Governing Body Wed, Jan 29, 2025 · Governing Body https://santafeminutes.space/meeting/388 == Executive Summary == The Santa Fe City Council meeting covered a wide range of topics, with significant discussion dedicated to the city's General Plan update and solutions for homelessness, particularly the proposed pallet shelter communities. The General Plan update, dubbed 'Santa Fe Forward,' aims to create a vision for the city through 2050, with a strong emphasis on community engagement and addressing modern challenges like affordability and climate change. The council approved a $2 million budget adjustment to purchase pallet shelters, despite considerable public debate and concerns about site selection, community impact, and transparency. Other key items included the formal recognition of Santa Fe as an Age-Friendly City, celebrating a successful holiday toy drive, and approving increased fines for noisy mufflers. The meeting concluded with the appointment of Mark Scott as the new City Manager, alongside several committee appointments, signaling a focus on new leadership and strategic planning for the city's future. == Key Decisions == - Motion to amend the agenda to move item 11B (budget adjustment for pallet communities) was approved. - Motion to approve the agenda as amended was approved. - The consent agenda, as amended (with item Q removed), was approved by a unanimous roll-call vote (9-0). - Police Vehicle Purchase Amendment (increase compensation for 26 police vehicles by $6,000) was approved (8 Yes, 1 No). - Entry into Executive Session was approved (9 Yes). - Reconvening in Open Session was approved (9 Yes). - Motion to go to Petitions from the Floor was approved (9 Yes). - A motion regarding a $2 million budget adjustment resolution (BAR) for non-congregate shelter solutions was approved (9-0). - Motion to approve increased fines for muffler noise was approved (8-0 vote). - Motion to approve Bill Number 2024-20 (technical correction) was approved (8-0 vote). - Mark Scott was appointed as City Manager (8-1 vote). - Immigration Committee Appointments were approved (9-0 vote). - Transit Advisory Board Appointments were approved (9-0 vote). - Public Safety Committee Reappointment of Bruce Finger was approved (9-0 vote). == Motions & Votes == - Motion to amend the agenda to move item 11B — Approved - Motion to approve the agenda as amended — Approved - The consent agenda, as amended (with item Q removed) — Approved 9-0 - Police Vehicle Purchase Amendment — Approved 8-1 - Entry into Executive Session — Approved 9-0 - Reconvening in Open Session — Approved 9-0 - Motion to go to Petitions from the Floor — Approved 9-0 - Motion to 'call the question' (end debate on BAR) — Failed 4-5 - Motion regarding a $2 million budget adjustment resolution (BAR) for non-congregate shelter solutions — Approved 9-0 - Motion to approve increased fines for muffler noise — Approved 8-0 - Motion to approve Bill Number 2024-20 (technical correction) — Approved 8-0 - Appointment of Mark Scott as City Manager — Approved 8-1 - Immigration Committee Appointments — Approved 9-0 - Transit Advisory Board Appointments — Approved 9-0 - Public Safety Committee Reappointment of Bruce Finger — Approved 9-0 == Public Comment == The public comment period was extensive and largely focused on the proposed pallet shelter communities for the unhoused. Many residents expressed strong opposition, citing fears of increased crime, drug use, and violence, particularly near schools and residential areas. Concerns were raised about the lack of infrastructure, potential negative impact on property values, and the city's communication and transparency regarding site selection. Some critics felt the city was neglecting taxpayers and affordable housing for residents by focusing on these solutions. Conversely, numerous speakers, including those with lived experience of homelessness and those working with the unhoused, passionately advocated for pallet homes. They highlighted successful micro-community models (like Christ Lutheran Church), emphasizing their effectiveness in providing stability, safety, and a pathway to permanent housing. Supporters stressed the humanitarian need, the importance of comprehensive support services, and the idea that housing is a fundamental human right. Other public comments included criticism of the city's handling of the obelisk graffiti and removal, calls to outlaw short-term rentals (Airbnb/VRBO) to address the housing crisis, and strong support for increased fines and enforcement of muffler noise ordinances due to concerns about street racing and aggressive driving. == Topics == - City Manager Appointment - Age-Friendly City Initiative - Holiday Toy Drive - Immigration Committee Appointments - Transit Advisory Board Appointments - Public Safety Committee Reappointment - Buckman Direct Diversion Board - City Staff Salaries - Community Engagement - Procedural Items == Full Transcript == As she will eventually, big thank you. Welcome, welcome, welcome. We have two wonderful presentations to make this afternoon before we get to the formal meeting of the governing body. I thought Councilor Chavez could start us off with the AARP Network. About, gosh, two years ago, we started the process of working to become an Age-Friendly City in partnership with AARP. So I do want to bring Gary Williams and Dr. Roybal-Sanchez up here, the director of AARP, if you want to join me. And of course, the woman that led the work to make this possible, our director, Maria Sandez-Tucker. She has been kind of the light in this process with partnership of these wonderful men here. What this is going to do is it's going to bring data to help us identify what services our seniors need. What is really beautiful about Age-Friendly is it also meets the needs of those with disabilities. So we're going to make our city accessible, accessible to seniors, accessible to individuals with disabilities. So it's a very, very important start and there's going to come some powerful initiatives. So we're very excited about this to finally become an Age-Friendly City. I'm going to turn it over to a doctor. Thank you, thank you, Councilor. Mr. Mayor, thank you for having us and all of the City Council that is here with us this evening, members of the community. My name is Joseph Roybal-Sanchez, State Director at AARP New Mexico, and we are delighted to be here with you. We have members of our volunteer corps at AARP, those are the folks back there in the red shirts as you can see. I just want to speak a little about what this means for the City of Santa Fe and what they have committed to do to kind of make the City of Santa Fe a more Age-Friendly place to live. AARP is a nonprofit, nonpartisan organization dedicated to empowering people to choose how they live their lives as they age. One of the things about AARP is that we represent 38 million older adults across the country. Here in New Mexico, we have a membership of 249,000 AARP members. What today means is that with this enrollment to the city, the City of Santa Fe has undertaken, they become the latest community in New Mexico to join the AARP Network of Age-Friendly States and Communities, following in the footsteps of other enrolled communities in New Mexico that include Carlsbad, Albuquerque, Las Cruces, Santa Fe. With this enrollment, the City of Santa Fe proudly stands as the 929th member of the network across the country. This step places the City of Santa Fe among the expansive network of communities, states, and territories, all united in the commitment to Age-Friendly initiatives. The AARP Network of Age-Friendly States and Communities was established to structure and champion approaches of livability, inspire engagement and change efforts, and foster a culture of inclusion. The network communities have successfully advanced policy changes making communities more livable because of their work. The network is built upon the global network of Age-Friendly Cities and Communities initiative, which recognizes the importance of creating environments that seek to empower and enable communities to become more Age-Friendly by addressing the unique needs of their older residents. Central to Age-Friendly work are eight domains of livability that this work will be concentrated on, a framework that identifies key areas of improvement within your community, including transportation, housing, outdoor spaces, social participation, respect and social inclusion, civic participation, communication, and health and community services. When a community enrolls in the AARP Network of Age-Friendly States and Communities, it means that the community elected officials standing behind me and beside me have made a commitment to work with the residents, you all in the audience, and stakeholders to make this community more Age-Friendly. So with that, we have a formal certificate that we want to present to the Mayor, Councilor Chavez, who I got to say has worked steadfast with us since 2022. We began these conversations. So I think I was speaking to Councilor Mike Chavez, no, Garcia, my apology, Garcia, and you know, we kind of talked about why do things take so long, governments, right? Oftentimes there's a lot of barriers that come between us, but something like this is such low-hanging fruit that we all want to live in good communities, communities for older adults so they can age in place and be able to do the things that they do best and give back to the community of Santa Fe, whether it's volunteering like they, we're always recruiting volunteers, so any of you are welcome to join our forces, just talk to Gary. But without further ado, do you want to present this formal certificate? And certainly Maria, she has been instrumental also. Please go, be careful. Thank you. Cake for everybody. Cake that has the emblem of the AARP Network of Age-Friendly States and Communities. Beautiful. I just want to add my own congratulations to the people who really did the hard work of making this happen. I know from my own work with AARP in the past that cities that are mindful of the needs of their senior citizens are good places to live for everybody. The