On Sunday, March 28, the following guest opinion column entitled “Dual leadership has never worked for officers or residents” written by Retired APD Area Commander David “Marty Gilmore” was published by the Albuquerque Journal:

“Mayor Tim Keller’s dual leadership at APD is bound to fail as other attempts have. It is reminiscent of the Chief Gorden Eden-Assistant Chief Huntsman era and those that followed. One of the mayor’s prime issues when he ran for office was tackling the crime issue; he has failed. He refuses to consider anything short of liberal policing methods. He appointed a new “superintendent of police,” then announced a national search for one. I can visualize Councilor Trudy Jones throwing up her arms in bewilderment when she commented on the plan for dual leadership.

Crime is up and directly related to the settlement agreement, an absurd use-of-force policy and the required investigations. These decrees can last for a decade or more. Seattle and Portland have been under one since 2012, Detroit since 2003. Crime escalates wherever they are implemented. The monitor has every financial reason to prolong this decree while he drains our coffers.

After another charade – remember Chief Michael Geier? – Harold Medina was selected as chief of police after a questionable national search. The union says it supports the new chief and in the next breath says morale is at an all-time low. The chief is directly responsible for officer morale, and Medina has had his hand in the mix for years. I have been informed by officers that the chief is overly strict and vindictive in his administration of discipline; this could be one reason discipline was placed in the superintendent’s hands. Discipline is a function of the chief and not a civilian member who has been given status as an assistant chief administrative officer for disciplinary reasons.

I believe I can speak for an overwhelming number of retired/former officers when I say this entire mess, settlement agreement/dual leadership is an unmitigated disaster that was preventable. We arrived here by the political inactions and lack of courage by our mayors and councils. They should have been the oversight when the chain of command faltered.

I spent nearly 22 of my 25 year career working the streets in a patrol car through the rank/position of an area commander. I was never aware of institutional racism nor recall what could be considered excessive force. Not everyone we arrested wanted to go without a fight. We were attacked with gunfire, knives, bludgeons and the list goes on. Yes, some had to be slammed up against the hood of a car, a wall or the ground to gain compliance. Some had to be gassed, tazed, struck with a baton and, yes, some had to be shot. For doing our job, a job most wouldn’t or couldn’t do, our politically correct politicians shoved us under the settlement agreement bus.

A once proud, nationally recognized, effective APD is in total shambles, and life for the officers and crime is only going to get worse. But alas, the new dual leadership at APD will “right” the sinking ship.

The link to the Albuquerque Journal guest column is here:

https://www.abqjournal.com/2374261/dual-leadership-has-never-worked-for-officers-or-residents.html?fbclid=IwAR1PhW_VsEQA6GRxLLyssKTojuDrdms5XPqgNeK37V4HpSXONeD_U_U3h7Q

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

In his Albuquerque Journal “Letter to the Editor”, retired area commander Marty Gilmore is 100% correct with his assessment of Chief Harold Medina and the likely result of the dual leadership of APD. Gilmore is also 100% dead wrong when he says “politically correct politicians shoved us under the settlement agreement bus”. Former Commander Gilmore without a doubt is sincere in his opinions and needs to be thanked for his years of service to the city and the department. With that said, he retired years before the Department of Justice (DOJ) Court Approved Settlement Agreement and he was part of management before the DOJ came to Albuquerque. When Gilmore says “… some [being arrested] had to be slammed up against the hood of a car, a wall or the ground to gain compliance. Some had to be gassed, tazed, struck with a baton and, yes, some had to be shot” only he knows for sure if his use of force was in fact justified and if they were resisting a lawful arrest. Only he knows for sure if he did not help create, did not participate nor did not stop the “culture of aggression” within APD that took many years to become reality long before the DOJ investigation.

The CASA and all 271 mandated reforms was necessitated because of APD’s actions and inactions from the Chief, APD management, the command staff all the way down to patrol officers. The April 10, 2014, DOJ investigation report reviewed all fatal shootings by APD officers between 2009 and 2012. The Department of Justice found excessive use of force and deadly force that was engrained into APD to the point that a “culture of aggression” existed.

The DOJ specifically found three patterns of excessive force by APD:

“APD officers too frequently use deadly force against people who pose a minimal threat and in situations where the conduct of the officers heightens the danger and contributes to the need to use force;

APD officers use less lethal force, including electronic controlled weapons, on people who are passively resisting, non-threatening, observably unable to comply with orders or pose only a minimal threat to the officers; and

Encounters between APD officers and persons with mental illness and in crisis too frequently result in a use of force or a higher level of force than necessary.

The department also found systemic deficiencies of the APD which contribute to these three patterns, including: deficient policies, failed accountability systems, inadequate training, inadequate supervision, ineffective systems of investigation and adjudication, the absence of a culture of community policing and a lack of sufficient civilian oversight.”

CITY’S CONSENT DECREE UNIQUELY DIFFERENT FROM ALL OTHERS

There are 18 consent decrees in the United States, all but one deal with racial profiling or systemic racism in one form or another. APD’s consent decree is significantly different. APD’s consent decree was brought about primarily because of APD’s inability to interact and deal with the mentally ill and those in crisis and as APD was attempting to take into custody for a suspected crime.

The 3 best examples are:

The 2010 shooting and killing of Kenneth Ellis, III, an Iraq War Veteran suffering post traumatic stress disorder and who had committed no crime, yet then Lt. Medina authorized the use of deadly force. The Ellis shooting resulted in $10.3 million judgement against the city

The 2011 shooting and killing by APD of mentally ill Christopher Torres in his backyard by APD detectives dressed in plain clothes confusing Torrez. The Torrez shooting resulted in over a $6 million judgement against the city.

The 2014 killing of homeless camper and mentally ill James Boyd who was shot and killed by SWAT in the Sandia Foothills after APD attempted to arrest him for illegal camping. The Boyd killing resulted in a $5 million judgment against the city.

All 3 shootings were preventable, a clear violation of constitutional rights and wound up costing over $21 million in judgements.

APD has been struggling for over 6 years with trying to implement the DOJ consent decree reforms. After six years and millions spent, APD still has a long way to go to be compliant under the settlement before the case can be dismissed. The reforms were to be fully implemented in 4 years, and after 2 years of compliance in 3 areas determined to be 95% , the case was to be dismissed. APD management, the police union and rank and file have essentially done whatever they could do, and at different times, to interfere with the reform efforts.

The biggest failure made clear in Federal Court Monitor’s 12th report filed on November 2, 2020, relates to “Operational Compliance”. Operational Compliance is defined as “managements adherence and enforcement to APD policies in the day-to-day operation of APD” .

Operational compliance is where line personnel are routinely held accountable for compliance by their sergeants, and sergeants are routinely held accountable for compliance by their lieutenants and upper command staff. In other words, APD “owns” and enforces its own policies and without expecting the Federal Monitor to do it for them.

DERELICTION OF DUTY BY APD, NOT POLITICIANS THROWING IT UNDER BUS

The problem always has been and continues to be that APD management, the police union and its membership have not fully embraced the reforms. In fact, all three have resisted them from time to time, at different times, as has been repeatedly documented by the federal monitor in at least 4 reports over the last 3 years.

The argument that “this entire mess, settlement agreement/dual leadership is an unmitigated disaster that was preventable. We arrived here by the political inactions and lack of courage by our mayors and councils. They should have been the oversight when the chain of command faltered” is nothing more than a pathetic attempt to undercut and discredit the need for the reforms. The settlement agreement was indeed preventable had APD in fact followed constitutional policing practices in the first place and it had nothing to do with “politically correct politicians” throwing APD under the bus. It was APD that brought the DOJ here in the first place and mandated the Federal Court to come down on it.

Simply put, if a police officer does not want to do their job and not follow constitutional policing practices as mandated by the consent decree, they are part of the problem and need to leave APD or find another line of work. Same goes for anyone currently within APD management, such as Chief Harold Medina, who helped create, contributed or who did not stop the “culture of aggression” and who have resisted the reforms.

On Thursday, March 25, 2021 the U.S. Supreme Court issued a ruling that expands the ability of citizens to sue police officers for excessive use of force. It is a New Mexico case. The US Supreme Court ruled in favor of Roxanne Torres, a New Mexico woman who filed a civil rights lawsuit after being shot by officers she had mistaken for carjackers. The court held that police shooting at a fleeing vehicle “is a seizure even if the person does not submit and is not subdued” and therefor a violation of the 4th Amendment right against unreasonable search and seizure.

A link to the Supreme Court decision is here:

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/19-292_21p3.pdf

The 5-3 decision allows Torres to pursue her lawsuit accusing New Mexico State Police officers Richard Williamson and Janice Madrid of violating the U.S. Constitution’s Fourth Amendment ban on illegal searches and seizures even though she had not been immediately detained, or seized, in the incident.

FACTS OF CASE EXAMINED

According to the lawsuit filed, Torres alleged she was sleeping in her SUV in the parking lot of an apartment complex when two police officers wearing dark clothing and tactical vests approached her. They had blocked her car with their unmarked cruiser. The two state police were attempting to serve an arrest warrant on another woman.

According to the civil complaint filed, when the officers tried to open her car door, she thought they were carjackers and started to drive away, at which time the 2 state police opened fired and shot 13 times at the fleeing vehicle striking Torrez in the back. The 2 state police officers contended Torrez drove at them and said they feared for their lives and shot in self-defense, yet the vehicle was driving away and Torrez was shot in the back.

Torres later crashed the car, stole another vehicle and managed to drive more than 80 miles to a hospital in Grants where she was treated. Torres was arrested the next day. She was convicted of 3 criminal offenses, including fleeing from a law enforcement officer.

THE RULING

Chief Justice John Roberts wrote:

“The question in this case is whether a seizure occurs when an officer shoots someone who temporarily eludes capture after the shooting. The answer is yes: The application of physical force to the body of a person with intent to restrain is a seizure, even if the force does not succeed in subduing the person.”

