Review of the 2017 campaign finance reports for Mayor filed with the City Clerk reveals serious flaws exist in the City’s public finance laws and the rules and regulations governing ethics and campaign practices.

The review confirms just how measured finance committees and big money donations are undercutting the spirit and intent of Albuquerque’ public financing system.

Out of 16 candidates initially running for Mayor, Democrat Tim Keller was the only candidate that was able to qualify for public financing while eight (8) other candidates tried and failed to qualify for public financing with half dropping out of the race.

QUALIFYING DONATIONS AND NOMINATING PETITIONS

All candidates for Mayor are given three months to collect nominating petition signatures from registered voters and only eight (8) secured the required number of signatures.

Collecting the $5 qualifying donations is extremely difficult because candidates are only give six weeks to collect the donations yet are given far more time to collect the nominating petition signatures.

Theoretically, a candidate for Mayor could gather the required number of qualifying donations and yet fail to collect the required number of nominating petition signatures.

It makes no sense giving more than double to time to collect signatures and just six weeks to collect $5 qualifying donations.

The Keller campaign was required to collect 3,000 qualifying cash donations of $5 to the City of Albuquerque from Albuquerque registered voters over a six-week period, which is a daunting and very difficult task for anyone.

If a candidate seeking public financing donations does not secure the 3,000 qualifying $5 donations, all the money reverts to the city and not kept by the candidate that collected the donations.

Candidates that decide to go with private financing as well as measured finance committees for candidates can solicit unlimited cash donations from any source including out of city and state contributions.

With public financing, paper receipts had to and issue and copies of paper receipts and the cash was turned into city hall.

Once qualified, the Keller for Mayor campaign was given $506,254 in public financing.

As a condition to receiving public financing from the City, a public financed candidate must agree to a spending cap not to exceed the amount given and agree not to raise and spend any more cash to financed their campaign.

KELLER’S $1.35 MILLION CAMPAIGN FOR MAYOR

Notwithstanding being a public finance candidate, Keller had three (3) measured finance committees that either raised money directly to spend on his behalf or that indirectly spent money and supported him financially.

ABQ Forward Together was a measured finance committee that was formed specifically to raise money to promote Tim Keller for Mayor and it raised over $663,000 for Keller.

ABQ Forward Together was chaired by a former campaign consultant for Mr. Keller when he ran successfully for New Mexico State Senate.

$1,358,254 was actually spent on Tim Keller’s successful campaign for Mayor ($506,254 public finance money + $663,000 ABQ Forward + $67,000 ABQFIREPAC + $122,000 ABQ Working Families = $1,358,254.)

Republican Dan Lewis raised more than $847,000 in cash contributions for the October election and the November Mayoral runoff election.

Democrat Brian Colón raised and spent nearly $824,000 for his unsuccessful mayoral run.

Republican Wayne Johnson privately raised and spent approximately $250,000.

Republican Ricardo Chavez finance his own campaign by contributing and loaning his campaign $1 million dollars, but when he dropped out of the race all of the money was repaid to him after he spent approximately $200,000.

The remaining three (3) candidates for Mayor raised and spent less than $50,000 combined after failing to qualify for public financing.

BOARD OF ETHICS AND CAMPAIGN PRACTICES

The City Charter contains the city’s election code and creates the Board of Ethics and Campaign Practices where complaints can be filed and investigated for campaign practice violations.

(See City Charter Article XIII, Election Code, Board of Ethics and Campaign Practices; Rules & Regulations)

The Rules and Regulations of the City of Albuquerque Finance laws, creates the position of “Campaign and Election Auditor.”

The duties and responsibility of the Campaign and Election Auditor is to monitor all campaign finance disclosure statement to examine the accuracy and compliance by the person filing such statement with the provisions of the election code and with the Rules and Regulations promulgated by the Board and provide such other services as required by the Board.

The Board of Ethics and Campaign Finance laws does provide that candidates can be sanctioned, fined or for that matter removed from office if elected for violations of the finance laws.