converse, when you ignore seniors, you allow people to be isolated and alone, that is a very dangerous situation. People die from isolation. So thanks for being here, thanks for all you do in our community. It's good to see you again and to you, Councilor, thanks for spearheading this. It's a really important step toward making real differences in the lives of people in our community. Round of applause everybody. Alright, hang on guys. We are also in the process of having another presentation. Can you bring them on up here please? Good. I think you're distribution. Some of you attended the amazing event over at the Teen Center. That was a tremendous, tremendous outpouring of community effort and community spirit to help kids and their families so that nobody this holiday season went without a gift or a toy or a recognition that they should have some joy in their lives. So I'm going to read a proclamation and then Lanell Faulkner, who really was instrumental in making this all happen along with a long and wonderful list of people and organizations. But we have a little certificate of appreciation and the Chief has his own little recognition item that he wants to add as well. But you should say a few words. Okay, I just, I want to say that the one thing that I felt through this whole process was at a time when I think we can feel divided and where people are struggling, all of you participating and helping to make toys possible for like 8,000 children in Northern New Mexico. I think it's really important that the community sees that you helped because the community needs to know that we are out there. There are a lot of us out here who want to help. So I just want to truly say thank you to all of you because it would not have happened without all of you. If it's okay, I had a couple things I wanted to say to thank. My name is Roland Jones. I've been running the toy drive for a little bit with Exit. I wrote down a few words. I'm going to keep it very brief. Chapter one. Alright. It was a privilege to stand here for you guys tonight to celebrate the incredible work that we've done together as a community. You're not only here to acknowledge an extraordinary effort, but also to honor the profound impact generosity shown for the lives of the children of Northern New Mexico. I really think that a lot of the problems we have as a community could be addressed by helping kids first and going straight to the solution. I want to thank our partners, local businesses, organizations, and community leaders that came together with the shared purpose to bring hope and joy to the lives of those that need it the most. Your dedication and compassion has made a world of difference for these kids and it's been truly incredible. The business owners that donated time and money and rallied around these kids, their employees, the volunteers that gave time, it's been an incredible army of people that just rallied around as a community to support these kids. Really, that's kind of the beauty of what we did as a community. We saw that these kids needed help and really that's kind of what's been lost in all of these things is the sense of community, bringing everybody together. That, and this is my favorite part about the toy drive, is all the incredible partners that come together with the united goal of helping these children. I wanted to say, we should carry forward with the spirit of what we did together, not just for Christmas, but throughout the year. Build on this, use this as a stepping point for other ways that we can help these kids and make it a year-round effort to support them. I wanted to thank a couple people really quickly. Lanell, who has been a game changer and really just flipped this on its head, made it, we used to spend nights just freaking out. We would have like a thousand kids and we were, we never had enough. Exit will tell you, and Lanell came in and now we can like, it's been a game changer. Chief Moya, Chief Moya, since he's been the fire chief, literally, we'll call up, everybody will be kind of like, we're stressed, we don't know what to do. I call Chief Moya and I said, he without hesitation will just reply, we're going to get it done. And he does, he makes it happen, which is a massive, massive relief. JP and Gina, the La Hadas, that event that they did with Polo, to help these kids that feel marginalized. Lee Parra, incredible work, made this happen and that was a terrifying undertaking and we, and it was a great, hopefully year-round event. And then Polo, who went above and beyond, deserves lots of applause for what she, she really brought community together. And then my good friend Houston with Opulent. When I started as a rookie, I want to say a little rookie, but it was probably still the same size. But when I was a much younger rookie, me and Brett started doing this, you know, just trying to help who we could for as much. And now this year with your guys' support, over 8,500 kids, over 8,500 kids from the Navajo reservation down to Santo Domingo. And then finally and most importantly, Exit Realty. When I stopped doing the toy drive during COVID, I wasn't able to, I'm going to get, when I wasn't able to do the toy drive with COVID, they stepped up and really, I mean, if you guys can see the amount of work that puts into this every year, it's, it's supreme and it's so much work and effort. And I always want to apologize to them for putting this on to them because it's, it's an undertaking, but they deserve all the thanks in the world and all the credit in the world. And finally, from the bottom of my heart, thank you for your generosity, your commitment, and your belief in the power of community. Let's keep this momentum alive and continue to show that when we come together, there's nothing we can't achieve. Thank you. And if everybody that was a participant wants to come down. Oh, lying, just joking. Well, I was going to read a proclamation, but unfortunately, we're out of time. Just kidding. He didn't even listen. He was too busy doing work. That's what he does. Alright, let me, I don't know if this mic is live, but I'm going to, I'm going to, I am going to read this and then we'll call people up one group at a time, one individual at a time. Please, when you hear the name of your group or yourself, please come on forward and we've got a couple of things we'd like to hand you as a way of thanking you for the incredible work that everybody came together to do this last holiday season. I'll give this a quick read before we get to the really good part. Whereas during the 2024 holiday season, there was a drastic increase in the number of children in need. of toys, more children than before were faced with a holiday without a toy or a gift. Whereas the Northern New Mexico Toy Drive, presented by Exit Realty Advantage New Mexico, along with Los Alamos National Laboratories, the Southside Latino Small Business Association, City of Santa Fe, and numerous volunteers, collaborated to address the needs of these children and to organize the first Southside La Posada. And whereas many local businesses and nonprofit organizations made generous donations of money, goods, and services to help produce a successful toy drive and Southside La Posada. And whereas the outpouring of generosity and support was inspiring and heartfelt, serving as an example of what Santa Fe can accomplish when we help each other and those in need. Now, therefore, I, Alan M. Weber, Mayor of the City of Santa Fe, New Mexico, hereby recognize the following community members, local businesses, and nonprofits for their dedication to the well-being of our children and families in Northern New Mexico. Please, when you hear your group or your name, please do come forward, and at the end, we'll give everybody an overwhelming standing ovation. We'll start with Exit Realty Advantage of Los Alamos. Thank you. Great job. Thank you. And if everybody goes and sits down, then when we get all done, we'll have a big giant group photo. Gina and JP, come on up, please. Good job, you guys. Thank you. Say hi to everybody. Give everybody... All right, Southside Latino Small Business Association. That's... Come on up. Come on up. Chief's got a secret handshake for everybody. Secret handshake. Hey, please. Thank you. You slip behind me. Don't do that. Thank you. Congratulations. Yeah, we love you. Good to see you. Thank you so much. Change Reaction, if you're here, come on up. I think they're... You are also Change Reaction's accepting the award on behalf of Change Reaction, but recognize the great work that Change Reaction did as well. One more. Okay, you get multiple. Thank you. Anorm, if you're in the house, come on up. If not, we will send something over to Jerry and Company. Boxcar Restaurant, are you... We love you anyway. AES in the house. Yes, hi. Hutton Broadcasting, are you in the house? They're everywhere. They're on screens all over town, right? Capitol Ford, Sam's Club. All of these people made huge contributions. Albertson's, Santa Fe Housing Trust. Okay, Santa Fe Country Club. Well, you're going to get an award anyway. Homewise. I think I saw Mr. Lofton. Come on up, Michael. Wow. Santa Fe Southside Teen Center and staff. Where's... Where's Maria? Maria, come on up. Yay, you. Accepting the award on behalf of the Teen Center. Harvey and Betty Henstead, not here, but we love them. American Legionnaires, Legion 12. Yes, there we go. Let's recognize Kiwanis for its great contributions. Unbelievable. Nice, Doc. Good job. Dr. Kristen Reidy, are you in the house? Not in the house. Visto, Los Alamos National Laboratory. They were shouted out before. I didn't see anybody stand up, but thank you. Tech Source. Tech Source. Waterstone Mortgage. Thank you for helping out so much. Hike Team, Title Guarantee, Merrick, Opulent Fine Jewelers, the Los Alamos Fire Department, John Hummer, and the Hispanic Chamber of Commerce. Hey, we also... So those were the donors, but Kaka was here. They've been an incredible partner and fantastic donor. If we can get them to come up. And Kelly McReynolds, if she's here from Gardan. Yep. Albert McCormick from the New Mexico Foodies. Robert, Santa