Public Works and Utilities Committee Mon, Nov 3, 2025 · Public Works and Utilities Committee https://santafeminutes.space/meeting/308 == Executive Summary == The Public Works and Utilities Committee meeting covered a range of topics, including a recognition for an outstanding employee, a comprehensive update on the city's transit services, and a significant discussion on a resolution concerning micro-communities for the unhoused. Jennifer Perez was honored as the October 2023 Employee of the Month for her exceptional work in utility billing. The transit update highlighted operational improvements, technological advancements, successful event transportation, fleet expansion, and substantial grant funding, while also addressing challenges like the CDL driver shortage and the strategic shift towards smaller vehicles and micro-transit. A major portion of the meeting was dedicated to a resolution requiring micro-communities in each council district. This discussion focused heavily on the need for Governing Body approval for proposed micro-community locations, especially on city-owned property, to ensure transparency and accountability. Concerns were raised about the clarity of the resolution's language and the timing of Governing Body involvement. Ultimately, the committee decided to forward the resolution to the Quality of Life Committee without a recommendation, with councilors planning further amendments and technical corrections. == Key Decisions == - Approved the agenda with one item (7K) pulled from the consent agenda. - Approved the consent agenda as amended. - Moved the resolution regarding micro-communities and unhoused services forward to the Quality of Life Committee without recommendation. == Motions & Votes == - Motion to approve the agenda — Passed via roll call vote. - Motion to approve the consent agenda as amended (pulling item 7K) — Passed via roll call vote. - Motion to approve Amendment B to Resolution Number 2025 (regarding Governing Body approval of micro-community locations) — Motion made, but later withdrawn. - Motion to move the resolution forward to the Quality of Life Committee without recommendation — Passed 2-1 (Councilor Castro: Yes, Councilor Garcia: Yes, Chair Romero Warus: No). == Public Comment == No public comment period. == Topics == - Micro-Community Sites - Transit Achievements & Projects - Transit Funding & Grants - Transit Compliance & Reporting - Transit Special Events - Utility Billing Operations - Transit Technology Upgrades - Employee Recognition == Full Transcript == Hello. There we are. Are we live or can we go live? We are live. All right. At 5:00, I am calling to order the Public Works and Public Utilities Committee for today, November 3rd. We do have counselors on Zoom, and if we could get a roll call, please. Absolutely. Counselor Alma Castro. Present. Counselor Lee Garcia. Here. Counselor Michael Garcia. He is excused until they get here. Excellent. Counselor Romero. Yes. And Counselor Chavez. She is excused. Thank you, our Chair. There is a quorum. Thank you. All right. Do we have changes to tonight's agenda from staff? Counselor, there are no changes from staff. Okay. Can we get a motion? Move to approve. We have a motion. Second. And a second to approve the agenda. If we could get a roll call. We have to do a roll call because we have counselors on Zoom. Excellent. Otherwise, we do a voice vote, but... Perfect. When we're split like this, we have to do a roll call. Excellent. No problem. Counselor Castro. Yes. Counselor Lee Garcia. Yes. Michael Garcia is excused. Counselor Romero. Yes. And Counselor Chavez is excused. Yes. So, only call the roll for those who are in attendance here. Okay. So, then we have our consent agenda, and I believe there was one item pulled off of consent. Hold on just a second. I'm looking for the item. Counselor, 7K. 7K. Okay. So, if we can pull that off. Is there anything else the committee wants to pull off of consent? And if not, is there a motion? Move to approve as amended. Second. We have a motion and a second to approve the consent agenda as amended. Again, we need a roll call. Counselor Castro. Yes. Counselor Lee Garcia. Yes. Counselor Romero. Yes. Thank you. All right. And from there, we go to public comment. Do we have anybody in the chamber who is here for public comment? I don't see anybody. And I don't think there's anybody online. And I don't think the Chair takes online public comment. So, we will go then from there to presentations. And we do have presentations. This is exciting. We have the Public Utilities Department Employee of the Month for October 2023. And we have Nancy Jimenez here at the podium. And I'll turn it over to you. Good to see you. Good to see you, too. Can you hear me? Okay. Maybe closer. There we go. Yes. Employee of the Month. We have for the month of October, Jennifer Perez. She is here sitting in the back in the nice pretty shirt. She is my pillar of billing. In front of her is her supervisor, Vanji Solivas. We have three vacancies in billing. We only have five people in billing. So, they are my pillar for billing. And Jennifer was nominated and selected for October's Employee of the Month. We have a nice pretty little certificate here for her. And I just wanted to kind of talk a little bit about Jennifer. She has been with utility billing in