Albuquerque’s Mayoral Runoff Is About Much More Than a Mayor

Albuquerque’s 2025 mayoral runoff between incumbent Tim Keller and former sheriff Darren White looks, on the surface, like a familiar clash: a progressive Democrat defending his record vs. a law-and-order Republican promising a crackdown on crime and homelessness. Underneath, it’s a test of what urban governance will look like in the Trump II era, in blue cities facing deep public safety anxieties and mounting homelessness—while federal policy moves sharply to the right.

This race is less a local anomaly than a bellwether. It will tell us whether voters in reliably blue cities are still willing to back mayors who position themselves as bulwarks against Washington, or whether anger over crime, encampments, and visible disorder has eroded that trust enough to usher in more punitive, enforcement-first leadership.

How Albuquerque Got Here: Crime, Homelessness, and Federal Scrutiny

To understand why this runoff has become so charged, you have to look back at three overlapping histories: the city’s crime trajectory, its homelessness crisis, and its long-running conflicts over policing and civil rights.

A city with a long crime problem—not a new one

Albuquerque has struggled with violent crime for more than a decade. In 2018 and 2019, the city’s homicide rates surged to levels that put it among the worst in the country on a per-capita basis. The pandemic years only intensified that trend, mirroring national spikes in homicides and gun violence. While recent FBI data suggest violent crime in many U.S. cities began declining in 2023–2024, perception has lagged reality, and Albuquerque’s reputation as unsafe has stuck.

Complicating matters, the Albuquerque Police Department (APD) has been under a federal consent decree with the Department of Justice since 2014, following a damning investigation that found a pattern of excessive force and questionable shootings. That decree reshaped how APD trains, supervises, and disciplines officers. For reform-oriented leaders like Keller, it’s a necessary check; for law-and-order critics like White, it’s part of what they see as an over-constrained, “unshackled” police force.

Homelessness as the visible face of broader economic failure

On homelessness, Albuquerque mirrors a broader Western pattern. New Mexico’s annual Point-in-Time counts have shown significant increases in unsheltered homelessness, driven by rising rents, fentanyl and meth addiction, and insufficient mental health infrastructure. While exact numbers vary year to year, the trend has been clear: more tents, more encampments, more public frustration.

Unlike coastal megacities, Albuquerque doesn’t have San Francisco-level housing costs. Instead, it has a mix of low wages, aging housing stock, and limited behavioral health capacity—a combination that turns relatively modest housing pressure into visible street crisis. Keller’s focus on reforming homelessness and housing services, alongside climate and community investments, is an attempt to tackle structural causes. White’s promise to “clean up homeless encampments” and adopt “policies that work” taps into public impatience with incrementalism.

Immigration, sanctuary politics, and Trump’s second term

Keller’s decision to issue an executive order reaffirming Albuquerque’s status as an immigrant-friendly city must be read in the context of Trump’s second-term immigration crackdown. The city has long branded itself as welcoming to immigrants and refugees—partly cultural, partly economic. Keller’s order to safeguard immigrant rights isn’t just symbolic; it puts the city on a direct collision course with federal enforcement priorities and with Trump’s allies at the state and local levels.

This sets up a stark contrast: Keller casts himself as the local protector against what he terms a sweeping, overreaching federal agenda. White frames Keller’s approach as “sanctuary policies” that endanger public safety and invite lawlessness. The runoff becomes a referendum on whether urban voters in a blue city still see sanctuary-style policies as moral imperatives—or as luxuries they can no longer afford amid perceived disorder.

What This Race Is Really About: Competing Models of Urban Governance

Keller’s bet: Progressive pragmatism plus anti-Trump resistance

Keller’s campaign leans heavily on continuity and the narrative that “we know what’s working” and now need to “press the pedal down.” That framing reveals his underlying bet: that voters will accept imperfect outcomes on crime and homelessness if they believe the city is moving in the right direction and if they see him as a bulwark against Trump.

His record highlights several core pillars:

• Public safety reforms: Attempting to balance crime reduction with DOJ-mandated police reform, shifting some calls to alternative response units, and emphasizing community policing.
• Systems-level homelessness response: Reworking shelter, outreach, and service delivery infrastructure rather than relying primarily on encampment sweeps.
• Climate and economic modernization: A commitment to 100% renewable energy by 2025, investments in youth programs, and efforts to “modernize” the economy.
• Values-based leadership: Positioning Albuquerque as pro-immigrant, pro-climate action, and resilient through COVID.

The underlying theory is that long-term safety requires not only policing but also stable housing, youth opportunity, and community trust in institutions. Keller’s vulnerability is that these structural strategies take years to pay off—and voters experiencing daily fear or frustration may not want to wait.

White’s bet: Order first, systems later

White’s pitch flips that sequencing. He promises to restore order first—"unshackling the police," ending “catch and release,” and rolling back sanctuary-style policies—and only then focus on economic growth and homelessness strategies framed as “what works.” His resume is central to this message: former head of the New Mexico State Police, former Bernalillo County sheriff, and a long law-enforcement career.

In effect, White is offering a more classic broken-windows approach: send a clear signal that crime and public disorder will not be tolerated, empower officers to act aggressively, and clear encampments to restore public space. The trade-off, if he wins and follows through, would likely be renewed tension with civil rights advocates, immigrant communities, and possibly federal monitors overseeing APD’s reforms.

The subtext is that White believes voters are now willing to accept a higher risk of heavy-handed policing in exchange for faster, visible improvement in street-level conditions.

