Albuquerque Municipal Election, Tuesday, October 5, 2005

[WMS]

Well, I finally assembled enough information for those who may be interested. This is a pretty damn big race here in NM, and has absorbed a lot of my 2005 political attention.

For your viewing pleasure - or not - a ton of stuff on the Albuquerque Municipal Election! In multiple posts, since there's that pesky size limit.

ALBUQUERQUE MUNICIPAL ELECTION: Tuesday, October 4, 2005 (yes, tomorrow):

Up for re-election: Mayor (obviously); City Council Districts 1, 3, 5, 7, 9; Ballot Propositions (Raise Minimum Wage, Public Financing of Elections, Voter ID); Bonds

Here's a primer for you, from the Albuquerque Journal:
Monday, August 29, 2005
City Campaign Offers Fierce Competition
    Expect an already bitter mayoral race to intensify as the campaigns approach their final month before the Oct. 4 election.
    Two city councilors, including the council president, are among those running against incumbent Martin Chávez, and political enmity has spilled over into relations at City Hall. Fights have centered on the general-obligation bond program, separation of powers and other issues.
    Attacks on the mayor are expected to become more frequent as opponents try to shake his status as the front-runner.
    In addition to the mayor's race, the election will feature races for five of the nine City Council seats and an estimated $121 million in general-obligation bond proposals.
    The ballot also will include proposals for a $7.50 citywide minimum wage, a requirement that people show a photo ID before voting in municipal elections and a plan for public financing of mayoral and City Council campaigns.
    In this year's mayoral race, Oct. 4 may not be the end of it. Some of the candidates predict the vote will be divided enough to force a runoff election.
    If no candidate gets at least 40 percent of the vote, a runoff election will be held in November between the two top vote-getters.

Here's what WMS says:
Martin J. Chavez - incumbent centrist Democrat, may actually be more conservative than the Republican, pro-business, strongest candidate
Eric G. Griego - current City Councillor, District 3, leftist Democrat, backed by the leftist Soltari group, fighting for distant second place
David L. Steele - currently on the City Environmental Commission or something like that, union Democrat (but public sector...?), so probably between Chavez and Griego, way back in fourth place
Brad Winter - current City Councillor, District 4, centrist Republican, may be ot the left of Chavez in some ways, fighting for distant second place, might be dangerous in a runoff vs. Chavez but has some Rep backing

ENDORSEMENT NOTES: Albuquerque Journal, center-leaning right dominant local paper; Albuquerque Tribune, center-left small local paper; Weekly Alibi, left-wing alternative weekly.
...
Martin J. Chávez
    POLITICAL PARTY: Democrat
    AGE: 53
    EDUCATION: bachelor's degree from the University of New Mexico; juris doctorate, Georgetown University Law Center
    OCCUPATION: Mayor of Albuquerque
    FAMILY: mother, Sara; daughter, Martinique, 15; son, Zeke, 11
    POLITICAL/GOVERNMENT EXPERIENCE: Mayor of Albuquerque, 1993-1997, 2001-2005; state senator; founding director of the New Mexico Worker's Compensation Administration
    TOP INITIATIVES IF ELECTED
   
Expand the Albuquerque Police Department to 1,100 officers, be committed to community policing;
   
Create a new way to help Albuquerque's public schools;
   
Establish a light-rail system for Albuquerque and emphasize multi-modal transportation.
    POSITIONS
   
Supports new impact fee system;
   
Opposes raising minimum wage to $7.50 in Albuquerque; it should be done at the federal level;
   
Supports removing big dollars from campaigns. If taxpayers invest in campaign, current federal plan is preferable to city ballot question;
   
Supports measure requiring voters to show a photo ID at city elections.

Endorsed by AJ, AT
-----------------------------------------------------
 
Eric Griego
    POLITICAL PARTY: Democrat
    AGE: 39
    EDUCATION: Bachelor's in government and journalism, New Mexico State University; master's degree in public management, University of Maryland
    OCCUPATION: Albuquerque city councilor, December 2001-present; Engaging Communication, LLC, president, June 2001-present; University of New Mexico Honors Program, lecturer, September 2000-present; Albuquerque Technical Vocational Institute, instructor, January 2000-present.
    FAMILY: Not married; one daughter, Melissa, 18
    POLITICAL/GOVERNMENT EXPERIENCE: Albuquerque city councilor, representing District 3; December 2001-present; vice president, 2003-2004; chairman of the Finance and Government Operations Committee, 2002. More than 10 years of working in government.
    TOP INITIATIVES IF ELECTED
   
Expand our approach to public safety by balancing fully staffed and equipped police, fire and emergency services with programs to address causes of crime;
   
Play an active role in public education. The city can no longer be a passive observer;
   
Balance growth policy. Need planned growth that builds communities for families.
    POSITIONS
   
Supports the new system of impact fees;
   
Supports raising minimum wage to $7.50 in Albuquerque;
   
Supports public financing of campaigns for city office;
   
Opposes current measure requiring voters to show a photo ID when voting in city elections.

Endorsed by WA
---------------------------------------------------------
   
David L. Steele
    POLITICAL PARTY: Democrat
    AGE: 66
    EDUCATION: High school
    OCCUPATION: Retired
    FAMILY: Married 47 years; seven grandchildren; one great-grandchild and twins on the way.
    POLITICAL/GOVERNMENT EXPERIENCE: Four years as state Construction Industries Division director; 17 years as city of Albuquerque chief building official and assistant planning director.
    TOP INITIATIVES IF ELECTED
   
Long-range city planning with smarter growth;
   
Better planning for construction projects, with better notification to those who are affected. Also, coordinate traffic lights for smoother traffic;
   
More police on city streets to provide safer neighborhoods.
    POSITIONS
   
Opposes the new system of impact fees;
   
Supports raising minimum wage to $7.50 in Albuquerque;
   
Supports public financing of campaigns for city office;
   
Supports measure requiring voters to show a photo ID at city elections.

Endorsed by None
------------------------------------------------------------- 
Brad Winter
    POLITICAL PARTY: Republican
    AGE: 53
    EDUCATION: Received degrees from New Mexico Junior College and the University of Oklahoma; received a master's from University of New Mexico; Ph.D in education, University of New Mexico
    OCCUPATION: Executive director at Albuquerque Public Schools, City Council president; high school coach, teacher, former assistant principal at Highland and La Cueva high schools
    FAMILY: Married, seven children
    POLITICAL/GOVERNMENT EXPERIENCE: Twice elected to the City Council from District 4; three times elected council president by members of both parties; currently president of the City Council
    TOP INITIATIVES IF ELECTED
   
Taxpayer Protection Plan: require voter approval for tax increases and limit spending increases to no more than inflation plus population growth;
   
Ethics reform: restore honesty and trust;
   
More police on the streets; real accountability.
    POSITIONS
   
Wants to adjust the new system of impact fees so schools are exempt;
   
Opposes raising minimum wage to $7.50 in Albuquerque;
   
Opposes public financing of campaigns for city office;
   
Supports measure requiring voters to show photo ID for city elections.