particular for November of 2021. Thank you very much. She actually started in the cashier's office, was promoted to the customer service area, administrative assistant, and now she's in billing. So, she has moved through her career. I hope she stays forever. She's really, like I said, the pillar of billing. Because we are short with positions, we rely heavily on her and Vanji, her supervisor, to get the billing done every Thursday. They stay nightly. If need be, they stay Thursdays until several hours have been, or several days have been late. I try and get her out of here by seven. But it's still a long day. So, and I just wanted to, you know, Employee of the Month, Jennifer Perez. Thank you for your dedication and devotion to the billing and administrative division. Your unwavering determination to our customers makes you the pillar of our team, and your performance is a testament to you and why you were nominated and selected for the Employee of the Month for October 2023. Thank you. Thank you. And do you want to present her with that certificate up here? We want to get you on camera. All right. Well, you don't have to say anything, but just know from us and from your team clearly, congratulations. And thank you. Utility billing is something we need good people, and it's nice to see you and to share this recognition with you. You, I'm sorry, you should go to the mic because otherwise... And Vanji, I do love my job. It's challenging, and I leave there exhausted, but in a good way. I appreciate them teaching me everything they know. So, I'm just excited to learn more and to continue with billing. All right. Well, thank you for being here tonight. Thank you for all those late nights, and congratulations. That's awesome. Oh, Director, sorry. No problem. And Madam Chair, if I could just add that pursuant to city policy, Jennifer will get eight hours of administrative leave to celebrate her accomplishment and use whenever she needs. Thank you, guys. Out. Okay. Terrific. All right. We're on to our second presentation, Transit Achievements, Projects, and Next Steps Report, and we have Gabriella Chavez and Andrew Baca, and I'll turn it over to you. Welcome. Thank you very much for taking the time. I believe we owed you kind of an update. The last time we met, we had a lot of processes and a lot of projects that we were going through. Just kind of wanted to give you an update where we're at with all of that. So, in March, we finalized the CDL driver tiered system that we had promised to do, which helped create retention and incentivize enrollment of new drivers. So, right now we have three trainees that are on board and three more trainees that are coming on board who have CDLs as of the 22nd. That was March. In April, we got with the Comms team, and we updated all of our transit website to be federally accessible standards. So, we met that benchmark. We started onboarding and vetting different farebox systems. So, we're looking to expand there as well. The last conversation we had with Mr. Garcia was we needed to evolve. Next step is getting off the cash-based only system that we have for our fareboxes. So, we're working towards that initiative. That is an ongoing project we have right now. In May, we rolled out our MDT tablets, our paratransit system, and fully enrolled in our TripMaster software. That was the main conversation we had the last time we were here. With that, we got automated night-before announcements for our passengers to remind them of their day trip the next day. And we got the ride notification that comes with the paratransit system to let them know when our driver is on the way. So, that was big, implementing a 20% increase overall of not missed trips or no-shows is what we call them. Next, we successfully reestablished the Transit Advisory Board in May. Then in July was the big one. We kicked off the Pio Go. That's a public-facing app that we have. That's where the bus riders can see where our buses are in real time. They give anticipated arrivals as well as every stop location is searchable and navigable. Next, we provided our Folk Art Market rail yard transportation for over 3,000 passengers for our International Folk Art Market. And also in July, we received three of our new Starcraft shuttle units. Those are the brand new shuttles you see around downtown and down Airport Road. In August, we performed our normal Spanish Market and Indian Market transportation as well as our largest event, which is Zozobra. In this last Zozobra, we transferred 45,056 passengers. We did it in record timing. We did it at the large bus side in 43 minutes and on the ADA side in 30 minutes. So, no lines, no buildups like we normally have during Zozobra. That takes ongoing projects that we have. Again, we're still working with the farebox system. We're looking to get the right farebox system that works for the locals as well as tourism, our average riders. We have a few standards in place like pass capping, which means if they buy a one-way pass, then it's $1. If they buy an all-day pass and charge twice, the marker will automatically give them an all-day pass instead of charging them three, four, $5 ongoing. And then if they buy a certain amount of passes in a month, it will limit that to being a monthly pass by the time they reach that $20 benchmark. The next