At the Rio Grande Foundation we do a lot of presentations and discussions. With the recent announcement that New Mexico faces up to a $2 billion deficit in FY 2021 (starting July 1) we decided to make a short video.

This was an experiment. For some reason Skype focused on Patrick throughout the video. We’ll do these ever week or so as events dictate.

On this week’s podcast, Paul and Wally discuss the fact that New Mexico’s schools have been shut down and, like it or not, parents are again responsible for their children’s education. While challenging, this is both an opportunity and a challenge for New Mexicans.

A massive $2.2 trillion stimulus passes. But what will it mean? What does it do for individuals and the State of NM? What pork is in it?

In this time of social distancing and the need for state and local news and analysis, we urge listeners to share this podcast!

The Rio Grande Foundation led the charge in getting plastic bags brought back to the City of Albuquerque. The mayor recently did just that for 30 days. Also, the NY Times covered our efforts albeit in a very biased manner.

A Special Session is inevitable for the New Mexico Legislature. Should that happen sooner or later? Should the GOP be calling for one ASAP? /Oil Prices/ Ideas for cutting the budget.

Finally, many celebrated “Earth Hour” recently, but in this challenging time, we should actually be celebrating what technology and fossil fuels do to enrich our lives.

(Albuquerque, NM) – Immediately prior to the 2020 New Mexico legislative session, the consulting firm Moss Adams released a study claiming that Spaceport America began producing net economic and fiscal benefits for New Mexico as early as 2013.

Danny Seymour, a policy analyst at the Rio Grande Foundation, (the Foundation is a long-time critic of the decision by then-Gov. Bill Richardson to spend hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars in such a speculative venture) immediately went to work analyzing the study and its findings. But Seymour didn’t stop at merely deconstructing the Moss Adams report.

In his new brief, “Lost in (Sub-Orbital) Space: Financial Reality vs. and Fantasy at New Mexico’s Spaceport Authority” Seymour considers the overall financial impact of the facility as well as what it has spent and what it has brought into the State.

Seymour’s analysis, using publicly-available information in the Moss Adams report and other public documents, shows that the Spaceport America has now cost New Mexico taxpayers in excess of $275 million. This number contrasts with the project’s “original” cost of $225 million, but in the meantime there have been operational expenses as well as significant expansions and improvements made to the facility at taxpayer expense.

In his analysis Seymour contrasts the Moss Adams claims of “break-even” with a broad calculation of how much the facility has attracted to the State. Seymour finds that the facility has brought in just under $55 million to New Mexico that would have otherwise not been spent here. Even this number should not be used to calculate profit and loss as only direct lease payments could really be counted in a profit and loss statement for the Spaceport.

“Ultimately,” notes Seymour, “to be considered economically successful (let alone profitable), New Mexico’s Spaceport must become the home base for Virgin Galactic’s frequent manned commercial launches as the project was originally sold to the people of New Mexico.”

In conclusion noted Seymour, “Major government construction projects like the Spaceport often suffer from the “sunk cost” problem. It is easy to sell elected officials on the idea that the next dollar spent will make the project a success. In reality the Spaceport is a cautionary example of a State government spending taxpayer money on an extremely speculative project for which it had no expertise.”

Currently, the primary focus of our elected officials remains on addressing the viral outbreak that continues to infect people and shut down large swaths of our economy. Soon, however, a special session of the Legislature will be called to address the situation. When it happens will depend on the dynamics of the current outbreak and any number of political decisions made in both Washington and Santa Fe.

What we DO know is that there are numerous potential cuts to be made. These include everything from  17% pay raises for the Gov’s cabinet secretaries to some  more substantive savings to be had.  Regardless, as the following chart illustrates, New Mexico government is substantially bigger in terms of spending as a percentage of GDP than any neighboring state. You can check the data for other states (including state and local breakdowns) here. 

We know the State budget is going to be deeply affected by the decline in oil and gas prices. But, when they do meet to address the budget New Mexico’s legislators MUST cut spending BEFORE even considering tax hikes.

The following article appeared in the Current Argus on March 13, 2020

With Coronavirus grinding travel and much of society to a halt and oil prices having crashed, there is little chance the budget passed during the 2020 Legislature will survive the year without some major revisions.

