Regular Governing Body Meeting - Second Wednesday Wed, Jul 9, 2025 · Governing Body https://santafeminutes.space/meeting/263 == Executive Summary == The Santa Fe City Council meeting covered a wide range of topics, including the approval of a collective bargaining agreement for police officers, the adoption of the city's Infrastructure Capital Improvements Plan (ICIP), and discussions around homelessness solutions and city project transparency. A significant portion of the meeting focused on police officer compensation, with a 3% raise approved for the police union, and ongoing efforts to address recruitment and retention challenges. The ICIP highlighted key priorities such as a new non-congregate shelter and a police training facility, though the shelter project sparked debate regarding planning and communication. Councilors also addressed concerns about communication breakdowns between staff and elected officials, particularly regarding sensitive projects like homeless services, and emphasized the need for transparency and community engagement. The meeting concluded with the approval of several contracts, a public hearing on general obligation bonds, and a discussion about the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Annual Action Plan, with concerns raised about potential federal funding cuts and the need for alternative housing funding strategies. Public comments included strong criticisms regarding the Soldiers Monument, city cleanliness, and constitutional rights. == Key Decisions == - Approved the meeting agenda as amended (Item F removed). - Approved the consent agenda as amended (Item I pulled). - Approved the collective bargaining agreement with the Santa Fe Police Officers Association (SFPOA) for FY26, including a 3% raise. - Approved an amendment to the police union contract to reflect a specific dollar amount ($43.39) for detectives on page 19. - Adopted the City of Santa Fe's 2027-2031 Infrastructure Capital Improvements Plan (ICIP). - Approved the ICIP item for homeless services funding (7-0). - Approved an Intergovernmental Agreement for Senior Volunteer Programs (5-0). - Approved a waiver and settlement for the Estate of Dorothy Stevens for $300,000. - Approved a written release of all claims (unanimous roll call vote). - Approved Amendment #2 to professional services contract with Info Tech Research Group, Inc. (unanimous roll call vote). - Approved Amendment #2 to professional services agreement with IT Connect, Inc. (unanimous roll call vote). - Approved the attorney-client privileged recommended strategy and next steps in the matter of a tort claim notice filed by Joish Bahi Bakti (unanimous roll call vote). - Approved the recommended CDBG funding for various organizations (7-0). - Approved the appointment of Laura Liswood to the Public Safety Committee (7-0). == Motions & Votes == - Motion to approve the agenda as amended (Item F removed) — Approved. - Motion to approve the consent agenda as amended (Item I pulled) — Approved. - Motion to approve the collective bargaining agreement with the SFPOA — Made and seconded. - Motion to amend the police union contract to reflect a specific dollar amount ($43.39) for detectives on page 19 — Approved. - Motion to adopt the City of Santa Fe's 2027-2031 Infrastructure Capital Improvements Plan — Approved. - Motion to approve the ICIP item for homeless services funding — Approved 7-0. - Motion to approve Intergovernmental Agreement for Senior Volunteer Programs — Approved 5-0. - Motion to approve waiver and settlement for Estate of Dorothy Stevens — Approved. - Motion to approve a written release of all claims — Approved (unanimous roll call vote). - Motion to approve Amendment #2 to professional services contract with Info Tech Research Group, Inc. — Approved (unanimous roll call vote). - Motion to approve Amendment #2 to professional services agreement with IT Connect, Inc. — Approved (unanimous roll call vote). - Motion to enter executive session — Approved (unanimous roll call vote). - Motion to reconvene in open session and confirm executive session discussions were limited to specified matters — Approved (unanimous roll call vote). - Motion to approve attorney-client privileged recommended strategy and next steps in the matter of a tort claim notice filed by Joish Bahi Bakti — Approved (unanimous roll call vote). - Motion to amend the agenda to move 'petitions from the floor' — Approved (unanimous roll call vote). - Motion to approve the previous item (not detailed in this excerpt) — Approved (roll call vote). - Motion to approve the recommended CDBG funding for various organizations — Passed unanimously 7-0. - Motion to approve the appointment of Laura Liswood to the Public Safety Committee — Approved unanimously 7-0. == Public Comment == The public comment period included a strong criticism from Virgil Camino Domiguel regarding the Mayor and council's handling of the Soldiers Monument and Diego de Vargas statue, accusing them of misusing funds and ignoring public will. Jessica Saxon and Tanley Down delivered a formal 'public notice' about constitutional violations in New Mexico's legal system concerning grand jury indictments. Suzanne Romero expressed frustration with unaddressed graffiti, particularly at the old Warehouse 21, and criticized the council's perceived inattention. Lewis DLA provided an update on the unusual arbitration outcome for ASME Local 399. No public comments were made during the public hearings for the Water Project Fund Loan Grant Agreement or the General Obligation Improvement Bonds, nor during the CDBG Annual Action Plan discussion. == Topics == - Police Officer Compensation - Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) - Affordable Housing Initiatives - Federal Funding Uncertainty - Housing Standards and Compliance - Sidewalk Repair Funding - Police Officer Recruitment/Retention - Compassion in Leadership - Agenda Changes and Approval - Public Safety Committee Appointment - Meeting Opening Procedures == Full Transcript == Yes. Mayor, we do. Yes, we are live on Zoom. Beautiful. Thank you. Welcome, everybody, to the July 9th, 2025, regular meeting of the governing body. Our starting time is 5:03. Let's begin with the Pledge of Allegiance, led by Councilor Lindell, salute to the New Mexico flag, led by Councilor Michael Garcia, and then invocation and remembrances, led by Councilor Faulkner. To the Republic. Okay. So, I think the call that I would make is that this is a time where a lot of people are suffering. People in Rio, people in Texas, and other parts of the country. And I feel like compassion is something we should lean into as leaders and as people in our community. And to be mindful that because someone reacts to you in a negative way, it may not be about you. It may be about the things that they're struggling with and their abilities around how to cope. And so I just would like everyone to think about being compassionate for the next week or so. Thank you. Are there remembrances at this time? Let me add my voice to Councilor's call for compassion and reach out to people in our community who are struggling with health issues, financial issues, family issues, concerns of their own that are painful and hard for them to deal with, and struggling to make ends meet, struggling to be able to get through hard times. Let's practice compassion and reach out to them. And as a compassionate community, we do our best to lead everybody. Take a minute, think about those who need. Thank you, everybody. Madam Clerk, can you please call the roll for us? Councilor Cassett: Here. Councilor Castro: Councilor Chavez: Here. Councilor Faulkner: Here. Councilor Lee Garcia: Here. Councilor Michael Garcia: Present. Councilor Lindell: Here. Councilor Marth is excused, I believe. Mayor Weber: Present. You have a quorum. Thank you. Madam Clerk, are there changes to the agenda as prepared? There is one change. So item F needs to be removed from the agenda. This grant has been rescinded. Item F, 9F on the consent. Yes. Move to approve as amended. Second. Is there discussion? All in favor? Well, we can't do it. We're remote. Madam Clerk, can you call the roll, please? Councilor Castro: Yes. Councilor Chavez: Yes. Councilor Faulkner: Yes. Councilor Lee Garcia: Yes. Councilor Michael Garcia: Yes. Councilor Lindell: Councilor Cassett: Yes. Mayor Weber: Yes. Motion is approved. And are there items pulled from the consent agenda? Madam Clerk, one item has been pulled from the consent agenda, item I. Can I get a motion to approve consent as amended? Motion to approve. Second. Is there discussion on that? If not, Madam Clerk, can you call the roll on consent at the minute? Councilor Chavez: Councilor Faulkner: Yes. Councilor Lee Garcia: Yes. Councilor Michael Garcia: Yes. Councilor Lindell: Yes. Mayor Weber: Yes. Councilor Cassett: Yes. Councilor Castro: Yes. Motion is approved. Thank you. So with that, Madam Clerk, you could take us to the first item for consideration, please. Item 9I, request for approval of the collective bargaining agreement with the Santa Fe Police Officers Association for FY26 for salary increases in the amount of $1,47,623.15 for sworn and civilian bargaining unit employees. And here to speak is Deputy Chief of Police Ben Valdez. May I entertain a motion and then we'll go to a presentation. Second. There's a motion to approve and there is a second, and this has been pulled from consent. Let's start. Chief, if you could give a presentation, then we'll go to the councilor who asked to take it off consent for questions to start. Thank you, Mr. Mayor and members of the council. We do have a need for one correction on the packet. It's going to be page 19 of the agreement, and it should be page 22 of the packet that was posted, where it says, "Detective," the minimum pay rate in the packet that was provided, it says 4330, and it's supposed to be 4339. And we would ask if that would be reflected in the consideration for this approval. Everywhere else in the documents, it reflects 4339, just on page 19 of the contract, 22 of the packet. We need that one correction made, please. I think this year's contract and our proposal, it's really a reflection of a lot of hard work that started with many of the leadership here on the council, those that served before, and everyone that's here today, as a matter of fact. And it's a long place that we've been coming back from 2019, where we lost a number of officers to area agencies because of our pay. It wasn't competitive. Working with leadership, we're able to be really competitive, and we're seeing the fruits of our labor. As of today, and it's ever-changing, we have 11 police officer vacancies with the new budget. We increased our civilian vacancies to from five at the end of the fiscal year to 11 now. And that's a long way that we came from years past, where we've seen vacancies close to 40 for police officers and a 50% vacancy rate for civilian staff. Some of these positions we've been able to fill, but also retain staff through our relationship with the Santa Fe Police Officer Association. And I think I'd be remiss to say if we're trying to say that the city management team, police department, and our colleagues at HR and finance are the only ones that are able to say that we got this across the finish line. A lot of it's done by our partnership with the POA. They bring a lot of concerns forward to say, "Hey, here's what we think will help." We work together in concert, and we find a way to keep our talented staff and attract others to join us. With this presentation, the city approved in the budget an equivalent to 3% salary increase for your way members. In addition, we were able to fund an allocation that was an equivalent of what was proposed, that amount, which was the additional 50% of what they got last year, $488,133, I believe. So this year, again, we're staying competitive. We're attracting others to join our team, and the big change to this contract was only for compensation, which I think speaks to the hard work we've done over the years, making sure that the contract and how we have it fits the needs of both the membership and the management team. We can have good folks out there doing the work that they need to do, make sure they're being compensated in a manner that shows that we appreciate what they do, but also addressing Indian labor concerns, whether it's through the disciplinary process or other workplace safety. So, I just want to really share my appreciation for everyone that got it this far. Our management team helping negotiations. The vice president of the POA, he was unable to make it. He suddenly was ill and was unable to make the meeting, but he intended to be here. So they were kind of scrambling to make it. His team and his colleagues that helped us at the table, but also the team here at the city in HR and finance and the leadership team that helped us get to where we are right now. Our hope again is we want to eliminate all the vacancies. We want to be able to improve the services we're able to provide to our community, and we want to inspire the next generation to come serve at the Santa Fe Police Department. Whether you're going to be a police officer, public safety aid, privacy technician, administrative support staff, we want people to know that we value them. And, you know, with this contract and this one piece of what we do to show people that we value what they do and for the sacrifices that they do for our community to keep everyone safe. And with that, sir, I'll fill the floor. Thank you, Chief. Councilor Castro, would you like to begin with some questions, and then we'll go around and keep it going around as we have in the past? Sure. Thank you so much, Mayor. Thank you, DC Valdez. I knew I was going to be remote, and so we had a little conversation, and I think you hit most of the points. Can you please just elaborate a little bit? We are going to be losing quite a bit of officers. Why is it so important to recruit new officers? Mayor Weber, Councilor Castro. So, for us, it's important for us to reduce our vacancies as much as possible. Every year, during about June and December, is where we see officers are usually hitting their anniversary. So that's when we see retirements usually occur. So we try to reduce those vacancies because in years past, we would have classes anywhere from two to 10 police officers. And so when those anniversary dates come up, it's important for us to have people in the pipeline and going through the selection process. So as we lose folks to attrition, like retirement, we have people ready to step up and take on those roles. And that's what we're trying to do this year. As we stand right now, a number of our command staff are eligible. We're hoping that they stay and continue to serve. They are a wealth of knowledge for our city, and our department's very young, and it's going to be advantageous for us to have those experts in the field to again grow that next generation and prepare them for the tasks ahead. And we have to be looking at not the end of this year, but four to five years down the road, who are going to be in these roles, who are going to be our supervisors in the field. We prepare them. Those are things that we do through professional development with our agency. But it's important for us, though, because very quickly, we can go from, let's say, reduced vacancies down to five, and then we have a cadre of staff that are eligible to retire. If it's a big group of five to six, we could very easily go from five vacancies back up to 11. And we always have to make sure we have folks in the pipeline. And we have to constantly be recruiting. We have to be constantly showing people what we do, get them interested, and kind of share the story of what we do for our community and garner that interest, if you will. Thank you so much, DC Valdez. And I know we had a little discussion about the availability of overtime. If I, as a police officer, wanted to maybe get overtime, how would I go about that? And in the past, there has been a need because of the cost of living to do a lot of overtime. How does the current pay relate to the current cost of living in Santa Fe? I know at this time, with our overtime, there are a lot of opportunities for overtime. We have traffic safety overtimes for traffic enforcement, DDI checkpoints, proactive operations that our police department conducts in areas where there's challenges or concerns, and also there's events that people host where they want to utilize law enforcement as staff to be on site to help out. There's a lot of opportunities for our folks. We have an overtime list. In years past, that list would be filled to the max. You'd have to wait the time to go through there. Today, there's plenty of opportunities. As I checked it early this afternoon, we have four people on that overtime list, and once we exhaust that list, we're calling anyone to see if they would like to assist us with covering the extra shifts or with helping out with overtime assignments. So, there's plenty of opportunities for that to get the added assignment and then the compensation that comes with it. That being said, we're a far way from, I know when I started, when Deputy Chief Grundley started, when you're a police officer making $131 an hour, and you had to work 10 to 20 hours per week to be able to pay the bills and make things happen, what we've seen with the trend with our compensation is our officers are not needing to work overtime if they need to provide for their families. The cost of living, not only here in Santa Fe, but nationwide has increased for home ownership and in other areas. And for us, we feel it's important that folks that serve our community can live in our community. As I mentioned with you, counselor, I don't get the benefit of being able to go home for my lunch to have a meal with my family. I have to pack a lunch. That's what I knew I signed up for. But for me, I was born here in Santa Fe. My heart is here in Santa Fe. This is where my family is, and I'm going to do what I need to do to protect the community. It's where I grew up. It's where I learned how to drive everything. It's really important to me. And although I may not sleep in Santa Fe at night, I come to Santa Fe and I try to do the very best each and every day to make a difference. And that's what we ask of folks that do have to commute. And just because folks do commute, it doesn't reduce the level of care that they do provide. And with any industry, we know there are people that can maybe do a little bit better in how they provide service. But I know for them to go on duty, go take a shift, and sometimes go to some of the most challenging calls that you can imagine, it does take a lot of dedication to do so, and I know their heart is there. But again, we would love for folks to be able to live in Santa Fe. I know there's been a lot of work to try to get opportunities for people to live in Santa Fe. And we work with a lot of apartment complexes and other folks that are offering rent at a lower rate for folks because they also want to see police officers in our community. So, I think it is something important. I think it's a bigger discussion for us to have, and I think it's going to be a huge partnership with everyone at the table to try to increase those numbers here in Santa Fe because I think it is of value. I think people want to see that police car in their neighborhood. They want to see that officer coaching their kids' baseball team. That's where we really get that buy-in. That's where we earn that trust. But even if folks do have to commute, I feel that their heart is in it, that they believe in what we do, and it's the responsibility of the leadership of the department to make sure that the values of our department, serving with honor, respect, is at the forefront, and that's what we're asking our folks to do. Thank you so much, DC Valdez. And I will cede the floor. I just want to make very, very clear that if our community continues to ask for more policing and more officers and more time, then we're going to have to invest financially. Thank you so much. Thank you, counselor. Other questions? Counselor Garcia. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. And Acting City Attorney Martinez, I just sent you an amendment request that reflects the request made by Deputy Chief Valdez. It's got to go through a process where we've got to see it in writing, so to speak. I figured that would be the easiest route where I don't know if we can quickly do it, but table it to move forward, but definitely would be happy to accommodate that request. My question is more for the city manager. Now, with this approval of the police union 3% raise, we've approved fire. Where are we at with the other unions' 3% raise? Mr. Mayor, councilors, the other group being the ASME bargaining group, we have had conversations with them subsequent to the arbitrator's ruling recently where the arbitrator did not choose to make a decision. So it's back in our court. My understanding is that the two lawyers representing the city and ASME have agreed that we need to return to the table. So we'll be in to talk to the governing body in executive session to make sure that we're all on board in terms of what proposals we would be pursuing at the table. Okay. And I guess let me ask this question. Is there anything that prevents us from implementing the 3% raise with ASME right now? Because it's the biggest union within city government, which is hundreds, nearly. And just like our hardworking PD, our hardworking fire, the ASME union folks deserve their 3% raise as well. And certainly we don't disagree. The law requires us to meet with them, negotiate with them, even before unilaterally taking, in other words, you can't take a unilateral action. So there would be a necessity to make that as something that we would sit down at the table and negotiate. We can discuss that in executive session with the city, with the governing body, as soon as we schedule that. Okay. Well, I know that unless there's a special governing body meeting being planned, the soonest we can talk about it is two weeks from now. And that means it's actually three weeks. So potentially two paychecks, these employees won't get their 3% raise. Will it be retroactive for those folks? There's a process by which we can discuss that, not retroactivity per se, but we can discuss the options with the governing body. Okay. I just again, I want us to be equitable, and we've got now a good portion of our workforce receiving this 3% and a larger portion through ASME that has not. And our workers deserve that raise. So thank you, City Manager Scott. I agree. Thank you. And so I think City Manager Martinez, I don't want to put you under pressure. We can move forward, and I'm happy to, after my colleagues have an opportunity to discuss, maybe table this to move forward with the amendment, but I don't know how you would like to proceed. Thank you, Garcia. Assuming that the governing body approves the contract with the amended language on page 19, I will work with Ben Valdez and Chris Ryan to amend the contract before it gets signed. Okay. So, do we need to state on the screen for the rules, or can I just say I would like to reflect the dollar amount for the detective on page 19 to be changed to $43.39? That should be sufficient for purposes of approval. Okay. So, I'll make that motion. Second. There's a motion to make sure that we have the accurate number reflected in that one spot. Any discussion? Can you call the roll on that to make sure that is officially sanctioned by the governing body? Okay. On this motion, Councilor Lee Garcia, yes. Councilor Michael Garcia, yes. Councilor Lindell, yes. Councilor Cassid, yes. Councilor Castro, yes. Councilor Chavez, yes. Councilor Falner, yes. Mayor Weber, yes. Motion is approved. We've now made sure that what I assume was a clerical error has been corrected. Are there other questions about the contract or about the item that's in front of us? Okay. Councilor Faulkner, just so the police force and the fire department knows, Councilor Lee Garcia and I are working on an agreement with the Housing Trust and with Homewise so we can get four houses built for firefighters and four houses built for the police department so we can kind of lean into community policing and fire. And so I would love to meet with the union about this and let them know what we're working on and how we can implement this in the most effective way. Thank you. Other questions or comments? We have a motion and a second, and the document has been amended to be accurate on that one spot on the page. Further discussion? If not, Madam Clerk, can you call the roll? Councilor Fulner. Yes. Councilor Lee Garcia, yes. Councilor Michael Garcia, yes. Councilor Lindell. Councilor Cassett, yes. Councilor Castro, yes. Councilor Chavez, Mayor Weber, yes. Motion is approved. Thank you. Thanks, Chief. Thank you all from the police department for being here tonight, and thank you for moving this forward so we could approve it. Could you take us to the next item on the agenda, Madam Clerk? Item 10, action items, discussion agenda 10A, consideration of Resolution Number 2025-TBD, sponsored by Councilor Amanda Chavez and Mayor Alan Weber. A resolution adopting the City of Santa Fe's 2027-2031 Infrastructure Capital Improvements Plan. And here to speak is Public Works Department Director Regina Wheeler. Is there a motion on this item? To approve. Second. There's a motion and there is a second. Director Wheeler, I think it'd be helpful if you, for everybody who's watching and listening and hearing it for the first time, if you could give us the benefit of introducing the item, and then we'll again entertain questions from the governing body. Thank you. So, thank you so much, Mayor, members of the governing body. This is our resolution that we do annually to adopt our five-year capital plan that is required by the New Mexico Department of Finance and Administration in order to be eligible for legislative appropriations. It's also a very important document to our city. It makes us eligible in many ways for all kinds of funding for these projects and sets priorities by the governing body, sets priorities for staff to work on implementation. And you've seen this in, we've discussed it in committee, but for the public, when you're looking at this, the first five items on the list do constitute the city's top priorities for capital improvements that are needed to further the goals and quality of life in the city. This year, those top five projects are a new large-capacity non-congregate shelter. Last year, this was a more general item to address homelessness, and this is a much more specific, very important project that we see is needed for some to put all the pieces together for our homelessness strategy. The second one is the replacement of the Pojaque Wastewater Treatment Plant, which has certainly come a long way with the investments real-time that the governing body has been making, but there is a study and a likelihood of some major replacements, and that's a very large and important compliance and quality of life and environmental project for the city. The third one is a new project on our ICIP. It's the police training facility. The police have been really focusing on staffing, as was the last discussion pointed at, and it's been very successful, and now it's time to really focus on making sure we have the facilities to support that staff executing their responsibilities. They're constrained in the current location of their training facility and does not have sufficient types of training capabilities. Airport terminal expansion phase two. This is going right from the completion of airport terminal expansion phase one that completed this year and rolling right into the next that will give us another building and, you know, a real baggage claim and other improvements to that airport, as well as ability to handle more flights and passengers. And then last but certainly not least is our Midtown Redevelopment Project, which actually has been in our top five for some years and is making excellent progress and is really looking forward soon to making significant investments in infrastructure. Another little note about how to read the document is that a very important column is the "funded to date" column that comes a couple of columns after the project title. And that tells you how much money that the city has on hand for that project. And that would really indicate to you the larger those numbers are, the more in progress that project is because it really takes funds allocated to a project to start. So that's a summary of the plan itself. And I also wanted to take a moment, if I could, to address some of the questions that came up and give the governing body a little bit more visibility into the effectiveness of this capital program that the governing body has been approving the plan for on an annual basis. And the city clerk sent out a couple of handouts that were also should also be in Civic Clerk. Thank you so much, City Clerk, for your fast work on that. What we sent is a partial list of completed projects. This partial list of completed projects demonstrates a number of things. One of the things that it demonstrates, and it's up on the screen as well, and I don't know if maybe the public can see that, is that the governing body and the City of Santa Fe are executing an incredibly productive capital program. This program has delivered in the last five years. So, it's kind of apropos. We're talking about a five-year capital plan that we're adopting. So, we're going to look back at the last five years. It has delivered well over $120 million of completed projects into the community. And this is probably short by about 30% because it's not completely thorough of every capital investment that's been made and completed. The other thing this list demonstrates, and the reason that it's incomplete, is because we actually don't have a system really well configured right now to give this kind of reporting. But this does show that as the governing body has continued to focus and supported the actions that are necessary—contracts, procurement software, staffing—what has been needed to deliver this capital program has been successful in being done. This demonstrates well over $25 million a year of improvements that the public is actually getting to experience. You can also see from this that it's a very diverse and dynamic program. So, not only does the capital program work to implement the long-range plans that we have, like the Sustainable Santa Fe Plan, the Master Transportation Plan, the Comprehensive Stormwater Plan—those are long-term. We have a large list of capital projects on those, clicking through, getting those big ones done. But it's also dynamic and responsive, this capital program. So, it has traffic calming improvements listed here, as well as culverts that we thought could last for a few more years but weren't able to and needed to be addressed right away. So, I think this demonstrates that this governing body and the staff at the city have really focused on delivering these improvements to the residents and been very successful on a wide range of types of projects. Everything from sustainability improvements to parks improvements to road improvements, compliance projects, water projects, historic renovation projects, pool projects, parks projects, playground equipment. It's just the range of seniors projects. It just goes on and on. So, there's one list, a partial list of completed projects that shows over $120 million of projects completed in the past five years. And then there's a shorter list, and it's also not complete, of all the projects that are well underway and will complete in this fiscal year that we're just in. And that alone adds up to over $40 million this year. So, the program is running very productively and is going to continue to deliver capital improvements to the residents of Santa Fe. So, I think that is my presentation, and I'd be happy to answer questions. Thanks so much, Councilor Garcia, and then raise your hand, and we'll just go down the road of everybody having a chance to ask Director Wheeler. Councilor Garcia: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Thank you, Director Wheeler, for the presentation and these two additional lists. Because we have the top five priorities, and this ultimately will move towards a supplemental resolution later on this year, I want to ensure that we've got proper planning in place. So, two items that are new to this list in general, and they're new to the top five, which is the large capacity non-congregate shelter police training facility. So, let me ask this question in the sense for the large capacity non-congregate shelter. I want to put it in the perspective that I'm the legislator at the Roundhouse, and our city lobbyist is coming to ask for the $10 million. As a legislator, they're going to say, "What's the plan? What are you, how are you going to use this initial $10 million? What is this idea? What are the services going to be provided?" etc. So, what supplemental information do we have at this moment on this topic? Because again, this is a topic I wholeheartedly support, but this is also a topic that was quite surprising to me that it was on this list when it was provided to us last week. And so, I don't know if you have this information, if Director Paul or Henry would have this information, but I would hope that there is some supplemental report, plan, design, etc., that actually backs up this ultimately $27 million request. Director Wheeler: Thank you so much, Mayor, Councilor Garcia, for that question. Yes, as I mentioned before, each of these projects has a large worksheet that has been given to the Department of Finance and Administration, and the legislators see it. It has both legislative language. It's about 200 words. It says, "acquire, design, public, engage the public, engineer, construct." And so, we make a very large, clear statement that this project may, this money may be used to acquire land. It may be used to acquire a building. It may be used to renovate the building, construct new design. So, that's in the legislative language that the legislators see. It also has a longer scope of work conversation. Director Hammond Paul did ask for this to be changed to be the top priority. I'm aware. And so, I'm sure our members of the governing body that there has been a coalition working with the city over the years, and Quorum being one, Thornburg being another, that are really sitting at the table and have been looking to deploy this project where it is a large capacity shelter that's wrapped with services at an appropriate location, and the time is now to make this happen. Acquisition could be as expensive as $5 million for the right location in a good building, maybe even more. So, it is your right to ask the question, "How well evolved is the design of this project at this moment, and what would we do with the $10 million if we got it?" And I think that will be a lot of work has been done over the past few years as these partners have come to the table with capital and desire to help and see this realized, as well as what will happen over the next number of months. We wouldn't receive these grant agreements until August of 2026, so a good year from now, which gives you plenty of time to do planning as a top priority. And that's one of the things that's made this capital program so effective is that all the project managers who know they have money coming likely will all do their planning and