thing we're working on is we partner with CWI. We're getting a new camera system in all of our fleet. That camera system is important because it gives Santa Fe Fire Department as well as Santa Fe Police Department live action feed, and so they're able to tune in immediately and see exactly what's going on in the buses. And then lastly, we're working with IT to get our facility security upgrades in place. So, this last year, just wanted to give you an idea of who we served and how we served them. On the large bus system, we served over 400,000 passengers for the fiscal year. So, that's July to June. That's on the large buses. We had an average of about the same passenger miles traveled, meaning they're staying on board for longer durations. Now, Next one. As for our large buses, on the next one, we have our paratransit services. We served nearly 30,000 ADA and senior members, as well as the same kind of mileage count for them. They're staying on board for up to five miles. So, we're definitely connecting and creating that access. And we are the only senior transportation on the weekends. And again, this is just to highlight the special events that we do. We do International Folk Art, we do Spanish Market, Indian Market, Zozobra, and the one we have coming up next is Fiestas. They all hold a different variety of time and days and the amount of passengers that we serve. But again, we're really proud about Zozobra this year because it was a major accomplishment of not being the last ones there. So, I'm going to turn it over to Gabrielle. That was the operation standpoint where we're at with some of the projects. Now, she's going to talk. Hello. Thank you for having us. Make sure you're really talking to that mic. Otherwise, anybody watching can't hear you. Okay. Can you hear me? I just want to say in the last two years, I've managed to bring in $22.1 million into the city. I've got us almost completely caught up applying and being awarded our formula grant money. We've also collected $4.1 million in NCRT regional gross receipts tax. All of this funding goes towards the operational side and paying for equipment operation services. And I think that it's just a testament to how much we are working to get transit back on track. I also want to say that $1.5 million of that is for capital grants. So, we are waiting on a number of cutaway buses that we have on order. I also have nine paratransit EVs on order right now. We were just awarded $1 million from the state for charging stations and six more paratransit EV vans. So, you know, we're just waiting to receive that equipment. It's coming. I hope to receive the nine vehicles by the end of the year. And as in terms of transit grant compliance, we are now totally caught up. Our FY22 financial management oversight review deficiencies are now contingently closed. We were able to accomplish that with the help of HR, finance, and IT. Our required federal reporting is being performed correctly and on time. Our FY24 FTA triennial review was successfully closed. We only had a total of four deficiencies, and those were all closed earlier this year. Our drug and alcohol deficiencies remain open pending HR corrective actions. We hope to have all of those closed in November or this month. I think this is just a part of what I'm working on. It's kind of behind the scenes, and it's my job to give operations the tools that they need to move transit forward. That's all I have for you to date. We are wanting a six-Starcraft shuttle to continue providing the shuttle service, and that is in conjunction with the tourism department. We would really like some help with getting that moved forward. We also are working on at least the first phase in construction design and transitioning to the new Southside Transit Center. Our next goal would be to complete construction of the Downtown Transit Center, and that's contingent on completing construction on Sheridan with the Georgia O'Keeffe Museum. My next goal will be to replace 10 large fixed-route buses. These buses cost over $800,000 a piece. I do have a grant in with FTA for a notice of funding opportunity that occurred in July, but we have not been awarded. I'm guessing that it's due to the shutdown, but we are hopeful that once the government opens back up, we'll be awarded at least enough to buy five new buses, and then we will need funding for five more. That's all I have for you today. Thank you. I think we can take the presentation down. Sounds like you guys have been very busy, so thank you for the broad overview of all the work you're doing. I do see Councilor Castro has her hand up, so I'll turn it over to her. Councilor Castro: Great. Thank you so much. Thank you, Chair. I just wanted to give Gabrielle and Andrew kudos. It has been a big lift, and I know they've been doing an amazing job. So, thank you so much. Anything we can do to help you get those shuttles or to help you with those buses, I would love to help. Thank you. Chair: Anything else from the committee? Councilor Michael Garcia. Councilor Michael Garcia: Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you, Directors Chavis and Zimbaka, for the update. Besides the future goals and needed support you stated here, how can we help with expansion of bus services to kind of get back to pre-pandemic level? That's a tricky