were 3 homicides at Coronado Park. In 2019, a disabled woman was raped, and in 2018 there was a murder. APD reported that it was dispatched to the park 651 times in 2021 and 312 times  in 2022. There had been 16 stabbings at the park in 2 years.  In 2023, APD had seized from the park 4,500 fentanyl pills, more than 5 pounds of methamphetamine, 24 grams of heroin and 29 grams of cocaine. APD also found $10,000 in cash. All the seized drugs were tied to a single bust that occurred at a nearby motel, not the park, though an APD spokeswoman said the suspect was “mainly doing all their distributions [at the park].”

HOMELESS  CLASS ACTION LAWSUITE  FOR VIOLATIONS OF CIVIL RIGHTS

On December 19, 2022 the American Civil Liberties Union of New Mexico, the NM Center on Law & Poverty, and the law firms of Ives & Flores, PA and Davis Law New Mexico filed a “Class Action Complaint For Violations of Civil Rights and for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief” against the City of Albuquerque on behalf 4 men and 4 women identified to be homeless. All 8, along with upwards of 100 unhoused, were evicted by the city from Coronado Park. Not one of the 8 plaintiffs allege they were charged nor arrested for refusing to leave Coronado Park on the day it was closed nor were they jailed. The lawsuit contends it is unconstitutional to punish or threaten to punish unhoused people for the “crime of being in an outdoor public space when there are inadequate indoor spaces for them to be.”

The Plaintiffs allege they were displaced from Coronado Park when the city closed it and that the city did not provide satisfactory shelter options to them.  According to the ACLU the lawsuit was filed to stop the City of Albuquerque from destroying encampments of the unhoused all over the city and preventing the city from seizing and destroying personal property and jailing and fining people for being unhoused.

The lawsuit alleges the city unlawfully seized personal property, denied due process of law, and violated constitutional rights by destroying property and forced all the unhoused at Coronado Park out with nowhere for them to go and with the city not providing shelter for them. The lawsuit sought court orders that required the city to cease and desist enforcement actions to stop the unhoused from camping in public spaces which include public streets, public rights of ways, alleyways, under bridges and city parks unless the city has shelter or housing for them.

GRANTS PASS V. JOHNSON 

On June 28, 2024 the United State Supreme Court announced its ruling in the case of Grants Pass v. Johnson where the court held that local laws effectively criminalizing homelessness do not violate the U.S. Constitution and do not constitute cruel and unusual punishment. The link to the Supreme Court opinion is here:

Click to access 23-175_19m2.pdf

The case challenged a municipality’s ability to bar people from sleeping or camping in public areas, such as sidewalks and parks. Local governments wanted to enforce ordinances making it a crime to sleep on public sidewalks, streets and alleyways, camp on public property as a temporary place to live, or camp or park overnight in the city’s parks. The case is strikingly similar in facts and circumstances and laws to the case filed against the City of Albuquerque over the closure of Coronado Park.

This article is a report on the August 21 State Fairground District Board’s second meeting and the presentations made to the board followed by Analysis and Commentary.

BACKGROUND

It was on March 21 that  the New Mexico legislature passed Senate Bill 481 creating the “State Fairgrounds District” and a governing board which has redevelopment authority over the existing State Fair grounds area. The “State Fairgrounds District” Board is empowered to raise property taxes and issue up to $500 million in bonds to fund future development of the property, to make improvement or even relocate the fairgrounds and repurpose the property. The bonds are backed primarily by future gaming revenue taxes generated at the Downs Racetrack and Casino which holds a multi-decade lease on  the  property until 2045 within the fairground’s perimeter. According to the legislation, the board will govern the development of the district for six years.