procurement in advance of getting it. So, by the time we get that grant agreement executed, say September, October 2026, they're ready to spend some money on the real solution. Councilor Garcia: Gotcha. Thank you for that. And I would like a copy of the information that went to DFA, one, that way I can be on the same page as what's being sent to the state. Now, regarding the coalition you mentioned that's been working on this topic, this is the same coalition that was exploring using the detention center for a facility, from my understanding, which is quite concerning to me because we're not engaging the community. For those that don't remember, when that proposal, or even the whiff of such a proposal, got wind to the community, not only this chamber, not only the halls of City Hall, but the entire City Hall campus was jam-packed with people. And my concern is that this coalition is operating in private. And it's operating in private so much it's not engaging this governing body, which is a major ask. It's our top priority ask. Am I right or am I wrong with that? This is our top priority ask. And for such a request to come forward, we need to ensure that all stakeholders are at the table, not people one-off meeting to propose things. And that's not the way we successfully implement such a critical not only need in our community, but which is ultimately going to provide critical services. And so, with that being said, whomever is this coalition, can you tell me who this coalition is that you mentioned besides Enorm? I know that Thornburg's coalition has rebranded itself. So, who else is part of this coalition? Director Wheeler: Mayor, Councilor Garcia, I don't sit in that room, and so it really would be, we could get you additional information. I don't know. Councilor Garcia: Well, again, that's my point. It's quite concerning to me as a governing body member. I don't even sit in that room, and these requests are quite frustrating when they're ultimately withheld by whomever it is. So, let me ask this question: Is any member of this governing body part of this coalition? I'm asking the governing body members. Is any member of the governing body part of this coalition? And if they are, I'd like to know who else is part of this coalition. Jump in. But you can, but I'd like, go ahead. Due respect, because I honestly know that there are some folks that are sitting up here on this dais, and I'd like for them to own up to the process. City Manager: Mr. Mayor, councilors, I'm not aware that what's being presented on that project is the result of any discussions with a group of advisory bodies. I'm not aware that any councilor had any particular influence on anything that got included on the list that the governing body is looking at tonight. I think this was a staff-driven effort to put a very complex issue, the capital project list, in front of the governing body. It's your list ultimately, to yours as a body, to decide what the priorities are. That's not staff's job, but I think staff needed to put something in front of you. And from staff's standpoint, this was a very high-priority project. And I think you yourself said, "Of course, it's a high-priority project." Whether it's number one is really an issue for all of you to decide. But I don't want, I don't want the governing body to think that this list is somehow the result of some kind of process that we've gone through because we haven't. I fully agree that with every individual project, when the day comes for implementation, that it requires all that kind of input that the governing body talks about seeking all the time. And yes, we can do things better in terms of outreach than we intend to, but this particular project is not the result of a great deal of study. It's the result of the recognition that we just went through a process where we identified a need to find other locations for sheltering of people other than the one that we have right now that just hasn't worked. And so, it was placed on the project from staff's standpoint, feeling that it's an important, a very important project, and would probably be one that the governing body would embrace as a very important project. But it's up to all of you to decide if this is where you want to put your rankings. If the governing body wants to change the rankings, that's totally within your authority to do so, and we would certainly support that. We don't have a plan yet for the project. We do, we have talked at great length about the need to come up with a program, an architectural type program, to drive the effort to seek this kind of a facility. We've, we have had opportunities to look at buildings occasionally that might be solutions, but we can't just look at buildings. We need to work from the idea of a program for a building. And I think that's what you were alluding to earlier is if we go to the legislature, what do we tell them the program is that we're trying to achieve here? And I think all of that does need to be done between now and the time that the legislature would very seriously be looking at this. But I think that's as thorough an answer as I can give you on this subject of how did this get on the list as the staff's top priority. It was presupposing that that would be a top priority for the governing body. It either is or it isn't, and we certainly will respect your decision. I appreciate that response, but I still had my initial question of who is part of this coalition, which members of the governing body are part of that? Now, I'm not aware there is a coalition. She said that there's a coalition of people that staff works with regularly, but that is not how this got on this list. Okay, so let me pose another question because I know for a fact, and this is where frustration comes in, that staff is working on this topic. Staff is meeting with individuals, visiting locations, and staff is not updating us on this information. What's frustrating is there are sites that I know that are being visited in District 2 that I have yet to be briefed on. I do not want an incident happening where we have people getting rumor information, similar to what we had with the detention center, and then really create much more of a controversy over a critical social-serving issue we have in our city. And I think that's where my frustration lies, is there is a group of folks working that are not sharing this information, that are not being collaborative, that have somehow made this the top priority of the city. Who, let me ask this final question because there was the supplemental question of who is part of this now. Who ultimately, and I'll ask the sponsors, is it you all who decided the top list? I don't believe that's the way it works. Who ultimately said, "Okay, we're going to make this one, we're going to make this two, we're going to make this three," and so on and so forth through the list? Who, who, who at the end of the day had the authority to make that decision? City man, it was developed by staff. It was developed solely by staff. The priorities got set, literally the draft priorities, we don't think that this is final priorities. The draft priorities, just to put something in front of you, was done at a staff meeting of department directors, coming off of the discussions about Pete's Place and many comments about the importance of trying to move forward and to not only make the changes there, but to find another location. So, this took on what felt like a high priority. We reviewed that list with the mayor before we sent it forward to the counselors. I don't believe there were any changes made when we did that. And it's simply a reflection of staff. Now, I'm not sure how to read in the rest of what you're asking because I'm not 100% sure what you're asking, but we have staff, has some staff members that I have in the last week gone to a location that someone is trying to sell, that there was a suggestion might be a good place for this kind of facility. Very, very premature discussion. Looked at a building location, had nothing to do with how this got ranked on the project. And I swear to you that's the truth. This was all put together before I ever even heard of the other location, let alone went and visited it. And if there's other locations that have been looked at, I certainly embrace that staff would go out and take looks at places, but I'm not aware that they've gone out with, I think Miss Wheeler was talking about the service agencies that meet regularly with Mr. Hammond Paul. I think that's what she's talking about. They didn't have anything to do with this list putting together. And I'm not trying to insinuate that by any means. It was bringing to light that there are some folks trying to work on this issue. Great. But what I don't agree with is this is a city-focused issue. This isn't a private issue that needs to be handed behind closed doors. This is, and we should learn from again, the faults we've had in the past, whether it's the detention center or the pallet shelter. We can go on and go on. When folks are not kept in the loop with critical information, it creates much more of a problem for us. And again, I know for a fact that there has been visitation to potential sites in my district. I, as a counselor, should be aware of that, even if it didn't work out, because we're a very small community, and I would like for us to work together, not work in silos and work behind closed doors. And that's unfortunately what's been happening. So with that, I'll yield the floor. Thank you, Councilor. Councilor Faulkner. So I want to speak to Councilor Garcia's concerns. I don't think that everything is a conspiracy. I personally have been looking into... Point of order. There's no conspiracy that was mentioned. It was stating for the fact that there are meetings being held that are not including everybody, but it was insinuated that I... You better have her say, please. Thank you. I personally have been looking into sites around the city that could be a homeless campus where we can provide wraparound services and we can do triage and we can do a continuum of care, which is the program that is working throughout the United States and the cities that are successful about handling this. In no way was any of the site visits or me being interested in these sites exclusionary. It was not. And one of the things that I find interesting is all of us have the ability to ask any question we want of staff and get an answer. All I can say is that there is, at least for my part, I am one of the counselors who is looking into solving this problem, and I'm proactively doing it. And so, Councilor Garcia, if you want to have a conversation after this, I'm more than happy to share with you everything that I've been doing. I 100%. Any other questions? I want to come back to what's in front of us, which is a series of priorities for capital projects. Director Wheeler, Councilor Garcia has raised the question, it's always a fair matter to talk about process. What is the, for the public's benefit, what is the process both in this list and historically that you've used in the way of getting input, getting evaluation, seeking some sense of how to rank things based on historically what the legislature and the governor have responded to, where there is already support for some items that we know if we put them on our list, there's a high likelihood that they'll get a positive response based on the number of years and the number of times you and others have gone to the legislature to seek support. Maybe just for the benefit of anyone who's listening or watching, you could give a brief description of what that process has been both historically and with this list. Who gets consulted, under what circumstances, who gets emails, how you send it out. I think you've been very thorough historically to make sure that this is a list that reflects the values and the priorities of people who are up here serving as members of the governing body. Thank you so much, Mayor. Yes, there's quite a large stakeholder input, mostly staff-wise. So every department meets with their staff to look at what last year's capital plan was, understand if that really represents their priority projects that really need to be addressed, updates any of them that need to stay on the list. They update the numbers, how much funding has been received, what is their projected project plan for deploying capital. Then projects that are completed come off the list. Projects that are fully funded come off the list. Maybe projects that have other funding sources and maybe are lower priority than others, some come on and move them off. We can't have an ever-expanding list. Then the staff updates the projects, and then we create a draft list from in the DFA website that all the department directors and the city manager review, particularly for order at that point and for completeness. People will be looking for things that constituents had been really wanting to see on the list. For instance, the Clawson Street pedestrian bridge is now on this list. If you remember, it fell down this year. Counselors forwarded constituent requests to us, and staff made sure that that project is on the list. So you see that's the process for developing it. Then it's the executive team with the city manager that gets together, orders the list, and then that goes out to council governing body. It went to the counselors about a month ago to ask for feedback as well, offer meetings, answer any questions for ordering for items that are or not on the list. And so that is the, and then at our first meeting where we invite public comment at the Public Works and Utilities Committee meeting, and there public can always make comment of petitions from the floor at governing body, of course, and this year there weren't any public comments. And that is the process, Mayor, by which this list is put together and then brought forward for adoption. Thank you. I see Councilor Cassid's hand up and then Councilor Garcia's hand is up as well. Thank you so much, Mr. Mayor, and thank you, Director Wheeler. One of the conversations we had in finance, because I was also feeling a little bit in the dark as to exactly how these pieces come or how these projects come onto the list. But the other thing I wanted to make sure that I understood, as well as any constituents, is just because you're not seeing a project on the list does not mean that it has poof disappeared. There are other, actually, you rattled off a number of other lists that we are operating off of that are directing other projects within the city. So I wanted to make sure that people understand that this is not a definitive list of all the capital work that is happening in the city. It is primarily what we are sending to the legislature asking for capital outlay dollars. Am I still correct in that understanding from our finance conversation? Thank you so much, Mayor, Councilor Cassid. That's exactly right. And in fact, I've pulled up the list, the partial list of completed projects that is in the packet as well. Things like the Cay Ataho speed bumps, a very important capital project, actually three phases to get the traffic calmed around a park right there. The Camino Pinto flasher, that's another traffic calming project that came, was community-driven and deployed without ever making it onto the ICIP. So that's exactly right, Councilor Cassid. Thank you for pointing that out. It is not, this list is not the definitive list of the only things that will be invested in. Councilor Cassid, did that... Yes, thank you. And also, thank you for calling those out. Those were two pretty exciting projects from my constituents that they were very, very appreciative of. I did also want to comment a little bit on some of the appreciation I have for staff as I've seen projects come on the list as they've been involved with community meetings, specifically here to one Swan Park, which we've always been talking about, but the amount of attention on the next phase of Swan Park and a lot of the hopes that are resting within the community for the next phase of that development, they've been very loud and vocal. So, I really appreciate that continuing to stay on this list, but also the Herb Martinez Park updates. And this actually came from a meeting with the Police Department with Councilor Chavez and I around safety concerns at Herb Martinez. And Director McDonald, being the incredible person that she is, came to the meeting and came up with some park improvement solutions that will help address these public safety issues. And so, I was very pleased to see that on the list. I know my constituents will be very grateful that that is being prioritized. So I did want to recognize the Parks Department in them reflecting some of the values and the priorities that I'm hearing about in District 4. So I just want to give kudos to your team, and that is all. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Councilor. Councilor Lee Garcia. Thank you, Mayor. I think that when overlooking the list that we have in prioritizing over the last three, well, almost four years now, it is somewhat confusing when you see what your priorities are and how they are moved around based upon whether they were funded, which took higher priority. I know when I first was on the governing body, one of the top five was another fire station in District 3. And so, we still don't have that fire station. When I take a look at the Infrastructure Capital Improvement Plan, we've gone down this road already, many times on Airport Road, and how do we prioritize some of the areas of capital improvements that are needed? I'm speaking from the perspective of District 3 when Councilor Faulkner and myself get calls so much about local communities that were developments that were annexed by the city and their roads are in shambles. And how do we get those on this list? And so, the needs are whether it's street lighting, adoption of those streets into our infrastructure. And so, Infrastructure Capital Improvement, I am in agreement that we are in crisis mode with unhoused community people all over our city, and so this is a top priority. I would concur with Councilor Michael Garcia that it would be very advantageous if we could have a rough draft of what direction we're looking at. Any district in the city is impacted a lot by a homeless non-congregate shelter, so to speak. And if we're going to do that, I think that it really needs to be, the thought process needs to be there and at least give that due diligence and give that respect to our community members that live in those areas. When it comes to this, back again, infrastructure, capital improvement, they're everywhere. It's everywhere in our city. Sometimes I think it's a lot more in District 3 because we live there and we're there every single day listening to our constituents, but we're not hearing from constituents in other districts, and sometimes we do, and we reach out to the other councilors. And so for me, I think it is a very high priority. I am very interested in seeing how the leadership at the state level looks at this and says, "Okay, this is something that we can get behind." But I think they're going to want to know what the plan is, and I think it's very important that they know that plan beforehand. And at that, I'll yield the floor. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Councilor. Councilor Chavez, I didn't even give you the opportunity to speak, and your name is on the bill. I apologize. And you're the chair of the committee. Why don't you take the floor and make any remarks or ask any questions you'd like to do at this time? Thank you, Mayor. I think that we got into a good conversation at Quality of Life. And I think what I really, Director Wheeler has a very difficult job in this, and the ever-changing fact that the needs of our cities evolve, our staffing is ever-changing, our resources are ever-changing. And I think a lot of times when we think of funding, we think of funding. We think the money comes and it happens. The money comes and it happens. And I know that I used an example of renovating a home. You get approved for the loan. How quickly does that house get remodeled? It doesn't happen very quickly. And so there is a process involved. And I think it's really important that constituents understand there's a lot of moving parts. I know that there was conversation that some projects have kind of gone forgotten or are not on the list anymore, or there's not work happening fast enough. And I think in regards to speed, there has to be the realization, just acceptance of the reality that there's a lot of moving parts. There's a lot to manage, which I think, Director Wheeler, you've taken on a large task. I also wanted to comment on the fact that as city councilors, when we see a problem, I think every one of us has a right to seek a solution, and it does not require we involve every single person on the governing body. In fact, we're not supposed to. And so I appreciate those of you that are looking for facilities for this need. I, you know, if I would hear about it and I knew you were involved and I had questions, I would seek you out to ask questions if you were able to and you hadn't involved enough other governing body members already. But that's what we're supposed to do. There is a process in which we function, and until we enter that process, there's a lot of background work that we put in that doesn't say anywhere that we're required to share with everyone that's sitting up here. Like I said, in fact, we're not supposed to. So I thank you, Councilor Faulkner, for looking and seeking out a solution. And I think that's an appropriate thing to do is involve the staff that you'd be collaborating with if you would be pushing something through, which again, I will say is the process that we function by. So that's it, just mostly comments. I don't have questions. I think that we know what the need is, that constituents have been very upfront about what the need is in regards to Heat's Place. And it's not, you know, we do have Urban Alchemy in now, which is exciting, but we also need to have the facility and the campus and the resources and an area to fit those resources so that we can really create something that's successful and serves our community. So yeah, just comments. Thank you again, Director Wheeler. I know I thanked you last week, but I don't think people understand the magnitude of the job that you've taken on in this process and the staff. It's very hard. There's a lot of agencies that don't spend money very quickly for the reality that we face and what that process actually looks like. So I would ask that our community really take time to understand that process before passing judgment on speed or movement or how our priorities have evolved. So thank you. Thank you. Councilor Castro, your hand is up. Yes. Thank you so much, Mayor. Thank you, fellow councilors. I will try to be brief. I also have been in communication with folks at non-congregate shelters and with county commissioners around this issue. So I just wanted to make that explicitly clear. And unfortunately, I think part of the issue is that we do our public conversations here at the dais. We are not allowed to speak in quorum without having it publicly announced. And so I have tried to be cautious before I bring it to a governing body to have all my ducks in a row and make sure that I know what I'm talking about. And so I apologize if that has made anyone uncomfortable, but I would be happy to speak to anybody about this issue. Thank you. Nancy Distle. Thank you, Councilor. Councilor Faulkner, I do want to encourage everyone to, when it comes to non-congregate shelters, if it's a low-barrier shelter, congregate shelters don't work very well. But if it's a high-barrier shelter with wraparound services that answer the needs of the homeless population, those have been successful as a continuum platform to move people from homelessness into being housed. And so I think we need to be mindful of how we're using the words. I know that we have felt like a congregate shelter is not a good idea, but that's because they were low-barrier shelters. High-barrier shelters are effective in other cities. Thank you. Councilor Michael. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I just want to state that even if councilors are working on something and that due to rolling quorum issues can't speak, that doesn't prevent staff from doing so. Staff has the responsibility to update councilors. It's the responsibility to ensure that councilors have all the information that they can relay it to their constituency. And in the instance where we're not given information, that is where the frustration begins, not only on my behalf, I can only speak for myself, but for my constituents' behalf. Now, I got one last question just because this list was provided in regards to projects completing in fiscal year 26. And there's two items on here that I just want to be crystal clear that they're going to be completed because I've heard a bit different. So, first one is the Airport Road pavement rehabilitation. It's saying that it's going to be completed in fiscal year 26. Is that still going to be the case? Thank you so much, Mayor and Councilor Garcia, for the question. Yes, fiscal 26 includes next spring until June 30th. So, yes, absolutely. We'll be issuing that PO probably this year after the bond funds, which the governing body approves tonight, and would promulgate a bunch of actions, and the PO will be issued to the contractor probably this year, and they'll be ready to roll as soon as paving season starts. Okay. And then the next one is the Shelby Street pedestrian bridge. That will be completed by June 30th next year. Thank you so much, Mayor, Councilor Garcia, for that question. We're really shooting to get that done before the legislative session starts. And so it actually passed Historic Review Board today. Historic Review Board did tack on some rather expensive and cumbersome facade issues on it, but we, you'll be, we'll be coming forward for the, to get the funding for that project. It's actually, it has a $250,000 2025 appropriation that we can use towards the $1.2 million construction, but we will need the rest of the funding. We'll be coming forward in the next 30 days for that so we can issue the PO by late August, and we are, we really need to have that bridge installed by the time the legislative session starts. Okay. And just out of curiosity, the changes that HDRB made, they increased the... Sorry for interrupting. They required that the rock facade that was going to look like rock be actual rock. And so now we have to figure out how to attach actual rock to the side of the new prefabricated bridge. But how much is that going to actually add to the cost of the project as well? I'm sorry, I can't give you those specific dollar amounts right now. We just got the information today. It just happened. So we'll be going to our engineer and getting the estimate, and we'll be, as I said, bringing forward the request for funding within the next 30 days. Okay. Thank you, Director. Absolutely. Councilor Lindell, and then Councilor Castro. Thank you, Mayor. I just wanted to clarify. I'm not sure I heard you right, Councilor Garcia, if you were talking about a rolling quorum and then you said that, but it was, did you say it's incumbent upon staff to keep the rest of the council informed? Yes, I did. Well, I would disagree with that. I think that we've gone through this in the past. For example, I may have some legislation that I'm working on that I'm not interested in having the City Attorney's office talk to every member on this council about. That would be inappropriate. And where you draw the line with what staff should talk to all the councilors about is a very, very important thing. I don't think that just the idea that it's incumbent upon staff to inform all the councilors of every conversation that they're having with a different councilor. I think that you're entering into a danger zone doing that, and I think it needs some thought. How do you decide what is discussed? I may have some idea that I go to Director Wheeler with that I want to talk about, but it's not a fully baked plan. I've had lots of them that weren't fully baked plans that I took to her, and it would be really inappropriate for her to talk to other councilors about that. I would ask that you would rethink your feeling on that and where you are with it. I think it's something that's really important that we have to be able to speak to staff and gain guidance and talk about different things. Lots of ideas that I've had, once I talked to staff, I threw them in the circular file. They weren't going to work, even though I thought they were great. So we really need to think about that. I think that's a dangerous path to go down to put that on staff. So that's all I want to say about it. Councilor Garcia: I think it's fair to respond, Mr. Mayor. And thank you, Councilor Lindell, for the perspective. I think the intention around my comment was focused on this specific issue, and to give it the specific instance where there was a site visit conducted with city staff in my district to look at a potential site for a homeless shelter. I do believe that I should be informed, and I do believe any other councilor should be informed because at the end of the day, we have the responsibilities as councilors to provide as much information to our constituents as possible. And that means being able to provide information that eliminates rumors. I think again, we saw it firsthand when we went through the whole detention, the old Santa Fe Detention Center exercise, and I'd hate for that to happen with the constituents in my district. I'd be able to clearly, would love to be able to clearly communicate to them that yes, X, Y, and Z from the city went and visited this site. This is what their thoughts were, and no, they determined it's not a feasible site. Yes, they determined it's a feasible site. I believe that's my responsibility to provide that information to constituents when staff has that information which can be provided to us. My expectation is not on any single piece of work that's being conducted, but this is a critical, high-tension issue. Any type of legislation or proposal that has come forth on this topic has packed this chamber, packed it, packed it to where people are looking in the windows, packed it. And I want to ensure that we are acting responsibly with our constituency because this is not an issue that impacts one district. This is an issue that impacts our entire city. And what I want for us to do is to be able to engage our community in the sense where they are completely supportive of the proposal that might come before us because they've been provided the information. But when information is not provided, it becomes that game of telephone. And that's what I would like to eliminate. That's the whole thought around it is we don't need to have anytime somebody wants to propose legislation be updated, even though some get an update every time a legislation is proposed. What I'm asking for is when these critical issues happen and they're being looked at, the appropriate folks are notified because all it takes is whether it's the City Manager or Henry to reach out and say, "Hey, look, we're exploring these sites, one's in your district, just a heads up, quick heads up." I think that's the collegial thing to do. That's all I got, Mr. Mayor. Mayor: Thank you, Councilor. I think Councilor Castro's hand is up. Councilor Castro: Yes. And just to add a little bit to what Councilor Garcia said, I do feel that if there's something going in our districts, it is appropriate for us to be informed. And I don't feel that this was done nefariously or that anybody's intention was to do anything behind closed doors. So, I hope that everyone has heard us. We do want to have community input on any new shelter, any new homeless services. I think that's been made clear. Second, I hate to do this to you again, Director Wheeler, but I was at the ANN for the Shelby Street Bridge, and there might be some room for the facade to not be actually stone, but look like stone. So, if we could talk about that offline and if there's possibilities to sort of work with the community, I think the real interest is to make sure that it looks like the historical part of the city that it is. Mayor: Thank you so much, Mayor Councilor Castro. Actually, the Historic Review Board made a determination today that, contingent in order to receive their approval for the project, it had to be actual stone. Councilor Castro: Oh, I'm so sorry. I was in transit. I missed that one. Darn. So, that's all right. I will do what needs to be done to get that bridge up. Thank you. Mayor: Thank you. Councilor Faulkner, did you have a comment? Councilor Faulkner: Quick comment. Councilor Garcia, I do apologize. There was no mal intent. I had a lot going on in my personal life, and I also was just kind of running. I'm like a pitbull. Once I lock my jaws into something, I just go for it. And having experienced this in my district, I promise you I will never again look at your district without communicating to you. Mayor: Thank you. Any other comments? City Manager: Mayor, if I could, and members of the governing body, I just wanted to make sure Councilor Chavez's comments reminded me that the accomplishments of this capital program are largely due to the governing body's leadership and support, and also to almost every single staff member in the city of Santa Fe. Every project requires procurement and contracts, City Attorney, it's the finance, it's budget, it's public engagement, it's public communication, it's the website. So I just really wanted to make sure that we recognize the entire city staff as having made this accomplishment of this capital program. Thank you. And I'm sorry, Mayor, could we let Councilor Cass back in? Mayor: Yeah, Madam Clerk, Councilor Casset needs again to be admitted into the Zoom. Apparently there was a disconnect, and if you could fix that, that would be super. Clerk: She is now a panelist again. Mayor: Thank you. For the benefit of anybody who is tracking the conversation, I would say that the money, the item in the ICIP that revolves around funding for a much-needed multi-service center for homeless individuals, people who are unhoused, and other related services is in there simply because it's been identified as a priority by everybody, including the Governor, including members of the State Legislature, including members of the City Council, the governing body, the staff, the community. The Interfaith Shelter has indicated that they, or the Interfaith Group has indicated they're going to look for their own version of such a facility. But at the moment, there is no site. We're not even talking about a specific site with this list. The list is not site-specific. It's simply priority-based and designed to try to get an allocation that would then produce the work that would lead to the identification and development of a site or sites that would fill the bill for what we all know is a high priority. We've been moving very steadfastly on this issue, and I give high marks to the members of the City Council for their stalwart effort to look at things like the micro-community as a piece of this remedy, like the vote we took on bringing the Urban Alchemy group into town. And these are all parts of the agenda that Director Ham and Paul went through last week at the community dialogue. It is an ongoing reflection of that strategy. The Governor has