one. I was speaking to somebody earlier. It reminds me back in the day, I was in 4-H, right? And we had a debate team, and they always talked about providing the same amount of goods off of less and less land. And that's kind of what we're working with in regards of the CDL aspect. There's a nationwide shortage, and it's just across all agencies. And all agencies are stating that this younger generation doesn't want to inherit this kind of risk. So we've tactically kind of maneuvered that, and we took all the positive principles of what the non-conspiratorial portions of like 15-minute cities are, and seeing what we can do to break down more routes in smaller areas running more frequently with non-CDLs. So, hence the need for the shuttles is to kind of create that mobility with smaller vehicles that don't necessarily require somebody to get that level of education or certification with the CDL. So we have a tactical two-year plan kind of in place that we'd be happy to show you a lot more in detail. It's very stringent, but to go ahead and navigate where those shortfalls are. So we have an idea of what the need and the resources are. As of right now, it's just procedure and process. It's changing some of the CDL titles to non-CDL, working with HR, working with finance to make sure that we have the appropriate amount of staff and proper job titles to make sure that we can get, as well as Gabrielle, crushing it with getting all the different vehicles. That's going to help. We've already initiated everything we needed for a micro-transit, including geo-fencing, surveying, and finding where the Venn diagram holds the most value of who needs that access and that outlet. So all that's in place, we just need the staff. And finish out the year, I would say by March this time next year, we'll be in a great place with the new vehicles and being able to accommodate some of those areas that are underserved. Okay. So staffing is one thing, the capacity with the actual technology and vehicles, we're working towards that component as well. Correct. Yeah. Right now, we have a 23 large bus fleet, and if I had it my way, we would have probably like 15 shuttles and like a 10 large bus fleet because then we wouldn't necessitate all those CDLs to operate it, and we can get oriented into those neighborhoods. I mean, Santa Fe is not really constructed for large buses outside of the large corridors. So, we need navigable vehicles that can hit the terrain they're traveling. Got it. Thank you, Mr. Bucka. I really appreciate that and definitely would love to continue the conversation with you on this. Absolutely. Thank you. No other questions, Madam Chair. Chair: Thank you, Councilor Lee Garcia. Councilor Lee Garcia: Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you, Director Chavez Baka. It's nice to somewhat speak the lingo a little bit since I've been on the Blue Bus board for four years now. And I think that to Councilor Garcia's point and question is, and I think the Blue Bus is doing, they have the same issues as far as ridership. And I think that as we look at what the need is, how full are our buses? Do we really need the really large buses which would require the CDLs? And so your direction is actually right on point, and that's kind of something that the Blue Bus is doing as well. They're looking at how do we service the needs of the people with smaller buses, which most of the time aren't full anyway, and give them more frequency of usage. And so I think that's really important, especially for our Southside users because many of them need that service, and I see them sitting out on the curb every single morning, and they're looking to get into town somewhere, go to the community college. And it's really important for them. And so I do appreciate the work you guys are doing, and you guys are working as a team, and that's really good. So thank you, Madam Chair. Chair: Thank you, Councilor. Just curious, are we, we don't have anything that gives real-time information about where buses are in a route, do we? Or do we have an app or something? We do. It's called Passio Go. That was part of the implementation that you guys helped us achieve by getting our new dispatch management software. Chair: Okay. With that comes the ability, like I said, to future date micro-transit, which gives people the ability to ride requests, especially in the Southside. That's why getting the Southside Transit Center is so important because right now we're dependent on Santa Fe Place Mall as our main hub, and we own the building on Camino Andrada. So if we can just do some updates there on the outside, we can operate utilizing that as our main hub, which would give somebody a solid city-owned foundation of a hub. Chair: Okay. So, and you can download, that's an app that Passio, or how do you get to it? Yeah, it's on the Google Play Store and iOS store. It's called Passio Go. P-A-S-S-I-O G-O. Chair: Okay, good. I did not know that. That's helpful. Thank you. Councilor Lee Garcia. Councilor Lee Garcia: Just a quick spin-off. So if you go on the Google Store, the Play Store, or the Apple Store, do you put in Santa Fe Trails or...? So you'll look up Passio Go, and as soon as you download that, it'll prompt you to look up a service, and it would be Santa Fe Trails. Chair: Okay. Because that name