Fe Foodies, sorry. And then also the Cowgirl, who are awesome partners and always support the fire department and everything. Do we have a raise of hands? If anybody I forgot is here, please. Oh, yes, yes, the library. And also the partners that joined. Fire Department team, come on up. And is there... Yeah, you could... Oh, hey, Tina Inc. Yes, Tina Inc. Another partner that came and does the trees with us every year. Chief Huckaby's daughter. Yeah. And is there anybody else that we forgot? Okay, thank you, guys. Appreciate you, guys. So what I want to say is thank you to everybody who's helped and supported, but we really wanted from the Latino Small Business Association to thank the fire department for participating and helping us get everything organized and helping sponsor and all the support from our city and our community. So this is yours. How do we do a group? Start up. We're going to come stand with you all. Everybody stand up. Everybody stand up, and we will get a group photo of everybody who made this incredible, successful, heartfelt event work so well. Yes, so again, this is my understanding. We'll flush it all out. My understanding that Knight's proposal is just to reallocate the money from a previous year's budget that went unspent to this year's budget. We're not agreeing to any plan, sites, etc. Okay, thank you so much. So with that being said, I am... Step over here. See, I don't... We're about ready to start the council meeting, so if everyone could take your celebration outside of the chambers. And if you all could... Madam Clerk, are we live with our streaming? We are live. Okay, very well. If everybody, all of our celebrants, thank you for being here. We're going to start the meeting of the governing body now. You're all welcome to stay and participate. If you want to grab a chair, that'd be terrific. We're going to start our agenda. According to my clock, it is 5:06 PM, a regular meeting of the governing body for January 29th. Madam Clerk, we'll start with a Pledge of Allegiance led by Councilor Lindell. Oh, I'm sorry. Councilor Chavez, salute to the New Mexico flag. Councilor Castro is going to be remote tonight on a Zoom, but Councilor, just for convenience, if Councilor Lindell, you'd lead us in the salute to the New Mexico flag, and then Councilor Michael Garcia, if you would please lead us in invocation and remembrances. Please rise as you are. Good evening, everybody. I'd like to take a moment just for us to reflect upon the work that's upon us and with hope that we accomplish the work with the residents' best interest, as I believe it's our community who provides the light, the energy, and the vision to drive us forward. So with that, I hope that faith will guide our decisions that are morally unjust. Compassion will allow for us to entertain the human spirit of wanting to support one another and ultimately take action in good government. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Thank you, Councilor. Are there remembrances tonight that folks would like to call to mind? Councilor Lindell. Thank you, Mayor. Santa Fe lost a president, treasure last week, a legend, Marg von Clausen. I can hardly say her name without smiling. Marg was called to her greater rewards, and I'm sure she'll let us know what the new view is like. I'm thankful that last year at age 96, Marg called me on St. Patrick's Day and left a message playing the ukulele and saying, "Who threw the overalls in Mrs. Murphy's chowder?" And I'm thankful I kept that voicemail, and I love it. Marg's responsible for thousands of kids in Santa Fe playing soccer. She also was the absolute driving force behind the ski program that allowed local children to learn how to ski at a reasonable price. There's nobody like her. I have plenty of stories of messages on my machine where it would start out, "Sal, it's Marg," and I knew I was in for it. I remember asking me one time, "Well, how are you going to vote on such and such?" And I was like, "Well, you know, Marg, I haven't really thought about it, and I haven't studied it." And she goes, "I'll tell you how you're going to vote on it." She was a treasure. Loved to tap dance, loved to sing, had to play her piano in her house. Had a party every December 23rd because, I don't know, Carol, remind me, was it Mayor Delgado or Mayor Pick that named it Marg von Clausen Day? She said she would have liked December 25th, but it was already taken. So, bond farewell, Marg, and from the bottom of my heart, thank you for all the fun, all the laughs, and all that you did for the children of Santa Fe because it was magnificent. Councilor Castro. Thank you, Mayor. I just quickly wanted to remember one of our transit operators, Chris, that we also lost. Thank you. Others? Yeah, go ahead, Councilor. I just would like to remember two young people who worked on my campaign. They also were part of Youth Works, and they both... I'd add my own thoughts about Marg very briefly. She, like Sal, I was the recipient of many a phone call that you couldn't miss the voice, and you couldn't miss the intent, but it was always delivered with a gravelly chuckle at the end of the conversation about how, "Well, we're going to, we'll figure this out, and it'll be okay." The fundraisers at her home for people far and wide were legendary. Her family is legendary and carry on her work. She's someone I'm going to miss enormously. I'd second the thoughts about Chris Senna, our transit driver, who worked the city for 19 years and was really a stalwart in Santa Fe's transit program. Miss Chris. And then we got a notice that Robert Morehead, one of the great leaders of our Stop Aggressive Driving program, tragically was killed. It's a, it's a comment on the work he was trying to do to stop aggressive driving, how dangerous it can be in our streets, and how his memory, we should all do our best to make Santa Fe a safer place for all of us to walk, drive, bike, get around. We have a lot of people in our community who are dealing with issues of poverty or sickness or disappointment or isolation, as we heard tonight, in regard to our seniors. So let's just take a minute and send our thoughts and our best wishes to everybody in Santa Fe who's struggling, needs some help. Thanks, everybody. Madam Clerk, would you please call the roll? Councilor Cassett. Here. Councilor Castro. Councilor Chavez. Councilor Faulkner. Here. Councilor Lee Garcia. Here. Councilor Michael Garcia. Present. Councilor Lindell. Councilor Romero-Wirth. Mayor Weber. Present. Are there any changes to the agenda, Madam Clerk? There are no changes to the agenda. Can I get a motion to approve the agenda? Second. Up, I have a hand up. Councilor Garcia. Just a question. If folks would be open to entertaining to moving item 11B to be the first item heard after public comment. I believe there's going to be a good number of folks that do want to speak to this item, and if we can allow for public comment and then directly move to hearing this item, that would accommodate the public's needs there. A motion to amend the agenda so that item 11B would come up immediately after that. That item, for those of you who don't have an annotated agenda, is the BAR of $2 million to provide money for construction progress and site planning development regarding pallet communities and non-congregate shelter solutions. So we would move that, that BAR of $2 million to after petitions from the floor. Is there a second to that motion? Second. Is there discussion? All in favor? Call the roll. I guess we'll do it that way. Have somebody remember. Councilor Chavez. Yes. Councilor Faulkner. Councilor Lee Garcia. Yes. Councilor Michael Garcia. Yes. Councilor Lindell. Councilor Romero-Wirth. Councilor Cassett. Yes. Councilor Castro. Yes. Mayor Weber. Yes. Motion is approved. So can we get a motion to approve the agenda as amended? Second. Is there a discussion? Madam Clerk, can you call the roll on that motion, please? Councilor Chavez. Yes. Councilor Faulkner. Yes. Councilor Lee Garcia. Yes. Councilor Michael Garcia. Yes. Councilor Lindell. Councilor Romero-Wirth. Yes. Councilor Cassett. Yes. Councilor Castro. Yes. Mayor Weber. Yes. That is approved. And we need to hear about items moved, removed from consent, and I don't know that we have a list at this time, so let me just see a raising of hands if anyone has something they would like to take off of the consent agenda, and I'll call on you in turn, and you can tell us which item to remove. Councilor Michael Garcia. Mr. Mayor, thank you. I'd like to remove item Q, not for matters of question, just a matter of technical clarification, so staff will not be needed for this item. Okay, item Q would come off of the consent agenda. Any other items be removed from consent? Move to approve as amended. There's a motion to approve the consent agenda as amended. Is there any discussion? Madam Clerk, can you call the roll please? Councilor Fuller: Yes. Councilor Lee Garcia: Yes. Councilor Michael Garcia: Yes. Councilor Lindell: Yes. Councilor Romero Worth: Yes. Councilor Cassett: Yes. Councilor Castro: Yes. Councilor Chavez: Yes. Mayor Weber: Yes. Motion is approved. Thank you. So with that, Madam Clerk, can you take us to our first item before us, which I believe is 9A. 9A: Presentation, Santa Fe General Plan Update, Santa Fe Forward, Santa Fe Avag, kickoff for the 2050 General Plan update project overview and launch of community engagement. Here to speak is Janice Iloff, hopefully that's correct, AICP, Long Range Strategic Planner, and Manjit Ranu, who is on line, and Nick Savio, who's going to start with the presentation. And do we need to facilitate a slide presentation? Do you need to facilitate the slide? You're going to need to, whoever is speaking, whenever it's your turn, that mic can be a little touchy, so you got to be right in front of it and for everybody's benefit, as loud and direct as possible. Thank you. Thank you for your patience. Good evening, Mayor Weber and members of City Council. My name is Janice Bannikov, and I'm the Long Range and Strategic Planner for the Planning and Land Use Department here at the city. In this role, I also serve