If a candidate is found to have violated the election conde and is the successful candidate in the election, the Board of Ethics may recommend to the City Council that the violator be removed from office.

The US Supreme Court ruling in Citizens United basically said that organizations, corporations, unions and others can spend as much as they want as long as they don’t coordinate their activities with candidate, but this is federal election law.

There were a number of ethics complaints filed against Tim Keller, Dan Lewis and Wayne Johnson for violations of the campaign practices act, and all were eventually dismissed.

One complaint filed against Tim Keller’s campaign involved the allegation that “cash donations” for political consulting were reported as “in-kind” donations.

The Election Board of Ethics and Campaign Practices ruled that the cash contributions were in fact an ethical violation but that the Keller Campaign acted in good faith and there was an “unintentional” violation of the ordinances with the Keller Campaign receiving an admonishment and with no fines.

A second complaint file against the Keller campaign was that the Keller Campaign for Mayor committee was coordinating their campaign and expenditures with ABQ Forward Together, the separate measured finance campaign committee headed up by one by of Keller’s former campaign managers for State Senate with the complaint dismissed with a finding of no coordination.

City of Albuquerque campaign reporting and finance ordinances do not have any specific provisions that actually nor specifically prohibit the coordination of expenditures and campaign activities with measured finance committees and candidates in municipal elections.

PROPOSED CHANGES TO PUBLIC FINANCE AND BOARD OF ETHICS AND CAMPAIGN PRACTICES.

Public finance laws should not be set up to make it too difficult to qualify for public financing.

Following are recommendations for changes to the City’s public finance and election laws that are in order:

1. Allow four (4) months and two (2) weeks, from January 1 to May 15, to collected both the qualifying donations and petition signatures, and private campaign donation collection.

2. Allow the collection of the qualifying donations from anyone who wants, and not just residents or registered voters of Albuquerque. Privately finance candidates now can collect donations from anyone they want and anywhere in the State and Country.

3. A public finance candidate who fails to secure the requisite nominating petition signatures, but secures the requisite $5 qualifying donations would be disqualified from the public financing .

4. Once the allowed number of qualifying donations is collected, the public financing would be made immediately available, but not allowed to be spent until starting May 15.

5. Permit campaign spending for both publicly financed and privately financed candidates only from May 15 to the October election day.

6. Return to candidates for their use in their campaign any qualifying donations the candidate has collected when the candidate fails to secure the required number of qualifying donations to get the public financing.

7. Mandate the City Clerk to issue debit card or credit card collection devices to collect the qualifying donations and to issue receipts and eliminate the mandatory use of “paper receipts”.

8. Increase from $1.00 to $2.50 per registered voter the amount of public financing, which will be approximately $900,000, and allow for incremental increases of 10% every election cycle keeping up with inflation.

9. Allow for additional matching public financing available for run offs at the rate of $1.25 per registered voter, or $450,000.

10. Albuquerque should make every effort to make municipal elections partisan elections to be held along with State and Federal elections by seeking a constitutional amendment from the legislature to be voted upon by the public.

11. Any money raised and spent by measured finance committees on behalf a candidate should be required to first be applied to reimburse the City for any taxpayer money advanced to a public finance candidate or deducted from a publicly financed candidates account and returned to the city.

12. City of Albuquerque campaign reporting and finance ordinances and regulations need to define with absolute clarity that strictly prohibit the coordination of expenditures and campaign activities with measured finance committees and individual candidate’s campaigns in municipal elections.

13. A mandatory schedule of fines and penalties for violations of the code of ethics and campaign practices act should be enacted by the City Council.

CONCLUSION

Every effort should be made to make Albuquerque’s public financing laws for municipal elections to legally provide for a “dollar for dollar” match to privately raised funds by candidates, thereby providing a real level playing field.

The influence of big money in elections allowed by the US Supreme Court decision in Citizens United is destroying our democracy.