Even prior to the session ending Senate Finance Committee Chairman John Arthur Smith said, “I don’t think any of us can walk away from here and say the spending was controlled, we’re skating on very thin ice from a spending standpoint.” It’s hard to argue with that considering that Governor Lujan Grisham and the Legislature grew government by 20% (from $6.3 billion to $7.6 billion in just two years)

They should have seen this coming. Even as the Legislature met the price of a barrel of oil was dropping. On January 6, 2020 oil was $63.27 a barrel. It dropped to $42 a barrel before the Russians and Saudis announced their price war which further reduced oil prices to about $30 a barrel. Since oil and gas comprise 40 percent of New Mexico’s budget a sustained price war makes a special session very likely.

The Legislature didn’t learn their lesson of the last decade during which New Mexico experienced stagnant economic growth due to declining oil prices. Price dropped from over $100 a barrel to less than $50 a barrel over a few short weeks in late 2014. And, despite Gov. Susana Martinez’s efforts to address systemic problems in New Mexico’s economy, the Democrat-controlled Legislature opposed her at every turn. New Mexico typically underperforms its neighbors economically, but that situation grew far more apparent as New Mexico’s oil dependency was exposed.

By the time Michelle Lujan Grisham and a new band of more “progressive” Democrats took over at the start of 2018 New Mexico was suddenly awash in revenue thanks to new discoveries in the Permian Basin. But, did we get policy reforms designed to diversify New Mexico’s economy? Not at all.

While they talked a lot about “diversifying” New Mexico’s economy the Legislature did nothing of the sort. Instead they enacted numerous tax hikes and regulations that make New Mexico even less friendly to business. We are more dependent on the volatile oil and gas industry than before.

In 2019 the Legislature adopted HB 6, the largest tax hike in New Mexico history. Among many economically-harmful provisions, that law increased personal income taxes which disproportionately impacts small business. Excise taxes on new cars were also increased by 33%.

The controversial Energy Transition Act is also going to make it harder to attract energy-intensive manufacturing operations. The Act is already impacting the Four Corners economy directly with the shutdown of San Juan Generating Station coming soon, but the cost of shifting from coal to “renewables” is going to be substantial for all PNM rate payers. Businesses will avoid uncertainty and set up shop where electricity prices are not as expensive or likely to rise in the future.

The biggest problem of the past two years was that no pro-business tax relief was passed and no reforms were made to the onerous and problematic gross receipts tax. And, rather than embracing needed reforms like “Right to Work” or “Davis Bacon” prevailing wage laws, the Legislature and Governor teamed up in this year’s 30 day session to allow more time consuming and costly complaints to be levied at construction businesses (SB 98) and for local governments to face higher labor costs and labor forces that are harder to work with (HB 364).

Will we suffer the same economic stagnation if prices remain depressed? It is hard to say for sure. This is a volume-driven boom and is not as price-dependent as prior booms. But, if prices remain too low, the Permian Basin producers will reduce activities or pull out completely. That means fewer jobs and tax dollars.

What happens next is anyone’s guess, but we do know all 112 members of the Legislature are up for election in November.

Gessing is president of New Mexico’s free market think tank, Rio Grande Foundation 

On this week’s episode, Paul interviews David Young who describes himself as a speaker, performance coach, and community leader. David is originally from Columbus, OH, but lives in New Mexico now and runs a consulting business called Being Wholehearted.

A young man, David lived in China a few years back and the two discuss Chinese culture and politics fairly extensively including aspects of the current Coronavirus outbreak.

Then, Paul and David discuss the power of virtual learning and how that tool can be used effectively not just in times of pandemic crisis, but also as a time-saving but effective learning tool.

Imagine being THIS Governor. Just a few weeks ago she was touting all manner of new government programs as part of a downright Orwellian “cradle to career” proposals.  Today this same Gov. Lujan Grisham canceled one of the supposedly core functions of state government (provision of an “adequate education” is in the State of New Mexico Constitution) for the rest of the year.

The order doesn’t impact virtual charters schools like New Mexico Connections Academy (full disclosure, I’m on the board of that school), but I have two kids in traditional public schools, so my wife and I are about to become full-fledged teachers.