put money into her budget. The Legislature has indicated great support for doing work in this area. The Governor's team has talked about statewide initiatives that we would like to be a part of. We're simply trying to lock up an allocation that would give us the financial means to do the work to produce a service facility that would meet the needs of the community and help get people housed. But there is no site in the allocation, nor in the documentation, nor is there a proposed site. Just if there's any confusion on that point. Any other comments at this time? Madam Clerk, we have a motion and a second. If you would call the roll. Clerk: Councilor Michael Garcia, yes. Councilor Lindell. Councilor Cassid, yes. Councilor Castro, yes. Councilor Chavez, yes. Councilor Faulkner. Councilor Lee Garcia, yes. Mayor Weber, yes. Motion is approved. Mayor: Thank you very much, Madam Clerk. Thank you, Director Wheeler, as always. Madam Clerk, can you take us to the next item? Clerk: Item 10B, request for approval of Intergovernmental Agreement Number 26-624-400-0024 with the State of New Mexico Aging and Long-Term Services Department for providing volunteer services for the Division of Senior Services Volunteer Programs in the total amount of $313,120 through June 30th, 2026. And here to present is Senior Services Director Manuel Sanchez. Mayor: Before we proceed, I think Councilor Michael Garcia would like to recuse himself. Councilor Garcia: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I'd like to recuse myself from this item as I work for the federal agency that manages these federal volunteer programs. Mayor: Thank you, Councilor. We'll let you know when we've completed the item. In the meantime, as Councilor Garcia makes his way out, is there a motion on this item? Councilor: Motion. Mayor: We have a motion and a second. Would you like to give us and the people who are watching and listening an opportunity to learn more about what this agreement would achieve and why we're pursuing it? Director Sanchez: Mayor, City Councilors, yes. The Intergovernmental Agreement is for volunteer programs which administers our RSVP program, which is our Retired Seniors Volunteers, which incorporates about 250 volunteers, 50 volunteer stations where volunteers go and serve the community. We also have the Senior Companion Program where we have seniors volunteer, go sit with other seniors that need companionship at their homes. The other program that we have is our Foster Grandparents Program in which we have volunteers that go sit with young students in their classrooms, mentor them, and assist them to understand what's going on, assist them in their schooling. A new program that we have is the Senior Care Companion Program in which seniors volunteer, or we have volunteers to go visit with seniors in assisted living facilities to just spend time with them and socialize with them. So we have multiple volunteers in the city that volunteer for the city of Santa Fe that go out into the community and assist. That's what this $313,000 helps us accomplish throughout the year. Mayor: Thank you. I think Councilor Lindell is trying to make her way home to get on Zoom. I believe even if she were to exit now with our two Zoom councilors and the three of us who are here and Councilor Faulkner stepped out for a minute, we have a five-person quorum. So, we're able to proceed even if Councilor Lindell has to make her way home to join us on Zoom. Am I correct, Mayor? City Attorney: You are correct. We have two councilors online. Thank you, Congress. Are there questions about this proposed agreement? I think we have enough people to take the vote. Madam Clerk, there's a motion and a second. If you could call the roll. **Councilor Cassett:** Yes. **Councilor Castro:** Yes. **Councilor Chavez:** Yes. **Councilor Faulkner:** Faulkner has stepped out for a minute. **Councilor Lee Garcia:** Yes. **Mayor Weber:** Yes. Motion is approved. Thank you. Thanks for appearing here tonight. Councilor Garcia, if you could let Councilor Michael Garcia know he can please rejoin us. We need him. While he does that, Madam Clerk, if you could read the next item on the agenda. **Madam Clerk:** Item 10C, request for approval of a waiver and settlement in the amount of $300,000 resolving threatened litigation regarding the estate of Dorothy Stevens. **Mayor Weber:** Here to present is Assistant City Attorney Frank Rubel. Can we get a motion on this item? **Councilor:** Move to approve. **Councilor:** Second. **Mayor Weber:** There's a motion and there is a second. If you'd like to say a few words about what we're doing here for the public and the benefit of people listening in who may not know about this, why we're approving or being asked to approve this settlement, take a moment and give us that overview. **Assistant City Attorney Frank Rubel:** Thank you, Mayor Weber and councilors. You may recall it was presented to the councilors in an executive session with respect to some injuries that were suffered by a lady that was in her 90s that was injured at a fitness center run by the city. That injury took place January 12th, 2024. Essentially, she was thrown from a treadmill and suffered severe injuries and then later on developed some complications during the medical treatment and passed away. Sadly, the councilors gave approval to settle this matter, and the matter was settled in about $300,000, which we believe is a fair settlement of this matter given the severity of the participant's injuries. So, at this time, we ask that you approve the written release of all claims that I believe was circulated by City Attorney Aaron McSherry previously earlier in the week. **Mayor Weber:** Thank you. Are there questions? Yes, sir. Madam Clerk, we have a motion and a second. If you would please call the roll. **Councilor Cassett:** Yes. **Councilor Castro:** Yes. **Councilor Chavez:** Yes. **Councilor Faulkner:** Yes. **Councilor Lee Garcia:** Yes. **Councilor Michael Garcia:** Yes. **Mayor Weber:** Yes. Motion is approved. Thank you. Thanks, Frank. Thank you. Thank you for being here. Madam Clerk, the next item, please. **Madam Clerk:** Item 10D, request for approval of amendment number two to professional services contract item number 24-0257 with Info Tech Research Group, Inc. to increase the compensation by $478,628.88 for a new total amount of $666,856.65 and to extend the termination date to June 25th, 2028 for executive counselor service membership. **Mayor Weber:** Here to speak is ITT Department Director Eric Kandeladia. Let me entertain a motion. **Councilor:** Motion to approve. **Councilor:** Second. **Mayor Weber:** There's a motion and there is a second. Director Kandeladia, you want to take us through this so that everyone knows what the proposal in front of us is? **ITT Department Director Eric Kandeladia:** Yes, Mr. Mayor, City Council. This contract is for professional services that we acquire for updated templates, standard methodologies, software enhancements, workshops that we provide not only our department but other departments. We recently implemented a SCADA incident management report leveraging the Info Tech Research company that we have. So it just allows us to leverage those templates and methodologies that are standard throughout the IT industry. **Mayor Weber:** Questions for the director? I see no hands. So, Madam Clerk, would you please call the roll? **Councilor Castro:** Yes. **Councilor Chavez:** Yes. **Councilor Faulkner:** Yes. **Councilor Lee Garcia:** Yes. **Councilor Michael Garcia:** Yes. **Councilor Cassett:** Yes. **Mayor Weber:** Yes. Motion is approved. Thank you. I believe, Director, there's another item coming up with your name on it. So, why don't we, Madam Clerk, go to that item now. **Madam Clerk:** Item 10E, request for approval of amendment number two to professional services agreement, item number 23-0169 with IT Connect, Inc. to increase the compensation amount by $225,30 including NMGRT and to extend the termination date to June 30th, 2026 for project management services. **Mayor Weber:** Again, Eric Kandeladia, ITT Director, is here to speak. Is there a motion? **Councilor:** Motion to approve. **Councilor:** And a second. **Mayor Weber:** We have a motion and we have a second. Director, could you talk us through this one, please? **ITT Department Director Eric Kandeladia:** Mr. Mayor, City Council. This contract is a staff augmentation contract that we have with IT Connect for business analysts as well as project coordinator for a lot of our IT projects throughout the city. So this staff contract allows us to just have extra resources to participate in business requirements, documentation, and meeting coordination. **Mayor Weber:** Thank you. I apologize. I was in consultation with my colleague. Are there any questions for the director about this item? Madam Clerk, I see no hands. If you would call the roll. **Councilor Chavez:** Yes. **Councilor Faulkner:** Yes. **Councilor Lee Garcia:** Yes. **Councilor Michael Garcia:** Yes. **Councilor Cassett:** Yes. **Councilor Castro:** Yes. **Mayor Weber:** I vote yes. Motion is approved. Thank you. Next item on the agenda, Madam Clerk, Item 11, matters from the City Manager. Mr. City Manager, you have the floor. **City Manager:** Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I've got three items to report on tonight. The first one is just the July list of employee anniversaries. You may be interested to know that we have a 25-year employee, Dora Marquez from Public Utilities. We have two 20-year employees, Melanie Lovado and Daniel Esabel. We have two 15-year employees from the Police Department, Hines Duca and Maria Tenna. Three ten-year employees, Arasmo Monteo, Alejandro Aoyo, and Mark Cordova. And also from the Police Department, five-year employee Brady Griffith. So we're celebrating their service this month. Secondly, I wanted to give just a quick update with a more complete report coming on the consultant efforts on the Soldiers Monument. By the next council or next governing body meeting, I expect to have a more complete report, if not the complete report, from the consulting firm that's doing this analysis. I can just tell you that where they are is they're in the process of looking at the options of piecing the obelisk together, the option of replacing it in its entirety, the options associated with relocating without having a specific location to relocate it, but the possibilities of moving the base that is there today. That has taken some additional effort for a couple of reasons that I think are fairly obvious when you think about it. We don't know how it's installed right now. We don't know how far down the base extends, how it's placed in the ground. So there's probably a need to do a little bit of excavation to find that out. We asked the consultant to work with the city archaeologist to consult on that effort before it takes place. I don't want people to think if they see a little bit of excavation that something's going on. They're just trying to do basic fact-finding. We don't, for instance, even know whether it's full of concrete or not. So, even measuring out what it would take to move it, they're not ready yet to provide that finding. But those efforts are still going on. Of course, there's also the issue of the one plaque that has been damaged. So that'll be coming forward hopefully by the end of July that that project will come to completion. Then the last thing I want to report on is good news. It's a different kind of report. Some of you may have heard that in the last couple of weeks we started getting notices. We want to thank a resident named Eileen Foley who called to report a dead cow in one of the arroyos in the city and wanted to know who was responsible for moving the dead cow. It turns out that there is no government agency that feels its primary responsibility is dealing with dead cows in arroyos. So after having exhausted every effort to find out what we could do with this, Javier Martinez in the City Clerk's office raised this issue, and the Mayor joined and challenged us to seek solutions, not point fingers. I was very proud of our staff because given the challenge of figuring out how to deal with a dead cow that no one was responsible for, we had several people from our staff step up. I'm going to call them out for having volunteered. Staff from the, by the way, the cow was in an arroyo near Cerrillos and Governor Miles, that's where it was located, off the beaten path. The Wastewater Department stepped up and sent people out to work on this. The Fire Department, Fleet Division went out in search of the cow. The ESD Department sent staff out, and as I said, Constituent Services was leading the way in trying to make this happen. Individual staff members Daniel Garcia, Gilbert Rodriguez, Andy Romero, Mike Doer, Javier Martinez, Angie Brown from the Mayor's office, who was all over this issue, all stepped up and said, "You know, it may not be clear whose job it is, but our community needs this task done." And they stepped up and did it. I think they deserve great credit for that. This is now a story we will tell regularly in the staff about the day that the dead cow problem arose and how people decided to find solutions rather than to point fingers to someone else. So I thought that was a good story worth sharing. **Mayor Weber:** Thank you, Mr. City Manager. Madam Clerk, the next item on the agenda. **Madam Clerk:** The next item are matters from the City Attorney. **Mayor Weber:** Yes, sir. You are our acting City Attorney. You have the floor. **Acting City Attorney:** Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I recommend that the governing body go into an executive session for matters noticed in the agenda in accordance with the Open Meetings Act NMSA 1978 section 10-15-1 H7 attorney-client privilege discussion of pending and threatened litigation in particular discussion of threatened litigation in the matter of Jagdish Bahigh Bakta. Councilor Michael Garcia, would you care to make a motion, sir? **Councilor Michael Garcia:** I move that we enter an executive session pursuant to the Open Meetings Act section 10-15-1H subpart 7 for the discussion of threatened or pending litigation in which the governing body is or may become a participant. **Councilor:** A second. **Mayor Weber:** There's a motion and a second. Any discussion? Madam Clerk, if you could call the roll. **Councilor Chavez:** Yes. **Councilor Faulkner:** Yes. **Councilor Lee Garcia:** Yes. **Councilor Michael Garcia:** Yes. **Councilor Cassett:** Yes. **Councilor Castro:** Yes. **Mayor Weber:** Yes. If you could make sure that the folks who are zooming are zoomed into the executive session. We will adjourn to the council meeting room. We'll be back as soon as we can to take up the next order of business. Thank you. **Mayor Weber:** Madam Clerk, are we still streaming? **Madam Clerk:** We are still streaming. We have our council members zooming in with us. There should be three of them now. I see one promoting them to panelist right now. **Mayor Weber:** Great. How about Councilor Lindell? Is she able to join? **Madam Clerk:** Both are panelists. **Mayor Weber:** All right. Very good. Councilor Garcia, do you have a motion to make? **Councilor Michael Garcia:** Pursuant to the Open Meetings Act section 10-15-1 J, I move that the governing body reconvene in open session and state for the record that the matters discussed in closed session were limited to those specified in the motion for closure. Second. There's a motion and a second. Is there any discussion? Madam Clerk, if you could please call the roll on the motion. Councilor Faulkner: Yes. Councilor Lee Garcia: Yes. Councilor Michael Garcia: Yes. Councilor Lindell: Yes. Councilor Cassutt: Yes. Councilor Castro: Yes. Councilor Chavez: Yes. Mayor Weber: Yes. Motion is approved. Thank you. Before we amend the agenda to go to petitions from the floor, we do have one item to act on coming out of the executive session. And I would entertain a motion on item, I believe it's 13A. If you'd like to read it, Madam Clerk. Item 13A: Approval of attorney-client privileged recommended strategy and next steps in the matter of a tort claim notice filed by Joish Bahi Bakti. Motion to approve. There's a motion to approve. Second. Is there discussion? Just making sure the City Attorney is at that's we're approving the recommendation. Thank you, Councilor Garcia. And Mr. Mayor, yes, I would request that the governing body approve the recommendation and next steps as discussed in executive session. I believe that was the motion. Is there any further discussion? Madam Clerk, if you could call a roll on that motion, please. Councilor Lee Garcia: Yes. Councilor Michael Garcia: Yes. Councilor Lindell: Yes. Councilor Cassutt: Yes. Councilor Castro: Yes. Councilor Chavez: Yes. Councilor Faulkner: Yes. Mayor Weber: Yes. Motion is approved. Thank you. I'd now entertain a motion to amend our agenda so that we go to petitions from the floor at this time and then resume regular order after that. So moved. Second. There's a motion and a second to go to petitions from the floor now. Is there any discussion? Madam Clerk, if you'd call the roll on that, please. Councilor Michael Garcia: Yes. Councilor Lindell: Yes. Councilor Cassutt: Yes. Councilor Castro: Yes. Councilor Chavez: Yes. Councilor Faulkner: Yes. Councilor Lee Garcia: Yes. Mayor Weber: Yes. Motion is approved. Very good. Thank you. So, at this time, we will go to petitions from the floor. We'll first start with people who are here in the council chambers. If you wish to address anything other than the items that are up for public, excuse me, I'm sorry, public hearing for two minutes, please come forward and the City Clerk will be the timekeeper. Please do your best to stay within the