The Local Election Act (LEA) was passed by the New Mexico Legislature in 2018. The Local Election Act provides for consolidated local elections to be conducted in New Mexico. November 5, 2019 will be the first consolidated elections for the City of Albuquerque, the Villages of Tijeras and Los Ranchos de Albuquerque, the Albuquerque Public School Board, CNM, the Albuquerque Metropolitan Arroyo Flood Control District and the Ciudad Soil and Water Conservation Board. Voters will get one ballot for the races that pertain to them when they go to vote based on their voter registration.

On Tuesday, August 27, 2019, candidates were required to file Declarations of Candidacies providing them with the opportunity to withdraw or to confirm their candidacies. Following are the candidates for office as confirmed by the Bernalillo County Clerk’s Office:

ALBUQUERQUE CITY COUNCIL

District 2

Joseph Griego
Zackary Quintero
Robert Raymond Blanquera Nelson
Isaac Benton, Incumbent
Connie Vigil
Steven Baca

District 4

Athena Ann Christodoulou
Ane C. Romero
Brook L. Bassan

District 6

Patrick M. Davis, Incumbent
Gina Naomi Dennis

District 8
S. Maurreen Skowran
Trudy E. Jones, Incumbent

ALBUQUERQUE PUBLIC SCHOOL BOARD

District 1
Yolanda M. Cordova
Madelyn A. Jones

District 2
Lauretta J. Harris
Peggy L. Muller-Aragon

District 4
Barbara E. Petersen
Laura W. Carlson
Verland O. Coker

NEW MEXICO COMMUNITY COLLEGE (CNM)

CNM Board District 2
James A. Chavez

CNM Board District 4
Annette Chavez y de la Cruz

CNM Board District 6
Layne E. McAdoo
Virginia Lopez Trujillo

Ciudad Soil and Water Conservation District –
Position 1 Supervisor
Maria Christina Young

Position 2 Supervisor
Thomas Ivey Allen

Position 5 At-Large Supervisor
Daniel F. Lyon
Daniel A. Conklin

Albuquerque Metropolitan Arroyo Flood Control Area (AMAFCA)

District 3 Director
Tim Eichenberg

District 4 Director
Ronald Duffield Brown

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

Historically, city elections, school board elections, and New Mexico Community College, and Arroyo Flood Control District elections have occurred at different times throughout the year, they have been very costly and have historically low voter turn outs and at times in the single digits of the percentage of those registered to vote.
The consolidated elections should result in a significantly higher voter turnout and result in a reduced amount of money to pay for only one election as opposed to 4 or 5 elections.

Recently, APD Deputy Chief Mike Smathers of the APD Administrative Services Bureau announced to the Civilian Police Oversight Board that APD has submitted the long-anticipated proposal to the Mayor’s Office to reduce overtime spending within APD. The proposal includes capping officer’s total number of overtime hours at 25 hours per week. Currently, there is a cap of 25 hours on Chief’ Overtime pay and no cap on the other overtime police officers can work.

On January 24, 2019 , the Albuquerque Police Department (APD) said it was placing a “cap” on how much Chief’s Overtime police officers can work in a week. “Chief’s overtime” is where private businesses pay to have an officer on site but where the APD Chief selects the APD Officer to do the overtime. APD charges the business and then pays the officer. “Chief’s Overtime” has been controversial with arguments made by police oversight civilian advocates that the city is subsidizing private businesses over the best interest of areas of the city with high crime rates. Last year, more than 100 businesses took part in chief’s overtime, and for a time APD officers were allowed to work as much chief’s overtime as they wanted.

https://www.krqe.com/news/albuquerque-metro/apd-places-limit-on-hours-of-overtime-officers-can-work-each-week/1724891754?fbclid=IwAR1UMy6HjOrG4YSVsz5ofIs4klWAu1BunYm6fD–417kuSgf9m4k2rN6G_0

In the 2018-2019 fiscal year which ended June 30, 2019, APD spent over $17 million on overtime which was nearly double the $9 million budgeted. For the new fiscal year that started July 1, 2019, the overtime appropriation was increased to over $11.4 million. According to an APD spokesman, that still will not be enough.

APD POLICE OFFICER OVERTIME PROPOSAL

There are nearly a dozen different types of overtime programs within the APD. The categories where APD Officers can earn overtime include holiday work, tac-plan initiatives, training, call outs, calls for service, special events, administrative work, investigations, and court appearances. DWI check points and special events like the Balloon Fiesta and security detail for high profile dignitary visits are all events that require an extensive amount of overtime. The police union contract entitles a police officer to be paid time and a half when overtime is worked on any given day or week.

The new proposal is to mandate the standard 40 hour work and once the 40 hours are worked allow 25 hours overtime at time and a half for a total of 65 hours. The 25 hours of overtime will include chief’s overtime, training, administrative duties and calls for service. The 25 hours of overtime will not include time officers spend in court for the reason such time cannot be controlled by APD.

According to Deputy Chief Smathers, the overtime policy will rearrange training and special event schedules to be more efficient. APD’s goal is to have the overtime policy implemented by the end of August. The Mayor’s office and the City’s Chief Administrative Officer Sarita Nair must approve the plan. Once approved, it will be implemented with a special order issued by APD Chief Geier. The new overtime policy must also be reviewed by the Independent Federal Court Monitor appointed by the Federal Court to oversee the Court Approved Settlement Agreement (CASA).

Smathers said the new overtime policy does not focus on overtime accrued during calls for service or court hearings, saying they are very unpredictable. The overtime policy instead looks at the time officers spend doing administrative work, training and community and special events. The goal is to eliminate training overtime through better scheduling and shift adjustments. According to Smathers, APD is developing a data program that supervisors can review to see which officers are working the most overtime.

Deputy Chief Smathers told the Civilian Police Oversight Board:

“Previously, we looked at the time in isolation, just overtime, just chief’s overtime. … So we’re looking at it all together, because at the end of the day they’re working X number of hours in total. … That’s a lot for men and women where you’re having these expectations that the next time you come to work, you’re able to be in a pursuit, use force, make critical decisions and have critical thinking skills. … I honestly believe once we are able to fine-tune these processes, we’ll be able to switch and move over aspects of overtime spending within APD and find some savings there. … [In situations where an officer is perpetually working a lot of overtime] it will be our hope that the commander will have a discussion and speak with that person [and find out why.] … The hope is to instill a better work-life balance among the officers. ”

https://www.abqjournal.com/1355755/plan-to-reduce-apd-overtime-in-the-works.html

124 OF 250 TOP PAID CITY HALL EMPLOYEES ARE POLICE OFFICERS

At the end of each calendar year, City Hall releases the top 250 wage earners at city hall.

The list of 250 top city hall wages earners is what is paid for the full calendar year of January 1 to December 31 of any given year.

The listing of the city’s 250 top wage earners for the calendar year 2018 includes 124 APD sworn police as the top wage city hall wage earners, earning more than most department directors as well as the APD Chief and all of his Deputy Chiefs.

The list of 124 include patrol officers first class, sergeants, lieutenants, commanders the deputy chiefs, and the chief with annual pay for the year 2018 ranging from $101,000 a year up to $192,937 all under the Keller Administration.

Base yearly pay for sworn police, depending upon rank and years of experience, is $60,320 to $83,200.

The base pay does not include longevity bonus pay at the end of a year of between $2,600 to $15,600 contingent on years of experience.

Following is a breakdown of the numbers of police officers paid in excess of $100,000 in calendar year 2018 as a result of overtime paid:

6 police officers were paid $151,313 TO $192,000
24 police officers were paid $126,162.80 to $144,510.44.
27 police officers were paid $113,498.98 to $125,088.48
22 police officers were paid $109,315.89 to $112,516.27
25 police officers were paid $105,076.20 to $108,946.45
21 police officers were paid $101,633.11 to $104,987.69

POLICE OVERTIME REPORT

In January, an APD “Overtime Evaluation Final Report” was released. The report was prepared by the city with input from APD and city payroll managers. Input for the report was also given by officials from the District Court and the District Attorney’s Office regarding court appearance requirements and officer interviews and trial preparation.

The Overtime Evaluation Final Report revealed that APD overtime spending has steadily increased since 2014 at the same time the number of police officers went down. Crime in the city also increased during the same period. In 2018, there were 867 officers and nearly $14 million was spent on overtime pay. On June 17, 2019, APD announced that it has hired 116 police officers during the 2018-2019 fiscal year that ended June 30, 2019 and the department now has 981 full time sworn police.

According to the Overtime Evaluation Report, although overtime is “an inevitable part of police work,” managerial changes can help reduce costs and improve accountability. According to the report, in 2017 on average, 6% of officers stayed late during of their shifts. However, some officers stayed late more than a third of their shifts.