as the project manager for the General Plan update, also known as Santa Fe Forward. Over the next three years, this planning process will ascertain the community's vision for the future of our city up to the year 2050 and set goals for achieving that vision. The updated General Plan will serve as a guiding document in the creation of policies and regulations that reflect the values of those who call Santa Fe home. We are so excited to engage with our neighbors on this effort, which starts now. Our consultants from WSP are here today to tell you all about the process and our equity-focused public engagement plan. And with that, I'd like to introduce Mr. Manjit Ranu, who is joining us virtually, and our presenter, Mr. Nick Savio. Following Nick's presentation, all three of us are here to answer any questions you may have. Thank you. Good evening, Mr. Mayor, Council, and staff. Thank you for inviting us to present to you this evening. As Janice mentioned, my name is Nick Savio. I'm WSP's Communications and Public Involvement Practice Lead for the Southwest. I'm based in Albuquerque, which is also where I was born and raised, so super excited to be here tonight. I'm also the Deputy Project Manager for Santa Fe Forward, which is the City of Santa Fe's General Plan update. A little bit about our project team. As Janice mentioned, the foundation of this effort was really the adoption of a resolution by this governing body in October of 2023, instructing the Planning and Land Use Department to update the General Plan. The existing General Plan, which was first adopted in 1999. So as a result, the Planning and Land Use Department is really the captain of this ship. They're the ones steering this effort. They're our fearless leaders and the primary project proponent. As I mentioned, I'm with WSP. We're a professional services firm, and we have operations from coast to coast, but we've got four offices here in New Mexico and approximately 140 staff, myself included. Again, we have Manjit Ranu, who is joining us via Zoom. He's our project manager. He's also the National Planning Practice Lead for WSP. And with us, we also have a couple sub-consultants: Design Workshop, which is based in Denver, Colorado. They are experts in urban design and network planning for parks and recreation, other types of systems. And then Leland Consulting Group, which is based in Portland, Oregon. They're experts in market analysis, and they'll be assisting us with things like housing and economic development segments of the plan. Tonight, I want to talk a little bit about what a General Plan is and why it's important. We'll talk about the three-year work plan as well. I'll go over the assessment report, which is the first significant deliverable that we have teed up in the pipeline. And then I'm also going to pull back the curtain on our public involvement and communications approach, which is a really foundational piece of this work together before moving on to next steps. So, why update the General Plan? General Plans are really common documents. Many cities across the entire country, including here in New Mexico, have General Plans. Oftentimes, they're known as comprehensive plans. And the reason they're so common is because they're really foundational, fundamental documents in how a city envisions its future, how it's going to develop and respond to growth and change over time. So that's the real main purpose of a General Plan. It's there to not only define and describe what that collective vision is, but also set out a policy framework so that there are objectives, goals, and policy priorities that support that collective vision. The need for this plan, as Janice mentioned, our existing General Plan was adopted in 1999. That's a really great document. There's a lot of foundational work in that document that hasn't really changed all that much. And one example is our shared values that are enumerated in that plan. It's clear that in 1999, Santa Fe was a community that was well-loved, and I imagine that is still true today. So that's where we're going to be starting from. But the world has changed significantly in the past 25 or 26 years. The first thing that comes to mind is really how technology has changed the world we live in with the advent of the internet, the smartphone, and now we're seeing that happen again with artificial intelligence and remote work. It's a completely different landscape that we're living in now as it relates to that. COVID, of course, was a large disruption for many communities, Santa Fe included, and cities all across the world are trying to imagine what a post-COVID future looks like for them. And then, of course, there are larger challenges that we're facing as a society: affordability. Popular places continue to be popular and therefore in high demand. And then the elephant in the room, climate change, is often articulated as one of the biggest challenges of our time. So how are we going to be resilient in the face of a changing climate? So the General Plan process that we're about to go through, updating, will help the city prepare itself to respond to those changing conditions. It'll take what's best about our existing General Plan and then work the rest of the things that need to be addressed into some sort of actionable framework, which is one of the benefits of a General Plan, right? A plan is there so that you take it off the shelf and you use it. It's meant to streamline implementation and operations not only for the Planning and Land Use Department, but for other city departments as well that will be looking to the General Plan for policy guidance, departments like Economic Development or Public Safety. It will help guide investments in both the public and private realm, and it also creates a baseline to establish equal opportunities for Santa Feans from all backgrounds. Most General Plans have a standard suite of components that are in that General Plan. As I mentioned, it starts with this overarching vision, as well as goals and policies and priorities that underpin that overarching vision. But there's also a relationship to the physical part of Santa Fe. In other words, where are houses? What types of land uses are in the city? What's our transportation network like and our open space network like? How do all these pieces fit together? The plan also provides policy guidance for a variety of areas, including economic development, social justice, how we maintain the quality of our natural environment, and it also lays out a roadmap for the long-term development as well as maintenance of our critical public utilities and services and facilities like our fire stations, our libraries, our cultural amenities, our parks, all things people care about. And all of this works together in concert to really promote a future that is resilient, sustainable, equitable, but also reflects the soul of Santa Fe, what it means to live here and be here and work here. On the screen, you'll see an overview of our three-year work plan. That's approximately how long it's going to take to update the General Plan. We're currently in step one, which takes about 25% of the time of our work together. That's really standing this project up and getting it started. Steps two, three, and four walk us through the development of vision and goals, as well as a variety of scenarios, in other words, future conditions that the city might have to respond to, as well as the development of a draft and final plan. Each one of those steps is going to take about a fifth of our time together. And then step five is the development of that implementation plan and funding plan. So how are we able to pay for the priorities that we identify collectively? And then, of course, step four is adoption by this governing body. Step ongoing is that thread that really carries us and connects all of these different steps. Of course, that's administration of the program and the project, but more important, it's engagement and communication, which is so foundational to our work. I also want to note that at the end of each one of these steps, we're going to be coming back to both the Planning Commission as well as the governing body for your advisement, for your input, for your guidance, your leadership. We really want to make sure that the plan is heading in the right direction before we move on to the next step. So you can imagine those as gates that we're going to have to go through from step one to step two, so on and so forth, all the way through adoption. I want to talk a little bit about the assessment report. This is the first key deliverable that we're teeing up. I like to describe an assessment report as an existing conditions analysis. This is so that the project team, as well as the community at large, can all get on the same page and make sure that there's some shared understanding about the existing state of Santa Fe. So that means data and statistics and population projections, but it also means accounting for and creating an inventory of our existing facilities and infrastructure and their condition. It also means assessing policies, so are the policies that we have in Santa Fe working for us? Are there gaps? Are there things that could be improved? Are there things that are surprisingly working well or things that were unexpected? All of this will be informed by public feedback and input. We can do desktop research, but that's only half of the story. The other half of the story is making sure we understand the real existing condition on the ground from the people that work and live here. And this serves as a springboard to then create policy recommendations and participate in that scenario planning. So we have a clear vision for what are the different scenarios we're going to have to consider. And then, of course, as I mentioned, this really builds on the existing General Plan from 1999 and all of the good work that has been done then and since then, like the General Plan. An assessment report has a standard suite of topics that we're going to cover, and you can see them on the screen. This list is not exhaustive by any means, but you can see we're going