doesn't seem like anything related to Santa Fe Trails or City of Santa Fe Transit or so I don't know if there could be some keywords that can be plugged in. Absolutely. And if you go on our social media or as well as our city website, it's the first banner that pops with a QR code that you can scan to take you directly there. I understand that. Chair: It sounds like that's something too that we should push out through the communications folks. Like we do Eye on Water, and I know we have a recycling app that helps folks know all about recycling. It seems like those are things we need to be more front-forward with. So, because that's awesome. That's great information that makes it easier to use the service. So, appreciate that. Okay. If you don't have anything else to add, I think we don't have any other questions, but really appreciate the work, especially on all the grant funding that you're bringing in. That's huge and really important that we have that to add to the capacity. So, thank you guys for the work. Really appreciate it. Yeah. Okay. From there, let me see. We go to we have one item that was pulled from consent. It is item K, consideration of Resolution Number 2025. The number will be determined later. This is sponsored by Mayor Alan Weber, Councilor Jamie Casset, Councilor Polar Faulkner, a resolution requiring a micro-community in every City of Santa Fe Council District by January 1st, 2027. Or if that timeline is not met, a presentation explaining the barriers to meeting the timeline and recommending how and when the goal of a micro-community in every district can be achieved. And we do have our Community Health and Safety Director, Henry Hammond Paul, here tonight. And Councilor Michael Garcia, I believe you pulled this from consent, so I'll turn it over to you. Councilor Michael Garcia: Thank you, Madam Chair. The reason why I pulled this item is I have an amendment that I'm proposing for this particular piece of legislation. And I guess holistically, there's nothing in this resolution that would require governing body approval of any of these sites. I definitely saw a big gap there, especially when we're looking at developing these sites and placing them potentially in each district. I feel that there needs to be some accountability in play, and it should not be just solely at the discretion of staff and at the determination of locations and implementation, etc. Ultimately, I feel those decisions should be up to the governing body because we're the ones who are at the end of the day held accountable by the voters. And so by amendment, it proposes that the City Manager present the options of any micro-community locations for review, and then the City Manager would have to seek the approval of any locations from the governing body. So that in essence is what my amendment is proposing. Happy to read the language if folks need me to do so. It's in the packet. Well, why don't I just do that for the public that might be watching. It adds a "Be it further resolved" clause that says, "Be it further resolved that the City Manager shall present proposed micro-community locations to the governing body for review and obtain approval of the locations from the governing body before establishing new micro-communities." So again, I think this just allows for checks and balances. I'm in full support of this proposal. I mean, I proposed this idea back in February, so I'm glad we're finally moving forward with this. I didn't think we needed it in resolution form, but hey, that's I'm supportive of it. So, with that, I'll make a motion to approve Amendment B. Second. I think we have a motion from Councilor Michael Garcia. I think that was a second from you, Councilor Castro, just confirming. Councilor Castro: Correct. Yes, a second from me. Okay. And questions from the committee. I do have a couple questions. I just want to understand, Councilor, exactly how you see this working. And the way you described it, I think you're thinking there's two steps to what happens. One is that, and you use the word "locations" in your language. So, is it that there'll be a list of locations? And then, I guess I'm confused. Or is it just that it says the City Manager shall present proposed micro-community locations. And I'm assuming that we won't do this all at once. And I don't know, maybe Director Hammond Paul, are we, I'm confused as to how this comes forward. Are all four council districts going to go at the same time? And so there's going to be a list of locations and then we have to approve them? Or are we talking as they come on in a particular council district? Are there locations? I'm confused by the plural of "locations," I guess. And is this a two-step process? Maybe you can help me. I can speak to that just because there is no proposed process right now. And so, I mean, if we really want to get super, super technical, which I'm happy to do so, but I don't think it's necessary, we could put in the word "locations," we can put the letter "s" in parentheses. That way it's whether it's location or locations. The intention is that when any location is determined, it has to be presented to the governing body. Then the next step is you've got to get approval of the governing body for any location. So that's the intention around this. I mean, if Director Hammond Paul has