In a dissenting opinion, conservative Justice Neil Gorsuch said a “seizure” under the Fourth Amendment has always been defined as “taking possession of someone or something,” and he criticized the majority court’s contrary conclusion by saying:

“That view is as mistaken as it is novel. … Our final destination confuses a battery for a seizure and an attempted seizure with its completion. … All this is miles from where the standard principles of interpretation lead and just as far from the Constitution’s original meaning.”

CASE REINSTATED

In 2016, Torres sued in a federal court in New Mexico. The Federal District Court judge dismissed the case ruling that there could be no excessive force claim because a “seizure” had not occurred. In 2019, the Denver-based 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals reached the same conclusion, prompting Torres to appeal to the United Sates Supreme Court.

The case will now return to lower courts, where the State Police officers could seek to have the lawsuit dismissed on other grounds including the legal doctrine called qualified immunity that protects police and other types of government officials from civil litigation in certain circumstances.

Links to news coverage are here:

https://www.krqe.com/news/politics-government/us-supreme-court-reinstates-albuquerque-womans-excessive-force-lawsuit-against-nmsp/

https://www.abqjournal.com/2373603/us-supreme-court-rules-in-favor-of-albuquerque-woman.html

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-court-police/u-s-supreme-court-widens-ability-to-sue-police-for-excessive-force-idUSKBN2BH2I5

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

This Supreme Court ruling is a remarkable decision in that Conservative Chief Justice John Roberts wrote the opinion and was joined by conservative Justice Brett Kavanaugh and liberal Justices Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan. Conservative Justices Neil Gorsuch, Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito dissented. Conservative Justice Amy Coney Barrett was not on the bench when the case was heard on October 14, 2020 and did not take part in consideration of the case.

This US Supreme Court case will no doubt send shock waves throughout all law enforcement agencies in the country. Many, but not all, law enforcement standard operating procedures prohibit shooting at fleeing suspects in cars. There is a very good reason for that. Stray bullets do not hit their targets and innocent bystanders can easily be hit and killed by mistake. In the Torrez case, only 2 out of 13 rounds fired hit Torrez and there is no mention as to what the 11 other bullets hit.

The decision is of particular interest and relevant to the Albuquerque Police Department (APD) because of the Department of Justice consent decree entered into after the DOJ found a “culture of agression” within APD and its use of excessive force and deadly force. One of the 271 mandated reforms is that APD Officers are strictly prohibited from shooting at fleeing vehicles.

With respect to the State of New Mexico, the 2021 legislature that just ended enacted the New Mexico Civil Rights Act. City, county and state law enforcement can now be sued for civil rights violations for shooting at a suspect fleeing in a vehicle and “qualified immunity” will not be able to be used as a defense as it is allowed in Federal Court cases for civil rights violations.

The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) defines a “mass murderer” as someone who “kills four or more people in a single incident, typically in a single location” and not including the killer who takes their own life.

The federal government has never defined “mass shooting” as a separate category. There is no federal crime definition of the term. Although there is no official or number as the threshold that distinguishes a mass shooting from other violent crimes involving a firearm, the common approach by the media and law enforcement is to adopt the FBI’s criteria for a mass murderer setting casualty threshold of 4 fatalities by firearm, excluding the offender or offenders.

https://www.rand.org/research/gun-policy/analysis/essays/mass-shootings.html

SEVEN MASS SHOOTINGS IN SEVEN DAYS

In seven days, there have been 7 mass shooting in the United States. The 7 mass shootings are as follows:

On March 22, in Boulder, Colorado, Ahmad Al Aliwi Alissa, 21, of Arvada, near Denver, opened fired at the King Soopers store killing 10 people, including a Boulder police officer, ranging in age from 20 to 65. The motive in the Boulder killings was not immediately known. Subsequent reports are that Alissa is suffering from severe mental illness and a violent personality disorder. He purchased the assault weapon he used a mere 6 days before the shooting.

https://www.cnn.com/2021/03/23/us/boulder-colorado-shooting-tuesday/index.html

On March 16, Robert Aaron Long, 21, of Woodstock, Georgia., was arrested for shooting to death 8 people, including six women of Asian descent, at a string of Atlanta-area spas. Long told authorities he had a “sexual addiction” and wanted to get rid of the temptation that the establishments represented. The murders fueled fears that the victims were targeted because of their race. Authorities said Long frequented the places in the past and may have been lashing out but said that racism did not appear to be the motive.

https://www.latimes.com/world-nation/story/2021-03-16/7-killed-in-shootings-at-3-atlanta-area-massage-parlors

On March 17, in Stockton, California, 5 people who were preparing for a vigil in Stockton, in California’s Central Valley, and were shot in a drive-by shooting. None had life-threatening injuries.

On March 18, in Gresham, Oregon, 4 victims were taken to the hospital after a shooting in the city east of Portland.

On March 20, in Houston, Texas, 5 people were shot after a disturbance inside a club. One was in critical condition after being shot in the neck, the rest were in stable condition.

On March 20, in Houston Dallas, 8 people were shot by an unknown assailant, one died.

On March 20, in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 5 were injured and 1 person killed during a shooting at an illegal party. According to the Philadelphia Police Commissioner, there were at least 150 people that fled and believing they had to flee for their lives.

https://www.cnn.com/us/live-news/colorado-king-soopers-shooting/index.html

NEWS UPDATE

On March 27, 2021 it was reported that at least 10 people were shot and two of them killed in a “chaotic” night of violence in Virginia Beach, the police said early Saturday morning. Officers arrived at a “resort area” on Atlantic Avenue late Friday night and found several shooting victims, the police said. Eight people were taken to the hospital with serious or life-threatening wounds, the police said. A woman who had been shot died at the scene. A man who was believed to be involved in the shooting on Atlantic Avenue was later shot and killed by officers, the police said.

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/03/27/us/virginia-beach-shootings.html?smid=fb-share&fbclid=IwAR3_TPbCpIdlo5gkfVwUU4VB_SOxWwYp4BoD7kHqIoyS26dnVZ6uSw0x4Fs

https://www.cnn.com/2021/03/27/us/virginia-beach-shootings/index.html

HEARING IT ALL OVER AGAIN

The Boulder, Colorado and the Atlanta, Georgia incidents are again spurring discussion about gun control legislation in the United States. After the shootings we are again going through another news cycle of outrage, mourning and demands for gun control action. We are hearing the interviews of the survivors and witnesses of the shootings. Newscasters are warning “the images you are about to see may be too graphic, so you may want to turn away” from your TV set. There will be news accounts of the funerals and eulogies given.

Reports are being made how easy it was for the killers to get the guns. The killer’s FACEBOOK posts or YouTube videos that give hints about what they were about to do are being explored by authorities. Law enforcement and private citizens will describe the shootings as acts of “pure evil”. Reports are being made of the killer’s arraignments and the charges they are facing with the likelihood they will be sentenced to death or spend the rest of their lives in prison or in a mental institution.

Prosecutors are saying that these are the very type of crime that the death penalty is deserved to be imposed. Corrections officials will declare that the defendant has been placed on a suicide watch or that he has attempted suicide. We will hear calls for congress to enact responsible gun control laws and restrictions such as extensive background checks, outlaw gun shows, prohibit the manufacture and sale of the AR-15, prohibit the sale of firearms to anyone 18 or younger and outlaw the manufacture of high-capacity clips.

Psychologists and psychiatrists will give opinions about post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and that survivors will need to be treated for with counselling given on how to cope with death and loss of their loved ones. News accounts will include stories about the heroes and first responder’s reactions during the shooting and of those who lost their lives and of the lives they saved. There will be reports on the background and life of the troubled shooter and the mental illness they endured and what broken people they are.

The mantra “guns don’t kill people, people kill people” will be heard over and over again, as well as “if you take away guns from the law abiding, only the criminals will have guns.” The NRA will once again exert its influence over elected officials and make millions of campaign contributions to those running for office, both on a national and local level.

We will hear again, and again and again gun owners and gun advocates say the only way their guns will ever be taken away from them is when their gun is “pried from their cold dead hands”, even the high-capacity magazine rifles designed only to kill mass numbers or used by the military to inflict as much death as possible.

THE WEAPON OF CHOICE

The on-line publication Mother Jones has compiled a database of mass shooting from 1982 to the present. The data base is broken down by location, date, summary of the facts, the number of fatalities, and the number of injured. You can review the entire Mother Jones data base here:

https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/12/mass-shootings-mother-jones-full-data/

From 1982 to 2021, there have been 121 mass shootings in the United States. Since January 8, 2001, the United States has had 69 mass shootings with 607 people shot and killed.

The mass shooting with guns in the last 11 years include: Orlando, Florida (49 killed, 50 injured), Blacksburg, Va. (32 killed), San Ysidro, Cal (21 killed), San Bernardino, (14 killed), Edmond Oklahoma (14 killed), Fort Hood (13 killed), Binghamton, NY (13 killed) Washington, DC (12 killed), Aurora, Colorado (12 killed), Sandy Hook Elementary School, Newtown, Conn (21 children and 6 adult staff members killed) and the largest mass shooting in this country’s history that occurred in Las Vegas, Nevada with at least 59 dead and at least 515 wounded and the Parkland/Stoneridge High School shooting that resulted in 17 children’s deaths, El Paso, Texas, 23 dead and 23 injured, Atlanta, Georgia (Atlanta Message Parlor) 10 killed, Boulder, Colorado (Boulder Supermarket) 8 killed.