to do a demographic profile. We're going to look at where housing is, is there enough housing? What are the land use characteristics and what are the neighborhood characteristics? Historical and cultural resources, as well as arts and culture, are a big part of daily life in Santa Fe, so each one of those will get its own section of the assessment report. Economic development. and bringing prosperity is so important, as is how we get around, community services, and facilities. This is where the rubber really meets the road for most Santa Feans, right? That's how they participate in their community in many ways. And then the really fundamental issue of having a natural environment that nourishes us and allows us to exist long-term. Of course, how the city is governed will also be something that is assessed. To do this assessment work, we'll be launching a public engagement and communications program. It's a really fundamental step in our work together. This is really intended to be a plan of the people and for the people. And so the way that we're going to do that is to talk to people. So our public engagement approach really sits on three pillars. The first is broad engagement, so casting a wide net to talk to as many Santa Feans as possible. The second is equitable engagement. We know that there are voices that traditionally have not been brought to the planning table, that have been left out of sort of decision-making processes. And so we are fully intent on making a good faith effort not just to bring those voices to the table, but also get them to participate. And one of the ways that we're going to do that is by creating bilingual engagement opportunities. So you can see that's our logo in Spanish, Santa Fe Avanzando. And then the third pillar is collaborative engagement. It's not fair for us to ask for input from the public if we're not going to do anything relevant with it. And so we're committed to making sure that the input that we receive is folded into the plan as much as possible, and that we're communicating back to the public how the input collected was used. On the right-hand side, you'll see some buckets of strategies that we're going to employ. Some of these you'll hear about in a little bit more detail, but we've got the North Star of our community partners program. We're also going to be standing up a technical working group, more about that in just a moment. We're going to be offering interested party briefings for elected and appointed officials, as well as community and neighborhood organizations, so that they can get a little one-on-one face time with the project team. That way they're prepared to inform their constituents. We're going to go to the public where they're already spending time through hosting open houses, but also conducting community conversations at tabling events across the city, at things like high school basketball games, church services, farmers markets, in front of grocery stores, places where people are already spending time. As I mentioned, with the advent of the internet, the way people consume information and participate in governance and planning has changed. So we have a pretty robust visual communication strategy that relies on both a website, as well as a social media campaign and other visual tools like video services, infographics, things like that. Then we know that there's a concurrent, separate, and distinct, but also related effort called the Land Development Code update. And we really want to be sure that we're connecting the dots from A to B for members of the public. They have a right to know that these are two distinct efforts, but that they're also related, and also how they can participate in both. So we're going to take on the responsibility of making sure that it's made clear. The community partner program I mentioned was our North Star. I am definitely of the belief, and I know the rest of the project team as well, that there's already people on the ground in Santa Fe doing the important work of coordinating with communities right now. So we want to leverage their expertise, we want to leverage their trust in the relationships that they've built, and we really want to use it to the project's advantage and to their advantage. So we're going to partner with nonprofit-affiliated community-based organizations that represent diverse and equity-focused interests. It's important that we ask them to not do this work for free, and so we're not. We've developed a system to make sure that they're compensated for their hard work. And because they're being compensated, it's also important that they provide back to the plan. And so we're going to make sure that that happens by clearly setting and communicating roles and expectations. You can see some of the ways that we plan on engaging our community partners on the screen. Along with that, we're going to stand up a technical working group. This is a group of up to 15 members with lived or professional experience in technical areas that we're going to be assessing. And the whole idea is that technical working group is an advisory body. They're here to serve as a sounding board, a gut check, and really provide advice to the project team to make sure that our planning is not only inclusive and equitable and community-centered, but is also technically sound. That's a really important component. The Santa Fe Forward project website is live. It went live earlier today, so you're welcome to check it out after this meeting. These are some screenshots of what it looks like. I want to really emphasize that the website is meant to be a living platform that grows and evolves as the project does. So you can see here that it's got key critical information about the project on the website. It's also got these interactive tools and plugins that may change over time depending on the phase of the project we're in, as well as a "Get Involved" page so that people can at a glance understand how they can participate and where there are opportunities to provide their input. We're also easily reachable. So of course there's the SantaFeForward.org website, but we also have info@SantaFeForward.org email inbox that is going to be the clearinghouse for all communications around this plan. That email goes to me and it goes to two other of my colleagues who are based in Albuquerque as well. So it's a real person who's local to New Mexico on the other side of this email. That's really important for you to know. You're not going to a chat box, you're not going to someone in a different state that doesn't really have a connection to the communities here. With that, I want to thank you for listening and turn it over to Janice for any questions that you may have. Thank you. Mayor: Let's see, we'll go around. We'll start tonight with our recognition that everybody may want to have something to say, so we'll try to keep the clock, Madam Clerk, around 10 minutes per person if it gets to that. And we'll just start on this side of the dais with Councilor Lee Garcia. Councilor. Councilor Garcia: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Not too many questions. I just recall 2018 when I started on the Planning Commission and the topic was brought forward numerous times when applicants came forward and there was community engagement, and it was like we're referring back to a historic document practically. And I think that as we move forward, collaboration with the community is key. And I think that I was, I think a couple of days back, I was conversing with somebody over how do you build a city? And we already have a city, but how does it change and how does it evolve? And we're referring back to the, I think it's the game SimCity. You got to be very careful and strategic in how you do that because if you don't do it right, at the end of the game, what happens? It implodes. And so, you know, that's I think one of the things that is very interesting about the process that you showed here. And there's a lot of intricacies to it. And so I think that going forward, there already has been a lot of work and there already has been a lot of community engagement under the code update and so on and so forth. And so again, encourage the community to be as involved as possible because when it comes time that this is finished and hopefully approved by everyone, that you know, we do have a product that serves the needs of everyone in Santa Fe. Thank you for your work. Councilor: Thank you, Councilor. Councilor Cassutt. Councilor Cassutt: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. And thank you so much for being here. Very excited to see this process getting started. I do have a couple questions/comments of things that I want to be just curious about how you guys are going to go about this or if you are asking that you do. One, as you mentioned, the 1999 General Plan, there is a lot of relevance there. As you mentioned, a lot of our values and the goals for the city, we still talk about them today. And while much has changed and we do need to come up to the current day, there are some things that I'd be interested in assessing if we were successful and why not. So, you know, we talk about having a mix of housing types in all parts of the city. This is something we still struggle with. And so as we're getting those policy recommendations, I would really like to see not just kind of a repeat of, oh, this is something that we would still like to do, but really a deep dive into why did we not achieve this yet? Because they're not new. Affordability was on there before. Climate change was on there. You know, we talk about mixed use, and we've had some success in some arenas, but we are still really reaching for a lot of these goals. And chances are many of them are going to be things that we never fully achieve, as they are a little nebulous. But I would really like to see a deeper analysis of what have been our policies that have been successful and what have been our policies that have actually hindered our ability to move forward with these. I think some of us have a lot of ideas about what those might be, but getting that professional opinion would be