Many highly qualified candidates for office all too often do not bother to run because of the inability or difficulty raising the necessary money to run.

Political campaign fundraising and big money influence are warping our election process.

Money spent becomes equated with the final vote.

Money drives the message, affects voter turnout and ultimately the outcome of an election.

Albuquerque municipal elections need campaign finance reform and enforcement.

2018 should be the year the City Council and the Mayor take action on campaign finance reform in anticipation of the 2019 municipal election.

The Albuquerque Journal did an excellent front page profile of Mayor Tim Keller on New Year’s Eve 2017 that went into great detail on his background, his family and hopes and aspirations for the new year and for Albuquerque.

The fact the article was written by Senior Editor Kent Walz says a lot.

(December 31, 2017 Albuquerque Journal, page A1, “FACE TO FACE WITH TIM KELLER”, “TAKING THE REINS”, “Dyslexia, football and a love of politics shape new mayor”)

https://www.abqjournal.com/1113032/tim-keller-abqs-new-mayor-takes-the-reins.html

The one quote that stuck out to me in the profile of Mayor Keller was his final comment “When I decided to run, I realized it might be the last job I ever get politically, so I’m ready for that. I think the key is to go through that and leave it all on the field in the sense you try to do everything you wanted to do. And then if it doesn’t work out, you gave it your best.”

This comment reflects a dramatic political maturity from 20 months ago when I asked him why he was running for Mayor and he said “because I think it would be really neat to be Mayor of my home town and I have done good at all the jobs I have ever held”. Frankly, I was somewhat taken aback by his initial naivete based on what he told me 20 months ago.

Hard fought campaigns are an education of candidates, not only on the issues, but also an education of learning a lot about yourself.

Mayor Keller won by a landslide with 62% of the vote in a runoff.

Keller now has a mandate for change and he needs to take advantage of that early on, especially when it comes to the Albuquerque Police Department, our economy, cleaning up the mess he was left and taxes.

Winning by such a historical margin the first time around just may mean his popularity has in fact “peaked” given the challenges we face as a community.

Mayor Keller’s popularity will take a hit once he starts making the hard decisions.

Most assuredly, Mayor Keller will be tested in a crisis as is are all Mayors.

We should all do what we can to support his efforts but nonetheless hold him accountable for his actions.

Frankly, I have no doubt now that Tim Keller is up to the challenge and he will be a good Mayor.

Only time will tell if he will serve multiple terms or goes onto higher office or for that matter nowhere at all as all other Mayors.

As the old Chinese curse goes “May you live in interesting times”.

Below are two guest editorial columns that ran side by side and were published on December 30, 2017 by the Albuquerque Journal under a bold red heading THE COST OF PUBLIC SAFETY.

The Albuquerque Journal Editor’s entitled my column as “Keller’s APD officer goal likely means a tax hike” and included the subtitle commentary “But Mayor should make the hard decision and back away from putting it up for a public vote”

My column stirred up a few nasty comments on the Journal’s website about liberals always wanting to tax and overspend and cops not doing their jobs.

The second column was by retired APD Police Officer Levi Borunda and the Journal Editors entitled it as “Incentives could have kept officers on force” with the subtitle commentary “Retirement options pushed out APD veterans who were on the fence about staying on duty”.

On April 1, 2018, the Keller Administration will be submitting the proposed City budget for fiscal year 2018-2019 and at that time we will learn how they intend to deal with the $40 million deficit projected.

FOLLOWING ARE BOTH EDITORIAL GUEST COLUMNS AS THEY WERE PUBLISHED BY THE ALBUQUERQUE JOURNAL

Keller’s APD officer goal likely means a tax hike
By Pete Dinelli / Former Albuquerque City Councilor
Saturday, December 30th, 2017 at 12:02am

Mayor Tim Keller held a press conference to address the $6 million deficit this fiscal year and the huge $40 million budget shortfall the city will be dealing with next fiscal year.

