from the New Mexico Independent
By Marjorie Childress 4/15/09 1:57 AM
ALBUQUERQUE — An ongoing turf-war between Mayor Martin Chávez and Albuquerque’s City Council bubbled up yesterday, this time over the city’s Capital Improvement Program (CIP).
Apparently, the city attorney and the mayor think the Council amended and passed this year’s CIP budget too late, which means the mayor’s version will go before voters in October.
The Capital Improvement Program funds projects like parks, roads, and city buildings.
The final legislation approved by the council on April 6 eliminated several of the mayor’s high profile priorities — including a $6.48 million lagoon intended for swimming at Tingley Beach as well as infrastructure for a big soccer field complex to be built on the far West Side near I-40 and Paseo del Volcan. SunCal Corporation offered to donate that land after the Council cut funding, with the Mayor making the offer to the Council on March 13.
But now, City Attorney Bob White — a long-time appointee of the mayor — says the Council didn’t follow the proper timeline, which means the mayor’s original proposal stands.
In response, city councilors said at a press conference late yesterday that White is mistaken, and that the decree represents an encroachment on the council’s power.
Showing posts with label Mayor Chavez. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Mayor Chavez. Show all posts
Wednesday, April 15, 2009
Wednesday, March 4, 2009
International District Press Conference
Tomorrow morning, Thursday, March 5th at 10:45 am, at the Talin Market, Mayor Martin Chavez will be having a press conference alongside City Councilor Rey Garduño to mark the Mayors signing of R-09-203 which recognizes the International District.
R-09-203, sponsored by Councilor Garduño, recognizes the area in and around Louisiana Blvd. between Central Ave. and Zuni Ave. as the “International District.”
This area includes the communities of La Mesa, Trumbull, South San Pedro, Elder Homestead, Fair West, and the surrounding areas.
If you are able, please come show your support of the International District.
R-09-203, sponsored by Councilor Garduño, recognizes the area in and around Louisiana Blvd. between Central Ave. and Zuni Ave. as the “International District.”
This area includes the communities of La Mesa, Trumbull, South San Pedro, Elder Homestead, Fair West, and the surrounding areas.
If you are able, please come show your support of the International District.
Wednesday, August 27, 2008
Mayor Chavez: Flip-flopper on binding arbitration?
from the New Mexico Independent
By Marjorie Childress 08/27/2008 79 Views -->
-->
Andrew Padilla, president of public employees union AFSCME Council 18, calls Mayor Martin Chavez’s threat to veto a bill passed last week by the Albuquerque City Council a “punch in the gut to labor.”
That’s because of what the mayor said last fall during his short-lived Senate race.
According to Padilla, Chavez came to the AFSCME union hall to speak with blue-collar workers and union representatives last fall to drum up support for his Senate campaign. During that visit, Padilla said, the mayor clearly voiced support for a binding arbitration measure like the one passed by the City Council.
“When he was running for the Senate last fall, he was for this measure,” Padilla said. “He came down to the union hall and said, in front of blue-collars and union reps, that he was in favor of binding arbitration for noneconomic issues. He said that. His vow to now veto this bill is a big deal for us. It’s a punch in the gut to labor from Marty Chavez.”
The Mayor’s Office did not respond to inquiries by the Independent asking for the mayor’s recollections of last year's campaign visit, or to questions in general about his thoughts on how to resolve the union’s concerns.
The New Mexico Public Employee Bargaining Act provides for forced arbitration to break through an impasse during labor contract negotiations. In such a case, an approved arbitrator is agreed to by both parties and has the final say on unresolved issues. The cost of arbitration is borne equally by both sides.
But when the act was signed into law in 2003, it grandfathered in municipal ordinances already in effect. One of those is the City of Albuquerque Labor-Management Relations Ordinance. The city ordinance allows the two sides to voluntarily enter into binding resolution, but does not allow either side to force the other into arbitration for unresolved issues.
Padilla told the Independent that he could not recall the city ever agreeing to enter into voluntary arbitration to resolve an impasse during contract negotiations, and attributes this to the city knowing that it can simply impose a contract in the end since public employees don't have the right to strike.