Endorsed by None (good councillor, though)
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Runoff Outcomes in descending order of likelihood (#1 - no runoff as Chavez gets 40%+)
Chavez vs. Winter - closest outcome, probably for Chavez
Chavez vs. Griego - Chavez, no doubt
Winter vs. Griego - in-between other two but probably Winter
Steele vs. eh, who are we kidding? [see poll post]

See this stuff for yourself, at the currently free Journal Election Guide
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[WMS]

Albuquerque City Council

ENDORSEMENT NOTES: Albuquerque Journal, center-leaning right dominant local paper; Albuquerque Tribune, center-left small local paper; Weekly Alibi, left-wing alternative weekly.

District 1: Left-leaning District
Miguel A. Gomez (BOO! HISS!) - incumbent leftist Democrat, Soltari-backed, weak candidate, going down in flames. Endorsed by: WA
Ken Sanchez (YAY!) - centrist Democrat, backed by Chavez, ex-County Commissioner for the West Side, strong candidate, quite likely to win. Endorsed by: AJ, AT

District 3: Leftist District
Dianna Dorn-Jones - center-left/centrist Democrat, Chavez-backed, campaign has stalled. Endorsed by: AT
Isaac Benton - leftist Democrat, Soltari-backed, probable victor. Endorsed by: WA
The AJ made no endorsement.

District 5: Right-leaning District
Michael Cadigan - incumbent...kinda center-left Democrat, but smart enough to back the infrastructure issues. Not sure if either Soltari or Chavez is weighing in on this one. Likely victor. Endorsed by: AJ, AT, WA
Betty Valdez - Republican candidate, has good funding but probably not enough to win this race - I'm sure we'll see her in another race, though. Endorsed by None.

District 7: Right-leaning District
Marianne Dickinson - leftist Democrat, Soltari-backed, competitive. Endorsed by: AT, WA
Wayne A. Johnson - Neither Soltari nor Republican nor (known) Chavez backed, but the best organization of the lot and well-funded - probable victor, despite the 'came out of nowhere' bit. Endorsed by None, surprisingly
Sally Mayer - incumbent, center-right Republican, in trouble but not out of the running by any measure. Endorsed by AJ.
Edward Douglas Glenn - rightist Republican "nut" (yes, that's a quote), OK, here's someone who's not a contender. Endorsed by None, NOT surprisingly.

District 9: Rightist District
Chris Catechis - Democrat (err, center-left? center?) ran vs. State Representative Ted Hobbs (R) for State House seat in 2004, decent shot at seat. Endorsed by WA
Vivian Cordova - Republican, but weak candidate. Endorsed by None
Tina L. Cummins - incumbent, center-right/right Republican, not an impressive term in office, in serious trouble. Endorsed by AT - and I find that surprising.
Don F. Harris - Republican, best of the three Republican candidates, good shot at seat. Endorsed by AJ
---------------------------------------------------------

No good polling data is available here, but from the snippets I've found (it's nice to have a political contact):
D1 - Sanchez wins, period. WMS gets somewhat intoxicated in joy.
D3 - Benton wins, period.
D5 - Cadigan wins, highly likely.
D7 - Runoff likely, who knows which 2 of the 3 strong candidates make it in (Dickinson, Johnson, Mayer), since it could be ANY of the three. Johnson or Meyer runoff edge over Dickinson, Johnson edge over Mayer, but eek! it's close...
D9 - Runoff likely, totally in the air but if pressed to the wall I'd say Harris and Catechis, edge to Harris.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ballot Measures:

ENDORSEMENT NOTES: Albuquerque Journal, center-leaning right dominant local paper; Albuquerque Tribune, center-left small local paper; Weekly Alibi, left-wing alternative weekly.

Voter ID primer, from Albuquerque Journal:
There's widespread support for requiring Albuquerque voters to show photo identification at the polls, but critics say the ballot measure doesn't go far enough.
    They say it should apply to mail-in absentee voting, too.
    The proposal would deal with city elections. If it's approved on Oct. 4, voters in future elections would have to show an ID containing their name and photograph.
    Acceptable identification would include any ID card issued by a government agency, a driver's license, student identification card, credit card, insurance card, union card or professional association card— but it would have to have a photo on it.
    The city clerk would issue photo identification cards to anyone needing one. To get a card from the city clerk, the person would have to present two identifying documents such as a Social Security card, bank statement, utility bill or paycheck.

Endorsements: AJ
The AT and WA oppose
-----------------------------------------------------
Public Campaign Financing primer, from Albuquerque Journal:
Voters will consider a proposal Oct. 4 that could change the nature of local political campaigns in Albuquerque.
    If approved, it would establish a new system for using tax money instead of private contributions to pay for the campaigns of people running for mayor and the City Council.
    Proponents say it would help little-known candidates and make money less of an issue in politics. But critics say it would subsidize politicians while forcing individual taxpayers to help fund the campaigns of candidates they dislike.
Endorsements: AJ, AT, WA
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Minimum Wage primer, from Albuquerque Journal:
A proposal to raise the minimum wage in Albuquerque has evolved into a debate over what is really at stake.
    The ballot initiative calls for an hourly minimum wage of $7.50 for regular workers and $4.50 for tipped workers at businesses with 11 or more employees. It calls for annual increases to keep pace with inflation.
    The federal minimum wage is $5.15 an hour.
    The campaign seems more complicated than an up-or- down vote on raising the wage:
   
Supporters, led by New Mexico labor and some community groups, say raising the wage will improve life for Albuquerque's working poor and help combat poverty. About 30,000 Albuquerque workers earned less than $7.50 an hour last year;
   
A group formed by the New Mexico Restaurant Association opposes the initiative on economic grounds, contending it would damage the city's economy by causing employers to avoid Albuquerque or delay expansion plans. The group says it would force some employers to trim their work force and push prices higher, hurting people on fixed incomes;
   
Another opposition group argues the real issue isn't the wage, but a sweeping provision that would give "any member of the public" access to businesses to inform workers about "this ordinance or other laws." The group contends it is a ploy to help unions and other organizing activities and treads on private property rights.
Endorsements: WA
The AJ and AT oppose
------------------------------------------------------------------

[WMS]