The report states:

“Reportedly, overtime has historically been used within APD as a morale booster. … This practice has resulted in overtime becoming almost an expectation. Understandably, given this history, management controls and accountability either do not exist or are not enforced. This lack of management is one of the key drivers of overtime costs.”

https://www.abqjournal.com/1355755/plan-to-reduce-apd-overtime-in-the-works.html

COURT APPEARANCES SOURCE OF OVERTIME

Historically, APD Patrol Officers First Class and Sergeants who work or are assigned to DWI unit or issue traffic citations are the ones that get paid an extensive amount of overtime. Under the union contract, APD Patrol Offers First Class get paid a minimum of 2 hours in overtime pay at time and a half when they appear in court on their days off for arraignment or trials, which is usually the case for DWI prosecutions.

DWI’s arrests are usually made during night shifts, but the arraignments and trials occur during the day in Metro Court entitling the officer to bill the hours of overtime per arraignment, plea, or trial. Arraignments are scheduled in Metro Court in mass and usually take no more than 15 minutes per individual person arraigned on charges. However, Police officers are required to wait prolong periods of time for cases to be called, most notably DWI cases.

The Traffic Court Arraignment program was established over 16 years ago where Assistant City Attorneys and paralegals are assigned to handle arraignments and plea agreements in traffic citation cases, thereby eliminating APD officers appearing in court on traffic cases. The Bernalillo County District Attorney’s Office also has a Metro Court Division with upwards of 22 full time Assistant District Attorneys.

MOST EGREGIOUS OVERTIME PAID

According to the listing of the 250 top paid city hall employees for 2018, APD Sergeant Simon Drobik, one of the many APD Public Information Officers, was paid $192,937 making him the number one top paid city hall employee for 2018. Drobik’s base pay is $31.50 per hour or $65,520 a year. (40 hour work week X 52 weeks in a year X $31.50 = $65,520.) APD claimed that APD Public Information Officer Simon Drobik works full-time as PIO during weekdays as his primary assignment, working 7 days a week, and he also works as a patrol officer entitling him to be paid for that position as well, holding down and being paid for two positions. Drobik regularly reported having worked more than 100 hours per week, according to his pay stubs.

https://www.abqjournal.com/1248553/ot-work-apd-spokesman-duties-lift-officers-pay-to-highest-in-city.html

EXCESSIVE OVERTIME CHRONIC PROBLEM

Police officers earning excessive overtime is nothing new. It has been going on for years and is very common knowledge. During the last 9 years, the Albuquerque Police Department has consistently gone over its overtime budget by millions. In fiscal year 2016, APD was funded for $9 million for over time but APD actually spent $13 million. A March, 2017 city internal audit of APD’s overtime spending found police officers taking advantage of a system that allows them to accumulate excessive overtime at the expense of other city departments. A city internal audit report released in March, 2017 revealed that the Albuquerque Police Department spent over $3.9 million over its $9 million “overtime” budget.

https://www.petedinelli.com/2018/03/30/apd-overtime-pay-abuse-and-recruitment-tool/

There are approximately 5,000 full time city hall employees. A review of the city’s 250 top earners in 2018 reveals that 140 are sworn police officers working for APD, mostly patrol officers first class. The 140 top wage city hall wage earners employed by the Albuquerque Police Department include patrol officers first class, sergeants, lieutenants, commanders the deputy chiefs, and the chief with annual pay ranging from $101,000 a year up to $192,937 a year.

Five (5) APD Senior Patrol Officers First Class are listed in the top 250 city wage earners for 2018 as being paid $166,692, $163,223, $160,692, $152,876 and $151,313 respectfully making them the 3rd, 5th, 7th, 10th, and 11th highest paid employees at city hall. The amounts paid in excess of $100,000 a year to patrol officers first class can be attributed mostly to overtime pay and “time and a half” paid.

(See City of Albuquerque website for full list of 250 top city wage earners).

TIME AND A HALF FOR OVERTIME IS CULPRIT

In 2018, the Keller Administration and the APD Union negotiated and agreed to a 2-year contract. The approved contract provides that the pay rate for officers with zero to 4 years of experience went from $28 to $29 an hour. Starting pay for an APD officer right out of the APD academy is $29 an hour.

Under the two-year contract, officers with 4 to 14 years of experience are paid $30 an hour. The new contract pays senior officers between $30 to $31.50 an hour. Officers with 15 years or more experience are paid $31.50 an hour. The rate for sergeants went from $32 to $35 an hour, and lieutenants pay went from $36.70 to $40.00 an hour.

Patrolman first class earning in excess of $100,000 a year can be easily explained using the $29 an hour base pay for officers with zero to 4 years of experience and starting pay for an APD officer right out of the APD academy.

The pay rate for patrol officers first class with zero to 4 years of experience is $29 an hour. A 40 hour work week is $60,320 yearly base salary calculated as follows: 40 hours a week X 52 weeks a year = 2,020 hours at $29.00 an hour = $60,320 yearly base salary.

Time and a half pay is $43.50 an hour ($29 divided by 2 = 14.50 + $28.00 = $43.50.) Overtime added is 25 hours a week X 52 weeks = 1,300 X $43.50 overtime pay an hour at time and a half per hour = $56, 550.

Base salary of $60,320 for 40-hour work week + $56,550 overtime for 25 hours a week = $116,870 total salary a year.

After the base salary is paid along with overtime paid, the city then pays longevity pay at the end of the year as follows:

For 5 years of experience: $100 will be paid bi-weekly, or $2,600 yearly
For 6 years of experience: $125 will be paid bi-weekly, or $3,250 yearly
For 7 to 9 years of experience: $225 will be paid bi-weekly, or $5,800 yearly
For 10 to 12 years of experience: $300 will be paid bi-weekly, or $7,800 yearly
For 13 to 15 years of experience: $350 will be paid bi-weekly, or $9,100 yearly
For 16 to 17 years or more: $450 will be paid bi-weekly, or $11,700 yearly
For 18 or more years of experience: $600 will be paid bi-weekly, 15,600 yearly.
(NOTE: Effective the first full pay period following July 1, 2019.)

ANALYSIS AND COMMENTARY

It is long overdue that APD places a cap on all police overtime worked. From a personnel management standpoint, when you have a select few that are taking the lion’s share of overtime, it causes moral problems with the rest. Excessive overtime paid is a red flag for abuse of the system, mismanagement of police resources and the lack of personnel. Excessive overtime for any police officer can lead to extreme fatigue, emotional burnout and reduce an officer’s alertness and response times and reflexes that can endanger lives and public safety.

When APD exceeds its overtime budget, it is to the detriment of other city departments and other city employees in that the funding must be found somewhere else to make it up, either by taking it from other departments and programs, budget cuts or cost saving measurements. APD has added 117 police officers over the last year as a result of increases in pay and an aggressive recruitment program. APD now has over 981 sworn police officers and overtime should be coming down, not going up, yet an APD spokesman is saying more overtime can be expected during the 2019-202o fiscal year that began July 1, 2019.

RECOMMENDATIONS

A complete restructuring of APD hourly wages to base salaries should be implemented. The city should do away with hourly wage and time and a half for overtime for sworn police and implement a salary structure based on steps and years of service. A system of overtime bonuses to be paid at the end of the year for accumulated increments of overtime should be implemented. Shift time to work would remain the same, but if more time is needed to complete work load, the employee works it for the same salary with no overtime and a modification of shift times for court appearances.

Salaries and step increase take away inflating overtime and motivates employees to get more done within the allotted shift or modification of shift times. Until the APD salary structure is changed, APD will always have patrol officers first class making two to four times their base salary and emotional burnout will be the norm endangering public safety.

Another option would be to implement an “on call” shift pool of officers who normally work desk duties, such as detectives, that could assist in holiday work, tac-plan initiatives, call outs, calls for service, and special events to take over from officers who have already worked a full 40 hours. The “on call” shift pool would be on a rotating basis and be mandatory for all APD sworn personnel. No overtime would be paid to the “on call” shift pool and the hours worked would be applied towards their regular 40-hour work week.

Deputy Chief Smathers saying his plan does not focus on overtime accrued during calls for service or court hearings because both are inevitable and unpredictable is disappointing and somewhat short sighted. As was noted, APD Patrol Officers First Class and Sergeants who work or are assigned to DWI unit or issue traffic citations are the ones that getting paid an extensive amount of overtime. Also, under the union contract, APD Patrol Offers First Class get paid a minimum of 2 hours in overtime pay at time and a half when they appear in court on their days off for arraignment or trials, which is usually the case for DWI prosecutions. It is short sided not to make more of an effort to get a handle and reduce the amount of overtime paid to the officers dealing with DWI and appearing in court, which are both sources of high overtime.

