Albuquerque City Council Meeting Summary – November 5, 2025
STREAMING COPY IN PREPARATION — RECORDING AVAILABLE FROM THE ORIGINAL SOURCE
Albuquerque City Council Meeting Summary – November 5, 2025
The 26th Albuquerque City Council convened for its 41st meeting to address appeals, administration questions, and significant legislative items regarding traffic safety, housing dignity, and financial instruments. The session featured a strong public presence advocating for pedestrian safety following recent fatalities, detailed discussions on the Broken Windows program and AED procurement, and the unanimous passage of amendments designed to protect vulnerable road users and preserve the dignity of senior housing residents.
Consent Calendar
- Item E, EC 519 (Lotus Engineering & Sustainability LLC contract) and Item E, EC 520 were pulled from the consent agenda for discussion regarding grant parameters and Justice 40 alignment.
- Remaining consent agenda items, including appointments to boards/commissions, were approved unanimously.
Public Comments & Testimony
- Opposition to Officer Immunity: Francesco Artist expressed strong opposition to leadership allegedly violating oaths of office and covering up laws broken by police, calling for accountability rather than the removal of immunity.
- Food Insecurity Concerns: Anami Das and Let's Autvo (Letra Otva) testified that SNAP benefit extensions would lead to increased crime and homicide; they urged the city to utilize resources like the convention center catering to feed hungry residents immediately.
- First Amendment & Civil Rights: Leo Ortiz, Miguel Alvarez, and Nicole Finch (Zoom) expressed concerns regarding police overreach, specifically the use of horses on sidewalks, prior restraint of press (spotlighting cameras), and the need for new leadership to address city issues.
- Library Bond Support: Nicole Finch expressed overwhelming support for the library bond, emphasizing the critical need to replace the 50-year-old HVAC system at the main branch to prevent operational shutdowns.
- Traffic Safety Advocacy: Family members of Kayla Van Landingham (Melinda Montoya, Diana Zamora, Sonai Perez) delivered emotional testimonies calling for the passage of safety ordinances. They expressed gratitude for the legislation but highlighted the tragic necessity of the changes following Kayla's death by an inattentive driver.
- Support for Infrastructure: Ted Numitsky and Eva Montoya supported the traffic code updates, requesting the addition of speed bumps near dangerous intersections and QR codes for reporting damaged infrastructure.
Discussion Items
-
Appeal AC 2502 (Wall/Variance Permit): The City Council reviewed the appeal of Cynthia Hernandez regarding the denial of a 3-foot front wall variance at 3421 Abbey Court. The Land Use Hearing Officer recommended denying the appeal due to the applicant's failure to satisfy the "20% rule" (only 2 of 3 required neighboring properties existed). Councilor Pena questioned the consistency of enforcement regarding over-height fences in District Three.
- Action: Council accepted the Luho recommendation to uphold the ZHE denial (7-2 vote).
-
Administration Q&A:
- APD Academy Lawsuit: City Attorney Lauren Keefe clarified that the APD case went to trial and was lost, not settled; the intent is to appeal. Funding for any judgment would come from the risk fund, but no individual staff reprimand regarding "conduct unbecoming" was found to be implied by the verdict.
- Rail Trail Lawsuit: Keefe confirmed the executive branch has the authority to litigate regarding the Rail Trail without Council approval if using existing budget funds, though the terminology regarding "one-third of the cost" was noted as potentially misleading by Councilor Champagne.
- Broken Windows Program: Director Turner reported 210 windows replaced in the first round with 100% positive feedback. The second round (allocated $215,000) is open in the SIP code areas (pockets of poverty) to reduce blight and assist small businesses.
- 2024 Progress Report: CAO noted delays due to quorum issues with the Indicators Progress Commission; they aim to publish before year-end.
- Firefighter Reports: Monthly service reports had paused due to retirement of a staff member; they are expected to resume in January 2026.
- Ballot Error: Council President Bassan and Clerk Watson discussed the omission of P25-7 from the May ballot. The Clerk confirmed no remedial ballot option exists currently.
- AED Procurement: Councilor Rogers expressed frustration over the delay in procuring and training staff on AEDs since February 2025. The CAO committed to providing exact installation dates by the following day, acknowledging the liability risks.
-
EC 519 & EC 520 (Tree Planting Grant): Councilors Champagne and Rogers questioned the use of city funds for regional tree planting if the grant is from the USDA Forest Service. The Sustainability Officer clarified that the trees will be planted entirely within Albuquerque to address urban heat islands, though the application included regional partners (Sandoval, Valencia, Torrance, Bernalillo) to strengthen the grant bid. The Justice 40 principles continue to guide the selection of planting locations despite federal changes.
-
O 98 (Traffic Code Updates): Councilor Febalcorn introduced updates to the traffic code and sidewalk ordinances.
- Amendment 1: Added definitions for "personal assistive mobility devices" to ensure ADA compliance.
- Amendment 2: Modified definitions for vulnerable road users regarding crossing at intersections, allowing bicycles/e-bikes to cross uncontrolled intersections where signals are present within 600 feet, to discourage mid-block crossing while avoiding criminalization.
-
R 196 (Education Campaign): Resolution establishing a public education campaign for the new traffic code.
- Amendment 1 (Reporting): Required monthly presentations for the first 180 days, then quarterly via Executive Communication (EC) thereafter.