Voting members of the State Fairgrounds District governing Board are:

• Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham, chair.
• Albuquerque Mayor Tim Keller
• Senator Mimi Stewart, Senate President Pro-Tempore, International District, #17
• State  Representative Janelle Anyanonu whose district the fair grounds is located
• City Councilor Nichole Rogers whose district the fair grounds is located
• County Commissioner Adriann Barboa whose district the fair grounds is located
• Dr. Peter Belletto, President, District 6 Neighborhood Coalition

STATE FAIRGROUNDS DISTRICT HOLDS SECOND MEETING

On August 21, the State Fairgrounds District held its second meeting. The meeting was chaired by former Albuquerque Mayor Martin Chavez who was designated by the Governor to run the meeting because she could not attend. Appearing in person were Senate Pro Temp Mimi Stewart, City Councilor Nichole Rogers, State Representative Janelle Anyanonu, Mayor Tim Keller  and District 6 Neighborhood Coalition President  Dr. President Peter Belletto. Appearing by phone was Bernalillo County Commissioner Adriann Barboa.

The two and a half hour meeting was dedicated to both administrative matters and presentations. Administrative matters included adopting resolutions appropriating $30,000 on a communications plan, a budget overview and adoption of a budget.

HISTORICAL CRIME STATISTICS PRESENTED

A presentation of historical crime statistics for the four directional areas surrounding the State Fair Grounds was made by retired APD Captain Rob Debuck using a map and  data provided by the Albuquerque Police Department. Although the statistics were provided by APD, they did not include recent statics released by APD in July comparing crime statistics for 2025 and 2024 that show a marked decline in crime and following national trends.

The statistics did not include the monthly crime statistics for the Southeast Area command, wherein the State Fairgrounds is located, for the last year which are provided routinely and monthly by area commanders to neighborhood associations. Those statistics show a decline in crime. No discussion was made of the enforcement actions taken by the city to deal with homeless encampments nor calculations of the number of the unhoused in the area.

City Councilor Nichole Rogers voiced objections noting that the board needed current data, a request noted by the chair and acknowledged by Mayor Tim Keller. The postscript to this article contains the link to an article on the July midyear crime statistics released by APD.

UPDATES ON WORK

One presentation was an update on the work performed on the State Fair Grounds Mater Plan by Stantec Consulting Services Inc, the firm contracted by the state to create a master plan for repurposing the 236-acre tract of land.

A second presentation was on economic data relating to the project.

Both presentations merit review.

COMMUNITY ENGAGMENT

A subcontractor that specializes in public affairs and strategic communications working for Stantec Consulting Services Inc. reported to the State Fair Grounds District governing board that it completed 14 in-depth interviews with board members, key stakeholders and community leaders and will be conducting further interviews. It was announced that three meetings will be held with the Stakeholders to discuss the overall plans for the area. It was also announced that a website has been completed and that it will be launched in the week of August 15. A community survey will be conducted from September 1 to September 17. Community meetings will be held the week of September 8.

INSIGHTS FROM IN-DEPTH INTERVIEWS

A report was given on the following four major insights given by the stakeholders during interviews:

1. DESIRE FOR SAFE WALKABLE FAIRGROUND

Stakeholders stated that they felt the top priority for the fairgrounds is a safe walkable greenspace that connects the neighborhoods on all sides of the Fairgrounds and that provides a shared community space. Stakeholders said they want neighborhoods on all sides of the Fairgrounds to be connected to create a shared community space. Environmental considerations include having tree coverage reducing the heat index and reducing “inhalable pollution.” Stakeholders said they want the ability to walk to grocery stores, schools, neighborhood restaurants and retail stores.

2. ACCESSABLE HOUSING WITH CAVEATS

Stakeholders said a close second priority is accessible housing but with caveats. Stakeholders said they would like to see prioritizing renovating existing structures within neighborhoods and infill housing. New housing on the Fairgrounds itself must be mixed income. There must be supported pathways for the first time homeownership, including in the surrounding neighborhoods as well as the fairgrounds. There is a measurable sentiment for a “Community Land Trust” which would allow for the neighborhoods to have “skin in the game” and own land and property.