In fact, this shut-down exposes the reality that, while we pay a great deal of money (more than $18,000 annually for APS) the reality is that (no matter their education levels) parents are ultimately responsible for their child’s learning. The good news is that there are more options for students than ever before. Schools are supposed to provide resources, but Khan Academy is great. There are numerous other options here.

If you live in an area that doesn’t have great Internet service, that can be a challenge. Hopefully you have books and other reading materials and textbooks.  These are not easy times. It would be great to see a more diverse, market based education system ultimately operating outside of state control that could come up with innovative solutions to these challenges. But, for now, we are all home schoolers.

The FY 2021 budget begins on July 1. The budget passed in the 2020 legislative session which wrapped up in February. Total spending contained in the budget amounted to $7.6 billion. Gov. Lujan Grisham vetoed $50 million worth of infrastructure spending as concerns mounted over the budget mounted, but a combination of low oil prices and drastically slowing economic growth will lead to spending at far lower levels than those in place today.

In an effort to put forth some real, specific ideas to address New Mexico’s looming budget shortfall, here are some ideas for legislators and Gov. Lujan Grisham to consider in a special session dealing with the FY 2021 budget.

For starters, the focus needs to be on spending cuts. Tax hikes during this time of economic crisis are simply unacceptable.

1. The early childhood fund created by House Bill 83 which is otherwise expected to receive $320 million this year should be put on hold.
2. “Free” college will have to be canceled for a savings of $27 million (between the $17 million directly appropriated for the program and the $10 million allocated to the Lottery Scholarship program.
3. Under the FY 2021  budget most State employees are expected to receive 4 percent pay raises.  This comes on top of raises passed the previous year. Cabinet secretaries received 17% pay raises in 2019. In a time of shared sacrifice with some economists from the Federal Reserve predicting unemployment rates of 30% this is a simple way to save $179 million.
4. Film subsidies as expanded in SB 2 in 2019 could cost New Mexico up to $110 million annually.  The cost to New Mexicans of these subsidies should be eliminated or at least reduced.
5. Infrastructure is a core function of government. $50 million in badly-needed infrastructure spending was vetoed by the Gov. due to budget concerns from this session. It is time to eliminate or rework New Mexico’s Davis-Bacon prevailing wage law to get more bang for our infrastructure bucks and put more New Mexicans back to work in the trades.
6. According to the Legislative Finance Committee operating the New Mexico Rail Runner costs $33 million annually. The train has been shut down due to the virus. Shutting it down permanently or at least for the duration of this crisis would save scarce resources.

Businesses are allowed plastic bags for their customers, City will suspend enforcement of the plastic bag ban.

This afternoon Albuquerque Mayor Tim Keller released an announcement that for the next 30 days, businesses will be allowed to use any type of plastic bag for their customers and the City will suspend enforcement of the plastic bag ban.

New Mexico faces unprecedented budgetary challenges in light of both the Coronavirus outbreak and dramatic restrictions on business and travel activities as well as the dramatic declines in the price of a barrel of oil. We have previously listed some ideas for dealing with the crisis here. 

The suggestions here deal with the budget year that we are currently operating under. until the end of June. It was passed in 2019. Very quickly, New Mexico has gone from having massive budget surpluses to facing big cuts and relative “austerity” in the years ahead.

The good news is that oil and gas revenues were strong most of that fiscal year. The Gov. and relevant agencies should be able to pull back on funds that have not been spent from the past fiscal year including from shut down government including the K-12 system and support for the higher ed system (not including staff pay) because their operations have been shut down. Those are pretty simple cuts, but they likely won’t be enough.

On this week’s episode, Paul and Wally provide a Coronavirus update. Which states have quarantines active? Where are things heading with the stock market and oil prices? What about New Mexico Republicans pushing for a special session?

The Lujan Grisham Administration supported the Yazzie v. Martinez suit as long as there was plenty of money available to spend on K-12. Now it looks like New Mexico is heading into a budget shortfall. It is asking the courts to drop Yazzie v. Martinez. Why now? Is this simply a nod to budgetary reality?

Based on its own ideas as well as some crowdsourced thoughts, the Rio Grande Foundation has a few ideas for Gov. Lujan Grisham to consider in this time of crisis.