Why this Runoff Matters Beyond Albuquerque

A test of the “blue city backlash” thesis

Across the country, progressive mayors in Democratic cities are facing more conservative or centrist challengers who center their campaigns on crime and homelessness. We’ve seen moderate or tough-on-crime candidates win in places like New York City and San Francisco recall reformist prosecutors. Albuquerque’s runoff slots directly into that pattern.

If White, a Republican, can win in a reliably Democratic city in a state that Trump lost, it will be read nationally as evidence that “quality of life” fears are now powerful enough to override party loyalty at the local level. If Keller wins decisively, Democrats will cite it as proof that urban voters still prefer progressive, reform-oriented governance even in the face of elevated crime and homelessness—especially when that governance is explicitly positioned as a check on Trump.

Federal vs. local power in the Trump II era

Trump’s first term triggered a wave of local and state-level resistance: sanctuary policies, climate compacts, and legal challenges. His second term, with hardened political networks and a potentially more disciplined Justice Department and Department of Homeland Security, is likely to intensify federal pressure on noncompliant jurisdictions.

If Keller is re-elected, Albuquerque would likely double down on its immigrant-friendly stance and climate agenda, setting up potential confrontations over information-sharing, federal immigration detainers, and grant conditions tied to cooperation with federal enforcement. If White wins, Albuquerque could flip from being a symbol of resistance to a model of alignment with Trump’s agenda in a blue state—offering the administration a powerful talking point about “Democrats waking up on crime and border chaos.”

Urban policy signaling to other medium-sized cities

Most national political coverage focuses on megacities. But the reality is that medium-sized metros like Albuquerque are where many Americans live, and where policy experimentation is often more nimble. Their choices on crime, housing, and immigration frequently spread laterally.

A Keller victory would reinforce a model that pairs police reform, climate goals, and social services expansion even under intense public safety pressure. A White win could embolden sheriffs, former prosecutors, and law-and-order figures in similar cities—from Tucson to Fresno to Oklahoma City—to run explicitly on “unshackling police” and dismantling sanctuary frameworks, betting that voters have reached a tipping point of frustration.

What the Numbers and Trends Suggest

Several underlying data-driven dynamics are shaping this contest, even if they don’t show up on campaign mailers:

• Crime trends vs. crime perception: Nationally, early FBI and local data show violent crime moderating after pandemic peaks, but public perception remains anchored in 2020–2022 levels. In Albuquerque, even modest improvements may feel invisible to residents who still hear gunshots or see headlines about homicides.
• Housing cost stress: While Albuquerque remains cheaper than coastal markets, rents and home prices rose significantly over the past decade, outpacing incomes for many low-wage workers. This fuels both homelessness and middle-class anxiety about economic security.
• Partisan sorting at the local level: Cities that once elected moderate Republicans to mayoral offices have largely shifted to one-party Democratic governance. White’s competitiveness in this environment is itself notable; it suggests that local partisan lines are more fluid when everyday security feels threatened.
• Latino voter complexity: New Mexico’s heavily Latino electorate does not map neatly onto national partisan assumptions. In recent years, Republicans have made gains among some Latino voters on economic and security issues. Albuquerque’s runoff will offer clues about whether that shift is durable in urban contexts.

Expert Perspectives: What’s at Stake in the Policy Choices

Urban policy scholars and policing experts warn that both candidates’ approaches carry real risks.

Criminologist David Kennedy has long argued that “enforcement-only crackdowns produce quick but often fragile reductions in visible crime, and can poison police-community relations in ways that make long-term safety harder to achieve.” That critique speaks directly to the kind of mandate White is seeking.

On the other hand, public safety expert Thomas Abt notes that “communities experiencing daily violence and open-air drug markets are not asking for fewer police; they’re asking for better policing that is both effective and accountable.” Keller’s challenge has been convincing those communities that his reforms are delivering “better policing,” not simply more paperwork and slower response times.

Housing and homelessness researchers emphasize that clearing encampments without expanding housing and treatment mostly displaces the problem. Yet they also acknowledge that unmanaged public spaces erode trust in government and undermine support for progressive policies. In Albuquerque, both candidates are walking that tightrope—Keller through service-focused reforms, White through promises of visible cleanups.

What to Watch After the Runoff

Regardless of who wins, several fault lines will shape Albuquerque’s next four years:

• Policing under the consent decree: A White administration would likely seek to push the boundaries of what’s permissible under the DOJ agreement, risking conflict with the federal monitor; a Keller administration would likely continue incremental reform, risking public impatience.
• Encampment policy and litigation: Aggressive encampment sweeps, if pursued, could trigger lawsuits under federal rulings that limit criminalization of homelessness without adequate shelter. That’s already a live issue in western cities.
• City–federal confrontation over immigration: Keller’s immigrant-friendly policies and Trump’s crackdown are on a collision course. Even if White wins and rolls back sanctuary practices, the surrounding political and legal environment in New Mexico will remain contested.
• Business and investment confidence: Both candidates talk about jobs and economic growth, but the business community will be watching how quickly post-election policy shifts translate into cleaner, safer corridors—or into instability and legal fights.

The Bottom Line

Albuquerque’s mayoral runoff is not just about two men with contrasting resumes. It’s about which narrative of urban governance will dominate the next phase of American politics: a values-driven, reformist model that tries to tackle crime and homelessness through systemic change while resisting federal pressure, or a security-first model that prioritizes rapid, visible order even if it rekindles old battles over civil rights and immigration.

In that sense, the choice Albuquerque’s voters make will echo well beyond New Mexico. Other cities—and the Trump administration—are watching closely.