3. ECONOMIC AND BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT

Stakeholders emphasized that Economic and Business Development is a tertiary priority. Stakeholders expressed widespread acknowledgement of the importance of an anchor tenant on the fairgrounds itself, but the nature of the tenant is not clear.

4. HEALTHY AND SAFE COMMUNITIES

Stakeholders stressed there is a need to address the proliferation of violent crime, property crime and the presence of unhoused, open drug use and behavioral health challenges. Stakeholders believe there is “power and progress” in the communities surrounding the fairgrounds. Stakeholders said more community services are needed, but it’s complicated on how to achieve them and saying communities must be an authentic part of the work.

PRELIMINARY ECONOMIC ANALYSIS

A preliminary report presentation was made to the State Fairgrounds District governing board estimating the economic, fiscal and social impacts of redevelopment of the fairgrounds. The presentation was made by economist Dr. Kelley O’Donnell, Phd. where she discussed her preliminary findings from a regional analysis of the State Fair redevelopment project.

Dr. O’Donnell stated that there were three very distinct but interrelated impacts that would be associated with the redevelopment of the state Fair Grounds:

The First Impact would be the Social Impact of the Sate Fair redevelopment. This would involve housing, public safety, access to services and potential displacement of residents in the area.

The Second Impact would be the Fiscal Impact of the State Fair redevelopment. This would involve tax revenues generated by the project and the required bonding to raise funds for the redevelopment.

The Third Impact would be the Economic Impact of the State Fair redevelopment. This involves the creation of jobs and income in the short term and long term.

DEVELOPMENT TRADE OFFS

Dr. O’Donnell discussed three very specific development tradeoffs, presented in a slide projection, that are under consideration or being proposed for the redevelopment of the existing state fairgrounds.

The slide presentation stated that proposed housing development on the property, which would include affordable housing, would have a HIGH social impact of providing necessary housing but a very LOW long term fiscal impact and very LOW long term economic impact.

The slide presentation stated that the construction of a new stadium to replace Tingley Coliseum would have a LOW social impact and that it would have an UNKNOWN long term fiscal impact and UNKNOWN long term economic impact.

EDITOR’S COMMENTARY: The social, fiscal and economic impact of a multipurpose stadium facility cannot be correctly gaged nor predicted without definitive information on size, purpose and dedicated functions of such a facility.

The slide presentation addressed the development of retail business on the property and concluded that retail development would have moderate social impact but high long term fiscal impact and moderate economic impact.

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

EDITOR’S DISCLOSURE: In the interest of full disclosure, the author and editor of this article was born and raised in Albuquerque, has lived directly North of the State Fair Grounds since 1985 and has raised a family there and for over 40 years has seen and experienced what has happened to the area and the Fairgrounds.

The author has served as an Albuquerque City Councilor for the area, is a former Bernalillo County Chief Deputy District Attorney and a former Albuquerque Chief Public Safety Officer and former Director of the Safe City Strike Force. The Strike Force took  enforcement actions against nuisance commercial and residential properties in the surrounding areas of the State Fair Grounds.

For the last 6 years, the author has published a “news and commentary” blog  at www.PeteDinelli.com which has an average annual readership and views of upwards 70,000 a year.

SURROUNDING AREAS UNDEREPRESENTED

A glaring observation that can be made after attending the August 21 meeting of the State Fairgrounds District Board and listening to comments from board members is that the board its extremely “top heavy” with representation of elected officials who represent  the International District and the neighborhoods in the International District. They appear to be providing only one perspective for the entire area surrounding the State Fairgrounds.

It is very disappointing that there is only ONE appointed member of the public appointed to the State Fairgrounds District Board by the Governor to represent the interests of the numerous neighborhoods. The appointed civilian member of the board is the President of the District 6 Coalition Of Neighborhood Associations, with all those neighborhood associations in the International District or City Council District 6. Virtually all of the elected officials who have the fairgrounds in their district have a seat at the table with the Governor.