“The deadliest mass shootings … have had one thing in common: the perpetrator used an assault rifle. These weapons possess an incredible amount of killing power, and amplify the destructive will of the person who carries out an attack. Nine people died and 27 were injured in a mass shooting in Dayton, Ohio in an attack that lasted 32 seconds. The killer used an AR-15 style assault rifle. Since 1999, there have been 115 mass shootings with 941 people were killed and 1,431 were injured. Of those 115 attacks, 32 — just over a quarter — involved semi-automatic rifles. But those attacks accounted for 40% of all deaths and 69% of all injuries. Since 2017, 12 of the 31 mass shootings involved assault rifles — which caused 39% of the deaths and 92% of the injuries. That includes the Las Vegas massacre — which alone accounts for almost 40% of all mass shooting injuries since 1999. The perpetrator of that shooting used over 20 assault rifles during that attack.”

https://www.axios.com/deadliest-mass-shootings-common-4211bafd-da85-41d4-b3b2-b51ff61e7c86.html

PUBLIC OPINION SUPPORTING GUN CONTROL GROWS

On October 20, 2019 , NPR reported on a Pew Research Center survey released. The percentage of Americans who favor stricter gun laws was found to be on the rise, though significant partisan divisions persisted. The survey found that 60% of Americans say gun laws should be tougher, up from 57% in 2018 and 52% in 2017.

The study indicated that while a solid majority of Americans favor stricter gun laws, support remains split down party lines. 86% of Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents said gun laws should be stricter than they are today, compared with 31% of Republican counterparts.

Large majorities of Democrats and Republicans somewhat or strongly support barring people with mental illnesses from purchasing guns, as well as making private gun sales and sales at gun shows subject to background checks. But when it comes to banning high-capacity ammunition magazines and assault-style weapons, the parties diverge. Nearly 9 in 10 Democrats favor each of these proposals, compared with roughly half of Republicans.

The survey explores the relationship between gun control and gun rights. Overall, it found that 53% of Americans believe it is more important to control gun ownership, while 47% say it is more important to protect the right of Americans to own guns. Men are more likely to favor protecting gun rights, while women are more likely to favor controlling gun ownership.

The link to the full report is here:

https://www.npr.org/2019/10/20/771278167/poll-number-of-americans-who-favor-stricter-gun-laws-continues-to-grow

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

It’s more likely than not that public support of gun control laws will continue to increase as more mass shootings with assault weapons occur, while all Republican Senators will continue to oppose such legislation.

There are many components to America’s mass shooting epidemic. We need more mental health treatment facilities, more parental involvement, better educational systems, early childhood intervention to prevent child abuse and to identify and get help and counseling to emotionally and violent children and more to secure our schools. This will take years but something can and needs to be done immediately.

There is no doubt that this country’s pandemic of mass shootings continues. Yet all we do about it is bury, debate and wait for the next mass shooting. After so many mass killings, it is difficult to refute that something needs to be done and done now about semi-automatic and automatic guns such as the AR-15 which are the type used in all the mass shootings.
The Unites States Congress needs to enact the following:

1. Ban the manufacture and sale of all assault weapons and regulate existing assault weapons under the National Firearms Act of 1934, and initiate a federal gun buyback program.

2. Ban “bump-fire stocks” as was used in the Las Vegas mass shooting and other dangerous accessories.

3. Impose limits on high-capacity magazines.

4. Implementation of background checks on the sale of all guns.

5. Close the “Charleston loophole” or “delayed denial” where federally licensed dealers can sell guns if three business days pass without FBI clearance.

4. Call for the update and enhancement of the federal National Instant Criminal Background Check system (NCIS).

5. Institute mandatory extended waiting periods for all gun purchases.

6. Implement mandatory handgun licensing, permitting, training, and registration requirements.

7. Prohibit firearm sale or transfer to and receipt or possession by an individual who has: (1) been convicted in any court of a misdemeanor hate crime, or (2) received from any court an enhanced hate crime misdemeanor sentence.

8. Institute mandatory child access prevention safe storage requirements and prohibit the sales of handguns with “hair triggers”.

9. Provide more resources and treatment for people with mental illness.

10. Enhance accountability of federally licensed firearms dealers.

11. Implement micro stamped code on each bullet that links it to a specific gun.

12. Produce ‘x-mart guns’ with Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) or biometric recognition (fingerprint) capability.

13. Limit gun purchases to one gun per month to reduce trafficking and straw purchases.

14. Prohibit open carry of firearms.

15. Digitize Alcohol, Tobacco and Fire (ATF) gun records.

16. Require licensing for ammunition dealer.

INCLUDE GUN CONTROL IN NEW MEXICO LEGISLATURE SPECIAL SESSION

Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham has announced that she will be calling a special session to deal with the issue of legalization of recreational cannabis. She should include gun control legislation for the special session.

The New Mexico can and should consider any number of gun control measures. Those could include:

1. Repeal the New Mexico Constitutional provision that allows the “open carry” of firearms. This would require a public vote and no doubt generate heated discussion given New Mexico’s high percentage of gun ownership for hunting, sport or hobby.

2. Ban the sale of all assault weapons.

3. 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.

4. Requiring 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.

5. Enact a gun violence restraining order and extreme risk protection process to temporarily prohibit an individual deemed by a judge to pose a danger to self or others, from purchasing or possessing firearms or ammunition and allow law local law enforcement to remove any firearms or ammunition already in the individual’s possession.

6. Restrict and penalize firearm possession by or transfer to a person subject to a domestic violence protection order or a person, including dating partners, convicted of a domestic violence misdemeanor.

7. 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.

FINAL COMMENT

What is needed at a minimum on federal level are prohibitions and the ban of the manufacture, sale and distribution to the general public of semi-automatic firearms, AR-15 style rifles, assault weapons, semi-automatic pistols, semi-automatic shotguns and weapons that result in the most murders in the shortest amount of time.

Until the United States congress does something to enact reasonable and responsible gun control measures and ban assault weapons, we can expect many more mass shootings at soft targets such as schools, movie theaters, malls, department stores and major public events like concerts and state fairs. The mass shootings will again be followed by the predictable cycle of news coverage, more outrage, more nighttime candle vigils, more funerals, more condolences, more rhetoric demanding action. Congress can end the madness but only they have the backbone to act.

In politics, media coverage can cause less confident politicians to over react in order to offset favorable coverage given to any rival. On March 21 and March 22, Albuquerque voters were witness to such media coverage and reactions between the two top emerging candidates running for Albuquerque Mayor, Conservative Democrat Sheriff Manny Gonzales and Progressive Democrat Mayor Tim Keller.

FRONT PAGE ABQ JOURNAL COVERAGE OF SHERIFF MANNY GONZALES

Bernalillo County Sheriff Manuel Gonzales III has notified the city clerk he is running for Mayor and will be seeking public finance. Gonzales has submitted a candidate registration form for the race but he has yet to publicly announce he is running for Mayor.

On Sunday, March 21, the Albuquerque Journal ran a front-page article that continued on pages A-4 and A-5 on Bernalillo County Sheriff Manny Gonzales. The front-page story headline was “Quick to draw fire – and fire back”, on page A-4 the headline was “On BCSO ride along, “That’s what I wanted to be” and the headline on A-5 was “Sheriff’s childhood dream: ‘Keeping people safe”. The link to the entire Albuquerque Journal article is here:

https://www.abqjournal.com/2371964/sheriffs-childhood-dream-keeping-people-safe.html

You know the Journal means business when it publishes color photos and calls in Senior Editor Ken Waltz, who has been with the Journal for decades, to write a political profile of anyone. The Sunday Journal is the largest circulation day of the newspaper. The news article was a “candidate profile” of Sheriff Gonzales complete with flattering, colored photos and bold headlines. On the front page below the fold was 2 and half inch by 1 and a half inch color photo of the Sheriff speaking. Appearing on page A-4 of the Journal was a 5” by 8” photo of the Sheriff in his dress BCSO uniform talking to former Attorney General William Bar. On page A-5 were two other colored photos, one 5” by 7” and one 4” by 5” of the sheriff.

The article was the most flattering article and profile of Manny Gonzales reported in all the years he has been in elective office. Usually, the Journal publishes editorials critical of Sheriff Gonzales, especially on his refusal to order lapel camera usage by all BCSO Deputies.

The first few sentences of the article captures the tone of the entire lengthy profile article and for that reason merits quoting:

“Hard-nosed. Outspoken. Controversial. Unapologetic.

Bernalillo County Sheriff Manuel Gonzales III is all of that – whether you’re talking about hard-hitting press releases from his office announcing arrests to resisting on-body cameras for his deputies for years to shrugging off calls for his resignation from quarters that range from the American Civil Liberties Union to the state’s senior senator.

He has taken heat over a range of issues including meeting with then-President Donald Trump and agreeing to work with federal agents in a crime crackdown last summer and high-profile shootings by his deputies that led to multimillion-dollar settlements. He has at times been at odds with the district attorney and the governor.

A Marine Corps veteran who has been with BCSO for 25 years, Gonzales not only rejects the criticism, he doesn’t hesitate to fire back.

I don’t work for the governor. I don’t work for the mayor. I don’t work for the president of the United States. I answer to the people who voted me into office,” he said.”

The article continues by reporting on Sheriff Gonzales’ background and giving the Sheriff an opportunity to explain many controversies, including shootings his Sheriff Deputies have been involved with during his time in office.

It was absolutely disappointing that the Journal article failed to report on why Sheriff Gonzales is running for Mayor or for that matter what his platform will be.

The link to the entire Albuquerque Journal profile article is here:

https://www.abqjournal.com/2371964/sheriffs-childhood-dream-keeping-people-safe.html

MAYOR TIM KELLER ANNOUNCES RUN FOR SECOND TERM

On Monday, March 22, Mayor Tim Keller announced formally he is running for a second term. The announcement comes as absolutely no surprise to anyone. Over 2 years ago, Tim Keller made it known in a November 5, 2018 radio election night news coverage that he intended to run for a second term. In his March 23 reelection announcement, Keller said he has filed his candidate paperwork and will start campaigning in April when the qualifying period for public financing begins.

What was surprising was Tim Keller made the announcement with a press conference and no fan fair, no crowd, no rousing emotional speech. Keller stood outside in front of the old City Hall, south of the APD Main station in Downtown Albuquerque with his wife and two children by his side. Frankly, it was as if his announcement was hastily arranged in order off set Sheriff’s Gonzales Journal profile published the day before. By all standards, the Keller announcement was a lost opportunity that can not be repeated. It is likely Gonzales will have a more public announcement with a crowd of supporters and it will generate coverage on the TV News stations.