APD Patrol Officers First Class who handle DWI during nighttime shifts should be required to change their shift times to daytime shifts when the arraignments and trials occur to prevent overtime pay. As an alternative to DWI arraignments, the City Attorney’s Office should explore the possibility of expanding or modifying the Metro Traffic Arraignment Program with the Bernalillo County District Attorney’s Office assisting to include not just traffic citations but DWI arraignments to eliminate the need for APD officers to appear at arraignments.

CONCLUSION

The 25-hour overtime cap is a good first step. However, authorizing 65-hour work weeks as a matter of policy does not make much sense if you want to avoid extreme fatigue and emotional burnout.

It is likely given the amount of pay involved, more officers will want to work 65 hour work weeks, 40 at regular pay and 25 at time and a half. The 25-hour cap on overtime should be monthly, not weekly and an “on call” shift pool of officers should be created.

Albuquerque Democrats Mayor Tim Keller and Congresswoman Debra Harland released a joint video endorsing Democratic Albuquerque City Councilors Isaac (IKE) Benton and Pat Davis for another term to the Albuquerque City Council and newcomer Ane C. Romero in the District 4 City Council race. The joint endorsement has raised more than a few political eyebrows, especially among Democratic activists. The Debra Haaland endorsement in particular appears to be nothing more than a political payback to Pat Davis who endorsed her when she ran for congress. You can view the full video here:

https://www.facebook.com/BentonForABQ/videos/504381937059221/

In the video endorsement, both Mayor Keller and Congresswomen Haaland proclaim that Benton and Davis have been tremendous City Councilors and are in the best positions to move Albuquerque forward and stating “With the right leadership we truly can come together to be the best city we can be.” Keller has been in office for 21 months and Haaland has been in office 7 months, but they both think they know Davis and Benton have done such great jobs for the last 4 years that they need to be reelected.

IKE BENTON

Democrat Isaac (Ike) Benton is the District 2 City Councilor and was first elected to the council in 2005. Benton is a retired architect and avowed urbanist. Benton’s city council district includes a large area of downtown Central and the North Valley which leans left and is heavily Hispanic, yet he has shown more loyalty and cooperation with Republican causes than Democratic causes on the City Council. Benton ran unopposed in 2015. Democrat Isaac Benton has 4 Democratic opponents: Steve Baca (D), Joseph Griego (D), Robert Raymond Blanquera Nelson (D), Zack Quintero, (D). Connie Vigil is also running as an Independent. Nelson and Quintero have been political activists in the Democratic Party.

PAT DAVIS

Democrat City Councilor Pat Davis was elected to the Albuquerque City Council on October 6, 2015 to represent District 6. District 6 encompasses the International District, Mesa Del Sol, Nob Hill, Southeast Heights, and the University of New Mexico. Last year, Davis ran unsuccessfully for US Congress in the First Congressional District. Davis withdrew from the race when he polled at 3% and could not raise the money to run a viable campaign.

Before Davis withdrew from the congressional race, Davis had no problem accusing the then Democrat front runner former US Attorney for New Mexico Damon Martinez of being a “racist”, which was an absolute lie. Pat Davis endorsed Debra Haaland who went on to become elected to congress. Democrat Pat Davis has only one opponent: Gina Naomi Dennis a progressive Democrat, who is an attorney, a neighborhood activist and was a Bernie Sanders delegate to the Democratic Party National Convention in 2016.

District 4 Race

District 4 has 4 candidates who qualified for the ballot and running to replace Brad Winter. Those candidates are: Brook L. Bassen, Athena Ann Christodoulou, Ane C. Romero, Hailey Josselyn Roy. Winter has endorsed the sole Republican running who is Brook L. Bassen. The endorsement of Ane C. Romero was somewhat muted but none the less was made over other Democrats.

COMMENTARY AND ANAYSIS

“We stand with Ike” proclaimed Keller and Haaland in a joint endorsement of Benton. Hopefully, Keller and Haaland will stumble and fall flat on their faces with their endorsements of Ike Benton and Pat Davis. This is what you call political payback given the support Benton and Davis gave to Keller and Haaland when they were running for office themselves. Too bad. There are 3 very qualified and deserving Democrats running against Ike Benton and one solid progressive Democrat who is running against Pat Davis.

Both Keller and Haaland consider themselves “progressive democrats”. Their endorsements of Benton and Davis are ill advised and should have never been made, but they obviously want to act as “king makers” over the other Democrats. Keller in particular has now alienated two potential Democratic City Councilors whose votes he will need in the long run if his chosen two of Davis and Benton are not reelected.

DYNAMIC DUO VOTING LIKE REPUBLICANS

Isaac Benton and Pat Davis have acted more like Republicans and not the progressives they proclaim to be within the Democratic Party. They both have voting records that are more Republican than Democrat with their support of the disastrous ART Bus project and supporting final adoption of the ABC-Z comprehensive plan, now known as the Integrated Development Ordinance (IDO).

To be blunt, both Isaac Benton and Pat Davis need to voted out of office and be replaced with true progressive democrats. Davis has never apologized to former US Attorney Democrat Damon Martinez for calling him a racist when he ran for congress. Debra Haaland for her part had no problem with Davis calling Damon Martinez a racist and tolerated it and allowed it on her campaign letter head. Keller now ignores Davis calling Martinez a racist even though he hired Damon Martinez as a policy writer for the Albuquerque Police Department.

Both Davis and Benton proclaim to be “progressive democrats”. However, the Benton and Davis City Council voting records say otherwise. During the past four years, Albuquerque has suffered from record breaking high crime rates and the ART bus project without either Benton nor Davis even trying doing much to improve things, at least not until now when they want to be elected again.

There are at least 8 egregious specific votes Isaac Benton’s and Pat Davis’s that reveal the true voting record as going against core Democratic principles:

1. Councilors Benton and Davis voted repeatedly for the disastrous ART Bus project that has destroyed the character of Route 66. Both refused to advocate to put the ART Bus project on the ballot for public approval. Benton and Davis voted to spend federal grant money that had yet to be appropriated by congress. The ART Bus project has been a total disaster resulting the destruction of the character of Route 66. ART has a negative impact on Central resulting in several businesses going out of business. Many central businesses and Nob Hill businesses, no longer exist because of the ART Bus Project.

2. Both Benton and Davis voted to use $13 million dollars in revenue bonds to pay for the ART Bus project. The revenue bonds were not voted upon by the public. It was reported that the Albuquerque City Council borrowed over $63 million dollars over a two-year period to build pickle ball courts, baseball fields and the ART bus project down central by bypassing the voters. The $65 million dollars was borrowed with the Albuquerque City Councilors voting to use revenue bonds as the financing mechanism to pay for big capital projects.

https://www.abqjournal.com/919263/revenue-bonds-find-favor-in-abq.html

3. The Albuquerque City Council plays a crucial oversight role of the Albuquerque Police Department (APD) including controlling its budget. Benton and Davis did nothing when it comes to Albuquerque Police Department (APD) reforms and never challenged the previous Administration and the former APD command staff in any meaningful way demanding compliance with the Department of Justice (DOJ) consent decree reforms. Each time the Federal Court appointed Monitor presented his critical reports of APD to the City Council, Benton and Davis remained silent. Both declined to demand accountability from the Mayor and hold the APD command staff responsible for dragging their feet on the reforms. Both Benton and Davis have failed to attend a single one of the federal court hearings on the Court Approved Settlement Agreement (CASA).

4. Both Benton and Davis voted for the city ordinance amendments requiring equal pay for woman but failed to demand more. The amendments to the equal pay for woman ordinance sounded good and look good on paper but accomplished very little. The truth is that the equal pay for woman ordinance only applies to city contracts and those who do business with the city. The ordinance is voluntary and gives preferential treatment on city contracts to those who voluntarily comply. The equal pay for woman ordinance should apply to all businesses licensed to do business in Albuquerque, it should be mandatory for all businesses and enforced by city planning that issues business licenses and could be made so by the city council.

5. When he served on a task force to overhaul Albuquerque’s public fiancé laws, Pat Davis declined to advocate meaningful changes to our public finance laws making it easier for candidates to qualify for public finance. The only change both Davis and Benton agreed to was increasing the amount of money candidates get and not the process of collecting the donations to qualify and not expanding the time to collect qualifying donations. The lack of changes to the public finance laws favors incumbents like Davis and Benton and they have taken full advantage of it.

6. Davis advocated for enactment of the Healthy Workforce ordinance by voters which would have mandate the pay of sick leave by employers and was always there for a photo op with those organizations who pushed to get it on the ballot. However, both Benton and Davis never demanded the City Attorney’s office enforce the existing Albuquerque minimum wage ordinance, even when workers were forced to sue their employers. Davis and Benton claim to be in favor of increasing the minimum wage, but they have never demanded the Mayor nor the City Attorney to enforce the current city ordinance enacted by voters with a 2 to 1 margin.

