Who’s funding Albuquerque’s runoff campaigns? Voters may never know

A federal judge this week struck down Albuquerque’s donor disclosure rules for advocacy groups that spend money in city elections, opening the door for thousands or even millions of dollars in anonymous cash to flood the Dec. 9 runoff with early voting starting in 10 days.

U.S. District Judge James Browning ruled Wednesday that Albuquerque’s Election Code violated the free speech rights of three progressive advocacy groups by requiring them to disclose their top donors. His decision opens the door for advocacy nonprofits to spend unlimited amounts in city races without voters knowing who is funding the effort.

Browning wrote that the disclosure rules placed “a burden on the Plaintiffs’ First Amendment rights” and were “not justified by a sufficiently important government interest.”

The lawsuit moved quickly through federal court. The groups filed suit on Nov. 11, and Browning issued his ruling nine days later, less than three weeks before the runoff election. The ruling is temporary — Browning scheduled a Dec. 3 hearing to consider a preliminary injunction, meaning the case could change before the Dec. 9 election.

The three groups — Center for Civic Action, ProgressNow New Mexico and Semilla Action — already do not have to disclose their donors under federal tax law because of their status as 501(c)4 nonprofits. Albuquerque’s Election Code had filled that gap since 2012, but the ruling strips away that safeguard. Now the true sources of the money will stay hidden, a setup campaign finance experts often call “dark money.”

The ruling could open the door to other groups with similar tax statuses such as the New Mexico Business Coalition becoming more engaged in city elections.

Groups that violated the disclosure rules faced potential public reprimand or fines under the city’s Election Code.

In court filings, city attorney Mark Baker argued that Center for Civic Action’s values statement “gives primacy to its electoral activities” and says the group is “proud to support work that advances progressive policies through electoral, policy, and organizing campaigns.” 

“The public has an interest in knowing who is paying for campaign advertising,” Baker said. “So that voters can make an informed choice about the weight to give any particular campaign advertisement.”

Baker also noted that ProgressNow New Mexico registered as a Measure Finance Committee during the 2023 municipal election cycle, according to city records. The records also show that the Center for Civic Action is a registered lobbyist employer and “a primary contributor to a political committee called Legacy PAC.”

The groups plan to spend a combined $60,000 on the runoff elections, according to court documents. Center for Civic Action, which has already contributed $6,000 total to two candidates, plans to spend $25,000. ProgressNow New Mexico plans $15,000 and Semilla Action plans $20,000.

CCA contributed $2,000 to Teresa Garcia in District 3 during the general election and another $2,000 in the runoff. It also contributed $2,000 to Stephanie Telles in District 1 for the runoff, according to city campaign finance records. Both races could flip City Council seats from conservative to progressive, potentially shifting the council’s ideological balance.

Garcia said she’s “ proud that individuals and organizations that fight for working families, protecting the environment and electing grassroots candidates are supporting me.”

She said the “bigger question is what to do about the massive amount of corporate money flooding into our elections.” 

Telles said she respects the court’s ruling but believes “strongly in transparency because it’s fundamental to public trust and accountable government.” 

She said community-based organizations are “navigating” a legal framework shaped by federal decisions like Citizens United, which expanded outside spending without disclosure requirements. 

“What I can control is my own campaign, which fully discloses every contribution, and my commitment to accountability, integrity and strong safeguards for the public,” Telles said.

City Clerk Ethan Watson said his office is reviewing the ruling to determine next steps. 

“These safeguards give voters clear information in elections where spending by candidates and outside groups can easily exceed $1 million,” Watson said. “This temporary ruling opens the door for more dark-money spending and large outside donors to operate with less visibility, and we remain committed to protecting transparency for Albuquerque voters.”

Browning ruled that the city’s $250 spending threshold fails the Supreme Court’s “major purpose test,” which requires a political committee’s main goal to be electing or defeating candidates. The city had strengthened its disclosure rules on Feb. 10, 2025, to “enhance clarity and transparency.”

The ruling applies to the three advocacy groups and similar organizations whose primary purpose is not electing candidates. Traditional political action committees, whose main goal is electing or defeating candidates, must still disclose their donors under the city’s election code.

The groups must include disclaimers on campaign materials showing who paid for them, but they no longer have to reveal their donors’ identities.

Center for Civic Action has an annual budget of about $1 million, and ProgressNow New Mexico’s budget is roughly $360,000, according to court documents. Semilla Action’s budget was not disclosed in those filings.