This story was originally published by City Desk ABQ, a local nonprofit daily newsroom covering local government, politics and more. If you like this story, please support local, independent journalists like these by reading more and donating today at citydesk.org
By Elizabeth McCall, City Desk ABQ
Within the last week contention has escalated between Albuquerque City Council President Dan Lewis and Mayor Tim Keller’s administration after Lewis accused the mayor of playing politics over former President Donald Trump’s campaign visits. Now he is calling on other councilors to join him in publicly condemning Keller over his response to two ballot questions voters approved earlier last week.
The two questions were proposed amendments to the city’s charter. One amendment allows the council to terminate a police or fire chief without cause on a 7-2 vote. The other creates a process for filling vacancies on a three-member committee that resolves disputes between the mayor and the council.
After the amendments passed, Keller said in a news release election night that the administration “heard concerns that the language on the ballot was too vague” and the amendments may have to be “reviewed by the courts.”
Lewis said in a news release that it is unclear why the administration “did not raise concerns about the ballot language sooner, given the ample time and process available.” Lewis emphasized that Keller originally said the proposal to change the way chiefs are fired “gives reasonable checks to both the mayor and the council.”
The Bernalillo County clerk and the city clerk collaborated on the ballot language which was also approved by the secretary of state, according to the release. Lewis said Keller “misled the public and dishonored his office” and the council “should move a vote of no confidence.”
Lewis told City Desk ABQ that he suggested a vote of no confidence because Keller is “misleading the public’s trust.”
Staci Drangmeister, a spokesperson for Keller’s office, said a vote of no confidence “wouldn’t do anything.” Drangmeister said the administration sent out the news release because it received countless questions about the ballot measures and the mayor “was never involved in any discussions about the ballot language and that process.”
“Mayor Keller was helping folks during a storm that left thousands without power while Dan Lewis was overreacting and whining about the mayor,” Drangmeister said. “More meaningless grandstanding from the bitter council president. Our constituents want us to fight for them, not with each other.”
It’s unclear how many councilors might side with Lewis, but two councilors who spoke with City Desk ABQ offered two different views.
Councilor Louie Sanchez said the mayor had the chance to review the ballot measures before they went to voters and the council “went through the full process from start to finish and that’s what the charter called for.”
On the other hand, Councilor Tammy Fiebelkorn said she had constituents tell her they were confused about the ballot questions.
“They were vague, they were confusing,” Fiebelkorn said. “But it’s not surprising because these are part of the eight charter amendments that were proposed, that were fast tracked, that were voted on very quickly.”
Fiebelkorn said a vote of no confidence “wouldn’t be something I would be supportive of.”
The back and forth jabs over the ballot questions are the latest in a week’s worth of contention between Lewis and Keller.
When Trump stopped in Albuquerque on Oct. 31, he spoke at CSI Aviation, near the Albuquerque International Sunport, after officials with the Albuquerque Convention Center denied the campaign’s request to use the facility, citing maintenance issues. Lewis claimed that explanation was an excuse for Keller to attempt to stop the rally.
The campaign visit was also marked with a reminder from Keller’s administration that the city still holds an unpaid invoice for hundreds of thousands of dollars from Trump’s visit in 2019. During a recent council meeting, Lewis argued with the administration about consistency when it comes to charging for other campaign events.
Read more about the argument here.