7. On July 2, 2018 Democrat Mayor Tim Keller vetoed the $2.6 million economic development package that would help Topgolf to construct a $39 million entertainment complex at the site of the former Beach Waterpark. Benton and Davis went along with the City Council voting 8-1 to give the incentives after a 9-0 veto override Keller’s veto of a resolution expressing the city councils support. A few weeks later, Both Benton and Davis again voted to override Democrat Mayor Keller’s veto of the funding. Rather than give the new Democrat Mayor the benefit of the doubt, Benton and Davis voted to overturn the veto, but never once voted to overturn a veto of the previous Republican Mayor.

https://www.abqjournal.com/1192145/keller-vetoes-topgolf-economic-development-package.html

8. The most egregious votes by Benton and Davis was that they voted for the final adoption of the ABC-Z comprehensive plan which will have long term impact on our neighborhoods and favors developers. The enactment of the comprehensive plan was a major priority of Republican Mayor Berry and the development community pushed hard for its enactment before Berry left office. The ABC-Z project rewrite was nothing more than making “gentrification” an official city policy and the “gutting” of long-standing sector development plans by the development community to repeal those sector development plans designed to protect neighborhoods and their character. Benton, a retired architect knew better but refused to intervene on behalf of neighborhood interests.

CONCLUSION

What people should be sick of are Democrats acting and talking like Republicans especially after they get elected to positions like City Council and Mayor and arguing that they are being “nonpartisan”. Both City Councilors Isaac Benton and Pat Davis will say that they have done a great job as City Councilors by acting “non-partisan” and they needed to cooperate with Republicans to get things done, even though Democrats now hold a majority of 6-3 on the City Council and even though the Mayor is a Democrat.

There is a significant difference between cooperating and working with other elected officials from the opposite party and then being hypocritical and going against your own basic political philosophy of what you believe to be true and then turning around and acting and voting against that what you claim to believe in. What would be disappointing is if Davis and Benton are elected again saying they are Progressives Democrats when in fact they vote like conservative Republicans.

Mayor Tim Keller and Congresswoman Debra Haaland should have kept their egos desiring to be “king makers” and their endorsements to themselves. Keller and Haaland have now alienated the other very qualified Democrats running and their supporters they both will need for any reelection bid.

On Monday August 9, 2019, the Bernalillo County Commission passed the Employee Wellness Act on a 3-2 vote after a highly contentious meeting, hours of public discussion and board debate. The act is also referred to as the employer “paid sick leave ordinance.” The county ordinance does not go into effect until July 1, 2020 and then will only apply to businesses in the unincorporated areas of the county, including the East Mountains and the South Valley.

Many changes to the county ordinance were made before it was enacted. The changes included redefining the benefit as the less-specific “paid time off” and requiring a county administrative process before any alleged offender can be sued and limiting the financial penalties for an infraction. County officials said the “paid time off” change aligns with modern workplace benefits packages and reduces the administrative burden of tying leave to health or medical uses requiring a doctor’s statement.

The act requires businesses with at least 2 employees to provide workers with at least one hour of paid time off for every 32 hours worked. The county will phase in the mandate over several years. Under the phase in, the law does not entitle workers to accrue more than 24 hours of leave during the first year of implementation, 40 hours in the second year and 56 hours in the third year and beyond. The county ordinance does not prevent companies from offering more generous benefits.

https://www.abqjournal.com/1356209/county-commission-oks-paid-leave-ordinance.html

No businesses in the city will be required to provide sick leave under the ordinance.

DEMOCRATIC DYNAMIC DUO GETTING INTO THE ACT

A mere 4 days after the Bernalillo County Commission enacted the paid sick leave ordinance, Albuquerque City Councilors Pat Davis, District 6, and Isaac Benton, District 2, ordered an economic analysis of the paid sick leave legislation enacted by the county to see how it would work in Albuquerque. It was late in 2018 that Davis introduced a “paid sick leave” bill for the city council to consider. The paid sick leave ordinance has yet to have a committee hearing and make it to the full council for a vote. Davis said he knows his bill “lacks enough votes” on the nine-member council to pass it even though the council is controlled by a Democratic majority of 6 to 3 Republicans.

Davis claims he wants to change his 2018 proposed ordinance to make it identical to the county ordinance by saying:

“I do think the county’s bill strikes the right balance for businesses and workers, and everybody gets a little something. … If that’s what it takes to get us leave for all folks, I’m down for that. … There’s a real conversation about consistency, and how we apply the law between the city and the county … Even though the county legislation doesn’t have everything I’d like to have in it, there’s a good argument that the city law is consistent for employers and workers, no matter what side of the line they work on. … What this shows us is the county commission found a balance between business interests and workers that they could find majority support for. … That’s putting new pressure back on the other colleagues at the city council who have those same concerns.”

Benton for his part had this to say about the economic analysis he is requesting:

“Every worker deserves to have access to paid leave for life’s emergencies, and it makes sense that employees and businesses in both the city and the county should expect some consistency in our law. … This study will tell us if that is feasible. … No business can succeed with workers who can’t get time off when they need it. ”

https://www.abqjournal.com/1357478/city-of-abq-leaders-exploring-new-paid-leave-law.html

https://www.kob.com/albuquerque-news/two-city-councilors-advocate-to-adopt-countys-paid-time-off-rule/5469811/?cat=500

PREVIOUS ATTEMPTS VOTED DOWN

Two previous attempts to require paid sick leave in Albuquerque have failed, one at the city council level and one at the ballot .

Supporters of the paid sick leave ballot initiative known as the “Healthy Workforce Act” gathered enough valid signatures from registered voters to place the initiative on the ballot. The campaign needed 14,218 registered voter signatures but at least 24,000 signatures were gathered and submitted. Notwithstanding the success of getting the ordinance on the ballot, it failed and lost by a slim margin of about 600 votes.

The Healthy Workforce Act would have required business owners to pay one (1) hour of sick leave for every thirty (30) hours worked. Part time workers who normally are not afforded paid sick leave would have been the biggest beneficiary of the ordinance. Large employers would have been required to offer 7 sick days per year after working 40 hours a week for a full year. Workers employed by smaller businesses would earn five sick days per year.

https://www.petedinelli.com/2017/01/02/demand-candidates-position-on-paid-sick-leave/

A 2017 city council bill sponsored by Republican City Councilor Don Harris and Democrat Ken Sanchez would have required all companies in the city with 50 or more employees to provide mandatory sick leave to their workers. The proposed law would have affected only 6% of the city’s employers. It was reported at the time 94% of all employers in Bernalillo County have fewer than 50 workers. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, in 2015 there were 15,746 private sector establishment in the county, which includes the city. Of those, 14,846 had fewer than 50 employees. A grand total of 900 had 50 or more workers. The bill was voted down in council committee.

https://www.petedinelli.com/2017/12/19/abq-reports-sick-leave-bill-would-affect-6-of-all-city-employees/

DYNAMIC DUO CITY COUNCILORS SEEKING REELECTION

Both Democrats City Councilors Issac Benton and Pat Davis are running for another term on the Albuquerque City Council and will be on the November 5, 2019 ballot.

IKE BENTON

Democrat Isaac (Ike) Benton is the District 2 City Councilor and was first elected to the council in 2005. Benton is a retired architect and avowed urbanist. Benton’s city council district includes a large area of downtown Central and the North Valley which leans left and is heavily Hispanic. Benton ran unopposed in 2015. Democrat (D) Isaac Benton has 5 opponents: Steve Baca (D), Joseph Griego (D), Robert Raymond Blanquera Nelson (D), Zack Quintero, (D) and Connie Vigil, Independent.

PAT DAVIS

Democrat City Councilor Pat Davis was elected to the Albuquerque City Council on October 6, 2015 to represent District 6. District 6 encompasses the International District, Mesa Del Sol, Nob Hill, Southeast Heights, and the University of New Mexico. Last year, Davis ran unsuccessfully for US Congress in the First Congressional District. Davis withdrew from the race when he polled at 3% and could not raise the money to run a viable campaign. Before Davis withdrew from the congressional race, Davis had no problem accusing the then Democrat front runner former US Attorney Damon Martinez of being a “racist”, which was a lie, and Davis endorsed the eventual Democratic nominee who went on to become elected to congress. Democrat (D) Pat Davis has only one opponent: Gina Naomi Dennis a progressive Democrat, who is an attorney, a neighborhood activist and was a Bernie Sanders delegate to the Democratic Party National Convention in 2016.