wonderful. And then you mentioned the coordination with Clarion, which is great because as we know, you know, the General Plan is the policy goals and Chapter 14 is the hammer. So need to make sure that the hammer aligns. I also love the community partner component. This was one of my really big concerns. I am very happy that there is a very local presence that is leading this project. Santa Fe is the city different, and you know, we really do live that name. And a lot of times things that might work in other places are not necessarily going to work here. So having that understanding is going to be important. A couple things on the community partner programs. One, I imagine this is somewhat modeled after our Midtown engagement partner program. And I would just encourage you all to speak with Mr. Hernandez to, you know, pros and cons of what went well, what did not. But I also would like to know how those community partners are going to be chosen. Is this an RFP? Are they handpicked? You know, what does this look like in order to get people to the table for? Thank you for the question. Speaker: Can you hear me? Is my mic on? I think so. Great. It's a good question. And you're right, Santa Fe is so distinctive. All of New Mexico is so distinctive. So we will be talking to Mr. Hernandez. And it is modeled in part after the Midtown approach. We're also using a variety of other models from other parts of the country to help inform our lessons learned. So with that, you know, we're really open to learning what are the better, the better methods that are out there that we can see if we can't tweak or refine for our specific context. In more direct answer to your question, how the community partners will be chosen, you know, we're really expecting that there are going to be community-based organizations out there that want to do this work, that feel like this is a good fit for their current mission. And then there's going to be a lot of other community partners out there who might have contributions, but may not necessarily be the right fit, or they may be too busy with their current mission and feel like their efforts efforts are better spent elsewhere. So, in large part, this will be self-selected. We're asking for community-based organizations to throw their name in the hat. On the Santa Fe Forward website, we will put out an open call for community-based organizations, and we'll also send invitation letters or awareness letters to community-based organizations. The draft public engagement and communications plan that we're using as a working copy right now has a pretty robust list of potential organizations to reach out to already. I think the communication is something like, "Hey, Santa Fe Forward is launching its General Plan update. We really feel like there are some opportunities as a community-based organization to participate. Find out more here at our website and let us know if you would like to apply." Then we'll go ahead and take all of those applications. The project team will evaluate them first, and then advance a list of recommendations over to the city manager, who will then review that and make sort of official onboarding assignments for the community-based organizations. I will say something important to keep in mind is we recognize that community-based organizations may have different capacity levels and different interest levels. So, the Community Partners program includes three tiers in terms of their contributions and expectations of their efforts back to the plan. Some community-based organizations will be able to send out information on our behalf to their constituents, and that might be all that they have. Well, there's a tier for that level of effort. There's also a level of effort tier above that, and then there's one above that, and each one comes with additional compensation. But the idea is that we're trying to right-size community-based partners' efforts with their capacity, and they are self-selecting to participate. Thank you, that's helpful. Will we have the opportunity to take a look at the list so if there are sector representation areas that we feel are missing, that we can provide that feedback to you all before you get started? Yes, I think there is an opportunity. I imagine we'll model it very closely to the TW selection process, where the city manager will provide to the governing body the names of the selected community-based organizations for your input. You'll have the opportunity to provide that input back to the city manager, and then we'll move forward making the selections. Okay, wonderful. And then my last comment/question, and this goes for both the community-based organizations as well as just individuals, I don't know if people always understand that land use is important. I have become a bit of a land use nerd, and it was a bit of a surprise for me because it seems really boring. And I think on the surface, I can't tell you how many times I've seen people's eyes glaze over when I start to talk about zoning, which I just find fascinating. But I do want to make sure that, I mean, both being present is wonderful and having the accessibility is great and having the organizations, but that we're really cognizant in how, or I guess you all are really cognizant in how you're talking about the General Plan and the way that it impacts so many different aspects of our lives and of the quality of life of the city. And so I don't, I don't think that it is necessarily, at least it wasn't for me until I came into this position, it was not a natural connection that I made between things around zoning and how are we deciding form-based code versus not, all of these different things and the way that it interacts with the street and how this impacts driving and walking and all of the different things that people are concerned about and the type of community that they want to live in. It seems a little dry on the surface. So, I would just really encourage you when you're thinking about that communication, how do we bring this back down to recognizing that there are some real issues that people are very concerned about that land use absolutely has an impact on? My constituents who are dealing with a nighttime venue that is shaking their walls, this is a land use issue. Some of our public safety issues, there is land use involved here. People wanting to be close to restaurants or why don't we have a more robust public transit system? All of this really does come down to land use in our General Plan. So, I think making that extremely apparent to both individuals as you are soliciting their input and trying to get them involved, but also some of these community-based organizations that might be really crucial, some of our Chambers of Commerce or other organizations that land use actually does have a big impact on them that they may not necessarily see right away. So, I just would make the pitch to be very robust in that conversation and laying out how intrinsic land use is to our everyday quality of life so that people not only have the access, but they understand why this is something to spend their very limited extra hours in the week, month, year potentially on. So, that would be my comment there and my hope and my wish, and I am really looking forward to this, very excited to get all the updates, and I'm sure you'll be hearing from me. Thank you, Counselor. Councilor Mward: Thank you, Mayor. I'll be quick. Really glad you talked about the three tiers because I was going to ask you about the time commitment for what you're expecting from these community organizations, community partners. I think they're going to need to know that. And the only other thing I would tack on to Counselor Cassett's suggestion about why haven't we been able to achieve some of the policy goals? I mean, I think affordable housing is something we'll always be trying to achieve. I'm not sure you ever get there, you just got to just keep pushing on it. And so I think on the flip side, it would be interesting to know what we have achieved, what ground we have made, not just why haven't we, why aren't we affordable, right? Because some of these things, I think as has been noted, are things, sustainability, why aren't we sustainable? Well, I think we've done a lot of things that are making us more sustainable. There's more to do, and I think there always will be. So, I think it's important to acknowledge that work as well. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you. Councilor Fulber: I just want to say that I'm excited about this. I was on the Planning Commission for seven years, and I was the chair of the policy committee on the subcommittee on the Planning Commission, and this was like one of the critical things we really wanted to get done. So, really excited, and if there's anything I can do to help, I'm here to help. Thank you. We're just going to go around. Councilor Lindell: Thank you, Mayor. Thanks for being here tonight. This is a huge project, a little bit overdue. So, the quicker that we can move along with it and not get caught out in the weeds over the small stuff, the better off we'll be. I really applaud the project. It's time. Let's keep it moving as quickly as we possibly can. Thank you. Thank you. Councilor Michael Garcia, did was there something to be said? Director: I want to add to that. Thank you. Councilor Michael Garcia: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. One quick question around the community engagement process. And so I really appreciate what's planned here in regards to what I would consider the general public, residents, community organizations, nonprofits, et cetera. But what I didn't mention was the development community. And as a counselor, one of the things that comes before us time after time again is appeals to up or an appeal to the General Plan. And what I want to do as we work towards updating the General Plan through this process is to ensure that there's as minimal to none of that in the future. So, including the development community on the front end to get their insight and have it co-mingle and exist with the community's ideas, philosophies, vision, we