time limit so that everybody gets a fair and equal amount of time. And you have an opportunity to speak about any subject you'd like other than the public hearings on the agenda. So let's start right now. Just going to do a quick sound check here. All right, perfect. Everything works. My name is Lewis DLA. I'm with ASME Local 399 with the City of Santa Fe. Good evening to everyone in attendance, administration, and governing body. I came tonight because one, it's the start of a new fiscal year and I wanted to give everyone an update on the negotiation statuses with ASME. Now that we've finished our arbitration session, all of this is a matter of public record. So, I wanted to make sure that the governing body was caught up to speed just in case you hadn't been informed. We just finished up our arbitration session. Now, according to the Public Employee Bargaining Act, a state law with New Mexico, the arbitrator is supposed to make a decision on either the city's contract or the union's contract proposed for the next several years. The arbitrator did make a decision. His decision was to choose neither side. That is something that threw off our legal team and the law firm that represents us. I believe the city's position is in the same with their legal counsel. I wanted to let you know that as far as the arbitrator's decision regarding illegality, he both sides asserted what the other was asking is illegal. The arbitrator ended up ruling that for the city's statements of illegality, the one that they stuck with was regarding our, the union's use of the mail system, the interdepartment mail system the city has, and that it threatens the monopoly the postal service has on how things are distributed. Now, that's not something the union agreed with since one, it's 2025. We usually use email for everything rather than physical mail. But it is something the arbitrator ruled on. For what the union asserted the city was doing illegally is that in one of their articles they asserted that the union's ability to reach out to governing body regarding union matters is something that we could no longer do. That is a violation of the First Amendment. We do have the ability to petition the governing body regarding grievances, whatever they may be, like what I'm doing for you tonight. With that decision, we're going to be meeting. We had a labor management committee meeting with the HR director and Nancy Himenez and several other representatives of HR. They're going to talk with us on the 11th, which is this Friday, where both sides can hopefully work out how we want to handle this since the arbitrator didn't give a decision that neither one of us can work with. That's my two minutes. All right, that's it. Thanks, folks. Thank you, sir. Good evening. My name is Jessica Saxon. I'm a civil rights advocate and litigator from Washington D.C. I'm here to provide public notice to Santa Fe City Council. This is in accordance with USCS rules of civil procedure as well as Rule 17 and Rule 20 of the United States Supreme Court. The Constitution for the United States is the overarching requirement that every state must follow. I trust no one here would disagree with that. States cannot enact their own alternative legislation in substitute it for the guarantees of the Constitution. That would mean that state laws are in fact more powerful than the Constitution. Clause one of Amendment Five states that no person should be held to answer for a capital or otherwise infamous crime unless on presentment or indictment by a grand jury. The State of New Mexico has enacted its own alternative legislation and permits its prosecuting attorneys and police officers to charge by way of information as opposed to indictment. That is unconstitutional. An emolument violation is when you pay a public official to break the law. The first article, there's two areas that the Constitution enforces this. The first is Article 1, Section 10, where it states that no state shall create a law that shall impair the obligations of contracts. Police officers, your prosecutors, and judges are all under contract, a contract to perform based on their oath or affirmation that they took. The second is the 14th Amendment that says that no state shall create or enforce any law that shall abridge the privileges and immunities of the United States citizens. Privileges and immunities are at a minimum those that are enumerated in the Bill of Rights in the first 10 amendments. Unfortunately, New Mexico has enacted its own inferior constitution that permits public officials and law enforcements whom you all pay to violate the Constitution of the United States. As a result, there is an inordinate amount of people currently in prison in the United States. Tanama Downing is preparing to litigate this issue at the United States Supreme Court on behalf of more than 700 people currently imprisoned here in America. If you continue to pay public officials to break the law, unfortunately, there can be criminal sanctions that could come from that. We don't want to go down that path. Officials have been made aware at this point that paying people to disobey the law is an emolument violation. It is illegal and it is unconstitutional. So, I'm asking your honorable individuals to please take a look at Clause One, Amendment Five. Confirm what I'm saying to be true and direct your public officials to act in a constitutional manner. And I do have something that I'd like to... Thank you. Yes, sir. You have the floor as soon as we reset the clock. One sec. Very good. Go right ahead. So, my name is Tanley Down. I'm the civil rights litigator that Miss Saxon was just talking about. I know she had to speak really fast because there was a lot of stuff that had to get out, but we're here today because we want to bring attention to you guys that there is an unconstitutional situation that's occurring. And so, when your police officers whom you pay, when they go out and they choose to rely upon an imperial state statute that directs them to disobey the Constitution of the United States, that is illegal, it is unconstitutional. It is the emolument violation that she's referring to. You guys do pay for those things. And so, as a result, having been made aware of this situation, you do have a statutory obligation now to take action to correct those unlawful acts. Now, I know that you guys are going to finish up here. You're going to go and you're going to have a conversation with your attorney and he's going to probably direct you guys that it's okay, that what we're saying is not true because the United States Supreme Court came out in 1884 in a case called Hurtado versus California and said that the states don't have to have an indictment by a grand jury. But before you choose to rely upon a judge-made ruling as the foundation, I want to point out that the Constitution of the United States is in fact the foundation, not a judge-made ruling. Judges have no authority to be able to alter, amend, or destroy any provisions or guarantees of the United States Constitution. In fact, sedition is defined as the speaking or writing of words such as law established in order to cause disaffection to the Constitution, to procure its alteration in other than a lawful manner. Judges have no authority to be able to alter or amend the Constitution because that must be done in accordance with the special amending procedure of Article Five. Any other way would be an act of sedition by traitors to the nation. That's what we're litigating. That's what I'm arguing. I'm not here to get anybody into trouble. I'm simply asking you guys to please take a look at Clause One, Amendment Five, and burn the things we're saying and then let's direct those agents to act in a lawful constitutional manner or don't pay them anymore because if you do continue, then there can be criminal sanctions that would come from that. So, I ask you to please step up, discharge the duties of your office, fulfill the obligations and promises that you made to the people of New Mexico, and enforce and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic. Thank you guys so much. God bless. Thank you. Yes, ma'am. You have the floor. Good evening, Mayor, Councilors. Suzanne Romero, District 1. Good evening, Santa Fe. No seorisador, pray for us. Senor de Guadalupe, pray for us. Can you guys hear me? Yes. Really, I hope all of you can hear me and the reason I say this is because I view this. Obviously, I have had some physical ailments. When I see you on the YouTube, you're not listening. You folks are not listening and it's really a shame to see it. You're texting each other, you're sending notes, you're writing everything. It does not look good and I want, I expect more from you guys. Okay, so first of all, I'm going to go to the City Manager. First of all, welcome to Santa Fe. You have let me down. You have let the sacrilegious graffiti of hate of the old Warehouse 21 go unclean for months. If you don't know the devotion to Our Lady of Guadalupe in Santa Fe, you should have kept your promise to have a meeting with me. You did not. Since you did not, I'm again asking you to clean it now. I know the city has cleaned it along with many other places, including the Cross of the Martyrs and everywhere else the vandals have chosen to desecrate in this once beautiful city. If you need information, call me. I went by there today. It's ugly, it's disgusting, and it puts a stain on this beautiful city. Today we got the news that this was one of the best travel destinations. Not if you're going down Mel de Peralta and what I used to call Hickok Street. It's ugly and it's just disgusting, and I wish you would have called me. So you still have tomorrow morning because the street's already been blocked off. Thousands of people are going to be... I've just got started. I was saying hello to everybody, so I'm just going to finish up real quick. Thousands will be in the railyard tomorrow. It needs to be cleaned. The criminals have taken over the city. We all know it. You all are not listening. What is it? Everybody here has my number. I sent an email to everybody, and somebody said to me today, Mr. Mayor, that I did not... they said they used the word "hate," and I said, "I do not hate the mayor." I said, "You have it all wrong. I will disagree with the mayor. I want more from the mayor because I know he can give it to me, give it to us." Thank you, ma'am. And I pray for you, and I've told all of you that in my emails. Thank you, and I will continue to do that. I want you guys to think about what you've done. The way that you handled the homelessness was just horrific. And then somebody in one of those groups, they said, "Well, be nice and take cookies." Well, this was... that's what they said at the town hall meeting. Thank you. This is way more than cookies, people. Okay, I have pages and pages. If you'd like to submit your pages, we'll all be the beneficiary of it. I'll send you all an email. Okay. Thank you, ma'am. Suzanne Romero, District One. Thank you, ma'am. I don't think you can forget me. Oh, thank you for coming. Virgil Camino Domiguel, Mayor, and the majority council members, specifically those of you that are not running for re-election, and we all know who's not running for re-election. For the last four years, you have seen me here with hundreds of people in this audience over here. Well, there's not an audience today, but they were there before, asking you to restore the Soldiers Monument. In addition, we've asked that the statue of Diego de Vargas be placed where it used to be before, which was approved by a prior mayor and prior city council. The city and the mayor had to be sued by the Pro-Lima, where the city spent almost a million dollars, and you're continuing to spend money now to defend yourselves for not restoring the Soldiers Monument. This is a complete misuse of the people's money, as the District Court ordered to replace the monument to 2020 condition by June 15th. As you know, it hasn't been done. Despite this, the mayor approached the State Historical Preservation Officer for permission to remove the Soldiers Monument. He and some council members continued to ignore what the people want. The SHPO responded to the mayor by stating that the city must present reasonable alternatives and conduct a public hearing on the Soldiers Monument removal before they will even consider what you're asking them to do. We the people understand a public hearing will not be scheduled. Don't believe it will be during your terms. For those who have decided not to seek re-election, continue to oppose the Soldiers Monument. You're going to let the next mayor and city council make the decision for the debacle that this mayor and this administration has created. They're afraid. They just lack the leadership. So you council members need to put pressure on the mayor and those other council members that he controls. The majority of them are not here, and tell him the people want this Soldiers Monument. They want the lawsuit. Thank you, sir. Why do you continue to fight it? Thank you. The people want, and you continue to spend the people's money because it's not coming out of your pocket. Thank you, sir, very much. Thank you for coming down tonight. I got to thank you for one thing, though, and that one thing is I thank you all for not running for re-election. Thank you for coming because the people... Thank you for coming down tonight. You're welcome. So the people without you. Thank you. I hesitate to cut you off, but we're trying to give everybody equal time. Is there... Is there anybody in the Zoom room, Madam Clerk, who would like to speak at this time? There are no attendees in the Zoom room. Okay. In that case, Madam Clerk, why don't we resume regular order and go back to the business of the agenda as published? Item 14, matters from the City Clerk. I had to be brief. I had a couple things I wanted to send you. I put on your tables the Movies in the Park event that's happening this Friday. Trying to reiterate, Christ's joining us in a partnership. So, food will be 50% off for all of the vendors that will be there. Let's see. We sent out an agenda process memo to all staff members outlining timetables for when presentations need to be in, when packets need to be in, when legislation needs to be in. I will be sending it to you, but I wanted to give you all a heads-up that we had sent this out. It's also guidance about procedural rules and all of that kind of stuff. So, I will be issuing that to you. It has gone to directors and division department directors and division directors. I did want to kind of give you a breakdown of the community engagement event, the micro-communities, just by the numbers. So, we had room for 200 people. 60 were on the waitlist. 128 ended up attending. We had 45 staff members, the city manager, mayor, six councilors, and four media were in attendance. The presentation section that we recorded, our team is working on it so that the presentations in terms of the PowerPoint presentations and the video are synced into the video. That should be up on Friday for anyone to watch. And then the report is expected to be out in about three weeks. Communications and marketing. I just wanted to give you all a heads-up. Anything that's city-sponsored, please reach out to our team to get flyers or get any promotional materials. We did come across a seal that's used that actually is written in Thai. So, we want to make sure that we're utilizing the right seals and stuff. Please reach out to us. We are happy to help. I think the city manager already discussed the cow issue. I just wanted to give kudos to two other people who weren't on that list, Jesse Roach and Deborah Trillo, who were instrumental in also helping with this. And that's all I have. Thank you. Next item, Madam Clerk. 