Keller’s announcement was very low key in comparison to the orchestrated public relations he is known for such as his state of the City addresses and his townhall meetings where thousands are called the day before. Keller’s March 14, 2021 State of the City address was given a full hour of television coverage on Channel 7, it was advertised in advance and it consisted of a very slick and impressive pre recorded one hour presentation that also included members of his administration speaking about the accomplishments of the Keller Administration. Watch parties for Keller’s State of the City Address were also arranged at local brewery’s with re-broadcasts of the address given on cable and his FACEBOOK page.

In his March 22 announcement, Keller proclaimed the city’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic as the signature accomplishment of his first term and had this to say:

“Shepherding our city, leading our city, making those tough decisions was a trial like no other. I think it’s shown we are tested by a crisis our city has not seen in decades, or in modern history. … That puts us in a great position going forward. … Now I believe our city is finally going in the right direction, and we must keep the course. … It’s time we hit the accelerator and we do not go backwards.”

We are poised to come out of the pandemic stronger and safer with thousands of new good-paying jobs for working families; revitalized public safety efforts; and taking on homelessness, which has been exacerbated by COVID, in a real way. That’s on top of our nationally-leading sustainability efforts, our innovative new safety department, and our commitment to social justice, equity, and inclusion. Now that we’re finally going in the right direction, it’s time to hit the accelerator, not go backward—and that’s why I’m running for re-election. ”

Since February, 2020, for over a full year since the pandemic hit the city and after he declared a public health emergency, Keller has touted the city government’s ability to avoid employee layoffs and continue delivering services despite the pandemic. He also acknowledged that the $150 million in federal relief money the city received last spring was a key factor with the city’s success, but Keller argued that Albuquerque fared better than other comparable cities during the crisis.

Links to related news coverage is here:

https://www.abqjournal.com/2372296/keller-announces-2021-reelection-bid.html

https://www.kob.com/albuquerque-news/albuquerque-mayoral-race-starting-to-take-shape/6050304/?cat=500

https://www.krqe.com/news/politics-government/albuquerque-mayor-announces-bid-for-re-election/

OTHER CANDIDATES FOR MAYOR

Two other relatively unknows have said they are also running for Mayor. They are Nicholas Bevins, a 25-year-old activist, and Patrick Ben Sais has also filed registration as a mayoral candidate.

Bevins sent KOB 4 News a statement that read in part:

“I am running out of a sense of urgency for my generation and future generations who face countless threats such as climate change and economic inequality which are going unaddressed.”

https://www.kob.com/albuquerque-news/albuquerque-mayoral-race-starting-to-take-shape/6050304/?cat=500

PUBLIC FINANCE VERSUS PRIVATE FINANCE CANDIDATES

Albuquerque’s municipal election is November 2. On the ballot this year will be the office for Mayor and the 5 odd numbered city council districts of the 9 city council seats. The council seats up for election are City Council seats 1, 3, 5, 7, and 9.

Both Keller and Gonzales are seeking public finance, hence the reason for Mayor Keller’s announcement and the Journal’s candidate profile of Sheriff Gonzales.

Under the city’s election laws, from April 17 to June 19, public finance candidates for Mayor must collect 3,779 qualifying $5 donations to the city and 3,000 nominating petition signatures both from registered Albuquerque voters. Qualifying public finance candidates will be given $660,000 in cash to run their campaigns in exchange for agreeing to a spending cap and not soliciting any further donations.

The postscript to this blog article provides greater details and deadlines.

Privately financed candidates for Mayor must wait to collect nominating petition signature and will have from June 8 to August 10 must gather more the 3,000 signatures from registered voters within the City.

It’s likely that measured finance committee will be set up to advocate for candidates and they will be able to raise and spend unlimited amounts on behalf of candidates.

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

At this point in time, Mayor Tim Keller is the front runner in the race for Mayor and it is his race to lose. The problem is that the pandemic is now beginning to subside and the City’s out of control crime rates are once again emerging as the top story. During the upcoming long hot summer months, it is more likely than not the city will see violent crime continue to rise as people break out of quarantine and start to get back to normal life.

MAYOR TIM KELLER

One thing for certain, Keller does have a big advantage with incumbency and his strong base of progressive supporters. Keller’s problem is his overall accomplishments have been less than stellar, especially dealing with the city’s high crime rates. Keller has not come even even close to the dramatic change he promised when he ran for Mayor. Just 5 months after being elected, Keller sign off on a tax increase after promising not to raise taxes without a public vote. Keller failed to make the sweeping changes to APD and his promised implementation of the Department of Justice reforms stalled so much that he fired his first appointed Chief. Initially, Keller appointed as Chief and Deputy Chief’s those who were part of the culture that resulted in a Department of Justice investigation. Keller recently appointed Harold Medina permanent APD Chief, who has a nefarious past. Medina shot and killed a 14 year old child suffering a psychotic episode and brandishing a BB gun while Medina was attempting to take him into custody. Years later, it was Medina that gave authorization to use deadly force against and Iraq War Veteran suffering from post traumatic stress order, with the city hit with a Jury verdict of $10 Million for wrongful death after the jury decided the veteran was only a threat to himself. Keller is not even close to reaching the 1,200 sworn police officers he promised by the end of his term with the current number being 998 sworn officers. Keller’s promise to bring down violent crime never materialized and his 4 programs to bring down violent crime have failed to move the murder trend down. During the last 3 years homicides have hit all time record numbers with many still unsolved. Keller has always appeared to be more interested in public relations and image than substance and accomplishment.

SHERIFF MANNY GONZALEZ

Gonzales brings to the table his law enforcement credentials, but that is no way enough to run a city during bad economic times, especially with a police department operating under a court approved settlement agreement that Gonzales opposes. Gonzales is well known for his inability to work with other elected officials, often at odds with the County Commission and the District Attorneys Office and refusing to make changes within his office. Given his history of resisting civilian oversight of the Sheriffs Department, it is not at all likely that a Mayor Manny Gonzales will listen to and work with the city council, let alone respect the Police Oversight Board and the Community Policing Councils. The Sheriff’s grand standing refusal to enforce the Governor’s health care orders declaring they were “unconstitutional” during the pandemic was an expression that he feels law enforcement is above the law and he should answer to no one. Gonzales is a throw back to the way law enforcement was many years ago before the Black Lives movement and he has failed to keep up with the times and implementing constitutional policing practices within BCSO. When Sheriff Gonzales says “I answer to the people who voted me into office” ostensibly he believes he answers to only those who actually vote for him and not those like 26-year-old mentally ill Elisha Romero and the 88-year-old Fedencio Duran suffering from Alzheimer’s, both killed by BCSO Deputies. Bernalillo County paid Romero’ family $4,000,000 and Duran’s family $1,495,000 in settlements for civil rights violations, wrongful death and Gonzales defended his officers and complained about the amounts of the settlements, and going so far as to give his deputies commendations for their actions in the Romero case. Sheriff Gonzales is viewed as a Democrate In Name Only (DINO) after he embraced President Trump’s Operation Legend and traveled to Washington, DC, to attend a press conference in the White House.

CONCLUSION

The city is facing any number of problems that are bringing it to its knees. Those problems include the corona virus pandemic, business closures, high unemployment rates, exceptionally high violent crime and murders rates, continuing mismanagement of the Albuquerque Police Department, failed implementation of the Department of Justice reforms after a full 6 years and millions spent, declining revenues and gross receipts tax, high unemployment rates, persistent and increasing homeless numbers, a lack of mental health and counseling programs and very little economic development, just to mention a few.

The city can go no longer afford to elect a Mayor nor a City Council just based upon promises and nothing but eternal hope for better times and for a better future that only results in broken campaign promises. What is needed are elected officials that actually know what they are doing and will make the hard decisions without their eye on the next election or make decisions only to placate their base and to please only those who voted for them, which is exactly what Mayor Keller and Sheriff Gonzales have done now since they have been in office.

At this point, what is needed is a healthy debate on solutions and new ideas to solve our mutual problems. Such a debate can only happen with contested elections. The city needs a highly contested race for Mayor to reveal and come up with solutions to our problems. The city needs more than just two viable candidates for Mayor that will make the ballot such as Mayor Keller and Sheriff Gonzales. If that happens and it’s just Keller and Gonzales, we will be faced with voting for the lesser of two evils, or simply not voting at all.

There is still time left for candidates to announce, but time is running short for candidates who want to seek public finance.

____________________________________

POSTCRIPT

Albuquerque’s municipal election is November 2. On the ballot this year will be the office for Mayor and the 5 odd numbered city council districts of the 9 city council seats. The council seats up for election are City Council seats 1, 3, 5, 7, and 9.

March 1 was the first day candidates were able to declare to seek public finance beginning an 8-month election process. The time lines for privately finance candidates are on a later time frame.
The city link listing all deadlines is here:

https://www.cabq.gov/vote/candidate-information/candidate-calendar-for-the-2021-regular-local-election

PUBLIC FINANCE CANDIDATES FOR MAYOR

From April 17 to June 19, 2021, candidates for Mayor must gather 3,000 signatures from registered voters within the City.

From April 17 to June 19, 2021, Candidates for Mayor can collect the $5.00 donations and must collect 3,779 donations. Candidates for Mayor are only given 8 weeks to collect the 3,779 qualifying donations of $5.00. In 2017, there were 8 candidates for Mayor with only 1 candidate qualifying.

PUBLIC FINANCE CANDIDATES FOR CITY COUNCIL

From May 31 to July 5, 2021, candidates for City Council must gather 500 qualifying signatures from registered voters within the district the candidate wishes to represent.
From May 31 to July 5, 2021, or approximately 4 weeks Candidates for City Council can collect the $5.00 donations only from May 31 to July 5, 2021, or approximately 4 weeks. There are varying number of $5.00 donations for each council district.
PRIVATELY FINANCED CANDIDATES FOR MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL

From June 8 to August 10, 2021, Privately Finance Candidates for Mayor must gather more than 3,000 signatures from registered voters within the City.