TWO OTHER COUNCIL DISTRICT RACES

District 4 has 4 candidates who qualified for the ballot and running to replace Republican Brad Winter. Those candidates are: Brook L. Bassen, a Republican endorsed by Brad Winter and 3 Democrats Athena Ann Christodoulou, Ane C. Romero, Hailey Josselyn Roy. 4 candidates in District 4 sought public financing with the 3 securing the necessary $5.00 qualifying donations and they are Republican Brook L. Bassan, and Democrats Ane C. Romero and Haley Josselyn Roy.

District 8 Republican City Councilor Trudy Jones has one challenger and she is Democrat S. Maureen Sakowin who qualified for public financing. Trudy Jones has elected to finance her campaign with private financing and has never sought public financing of her campaigns. Both Trudy Jones and S. Maureen Sakowin collected the 500 petition signatures required to get on the ballot.

All the candidates who are running for city council in Districts 2, 4, 6 and 8 need to articulate their positions on a sick leave ordinance and how they would vote on such an ordinance it if elected to City Council.

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

Paid sick leave is considered a core Democratic value as is increasing the minimum wage. A “paid sick leave” law helps the working class who have no rights, who are mostly “minimum wage” or low hourly wage workers and who are overwhelmingly “at will” employees in the private sector. “At will” employees can be terminated without any cause or notice by their employers. At will employees have little or no employment rights, and no real vested rights in their jobs except those allowed by law such as required being paid the minimum wage and federal and state laws governing working conditions, sexual harassment and retaliation. A mandatory sick leave ordinance is an extension of increasing the minimum wage and is considered a step toward a living wage.

Paid sick leave mandated by any government entity has always been a source of opposition by Albuquerque’s Republican business community as has been increasing the minimum wage by the New Mexico legislature. The Albuquerque business community and the private sector have consistently mounted aggressive opposition to any form of government imposed paid sick leave and increases in the minimum wage. The biggest arguments that are always made by the Republican business community is that such laws are unreasonable, that they disproportionately hurt small businesses that cannot afford to pay it, it brings hardship to job creators, it reduces flexibility with staffing and imposes unnecessary government regulations that interfere with business development adding unnecessary overhead cutting into profits needed to be a successful, thriving business.

TWO DEMOCRATS VOTING LIKE REPUBLICANS

The Democratic Dynamic Duo Isaac Benton and Pat Davis talk about the need for consistency. The only thing consistent from the Dynamic Duo of Benton and Davis are when they act and do things promoting their own self-interests and re-election bids. Both city councilors represent the more progressive and heavily Democratic districts of District 2 and 6. The districts have some of largest percentage of the working class and minorities. Both are facing tough reelection bids. Both have done little next to nothing over the last 4 years to get a sick leave ordinance passed by the city council until now.

One thing is for certain is that during the last 4 years, Benton and Davis have acted more like Republicans and not the progressives they proclaim to be within the Democratic Party. They both have voting records that are more Republican than Democrat with their support of the disastrous ART Bus project and supporting final adoption of the ABC-Z comprehensive plan, now known as the Integrated Development Ordinance (IDO). You can read more on the Benton and Davis voting records in the below blog article.

What people should be sick of are Democrats acting and talking like Republicans especially after they get elected to positions like City Council and arguing that they are being “nonpartisan”. Both City Councilors Isaac Benton and Pat Davis will say that they have done a great job as City Councilors by acting “non-partisan” and they needed to cooperate with Republicans to get things done, even though Democrats now hold a majority of 6-3 on the City Council and even though the Mayor is a Democrat.

There is a significant difference between cooperating and working with other elected officials from the opposite party and then being hypocritical and going against your own basic political philosophy of what you believe to be true and then turning around and acting and voting against that what you claim to believe in. What would be disappointing is if Davis and Benton are elected again saying they are Progressives Democrats when in fact they vote like conservative Republicans.

ART BUS PROJECT

City Councilors Benton and Davis voted repeatedly for the disastrous ART Bus project that has destroyed the character of Route 66. Both refused to advocate to put the ART Bus project on the ballot for public approval proclaiming it to be the Republican Mayor’s project that they agreed with. Benton and Davis voted to spend federal grant money on ART that had yet to be appropriated by congress. The ART Bus project has been a total disaster resulting the destruction of the character of Route 66. ART has a negative impact on Central resulting in several businesses going out of business. Many central businesses and Nob Hill businesses no longer exist because of the ART Bus Project.

What is just as pathetic is that Benton and Davis never demanded an economic impact study when it came to the ART Bus project and how it would affect businesses along the central corridor. Davis also does not recognize that his sick leave ordinance will have still another negative affect on all the Nob Hill businesses that were affected by ART and still struggling, assuming they have not already gone out of business because of ART.

INTEGRATED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE (IDO).

City Councilors Benton and Davis voted for the Integrated Development Ordinance (IDO). Before the Integrated Development Ordinance (IDO), there were sixty (60) sector development plans which governed new development in specific neighborhoods. Forty (40) of the development plans had their own “distinct zoning guidelines” that were designed to protect many historical areas of the city. Examples of areas of the city governed by long standing sector development plans that were repealed include Barelas, San Jose, Hunning Highland, Silver Hills, Nob Hill and Old Town. Historical overlay zones were also affected. The IDO favors developers and makes gentrification official city policy.

The IDO repealed many sector development plans designed to protect neighborhoods and it will have the most effect on both the City Council Districts Davis and Benton represent.

NEED FOR ECONOMIC ANALYSIS QUESTIONED

Now that the Bernalillo County Commission has enacted a sick leave ordinance our Dynamic Duo want to spend tax payer money on an economic analysis to determine how a similar paid sick leave ordinance would work in Albuquerque. Davis actually thinks the County Commission enacting their ordinance on a 3 to 2 vote somehow translates into momentum for the City Council to act. It does not.

Davis and Benton both now think an economic impact study on a sick leave ordinance will be of help when the Council’s version of a paid sick leave ordinance is finally brought up for approval. It is very likely that such an analysis has already been done by the private sector either by the coalition of businesses that opposed the Healthy Workforce ordinance or even by the Greater Albuquerque Chamber of Commerce.

The Dynamic Duo’s economic analysis of the paid sick leave amounts to nothing more than a publicity stunt in an effort to shore up their sagging support within their progressive Democratic districts so they can say all the right things to get media attention and for progressive Democrats to hear.

KNOW THE OPPOSITION

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

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

You can expect the same coalition to form to oppose any type of mandatory sick leave ordinance by the city and even going to court to stop it as they did with the Healthy Workforce ordinance.

CONCLUSION

There are legitimate arguments made in support and in opposition of a sick leave ordinance. Make no mistake, there is a definite need for sick leave legislation. A mandatory sick leave is an extension of increasing the minimum wage and is considered a step toward a living wage and for that reason it should be tied to the minimum wage by the New Mexico legislature.

It would make common sense for Mayor Tim Keller and the City Council to contact the coalition formed last year to oppose the Healthy Workforce ordinance and create a working group, get their input and recommendations on what they will support and draft an ordinance that will pass the city council that they will not oppose and resent. The working group should also include representatives of the county’s New Mexico delegation to Santa Fe to gauge if there is support to enact such a law state wide attached to the minimum wage.

Then again, common sense is something that has always historically been seriously lacking at city hall as has been real leadership and consensus building by Democrats that act and vote more like Republicans until its election time.

ALB City Councilors Isaac Benton and Pat Davis Both Need To Voted Out Of Office And Thanked For Their Service

On Tuesday, August 20, 2019, a day long status conference was convened by Federal Judge James Browning to listen to Federal Court Appointed Monitor James Ginger’s third “Outcome and Measures And Analysis Report” on the Court Approved Settlement Agreement (CASA). It has been more than a year since the last public status conference was held.

Judge James Browning took over the case from Judge Robert Brack. The U.S. Attorney’s Office, the city of Albuquerque, APD , the police union and the many stakeholders in the effort testified. Overall, the consensus throughout the all-day hearing was that APD has improved dramatically. All seem to agree that there is a lot more left to be done with the police reforms. All of the participants said they are committed to seeing the reform through.

BACKGROUND ON COMPLIANCE LEVELS

The third “Outcome and Measures And Analysis Report” deals with “operational compliance measures”. There are 3 compliance areas that are audited:

1. PRIMARY COMPLIANCE: Primary compliance is the “policy” part of compliance. To attain primary compliance, APD must have in place operational policies and procedures designed to guide officers, supervisors and managers in the performance of the tasks outlined in the CASA.

2. SECONDARY COMPLIANCE: Secondary compliance is attained by implementing supervisory, managerial and executive practices designed to and effective in implementing the policy as written, e.g., sergeants routinely enforce the policies among field personnel and are held accountable by managerial and executive levels of the department for doing so.