RGF files a lawsuit against the City of Albuquerque arguing that city councilors violated open meeting laws.

We’re living the “Green New Deal” right now Wally and Paul discuss why.

Despite plenty of evidence (and news from both Maine and New York which have put their bans on hold) neither the City of Albuquerque nor Bernalillo County are acting to suspend or repeal their plastic bag bans.

In New Hampshire the governor issued an emergency order banning reusable bags, requiring stores to use plastic or paper instead,

The NM Grocers Association wants temporary repeal of bag ban.

With the economic challenge facing New Mexico in this crisis, here are a few small ideas for getting back to work and prioritizing what matters in these challenging times. The Rio Grande Foundation produced its original list of specific ideas and then reached out to the public online for additional ideas.

The full list which is being sent to Gov. Lujan Grisham is below.

• Waive increases in unemployment insurance costs under the State’s formula. Consider rescinding the 4% raise given to public employees and used for that purpose.
• Request a Section 1135 Medicaid waiver to eliminate burdensome rules with regard to Medicaid (Florida was just approved fort the first one in this emergency);
• Allow full licensing reciprocity for qualified medical personnel from other states;
• Relax occupational licensing rules and regulations so people can work. Giving haircuts in your home for money shouldn’t be a crime;
• Suspend business licensing rules that interfere with solo or very small startups;
• Re-purpose money from film subsidies (the industry, like most, has shut down in the State for now) and Rail Runner operations (the train is shut down as well) to health related initiatives;
• Give state tax breaks to businesses that are able to continue to pay employees through shutdowns;
• Instead of landlords shouldering the burden of unpaid rent, let the tenants pay with a form that provides the necessary documentation then allow the landlord to fully deduct that amount from his/her property taxes in the future. Government could even reimburse directly then deal with the back payments itself if it requires back payments.
• Delay collection of property taxes since many are going to lose jobs or lose salaries for awhile.
• Facilitate the transfer of workers being laid of from restaurants to be transferred, temporarily, to help out the food chain, like grocery stores stocking shelves, and unloading trucks for example. The State could facilitate with leaders in the food sector to make it happen and to compensate for wage differences.
• State government should place a moratorium on any new State regulations at least for the duration of the crisis.
• The governor, should immediately eliminate the SS tax on seniors
• Businesses which have been forced to close should not be required to pay ANY expenses including loan payments, utilities, rent and vendor invoices. Those payments should be absorbed by the state. The Land Grant Permanent Fund should be considered as a means of helping the State “backstop” these efforts.
• Schools are closed for at least three weeks and may be closed for the rest of the school season. Funds devoted to that period of time should be diverted to relieve businesses that have been shut down by the State.
• The Gov. and PED should work with virtual education providers to increase and improve education options for students in traditional public schools.
• With the Four Corners already struggling and natural gas prices (a main economic driver of the area falling from already-depressed levels) the State of New Mexico must give Enchant Energy a chance to see if its carbon sequestration plans to keep San Juan Generating Station open (and people working at the Plant and mine) will work.
• The Rail Runner is shut down. Now is the time to consider whether continuing this money-losing service is necessary.

The Lujan Grisham Administration has petitioned for dismissal of the Yazzie v. Martinez education funding suit. The Rio Grande Foundation has always been skeptical of this lawsuit so in many ways we support the Gov. in making this decision.

New Mexico already spends “adequately” (more per-student than any of its neighbors) but our education outcomes remain among the worst in the nation. So there are serious questions about the “adequacy” of our education system, but how much money is enough? What measurable outcomes would cause our system to be considered “adequate” by the courts? Perhaps, given the precipitous decline in oil prices (and likely the State budget) the Gov. is simply preparing for fiscal reality in future K-12 budgets.

At the Rio  Grande Foundation we have long supported broader school choice including improving our charter school law and allowing parents to direct education funding to private schools via tax credits or vouchers. Those are NOT among Gov. Lujan Grisham’s solutions.

So, should Yazzie be dismissed? Probably. Is New Mexico’s K-12 system “adequate?” Not really. But, the tools needed to make the system adequate really don’t require more money and we see no sign that this union-friendly Gov. will embrace choice as a means of making our system “adequate.”