Polling Data, from Sunday, October 2, 2005:
Mayoral: Mayor Martin Chávez continues to lead in the mayoral race— possibly by enough to avoid a runoff.
    Brad Winter and Eric Griego picked up support in the past month, but both still trail Chávez by more than 20 points, according to the latest Journal poll.
    Chávez is favored by 42.6 percent of likely voters. Undecided voters who say they are leaning toward Chávez could add three percentage points to his total if they support him in Tuesday's election.
    Councilor Eric Griego and Council President Brad Winter are tied in the poll. Each has the support of 18.8 percent of the likely voters.
    David Steele, a former assistant director of city planning, has 2.6 percent.
    To win the election Tuesday, a mayoral candidate needs at least 40 percent of the vote. If no one reaches 40 percent, there will be a runoff election Nov. 15 between the top two vote-getters.
...
In August, a similar poll showed Chávez had 40 percent. Griego had 13 percent, Winter had 11 percent and Steele had 3 percent.
    In that poll, 31 percent were undecided. In the latest poll, the undecided was down to about 17 percent.
    The new poll involved 500 telephone interviews with likely voters Thursday and Friday. Its maximum margin of error is 4.4 percentage points, Sanderoff said.
Chávez, a Democrat who says he takes a nonpartisan approach to the Mayor's Office, has a strong lead among both Democrats and Republicans.
    He has the support of 46 percent of the Democrats, compared with 27 percent for Griego, 5 percent for Winter and 4 percent for Steele.
    Among Republicans, Chávez has the support of 44 percent, compared with 32 percent for Winter, 5 percent for Griego and 1 percent for Steele.
    Independents and other voters are more narrowly divided, but Chávez has the lead: 30 percent, compared with 26 percent for Griego, 26 percent for Winter and 1 percent for Steele.
    Chávez's support was particularly strong on the West Side, where 65 percent of those polled back his re-election. <-- Home area of WMS - REPRESENT! WOOT! Take that, you left-libertarian ers from Downtown!
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Voter ID: Albuquerque voters appear poised to adopt a ballot measure requiring people to show a photo ID before casting ballots at city polling places.
    The latest Journal poll shows "overwhelming support throughout the community," pollster Brian Sanderoff said.
    About 81 percent of those surveyed support the voter identification measure. About 14 percent were opposed, and the rest were neutral, didn't know or wouldn't say.
    The measure was favored across party lines.
    "This voter ID proposal has nearly unanimous support of Republicans and three-quarters of the Democrats," Sanderoff said in an interview.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Campaign Finance: Albuquerque voters favor the ballot measure calling for publicly financed campaigns for mayor and City Council, according to a Journal poll.
    About 54 percent of those surveyed said they support the measure. About 28 percent were opposed, and the rest either had no opinion, wouldn't say or didn't know, according to the survey.
    "Albuquerque may be about to embark on an experiment in public finance," said Brian Sanderoff of Research & Polling Inc., which conducted the survey.
    Support crossed party lines, with more Democrats, Republicans and independents in favor than opposed. Voters under 34, in particular, strongly favored the measure.
...
Sanderoff said the way the proposal is described on the ballot— as the Open and Ethical Election Code— may have added to its support. There would be stronger opposition if the measure was described as calling for taxpayer-funded campaigns, he said.
    The kickback allegations involving the state treasurer's office also may be a factor that softened opposition, he said.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Minimum Wage: Support for a minimum-wage proposal has slipped, but it still has a slight majority of support among voters surveyed in the most recent Journal poll.
    The poll shows 53 percent of likely voters favor creating a local $7.50 minimum wage with an automatic inflation adjustment. Thirty-nine percent are opposed.
    Support decreases to 47 percent when voters are told about a controversial aspect of the measure: a provision that would allow any member of the public the right to have access to certain nonwork areas "to inform employees of their rights under this ordinance and other laws."
    There also is a gender difference. Among women, 58 percent favor the minimum-wage proposal and 32 percent oppose it; among men, it's supported by 47 percent and opposed by 46 percent.
    In August, a similar poll showed the proposal was favored 61 percent to 27 percent among likely voters.
    "It could definitely hold on, but it's not going to win by the margin it would have had a month ago," said Brian Sanderoff, president of Research & Polling Inc., which conducted the poll.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bonds: No polling data, but everything highly likely to pass, since there's no controversial road bonds this year.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

[minionofmidas]

Council seat runoffs happen the same way as mayoral runoff?

[WMS]

Council seat runoffs happen the same way as mayoral runoff?

Yes. I had to get confirmation of that before I could assemble this guide. In three cases it makes no difference - there's only two candidates in Districts 1, 3, and 5 (and there was some political persuasion used to accomplish that in 1 and 3! ) - but in Districts 7 and 9 it will certainly, barring a last-second rush to a candidate, come into play.

[WMS]

Not that any of you care but it's time for WMS to gloat. Those of a left-leaning nature are warned that you will definitely find this offensive.
(spaces follow, so you don't have to read me exulting if you don't want to)














































YES! YES! IN YOUR MOTHERF*****G FACES, LEFT-WINGERS! YOU HAVE BEEN BITCH-SLAPPED! ALBUQUERQUE SHALL NOT BECOME ANOTHER F***ING PORTLAND! WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOT!

Results are in here.

MAYOR - Candidate/Issue - Precinct - Absentee - Early - Total - Percentage
ERIC G. GRIEGO             20,633    991       899       22,523    25.96%
MARTIN J. CHAVEZ       35,211          4,287    1,525    41,023        47.28%
BRAD WINTER             18,579    2,048      725       21,352    24.61%
DAVID L. STEELE      1,588    186        85            1,859         2.14%
86,757 Total Votes

THE CENTER DEFEATS THE LEFT! THE CENTER DEFEATS THE LEFT! OUTRIGHT VICTORY FOR THE CENTRIST CANDIDATE WITH 47%! UTTER DEFEAT FOR THE LEFT WITH 26%! WEST SIDE ADDS AT LEAST FIVE PERCENTAGE POINTS TO CHAVEZ'S TOTAL MARGIN OF VICTORY! PISS ON OUR ROADS, YUPPIE LIBERALS? WELL, WE'VE GOT OUR REVENGE ON YOU!

COUNCIL DISTRICT 1 - Candidate/Issue - Precinct - Absentee - Early - Total - Percentage
MIGUEL A. GOMEZ    2,110            87    99    2,296    38.74%
KEN SANCHEZ              3,226    228    176    3,630    61.26%
5,926 Total Votes

OH GOD YES! I'VE WAITED FOUR YEARS TO GET THIS DISLOYAL, DESPICABLE LEFT-WING WEASEL OUSTED FROM THE WEST SIDE! CRASH AND BURN, LEFTIES - YOU DIDN'T JUST GET BEAT, YOU GOT ANNIHILATED! WEST SIDE R-E-P-R-E-S-E-N-T! WOOOOOOOOOOOOOT! AND WITH THIS VICTORY, POWER ON THE CITY COUNCIL SHIFTS TO THE CENTER FROM THE LEFT! VENGEANCE, YOU F-ERS, FOR 2001 and 2003!

COUNCIL DISTRICT 3 - Candidate/Issue - Precinct - Absentee - Early - Total - Percentage
ISAAC BENTON                3,563    246    178    3,987       55.72%
DIANA DORN-JONES    2,853        163     134     3,150    44.03%
DECLARED WRITE-IN         10      6    2         18    0.25%
7,155 Total Votes

Well, you can't win them all. Oooooh, a leftist wins a leftist district! Like that's difficult...

COUNCIL DISTRICT 5 - Candidate/Issue - Precinct - Absentee - Early - Total - Percentage
MICHAEL CADIGAN    5,931        574    275       6,780   69.72%
BETTY VALDEZ                2,676    124        144        2,944    30.28%
9,724 Total Votes

Result, not surprising, and acceptable. Margin of victory - surprising! For a right-leaning district, Democrat Cadigan sure did well. But he's been a stalwart supporter of the West Side infrastructure issues, so no relief for the left-wing on this one.

COUNCIL DISTRICT 7 - Candidate/Issue - Precinct - Absentee - Early - Total - Percentage
MARIANNE DICKINSON       3,617      467    158       4,242    34.75%
WAYNE A. JOHNSON        1,947    199     67      2,213    18.13%
SALLY MAYER                       4,665      608    156       5,429    44.48%
EDWARD DOUGLAS GLENN      249         58      15     322      2.64%
12,206 Total Votes

Surprise of the night - no way is Mayer that strong, but I guess all the 'I don't know who any of these people are so I'll vote for the incumbent' voters helped her out. Poor Wayne Johnson - I met him tonight, and he's a very nice guy, but he lost. Silver Linings: 1, LEFTIST CANDIDATE MARIANNE DICKINSON LOST! LOST! LOST! NO RUNOFF FOR YOU! AHAHAHAHAHA! 2. Mayer is good on animal welfare issues, so that's a definite bonus.