- Amendment 2 (Inventory): Added a requirement to report on the status of crosswalk striping and electronic beacons (including LED vs. Halogen status) by May 1, 2026. Councilors discussed the liability implications of creating a public record of broken equipment, with legal staff noting that knowledge alone does not establish liability if the city lacks the resources to act.
-
R 201 (Juniper Flats Naming): Councilor Grout moved to preserve the name "Juniper Flats" for senior housing at 25 Hotel Circle Northeast to maintain dignity and avoid association with the "Gateway" shelter system. Administration and legal staff raised concerns regarding Separation of Powers and potential micromanagement of executive naming rights. Councilor Lewis argued against the separation of powers claim, viewing it as an overreach by the administration.
Key Outcomes
- Appeal AC 2502: Motion accepted to uphold the ZHE denial (7-2 vote). Counselor Lewis and Vice President Pinya voted no.
- O 98 (Traffic Code): Passed unanimously as amended (including the 210, 214, and 216 amendments). Councilor Champagne voted no on the initial vulnerability crossing amendment but the final version passed.
- R 196 (Education Campaign): Passed unanimously as amended. Required the inclusion of APS and driver education schools in outreach and the May 1st inventory report.
- R 201 (Juniper Flats): Passed unanimously (8-0 vote); Councilor Lewis and President Bassan voted yes, though they expressed concerns about the legal mechanism. The resolution directs the administration to preserve the name.
- Bond & Resolution Approvals: R 201 (Juniper Flats) and R 205 (Quarterly Ops Reports) passed unanimously. The journal for October 20th was adopted unanimously.
- Consent Agenda: Items EC 519 and EC 520 were subsequently approved unanimously after public discussion.
Meeting Transcript
And then there's that. Good evening. It's November 5th, 2025, the 41st meeting of the 26th Council will come to order. All counselors will be present this evening with Counselor Sanchez joining via Zoom and Counselor Lewis coming up just a little bit later this evening. We're going to start with a moment of silence, followed by the Pledge of Allegiance in English and then in Spanish. One is justice. Civic Plaza parking passes are provided for members of the public. You can obtain a parking pass from council staff at the table near the chamber's entrance. Members of the public city staff and the media have the ability to view this meeting in person and on live streams through four different platforms. Gov TV on Comcast Channel 16, the Gov TV website, YouTube, and Zoom webinar. The live streams can be accessed from most smartphones, tablets, or computers. Also, this meeting is closed captioned, and you may enable the closed captioning services on your television or device at this time. The video recording of this and all past council meetings will remain available for viewing at any time on the city council's website. Council staff is available via telephone if members of the public need assistance finding the videos online. Please call 505-768-3100 for assistance during business hours Monday through Friday, 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. The council will take a break at approximately 7 p.m. this evening if needed. With regard to decorum in the chambers, we want tonight's proceeding to be as civil and respectful as possible. Please do not make any personal attacks and please no applause, snapping, or other outbursts during the meeting. I will provide one warning to anyone causing a disruption. Upon the second or continued disruption, that individual will be asked to leave the chambers, and if necessary, security will be asked to escort that person out of the chambers. Such removal from the council chambers will be effective for the remainder of the meeting. And if continued disruptions occur, I may recess the meeting until order is restored and if necessary may clear the chambers of persons participating in the disturbance. This meeting will go a lot smoother if we are respectful of one another. Counselors, we're going to change the agenda around a little bit and begin with our appeal this evening. So we're going to move to item 11, appeals AC 2502. Cynthia Hernandez, applicant, appeals the zoning hearing examiner's decision to deny a permit, wall or fence major and a variance of three feet to the maximum three-foot wall height in the front yard for the property located at 3421 Abbey Court Northwest, zoned RT PR 2025 020042 MZP 2025 00003 and V8 2025 00015. Thank you, Madam President. Good evening, counselors. The zoning hearing examiner determined that the application should be denied because the applicant failed to satisfy what's called the 20% rule for front yard fences exceeding three feet in height. The 20% rule requires that 20% of the properties within 330 feet and on the same street as the property must also have front yard walls or fences that are taller than three feet in height. The applicant appealed the decision of the ZHE to deny the applications to the city council, who referred the appeal to the land use hearing officer. And the Luho recommends that the city council deny the appeal and uphold the ZHE's uh decision to deny the wall permit and variance. In reviewing the ZHE's application of the 20% rule, the LUHO found that because there were 15 total properties within 330 feet and on the same street as the property, the applicant must show three properties with taller walls. However, the evidence produced showed there were only two properties with taller walls. The appellant does not dispute the ZHE's conclusions or the evidence in the record that supported the decision to deny the application. Instead, the Luho found that in the appeal, the appellant essentially resubmitted the same evidence she submitted with her application to the ZAG and argued that the fence is necessary to protect the children that she cares for in her daycare business that she operates from the home. So the Luho concluded that the ZHE's finding that the appellant failed to satisfy the 20% rule is supported by substantial factual evidence and should be upheld. The Luho recommends that the appeal be denied and the ZHE's denial of the wall permit and variance requests be upheld. And this is the accept or reject stage, so you will not hear from the applicant appellant. Um but I'll do my best to answer any questions that you may have. Counselors, would anybody care to make a motion? Or do you have any questions? Madam Vice President. Um thank you, Madam President. Just a couple of questions. I know this is something that's come up with um some of the um recommendations for changes for um fence heights. This has been a proposed for the IDO. Um, you know, I I don't see the planning director here, but I guess maybe my question is is that how do we address there's tons in like in District Three that are over this height, right?
openpublica.com