Thousands of residents who have lived in the areas West, North and East of the Fair Ground for decades, in established neighborhoods and who truly understand the area are essentially being ignored and cut out of the process. Hundreds of affected businesses in the same areas are also being ignored and are not represented on the board.

The impression given during the meeting is that only the problems, best interests and needs of the International District will be addressed by the State Fair Grounds District governing board. The neighborhoods to the North and the West have virtually no representation on the board with the Governor and residents of the other areas are relegated to trying to make their opinions known to the board who take no public comments or questions during their meetings.

INFLAMATORY NARRATIVE

The preliminary report presented to the board contains an extremely inflammatory and an insulting introductory narrative that paints with an extremely broad, negative brush. It contains misleading and false information. It states in part as follows:

“In December 2024, Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham declared that the state of the area around the New Mexico State Fair was unconditionally unacceptable. Once an area of great schools, thriving small businesses and vibrant neighborhoods around, the neighborhoods around the Fairgrounds have descended into what is today the statewide epicenter of homicide, violence, homeless despair, drug addiction, and other criminal activity.  As part of her plan to stem the tide of human misery and revitalize this part of Albuquerque, the Governor requested that the New Mexico State Fairgrounds District …  be established. … “ (Emphasis added.)

The above narrative is a false and misleading narrative ostensibly being used to justify moving the State Fair Grounds or to totally repurpose the fairgrounds and to include affordable housing. The narrative reflects a gross ignorance of all 4 areas and neighborhoods that border the fairgrounds. The four neighborhoods to the North, South, East and West are established neighborhoods built around the fairgrounds over many decades as the city grew and encompassed it. All four areas are as different as night and day representing varying and even extreme decrees of social, economic and ethnic makeup.

Proclaiming  “the neighborhoods around the Fairgrounds have descended into what is today the statewide epicenter of homicide, violence, homeless despair, drug addiction, and other criminal activity”  is insulting. It is not accurate as to all four areas surrounding the fairgrounds. The inflammatory statement ostensibly is an effort to dramatize the conditions of East Central that boarders the State Fairgrounds on the South between San Pedro on the West and Louisiana on the East. It is an obvious effort to avoid identifying and making any characterization of the International District South of the State Fairgrounds to avoid controversy with the elected officials who represent the International District and who dominate the State Fair District Board.

CURRENT CRIME DATA

The crime data presented were the historical crime statistics for the four distinct areas to the North, South, East and West that border the state fairgrounds. The most recent July and August crime statistics for the neighborhoods North, South, East and West of the state fairgrounds were NOT included. Had those statistics been presented, they would reflect a decrease in crime in the entire APD Southeast Area Command.

In July, the Albuquerque Police Department (APD) released the city’s 2025 first sixth months crime statistics. The crime statistics for the first half of 2025 reveal significant decreases in many crime categories compared to the same period in 2024. Specifically, homicide, aggravated assault, auto theft, and other property crimes have had significant reductions. APD also noted that felony arrests have increased, and they attribute these positive trends to factors like technological  upgrades such as gunshot detection, surveillance cameras, and targeted enforcement actions.

According to APD’s midyear crime statistic for 2025, all major categories of crime are down compared to the same period in 2024. Auto theft has dropped 40%, residential burglary dropped 14%, and commercial burglary has dropped 24%. Major nonviolent crime is down by 25% when shoplifting is added. The three main categories of violent crime of  aggravated assault, sex crimes, and robbery are down 12%. Homicides which are identified as a totally separate category, have declined 28%. Murders went from 47 in the first half of 2024 to 34 the first half of 2025 year putting the city on track to finish the year below 80 homicides. In 2024, the city recorded 89 total homicides.

The link to review the APD crime statistics is here:

https://www.cabq.gov/police/crime-statistics

A link to a published column on crime statistics is in the postscript.

FAIR GROUNDS NOT CAUSE, NOT MAGNET FOR CRIME

No statistics were  given on the extent of crime that occurs on the State Fairgrounds itself. No discussion was held or proof offered as to what extent the State Fair grounds is responsible for crime in the area. The blunt reality is the Fair Grounds cannot be characterized as the cause or as a magnet for crime.