RGF president Paul Gessing recently sat down with Fred Martino of KRWG TV in Las Cruces to discuss the aftermath of the 2020 Legislature and how things will likely shake out in the wake of the Coronavirus situation and the rapid decline in oil and gas prices.

Ryan Laughlin of KOB TV did a great job covering the special Albuquerque City Council meeting which resulted in Mayor Keller receiving significant new powers. He also covered our lawsuit which was filed in the aftermath of the meeting and challenges the legality of the meeting and the powers delegated to the Mayor.

On this week’s podcast, Paul sat down with Charles Sullivan. An attorney, Charles moved to New Mexico from upstate New York several decades ago, largely for the weather. But, as you can read for yourself in his recent American Thinker column Charles is frustrated by the State’s politics and what he believes it has done to the State in terms of the overall economy, the education system, and crime.

Mr. Sullivan clearly loves New Mexico. He isn’t going anywhere, but he also has some tough love for the state he’s lived in for nearly 40 years.

Imagine,  massive reductions in vehicle traffic as this photo of “The 405” during a recent “rush hour” in Los Angeles illustrates.

Massive declines in air travel as flights are canceled and people refrain from air travel.

And even slower population growth (long a quiet goal of the environmental movement) due to as many as 1.6 million deaths.  That is obviously the reality we are living through right now due to the Coronavirus, but in many respects this is what environmental groups WANT to see happen as a means of reducing CO2 emissions.

Finally, while presidential candidate Joe Biden said recently that he wants to “ban new fracking”the fact is that due to dropping demand (see travel declines above) we may not see much fracking in the near future. Gas prices may be low, but New Mexico’s Permian Basin and oil producers across the nation are going to see massive reductions in jobs and states will see big declines in tax revenues. All of this is gleefully supported by radical environmentalists.

Less mobility, less economic growth, less freedom, and potentially even fewer people on the planet. For most of us it is an experience we are gritting our teeth and bearing while hoping it will end as soon as possible. For many in the environmental movement the current crisis is (at least temporarily) advancing their agenda of lower CO2 emissions.

This article appeared in the Albuquerque Journal on March 18, 2020.

Albuquerque City Councilor Pat Davis’s recent comments on expanding the city’s ban on plastic bags were out of touch, especially in this time of coronavirus.

The councilor recently said he wants to amend city law to get rid of plastic bags that are thicker than 2.25 thousandths of an inch. The thicker bags were exempted from the law for the simple reason they are considered “reusable,” but Davis thinks retailers and the public are abusing the situation and that it amounts to a “loophole.”

Davis recently stated, “If (retailers) keep bringing back new plastic bags, we’re going to keep banning them, and eventually they’ll get the message.” He anticipates the city will try to ban more bags this summer.

In the meantime, due to coronavirus concerns, major retailers are rightly emphasizing public safety above environmental concerns. Dunkin’ Donuts and Starbucks are just two of the largest companies that have disallowed the use of reusable cups due to health concerns.

Apparently Davis has no concern about the impact of the virus, which has disrupted all facets of American life. This isn’t mere hyperbole on my part. The problem with reusable cloth bags preferred by Davis and other opponents of plastic bags is real.

A 2018 report from Loma Linda University was based on an experiment in which researchers purposely “contaminated” a reusable bag with a harmless form of a virus. A single shopper then went through a typical grocery store, and the research team tracked the spread of the virus.

Quoting directly from the executive summary of the report, “The data show that MS2 spread to all surfaces touched by the shopper; the highest concentration occurred on the shopper’s hands, the checkout stand, and the clerk’s hands.”

Additionally in 2012 epidemiologists from the Oregon Public Health Division and Oregon Health & Science University published a peer reviewed article in the Journal of Infections Disease that documented a reusable grocery bag was the point source in an actual virus outbreak in the Pacific Northwest.

For years, people have simply believed that people will wash their bags. But recent runs on hand sanitizer and toilet paper show society doesn’t always act with balance. Loma Linda researches found only 3% of bags get washed. With companies prohibiting reusable cups as a precaution, we should at least temporarily suspend government-mandated use of reusable bags, a known and documented risk.