From July 6 to August 10, 2021, Privately Financed Candidates for City Council must gather more than 500 signatures from registered voters within the district the candidate wishes to represent.

Privately financed candidates have no fundraising or spending limits. Privately financed candidates can raise and are free to accept campaign contributions from whatever legal source they want including contributions from individuals, businesses and corporations within the city, county, state or out of state and there is no city voter registration required.

There is no limit on what privately financed candidates can spend on their campaigns. However, there are limits on individual contributions privately financed candidates can accept from donors. Specifically, Article XIII, Section 4(e) limits the total contributions from any one person, with the only exception being the candidates themselves, and the private contribution cannot exceed 5% of the salary of the elected official at the time of filing the Declaration of Candidacy.

ON LINE COLLECTION OF SIGNATURES AND DONATIONS

On March 2, it was reported that City Clerk Ethan Watson “announced [due to COVID-19] new procedures that allow the candidates to collect those signatures online, while also permitting them to still gather them in person.

The city clerk’s office is creating a new website, in collaboration with New Mexico Secretary of State Maggie Toulouse Oliver, that will use the Secretary of State’s voter registration database for verification purposes before allowing a signature. The clerk’s office also is updating a second website that allows voters to make $5 contributions for candidates seeking public financing.

https://www.abqjournal.com/2364765/campaign-season-starts-for-city-races-ex-mayors-seat-and-five-councilor-positions-up-for-grabs.html

2021 CANDIDATE GUIDE

The City of Albuquerque “2021 CANDIDATE GUIDE” provides a detailed candidate calendar of deadlines on pages 6 to 12 of the guide. The Candidate Guide provides the dates and requirements for the filing of campaign finance reports.

The link to the Candidate Guide is here:

http://www.cabq.gov/clerk/documents/candidate-guide-2-0.pdf

COMMENCEMENT DATES EMPHASIZED

There is still time for people to make a decision to run for Mayor and City Council, but time is short for candidates for Mayor and City Councilor candidates who are seeking public financing funding.

It is hoped that there will be more than just one candidate opposing all incumbents. What is needed is a healthy debate on solutions and new ideas to solve our mutual problems. Such a debate can only happen with contested elections.

The very last thing the city needs is the coronation of unopposed incumbents.

Related links are here:

https://www.cabq.gov/vote/candidate-information/publicly-financed-candidates

The link to the 2021 Candidate Guide is here:

https://www.cabq.gov/clerk/documents/office-of-the-city-clerk-2021-candidate-guide-12-30-20-3.pdf

The link to Public Finance General Information is here:

https://www.cabq.gov/vote/candidate-information/publicly-financed-candidates/publicly-financed-candidates-general-information

The link to Election Matching Funds information is here:

https://www.cabq.gov/vote/candidate-information/publicly-financed-candidates/election-matching-funds

On Saturday, March 20 at 12:00 noon, the 2021 New Mexico Legislative session became history. Upwards of 110 pieces of legislation were passed by both the House and Senate. Governor Lujan Grisham will have until April 9 to act on the legislation.

This blog article highlights those bills that passed and failed and that are considered the major highlights of the session.

SUMMARY OF BILLS PASSED

2021-2021 BUDGET ENACTED

On March 19, just one day before the New Mexico legislature adjourns, 19, the legislature enacted a 7.4 billion state budget is will be sent to Governor Lujan Grisham for approval. The Governor does have line-item veto power and it may be exercised as she sees fit.

The state government will increase spending by 4.8 percent, or $373 million. The proposed $7.4 billion budget passed both chambers in the final days of the session and is now headed to the governor. Upwards of half of the $7.5 Billon dollar budget will go towards public education. $110-million will be spent to extend the school year by ten days with an additional $120-million for kindergarten to fifth-grade programs to add 25 extra school days to make up for lost learning time.

Part of the budget will be used to increase the governor’s Opportunity Scholarship, which helps provide funding for tuition at two-year universities, to $18-million. An additional $35-million will head towards addressing the needs of Native student’s education.

Lawmakers appropriated about $1.6 billion from the federal American Rescue Plan to help with lost revenue and put about $600-million towards replenishing the state’s unemployment fund. Along additional coronavirus relief plan financing, the state budget spends $400-million in one-time spending for economic recovery.

Overall, the budget increases spending compared to fiscal year 2021 by 4.9%, or $378-million. The budget provides for cash reserves at $1.7 billion, or about 24% of current spending.
Once signed, the budget will take effect from July 1. 2021 to June 30, 2022.

https://www.krqe.com/news/politics-government/legislature/new-mexico-lawmakers-send-7-4b-budget-to-governor/

PANDEMIC RELIEF MEASURES

On Friday, February 26, Governor Lujan Grisham signed into law House Bill 11 the long-anticipated pandemic relief measure. It authorizes $200 million in small business loans. Qualifying businesses that have no more than 75 employees will be able to secure up to $100,000 in funding. A separate pandemic recovery bill providing $600 rebates to low-income workers and enacting a four-month tax holiday for restaurants and breweries is also on its way to Lujan Grisham’s desk for final approval after being approved Wednesday by the House. Thus far, the 2021 New Mexico Legislature have enacted bills authorizing upwards of $400 million in state spending on pandemic relief measures.

On March 3, the Governor signed Senate Bill 3 called the Small Business Recovery Act. The bill will provide more than $460 million in low-interest relief loans. It would also make it easier for small and medium-sized businesses to receive up to $75,000.

GRT AND PERMANENT FUNDS FOR LEDA PROJECTS

On February 26, the Governor signed House Bill 11 will provide $200 million from the state general fund gross receipts tax revenues to thousands of businesses that experienced income declines in 2020. The bill provides for individual grants of up to $100,000 without repayment to businesses for the reimbursement of rent, lease or mortgage obligations on property located in New Mexico.
Among the guidelines:

Businesses must be operating in New Mexico with fewer than 75 employees per location;

Businesses must demonstrate a loss of revenue for at least one quarter between 2019 and 2020;

Funding must be used for reimbursement of rent, mortgage or lease obligations;

The grant must be accompanied by job creation for each quarter prior to one of the quarterly payments; and

The grants will be paid out in quarterly installments.

TAX PACKAGE

On Friday March 19, a proposal to expand and reshape two New Mexico tax breaks for low-income workers won final approval. The bill expands the tax benefits offered by the Low Income Comprehensive Tax Rebate and the Working Families Tax Credit. The tax credit will be expanded to allow an estimated 41,600 New Mexicans between the age of 18 to 24 to qualify. And it would expand the tax benefit to immigrant workers who are not U.S. citizens.

The Senate voted 40-0 to approve the tax package after rejecting GOP-backed attempts to tack on provisions exempting Social Security benefits from taxation and partially reinstating a tax on food items. The House then voted to send the bill to Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham’s desk for final consideration, signing off on changes made during the Senate committee process.

In its initial form, the tax package also called for a new top personal income bracket of 6.5%, which was up from 5.9% under current state law. But that provision, along with other proposed tax increases, was scrapped by the Senate Finance Committee earlier this week.

Without the tax increases, the more generous tax credits would cost the state an estimated $70 million annually. The $70 million price tag will be set off with the enactment of the state’s $7.4 billion budget and Covid federal relief approved for the states.

Meanwhile, the attempt by Senate Republicans to add the Social Security tax benefit exemption came after several standalone bills on the issue failed to get any traction during this year’s session.

https://www.abqjournal.com/2371658/pared-back-tax-package-nears-roundhouse-finish-line.html

UNEMPLOYMENT BENEFITS EXTENDED

On March 17, the Governor signed Senate Bill 52 extending unemployment benefits. SB 52 is a technical adjustment to the state unemployment benefit statute that accommodates changes to federal requirements that have come about as a result of pandemic-related unemployment programs.

MINIMUM WAGE FOR SECONDARY SCHOOL STUDENTS

On March 18, the Governor signed Senate Bill 35 which provides that minimum wage for all high school-aged workers to make the state’s $10.50 an hour minimum wage instead of their current $8.50 an hour. Many argued it was unfair to pay kids less for the same work while others said the lower wage gave school age workers a better chance to enter the workforce.

RESTAURANT GROSS RECEIPT TAX DEDUCTION

On March 3, the Governor signed Senate Bill 1 which provides a short gross receipts tax break for businesses like restaurants, breweries, food trucks and wineries for four months in 2021. Businesses would be able to pocket that sales tax money while the state would reimburse local government for the loss of that tax revenue. The bill will create a $600 income tax credit for people earning less than $31,200 a year who are also claiming the working families tax credit.

PAID SICK LEAVE

House Bill 20, known as the Healthy Workplaces Act, calls for paid sick leave to be a right and not a privilege. Under House Bill 20, which passed on March 20, the state would require businesses to provide sick leave for their employees. The bill states the longer the employee has been with the company, the more time off they will accrue.

Under the bill, private employers in the state will be required to provide workers at least one hour of paid sick leave for every 30 hours they work, or 64 hours per year. House Bill 20 was narrowly approved by both the House and Senate.

Supporters of the measure described it as a basic protection for employees, particularly low-wage earners who sometimes have to choose between going to work sick or risk losing their jobs. Opponents argued it would hurt small businesses, particularly those still struggling to get back on their feet after the economic fallout from the coronavirus pandemic.

A legislative fiscal impact report of the bill reported that earned sick leave could be used for any type of personal or family member illness or health condition or medical care, curative or preventive, including to attend school meetings related to a child’s disability and absences connected to domestic violence, sexual assault or stalking of the employee or a family member. The bill also establishes supplemental sick leave during a public health emergency of 80 hours or twice the weekly number of hours for part-time employees.

The bill lists numerous purposes, including ensuring that all employees can address their personal and family health and safety needs and reducing health care costs and promoting preventive health services by enabling employees to seek early and routine medical care. The bill also addresses the concern that many New Mexico employees currently have no access to sick leave.