3. OPERATIONAL COMPLIANCE: Operational compliance is attained when there is an apparent adherence to policies in the day-to-day operation of the agency. For example, line personnel are routinely held accountable for compliance by their sergeants, and sergeants are routinely held accountable for compliance by their lieutenants and command staff. In other words, the APD command staff enforces its policies.

On May 1, 2019, Dr. Ginger filed his 9th “Compliance Levels of the Albuquerque Police Department”. The 9th Report found that APD achieved a 100% compliance with primary tasks, 79% secondary compliance and 61% operational compliance. Under the CASA, once APD achieves a 95% compliance rate in all 3 compliance areas, and the department sustains compliance for two years in all 3 categories the case can be dismissed.

PROBLEMS IDENTIFIED

August 20, 2019, Federal Monitor James Ginger appeared by telephone conference call with the Court. According to Dr. Ginger, one of the enduring problems APD needs to continue to deal with is “Operational Compliance” and getting supervisors, and in particular APD sergeants and lieutenants to enforce policies and to discipline officers who violate those policies.

Dr. Ginger told the Court:

“[APD Police Chief Michael] Geier has pulled a U-turn with this police department and is getting it in line with best practices … But until the sergeants are in harness and pulling in the same direction as the chief, things won’t get done as quickly.”

According to US Assistant Attorney General Paul Killebrew, with the US Department of Justice out of Washington, DC, the problems the DOJ found in its investigation into APD was a lack of “consistency and accountability” when officers violated policies or used excessive force. Killebrew said often times discipline was meted out only if stories appeared in the media or when the city needed a “sacrificial lamb.”

Killebrew said he still notices ways in which APD supervisors skirt reporting use of force by detailing an action in an “Additional Concern Memo” rather than an official report to the Internal Affairs Division which is required under the consent decree. According to Killebrew the practice spiked in 2018 at the same time the Internal Affairs Force Review Division was being established. The City Attorney’s Office and the Police Union Attorney objected to Killebrew’s characterization of the memos and said there was no concerted effort to hide misconduct.

Killebrew did say APD’s Internal Affairs “went beyond expectations” in tackling a 300-case backlog of use-of-force cases. The cases were older than 120 days prohibiting disciplinary action. Notwithstanding, the IA investigators looked at every single one of the cases, noted any infractions in an officer’s file and kept an eye out for enduring patterns or problems. It was reported many of the cases predated the current administration. Killebrew said he believed APD’s Internal Affairs “made the best out of a bad situation.”

https://www.abqjournal.com/1356242/apd-doj-city-outline-progress-made-on-police-reform-effort.html

COUNTER CASA AFFECT

Last year on September 10, 2018, a status telephone conference call was held with US District Court Judge Robert Brack who was presiding over the Court Approved Settlement Agreement (CASA) reforms. During the status conference, Federal Monitor Dr. Ginger told the federal judge that a group of “high-ranking APD officers” within the department were trying to thwart reform efforts.

The entire 53-page transcript of the conference call can be read here:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1GzUumHhiD3Mw2_dLg_czXml_T6-3QI2w/view

It was revealed that the group of “high-ranking APD officers” were APD sergeants and lieutenants. Because sergeants and lieutenants are part of the police bargaining unit they remained in their positions and could not be removed by the Chief. APD Chief Michael Geier also reported last year to Judge Brack that he had noticed some “old-school resistance” to reforms mandated by the CASA. At the time, Chief Geier reported he replaced a number of commanders with others who agree with police reforms. However, Chief Geier reported he could not replace the sergeants nor lieutenants who were resisting the reforms because of the union contract.

Federal Monitor Ginger referred to the group as the “counter-CASA effect.” Ginger described the group’s attitude as “certainly ambivalent” to the reform effort and the CASA. According to the transcript of the proceeding, Dr. Ginger told Judge Brack:

“The ones I’m speaking of are in critical areas and that ambivalence, alone, will give rise to exactly the sort of issues that we’ve seen in the past at the training academy. … So while it’s not overt, you know, there’s nobody sabotaging computer files or that sort of thing, it’s a sort of a low-level processing, but nonetheless, it has an effect. … It’s a small group, but it’s a widespread collection of sworn personnel at sergeant’s and lieutenant’s levels with civil service protection that appear to be, based on my knowledge and experience, not completely committed to this process … It is something that is deep-seated and it’s a little harder to find a quick fix or solution to it, but I think, in the long term, by having this foundation with new leadership and a new direction from the top down, we should be able to get through this and survive it.”

The sergeants and lieutenants are part of the police union yet have important managerial positions with the police department that are protected as a condition of their collective bargaining agreement between police and the city. The sergeants and lieutenants are not at will employees and only can be terminated for cause with personnel rights of appeal.

APD UNION OPPOSITION TO DOJ REFORMS HAS NOT CHANGED

The APD Union was not a named party to the original civil rights complaint for excessive use of force and deadly force filed against the city by the Department of Justice (DOJ). Soon after the DOJ initiated the federal lawsuit against APD and the City, the APOA police union intervened to become a party to the federal lawsuit in order to advocate for union interests in city policy and changes to the “use of force” and “deadly force policies.”

The Police Union, despite public comments of cooperation and comments made to the court, have never fully supported the agreed to reforms. The Police Union contributed significantly to the delay in writing the new use of force and deadly force policies.

The union leadership has always been at the negotiating table and for a full year were involved with the drafting of the “use of force” and “deadly use of force” policy. The union contributed to the one-year delay in writing the policies objecting to many provisions of the policies. The police union repeatedly objected to the language of the use of force policy asserting the policy was unreasonable. This was evidenced by the monitors claim that submitted use of force policy was missing key components and the monitor saw 50-plus changes needing to be made to satisfy union objections.

The union leadership has attended and has sat at counsel table during all court hearings and the Federal Monitor presentations on his reports. During all the Court proceeding where the federal monitor has made his presentation to the federal court, the APOA union has made its opposition and objections known to the federal court regarding the use of force and deadly force policies as being too restrictive with rank and file claiming rank and file cannot do their jobs even with training on the policies.

Six of the 9 Federal Monitor’s status reports have been scathing against the city accusing the previous APD chain of command of delaying and obstructing the DOJ reform process, yet the police union had no comment and took no position. When the previous administration accused the federal monitor of biasness and attempted to have the monitor removed, after the Assistant Chief secretly tape a conference meeting with the monitor, the police union remained totally silent ostensibly giving its support to have the federal monitor removed.

The police union and its leadership have said in open court that the mandated reforms under the consent decree are interfering with rank and file officer’s ability to perform their job duties. During the August 20, 2019, a day long status conference, the APOA union President Shaun Willoughby made is clear that the attitude towards the CASA has not changed in the least.

District Court Judge Browning asked APOA Union President Shawn Willoughby what he and the union rank and file felt about the CASA. Willoughby’s responses were a quick condemnation of the CASA when he said “we hate it”, “we’re frustrated”, the reforms and mandates are “a hard pill to swallow”, that “all change is hard”. According to Willoughby, police officers are afraid to do their jobs for fear of being investigated, fired or disciplined. In the same breath, Willoughby went on to brag about how his union, unlike other police unions in city’s with consent decrees, actually worked and cooperated with the city and the DOJ.

A FIRST OF ITS KIND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

What the news media failed to report was the exchange Judge James Browning had with Chief Michael Geier when he testified. Judge Browning asked APD Chief Michael Geier in no uncertain terms if he had read the April 10, 2014 Department Investigation Report that found a “culture of aggression” within APD. Judge Browning essentially asked if APD Chief Geier agreed with the DOJ findings that APD had engage in a pattern or practice of excessive force and deadly force that lead to so many police officer involved shootings. Chief Geier did not hesitate with his answers. Chief Geier said he had read the DOJ report that found a “culture of aggression”, he agreed with it and he did not disagree and he did not dispute any of the findings of the Department of Justice.

Chief Geier’s response is the very first time anyone, ever, within APD command staff has publicly acknowledge what was wrong with APD requiring the CASA. More important, it was a reflection of a Police Chief who is truly committed to the reforms and who is making progress. Many within the community had reservations about Geier’s appointment as permanent Chief. Based on what the Chief said to the Federal Judge and the progress made with the reforms, those reservations can now be laid to rest.

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

The 9th Federal Monitors Report found that APD achieved a 100% compliance with primary tasks, 79% secondary compliance and 61% operational compliance. “Operational Compliance” is the adherence to policies in the day-to-day operation of the agency where the line personnel are routinely held accountable for compliance by their sergeants, and sergeants are routinely held accountable for compliance by their lieutenants and command staff. In other words, APD “owns” and enforces its policies.