Mayor Keller said, in part, “Because we have a deficit situation, we are really going to have to focus on prioritizing what is important this year for our city. … The tougher question is, how do we actually get more officers on the streets? And we’re going to be working with our police chief and the City Council to find a way to do that.”

Currently, the Albuquerque Police Department is budgeted for 1,000 police officers but actually employs 836 with only 430 assigned to the field to take calls for service.

Money from the 150-plus police officer vacancies has gone to pay police overtime, and the Albuquerque Police Department busted its overtime budget by $4 million going from the $9 million budgeted to $13 million.

On the campaign trail, candidate Keller laid out his plans for APD and for completing the Department of Justice reforms.

Keller made the campaign promise that he wanted to increase the number of sworn police officers from the current 836 positions filled to 1,200, or by 350 sworn police officers, and return to community-based policing.

Getting to the 1,200 level of sworn officers is going to take years and probably will not be accomplished without a tax increase.

On the campaign trail, candidate Keller said he would raise taxes as a last resort for public safety and only with voter approval.

It is disappointing when mayors and city councilors proclaim they will put increases in taxes on the ballot, thereby trying to avoid the political “hot potato” and accusation that they increased taxes when they run for office again.

People have no business running for office if they do not want to make the hard decisions, especially when it comes to taxes and public safety and providing police services.

In any representative form of government, people are elected to make the best decisions they can based on the facts and needs of their constituents.

Public safety and police services are among the few areas that elected officials should never resist increasing taxes when there is a crisis such as we have now in Albuquerque with our high crime rates.

On a federal level, our military defense is akin to police services on the local level, and you never see Congress put to a public vote the Pentagon budget.

Keller is quickly learning, albeit the hard way, there is a big difference between campaigning for elective office and making a lot of promises that you may be unable to keep versus actually governing and making the decisions that have to be made that will most assuredly anger people.

A mayor making decisions with an eye toward future office or a legacy is a recipe for failure.

One of those decisions that upset voters is having to increase our taxes.

As former Mayor David Rusk said, “Taxes are the dues we pay to live in a civilized society.”

It is the City Council that has the authority to raise taxes, not the mayor.

Keller needs to have a frank conversation with the Albuquerque City Council pointing out that they are the ones that have the budget responsibility to fully address our public safety needs.

If Keller feels we need a public safety tax for police and the DOJ reforms, he should advocate its enactment by the City Council and not put it to a public vote.

It’s great being mayor during good economic times and low crime rates, and miserable being mayor during a bad economy and rising crime rates.

A few mayors have found out the job is way too close to the garbage cans and the job turned out not to be what they expected.

Incentives could have kept officers on force
By Levi Borunda / Retired Albuquerque Police Officer
Saturday, December 30th, 2017 at 12:02am

When I retired from the Albuquerque Police Department in 2016, I did so with mixed feelings. On one hand, I loved serving the Albuquerque community in my role as an officer in a department filled with wonderful women and men who are dedicated to keeping Albuquerque safe. I also knew that most of Albuquerque’s citizens had faith in us, in our integrity and our commitment to them.

However, I also believed the department was moving in the wrong path, exemplified by lack of clear direction in the face of a Department of Justice settlement agreement, as well as an apparent unwillingness to incentivize experienced officers to stay on with APD. There was also the associated issue of lack of personnel, which often made the job of a uniformed officer very dangerous. Lastly, when the New Mexico state Legislature enacted necessary reforms to the Public Employment Retirement Association’s cost-of-living adjustments, they obviously didn’t consider the effects that these changes could have on law enforcement retirements. In my own situation, if I didn’t retire before June 1, 2016, I was looking at having to wait seven years before I received a small increase in my retirement pay when I finally did retire.