15, Communications from the Governing Body. Super. I'm going to start with our Zoom colleagues so that I don't accidentally overlook them because they're up on the screen. Councilor Cassett, you want to kick us off? Sure, Mayor. Thank you. I just have one thing today. I wanted to thank the Public Works Department and especially Marcos Eskeel, who is in charge of paving. There is a road that my constituents have been trying to get paved since before my time, Autumn Leaf Lane. It's a tiny little road. It seems like there's nothing to it, but it also connects some of the trails in Nava Day. And I got a picture from one of the residents there of kids finally able to ride their bike. So, we've been working really hard to get that street paved. It finally was repaved, and the residents are extremely happy that this is finally done. So, I really, really wanted to thank Director Wheeler and Mr. Eskeel for all of their work in getting this done. Thanks, Mayor. Thank you, Councilor. Councilor Castro. Thank you all so much for a wonderful meeting. I just want to remind folks that the Metropolitan Planning Organization is looking for public review of its current transportation plan. So, please, if you can go to the MPO website and take a look at it, we would love some more community input, and in particular from BPC. Councilor Garcia, if you guys would like to take a look at it, we would love to collaborate. Thank you. Thank you very much. And Councilor Lindell, I don't see you, but I'm told you're there. Do you have anything you'd wish to share? Mayor, she just dropped off. Okay, then we'll come back. If she comes back on, you'll let me know. Super. Councilor Chavez, why don't you take the floor? I don't have anything tonight, Mayor. Thank you. Councilor Garcia, why don't you take the floor? Thank you, Mr. Mayor. In response to Councilor Castro, that is on our August EPAC meeting agenda. So, stay tuned. And then just wanted to give an acknowledgment and thanks and gratitude for two city employees who recently retired. One, Carol Branch, who led the City of Santa Fe's Keep Santa Fe Beautiful program. I just want to thank her for all of her service. And then Miss Anita Medina, who is with Finance. I don't know, City Manager, in your, as you're acknowledging folks having their anniversaries, if maybe we can acknowledge folks that have retired from the city. I think it's incumbent of us. We once upon a time, and I'm going back here, I'm going to be dated. I remember watching these council meetings when I was in high school, and folks would actually be given silver platters and be brought up before the council, and we can all applaud and hurray and give them high fives. And I definitely want to acknowledge those folks that gave their tireless dedication and ultimately retired with the city. So, I just want to acknowledge those two individuals and thank them for their service. That's all I have, Mr. Mayor. Beautiful. Thank you. Councilor Faulkner. Quickly, I just want to thank Regina Ree and the Fire Department for helping us get the Southside Back to School Bash organized. They really have been helping a lot, and I just want to appreciate them because this is hopefully going to be a great event, August 2nd. Beautiful. And Councilor Garcia, not to leave you last, but take us home. Thank you, Mayor. Ditto, Councilor Faulkner, thank you for all the work you've done on that. Shaping up to be a, hopefully it is going to be a great event. A lot of moving pieces to it, and many people working on it. So, again, come on out and let's have a bash. Thank you. Is Councilor Lindell back with us, or should I take the floor? No, she is not. Well, let me mention a few things very briefly. First, the clerk already gave us some of the data from the community dialogue that was held over at the convention center. Huge, huge thanks to all the residents who came and participated with great, really great spirit, great community engagement, positive energy. Our friend Roseanne Hagerty, who flew in to participate, who is, I think, the leading expert on homelessness in America, commented to me after the meeting. She'd been to these for years. It's the best one she ever attended in terms of the level of participation and constructive engagement and positive input. Thanks to all the council members who were there. Thanks to the city employees who acted as facilitators and note-takers. It was really quite a great evening and a tremendous testimony to what happens when people come out and want to constructively engage with their ideas about how to make micro-communities work and to the presentations that were made. Henry went through the entire strategy for homelessness that he architected back in October. We had a presentation about the great work that has been going on over at the one micro-community that is being operated, as well as a video that demonstrated what that facility looks like. And then Roseanne Hagerty commented on trends across the country when it comes to homelessness. I thought it was a terrific example of constructive engagement, and I think we should model it and do that kind of round conversation in the future. I want to pay my respects to the Tibetan community of Santa Fe. There was a beautiful celebration at their Tibetan center in honor of the 90th birthday of His Holiness the Dalai Lama. Dancing, chanting, celebration, and as Councilor Faulkner already mentioned, compassion really was the theme of the message. We're so fortunate to have the Tibetan community here contributing to Santa Fe. They add an enormous amount of heart and spirit and love to Santa Fe, and my gratitude goes out to them for all they do. I know everybody knows this, but it starts tomorrow: the Art Market. I hope everybody will make it a point to go and visit and get a ticket. It is a really special event. It is not just beautiful work by arts and crafts, brilliant craftspeople from all over the world. It's an example of social entrepreneurship where the entrepreneurs who make these amazing works of art use the funds that they get to go back to their home villages and support those villages, in many instances, for the whole rest of the year. Many of them come from small workshops, groups of collaborative artists, and their work is sold here. It's staffed by volunteers who used to be in the Peace Corps and in some of the countries that are represented here. It's been hard for some of those artisans and craftspeople to get into the country this year, unfortunately. So in some instances, the booths are being staffed by the Santa Fe Peace Corps graduates. But it is such a special part of our community to see social entrepreneurship flourishing here and around the world. And then as a last item, I would be remiss if I didn't say to everybody watching and listening, we're number one. I don't know if you heard, but we're number one. It's official. Everybody else isn't number one. We're number one. The people in South Carolina are not number one. Santa Fe is number one. It's something we should all be really proud of. The people in our community who provide hospitality, which is everybody, because in Santa Fe, if you're standing on a street corner looking at your phone trying to figure out what to do and where to go, somebody who lives here will stop and say, "Can I help you?" If you're at a hotel, you'll be treated great. If you're a restaurant attendee, you will be given amazing service. If you go into a shop, a store, a museum, a gallery, you name it. In Santa Fe, people are given number one quality treatment. So I tip my hat and send out a great big thank you to everybody in our hospitality community, to our staff in tourism, and all the other departments that make the city work and look great: the parks, the trails, you name it, that people love to come here for. This accolade is something we should all be very, very proud of and congratulate the whole community for bringing us to that level of being the number one city in America. Not only that, but when it came to the vote about places to go in the world, we're the only United States city on the list of 25 locations. We're number 19 on a list of 25, and no other US city even made the list. So there's reason to feel very proud and very blessed to live here, and that we knew was true before we got this vote, but the vote should put a great big smile on everybody's face here in Santa Fe. Back to you, Madam Clerk. Item 16, introduction of legislation 16A, consideration of Resolution Number 2025-TBD, sponsored by Councilor Signe Lindell, a resolution authorizing the consumption of wine during the Santa Fe Wine and Chili Fiesta's Grand Tasting on the last Saturday of September for the years 2025 through 2029 pursuant to Subsection 23-6.2.2C SFCC 1987. I don't know if Councilor Lindell is with us. If she's not, I think she would probably say the title speaks for itself. Why don't we go to the next one then? 16B, consideration of Resolution Number 2025-TBD, sponsored by Councilor Signe Lindell, a resolution authorizing a tasting event and consumption of beer, wine, cider, and mixed beverages that include liquor during the Santa Fe Wine and Chili Fiesta's Chili Friday event on the last Friday of September for the years 2025 through 2029 pursuant to Subsections 23-6.3B7 and 23-6.2C SFCC1987. And I think the same holds for that item. I think the title speaks for itself as well. 16C, consideration of Resolution Number 2025-TBD, sponsored by Councilor Lee Garcia and Mayor Alan Weber, a resolution approving the updated Santa Fe Trails Agency Safety Plan and directing its submission to the Federal Transit Administration. Councilor Garcia, do you want to say a word about that? Councilor Garcia: Sure. Thank you, Mayor. Basically, it's just protocol to submit our transit plan to reach out and get funding from FTA. Just kind of going after the low-hanging fruit, as they say. Thank you, sir. Next item, please, Madam Clerk. 16D, consideration of Resolution Number 2025-TBD, sponsored by Councilor Amanda Chavez, a resolution authorizing representatives and agents to enter an agreement with the New Mexico Department of Transportation regarding appropriation ID number F3057, control number C5213057, to acquire rights of way and to plan, design, construct, and improve pedestrian, bicycle, and drainage infrastructure on Governor Miles Road in the City of Santa Fe and accepting responsibility for the project and assuming ownership, liability, and maintenance responsibilities for all amenities related to the project. Councilor Chavez: I think it speaks for itself, Mayor. Thank you. Mayor: Okay, Councilor. Thank you. Next item, Madam Clerk. 16E, consideration of Resolution Number 2025-TBD, sponsored by Councilor Pilar Faulkner, Councilor Amanda Chavez, and Councilor Lee Garcia. Resolution proposing a ballot question to be submitted to the City of Santa Fe voters during the November 4th, 2025 regular local election regarding amending Articles VI Section 6.02.02 and VIII Section 8.04 of the city's municipal charter to allow five councilors to suspend or remove the city manager, city attorney, and city clerk at a regularly scheduled meeting. Councilor Faulkner, do you want to speak to this item, and then we'll let your colleagues who are also sponsors have an opportunity. Councilor Faulkner: I think what we're trying to get at with this endeavor is that there needs to be some checks and balances. I think when we did the charter review, we contemplated a powerful executive, but we didn't contemplate what the balance would be on the council side. I think we can all agree that checks and balances are really important. We feel like this measure allows for some continuity in the powers that the council has, and I don't think it's that far-fetched. I also believe that we should give the community opportunities to vote on certain things that I know it seems like who fires the city clerk and the city manager and the city attorney doesn't seem like it matters that much, but I think under certain administrations, and I know there's examples of these administrations currently, if we don't have a council that can also weigh in on these decisions, we give the executive way too much power and the legislative branch not enough power to combat anything that would be out of sorts. Councilor Chavez: Thank you. I think I jumped on because there's been a lot of feedback. Well, and I think we always hear it, but I think a lot of our community members want us to stop running so politically and have leadership that's not dictated by political agenda. I think that's a perception. I'm not saying that it's confirmed or not, but I definitely think there's a perception that when it's tied to one individual or there's an imbalance of power, it does become more political than managing a city with appropriate leaders who can use their leadership to make the best decisions for the city. So I think that this will be a good change to address that concern that community members have been really open to me. They have in regards to some of our leadership. Thank you. Mayor: Thank you, Councilor Lee Garcia. Councilor Garcia: Thank you, Mayor. I won't add too much to that. Many of those conversations were had between sponsors when we brought this forward and the idea started. But once again, I think that not just for yesterday or today, but for the future, and I think no matter which administration is in, whether it's city councilors or mayoral leadership, that a collaboration between both parties makes good decisions in who helps to lead this city from an administrative standpoint. Thank you. Mayor: Sir, next item, Madam Clerk. 18, public comment on bills. First public comment, no action. 18A, consideration of Bill Number 2025-15, adoption of Ordinance Number 2025-TBD, sponsored by Councilor Amanda Chavez and Councilor Carol Romero-Wirth, a bill authorizing the execution and delivery of a Water Project Fund Loan Grant Agreement by and between the New Mexico Finance Authority and the City of Santa Fe, New Mexico, the borrower guarantee in the total amount of $2 million, including a loan in the amount of $800,000, evidencing an obligation of the borrower guarantee to utilize the loan grant amount solely for the purpose of financing the cost of designing a new pipeline and pump to return San Juan Chama project source effluent water for reuse via return flow credits and increased diversions, including related work and revisions, and solely in the manner described in the loan grant agreement. Providing for the pledge and payment of the loan amount and an administrative fees solely from the net revenues of the water utility system of the borrower guarantee. Certifying that the loan grant amount together with other funds available to the borrower guarantee is sufficient to complete the project. Approving the form of and other details concerning the loan grant agreement, ratifying actions heretofore taken, repealing all action inconsistent with this ordinance, and authorizing and taking of other actions in connection with the execution and delivery of the loan grant agreement. Thank you. This is an opportunity for public comment. If anyone is here in the chamber who would like to step up to the podium and address this measure, now would be the time to do that. Or, Madam Clerk, if there's somebody on Zoom who has a hand up, they would also have an opportunity to comment. Madam Clerk: There is no one in the Zoom room, and I see no one coming forward. Mayor: So with that, perhaps you could take us to the next item, Madam Clerk. Madam Clerk: Next item 19, final action on legislation, public hearing 19A, consideration of Bill Number 2025-14, adoption of Ordinance Number 2025-TBD, sponsored by Mayor Alan Weber and Councilor Carol Romero-Wirth, authorizing the issuance and sale of City of Santa Fe, New Mexico tax-exempt general obligation improvement bonds, Series 2025, in the principal amount of $25 million, payable from ad valorem taxes levied on all taxable property within the city. Levied without limit as to rate or amount, providing the form, certain terms and conditions of the bonds, the manner of their execution, and the method of and security for payment thereof. Delegating authority to each of the Mayor, City Manager, and City Finance Director to approve a form of notice of competitive sale of the bonds or, if deemed advisable, the selection of underwriters to sell the bonds in a negotiated sale and to determine the maturity dates and bonds and amounts, interest rates, prices, redemption features, and other final terms of the bonds in an award certificate approving the formative agreement for registrar. are in paying agent services to be provided by BOKF, and authorizing its execution and delivery and providing for other details concerning the bonds. Thank you. This is a public hearing. I think I know our finance director is here and believe I'm spotting a wise head with regard to bonds in the audience as well. Let me first just simply step up and for the public and for the record, reiterate what is a very lengthy title, but essentially, I think, is a very important step in the issuance of the bonds that we already talked about a little bit this evening when Director Wheeler was describing some of the capital projects that would be funded. This is the mechanism for that funding. So, if the public is listening or watching, perhaps a quick reminder as to what this item is about. Mayor: Certainly, Mr. Mayor, thank you for the opportunity, and I'm delighted to be joined by our bond counsel, Mr. Peter Franklin of Modrall Sperling. I'll turn the more technical questions over to Peter. In essence, what this ordinance will do is authorize the sale of the up to $25 million of new general obligation bonds. This item was a bond question on the ballot at the general election last year. It was supported by 84% of voters in that election, and we're certainly excited to be moving forward with the process to issue the bonds. If the ordinance is approved this evening, we plan to sell the bonds in early August. Mayor: Thank you. That's exactly what I was hoping to hear. Let me entertain a motion and then questions to approve. Councilor: Second. Mayor: Motion has been made to approve. Is there anyone in the audience here or on Zoom, Madame Clerk, who wishes to come forward and testify on this public hearing? Is there a hand up in the Zoom room? Clerk: There are no hands up in the Zoom room. Mayor: And there's no one coming forward in the council chambers. Are there questions from the governing body members? In that case, we have a motion. We have a second. Madame Clerk, could you call the roll? Clerk: Councilor Lindell. Oh, sorry. She is not in the Zoom room. Councilor Cassutt. Councilor Cassutt: Yes. Clerk: Councilor Castro. Councilor Castro: Yes. Clerk: Councilor Chavez. Councilor Faulkner. Councilor Faulkner: Yes. Clerk: Councilor Lee Garcia. Councilor Lee Garcia: Yes. Clerk: Councilor Michael Garcia. Councilor Michael Garcia: Yes. Clerk: Mayor Weber. Mayor: Yes. Motion is approved. Thank you. Thank you both for staying with us tonight and providing that overview. Next item, Madame Clerk. Clerk: Item 20, public hearings, land use cases, appeals, and other items required to have public hearing. 