Employers would be subject to monetary penalties for violating the proposed law. Not at all surprising HB 20 generated opposition from business groups arguing it would create a right to paid sick leave for all employees in New Mexico. Republican lawmakers pushed to exempt employers with fewer than 10 employees.

https://www.santafenewmexican.com/news/legislature/new-mexico-house-passes-paid-sick-leave-bill/article_99ea8da2-7863-11eb-b1c5-e721194a1a9e.html

Nationwide, 15 states already have paid sick leave laws on their books, including neighboring Colorado and Arizona, although many of them exempt small businesses, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.

The enacted bill will not exempt small employers. It would, in its current form, allow employers that already offer paid leave programs to qualify under the law as long as they meet its minimum terms.

Bernalillo County has adopted a paid sick leave ordinance, although it applies only to unincorporated parts of the county and is not as generous to employees as the proposed statewide law. Albuquerque city councilors have put off a local debate over paid sick leave to see what action lawmakers take during this year’s session.

https://www.abqjournal.com/2371402/paid-sick-leave-bill-passes-senate-amid-turmoil.html

WAIVER OF 2021 LIQUOR LICENSE FEES

On March 9, the Governor signed Senate Bill 2. The legislation will allow the state to waive annual liquor license fees as businesses struggle to rebound amid the pandemic. The governor said the food and beverage industry is a key piece of the state’s economy. Under the legislation, the next annual fee for renewed liquor licenses and for all new licenses issued in this year will be waived.

LIQUOR REFORM

On Wednesday, March 17, Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham signed House Bill 255, which will allow home delivery of alcohol by restaurants. Identification checks will be mandatory for all deliveries. Alcohol delivery permits can be issued to retailers, dispensers, craft distillers, winegrowers, small brewers and restaurant licensees.

Under the new law liquor licenses will be more affordable and accessible for those business owners seeking to obtain one. The bill will also provide a significant tax deduction among other protections for existing license holders in recognition of their investment.

As part of the legislation, the Department of Health is directed to conduct a study of the effects of alcohol delivery in the state in several years. Following revisions in both chambers, the bill also makes licenses more affordable and accessible while providing for a significant tax deduction among other protections for existing license holders to recognize their investment.

The bill lifts the restrictions on alcohol sales that had been imposed on Sundays and prohibits the sale of miniature bottles of liquor for off-site consumption. Additionally, the legislation prohibits wine and spirit sales at gas stations in McKinley County.

The bill was sponsored by members of both parties, led by Sen. Daniel Ivey-Soto and Rep. Antonio “Moe” Maestas, and including Rep. Dayan Hochman-Vigil, Rep. Javier Martinez, Rep. Rod Montoya and Rep. Joshua Hernandez.

Governor Lujan Grisham released the following statement:

“As lawmakers from both parties said over the course of debate, this was an example of productive and creating problem-solving, with well-considered and compassionate and careful arguments made on both sides of a complicated and charged issue. … Like any bipartisan compromise, at the end of the day, most if not all will feel both that they got some of what they wanted and had to give some of what they didn’t.

Ultimately, I side with those who argued that reform, after so many decades, is more than warranted, and that these reforms, in particular, will move us forward as a state – not only by providing an important new revenue stream for the restaurant and hospitality industry but by making this industry more accessible to more New Mexicans while including important safeguards.”

https://www.koat.com/article/gov-signs-bill-allowing-alcohol-delivery-reducing-license-fees-and-lifting-sunday-restrictions/35866439

https://www.kob.com/albuquerque-news/new-mexico-governor-signs-bill-allowing-alcohol-delivery-license-overhaul/6045447/?cat=500

https://www.krqe.com/news/politics-government/legislature/gov-lujan-grisham-signs-liquor-law-reform-bill-allowing-home-delivery-of-alcohol/

https://www.krqe.com/news/education/voters-to-decide-childhood-education-proposal/

CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT FOR EARLY CHILDHOOD PERMANENT FUND

On Thursday, March 18, House Joint Resolution 1 (HJR 1) calling for a constitutional amendment to create a permanent fund for early childhood education programs passed the State Senate.

The bill is considered landmark legislation because it creates a permanent fund for early childhood education. The enactment of the Constitutional Amendment has the potential to transform and expand childhood education programs and provide additional support for K-12 across the state. The funding distribution is from New Mexico’s land grant permanent fund. For years, attempts have been made to dip into the state’s permanent fund which is currently valued at upwards $22 billion for early childhood programs. The Constitutional Amendment will be placed on the ballot as a Constitutional Amendment for the voters to decide its enactment.

As enacted HJR 1 would take an additional 1.25% from the Land Grant Permanent Fund and put it towards child education. The proposal would send an additional $127 million a year for early childhood education programs and an extra $85 million a year for Kindergarten to 12-grade schools. Roughly $33 million would also go to other beneficiaries of the Land Grant Permanent Fund, like the New Mexico Military Institute and the School for the Deaf, just to name a couple. The House has to first agree with some of the changes made before it heads to the voters.

Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham had this to say:

“I know I am not alone in feeling humbled and awe-struck by the transformational potential of today’s action at the Capitol. We are talking about comprehensively uplifting generations – generations – of New Mexican children and families. We are talking about fundamentally changing the historical trajectory of our state. This is a big deal, the big deal.”

State Senator Pete Campos had this to say:

“This bill is about what every child deserves, and that is the best that we can give them so that as they move forward they have a vision and they have purpose, ensuring that their families have a bright future.”

https://www.koat.com/article/landmark-investment-in-new-mexicos-children-passes-senate/35880118

CIVIL RIGHTS ACT ENACTED

On Wednesday, March 16, the House adopted the New Mexico Civil Rights bill HB 4 agreeing with Senate changes on a 41-26 vote and sent it to the governor’s desk. HB 4 enacts a new civil rights act and ends qualified immunity as a defense in state civil courts and allows individuals whose civil rights have been violated to bring a case for remedy in state court. The New Mexico Civil Rights bill sets a cap of $2 million for remedy. There is no cap on damages in civil rights actions brought in federal courts and “qualified immunity” is available.

The original bill was amended to make attorney’s fees subject to judicial review and added that a claimant suing law enforcement must notify the police of the lawsuit within one year after an alleged event occurs. The notice provision was assed so law enforcement could begin recovering records and conducting interviews. The enacted bill allows a potential claim up to three years to be brought to the court. Only an event that occurs after July 1, 2021 is actionable.

https://www.koat.com/article/civil-rights-act-headed-to-governors-desk/35868371

PUBLIC FUNDING FOR JUDICIAL OFFICES

Senate Bill 160 passed making New Mexico the first state to extend public campaign financing to district judges. Since 2008, New Mexico has had a publicly finance system for those running for Supreme Court and Court of Appeals seats public financing since 2008. SB 160 passed the Senate on a party-line 22-13 vote.

The importance of the bill is that it would result in more transparency, reduce the appearance of impropriety of lawyers contributing to judicial campaigns of judges they appear before that gives an impression of a pay-to-play system of justice. To qualify for the public finance, candidates would have to obtain a number of small contributions from voters with the exact figure dependent on the judicial district they were running in.

Candidates for District Judge will get distributions from a public election fund that is financed in part by proceeds from unclaimed property, such as abandoned personal bank accounts and stocks. The amount of public finance candidates received will be based on numbers of registered voters eligible to cast ballots in their races. A fiscal analysis of the bill estimated it could cost $950,000 to provide the public funds to an average number of District Court candidates during an election year.

REPEAL OF 1969 ABORTION BAN

On Friday, February 26, Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham signed Senate Bill 9 repealing the 1969 state statute that criminalized abortion. 1969 law criminalized abortion to end a woman’s pregnancy except in certain circumstances, such as rape and incest. The 1969 state statute has not enforced been in the state due to the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Roe v Wade in the 1970s, which legalized abortion nationwide.

The repeal of the 1969 law was necessitated by the fact the repeated attempts have been made over the years to have the United States Supreme Court reverse the decision of Roe v Wade. With the appointment of 3 very conservative supreme justices over the last 4 years, the reversal of Roe v. Wade is becoming more and more likely by the Supreme Court, in which case New Mexico’s 1969 law would again become law in the state.

AID IN DYING

House Bill 47 called the “End-of-Life Options Act” passed both the Senate and House and the Governor has said she will sing it. It allows terminally ill patients of sound mind to ask a physician to prescribe drugs to help them die, led to impassioned arguments. Proponents said people should have the right to a peaceful death, while opponents said life should be respected and raised concerns about misuse. Previous attempts to pass such legislation failed. , but this year’s effort made it across the finish line. The governor has said she will sign it.

https://www.abqjournal.com/2370378/lawmakers-send-aid-in-dying-bill-to-lujan-grisham.html

NEW MEXICO TRAPPING BAN

On Thursday, March 18, the New Mexico House voted 35-34 in favor of Senate Bill 32, a proposal to ban traps, snares and wildlife poisons on public land. Three hours of intense debate that touched on ranching, outdoor recreation and animal cruelty. The proposal has already passed the Senate on a 23-16 vote and it now goes to Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham for her signature to become law. If signed by the Governor, the bill would go into effect April 1 next year.

The measure is called “Roxy’s Law” after a dog strangled to death by a snare during a 2018 hike. Senate Bill 32 was described by supporters as a commonsense step that would prevent the suffering of pets caught or killed in traps and snares. If signed into law, it will be illegal to use a trap, snare or wildlife poison “for purposes of capturing, injuring or killing an animal on public land.” The bill has exceptions for Native American ceremonies and ecosystem management by government agencies. Cage traps would also be permitted in some circumstances.

Opposition to Senate Bill 32 was strong by the ranching community arguing that traps are a reasonable way to manage predators. Cattle for example can be captured and then fall prey to wild predators such as coyotes. According to Animal Protection Voters and Wild Earth Guardians, during the current trapping season, at least nine dogs have been caught in privately set traps and snares on public land.

https://www.abqjournal.com/2371274/lawmakers-take-up-trapping-ban-for-public-lands.html

CAPITAL OUTLAY AND TRANSPARENCY ON INFRASTRUCTURE FUNDING

Dozens of infrastructure and other projects around the state will receive a combined $517 million in capital outlay funding under House Bill 285. Under House Bill 55, The Legislature would be required to publish a searchable database showing how each lawmaker spends capital outlay dollars.

