Envision ABQ

The following letter was sent by a neighborhood association board member. Of all the responses he received, not one supported the actions of the City Council.

Dear **** ***** Neighbors,

Most of you are now aware that our City Council on Monday night passed three and deferred one of four measures intended to redefine the scope and role of Neighborhood Associations and especially Coalitions of Neighborhood Associations in Albuquerque.

The most significant measure, which passed, is O-26-61, removing recognition of Coalitions of Neighborhood Associations under the City’s Neighborhood Recognition Ordinance (NARO), with the effect Coalitions will no longer receive notification of developments within their boundaries and will have no standing to appeal developments on behalf of their residents.

Neighborhood Associations will retain notification and standing to appeal but it should be understood that decline in Neighborhood Associations in the past years leaves vast parts of most Districts, including District 7, without Neighborhood Association representation.  O-26-61 effectively renders them voiceless about what is built in or around them.

The main justification for this Ordinance O-26-61 is the unsubstantiated claim that appeals from Coalitions cause unwarranted delay and cost to development projects to solve our “housing crisis”.   I have spent much of the last 3 months extracting the actual numbers and state of housing in Bernalillo County and can assert with mathematical certainty that the “crisis” in Albuquerque is not housing availability.  We have more housing units than households.   The crisis is housing affordability and no developer can or is solving that, unless heavily subsidized with public funds.

Sadly, our District 7 City Councilor Fiebelkorn was one of the 5 votes (along with District 1 (Telles), 5 (sponsor Lewis), 8 (Champine), and 9 (Grout)) in favor of this ordinance.   Districts 2 (Baca), 3 (Peña), 4 (Bassan), and 6 (Rogers) voted against.

Associations and Coalitions can and should continually seek to improve and be better community representatives.  As someone who, until two years ago, was relatively passive and unengaged in the local community I fully understand how easy it can be to ignore this stuff.   Organizing and maintaining groups to represent and advocate for community interest can be time-consuming and often seems inconsequential.   Why not just let our elected government representatives and the developer community run the show, especially since they are paid to do so?

For me the answer to that question becomes abundantly clear every time I venture beyond the borders of **** *****.   It becomes even more apparent when the “numbers” are tallied; the actual number of dwelling units vs. households, vacant buildings, closed businesses, or homeless living on our streets.  Albuquerque is not thriving….though it should be.   Throttling community voices, especially those representing neighborhoods, is the last thing we need.

Mayor Keller can veto this measure O-26-61, which only barely passed.  The veto almost certainly would not be overridden.

District 6 resident Patricia Willson has authored a series of papers examining the recent bills passed by the ABQ City Council. Here is one about the magical thinking going on in the minds of the councillors. Please contact mayorkeller@cabq.gov and request vetos of O-26-61, M-26-1, and M-26-2. Thank you.

City Councillor Dan Lewis introduced two ordinances and two memorials that will harm neighbourhood associations and coalitions. Council President Klarissa Peña allowed these bills (O-26-60, O-26-61, M-26-01, and M-26-02) to bypass the normal committee process. The legislation will be heard on Monday, October 5, 2026, at the regular council meeting.

O-26-60 increases fees to file an administrative appeal for an approved application to $1000 compared to $300 for appeal of a denied application.

O-26-61 rewrites the NARO to eliminate recognition for neighbourhood coalitions, HOAs, and some NAs, among other things.

M-26-01 asks the state legislature to change the definition of “aggrieved” as a basis for standing to file an appeal.

M-26-2 asks the state to remove the requirement for the local jurisdiction to provide an administrative appeal pathway and to shield the local jurisdiction from producing a record of the case. Appeals would go directly to district court.

Take action! Please contact your city councillor and ask her or him to OPPOSE O-26-60, O-26-61, M-26-01, and M-26-02. You can sign up for public comment at https://www.cabq.gov/council/find-your-councilor/public-comments/public-comment-sign-up-oct-5-2026-council-meeting

Send written comments also:https://www.cabq.gov/council/find-your-councilor/contact-all-councilors PLEASE ACT BY EARLY AFTERNOON, MONDAY, OCTOBER 5, 2026. Thank you.

One of the proposed amendments to the IDO is to eliminate the R-1 zone district and replace it with R-L that allows for duplexes and triplexes alongside single-family homes. This city-wide zoning change could put homeowners at risk of tax lightning, as properties would have to be re-assessed. The next hearing is at the Land Use, Planning, and Zoning (LUPZ) committee on Wednesday, January 28, 2026, at 5:00 p. m. in the council chambers. Sign up for public comment or give written comment by 3:00 p. m. Here is the link: https://www.cabq.gov/council/find-your-councilor/public-comments/public-comment-sign-up-january-28-2026-land-use-planning-zoning-committee-meeting

Just as some of us suspected would happen, people within Bernalillo County’s Planning Department have taken aim at Neighborhood Associations in the same manner as ABQ City Council did with the NARO. The first hearing is at the Planning Commission meeting, Wednesday, January 7, 2026, at 9:00 a. m. It is item #10 on the agenda. We encourage you to make public comment against approval (link below). Neighborhood input was not broadly solicited for review of the code prior to the department marking proposed changes.

https://www.bernco.gov/boards-commissions/speak-at-a-meeting/

The Special Hearing on October 28 on the IDO Update was continued to the regular meeting on November 20, 2025. Several EPC recommendations made at the first hearing have been collected in a 122-page document.

Community members spoke about their concerns regarding proposed changes likely to be harmful to established neighborhoods. For all of the written information related to the first meeting, check the EPC page.

Once again, the IDO update process turns the notion of stability in the zoning code on its head. The CoA Planning Department offers a series of Zoom meetings to learn about the dozens of amendments proposed for this year’s update. Here is the info:

Monday, October 6, 5:30 – 7:00 pm – Presentation + Q&A

Wednesday, October 8, 12:00 – 1:30 pm – Q&A 

Tuesday, October 14, 12:00 – 1:30 pm – Presentation + Q&A

Zoom Link

Phone: (669) 444-9171  Meeting ID: 841 0361 3555

Contact abctoz@cabq.gov for more information. There is a lot of information on the project web site.

Communities across the country face challenges to protect historic areas. Gentrification is often a threat. Here is a story from Georgia describing one situation: https://apnews.com/article/gullah-geechee-sapelo-island-georgia-court-zoning-13efe2a82ff718c9b04ee9394146697a.

Proposed amendments to the Integrated Development Ordinance were published on September 15.

First glance gave pause to community members that between Planning staff, the Mayor, and Council members, there are amendments to dress the upzoning in residential neighborhoods in a different outfit. Contact us if you want to get involved in protecting the character of your neighborhood.