For this reason, he said, the city’s labor ordinance has long hampered genuine negotiations between the city and it’s public employees.
“Negotiations really aren’t negotiations if the employer can just impose a contract on you in the end,” Padilla said. “In the past, when we’ve reached an impasse and mediation hasn’t worked, we’ve sent a letter requesting arbitration. Then they say no.”
When asked about concerns that the bill would constitute a “substantial” change, which under the state statute would end the grandfathering provision and make the city ordinance null and void, Padilla said it was pure speculation. Different attorneys say different things, he said, and in any event Councilor Debbie O’Malley offered an amendment to the bill that would make the binding arbitration provision null and void should it be declared a “substantial” change in court.
Other concerns are that the bill would make it difficult for the city to schedule workers when and where they are needed. Padilla said that would not be the case either since O’Malley added an amendment to the bill exempting “management rights.”
Under the City’s labor ordinance, management rights have the following definition:
§ 3-2-5 MANAGEMENT RIGHTS.
Subject to existing law, the Mayor and his administrative staff shall have the following rights:
(A) To direct the work of its employees;
(B) To hire, promote, evaluate, transfer and assign employees;
(C) To demote, suspend, discharge or terminate employees for just cause;
(D) To determine staffing requirements;
(E) To maintain the efficiency of the city government and ensure the carrying out ofnormal management functions;
(F) To take actions as may be necessary to carry out the mission of the citygovernment in emergencies; and
(G) To manage and to exercise judgment on all matters not specifically prohibitedby this article or by a collective bargaining agreement in effect between the city employer and an employee organization.
Padilla argues that staffing questions regarding when and where employees would be assigned to work falls under management rights that are exempt from the bill. O’Malley also amended the bill to exclude drug use policy.
There are a whole host of other issues that fall outside of economic issues, management rights, and drug use policy, that are the subject of contract negotiations. Current city contracts can be seen on this Web page.
The table of contents in each shows the scope of issues covered. The City Council passed the bill 5-3, with Councilor Sally Mayer absent. To override the mayor’s veto, Mayer would need to provide the sixth vote in favor of the bill.
Padilla said his union will challenge the city’s ordinance in court if necessary in an attempt to bring it in line with the arbitration provisions in the state statute.
By Marjorie Childress 08/27/2008 79 Views -->
-->
Andrew Padilla, president of public employees union AFSCME Council 18, calls Mayor Martin Chavez’s threat to veto a bill passed last week by the Albuquerque City Council a “punch in the gut to labor.”
That’s because of what the mayor said last fall during his short-lived Senate race.
According to Padilla, Chavez came to the AFSCME union hall to speak with blue-collar workers and union representatives last fall to drum up support for his Senate campaign. During that visit, Padilla said, the mayor clearly voiced support for a binding arbitration measure like the one passed by the City Council.
“When he was running for the Senate last fall, he was for this measure,” Padilla said. “He came down to the union hall and said, in front of blue-collars and union reps, that he was in favor of binding arbitration for noneconomic issues. He said that. His vow to now veto this bill is a big deal for us. It’s a punch in the gut to labor from Marty Chavez.”
The Mayor’s Office did not respond to inquiries by the Independent asking for the mayor’s recollections of last year's campaign visit, or to questions in general about his thoughts on how to resolve the union’s concerns.
The New Mexico Public Employee Bargaining Act provides for forced arbitration to break through an impasse during labor contract negotiations. In such a case, an approved arbitrator is agreed to by both parties and has the final say on unresolved issues. The cost of arbitration is borne equally by both sides.
But when the act was signed into law in 2003, it grandfathered in municipal ordinances already in effect. One of those is the City of Albuquerque Labor-Management Relations Ordinance. The city ordinance allows the two sides to voluntarily enter into binding resolution, but does not allow either side to force the other into arbitration for unresolved issues.
Padilla told the Independent that he could not recall the city ever agreeing to enter into voluntary arbitration to resolve an impasse during contract negotiations, and attributes this to the city knowing that it can simply impose a contract in the end since public employees don't have the right to strike.
For this reason, he said, the city’s labor ordinance has long hampered genuine negotiations between the city and it’s public employees.