The International District, which is bordered by Central South of the State Fairgrounds has had for decades some of the highest violent crime, property crime and drug offense rates, so much so that it was at one time referred to as the WAR ZONE.  The International District continues to be plagued by high crime rates but now has become a magnet for the unhoused with encampments constantly popping up, cleaned up by the city only to pop up again.

To blame the State Fair Grounds of the crime in the area or for the unhoused is inflammatory and simply a lie. The problem is that Governor Lujan Grisham herself  said all the crime on East Central and the unhoused crisis is “unsustainable” to justify moving the State Fair Grounds and redeveloping the area.

ANGER IN THE INTERNATIONAL DISTRICT RECALLED

On February 26, Bernalillo County Government  held meeting to discuss and provide information on a proposed Tax Increment Development District (TIDD) for the New State Fairgrounds. Upwards of 200 residents attended.

The Governor’s proposal of moving the State Fair has been met with opposition from the residents of Albuquerque’s International District, which has dealt with rampant drug use and homelessness in recent years. Most if not all of  the public present for the February 26 meeting were very hostile to the State moving the state fair and spoke out against moving the state fair to another location.

Audience members were given the opportunity to speak after the presentation on the proposed Tax Increment District (TIDD). Audience members said that the City and the Mayor Keller Administration have been a total failure in cleaning up Central and the city has failed to address the homeless crisis on Central. Audience members argued that before anything is spent on improving or moving the Fair Grounds, money would be better spent cleaning up Central, dealing with the homeless, drug addicted and mentally ill and providing them with services to get them off the streets.

CITY NEEDS TO TAKE AGGRESSIVE ACTION TO DEAL NUISANCE PROPERTIES AND THE  UNHOUSED

The City of Albuquerque must and can, as it has in the past, take aggressive action to deal with nuisance properties that are magnets for crime in the  surrounding neighborhoods, especially in the International District. The City needs to aggressively enforce the city’s vagrancy laws to deal with the homeless, including making arrests if need be and to provide services to them designed to get them off the streets.

From 2001 to 2009, East Central that borders the State Fair grounds on the South and North of International District was in fact cleaned up before by the Safe City Strike Force with aggressive code enforcement action against Central motels and violent bars that the city tore down or closed. The bars located near the State Fair that were closed or torn down by the Safe City Strike Force included the Blue Spruce Bar (Central and Louisiana), Rusty’s Cork and Bottle (San Pedro and Central) and the Last Chance Bar and Grill (Central and Louisiana).

The Safe City Strike Force took code enforcement action against 48 of the 150 motels along central, many near the State Fair grounds and forced compliance with building codes and mandated repairs to the properties. Residential properties located to the East and South  in the International District that were used to promote, facilitate or involved with criminal activity were targeted and declared nuisances and bordered up and posted substandard for code violations.

RACETRACK AND CASINO ARE GOING NOWHERE

Although very interesting but very academic in nature, the three scenarios involving the moving of the racetrack, the casino or both as outlined by the economist are not grounded in reality.

The Albuquerque Downs Racetrack and Casino, along with its stables, occupies upwards half of the state fairgrounds and it is not going anywhere for the next two decades. What will prevent moving of the racetrack and casino is the existing lease of the property for the racino that will not expire until 2045. The lease is a one billion dollar lease and a buyout is too cost prohibitive. Attempts to break the lease by the state will no doubt result in prolong litigation.

Prominent and respected Albuquerque businessman Paul Blanchard is one of the owners of the Downs Race Track and Casino. There is little doubt he will try and have major say on what is to be developed on the remaining fairgrounds areas that may affect the casino or racetrack.  Further, the federal gaming compact act will prohibit separating the casino operations from racetrack operations taking the option to move one or both off the table.

