Downtown revitalization bill fails in landslide vote

City Councilor Joaquín Baca was the only member on the dais whose hand shot up when it came time to vote for a bill aimed at lowering vacancy rates in Downtown Albuquerque.

After dominating conversation at the majority of the previous council meetings, the “Renaissance and Progress for Downtown Albuquerque” bill failed on an 8-1 vote Monday night.

“This started as a good faith effort to put together something that would address multiple issues, longstanding issues. I met with multiple groups, multiple stakeholders: property owners, business owners, residents, the neighborhood association, so many different associations,” Baca said. “We made a ton of reasonable amendments in this. I think this is a very reasonable bill.”

The bill would have created a fee for owners of buildings that are vacant and dilapidated in hopes of spurring business growth. It also included a section that creates penalties and fines for people “obstructing” the sidewalk to make Downtown more pedestrian friendly.

The bill was criticized by council members and members of the public for being too broad, criminalizing homelessness and burdening the business community. There were 11 amendments proposed to the bill from the past meeting, made by multiple councilors.

Baca reintroduced the bill by reciting — almost verbatim — an op-ed opinion piece he wrote that was published by the Journal.

The council voted 8-1 to table the bill at the Sept. 16 meeting. City Councilor Klarissa Peña was the lone vote against tabling the bill that time.

Section five is a part of the bill with a “no obstruction” clause that penalizes people for lying or crouching on the Downtown sidewalks in an attempt to encourage more pedestrian and safety activity.

People showed up in droves — at both meetings — to speak out against the legislation. On Monday, more than 40 speakers signed up to deliver remarks in person and remotely. Nine came to express support of the bill.

Jordon McConnell, communications chair of the Albuquerque chapter of Strong Towns, a national nonprofit advocating for walkable cities, showed up to speak in support of the bill.

“Our members believe this bill is a good step for revitalizing Downtown and ensuring a brighter future for the entire city,” Mconnell said. “After polling membership, we found unanimous support for most provisions of the bill.”

But he aired a grievance the organization has that is shared by most of the people who signed up to speak against the bill.

“Our membership does, however, have concerns about the no obstruction zone section five, particularly its impact on the unhoused community,” McConnell said. “We hope to see a more compassionate approach that focuses on services rather than fines.”

State Sen. Antoinette Sedillo Lopez, D-Albuquerque, who represents portions of the International District, Nob Hill and Uptown, spoke about the impact the bill could have on the city’s homeless.

“If people are moved out of Downtown, that just means they’re going to be somewhere else, and that’s not going to ultimately solve the issue,” Sedillo Lopez said. “Criminalizing individuals and moving them around like pieces is wasting resources. I urge you to put your resources into getting to the root causes of why these individuals are on the street and how we can help them.”

Representatives of the Greater Albuquerque Chamber of Commerce and the New Mexico chapter of NAIOP, a commercial real estate development association, spoke against repercussions the bill could have on the business community, such as fees to property owners who have dilapidated or vacant buildings.

Before the bill was shot down by the council, its president, Dan Lewis, said he liked parts of the bill brought forth by Baca and appreciated the councilor’s effort, but it had too many “unintended consequences.”

Councilor Louie Sanchez — a former Albuquerque Police Department officer — said he believes there needs to be more police hired to enforce the bill.

Councilor Tammy Fiebelkorn shared her reason for voting against the bill, which was in line with most of the public speakers.

“If this bill were four bills, which in my mind it should’ve been, I would’ve voted for two of them with no amendments,” Fiebelkorn said. “There are really great ideas in here. I really do support them and I hope we can bring back in a way that can get some serious consideration from this council.

“But I also think that there is this section five in here that is just incredibly problematic for the citizens of Albuquerque.”