“Negotiations really aren’t negotiations if the employer can just impose a contract on you in the end,” Padilla said. “In the past, when we’ve reached an impasse and mediation hasn’t worked, we’ve sent a letter requesting arbitration. Then they say no.”
When asked about concerns that the bill would constitute a “substantial” change, which under the state statute would end the grandfathering provision and make the city ordinance null and void, Padilla said it was pure speculation. Different attorneys say different things, he said, and in any event Councilor Debbie O’Malley offered an amendment to the bill that would make the binding arbitration provision null and void should it be declared a “substantial” change in court.
Other concerns are that the bill would make it difficult for the city to schedule workers when and where they are needed. Padilla said that would not be the case either since O’Malley added an amendment to the bill exempting “management rights.”
Under the City’s labor ordinance, management rights have the following definition:
§ 3-2-5 MANAGEMENT RIGHTS.
Subject to existing law, the Mayor and his administrative staff shall have the following rights:
(A) To direct the work of its employees;
(B) To hire, promote, evaluate, transfer and assign employees;
(C) To demote, suspend, discharge or terminate employees for just cause;
(D) To determine staffing requirements;
(E) To maintain the efficiency of the city government and ensure the carrying out ofnormal management functions;
(F) To take actions as may be necessary to carry out the mission of the citygovernment in emergencies; and
(G) To manage and to exercise judgment on all matters not specifically prohibitedby this article or by a collective bargaining agreement in effect between the city employer and an employee organization.
Padilla argues that staffing questions regarding when and where employees would be assigned to work falls under management rights that are exempt from the bill. O’Malley also amended the bill to exclude drug use policy.
There are a whole host of other issues that fall outside of economic issues, management rights, and drug use policy, that are the subject of contract negotiations. Current city contracts can be seen on this Web page.
The table of contents in each shows the scope of issues covered. The City Council passed the bill 5-3, with Councilor Sally Mayer absent. To override the mayor’s veto, Mayer would need to provide the sixth vote in favor of the bill.
Padilla said his union will challenge the city’s ordinance in court if necessary in an attempt to bring it in line with the arbitration provisions in the state statute.
Tuesday, July 8, 2008
Governor Asking for Your Ideas
from the Albuquerque Journal
Got Any Ideas for Expo? Speak Up!
AlbuquerqueJournal-->By Jeff JonesJournal Staff Writer
Gov. Bill Richardson, who envisions a dramatic revamp of the state fairgrounds in Albuquerque, wants to know what developers, businesses, architects and anyone else who's interested have in mind.
The options, including moving the fairgrounds elsewhere, seem to be wide open.
The state on Monday issued a written “request for information” on ideas for the future of the 237-acre Expo New Mexico grounds on Central Avenue. And the state is continuing to explore a public-private partnership to make big changes on the valuable chunk of central Albuquerque real estate.
Richardson earlier this year made headlines when he announced the partnership possibility and tossed out the idea of replacing the aging Tingley Coliseum and the Downs at Albuquerque horse track with a new “world-class” exhibit center.
Some of the other possibilities in the new request for information are also likely to spark conversation.
“Expo New Mexico grounds are large enough and located in an area that lends itself to any number of possible uses, including but by no means limited to a year-round theme park, commercial, residential and/or retail development, an equestrian center, land leases, a state office campus for the Albuquerque area, expansion of the flea market, etc.,” the request says.
The request also says the state is seeking ideas for keeping the fair “as an integral part of the new development” as well as a “development with the state fair moved to an alternate location.”
The potential exhibit center, convention facilities, green space and “destination retail” are also mentioned in the request.
The request for ideas is not a formal request seeking bids on an Expo revamp, and the state is not paying anything for the ideas it generates — though Richardson spokesman Gilbert Gallegos said the ideas could eventually be incorporated into a bid request.
A meeting for anyone wishing to give their two cents' worth is set to take place 10 a.m. July 18 on the Expo grounds, and responses must be submitted to the state by Aug. 15.
“If there's something we need from the Legislature, we'd like to get it to them by the next session,” Gallegos said of the potential state involvement in an Expo makeover.