The goal of House Bill 55 is to bring transparency to the state’s process for funding public infrastructure projects, passed the Senate 40-0 and passed the House 65-1 and the Governor is expected to sign it.

Think New Mexico has been advocating for making the state’s capital outlay system more transparent ever since we published our 2015 report, which called for overhauling the way New Mexico funds infrastructure projects. Two years ago, legislation that would have disclosed the legislative sponsors of every capital outlay appropriation passed the House but failed by just a handful of votes in the Senate. Last week, we were given 1,000 to 1 odds of passing House Bill 55 this year.

As New Mexico In Depth wrote, when the bill is signed into law, the public will finally be able to see “how individual lawmakers spend millions of dollars in most years — a far cry from the secrecy that has surrounded such decision making at the Roundhouse for as long as people can remember.”

PAID SICK LEAVE

House Bill 20, known as the Healthy Workplaces Act, calls for paid sick leave to be a right and not a privilege. House Bill 20 was narrowly approved by both the House and Senate.

Under the bill, private employers in the state would be required to provide workers at least one hour of paid sick leave for every 30 hours they work, or 64 hours per year. The bill provides that the longer the employee has been with the company, the more time off they will accrue.

Supporters of the measure described it as a basic protection for employees, particularly low-wage earners who sometimes have to choose between going to work sick or risk losing their jobs. Opponents argued it would hurt small businesses, particularly those still struggling to get back on their feet after the economic fallout from the coronavirus pandemic.

A legislative fiscal impact report of the bill reported that earned sick leave could be used for any type of personal or family member illness or health condition or medical care, curative or preventive, including to attend school meetings related to a child’s disability and absences connected to domestic violence, sexual assault or stalking of the employee or a family member. The bill also establishes supplemental sick leave during a public health emergency of 80 hours or twice the weekly number of hours for part-time employees.

The bill lists numerous purposes, including ensuring that all employees can address their personal and family health and safety needs and reducing health care costs and promoting preventive health services by enabling employees to seek early and routine medical care. The bill also addresses the concern that many New Mexico employees currently have no access to sick leave.

Employers would be subject to monetary penalties for violating the proposed law. Not at all surprising HB 20 generated opposition from business groups arguing it would create a right to paid sick leave for all employees in New Mexico. Republican lawmakers pushed to exempt employers with fewer than 10 employees.

https://www.santafenewmexican.com/news/legislature/new-mexico-house-passes-paid-sick-leave-bill/article_99ea8da2-7863-11eb-b1c5-e721194a1a9e.html

https://www.krqe.com/news/politics-government/legislature/roundhouse-roundup-paid-sick-leave-bill-passes-2021-session-wraps/

REDISTRICTNG LEGISLATION

On March 30, the state House reached agreement Senate Bill 304 which is bipartisan legislation that would establish an independent redistricting committee to propose new legislative and congressional districts. The proposal passed the House on a 64-2 vote. The proposal adopts the elements of several competing redistricting measures. It calls for a seven-member committee that would hold hearings throughout New Mexico and propose maps based on new census data.

The legislation bars the committee from considering party registration data in crafting the proposed boundaries, and the panel couldn’t consider the voting addresses of candidates or incumbents, except to avoid pairing of incumbents, if possible. The proposal would start the process this summer with an independent committee led by a retired judge or justice. No more than three of the seven members could be from the same party. Lawmakers could amend or change the maps in the special session, but they would start with the committee’s proposals.

https://www.abqjournal.com/2371821/house-sends-bipartisan-redistricting-bill-to-senate.html

NO HAIR DISCRIMINATION:

Senate Bill 80 passed both chambers which prohibits discipline or discrimination based on a student’s race or culture because of a hairstyle or headdress

BROADBAND

Senate Bll 93 passed both the Senate and House and will create a central state agency to develop and upgrade New Mexico’s broadband system. Despite investments of hundreds of millions of dollars, access to broadband services has remained spotty for many New Mexicans. SB 93 awaits the governor’s signature.

SUMMARY OF WHAT FAILED

Following is a listing of major legislation the failed to pass the session.

RECREATIONAL USE OF CANNABIS FAILS WITH SPECIAL SESSION TO BE CONVENED

The biggest disappointment of the 2021 New Mexico Legislature was the State Senate to take up a final vote of House Bill 12 which would legalize the recreational use of cannabis.

It passed the Senate Judiciary Committee on a 5-4 vote and advanced to the full Senate for a final vote. House Bill 12 emphasizes government oversight of pricing and supplies along with social services for communities. Under the bill, the Regulation and Licensing Department will get discretion to select a plant limit, require independent testing of potency and prohibit producers from stacking licenses to prevent monopolies.

The major provisions of the bill in final form were:

• Recreational cannabis will be legal in 2022.

• There will be a maximum 20% tax on all sales.

• The state will regulate sellers.

• There will be no limits on the amount of license issued.

• People who have been convicted of possessing it for personal use will have their criminal record expunged.

• There will be a cap on the number of plants sellers can grow as determined by the Department of Regulation and Licensing.

Had the full Senate adopted HB 12, New Mexico would be the 16th state to legalize recreational marijuana. Projections show that recreational cannabis sales in the state could total as much as $318 million in the first year alone. Governor Lujan Grisham has indicated supports the legislation.

Links to media coverage are here:

https://www.koat.com/article/recreational-cannabis-is-expected-to-cross-the-finish-line/35878644

https://www.kob.com/albuquerque-news/bill-legalizing-recreational-marijuana-advances-to-senate-floor-/6046136/?cat=500

https://www.krqe.com/news/politics-government/legislature/senate-judiciary-committee-set-to-hear-bill-legalizing-recreational-marijuana/

On Friday, March 19, the Governor’s office issued a statement that a special session is ‘on the table’ if the Recreational Cannabis did not pass by Saturday at noon. The Governor’s office announced that within 2 weeks a special session will be called for the legalization of recreational use of cannibus.

https://www.koat.com/article/governors-office-says-special-session-is-on-the-table/35890847

LEGISLATION THAT FAILED

The online news agency New Mexico Political Report published an excellent summation of the legislation that failed in the 2021 legislative session. Below is the summation followed by the link to the report.

“Payday loans: A bill that would have reined in what many call predatory lending died after the House and Senate failed to agree on how much interest storefront lenders could charge on small loans. The Senate approved Senate Bill 66, which would have capped the interest rate on storefront loans at 36 percent. But the House amended the bill to allow a 99 percent interest rate on loans of less than $1,100.

Curbing gubernatorial powers: Following a year of contentious government-ordered shutdowns amid the pandemic, House Bill 139 and Senate Bill 74, which would ensure the Legislature played a role in any future emergency order by the governor, went nowhere.

Open primaries: House Bill 79, which would have opened up the state’s primary elections to New Mexico voters who aren’t affiliated with a major political party, failed to make it to the House floor for a vote, dying early in the committee process.

Clean fuel standards: A bill that would reduce New Mexico’s carbon footprint by implementing a statewide clean fuel standard cleared the Senate but did not get taken up by the full House. Opponents argued Senate Bill 11 would lead to higher gas prices, but supporters disputed that notion, saying similar laws enacted by other states have not caused fuel prices to spike.

Prison reform: House Bill 352 and House Bill 40 would have prohibited the state or counties from entering into any new contract with a private company to run a jail, prison or juvenile facility. Both got stuck awaiting a hearing in the House Appropriations and Finance Committee.

Dam repairs: The safety of New Mexico’s dams has raised concerns among lawmakers and safety experts for two years, following the release of state and federal reports about poor conditions. Sen. Pete Campos, D-Las Vegas, introduced legislation committing $100 million to repairs. But Senate Bill 138 never got past the Senate Finance Committee.

Changing the Legislature: Senate Joint Resolution 273 would have let voters decide whether to limit how many terms a state lawmaker could serve. House Joint Resolution 12 would have let voters decide whether to give the State Ethics Commission the power to set government officials’ salaries — including for state lawmakers, who are currently volunteers. And House Joint Resolution 13 would have asked voters if the Legislature should extend its 30-day session in even-numbered years to 45. None of the measures made it through both chambers.

Cigarette tax: A bill that would have added $2 to the price of a pack of cigarettes stalled in a Senate committee. Senate Bill 197 also would have increased the excise tax for other tobacco products, such as chewing tobacco, as well as e-liquids and closed system cartridges for electronic cigarettes.

Social Security tax break: What senior relying on Social Security income wouldn’t embrace a plan to exclude those checks from taxes? Two efforts — House Bill 49 and Senate Bill 78 — got stuck in tax and revenue committees. Some Senate Republicans tried, without success, to renew them Friday during a lengthy debate on tax reform.

Cage-free eggs: It wasn’t sunny side up for legislation to require that eggs produced or sold in New Mexico be cage-free. Senate Bill 347 became another casualty of the backlog of bills in the Senate Judiciary Committee, where the measure languished for three weeks.

PERA reform: A bill that would have significantly altered the New Mexico Public Employees Retirement Association Board of Trustees, House Bill 162, never got out of committee. The board, beset by infighting, oversees a nearly $17 billion retirement fund for about 92,000 New Mexico state workers and retirees.

Mandatory minimum sentences: Lawmakers backing House Bill 293, to eliminate mandatory minimum sentences for many crimes, asked a committee to essentially kill it early in the session after Republican Party leaders blasted them for trying to cut a break to sex offenders who harm children. The intent was to give judges more leeway in sentencing defendants.

Financial literacy: Two efforts to require public school students to take a half-credit class in money management stalled — House Bill 302 in a House committee and House Bill 63 on the Senate floor. Lawmakers in both parties and both legislative chambers were generally supportive of the measures.

Graduation credits: Legislation changing the type of credits high schoolers would need to graduate stalled in the Senate Education Committee — though lawmakers vowed to study the issue in the interim. House Bill 83 would have dropped the number of required credits, allowed students more leeway in choosing electives and let them bypass Algebra 2.