COUNCIL DISTRICT 9 - Candidate/Issue - Precinct - Absentee - Early - Total - Percentage
TINA L. CUMMINS    1,924          249    78    2,251     26.73%
VIVIAN CORDOVA           1,024          65    26    1,115     13.24%
CHRIS CATECHIS            1,856         194    61    2,111     25.07%
DON F. HARRIS              2,625    261      57      2,943    34.95%
8,420 Total Votes

Whoa Nelly, our one runoff of the night! I met Don Harris as well tonight, and he seemed okay. Democrat Catechis called Republican Harris up and pledged his support to him in the runoff over hated Republican incumbent Cummins. Republican Cordova - who's a guy, BTW - will support Cummins, but his voters probably won't. Harris is a definite favorite. Oh, and YOU LOSE AGAIN, LEFTISTS! WOOT! NO RUNOFF FOR THE DEMOCRATIC CANDIDATE!

PROPOSITION - OPEN ETHICAL ELECTIONS CODE - Candidate/Issue - Precinct - Absentee - Early - Total - Percentage
FOR               50,247     5,085    2,084      57,416    69.07%
AGAINST    22,558     2,224    932    25,714        30.93%
83,130 Total Votes

Stronger than I thought for a measure I voted against, but I can live with it.

PROPOSITION - LIVING WAGE ORDINANCE - Candidate/Issue - Precinct - Absentee - Early - Total - Percentage
FOR               35,940      3,822    1,583     41,345    49.12%
AGAINST    37,857      3,515    1,452    42,824         50.88%
84,169 Total Votes

Big surprise. The vote percentages on this one fluctuated throughout the night, at one point there was a 4 - count 'em, four - vote difference between the FOR and AGAINST vote, but, in the end...
Ahem. YOU LOSE YET AGAIN, LEFTIES! AND YES, IT APPEARS THE WEST SIDE PROVIDED THE MARGINS HERE AS WELL! THAT SHOULD TEACH YOU LEFTY DIPSH!TS NOT TO PISS OFF ALL THE MODERATES ON THE WEST SIDE WITH YOUR SNOTTY ATTITUDES AND SULLEN HOSTILITY! WOOT!

PROPOSITION - VOTER ID - Candidate/Issue - Precinct - Absentee - Early - Total - Percentage
FOR               51,102    5,484    1,900      58,486    73.06%
AGAINST    19,238    1,442    883    21,563          26.94%
80,049 Total Votes

OH, HOW THE LEFT-WING WILL HOWL OVER THIS ONE! THEY ALL OPPOSED THIS ON THE USUAL BS, 'IT WILL HURT THE MINORITIES' GROUNDS, BUT THEY GOT HAMMERED HERE!

The War Between the Left and the Center is all but over in Albuquerque. The Center has Won, and the Left's attempt to seize control of the city and turn us into another Portland or Seattle has Failed. Utter Victory.
-WMS, busy hitting the booze as promised per the District 1 race results.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

So, you feel happy today

[socaldem]

The War Between the Left and the Center is all but over in Albuquerque. The Center has Won, and the Left's attempt to seize control of the city and turn us into another Portland or Seattle has Failed. Utter Victory.
-WMS, busy hitting the booze as promised per the District 1 race results.

I'm glad that your candidates won...

I'd like to know a little more about this left/centre conflict in Albuquerque...

What exactly are the main issues at stake?
What demographics support each group?

If I were to guess from your post, it seems that the split would be between the more yuppie left and more pro-growth Democrats...

Yuppie leftists, of course, are social liberals (though I dont know exactly how social liberalism would really be that important in local politics) but I'd venture to guess that the conflict revolves around their tendency to favor slow-growth and quality of life issues over policies that will expand business, jobs, and aggregate wage growth (rather than wage growth for well-educated propertied types)...  is that a fair characterization?

In the center, I suppose, would be the poorer but hopefully upwardly mobile Latino community who seeks pro-growth policies and is not as concerned about regulations to preserve the status quo... I imagine they would be a bit more socially conservative... however, unlike right-wingers, they are not afraid of the government taking a necessary regulatory or unlike both right-wingers and left-wingers, a pro-business role....

I suppose a perfect example of conflict would be the minimum wage ordinance... while I'd like to see a dramatic increase in the minimum wage on the federal level and an increase in u.s. wages generally, such a dramatic increase at the municipal level would certainly cause problems...

Please tell me if my assumptions are way off.... and elaborate on the context of your election glee...

[minionofmidas]

WMS happy at Chavez victory! Hell freezes over!

[King]

I called relatives who lived in my area and they all voted for Chavez.  Some were considering Brad Winter, but they said they saw absolutely no campaigning from his end.

[WMS]

So, you feel happy today

You could tell?

Let's put it this way, Al - this is the local equivalent of the Crouch End yuppies getting reamed.

[WMS]

Part I of my response. Yep, it's a big 'un.

The War Between the Left and the Center is all but over in Albuquerque. The Center has Won, and the Left's attempt to seize control of the city and turn us into another Portland or Seattle has Failed. Utter Victory.
-WMS, busy hitting the booze as promised per the District 1 race results.

I'm glad that your candidates won...

Thanks! So am I!

I'd like to know a little more about this left/centre conflict in Albuquerque...

What exactly are the main issues at stake?
What demographics support each group?

You pretty much nailed it below, but let's see...

Hell, I better do the demographics first.
Hispanics and Anglos both split between the Left and the Center (and the Right, although it is more Anglo than the other two) but not entirely evenly; there is a higher percentage of Hispanics on the Left than Anglos on the Left, but the difference isn't enormous, given the white liberals in town; and the Center has a higher percentage of Anglos going to it than Hispanics, but there are a large number of Hispanics in the Center, as the recent election indicated. Native Americans get pretty Left-ist, except when it comes to casino building. But there's not a lot of them compared to the other two groups. Blacks? Asians? What are these mysterious words? OK, actually, the few Blacks we have tend to be poor and leftist - we even have a mini-slum neighborhood for them somehow, which given their limited numbers shouldn't happen, but eh *shrugs* - and the Asians are mostly somewhat affluent and rightist. There are plenty of exceptions to both rules - I know of a slum apartment complex with a lot of Vietnamese - but Blacks and Asians usually don't affect elections. As a group - the current #2 at the City of Albuquerque is James Lewis, a very talented and very nice black Democrat who previously served in a high administrative position in neighboring boomtown Rio Rancho.
The Left is a mix of poor people and rich yuppie types, including most of the Green Left. Not that atypical.
The Center vacuums in most of the middle and working classes. Also not that atypical.

I'm sure I missed something, so if you've got more questions, feel free to ask.