What would have encouraged me and other officers in my situation to stay with APD? I can truly only answer for myself, but I’ve spoken with individuals who left APD around the same time I did, and I think a combination of serious recruitment efforts along with some monetary incentives would have gone a long way in keeping us motivated to remain beyond our retirement dates. About two years before I retired, the city gave officers with 18 or more years in PERA a monthly longevity stipend, and I observed that many officers who would have retired stayed on instead, which helped our staffing levels. This incentive also went to senior command officials, a decision I don’t think was popular with either the public or rank-and-file officers. In fact, when the incentive quickly went away for regular line officers, the city continued paying this stipend to high-ranking officials, which didn’t sit well with me.

In my retirement letter to then-Chief Gorden Eden, I communicated that I would consider delaying my retirement if the city would offer a monetary offset to the negative financial impact of the PERA cost-of-living extension. I never got an answer, and I quietly retired. God bless the brave men and women who remain in the fight to keep Albuquerque safe and secure; there are just not enough of them to keep up with the growing crime problems facing us today and in the future.

Albuquerque has now reached a record high of 75 murders in one year.

(December 28, 2017 Albuquerque Journal, page A-1, “The city has reached 75 homicides with decomposed body, police say”)

https://www.abqjournal.com/1111564/the-city-has-reached-75-homicides-this-year-police-say.html

The record high was originally 70 murders in the year 1996.

Currently, there are only five homicide detectives, with three in training, and a sergeant, that are currently investing the 75 murders.

APD’s homicide clearance rate has usually been in the 80% and and it is now only 59%.

Complicating the murder investigations is the increase in the number of homeless people that have been murdered this year.

Fifteen (15) of the 75 murders involve homeless people.

The murder of homeless people are usually very difficult to solve because the murders usually occur in the outdoors and there is not much of a crime scene left where evidence and witnesses can be found.

Clearly APD’s Homicide Detective Unit is overwhelmed by the caseload and needs immediate help and resources.

The Homicide Investigation Unit needs to be at least 15 detectives.

APD Police Spokesman Simon Dobrik says “You can’t just go out to the field and grab two officers and, all of a sudden, make them homicide detectives”.

Officer Dobrik is correct when he says that it takes years of grooming through various positions, from impact to robbery and burglary detectives, as they “refine” their skills.

That may be the case, but APD is in a crisis mode and it needs to concentrate on recruiting seasoned homicide detectives from other departments if necessary.

At the very least, APD needs to ask for temporary assignment of personnel from other agencies such as the Bernalillo County Sherriff’s Department or the State Police to help clear out the cases.

The longer a homicide case takes to complete an investigation or is neglected because of lack of personnel, the less likely the cases will be solved.

Adding to the crisis is the emotional toll an unsolved murder takes on the families of the victims.

State Senator Jerry Ortiz y Pino (D-Albuquerque) is once again attempting to legalize the sale and use of marijuana in New Mexico and will once again introduce legislation in the upcoming 2018 New Mexico legislative session to put it on the ballot as a constitutional amendment for voter approval.

That means getting a majority of legislators to agree to a constitutional amendment to put it on the ballot for voter approval.

Senator Otiz y Pino needs a majority in both the Senate and the House to place the measure on the ballot for voters to decide.

For a number of years, Ortiz y Pino’s his efforts to place the issue on the ballot has failed.

Governor Suzana Martinez would not be involved and could not veto the legislation because it would be a constitutional amendment.

It is very disappointing when the New Mexico Legislature feels the need to seek constitutional amendments for voter approval for the sake of by passing Governor Martinez because of her “my way or the highway” philosophy.

In any representative form of government, people are elected to make the best decisions they can based on the facts and needs of their constituents.

During the 2017 Legislative Session, Ortiz y Pino’s resolution was tabled in committee when two Democrats expressed opposition.

The Democrats who opposed the legislation both argued they knew people with drug problems and the argument was made that pot is an “entry level drug” for harder drug abuse.

The same argument can be made that alcohol is also entry level drug and “prohibition” failed in this country years ago.

The truth is, our war on drugs has been a miserable failure in this country, especially when it comes to pot, and that is coming from someone who has prosecuted narcotics cases.