20A, request for approval of the Community Development Block Grant, CDBG, annual action plan. And here to speak are Affordable Housing Project Manager Rocío Gussio, and Office of Economic Development Director and Affordable Housing Interim Director Johanna Nollin. Mayor: Thank you. This is also a public hearing. Let's, if you would please, give us, whoever chooses to do it, I know you're both well-schooled on this, for the benefit of everyone watching and listening or not fully aware of how this works, what is this item and why is it important for the City of Santa Fe and the people? Johanna Nollin: Mayor, counselors, good evening. Great to see everyone. Thanks for the opportunity to share our annual action plan. As mentioned, Rocío Gussio, who's our new program manager for CDBG as well as Affordable Housing Trust Fund, is here to answer questions, too. So, we're hopeful to get information out to you. This is the approval of the city's annual action plan, and this is through HUD, the federal agency that regulates and supports access to affordable housing and a number of things. The CDBG program, Community Development Block Grant. The City of Santa Fe is an entitlement city. There's about a thousand of them across the country. And due to a formula that the federal agency uses that looks at access to affordable housing, poverty levels, population, a number of things. Entitlement city or community means that we are entitled to a certain amount of funds each year. We typically receive about $630,000 per year from HUD. And in order to comply with regulations, rules, and have access to that funding, we have to provide certain plans. We have a number of them, three plans, and I'll mention those, to have access to this funding. So, one is the five-year consolidated plan that outlines our strategic goals. We have about 14 of them that are very fascinating. You can look at those on our website. We also have to every year provide the AAP that is what you have in front of you. This allows us to put the projects of how we choose to use this entitlement funds. Then we also have a thing called a CAPER, a Consolidated Annual Performance and Evaluation Report. This is in addition to many other reporting mechanisms that are put into place that we have to comply with. It's important to note because all projects have to comply with that five-year strategic plan. The city, our office, went through a Request for Proposals at the beginning of the year to put out to public and community solutions to how we comply with the federal agency's goals and match with our goals. What are projects that can help us address access to affordable housing? The CDC is responsible for reviewing all proposals that we received and electing and determining the amounts and the projects through that RFP process. What you have before you are the projects that were voted on and evaluated and selected by the CDC. So, what we are asking tonight is that you are in agreement with the CDC and these recommendations for funding. And I'm happy to go over that. We can answer any questions that you might have. And the other thing to point out that's really important is HUD requires each city to have this plan available for public comment for 30 days. The plan is available on our website. That started June 30th, and we are open to your feedback, to public's feedback, any edits. Thank you, Councilor Cassutt, who found an edit that we made. And we are taking those edits. Folks can review and submit comments personally to us or via email. Do you want me to go through the projects? Mayor: Let's see if we have specific questions. We also need to open the floor for public comment. So let's do that next, and then members of the governing body may have specific questions about the plan in general, the status of CDBG, other things that they want to ask you about. But thank you for being here tonight. Johanna Nollin: Thank you. Mayor: Is there anyone in the chamber who wants to come forward and speak on this at this time as part of the public hearing or on Zoom? Clerk: There is no one in the Zoom room. Mayor: Okay. What I will do is ask council members if you're interested in either commenting or asking a question. Let's go around. Everybody get a fair chance at asking questions. Councilor Garcia, you raised your hand first. Councilor Michael Garcia: Yes. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Thank you, Director Nollin, for the presentation and all the work that went into this plan. But sometimes, these plans take a lot of time, months, but then there are things that are out of our control that derail it. And, for example, the current presidential budget proposes to eliminate CDBG funding. And so that is problematic for me in the sense I want to be able to provide these resources to the organizations that are providing these critical services to residents. Do we have an alternative plan, Plan B, in the instance that Congress does absorb the president's recommendation to eliminate this program, which would ultimately mean zero funding available for this proposal? How, what, what alternative plans do we have to continue to support residents in our community? Johanna Nollin: Mayor, counselor, counselors, this is such a really, really important question, and I'm really appreciative that you raised it. This has been not only available in news, the rumor, and also seeing it in the budget that there is a momentum to cut CDBG. So this definitely is not only on our radar but our organization's radar, too. It's a big concern. And to answer your question directly, our go-to is the Affordable Housing Trust Fund. And as you know, you all voted to put $3 million into that fund. Many of the eligible uses for that fund align with CDBG. It doesn't fit perfectly. CDBG is very specific about addressing services and low to moderate income residents. It's much more broad than an Affordable Housing Trust Fund. However, that is available. And counselor, again, I'm glad you raised the question because we are in the process. Hopefully, today, or I'm sorry, not today. We were hopeful of today, but tomorrow we can announce the publication of the RFP for the Affordable Housing Trust Fund. Again, that's one source of funding, and that's why other sources of funding to put into the Affordable Housing Trust Fund are so important, like the excise tax and other channels to get funding into that. We also are meeting with some of our organizations to brainstorm additional funding, too. That's where the collective community comes into play about making sure that every single rock is turned over to support our organizations that are carrying such a big burden on this topic. Councilor Michael Garcia: Okay. Thank you, Director Nollin. And am I incorrect with the math? It's about a little over $600,000 that we're proposing or we're seeking. Johanna Nollin: Mayor, counselor, counselors, you're correct. We, our allotment is about $633,000, and give or take, there's variables that also are incurred, too. Councilor Michael Garcia: Okay. And the only reason I point that out is, as you mentioned, we do have the $3 million that we allocated from the Affordable Housing Trust Fund, but sometimes that fund might be committed on a multi-year plan. And I just want to make sure that if there isn't potentially funds from the Affordable Housing Trust Fund, where else might, where else might we be able to find this $600,000 to again continue these critical services to residents? Just to plant that seed, and no need for the answer now, but I want to ensure that should, should Congress again move forward with the budget, and right now on the federal level, it's, we, we saw a pretty, pretty drastic cuts to some very social serving programs, and this is one of those that could be impacted in the next fiscal year budget. So this, just want us to begin to plan and prepare in regards to, because this wouldn't have the immediate impact. I just want to again point that out. That's for fiscal year 26 budget. Johanna Nollin: Mayor, counselors, it's for this current fiscal year, but this funding, but the allocation and the actual cash usually hits in the fall. And so if the federal government, depending on when their budget goes into effect in the fall, it would affect this allotment. And so something to point out, too, the way that we are able to write the contract, should this be approved and the projects move forward, but we have a contingency that says pending the availability of funds, right? So, fiscal year 25 budget resources are not at risk. It's fiscal year 26, which would begin October 1, 2025. So, yes. Councilor Michael Garcia: Just, just because it's a different cycle than the city cycle. City is July to June. Federal is typically, I mean, the past few years with the reconciliation budget, it hasn't followed that process, but October to September. So this would impact potential funds September beyond. Johanna Nollin: So, exactly, counselor. Thanks for the clarification. Councilor Michael Garcia: Sure. Okay. Just want to make sure we're starting to plan because I would hope that we don't become so reliant on federal funds given the uncertainty. We can begin to plan and prepare. Thank you for all the work that went into this. No other questions. Councilor Castro, your hand is up. Why don't you take the floor? Thank you so much, Mayor, and thank you, Director, for the presentation. I do have some questions about some of the rubrics. In particular, one of the rubrics that HUD is giving us is to provide decent housing. How do we measure that? Mayor, Councilors, Councilor Castro, thank you so much for the question. There is a series of audits that we have to do that make sure that we are in compliance with our 14 goals that are in our strategic plan. Those audits are conducted on an annual basis. And so each year when we support our CAPER, one of the reports that are due, that's where we are getting judged and evaluated. Did we achieve the deliverables that were set out in our goals? And that's what we're judged on. Okay. And Director, I apologize. This might be a question for the City Manager. My understanding is we don't have, because I've been working with some community members on minimum standards for housing. And in particular, I'm concerned because we had just passed a piece of legislation around discrimination based on source of income, and there was testimony by some of those landlords that they would not meet HUD minimum requirements, and we actually wrote that into the law. So if we do have substandard housing, it seems that that is not providing decent housing. Mr. Mayor, Councilor, I can't directly respond to that comment except that HUD very seriously evaluates compliance with a local government's adopted plan. So to the extent that our plan doesn't provide clear guidance on what those standards are, we would need to take a good look at that. And that's a good comment for moving forward, but I'm not aware of what exactly the current plan calls for. Wonderful. Thank you. And just one quick question on the CDBG activities, in particular the home repair program. I know that I'm sure we don't have Director Wheeler with us anymore, but there is a concern I had with sidewalk repair because that is currently under the homeowner's responsibility. And yet these programs for home repair do not include sidewalk repair. And so we've had quite a few situations where folks are not in a financial situation to repair the sidewalks and yet they're being fined. Do you know if we could maybe help support some of these organizations or adjust our funding so they could include sidewalk repair? Mayor, Councilors, Councilor Costa, thank you so much for the question. This is again a really important question to address. Our programs that are approved are so regulated by HUD rules that we will have to go back and double-check this, but it's a great point and happy to raise this with our HUD rep, and we'll get back to you on that. Okay, thank you. No worries. These are just sort of things that I have seen coming up, and I appreciate the concern. No more questions. I yield the floor. Thank you. Thank you. Other questions? If you volunteered a minute ago to read the list, why don't you go ahead? I think it's a great public interest, and I didn't mean to prevent you, but I wanted to get the dialogue started first, but I think it'd be very useful if you would go over what has been proposed or recommended by the community oversight group and let everybody hear what's on their priority list. Thank you, Mayor, and thank you, Councilors. I'm going to turn it over to Rocio, your manager. Thank you. Make sure you get real close to that microphone. A little shorter. Good evening. Thank you. All right, so the recommended projects. The first one is the Santa Fe Habitat for Humanity. And just to respond, if you could lower your mic just a little more because we have... How's this? Yes, better. Better. Okay. The first organization that the CDC has recommended for funding is the Santa Fe Habitat for Humanity. And I just briefly wanted to mention that it is also contingent on the proposal. So if sidewalks were not mentioned on the proposal, we can't just throw it into the contract as well. So something to keep in mind next year's CDBG cycle. But the award recommended for this fiscal year '26 is $135,000. The next one is Interfaith Community Shelter for their Summer Safe Haven for All, recommended $45,000. The Adelante program with the Santa Fe Public Schools, $40,000. Homewise Energy Efficiency Upgrades, which is different this year. Just want to make a note of that. It's not for mortgage reduction. It is for energy efficiency upgrades at $85,000. The next one is Santa Fe Community Housing Trust for down payment assistance, $216,952.84. And then Youthworks for their kitchen renovation, $191,952.84. To make a note, the last two that I mentioned, there were unused program funds of $233,000.58 that were evenly distributed between the last two. Thank you. Thank you very much. I want to return to the question that Councilor Garcia started us on. I think we're all painfully aware of what the Washington D.C. situation is and what it would ultimately arrive at. And I do believe that, as was indicated when we talked about some of the priorities for our capital investment programs, some of ours align very closely with priorities that the Governor and the Legislature have already articulated. I believe that housing is also very high on the state's list, not just for Santa Fe, but statewide. And that we're all going to have to pull together if funds are no longer available from the federal government because of a huge sea change in federal funding. I do believe that state and local government will have to collaborate more and better than ever before to use the funding resources that are available to address these issues statewide. And I know that people in our delegation have been looking at this already. I know the Governor has made housing one of her key priorities going forward. And we'll have to see what happens in Washington. But in the interim, I do believe that it's up to all of us to pull together and continue to fund programs and projects that are really essential to the Santa Fe community, whether it's through city funds, state funds, combination, philanthropic dollars. This is a very compassionate city, and I think the housing agenda is clearly on everybody's mind as the highest priority that we need to address. So, I'm hopeful that even in the event of a zero out by the federal government, there'll be the ability for us to take care of our own here in Santa Fe. Thank you for pulling all this together. If I'm correct, you might want to reiterate your offer to have everybody read the document that is now posted and offer within the next 30 days comment and suggestions. That's an open invitation to the entire community, Mayor. Absolutely. So, it is currently on the City of Santa Fe Affordable Housing website. You're able to view the document as a PDF, and there's also instructions on how to provide public comment and participate. They will come to me essentially, and we actually take all of those comments and add them into the annual action plan. So it is still a working document, which is pretty neat. So, as far as like the comments that we might receive, some of it might be specific, like Councilor Casset mentioned, we've already made those edits, but they can also just be general comments about our projections since it is an estimation of what we hope to achieve in this new fiscal, whereas the CAPER is the actuals. And so, this is a pretty neat opportunity for folks to be involved in this process and provide public comment, and they have until July 30th. Thank you. Thanks for being with us tonight. Thank you, Mayor. Other questions before we go to a vote? Madam Clerk, I think we've had our public hearing. If you would like to call the roll on the motion. Do we have a motion? There isn't a motion yet. Motion to approve. I'd entertain a motion. We have a motion. We have a second. Now, if you'd call the roll. Councilor Casset. Yes. Councilor Castro. Yes. Councilor Chavez. Yes. Councilor Faulkner. Yes. Councilor Lee Garcia. Yes. Councilor Michael Garcia. Yes. Mayor Weber. Yes. Motion is approved. Thank you both for being with us tonight. Appreciate you. Could you take us to the next item, please, Madam Clerk? Item 21, appointments. 21A, Public Safety Committee. Laura Liswood. Appointment term ending March 2029. Is there a motion? Move to approve. Second. Councilor, did you want to say a word about the appointment? Yeah, I was really excited when I got the email of interest from Ms. Liswood. She has experience in leadership. She has sat on really important committees at different levels of government. And she is a former armed reserve officer. So she's played so many different roles, not just within public safety, but just within advocacy, leadership. I think she's going to bring a great amount of knowledge to our committee. So, I'm excited for her to join if we vote yes tonight. Thank you. Any questions about this appointment? Could you call the roll, Madam Clerk? Councilor Castro. Yes. Councilor Chavez. Yes. Councilor Faulkner. Yes. Councilor Lee Garcia. Yes. Councilor Michael Garcia. Yes. Councilor Casset. Yes. Mayor Weber. Yes. Motion is approved. I believe that completes our agenda for tonight, Madam Clerk. And so, thank you everybody. We're adjourned.