Urban Growth - good or bad? Left says bad, Center says good.
Where should the urban growth be? Left says only infill, and then gripes about sprawl. Center says both infill and at the edges, since without growth at the edges where are the working class and middle class going to live?
What infrastructure needs to be built to handle current and future growth? You might not believe it, but some of the worst fights are here. The Left is hostile to any new roads that are needed and not in the older areas, hostile to expanding existing roads that are needed and not in the older areas, hostile to building more bridges if needed and not in the older areas, hostile to expanding existing bridges if needed and not in the older areas, hostile, yes, even to expanding mass transit operations if needed and not in the older areas, hostile to building new schools if needed and not in the older areas, hostile to expanding existing schools if needed and not in the older areas, hostile to expanding the police presence if needed and not in the older areas...they're just plain hostile to anything that is needed and not in the older areas. They want everything in the way of funding to go to the older areas, which are of course both hipper/cooler on the one hand and full of poor people on the other hand.
The Center backs whatever is needed, wherever it is needed. They tend to support a balanced approach to growth, supporting new growth but not unrestrained growth everywhere - unrestrained growth has led to subdivisions being a decade behind in getting parks, for example. (the Right doesn't want anything but to lower its property taxes...that is, until they want something from the County or City government )

And then there's our own nasty dose of cultutal politics. The Left has adopted a position that tries to tar the Center as racist...despite the fact that that label is easier to apply to the anti-Anglo ideologues of the Left...and that claims that any support not given to the older areas is discriminatory against minorities.
The problem with that is that the growth areas, especially on the West Side of Albuquerque (Districts 1 (mostly) and 5 on that map I linked to; everything west of the Rio Grande and North of, more or less, Central Avenue...the southern extent of the West Side is a bit fuzzy), have more ethnic diversity (Anglos and Hispanics, mainly) than do the older areas (which are supermajority Hispanic if Left; the Right older areas are more Anglo) which makes the racist claim pretty damn silly.

Two big controversies: The Montano Bridge, running through the southern end of the highly-affluent yuppie Libertarian Village of Los Ranchos de Albuquerque. Delayed for 30 years by those same yuppies - who are currently fighting restriping the bridge to handle four lanes of traffic instead of two. You see, because of the many, many, lawsuits, the bridge is big enough for four lanes but is only striped for two lanes. Good Moment: my brother caught this in the mayoral debates - in response to a question about opposition to restriping Montano, Martin Chavez said something to the effect of 'well, if I had a $500,000 house in Los Ranchos I might be opposed to it too'. Eric Griego sputtered and had to defend by saying 'err, not everyone in the area is rich'. Point to Chavez, in being on the side of the working folk.

[WMS]

Part II of my response.

The other big (STILL ongoing) controversy - the Paseo Del Norte extension. You see, when the Petroglyph National Monument was proposed on the West Side in order to preserve the Petroglyphs from vandalism, room for an east-west major road through the park - and for another major north-road curving around the western side of the park and going through it at one point - was part of the proposal, and agreed to by the Pueblo Indians and the Green Lefties at the time. But as soon as the Monument was created (federally BTW), the Pueblos and the Green Left backstabbed the West Siders and immediately filed lawsuits claiming that the previously-agreed to extensions violated both the cultural rights of the Pueblo Indians (the Petroglyphs - the ones that aren't modern graffiti, anyway - have religious significance to the Pueblos) and the sanctity of a National Monument, and took an extreme position: that NO roads and NO development should EVER be allowed ANYWHERE NEAR the Petroglyph Monument. And so our Twenty-Five Years War began...yes, that's about as long as this has been an issue. It has absolutely poisoned relations between the West Side and the Leftist parts of town, and has led to the normally swing voters of the West Side ardently voting against the Left in every local race, including the one this Tuesday. They may vote for the Center, they may vote for the Right, but they will never, ever, vote for the Left (in local races) over their betrayal. In the midst of this fight (you can tell I could go on for a while here, right? ) the Leftist Mayor Jim Baca got elected in a multi-candidate nonpartisan, no-runoff election back in 1997 with 29%. It was a very long four years for the West Side, and when Baca opened up a poorly-designed road connecting with western Rio Rancho, opening the floodgates to an enormous horde of RR traffic, everything went insane, as the West Side choked slowly. In 2001, the West Side pushed Martin Chavez to win another multi-candidate race for Mayor, but due to a lack of runoff provisions the Left, organized around the Soltari LLC, won a near-majority on the Council - District 1, won by a Leftist with 28%, was the worst news of the night for the West Side, as Miguel Gomez consistently voted in step with the Anti-West Side Left Bloc on the Council. Chavez pushed hard for the West SIde roads, but in a low-turnout election in 2003 the street bonds, with money for the extensions, were narrowly voted down by the Left and their Unholy 'we hate taxes' allies on the Right.

The West Side damn near seceeded over the next year.

Chavez pushed HARD and got another vote on new street bonds on the 2004 General Election ballot. Some differences: several State Republican Legislators pledged funds for the Paseo and Unser (the northern extension) Extensions from their capital outlay money. Sensing that the Dems might well suffer irreversible losses on the West Side from the perception that Democrats opposed the West Side and Republicans supported it, Governor Richardson - after waiting a LONG time to make up his mind - finally released the funds for it, after making Chavez jump through some more hoops. Combined with federal funds Republican Congresswoman Wilson came up with, the new bonds had a smaller allotment for the West Side extensions.

Backed by very strong West Side turnout - the West Side got organized over 2003 and 2004 - the bonds roared through. But the Left has filed more lawsuits over this, continuing to this day and delaying the release of funds for construction. It appears they will finally fail, and construction might begin this coming January.

Here's an image I saved showing how the claim by the Left that the extension will TOTALLY DESTROY THE MONUMENT!!!!11!!!1!!ONE! is false:


See that tiny sliver - the one I drew a big circle around for visibility? That's the extension. Yep, that's it. The big shaded thing is the Monument.

If I were to guess from your post, it seems that the split would be between the more yuppie left and more pro-growth Democrats...

Yuppie leftists, of course, are social liberals (though I dont know exactly how social liberalism would really be that important in local politics) but I'd venture to guess that the conflict revolves around their tendency to favor slow-growth and quality of life issues over policies that will expand business, jobs, and aggregate wage growth (rather than wage growth for well-educated propertied types)...  is that a fair characterization?

In the center, I suppose, would be the poorer but hopefully upwardly mobile Latino community who seeks pro-growth policies and is not as concerned about regulations to preserve the status quo... I imagine they would be a bit more socially conservative... however, unlike right-wingers, they are not afraid of the government taking a necessary regulatory or unlike both right-wingers and left-wingers, a pro-business role....

I suppose a perfect example of conflict would be the minimum wage ordinance... while I'd like to see a dramatic increase in the minimum wage on the federal level and an increase in u.s. wages generally, such a dramatic increase at the municipal level would certainly cause problems...

Please tell me if my assumptions are way off.... and elaborate on the context of your election glee...

Very good analysis, socialdem. You might be surprised how social liberlaism creeps into disputes - the political correctness bit over the Monument is an example of that. So are Mayor Chavez' strong anti-crime measures - which the ACLU challenges every friggin time he proposes them. You know, hideous violations of civil rights like curfews for minors.   There's a social element in the opposition to them from the Left. To add to what you said - like before, the Latinos/Hispanics split over this. The more radical/leftist ones on one side (La Raza Unida types), the sane ones in the Center. I may not have enough space in this post to elaborate further, so feel free to reply.