Legalize, regulate and tax recreational marijuana is the real message of State Senator Jerry Ortiz y Pino (D-Albuquerque), and it is one that should be listened to by all.

I am not sure Senator Ortiz y Pino completely understood the implications of what he was saying when he said “Legalizing marijuana wouldn’t make it more available. It’s already available. Any high school kid worth their salt can find marijuana within a half-hour”.

http://krqe.com/2017/12/26/lawmakers-renew-push-to-legalize-marijuana-in-new-mexico/

That may be true if the kid has a dealer at school he can contact who will probably have more than just recreational pot for sale.

Keep under age kids out of the argument and the availability of drugs.

Senator Ortiz y Pino argues the goal is to legalize, regulate and control the pot more effectively and legalization would significantly boost the New Mexico economy.

If the Senator’s goal is truly to legalize, regulate and control the drug as he claims, then he should draft comprehensive legislation to do just that and get it approved by the legislature with simple majority votes.

State Senators and State Representatives need to voice their true position on the issue and not just pass it on to voters.

Get the candidates for Governor and those running for the legislature to take a stand.

In all likelihood, Governor Martinez, the former Dona Ana District Attorney, will veto the legislation

At this point in time no one should really care about what Governor Martinez has to say in that she will be leaving office in a year and we will have a new Governor and a new legislature on January 1, 2019.

Healthy debate on comprehensive legislation in the 2018 session could be a pre-cursory to drafting viable legislation and adopted the following year.

After a healthy debate, Martinez just may change her mind on legalization for the sake of having accomplished at least one thing during her eight (8) as Governor.

Governor Martinez should seriously consider how she will make a living after she leaves elective office.

Martinez could apply for a dispenser’s license and go into business with former Governor Gary Johnson and sell and market pot as “NM Governor’s Choice”.

No one should be at all surprised that the Albuquerque Chamber of Commerce is supportive of the proposed new mandatory sick leave ordinance sponsored by Councilors Ken Sanchez and Don Harris.

(See December 22, 2017 Albuquerque Journal, Business Section, page A-12, “Paid Sick Leave Redux”)

www.abqjournal.com/1109629/abq-sick-leave-plan-gets-mixed-reviews.html

Sherman McCorkle, the Chamber of Commerce’s well known Republican political operative seems to like the new ordinance as well.

You got to ask why, given their strong opposition to the Healthy Work Force Ordinance which was defeated by less than 800 votes in then October, 2017 municipal election.

Least anyone forgets, Sherman McCorkle endorsed and supported County Commissioner Wayne Johnson for Mayor.

Wayne Johnson was a huge opponent of the Heathy Work Force Ordinance and actually went to District Court hearings that were held to keep it off the 2016 general election ballot fearing it would pass.

McCorkle also opposed the ballot Healthy Workforce voter initiative.

McCorkle says “This is incredibly more business-friendly than the prior one. … This is much more fair and is something that the (chamber of commerce) board would look very favorably on”.

McCorkle and the Chamber are downright “sneaky” when they say it is “much more fair” and saying they would look more favorably on it.

The reason why they are “sneaky” is because they know damn well very few employees will be covered by the new ordinance and it will only affect businesses that employ 50 or more people, meaning only 6% of all employees in Albuquerque will be covered.

The truth is 94% percent 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 Bernalillo County and of those, 14,846 had fewer than 50 employees meaning that a grand total of 900 had 50 or more workers.

Elizabeth Wagoner, an attorney with the New Mexico Center on Law and Poverty, told the City Council that the ordinance if enacted will be one of the weakest in the country and said 28 other cities and nine states have paid sick leave laws.

Wagoner said proposed ordinance “excludes many part time workers, most of whom want full time jobs or work multiple jobs to make ends meet. It excludes between 90 to 95 percent of Albuquerque businesses from coverage altogether. And it denies coverage for many important family caregiving relationships.”

And the Chamber wonders why it is losing membership and so much credibility with the community.