Far from “doubling down” on a plastic bag ban that is of dubious environmental benefit and may in fact be a threat to public health, Davis and the rest of Albuquerque’s City Council should consider ending the plastic bag ban at least until fears of the coronavirus subside. Of course, common colds, the flu and other illnesses are a constant threat, so the Loma Linda University study’s findings should be of concern to all of us.

Perhaps a more realistic assessment of the pluses and minuses of plastic bags and other items might be in order at City Council – and Bernalillo County which has an even more onerous plastic ban in place? We’re not holding our breath for an outbreak of sanity to occur alongside that of coronavirus, but we can hope and hold politicians like Davis accountable.

The Rio Grande Foundation is an independent, non-partisan, tax-exempt research and educational organization dedicated to promoting prosperity for New Mexico based on principles of limited government, economic freedom and individual responsibility.

Update: on the same day this article was published in the Journal, New York State put its plastic bag ban on hold for health reasons.

(Albuquerque, NM) – On Friday, March 13, 2020, the City Council of the City of Albuquerque announced that it would be holding a closed meeting the following Monday, March 16, 2020. At that meeting which occurred this past Monday, the Council amended its Emergency Powers Ordinance which has been on the books for several decades.

Click Here to Donate Now

The Emergency Powers Ordinance contains numerous controversial provisions which, under New Mexico’s Open Meetings Act, residents of Albuquerque have a right to participate in with their members of the City Council.

The language of the Open Meetings Act is very simple. It states in part that, “…all meetings of any committee or policy-making body of the legislature held for the purpose of discussing public business or for the purpose of taking any action within the authority of or the delegated authority of the committee or body are declared to be public meetings open to the public at all times.”

The Rio Grande Foundation asserts in the lawsuit which has been filed in New Mexico district court that the City has violated the New Mexico Open Meetings Act by holding a City Council meeting March 16, 2020 without proper notice and without conducting such according to the provisions of the Open Meetings Act therein violating the Due Process owing to the citizens of Albuquerque.

Furthermore, the decades-old Emergency Powers Ordinance to which several amendments were made is itself unconstitutional. The Ordinance gave the Mayor power to restrict sales of firearms and ammunition. These provisions which were not amended on Monday violate New Mexico’s Constitution, which states:

“No law shall abridge the right of the citizen to keep and bear arms for security and defense, for lawful hunting and recreational use and for other lawful purposes, but nothing herein shall be held to permit the carrying of concealed weapons. No municipality or county shall regulate, in any way, an incident of the right to keep and bear arms.”

Said Rio Grande Foundation President Paul Gessing, “The Rio Grande Foundation understands that we are in a crisis situation right now, but laws like the Open Meetings Act and our State and Federal protections on the right to self defense were intended for crises.”

The Foundation’s lawsuit states that both the Open Meetings Act and the long-existing firearms restrictions violate New Mexico Law and should be considered void.

Click Here to View the Complaint as Filed

Paul and Wally give an update on the current situation: oil prices are close to $30. The Federal Reserve slashes interest rates to zero (rates were 1.75/1.5 at start of 2020).

While government is considering a number of “stimulus” measures, Paul and Wally wonder how government can stimulate the economy when Americans can’t really spend any money because virtually everything has been canceled?

Also, while traditional schools have been closed virtual options exist.

Paul and Wally address the State budget and what they expect to happen. Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham vetoed a spending bill that would have appropriated $49.5 million to fund 216 road projects statewide, including funding for bike paths, safety enhancements and median landscaping in Albuquerque. Wally and Paul agree that a special session is still likely. When will/should it happen?

Does the virus justify mandatory paid sick leave? If so, what kind of leave policy?

Pat Davis wants to crack down on plastic bags. Could there be a worse idea?

Finally, channel 13 covers our successful complaint against Mayor Keller’s use of City website to campaign for Democracy Dollars:

RGF recently hosted successful Liberty on the Rocks in Albuquerque and Las Cruces.

We at the Rio Grande Foundation remain busy and active in this trying time and we also are working to keep government accountable and push back against government overreach. Here in Albuquerque an ordinance was passed that expands the Mayor’s powers to include times of health emergencies. This ordinance was passed very quickly and without a single public meeting on the issue and that concerns us.