And as for my election glee - starting from around 1997, and definitely from 2001, the Left has made a concerted effort to seize control of Albuquerque government, and turn it in a Portland, OR type of direction. Look up 1000 Friends of Albuquerque to get the gist of what they want. The super-lefty Sage Council oppose Paseo till their dying breath. Or the West Side's. But for a quick look, go to the Weekly Alibi. These are the people who drove moderates out of Central Albuquerque and installed Leftist candidates in 2001 and 2003, and boy, that just did wonders for the political atmosphere here. I'm not currently on the West Side, but I've spent most of 1994 to 2004 there, so I identify with it. And in 2005, the West Side finally got its revenge on the Leftists who had, with a really nasty, snotty attitude, opposed the West Side on every infrastructure issue. With the fall of Miguel Gomez to the magnificent Ken Sanchez - who I've personally spoken to once, and he's very nice - the West Side has its representatives back, and the balance of power has shifted away from the Left in the Council. And we got 'Our' Mayor re-elected. And none of our enemies defeated any of our friends on the Council. And we even tipped the balance against the minimum wage. Now, I tend to agree with you, socialdem, on the munimum wage. But the timing of this vote was purely political by the Left - they waited until 2005 to put it on the ballot, hoping new poor voters would flood the polls and sweep them into victory. Turnout sucked, actually, so that didn't work. It couldn't be sweeter for the West Side. Council Balance (Left-Center-Right): 2003-2005: 4-2-3; 2005+: 3-3-3 (net gain of one for the Center and net loss of one for the Left). We may, yet, hold together in Albuquerque. If the Left had won the Mayorship and control of the Council, I am convinced the West Side would have seceeded by 2008 or 2009, and who knows what else would happen after that?

[WMS]

WMS happy at Chavez victory! Hell freezes over!

Good one, Lewis. Very good one.

Yes, I exult at the victory of Chavez! I now admit it!

[WMS]

I called relatives who lived in my area and they all voted for Chavez.  Some were considering Brad Winter, but they said they saw absolutely no campaigning from his end.

True. I actually like Brad Winter, but I saw no reason for me to pick him over Chavez. And his campaign was atrocious. What were the local Republicans thinking?! Then again, their civil war has disorganized them for years now. The R campaign was very nasty in addition to being incompetent. See the link below for some on that.

Considering Chavez tied Winter among Republicans and won pluralities of both Democrats and Independents, I'd say lots of other people felt the same way I did - he's done a good enough job to keep him around for another term.

I'm looking forward to light rail.

For a really good rundown of this, go look at Joe Monahan's blog. Chavez really, really, did well. And who boosted him by five percentage points overall with landslide wins of 60% plus? WEST SIDE, baby.

[minionofmidas]

Where should the urban growth be? Left says only infill, and then gripes about sprawl. Center says both infill and at the edges, since without growth at the edges where are the working class and middle class going to live?

In the infill.
Obviously situation where I live is a little different, since I'm not in a massive-growth country, but some of this sounds well-known to me. Certainly filling-up of gaps in central areas - and especially on ex-industrial areas - gets support from all over the board, while new developments on the outskirts are viewed with mixed feelings at best by both the greenish left and by those parts of the right living near them. Your typical SPD politico is probably the most enthusiastic about this stuff...it should be pointed out that there was next to no new housing (of either type) planned in Frankfurt during the period of CDU dominance at the local level, 1977-89. Things have changed since - with the unstable majorities since 1995 probably *more* active than the red-green city government of 89-95. (Although of course, stuff planned then wasn't built until afterwards, so this may be a wrong impression...)

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I believe it. Straight away.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

While the Center is hostile to not building roads just because they're not needed.
Actually, I'm surprised. Shouldn't the left be opposed to widening roads in the older areas even more than anything else?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Now this is fucking weird.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Hope it stays that way...enclaves may spring up once the areas age.

Two big controversies: The Montano Bridge, running through the southern end of the highly-affluent yuppie Libertarian Village of Los Ranchos de Albuquerque. Delayed for 30 years by those same yuppies - who are currently fighting restriping the bridge to handle four lanes of traffic instead of two. You see, because of the many, many, lawsuits, the bridge is big enough for four lanes but is only striped for two lanes. [/quote]Now, if these were India, people would use all six lanes anyways.

[minionofmidas]

(Petroglyph monument) over their betrayal.

Knowing nothing about this controversy but a little bit about similar controversies elsewhere in the world...makes me wonder if this agreement wasn't made purely tactically, ie signing everything to keep the petroglyphs from destruction, but never actually changing position - and certainly *actually* opposing the road all along?
Oh, btw, and just fmi - which Pueblos exactly?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

What's that mean?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

...typical how the West Side actually choked due to a road built but wants (and in all likelihood, really needs) more roads built...just goes to show it does not make sense to approve of just any new road project - they can make traffic situations worse as well as better. Of course, that doesn't say just don't build any roads. (I used to try and play Sim City that way - not building any roads, linking everything by railway. The game didn't buy it though. )

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Not saying the left's claim is correct o/c, but that doesn#t actually prove all *that* much.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

That would be hideous if enforceable.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Where are you living now?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[WMS]

In the infill.

Not at the prices being charged! An even bigger problem is, simply, there isn't enough infill housing to accomodate the population growth. Albuquerque, while not on the scale of Las Vegas (NV) or Phoenix, is growing at quite a steady clip. And the vast majority - a City study calculated it at 85% or so - of people moving into the new houses are natives of Albuquerque, not immigrants from outside. Thus Albuquerque's growth is very likely to continue. You may confirm that with Al.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Yes, this sounds familiar. For 'those parts of the right living near them', well, I can identify them easily on a map - Corrales, Los Ranchos, North Albuquerque Acres, various unincorporated areas (but not Paradise Hills)...oh yeah, easy to spot.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Well, that's sure diff-...err, actually, not that different. Some of the Right is also hostile to new growth (but they split on this issue). However, the bulk of the Right backs growth reflexively in response to the Left's opposition to it. It's the Center who strongly backs growth, since they're the ones who need those houses to live in and the new jobs non-residential growth brings.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Well, that's convenient then.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Actually, the new roads fall into two categories: 1 - they're needed to deal with the current transportation problems; 2 - they're part of the master plans for the area and are needed to head off future transportation problems - these are the big, major roads I'm referring to here, the veins of the transportation network.
Well, they're opposed to widening older roads most of the time as well, but usually what they want is for new road money to be redirected to maintenance and whatnot on the older, existing roads. The fact that you can cover both new and existing roads at once and that this is not a zero-sum game has escaped them. It's not like the West Side - and the rest of the Center - is opposed to spending road monies in the older areas - they've pretty consistently voted for all the road bonds, and they never object to new and refurbished roads in other parts of town.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Isn't it just? On mass transit, I remember trying out the bus system to get to and from work for about a month, and the West Side routes were...inadequate. No offense, but if I have to drive somewhere, park, and then wait to get on a bus that takes twice as long to get where I need to go, what's the point of using mass transit? To me, mass transit means 'I don't have to drive to use it, and can walk to it'. And the bus routes failed that test. Especially in the more anti-Baca northwest. Coincidence, I'm sure, that Baca cut back on West Side mass transit during his term. And every damn proposal from the Left on mass transit wants it to run pretty much entirely in the older parts of town and barely at all in the newer parts - the 'let's make sure any light rail system runs in a small circle around Downtown' bit was ridiculous. Don't you think that, if you want to reduce traffic congestion via mass transit, you might just want to run the mass transit through the areas where the bulk of the vehicles are coming from? I will note that Chavez has improved West Side transit - a bus route NOW serves the big subdivision of Ventana Ranch in the NW, running along a smaller north-south road - Universe - that connects with an older, existing road through the Monument (Unser - you might have noticed it running NW-SE on my map) and thus reaches the rest of the city. The Left went batsh!t when Chavez finished Universe without asking them to approve. Hey, it wasn't in the Monument at all, so Chavez could do this legally. See, road and mass transit development went together!
As for schools, you would not believe some of the dumbass comments the Leftist members on the Albuquerque School Board make! They continually bitch about having to spend money on those dastardly West Siders. Well, geez, maybe it's because the West Side has a ton of students and insufficient facilities! Getting new high schools built on the West Side is the TOP - yes, #1 - educational facility spending priority in the entire state of New Mexico, as determined by the State Department of Education. I think another high school for the southern end of the West Side is also quite high up the lost. I'd give you a link but the State Department of Education is awfully reluctant to share that data. Needless to say - my old High School was overcrowded at between 1500 and 2000 students when I was there - now it's hit 3000. And the Leftist members on the Board say the money for a new West Side high school would be better spent in their districts! Bad enough they gerrymandered the Board districts to deny the West Side its rightful second seat, but to deny reality in the name of bias and hostility...