a different process in mind where there's going to be a list of locations, but it's my understanding this is going to guide the process in regards to how we move forward with looking at potentially having a micro-community location in each district. So, the word "locations" is just because there are proposed multiple sites. Okay. May be coming forward at once. It could be one. I mean, and I think it's up to the timeline and how it's all carried out. I mean, there might be one district that is quick to approve a site. I mean, we've already got District 4 identified. So, this only leads Districts 1, 2, and 3. You know, Except we have one and two. So, really, But these are city, this is, this is my intention is this is on city-owned property, not holistically, right? This is micro-community sites on city-owned property. Am I understanding that correctly, Director Hammet? Madam Chair, Councilors. So, I think there could definitely, as staff on this, not necessarily the person who's drafting it, there are definitely things that I would recommend be added. I'm not sure how that fits into the whole resolution development process. I think big picture, we have found that it is best practice in many places for kind of sharing the burden, so to speak. So, broadly, what this is hoping to accomplish is something that we have seen across the country as best practice. How that's operationalized, I think there's a lot of variance there, whether we want to have that as part of a resolution or not. One thing that has been done in other cities is that council members are accountable for identifying locations themselves, which kind of gets at some of the similar goals. That's not currently written in this resolution. But, you know, that accomplishes some of the concerns of Councilor Michael Garcia of it having governing body buy-in. I would also just take a quick opportunity to point out that one of the major challenges here, and if we are intending this to be on city-owned property, is currently we have a quite substantial administrative burden to build things on city property, which is, as you know, maybe the elephant in the room is where's the site on Richards, you know, why isn't it developed? And we have a lot of policy and guardrails in place against quick development in some regards, which is good for a lot of things, but also has costs. So, another thing from at least a staff position is that however we could find ways to administratively facilitate the use of city-owned property for these ends, I think would be welcome. Not sure if I answered your questions, but those are kind of two best practices that we've seen nationally and they could complement the work here. Yeah. Yeah. So, I don't think the resolution contemplates this being directed around city-owned property. I just, as you were talking, Director Hammond Paul, so I, that's sort of surprising to me because I figured, so we already have one in District 2. We've got one in motion in 4. And so then that, but so I, and I guess that's another question I had. Councilor Michael Garcia, is that on your addition here, and again, I'm not against having to have governing body approval. I just want to understand how this works because I don't want, I want us to, when we bring something forward to the governing body, I want us to be pretty clear that that location has been vetted and is something that is ready to go so that we're engaging the public and the governing body at the right moment, rather than, you know, having a list of micro-community locations, many of which might not work out when we get down to it. And we've seen this already. We had a list and when it came down to it, most of the locations on the list weren't viable for various reasons. And we know we need to match particular parcels possibly with particular demographics. So, we saw that with Richards, right, where we have, you know, that's going to be a family site and it makes sense because it's so close to the Genoveva Chavez Center and the resources that that site can, that center can bring. So, I just, I guess my question is how do we know, and I want to help staff know, I don't want them to get caught in "I gotcha" moments of, "Oh, you didn't bring it forward for governing body approval at the right time." So, I guess I want us to be clear about when it should come forward. And then I think it, we need to be clear about whether it's city-owned property because I don't think the governing body, if there's a church out there, say, that wants to do a micro-community, they don't need governing body approval to work with us or to go forward. So, I think we do want to focus this on city-owned property. And I just wonder if this amendment might need a couple clarifying additions. So, that, I mean, as I'm trying to understand exactly, Councilor, what your intention is and then kind of what my concerns are and how do we make sure we're being as clear as possible. Thank you for the question, Madam Chair. And I think maybe, maybe I think this is where it's maybe the false assumption because if the intention is to have micro-communities in areas that don't already have them, then this resolution should just clearly stipulate Districts 1 and 3, if it's going off that methodology or that you're referencing. My train of thought is that we've had this discussion