It is pathetic that after almost a full four years of the consent decree, APD is only at a 61% compliance rate with progress in the single digits percentage wise. The most likely reason for this is the police union where APD sergeants and lieutenants are part of the union and management at the same time. The federal monitor reported in no uncertain terms that there are problems with APD sergeants and lieutenants enforcing policies and to discipline officers who violate those policies.

REMOVE SERGEANTS AND LIEUTENANTS FROM UNION

There is a definite “chain of command” when it comes to APD. All Commanders, Deputy Chiefs and the Chief are at will positions that serve at the pleasure of the Administration, either the Mayor or Chief. APD has a clear line of authority that separates management from rank and file sworn police officers that must be preserved and honored.

Police sergeants and lieutenants by virtue of their titles, responsibilities, management and supervisory authority over sworn police officers are part of the “chain of command” management team of the police department. Including APD police sergeants and lieutenants who are part of management in the union bargaining unit creates a clear conflict of interest and sends mixed messages to rank and file sworn police officers.

APD police sergeants and lieutenants are the ones on the front line to enforce personnel rules and regulations, standard operating procedures, approve and review work performed and assist in implementing DOJ reforms and standard operating procedures policies. This point was repeatedly made by the Federal Monitor when he said “until the sergeants are in harness and pulling in the same direction as the chief, things won’t get done as quickly”. Others said the same thing during the August 20, 2019 hearing. In other words, without the 100% support of the sergeants and lieutenants to the CASA and mandated reforms, there will be little or no progress made with “operational compliance” and reaching a 95% compliance rate will take years.

What is so damn laughable is when Union President Willoughby said during the August 20, 2019 hearing that the union cooperated and participated with the reforms unlike all other Departments in other cities faced with a consent decree. What he was actually doing was disrupting the process by not being fully committed to the reforms and changes in policies. What was just as laughable was when he said last year that sergeants and lieutenants who are not following APD policies and complying with reforms are sent to internal affairs and disciplined. Willoughby failed to acknowledge that the Union and its attorney supply a defense and oppose any disciplinary action.

All APD police sergeants and lieutenants are clearly part of police management and chain of command and should not be a part of the union. The police union refuses to acknowledge or agree to knowing that if sergeants and lieutenants are removed from the bargaining unit it will eliminate the unions ability to influence the sergeants and lieutenants in management and it will reduce the size of the dues paying union membership. What is very problematic is that no one knows for certain to what extent the union is influencing the actions of the sergeants and lieutenants to resist the implementation of the CASA reforms that the union opposes. During the August 20, 2019 hearing Union President Willoughby made it clear the union membership “hates” the CASA, feels the reforms are “a hard pill to swallow” and that they believe “all change is hard”. Willoughby went so far as to say the rank and file are afraid to do their jobs for fear of being fired when he knows they can only be fired for cause and guaranteed personnel rights and procedures.

Sergeants and lieutenants need to be made at will employees and removed from the union bargaining unit in order to get a real buy in to managements goals of police reform and the CASA. APD Police sergeants and lieutenants cannot serve two masters of Administration Management and Union priorities that are in conflict when it comes to the CASA reforms. During the next round of union contract negotiations, the city should demand that the management positions of APD sergeant and lieutenant be removed from the APOA Union bargaining unit. Otherwise, the Keller Administration should seek to have the APOA Union removed as a party to the federal lawsuit, the consent decree and CASA negotiations.

The very last thing APD management, the Keller Administration and the public needs now is for sergeants and lieutenants to passively but deliberately oppose the reforms and acting as union operatives as opposed to management, which ostensibly is still happening based on what the Federal Monitor told the Court during the August 20, 2019 hearing.

Otherwise, the city will continue to deal with the APD Union version of the “Counter-CASA Effect” and it will take far more years to get APD in compliance of all the reforms.

On February 19, 2019 Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham signed Executive Order 2019-005 entitled “Creating a Public Employees Retirement Association Of New Mexico Solvency Task Force And Directing That The Task Force To Provide Certain Recommendations”. The 19-member task force included PERA officials, labor union leaders, retiree representatives and other stakeholders. The committee was tasked with providing recommendations to the Governor by August 30, 2019.

https://www.abqjournal.com/1282402/governor-creates-task-force-to-study-pension-issues.html

PERA’s Board Chair, Jacquelin Kohlasch, along with Executive Director Wayne Propst and Chief Investment Officer Dominic Garcia were appointed Task Force members.

The other Task Force members included a representative from the following entities:

New Mexico House of Representatives
New Mexico State Senate
New Mexico Investments & Pensions Oversight Committee
Retired Public Employees of New Mexico
Fraternal Order of Police
National Association of Police Organizations
New Mexico State Police Association
New Mexico Sheriffs’ Association
New Mexico Professional Fire Fighters Association
Albuquerque Fire Department Retirees’ Association
American Federation of State County & Municipal Employees
Communication Workers of America
New Mexico Counties
New Mexico Municipal League

There were 6 representatives from public safety out of 16 on the Governor’s PERA Solvency Task Force: the Fraternal Order of Police, National Association of Police Organizations, New Mexico State Police Association, New Mexico Sheriffs’ Association, New Mexico Professional Fire Fighters Association, Albuquerque Fire Department Retirees’ Association. The Task Force was top heavy with public safety stake holders and union officials who have absolutely no background nor experience in economics, finance and pension plans. Yet they were tasked to come up with solutions to the pension programs no doubt following the leadership of the Task Force Chair.

Public Safety retirees have far more lucrative retirement benefits when it comes to years of service required to retire and the amount of pension benefits that they will paid once retired. There are 40,000 PERA retirees and the overwhelming majority of those retirees are not public safety retirees and their pensions are significantly less than public safety retirees.

GOVERNOR’S EXECUTIVE ORDERS ON TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Governor’s Executive Order was very specific and stated:

“5. The recommendations provided by the PERA Solvency Task Force must meet the following requirements:

a. They must result in an actuarial certified projection that, as of July 1, 2019, the Unfunded Actuarial Accrued Liability of the PERA Public Employees Plan will be amortized with no longer than a twenty-five-year period using an assumed investment rate of 7.25%.

b. They must include recommended employer and employee contribution levels and benefit modifications that are actuarily sound, preserve the defined-benefit retirement offered by PERA, and ensure intergenerational equity for current and future PERA retirees and other members.

c. They must consider the funded levels of the Divisions within the PERA Public Employees Plan.

6. The PERA Solvency Task Force may also consider and make recommendations on the governance structure on PERA, including but not limited to, the composition of the PERA Board of Trustees and other recommendations related [to] the administration of PERA.”

THE GOVERNOR’S DEPUTY CHIEF OF STAFF

It is not at all surprising that Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham appointed as her Deputy Chief of Staff Diego Arecon, who retired last year from the Albuquerque Fire Department given their history of working together for many years. Mr. Arecon for years was the Albuquerque Firefighter’s Union President and a lobbyist for the fire union when it came to labor issues in Santa Fe. Originally, he was appointed by the Governor as the “Labor Relations” special advisor.

Years before becoming an elected official and after being a cabinet secretary, Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham was employed by the Firefighters Union and lobbied and worked on changes to Workers Compensation law. Those changes to the law were long overdue and increased coverage to firefighters and first responders for certain types of illnesses and diseases caused or related to their work environment. Such changes were common place throughout the country either by changes to the Workers Compensation laws or by court rulings.

ROLE OF CHIEF AND DEPUTY CHIEF OF STAFF

When it comes to a Governor, a chief of staff and deputy chief of staff, generally work behind the scenes to solve problems, mediate disputes with cabinet members, and deal with issues before they are brought to the Governor. Often chiefs of staff act as a confidante and advisor to the Governor, acting as a sounding board for ideas. The chief of staff normally manages the governor’s office, overseeing the daily operations and interrelationship of the gubernatorial staff and determining what decisions will be taken to the governor.

The chief of staff and deputy chief of staff helps the governor to develop and maintain a focused policy agenda. As primary strategist, chiefs of staff and deputies help to reinforce and promote the governor’s commitments and agenda. Chiefs of staff to be effective should be loyal to the Governor that appoints them, the Governor’s policies and fully committed to those policies. One thing for certain is that no Chief of Staff or Deputy Chief of Staff should ever promote their own personal agenda or the agenda of anyone else but the Governor. No Chief of staff or assistant chief of staff should ever represent their own personal agenda as the agenda of the Governor they serve.

GOVERNOR’S PERA SOLVENCY TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATIONS

On August 8 , 2019, the Solvency Task Force released its recommendations to eliminate the $6 billion unfunded liability in New Mexico’s pension system for municipal, county and state workers known as the Public Employees Retirement Association (PERA).