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Hopefully it does stay this way. If enclaves form, I'll bet that the first ones will be Hispanic enclaves in the far south of the West Side, although I'm hoping this doesn't happen.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

There have been incidents before but the bridge will be restriped next year anyway, doubtless fueling the West Side - North Valley mutual animosity.

[WMS]

Knowing nothing about this controversy but a little bit about similar controversies elsewhere in the world...makes me wonder if this agreement wasn't made purely tactically, ie signing everything to keep the petroglyphs from destruction, but never actually changing position - and certainly *actually* opposing the road all along?
Oh, btw, and just fmi - which Pueblos exactly?

That...is possible, but they lied through their teeth in that case. And a point to remember is that the road extension isn't going to destroy any petroglyphs. There's very few in the road right-of-way, and those will be moved to preserve them. But that isn't good enough for the Left. It is too late for any alternative routes - it was probably too late shortly after Albuquerque went on an annexation spree in the late '70s and all of the '80s (which you can't blame on the West Siders because there were no West Siders ) and planted houses everywhere. At this point, any alternatives would destroy West Side neighborhoods and communities, especially the 40+ year-old Paradise Hills community (mostly unincorporated - one set of my parents lives there). But as I was directly told by a Downtown Green back in 1996 after I brought this up: 'We don't care what happens to Paradise Hills.' (or any of the other neighborhoods, for that matter) Well, at least that Leftist was honest about it.   Speaking of the opponents...
...currently, the All-Indian Pueblo Council has adopted a hard-line stance on this, dragging them all into this. But that wasn't always the case - the Petroglyphs aren't technically part of any one Pueblo's lands, so IIRC it was more Sandia Pueblo that was involved early on...and, really, it was some of the Leftist Native American interest groups that were first involved. Info is a bit fuzzy early on, since I may not have even been in Albuquerque way back when this started. I shall point out that the Navajos don't give a crap about this - 'this is Pueblo business'. I suppose the 1000+ years of war between them and the Pueblos might just have a tiny bit to do with that.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

These guys. It's a Leftist consulting firm. I'm sure you'll adore them.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

We didn't want that road. Not until after the other pieces of the network were built first to handle the traffic flows. The fact that it was a shoddy job did not improve matters. Nor did the fact that Baca did this without consulting the residents of the affected areas at all! This connector piece was built ass-backwards - it should've been the LAST part of the network on the western side of the West Side, not the FIRST part. Purely political, and highly spiteful. You see why the West Side hates Baca and people like him so much? Other roads needed to be built and improved first, and IIRC should've been according to the master plans for the West Side (which I've actually read, and if you go here and scroll down, so can you! There is some definite criticism of the parochialism of the other parts of the city - 'the 1993 bonds gave 12% of the funds to an area with 18% (at the time; it's higher now) of the City's population and over 60% of the City's growth', for example - there's lots more, and even more at other agencies like MRGCOG).
And what was Sim City's problem with railways?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Well, the disruption would be pretty damn minimal because of this, especially with all the proposed measures to allieviate impacts - it will be a very well-designed road. BTW...it gets better. That sliver of land is not technically nor legally part of the Petroglyph National Monument - it was removed by Congressional Action back in, err, 1998 or 1999.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

It was a very popular move by Chavez. Hoever, the ACLU sued to stop it, and gotr one of those damn activist judges to rule in their favor. We can argue about how wise it is, but to claim that it violates minors' civil rights to have to come home by 10:00 or 11:00 PM on school nights...?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

The Northeast Heights of Albuquerque, sharing an apartment with my older brother. Much further north than I wanted to be - I was trying to move south to be closer to work - but due to various reasons my choices - well, his choices, actually - were pretty limited. I would have preferred somewhere else, but... At least I don't have to cross a bridge in my commute any more.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I don't know why - there was certainly enough to vote on! Everyone thought the minimum wage bill would've spurred turnout, but nope. For one of the most competitive set of races I've ever seen, at that. *shakes head*

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

The freeway could have built through a golfcourse instead. However, you pro-sprawl jackasses decided to destroy some ancient Indian petroglyphs instead, and took land from a national park. Shame on you.

[minionofmidas]

"from the Spanish word for Sun and the Korean word for Bridge". No. Not my style.

jfern - how exactly? Look at the map? How can you build a road through the monument but not through the monument?

They actually would have to move some petroglyphs? Well, I can see how that will get the Sandia irate...but I was more concerned with, what sort of stone is it? Any chance of damage outside the road proper? (After all, the claim that the monument will be "destroyed", however ridiculous in light of the full facts, must be coming from somewhere...) Any sort of footpaths, whatever... throughout the monument that will be cut?

Sim City just kept telling me to build roads, and people moved out instead of using my shining new railroads. Notice that there weren't any roads in these cities - hey. I was just a kid that preferred streetcars to cars.

[WMS]

The freeway could have built through a golfcourse instead. However, you pro-sprawl jackasses decided to destroy some ancient Indian petroglyphs instead, and took land from a national park. Shame on you.

B-U-L-L-S-H-I-T, hoss. The supposed 'golfcourse' route actually would destroy the community of Paradise Hills by splititng it in two. That includes where my mom lives, so F off. Not to mention it would wreck several other neighborhoods as well. Also, look at a map - there is no way to connect to the rest of Paseo Del Norte, a major east-west access route across the entire city, by such a northerly route. It also wouldn't connect to the western part of Paseo Del Norte, on the other side of the Monument. And as I already explained, none of the petroglyphs would be destroyed. And, also as I already explained, the national monument's creation was predicated on allowing the road to be be built. Also, yes, as I already explained, if not a single new house was built these roads would be needed to handle existing traffic flows.