for nearly a year now where we are working towards establishing micro-community sites on city-owned land. That's been the initiative. That's been the talk. We have not talked about establishing micro-communities on public property for quite some time. So, if the intention of this resolution is to have micro-communities in each district, then maybe this should just clearly stipulate and be amended to say we're now looking at Districts 1 and 3. And I wish the sponsor was here because if that's the intention, that's clearly stated in this resolution. The way I'm understanding this is that we're moving forward with our initiative of developing micro-community sites on city-owned property and we want to ensure that we're working to develop one in each district. And right now it's outlining that the City Manager work with city staff to ensure that this gets done. And if it doesn't get done, then the City Manager reports back to us on such requests. My amendment is requesting that as this work is being done to identify locations, that the City Manager present these sites to us because it could be, who knows. This is where it's a bit, it's, when you, when we get too restrictive in something like this and we use the word "site" versus "sites," I'd rather use the word "sites" because it then gives staff the flexibility to give us a couple options versus one. So, I'm trying to be as lenient as possible with the language in here. That way, it gives the flexibility to staff to really think outside the box with a matter that is ultimately a critical social issue, which is going to require us to think outside the box, especially since it's city-owned property. And I think that is where the request is to, once any sites have been potentially identified, that those sites are brought forward to the governing body and then there must be an approval from the governing body before any site is moved, we move forward with it. Again, the intention around this is there's no language in this current resolution that would prohibit city staff to say, "Well, we're going to place a micro-community shelter on this city-owned property." Doesn't require any approval besides potentially the City Manager, which again does not have the accountability of the voters. And I think these are the decisions that the voters elect us to make. And so I want these decisions to be made ultimately by the governing body, not by city staff. And this is no disrespect to you, Director Hammond Paul. It's, we're asking you to utilize your expertise to bring forward the recommendations and then we kind of ultimately give the thumbs up or thumbs down to them. Similar to what we did with Richards, right? We determined Richards came to the governing body for approval and we moved forward. And this is just inserting that type of process into this resolution. Yeah, I get that. I just want to make sure we're being really clear with the language because you and I don't have any problem. I understand you don't want city staff making the decision. You want the governing body to make the decision. Completely fine with that. But you did use a word that is part of my concern. You said, "as soon as sites," and I like the idea of if we're saying "locations" or we're saying "sites" that we put the "s" in parentheses so that it can be, you know, maybe it is one, maybe it's two, maybe it's three. But you did use a word which is what I'm concerned about, which is "identified." So, we can, I think right now, identify all kinds of places, but whether they're actually feasible, whether we actually have the ability to match them with the proper demographic and put them forward in a serious, like, in a final proposal, we're going to, if the governing body approves, we're going to move tomorrow to start on this. I think that's the language that I'm concerned about because if it's just identified, I don't want to work everybody up into a frenzy over sites, whether they're multiple or singular, that aren't, after further, you know, investigation, aren't even, won't work because of drainage, won't work because of, you know, something that makes it infeasible to put these things on. So, I'm very concerned about the word "identified," and I'm just trying to make this, tighten this up a little bit, and I think it may need a little bit of tweaking. I get that you want the governing body to approve these things, but I don't want us, I want us to be clear about at what point. I definitely understand the concerns, Madam Chair, and the word "identified" is used in this resolution, line three, page three, line 22, and otherwise identifies potential locations. So, this is an already existing terminology used in this resolution. So, I understand where you're coming from, but I think this is where transparency is critical. Transparency is key, and I have no problem providing a list to the community of 50 sites, knowing that only one of them is viable, because it shows the due diligence and the work that is going into selecting such a site and being fully transparent with the public to say, "Look, we identified 50 sites. Out of these 50 sites, only one is feasible, and this is why we're going to move forward with this." And this is the transparency that I think has frustrated so many folks in the past, especially around how we're moving forward with