can maybe help circumvent any of those challenges in the future because it's, it's again, it's one of the roughest positions as a counselor when we have to make these tough decisions, and we're saying, "Well, this was a plan that was adopted in 1999, and it's old," and we give every excuse in the book as to why it should be amended versus we should be giving every excuse in the book why it should be upheld. And so what is the plan in regards to engaging the development community that way we're not getting developers coming in and saying, "You need to update, we need to appeal to the General Plan because of X, Y, and Z." Thank you for asking that question. Our development community is slated to be a part of our technical working group so that they will have frequent opportunities to give deep input as this is being built from square one. We have a very broad cross-section of our allied professionals in the land development community that will be represented in our technical working group, everything from county planning to architects to developers and planners, folks who can actually road test the ideas that we're bringing forward to see if they fit and if they're realistic and if they work with today's economy, with the environment we're dealing with, and with the economic realities in our community. So, we're very excited to get the technical working group started and be able to glean everything that they have to offer to us so that we can minimize things like the need for rezonings and the need for amending the future land use map exactly for the reasons that you specified. Okay. And so just so we ensure that there isn't siloing of information or consultation, is there a way for the technical working group to co-mingle with the community partner program? Because I again, I think we should be able to have developers argue their case, the community argue their case, have at it as we're developing the plan versus having at it 10, 15 years after the fact. We envision that our technical working group members will also become ambassadors for the process. And so we will expect some participation in the community conversations that will be hosted by our community partner groups, the community-based organizations. And of course, the technical working group meetings will be open meetings. Those will be available to the public and recorded and available for public consumption as well. So, we're, we're hoping to cross-pollinate as much as possible. Okay, thank you. I just, I appreciate the planning that's going into this, but I do want to ensure that again, we're not missing the mark because these are the type of plans that are not developed once every five years. They're decades long lasting. And you know, our hope is that we're setting up future generations for the next 30 years with a plan that again, we're not going to have developers come in to say, "You need to change your plan because of this." You know, we stand firm and say, "No, this is our plan, and this is why we're not changing it for whatever reason." So, thank you for the thought that's gone into this. I do echo Counselor Lindell's sentiments. This, the quicker we can get this done, the better, because those land use cases that come before us again, I'm of the mindset, the General Plan is the General Plan, and we shouldn't really be updating it unless it's extenuating circumstances. And so good luck. Thank you. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you for the presentation. What I want to stress with the General Plan is accessibility. I like, I think that when I look at the points you had listed in the presentation for like assessment, accessibility should be the first thing that we focus on on the General Plan. I feel like it should be the leading bullet point because a lot of the div The division we experience in the community is because there's a lack of understanding, because information is not accessible to everyone. I also just want to stress that accessibility is not just offering things in multiple languages. It is an opportunity to educate, to access information in a way that is clearly understood by all community members. So I just want to stress that with something as important as the general plan, we not only need to offer the information in Spanish, but we need to offer education and be very transparent on how these decisions impact every single part of our community. I don't think that we have communicated that clearly enough. Often, we don't even communicate it in Spanish, which is the start to making things accessible. But I just have to stress it's not just the language, it's the education, and it's the outreach in our community in Santa Fe. Having open meetings, and those meetings were opportunities, being in two languages isn't enough to get people out of their houses and involved. And it's because we've created a sense of discomfort in our community to all individuals. Not all individuals in our community feel comfortable enough to just come out. So community involvement is great, but outreach is even more important. So I hope that we really use some of our resources for outreach, accessibility, and education. I want something that's important, that will impact the decisions we make for all of our community, to be very clear to all of our community. So that's just my comments and my requests. This is actually a great opportunity for us as a city to bring all individuals to the table to build a plan that best serves Santa Fe. And I will say there is this division, but here is an opportunity for everyone to show up and have the opportunity to show up so that we're just building ourselves better. So I just ask that you keep that in mind. Let's try not to leave community members out or put the responsibility on them to show up. I don't think that we're in a place to do that. We have to do some outreach. So thank you. Councilor Castro: Thank you. I will try to be brief as usual. A lot of my colleagues mentioned some of my concerns, and I hope that you're hearing us loud and clear. Self-selection is tricky because we get the usual suspects, and so we need to expand that a little bit more. The demographics of the city would be a great place to start. Are we really being representative of the folks who live here with some sort of database model? And Director Lamboy can fill you in on the model that I like in particular. And again, accessibility, yes, thank you, Councilor Chavez. It's not just about language access, but it's about meeting folks where they are and making sure that they fully understand. So a first great step would be maybe translating the website and making sure that's accessible. Thank you. Mayor: Thank you, Councilor. I just make a few rapid conclusions. First, thank you very much for the presentation, for being here, and for kicking this off. I know we had planned to do this probably five years ago when a little thing called COVID hit and put a little dent in our schedule, but I'm very excited that this is happening now. And I think you've heard loud and clear the desires, and in fact, the urgency among the members of the governing body, that as we move forward, everybody's voice needs to be heard. And frequently, that means going to where they are rather than asking them to come to us. I have one substantive suggestion. The 1999 plan has a lot of merits to it. It may be old, but like some of us, it's only gotten better with age. And yet, it needs updating. One of the things that I think is really significant, in addition to the technical piece and the concerns about zoning and land use configurations, are the values that drive the plan. And I don't think they may be added to, they may be brought up to date in the language, but in reading the values that are at the beginning of our general plan, it strikes me that that would be a place to start a broad-based conversation about who we are and who we want to be, rather than how we want the land use plan per se to look. And if the values section hasn't already been posted on the newly initiated website, I'd start with that and initiate a very broad-based dialogue about what the values say about who we are and what we aspire to be as a community and as a city. As I said, some of them may need updating, and there may be some, as you noted, that weren't on the radar screen when this document was first written, and those can be brought to a revision. But I really like that section of the plan. I think it speaks to our aspirations as well as our configuration, and leading with values can never be a bad thing. So that's free advice, worth what you paid for. Yes, go ahead. Janice: Thank you. May I add two things? First, I would like to ask the council members to please go to the website and let us know if you have any input that you would like to see. Keep in mind, it is a soft launch. The full public site with all elements added will be available on February 3rd, but we would really like to hear what you have to say about it. And then secondly, I'd like to give the opportunity for Mr. Ranu to chime in with anything that we may have missed in presenting on where we are with the public launch. Go ahead. Mr. Ranu: Well, thank you, Mayor and members of the governing body, Janice and Heather and Nick. I think you all did a great job with the presentation today. We share your excitement about this opportunity. Appreciate being selected to support this city in undertaking this conversation about how to go forward, and we share the urgency as well. And that's why the public engagement communication plan is a big part of how we're launching this discussion today. So we will be engaging with your community carefully and closely and all of its key stakeholders. And as Nick said, checking in with the Planning Commission, City Council, the governing body rather, on a regular basis. And this plan will be succinct. It'll have appendices, of course, if folks want to get into the details like reading the assessment report when it comes out, but the actual plan is going to be very clear and succinct. So the messages about its relevance and its importance is easy to communicate. So that is a key