Thank you so much, Bezerkleyite, for demostrating the exact attitude that has split the Bernalillo County Democratic Party - the West Side Democrats are separating from the rest of the BCDP - and roiled our politics for over 20 years. I would be more upset if not for the fact that in a year your position will be rendered moot.

"from the Spanish word for Sun and the Korean word for Bridge". No. Not my style.

jfern - how exactly? Look at the map? How can you build a road through the monument but not through the monument?

They actually would have to move some petroglyphs? Well, I can see how that will get the Sandia irate...but I was more concerned with, what sort of stone is it? Any chance of damage outside the road proper? (After all, the claim that the monument will be "destroyed", however ridiculous in light of the full facts, must be coming from somewhere...) Any sort of footpaths, whatever... throughout the monument that will be cut?

Sim City just kept telling me to build roads, and people moved out instead of using my shining new railroads. Notice that there weren't any roads in these cities - hey. I was just a kid that preferred streetcars to cars.

*GASP* And I thought Soltari would be everything you desired!

I agree with you on your comment to the fern...I think...

Sand on top of lava - there shouldn't be any damage done. And the claim is often made on a cultural basis - to which I reply that it's funny how the boundaries of the sacred area happen to correspond exactly to a political boundary created by a bunch of white people , but anyway their argument is made with the subtlety of a club and with little details as to just how it would destroy the Monument, but with lots of emotion and race-guilting instead. I don't know about the footpaths, although I don't think there are any through the Extension. Most of the petroglyphs are to the south - I've seen a few, since I've visited the Monument myself - but most access is fairly rough going along the volcanic rock. Oh, yeah, there's a LOT of disputes over what precisely is a protected petroglyph and what is more modern graffiti - I did mention that before the Monument's creation there were a LOT of problems with vandalism...petroglyphs used for target practice, illegal dumping, etc., right? THAT is what imperiled the petroglyphs.

Typical Sim City. I tried that as well, but just ignored the 'build more roads bit'...although I had a LOT of railroad tracks built. Expensive, but it does cut down on pollution and congestion pretty well. And I'll just reiterate here that the 'temporary' Universe extension connecting to the already-existing southern Unser Blvd enabled an extension of mass transit to the Upper West Side.

[WMS]

Yarr, I know, bump and all that, but here's some additional information. I bolded some of my favorite parts.

Saturday, October 8, 2005

Chávez Won 6 of 9 Council Districts

By Jim Ludwick
Journal Staff Writer
    Mayor Martin Chávez won in six of the nine City Council districts in this week's mayoral election, while Eric Griego won the districts that include the university area, Nob Hill, Downtown and North Valley.
    The official canvass of the election was released Friday, showing the results for each of the city's consolidated precincts.
    Griego was in first place in Council District 3— which he represents— as well as District 2, represented by Debbie O'Malley; and District 6, represented by Martin Heinrich.
    Chávez won both West Side districts, along with the four East Side districts won by Bob Schwartz in 2001. Schwartz finished second to Chávez in that mayoral race.
    Council President Brad Winter took none of the districts, including District 4, which he represents. Chávez was the winner in District 4.
    "I just don't have much appeal to the far left of the Democratic Party, and that's what made the difference for Griego in three districts," Chávez said.
    The mayor said he appealed to moderate Republican districts in the Northeast and East Side and had solid support on the West Side.
    Griego said he won in the parts of the city "that are the heart of the Democratic base. ... I see that as a small victory for the kind of issues I've been putting forward."
    Sander Rue, campaign manager for Winter, said Winter's campaign got a later start than Chávez's and Griego's. Winter had little money and battled an incumbent mayor, Rue said.
    Chávez finished second in each of the districts won by Griego.
    He held on to the mayor's office with 47 percent of the citywide vote, enough to avoid a runoff election and carry him to his third term.
    Griego had 25.8 percent, Winter had just under 25 percent and David Steele had 2.1 percent.
    Brian Sanderoff, president of Research & Polling Inc., said Griego's support was from "progressive, liberal voters who happen to reside in those areas" where he won. Chávez appealed to moderates and conservatives, and "he's always been known as a fighter for the West Side," Sanderoff said.
    Chávez "had broad-based support: Democrats, Republicans, Anglos, Hispanics, various income groups," Sanderoff said.
    "He seems to have gotten the Bob Schwartz vote. He grew his numbers in the Heights," Sanderoff said.
    In 2001, Chávez carried all three of the districts he lost to Griego this year. Overall, however, he got more votes in those districts this year than he received in 2001: about 9,700 this time, compared to about 9,100 in 2001.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

To clarify matters, here's the district by district comparison between 2001 and 2005, both Chavez victories, but very different victories: Note: In BOTH races Chavez won 2nd place in every district he lost.

Here's an interactive page showing the Council Districts

District 1 - Lower West Side and Westgate, Swing/Left: 2001 Chavez; 2005 Chavez (VERY large margins both times)

District 2 - North Valley and Near Northeast Heights, Left: 2001 Chavez; 2005 Griego

District 3 - Downtown/Valley/University, Left: 2001 Chavez (IIRC Jim Baca of the Left won some precincts here); 2005 Griego

District 4 - Mid-Northeast Heights and Far Northeast Heights, Swing/Right: 2001 Schwartz; 2005 Chavez

District 5 - Upper West Side, Swing/Right: 2001 Chavez; 2005 Chavez (VERY large margins both times)

District 6 - University/Uptown/Nob Hill, Left: 2001 Chavez (IIRC Jim Baca of the Left won some precincts here); 2005 Griego

District 7 - Near Northeast Heights and Mid-Northeast Heights, Swing/Right: 2001 Schwartz; 2005 Chavez

District 8 - Far Northeast Heights, Right: 2001 Schwartz; 2005 Chavez

District 9 - Far Northeast Heights and Southeast Heights, Right: 2001 Schwartz; 2005 Chavez

2001: Chavez 5 Districts to Schwartz's 4
2005: Chavez 6 Districts to Griego's 3
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It's like there's three different cities voting, and two of them switched sides between elections: (current Ideological Councilors)
Districts 2, 3, and 6: 2001 Chavez; 2005 Griego (3 Councilors of the Left)
Districts 4, 7, 8, and 9: 2001 Schwartz; 2005 Chavez (1 Councilor of the Center; 3 Councilors of the Right)
Districts 1 and 5: 2001 Chavez; 2005 Chavez - the West Side has always been Chavez's stronghold, and is quite likely to remain that way (2 Councilors of the Center)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Well, that's Albuquerque.

[minionofmidas]

Ì gotta say, the city limits look frigging weird.
Yeah, I know, the Monument.

Anyways...
Who took second place behind Chavez in what district?

[WMS]

Ì gotta say, the city limits look frigging weird.
Yeah, I know, the Monument.

Anyways...
Who took second place behind Chavez in what district?

You haven't seen the worst of it, Lewis. There are places in the Valley where it goes house-by-house from City to County and back and forth and so on.

And that's a very, very, good question...which I don't have an answer for because of course the people who write these articles never think about that. I would guess Winter ran second in all the districts Chavez won, although District 1 makes me hesitate before saying that, since 2nd place there might have been Griego. 4, 5, 7, 8, and 9 are almost certainly Winter for 2nd place, but even here...damnit, I'll have to make a pilgrimage Downtown to see the results, because the City Clerk's Office sucks too much to put up the canvass online.