AFFORDABLE HOUSING NOT THE HIGHEST AND BEST USE OF PROPERTY

Efforts to address affordable housing continue to be a major topic of discussion for the State Fairgrounds District Board and were part of the presentations made to the board in the redevelopment plan for the property.  Proposing to commandeer a good portion of the Expo NM State Fair Property for affordable housing is as absurd as it gets. Affordable or low-income housing is not the highest and best use of any portion of the 236 acres of prime property for development in the center of Albuquerque. It would put a small dent in a projected 55,000 shortage of housing.

BUILDING A NEW MULTI PURPOSE ARENA

One major project that is being suggested that merits serious discussion is building a new arena as part of the redevelopment of the existing Expo New Mexico property. The new venue would be a modern arena that would have the capacity to support year-round large-scale concerts and events. It would replace the existing Tingley Coliseum. Demolishing the 60-year-old Tingly Coliseum and building a multipurpose entertainment and sports facility with the capacity of upwards 20,000 has been a dream of many a Governor, State Fair Commissions and Fair Managers.

Tingley Coliseum was built in 1957 and has a  seating capacity for 11,000 people. Over the years it’s been repeatedly remodeled and upgraded. Tingley Coliseum last year had $2 million worth of upgrades geared toward replacing old seats and fixing the electrical system. The work that began in November permanently removed the benches and outdated 80’s-era seats for new, wider ones. In the process, the coliseum lost roughly 700 of its total 10,000 seats, but officials plan to make up the loss with more standing-room availability.

The City of Albuquerque for decades has needed a large capacity, multipurpose entertainment venue after demolition of the 30 year old Albuquerque Civic Auditorium in 1986. It was back on February 25, 2019 that it was reported that there is a need for such a facility and EXPO New Mexico was in the final stages of conducting a feasibility study on the construction of a new arena on the state fairgrounds. Absolutely nothing ever happened with the feasibility study and its collecting dust somewhere in the State Fair manger’s office.

HIGHEST AND BEST USE OF PROPERTY IS EXPO NEW MEXICO

Expo New Mexico can be revitalized into an Entertainment and Commercial Hub  that could revitalize the entire SE Heights and surrounding area with creation of all new commercial property areas leased by the State Fair for shops, restaurants, theaters and entertainment venues that would also be used for operations of the annual State Fair and during the State Fair itself.

There should be no affordable housing and no other housing on the property. No portion of the State Fair acreage should be sold to any developer. Efforts to revitalize adjoining neighborhoods should only be undertaken by private developers perhaps with state and city development and tax incentives.

FINAL COMMENTARY

Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham, Albuquerque Mayor Tim Keller, Senate Pro Tempore Mimi Stewart, State Representative Janelle Anyanonu, City Councilor Nichole Rogers and County Commissioner Adriann Barboa who are the elected officials and politicians on the “State Fairgrounds District Board” need to keep their greedy little hands off the State Fair grounds and abandon any effort to move it. Simply put, the surrounding neighborhoods, businesses and their constituents want the State Fair to remain where it is.

Affordable housing is not the highest and best use for the property. The highest and best use of the 236 acres of property is the State Fair itself and keeping it as Expo New Mexico and developing a year-round Entertainment District and to preserve the New Mexico State Fair and Expo New Mexico where it is now.

NOTICE OF MEETING

The next meeting of the State Fair Grounds District Board is scheduled for September 25 on the State Fair Grounds with time and location to be announced.

Links to related blog articles are here:

“State Fairgrounds District Board” Holds First Meeting; Gov. MLG Merely Suggests State Fair May Not Be Moved Contrary To Her Expressed Thoughts; Development Of Master Plans Moves Forward; Highest And Best Use Of Property Is “Expo New Mexico” And Creation Of Year Around Entertainment District With No Affordable Housing   

City’s 2025 First Sixth Months Crime Stats Reveal Crime Is Down Compared To 2024; Part Of National Trend Having Nothing To Do With Mayor Tim Keller’s Failed Violent Crime Reduction Policies