Timothy M. Keller, Mayor
City of Albuquerque
Office of the Mayor/ chief administrative office
Interoffice Memorandum
|
to: |
City COUncil |
|
from: |
Timothy M. Keller, Mayor |
|
subject: |
VETO OF O-26-54, AMENDING ROA 1994, CHAPTER 2, ARTICLE 7, PART 2, RELATED TO THE CITY ATTORNEY AND THE CITY LEGAL DEPARTMENT AND REPEALING SECTION 3-2-5 OF THE CODE OF RESOLUTIONS |
|
date: |
September 3, 2026 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
title
Veto Of O-26-54, Amending ROA 1994, Chapter 2, Article 7, Part 2, Related To The City Attorney And The City Legal Department And Repealing Section 3-2-5 Of The Code Of Resolutions
body
Upon reviewing this legislation, I have found that while well intended and no doubt the result of past challenges, that I fully admit we have had regarding the role of attorneys in our processes; this specific piece of legislation creates an unworkable conflict with the City Charter and with the New Mexico Rules of Professional Conduct for attorneys, and would better be addressed and resolved through alternative legislation or the Charter review process and, pending confirmation, with the guidance of our next City Attorney.
Albuquerque has a long history of using a comprehensive Charter review process to consider significant changes to how our city government works. With fundamental questions about our governing structure once again before us, I believe it is time to undertake that process again, and this particular issue would best be addressed in conjunction with any other changes to ensure conflicting pieces of law are prevented.
Also, O-26-54 makes several changes to the relationship between the City Attorney, the City Council, the Administration and the Legal Department. Some of the changes create a conflicting situation for the City Attorney with both the Administration and City Council, other changes directly conflict with parts of our City Charter, and still other changes written in this version would put the City Attorney in a position that likely violates their oath to the Rules of Professional Conduct under Rule Set 16 - Rules of Professional Conduct for New Mexico.
The process is also timely as I have submitted a nominee for City Attorney for Council’s consideration. I have discussed this issue with him and added it to conditions of his appointment, which he is in full support of, to work on this issue to alleviate City Council concerns in this area, and with respect to his own communications and sharing of information with City Council.
There are alternative amendments to the City Attorney Ordinance and operational standards that would meet the expressed goals seemingly within this bill. The next City Attorney should be given the opportunity to cooperatively work with city leadership, both City Council and the Administration, as per Rule Set 16 -Rules of Professional Conduct, to articulate language that meets the City Council’s goals and expectations.
I am confident that if we can move forward together with this type of comprehensive approach, we will be able to work through any differences and propose and implement appropriate changes that are in the best interest of our city and our residents.
For these reasons I am vetoing O-26-54 and respectfully ask City Council uphold the veto.