But, thanks to State laws now in place, local ordinances dealing with guns and liquor provisions in the local ordinance that existed prior to its being amended last night WILL NOT impact gun rights.  See our analysis here. 

This story (in which RGF’s Paul Gessing is quoted) from KOB 4 TV deals with the ordinance prior to it being voted on:

This story which does not include video quotes RGF after the vote.

This story for which Gessing was quoted discusses the economic impacts of what is happening right now.

Finally, you ‘ll note that the video of Mr. Gessing is not in the usual setting. KOB TV requested a Skype interview due to virus concerns.

At last night’s (Monday’s) Albuquerque City Council meeting the Council passed this ordinance which expands the Mayor’s emergency powers. Among the specific provisions was an expansion of when these powers can be used. Here is the language, “[An actual or eminent outbreak, or reasonable threat of an actual or eminent outbreak, of any infectious disease that presents an unusual threat to the health or safety of the residents of the City, or threatens to unreasonably strain the medical or emergency service resources available in the City.”

The ordinance goes on to allow the Mayor to do the following:

(C) Order the closing of all retail package liquor stores and outlets.

(D) Order the closing of all bars and other establishments selling intoxicating liquor or beer by the drink.

(E) Order the discontinuance of selling, distributing or giving away gasoline or other liquid flammable or combustible products in any container other than a gasoline tank properly affixed to a motor vehicle said sale to be limited to not more than one gallon per motor vehicle, or in the alternative, order the closing of gasoline stations and other establishments, the chief activity of which is the sale, distribution or dispensing of liquid flammable or combustible products.

(F) Order the discontinuance of selling, distributing, dispensing or giving away of any firearms or ammunition of any character whatsoever, or in the alternative, order the closing of all establishments or portions thereof where arms and/or ammunition are kept for sale or distribution.

So, how does the City claim that the expanded ordinance “Does not allow the prohibition of sales of any item during a public health emergency.”

Simply put, the regulation of guns/ammo and liquor are preempted by the State of New Mexico and State laws supersede local laws. At least as it currently stands, these provisions of the expanded ordinance cannot take effect.

Of course, the existence of a national abortion policy (Roe v. Wade) has not stopped advocates on both sides of the abortion issue from having heated public debates over a 1969 New Mexico law which restricts abortion.

It would seem that many of these concerns and problems could have been avoided if City Council had taken some time to formulate this policy rather than introducing a bill on Friday and passing it on Monday in a meeting that was closed to the public.

Rahm Emmanuel once said, “Never let a crisis go to waste.”

The Albuquerque City Council is considering a “new” ordinance (actually amending its existing ordinance) to dramatically expand the powers of the Mayor to regulate or outright ban certain activities including public meetings and assemblies in times of civil unrest or potential civil unrest (or threatened epidemics).

The City ALREADY has a broad ordinance on the books which allows the Mayor to “Order the discontinuance of selling, distributing, dispensing or giving away of any firearms or ammunition of any character whatsoever, or in the alternative, order the closing of all establishments or portions thereof where arms and/or ammunition are kept for sale or distribution.”

The new version would expand those powers to allow for the Mayor to act in “An actual or eminent outbreak, or reasonable threat of an actual or eminent outbreak, of any infectious disease that presents an unusual threat to the health or safety of the residents of the City, or threatens to unreasonably strain the medical or emergency service resources available in the City.

The entire ordinance (which is currently the information that is not underlined or struck, that is the new material) is pretty aggressive. Do we want the Mayor to be able to take on a lot of new powers due to the “reasonable threat of an ’eminent’ outbreak?” It is a big question. There has been zero public debate or discussion on the issue and it will be voted on at the Council meeting the evening of Monday, March 16.

Because of said epidemic public comment is NOT being done in person at the meeting Monday night. Instead, you can use the following link specifically for this meeting to contact your City Councilors to let them know what you think.

Can elected officials use taxpayer-funded websites to campaign for and against local ballot measures? That’s what Mayor Keller’s Administration did using the City of Albuquerque’s website in the November 2019 election and the Rio Grande Foundation called “foul” and filed a complaint against the Mayor.

We won. Channel 13 covered the situation in the story below: