An Albuquerque city councilor’s proposal to require more accountability from Mayor Tim Keller’s administration passed nearly unanimously, but with changes that significantly lessened its impact.
During Monday’s City Council meeting, councilors passed a proposal 7-2 requiring Keller’s administration to answer councilors’ questions in writing as part of the administration question-and-answer period at council meetings.
Keller could veto the bill, sponsored by Councilor Louie Sanchez, but the council can override the veto with six votes.
YES: Joaquín Baca, Brook Bassan, Dan Champine, Tammy Fiebelkorn, Renée Grout, Dan Lewis, Louie Sanchez
NO: Klarissa Peña, Nichole Rogers
“This is something that needs to go through and something that needs to start holding the administration accountable to getting us — as councilors and the public — the answers to questions that we have,” Sanchez said. “It’s about making sure that we do the right thing for the public, for people that actually pay our bills and pay for our services.”
The proposal initially aimed to require every question to be answered with a written response and sent to the council within 10 business days of the meeting. The questions and answers would then be shared on the council’s website.
During Monday’s meeting, Councilor Tammy Fiebelkorn proposed multiple changes to the bill.
Fiebelkorn suggested the administration be required to submit written responses within seven business days of the meeting and respond in writing only when they can’t answer the question in person.
“I feel like we have a situation where we ask questions, and if they answer them, it is on the record…having the administrative staff spend time rewriting answers that they’ve already provided us does not seem like a good use of administration time,” Fiebelkorn said. “I am saying that they should provide in writing any questions that they were not able to answer on the dais.”
Fiebelkorn also proposed that written responses only be required when a councilor asks a question expecting a factual or informational answer, not when a councilor asks a question “that has only a subjective, philosophical or given basic answer.”
Council President Dan Lewis said he understood the bill but found it a “little embarrassing” because discussions between the council and administration are part of a public discussion.
“I think there needs to be an immediate response to it,” Lewis said. “Then, if the administration needs a little bit longer, I think there’s some trust here that that will take a little bit longer to do that. And a non-answer is an answer in my opinion. I don’t think it’s necessary to put all this in writing or to do this bill.”
Chief Administrative Officer Samantha Sengel told the council her goal is to ensure councilors get thorough, factual responses in a timely manner and when councilors submit questions before the meeting, the administration is “typically always prepared to answer those questions.”
“I think this is an unfortunate move…I think the working relationship that we have had recently, in terms of assuring we’re finding responses, is a better way for us to work together,” Sengel said.
Councilors approved Fiebelkorn’s proposed changes before passing the bill.
Nonprofit journalism like this depends on readers like you. This story is supported by City Desk ABQ, a nonprofit newsroom project of Citizen Media Group supporting news and politics coverage that inspires readers to participate in local democracy. Become a supporter to keep City Desk free and support nonprofit, independent journalists covering politics and policy f0r New Mexico newsrooms.