the micro-community process. I want to ensure that, especially when we're moving forward with city-owned property, that we are clear and consistent with the public in regards to, out of the great number of city-owned properties throughout each district, throughout the entire city, these are the locations that have been identified. These are the locations that are feasible. And you kind of dwindle it down. These are feasible. What are the ones that actually have support from the community? And then ultimately, what is the site that potentially would be approved as a final recommendation? You start with that process and you dwindle it down to a proposed location. Who knows? I mean, going through this process, there might be two locations that would be feasible. And this is where it's critical. We work with the public to understand what would be the best-suited location that would ultimately meet the needs and our residents of Santa Fe would be supportive of. So, I'm happy to tweak this to say, you know, put the "s" in "locations" both. It's that word is repeated twice in line 14. Again, I don't think it's that technical clarification is ultimately needed. I'm happy to do it, but I think we want to be flexible with staff. And I want to ensure we're giving the flexibility to Director Ham and Paul to say, "Look, we're not being hamstrung by a process that is so narrow, thin, we can't actually get work done." We want to ultimately give as much flexibility, but there are the guardrails. The guardrails are once there are any proposed locations, you come and present that info to the governing body, and then any approved locations based off of feasibility, et cetera, that those ultimately get the final approval of the governing body. So, Councilor Castro: I see Councilor Castro has her hand up. Councilor, are you... Councilor Castro: I am. I just wanted to add a few other things. Councilor Garcia, you have you seated at the floor. Thank you. Councilor Garcia: Yes, absolutely. Councilor Castro: Perfect. I agree. I think that this resolution needs, and thank you, Chair, for the opportunity, some tweaking, and I would love to work with you to work on some of those technical things. I was hoping, and I was working with Councilor Lindell, on bringing forward an amendment to this resolution to sort of reflect the other types of services and transitional housing that we are providing as a city. As we all have heard and we've spoken about, District 1 has plenty of opportunities for services for the unhoused community, some that we are openly talking about, some that are a little bit more secretive. And I think in the discussion around equity, there should be some understanding of things like the Lamplighter, which is more permanent transitional housing that we're trying to support. We definitely want to support micro-communities, but there is a network and a whole ecosystem of things that we are providing for unhoused folks that, from our perspective in District 1, are really not being taken into account. So, some tweaks that could be made to this language to maybe take that into account. Chair: Okay, we're about to, we're at risk of losing our quorum and losing our staff expert here. So, I don't know how you all want to leave this. I know it's in front of Quality of Life Wednesday night. Maybe you all want to take this up again there with a few tweaks. What's the will here? Councilor Garcia: Madam Chair, I'm happy to withdraw my motion to pass Amendment B and send it back to legal for that technical correction. It should be very simplistic and can introduce this amendment at Quality of Life Wednesday night. Chair: Okay. And will you withdraw my second? Okay, terrific. And so I think we just need to move this forward to Quality of Life. So, we get a motion to move it forward or motion to approve, I guess. Councilor Garcia: Move it forward with no recommendation. Chair: Is there a second? Councilor Castro: Second. Chair: There's a motion and a second to move this forward without recommendation. We're going to need a roll call, please. Clerk: Councilor Castro. Councilor Castro: Yes. Clerk: Councilor Michael Garcia. Councilor Garcia: Yes. Clerk: Chair Romero Warus. Chair: No. And I'll explain my vote. So, I don't have any problem with approving it as it is, knowing that it's going to get worked on. So, I don't think we, I think we could have moved it forward with just approved to pass, not without recommendation. Okay. So with that, that is all we had on our consent agenda. We are going, let's see, we don't have anything else. Matters from staff. Councilor Garcia: Madam Chair, can you clarify the direction of the committee on that last? Chair: So, it passed without recommendation. And what I was saying is I think we could have had a motion to approve, but that's not the will of the committee. So, the committee voted two to one to move it forward without recommendation. All right. Matters from staff. Staff: No matters from staff. Chair: Okay. Matters from the committee. Councilor Garcia: None. Councilor Castro: No. Chair: Councilor Castro, you're good. Councilor Castro: None. Thank you. Chair: Okay. Matters from the acting chair here on the dais. Our next meeting is Monday, December 1st. And with that, we are adjourned. Thanks, everyone. Councilor Garcia: Thank you. Good night.