Veteran discrimination: House Bill 113 started off strong, soaring through the House. But the bill meant to ensure someone could not be discriminated against for being a military veteran — particularly one wrestling with post-traumatic stress disorder — got stuck in the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Time change: A bill that might have ended twice-yearly clock changes in the state died in the House Commerce and Economic Development Committee days before the session ended. Senate Bill 102 would have made Mountain Daylight Time the permanent year-round time if enabling federal legislation on the issue were passed.

Reducing hunger: A measure that would have created a plan to reduce hunger in New Mexico failed to make it out of the House. House Bill 207 would have required state agencies to work with community and agricultural leaders on a commission tasked with creating an annual plan to decrease food needs.

Chop shops: Illegal chop shops that dismantle stolen vehicles to sell for parts would face stiffer penalties under a bill approved by the House. House Bill 145 idled in the Senate Judiciary Committee. The measure would make the dismantling of stolen vehicles a third-degree felony.

Red-flag law changes: Much to the disappointment of gun violence prevention advocates, a bill to expand New Mexico’s so-called red-flag gun law became a victim of more pressing priorities. House Bill 193 sought to amend the Extreme Risk Firearm Protection Order Act by adding law enforcement officers to the list of people who could seek a court order to temporarily take firearms from a person considered a threat.”

https://nmpoliticalreport.com/2021/03/21/what-passed-what-didnt-during-the-legislative-session/

COMMENTARY AND ANLYSIS

By all accounts, the 2021 New Mexico Legislature was productive but only historical as to the manner in which it was conducted. It was productive because many long serving conservative Senate Democrats lost their bids for another term resulting in more progressive legislations making it through.

It was historic session because the public was not allowed into the state capitol building but were allowed to participate by virtually by “zoom” with most or all committee hearings also held by zoom. It was reported that upwards of 20,000 members of the public participated virtually.

What will be historical will be if the special session to be called by the Governor in a few days results in New Mexico becoming the 16 state to legalize the recreational use of cannabis.

On Saturday, March 20 at 12:00 noon, the 2021 New Mexico Legislative session comes to an end. Upwards of 110 pieces of legislation have been passed by both the House and Senate. Thus far, Governor Michell Lujan Grisham has signed 10 of those bills This blog article highlights a few of those bills including the recreational use of cannabis which is still pending and the enactment of New Mexico Civil Rights Act, the Elizabeth Whitefield End of Life Options Act.

RECREATIONAL USE OF CANNABIS

On March 18, in the early morning hours, House Bill 12 that would legalize the recreational use of cannabis passed the Senate Judiciary Committee on a 5-4 vote. It now advances to the full Senate for a final vote. House Bill 12 emphasizes government oversight of pricing and supplies along with social services for communities. Under the bill, the Regulation and Licensing Department will get discretion to select a plant limit, require independent testing of potency and prohibit producers from stacking licenses to prevent monopolies.

As the bill currently stands:

• Recreational cannabis will be legal in 2022
• There will be a maximum 20% tax on all sales
• The state will regulate sellers
• There will be no limits on the amount of license issued
• People who have been convicted of possessing it for personal use will have their criminal record expunged
• There will be a cap on the number of plants sellers can grow as determined by the Department of Regulation and Licensing.

Representative Andrea Romero, D-Santa Fe, who was one of three sponsors had this to say:

“(We will be) regulating something that we know is safe, that we know what the product is, that we no longer have to have an illicit market provide for that for something that is and has been proven time and time again that is not only medically safe for patients who need this medication, but for those who are interested using it recreationally.”

The Senate Judiciary Committee further voted to table, and thereby kill, a Republican-sponsored proposal that stressed low taxes and cheap consumer prices to eliminate to illicit marijuana.

If the full Senate adopts HB 12, New Mexico would be the 16th state to legalize recreational marijuana. Projections show that recreational cannabis sales in the state could total as much as $318 million in the first year alone. Governor Lujan Grisham has indicated supports the legislation.

Links to media coverage are here:

https://www.koat.com/article/recreational-cannabis-is-expected-to-cross-the-finish-line/35878644

https://www.kob.com/albuquerque-news/bill-legalizing-recreational-marijuana-advances-to-senate-floor-/6046136/?cat=500

https://www.krqe.com/news/politics-government/legislature/senate-judiciary-committee-set-to-hear-bill-legalizing-recreational-marijuana/

CIVIL RIGHTS ACT ENACTED

On Wednesday, March 16, the House adopted the New Mexico Civil Rights bill HB 4 agreeing with Senate changes on a 41-26 vote and sent it to the governor’s desk. HB 4 enacts a new civil rights act and ends qualified immunity as a defense in state civil courts and allows individuals whose civil rights have been violated to bring a case for remedy in state court. The New Mexico Civil Rights bill sets a cap of $2 million for remedy. There is no cap on damages in civil rights actions brought in federal courts and “qualified immunity” is available.

The original bill was amended to make attorney’s fees subject to judicial review and added that a claimant suing law enforcement must notify the police of the lawsuit within one year after an alleged event occurs. The notice provision was assed so law enforcement could begin recovering records and conducting interviews. The enacted bill allows a potential claim up to three years to be brought to the court. Only an event that occurs after July 1, 2021 is actionable.

https://www.koat.com/article/civil-rights-act-headed-to-governors-desk/35868371

LIQUOR REFORM BECOMES LAW

On Wednesday, March 16, Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham has signed House Bill 255, which will allow home delivery of alcohol by restaurants. Identification checks will be mandatory for all deliveries. Alcohol delivery permits can be issued to retailers, dispensers, craft distillers, winegrowers, small brewers and restaurant licensees.

Under the new law liquor licenses will be more affordable and accessible for those business owners seeking to obtain one. The bill will also provide a significant tax deduction among other protections for existing license holders in recognition of their investment.

As part of the legislation, the Department of Health is directed to conduct a study of the effects of alcohol delivery in the state in several years. Following revisions in both chambers, the bill also makes licenses more affordable and accessible while providing for a significant tax deduction among other protections for existing license holders to recognize their investment.

The bill lifts the restrictions on alcohol sales that had been imposed on Sundays and prohibits the sale of miniature bottles of liquor for off-site consumption. Additionally, the legislation prohibits wine and spirit sales at gas stations in McKinley County.

The bill was sponsored by members of both parties, led by Sen. Daniel Ivey-Soto and Rep. Antonio “Moe” Maestas, and including Rep. Dayan Hochman-Vigil, Rep. Javier Martinez, Rep. Rod Montoya and Rep. Joshua Hernandez.

Governor Lujan Grisham released the following statement:

“As lawmakers from both parties said over the course of debate, this was an example of productive and creating problem-solving, with well-considered and compassionate and careful arguments made on both sides of a complicated and charged issue. … Like any bipartisan compromise, at the end of the day, most if not all will feel both that they got some of what they wanted and had to give some of what they didn’t. Ultimately, I side with those who argued that reform, after so many decades, is more than warranted, and that these reforms, in particular, will move us forward as a state – not only by providing an important new revenue stream for the restaurant and hospitality industry but by making this industry more accessible to more New Mexicans while including important safeguards.”

https://www.koat.com/article/gov-signs-bill-allowing-alcohol-delivery-reducing-license-fees-and-lifting-sunday-restrictions/35866439

https://www.kob.com/albuquerque-news/new-mexico-governor-signs-bill-allowing-alcohol-delivery-license-overhaul/6045447/?cat=500

https://www.krqe.com/news/politics-government/legislature/gov-lujan-grisham-signs-liquor-law-reform-bill-allowing-home-delivery-of-alcohol/

https://www.krqe.com/news/education/voters-to-decide-childhood-education-proposal/

CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT FOR EARLY CHILDHOOD PERMANENT FUND

On Thursday, March 18, House Joint Resolution 1 (HJR 1) calling for a constitutional amendment to create a permanent fund for early childhood education programs passed the State Senate.

The bill is considered landmark legislation because it creates a permanent fund for early childhood education. The enactment of the Constitutional Amendment has the potential to transform and expand childhood education programs and provide additional support for K-12 across the state. the funding distribution is from New Mexico’s land grant permanent fund. For years, attempts have been made to dip into the state’s permanent fund which is currently valued at upwards $22 billion for early childhood programs. The Constitutional Amendment will be placed on the ballot as a Constitutional for the voters to decide its enactment.

As enacted HJR 1 would take an additional 1.25% from the Land Grant Permanent Fund and put it towards child education. The proposal would send an additional $127 million a year for early childhood education programs and an extra $85 million a year for Kindergarten to 12-grade schools. Roughly $33 million would also go to other beneficiaries of the Land Grant Permanent Fund, like the New Mexico Military Institute and the School for the Deaf, just to name a couple. The House has to first agree with some of the changes made before it heads to the voters.

Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham had this to say:

“I know I am not alone in feeling humbled and awe-struck by the transformational potential of today’s action at the Capitol. We are talking about comprehensively uplifting generations – generations – of New Mexican children and families. We are talking about fundamentally changing the historical trajectory of our state. This is a big deal, the big deal.”

State Senator Pete Campos had this to say:

“This bill is about what every child deserves, and that is the best that we can give them so that as they move forward they have a vision and they have purpose, ensuring that their families have a bright future.”

https://www.koat.com/article/landmark-investment-in-new-mexicos-children-passes-senate/35880118

END OF LIFE BILL ENACTED

On Tuesday, March 16, New Mexico legislators granted final approval to a bill that would establish an End-of-Life Options Act, sending it to Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham. The measure allows patients with a terminal illness to seek a doctor’s help to end their life. The patient would have to be able to self-administer the life-ending medicine.

https://www.abqjournal.com/2370378/lawmakers-send-aid-in-dying-bill-to-lujan-grisham.html

COMMENTARY

Although a full day remains in the 2021 session, there is still time to act on major bills that could very easily make the 2021 session one of the most meaningful in state history.