Richardson in May announced that he had directed state Finance Secretary Katherine Miller and Expo General Manager Judith Espinosa to hammer out a proposal for a public-private partnership to revamp the aging fairgrounds, which for years has been a major money pit for repair and maintenance work.
The order came after the state Racing Commission approved a request by the Downs to move its track and casino operations to a new site in Moriarty. At the time, Gallegos said moving the track would strip about $2 million a year from Expo's $15.7 million budget.
Gallegos has said Richardson preferred keeping the fair on the Expo grounds, though the new request for information leaves a move elsewhere as one option.
Albuquerque Mayor Martin Chávez would like to see the fair moved to the developing Mesa del Sol area south of Albuquerque.
It wasn't immediately clear whether a new exhibit center would conflict in any way with Chávez's plans to bring a new arena and hotel project to Downtown Albuquerque, though the new request for information appears to refer to the other project at one point:
It mentions “keeping in mind other similarly planned projects in the Albuquerque metro area.”
A message left for Chávez on Monday afternoon wasn't immediately returned, though one city official has said Richardson appears to be supportive of the Downtown plans.
Got Any Ideas for Expo? Speak Up!
AlbuquerqueJournal-->By Jeff JonesJournal Staff Writer
Gov. Bill Richardson, who envisions a dramatic revamp of the state fairgrounds in Albuquerque, wants to know what developers, businesses, architects and anyone else who's interested have in mind.
The options, including moving the fairgrounds elsewhere, seem to be wide open.
The state on Monday issued a written “request for information” on ideas for the future of the 237-acre Expo New Mexico grounds on Central Avenue. And the state is continuing to explore a public-private partnership to make big changes on the valuable chunk of central Albuquerque real estate.
Richardson earlier this year made headlines when he announced the partnership possibility and tossed out the idea of replacing the aging Tingley Coliseum and the Downs at Albuquerque horse track with a new “world-class” exhibit center.
Some of the other possibilities in the new request for information are also likely to spark conversation.
“Expo New Mexico grounds are large enough and located in an area that lends itself to any number of possible uses, including but by no means limited to a year-round theme park, commercial, residential and/or retail development, an equestrian center, land leases, a state office campus for the Albuquerque area, expansion of the flea market, etc.,” the request says.
The request also says the state is seeking ideas for keeping the fair “as an integral part of the new development” as well as a “development with the state fair moved to an alternate location.”
The potential exhibit center, convention facilities, green space and “destination retail” are also mentioned in the request.
The request for ideas is not a formal request seeking bids on an Expo revamp, and the state is not paying anything for the ideas it generates — though Richardson spokesman Gilbert Gallegos said the ideas could eventually be incorporated into a bid request.
A meeting for anyone wishing to give their two cents' worth is set to take place 10 a.m. July 18 on the Expo grounds, and responses must be submitted to the state by Aug. 15.
“If there's something we need from the Legislature, we'd like to get it to them by the next session,” Gallegos said of the potential state involvement in an Expo makeover.
Richardson in May announced that he had directed state Finance Secretary Katherine Miller and Expo General Manager Judith Espinosa to hammer out a proposal for a public-private partnership to revamp the aging fairgrounds, which for years has been a major money pit for repair and maintenance work.
The order came after the state Racing Commission approved a request by the Downs to move its track and casino operations to a new site in Moriarty. At the time, Gallegos said moving the track would strip about $2 million a year from Expo's $15.7 million budget.
Gallegos has said Richardson preferred keeping the fair on the Expo grounds, though the new request for information leaves a move elsewhere as one option.
Albuquerque Mayor Martin Chávez would like to see the fair moved to the developing Mesa del Sol area south of Albuquerque.
It wasn't immediately clear whether a new exhibit center would conflict in any way with Chávez's plans to bring a new arena and hotel project to Downtown Albuquerque, though the new request for information appears to refer to the other project at one point:
It mentions “keeping in mind other similarly planned projects in the Albuquerque metro area.”
A message left for Chávez on Monday afternoon wasn't immediately returned, though one city official has said Richardson appears to be supportive of the Downtown plans.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