Following are the PERA Solvency Task Force Preliminary Recommendations as released by the Governor’ s Deputy Chief of Staff Diego Arecon who chairs the Task Force:

“• Fulfill the requirements of Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham’s January Executive Order including placing PERA on a path to pay off its $6 billion unfunded liability by the year 2043.

• Eliminate the current 7 year wait to receive a COLA upon retirement and restore it with the 2-year calendar period.”

ORGANIZED OPPOSITION TO TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATIONS

The Retired Public Employees Union (RPENM) is pushing back hard on plans to overhaul New Mexico’s underfunded pension system for public employees. Gerald Chavez, an RPENM Board Member and past president wrote an article published in the organizations Summer News Report and sent to all RPENM members. Mr. Chavez also served on the Governors Task Force. The published article was very damning with the most critcal paragraphs as follows:

“Unfortunately, the Governor’s executive order outlined some basic requirements or assumptions that served as the starting point for the task force, which may have unnecessarily limited the work of the task force and led us down a doomed fate. The task force was required to use a 25-year amortization period for the fund to achieve 100% or near 100% solvency. These assumptions are unnecessary, counterproductive and contrary to the latest thinking by leading experts in the field of pension fund management. Louise Sheirner of the Brookings Institution, Byron Lutz of the Federal Reserve Board and Jamie Lenney of the Bank of England just released a lengthy and detailed report convincingly countering such assumptions. Any serious recommendations, much less action by the legislature should, at the very least, consider the work of these and other experts.

As of the last meeting on July 11th, there was only one proposal, referred to as the “shared risk” model that was even being considered by the task force. No other proposals or models were considered by the task force. In addition to employee and employer contribution increases of 2% from each and a benefit cap change, it largely focuses on a 3-year suspension of the COLA, along with future COLA benefits being tied to the performance of the fund’s investment rate of return. I strongly voiced the need of the task force to consider different options, gather more information, run various scenarios and look at all options. I also urged the task force to consider “Grandfathering” in retirees from the proposed changes to and/or suspension of the COLA.”

According to the retiree union, the retirement system does not actually need to reach full funding and there is no immediate crisis and less drastic measures can be taken. The funded ratio for PERA assets divided by its liabilities is now at about 74%.

The group of retirees are saying full funding is not necessary and cite academic research published by the Brookings Institution, a Washington, D.C.-based think tank. Jamie Lenney of the Bank of England, Byron Lutz of the Federal Reserve Board of Governors and Louise Sheiner of the Brookings Institution wrote the analysis. The authors said the presence of unfunded liabilities doesn’t necessarily mean a pension plan is unsustainable. According to the study:

“Overall, our results suggest there is no imminent ‘crisis’ for most [government] pension plans” [and ] that pension plans “have always operated far short of full prefunding.”

Notwithstanding, experts in retirement plans say 100% funding is still a “worthwhile goal.” Alex Brown, research manager for the National Association of State Retirement Administrators, said there’s broad consensus among actuaries, policymakers and professional groups that government pension plans should target full funding over a reasonable period of time.

Miguel Gómez, the Executive director of the Retired Public Employees of New Mexico said the Brookings analysis suggests New Mexico has plenty of time to address its pension funding and shortfall. According to Gomez, adjustments to PERA are in order but it is not necessary to reach 100% funding within 25 years and there is still time to achieve it. Gomez also suggested setting a less ambitious goal showing the credit rating agencies that New Mexico is taking serious steps to better fund its pensions but without creating unnecessary harm.

https://www.abqjournal.com/1356227/new-mexico-retirees-question-math-in-proposed-pension-fix.html

REVENUE SOURCE

On August 17, it was reported that total state revenue collections were roughly $273 million above projected levels through April due primarily to skyrocketing oil production in southeastern New Mexico that has led to a regional economic upswing. New Mexico is now ranked the 3rd largest oil producing state in the United Sates. The state is now on track to collect an unprecedented $7.8 billion in the budget year that ended June 30 and could allow for additional spending increases on public schools, roads, pension funds and other state programs.

https://www.abqjournal.com/1354833/nm-coffers-flush-with-cash-from-oil-boom.html

COMMENTARY AND ANALYSIS

The Governor’s Executive Order creating the Task Force contains only 3 major requirements:

1. A 7.25% actuarially certified projection,
2. Recommend employer and employee contribution levels and benefit modifications that are actuarily sound and preserve PERA defined-benefit plans and
3. Consider funded levels of the PERA funds.

The Task Force makes 9 recommendations that are nothing more than general declarations of goals that contain absolutely no findings and information as to how the recommendations were arrived at nor how they will be achieved. There is no financial analysis how the recommendations will achieve the 7.25% actuarily certified projections. Most importantly, the Task Force recommendations contain no data how the modifications recommended will preserve the PERA defined-benefit plans, just declarations that it will be achieved.

Last year, candidate for Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham said she would oppose cuts to PERA benefits, including any reduction in the annual inflation-related pension adjustments that retired state workers and teachers receive. According to a campaign spokesperson at the time:

“She does not believe that New Mexico needs to eliminate our defined benefit system for current or future educators and state employees and opposes any reduction in cost-of-living adjustments.”

The PERA Task Force Recommendations are in total opposition and conflict sharply with the Governor’s position when she was running for Governor. This is surprising seeing as she appointed the Task Force.

GOVERNOR SHOULD REMOVE DEPUTY CHIEF OF STAFF

It is painfully obvious that the Governor’s Deputy Chief of Staff Diego Arecon was promoting his own former union or his personal agenda and not that of the Governor. Deputy Chief of Staff Diego Rincon should have known better than to release the recommendations without more thought, more detailed analysis with findings and justifications on each one of the recommendations. No public testimony was allowed by Arecon and Task Force meetings were held behind closed doors. The Deputy Chief of staff has now placed the Governor in a very awkward and precarious position that will alienate many of her supporters for advocating his own agenda and not her agenda. For these reasons Diego Arecon should be replaced as Assistant Chief of Staff and be given duties elsewhere in state government.

THE ROAD FORWARD TO 100% SOLVENCY

The first thing that Governor Michelle Lujan should do is to set aside the recommendations of the PERA Pension Fund Task Force. What are needed are outside experts in finance and pension funds to make recommendations to the legislature on what can and should be done to save PERA, presuming it really does need saving. The Governor should form a working group of actual experts and go from there to find real solutions.

The financial problems PERA is experiencing can be directly related to the type of pensions offered to government employees as well as what many PERA retirees feel has been mismanagement of the pension funds. Nothing was mentioned by the Task Force of trying to implement any other types of pension programs to be offered. There was no Task Force recommendations of a major infusion of finances that will be available from oil and gas production.

PERA’S goal is to reach 100% funding of liabilities by 2043. The New Mexico PERA pension program has 75.3% of funded liability in current funding assets to future liability making it one of the strongest pension programs in the country. The two major pension funds that are currently problematic are shortfalls of 7.99% of State General pensions and 13.87% for Municipal Fire Pension programs. Contribution shortfalls of State General and Municipal Fire are up and until 2066. PERA management has failed to articulate in clear terms all the options available to insure PERA will reach a 100% funding ratio by 2043.

Revenues from the oil and gas boom should be used in part reduce the $6.1 unfunded liability within a 5 to 10-year span. Such infusions of funding would no doubt benefit no less than 90,000 PERA workers not to mention their family’s over many more years with the funding no doubt being pumped into the economy. While the State is experiencing a windfall in increased revenues, the New Mexico Legislature should use a portion, not all, of the surplus revenues to increase funding to the PERA funds that are currently underfunded, currently the municipal fire and general worker funds to the tune of $4.1 Billion.

At a minimum, the PERA Pension plans are solvent for at least 23, if not more years. Notwithstanding, PERA Pension reform must again be undertaken. The difference is the New Mexico Legislature has time to address the PERA pension system and the sky is not falling by any means. The legislature can make adjustments like increasing age of retirements, change the formula to calculate retirement, make increases in contributions and infuse state funding into the pension funds, but only those that are underfunded which currently the municipal fire fighters fund and the general worker fund.

Better management of the pension funds and increasing returns on investment should be the major goal of any changes to the PERA pension programs to insure long term solvency.

For related blog articles see:

Joe Monahan Blog: “Raise Retirement Age, Leave Worker Contributions And COLA Alone”; ALSO: PERA Task Force Recommendations; Study Shows There Is NO Immediate Crisis

Dan Klein: Governor’s PERA Task Force Chairman Promotes Public Safety Unions Agenda And Own Agenda; Also: Task Force Recommendations And Underfunded Plans Identified

Governor’s PERA Solvency Task Force “Pokes The Bear”; Dissolve Task Force And Form Working Group

PERA Pension Plan Investments Continue To Falter; Gov.’s PERA Solvency Task Force Top Heavy With Public Safety Reps