feature about how we're going to approach this document. And the visualization around it and the digital tools will help to also make this innovative and accessible. So I'll turn that back to Janice. Thank you for weighing in. Appreciate it. Mayor: Any other last thoughts before we thank you for being here? Janice: Nothing further. Thank you for your time and consideration. Mayor: Yes, Madam Director. Director: Counselors, I would just like to say that this is really exciting for me personally. I was working for the City of Santa Fe back in the 90s when the first general plan was being drafted, well, not the first one for the city, but the previous general plan was being drafted. And it is sort of a tragic error that staff has over years not updated the general plan. We in 2010 to 2013, when I was employed the second time with the city, and there was a lot of good thought, a lot of good concepts that were forwarded. However, it just sort of got lost. And so the intent for this general plan is to make it a living document. There's going to be an actionable implementation plan so that we as a city know our direction not only in the short term, but also in the long term, identify our priorities, and then revisit them so that once every two or three years, we do take a critical look. And it's intended to also fold together nicely with the Land Development Code. And as we try it on for size, there might need to be some minor amendments, but overall, the intent is really to make the general plan not only the policy guidance for the city until 2050, but also something that is actionable in a living document. So, and we hear very loudly the importance of community engagement, and there is a lot of community conversations that need to happen. We'll go to recreation centers, we're going to go to different events in the community and make sure to have those informal conversations with the community as well. That's a big piece and a big foundation to a successful general. So thank you very much for your time. Really, we are all very excited about the general plan, and you'll be hearing from us many times. Mayor: Thank you. Thanks all for being here and for the kickoff, and we'll all be looking for updates on an ongoing basis. Thank you, Madam Clerk. Could you take us to the next item on the agenda, please? Item 10Q, consideration of a resolution sponsored by Councilor Amanda Chavez, a resolution authorizing representatives and agents for New Mexico Department of Finance and Administration appropriation ID number I3321, New Mexico Department of Transportation Control number C543321, to acquire rights of way and to plan, design, and construct a pedestrian underpass on St. Michael's Drive. Well, I'll entertain a motion, and then I'll turn it over to Councilor Garcia to approve. Councilor: Second. Mayor: There's a motion to approve and a second, and I believe Councilor Michael Garcia, you were pulling this off for some technical questions. Councilor Michael Garcia: Yeah, just thank you, Mr. Mayor. And I believe the City Clerk would be the appropriate person to ask this question. So on January 17th, the co-sponsorship request form was signed, and it's not included in the packet, and it's not reflective on the resolution either. So what are the next steps? City Clerk: So, Councilor Garcia, members of Council, I do not have that in our, I did not receive it, I guess, as the answer. So if it is in the packet, it's not. So I can forward you the final document, the co-sponsorship request form that was signed by me, that it's a finalized document. I'm happy to forward it to you. Mayor: May I, Councilor, I would just suggest maybe make a motion for a technical amendment, and then we'll put it on there. If I mean, it should be on there already, I agree, if you already submitted it, but if you want to make sure it's going to be there, that's fine. Councilor Michael Garcia: Sure. Well, and the reason why I asked is because I know historically we've been told we can't do any of the co-sponsorship actions three days before. Do we have to amend our rules to accept this? City Clerk: Mayor, Councilor, if the, if the request was in, your, your rules, the governing body's rules say that the requests have to come in at least 72 hours in advance. So if it was submitted 72 hours in advance, I think by your rules, it's already there. If you want to take an extra step and make a motion, that's fine too, but we will, we can add it if we have that. Councilor Michael Garcia: Okay. I don't think an amendment's necessary if it's there. I just again, wanted to be reflective part of the record enough for now. Yep. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Mayor: Thank you. We'll make sure that gets corrected. There's a motion and a second on this item. Is there further discussion? Madam Clerk, can you please call the roll? City Clerk: Councilor Lee Garcia? Yes. Councilor Michael Garcia? Yes. Councilor Lindell? Councilor Romero Worth? Yes. Councilor Cassett? Yes. Councilor Castro? Yes. Councilor Fogner? Yes. Sorry. Councilor Chavez? Mayor Weber? Yes. Motion is approved. Mayor: Thank you. Thank you for catching that. Next item, Madam Clerk. Item 11A, discussion agenda, request for approval to amend the original purchase of 26 police vehicles from Chalmer Ford and MHQ to increase the compensation by $6,000 to cover equipment and installation for a new total amount of $1,713,731.94. Councilor: There's a motion. Councilor: Second. Mayor: There's a motion and a second. Is there discussion? Madam Clerk, can you call the roll? City Clerk: Councilor Michael Garcia? Yes. Councilor Lindell? Councilor Romero Worth? Yes. Councilor Cassett? Yes. Councilor Castro? No. Councilor Chavez? Councilor Faulkner: Yes. Councilor Lee Garcia: Yes. Mayor Weber: Yes. Motion is approved. Thank you. Can you take us to the next item, Madam Clerk? Recognizing that 11A, I'm sorry, 11B has now been moved. Item 12, Matters from the City Manager. City Manager: Thank you, Mr. Mayor, members of the governing body. Just a reminder that the median ordinance relating to safety on the medians of three feet or narrower will go into effect February 1st. We'll have a 30-day warning period, during which time the Public Works team will be able to get those medians painted so they'll be clearly identified for anyone that chooses to be on medians or people crossing the roads. During this 30-day warning period, our police department will be handing out educational cards to anyone who is on the medians, giving them advice that they shouldn't be. It will include a link to a map that will identify where all the medians that are of concern to the city, that are three feet or narrower, are in the city. So that will go into effect February 1st. Mr. Mayor, that's my only comment. Thank you. Madam Clerk, the next item, please. Item 13, Matters from the City Attorney. City Attorney: Thank you, Mayor Weber, Counselors. I did want to publicly thank Pat Figali for her 3.5 years with the city. We all do talk in half years, but she was here earlier for a matter that could have been pulled. She has been representing the Land Use Department and advising the Land Use Department for the first couple years of her time with the city, and then more recently has been on asset development, economic development, affordable housing, tourism, arts and culture, and related matters. We haven't had any of the attorneys leave since Andrea left a couple years ago, so we will be posting that in the bar bulletin. Please share the job posting with anyone you know who might be interested. It'll be in both bar bulletins in February, and we're hoping to do interviews in early March. So please thank Pat for her service. Her last day is next Friday. Thank you. The other thing I have is to recommend that we go into executive session in accordance with the Open Meetings Act, subpart H2 of Section 10-15-1, in particular, appointment of Mark Scott as City Manager. Mayor: Councilor Mayor Worth, move we go into executive session pursuant to the New Mexico Open Meetings Act, subpart H2 of Section 10-15-1, to, in particular, the appointment of Mark Scott as City Manager. Second: Second. Mayor: There's a motion and there is a second. Is there a discussion? I want to double check, does Councilor Castro have a link for the executive session? Clerk: Not yet. I will need to send her one. Mayor: Make sure that happens as swiftly as possible. If there's no discussion, Madam Clerk, can you call the roll on the motion? Clerk: Councilor Lindell? Councilor Lindell: Yes. Clerk: Councilor Romero Worth? Councilor Romero Worth: Yes. Clerk: Councilor Cassett? Councilor Cassett: Yes. Clerk: Councilor Castro? Councilor Castro: Yes. Clerk: Councilor Chavez? Councilor Faulkner? Councilor Lee Garcia? Councilor Lee Garcia: Yes. Clerk: Councilor Michael Garcia? Councilor Michael Garcia: Yes. Clerk: Mayor Weber? Mayor Weber: Yes. Mayor: Motion is approved. We'll be in an executive session. Very good. For those of you who are in attendance or are watching on our link, we'll be in an executive session. Hopefully, we can be back in a relatively prompt matter and resume our agenda, but until then, we are in recess. Thanks, everybody. [Silence] Mayor: Thank you. Are we still live? We're not quite live yet. All right. Yes, we are live. We're live now. Okay. With that, we're back in session. Thank you, everybody, for your patience. Councilor Mayor Worth, do you have a motion to make pursuant to the Open Meetings Act, Section 10-15-1 J? Councilor Mayor Worth: I move that the governing body reconvene in the open session and state for the record that the matters discussed in the closed session were limited to those specified in the motion for closure. Second: Second. Mayor: There's a motion and a second. Is there discussion? Madam Clerk, can you call the roll on that motion, please? Clerk: Councilor Romero Worth? Councilor Romero Worth: Yes. Clerk: Councilor Cassett? Councilor Cassett: Yes. Clerk: Councilor Castro? Councilor Castro: Yes. Clerk: Councilor Chavez? Councilor Chavez: Yes. Clerk: Councilor Faulkner? Councilor Faulkner: Yes. Clerk: Councilor Lee Garcia? Councilor Lee Garcia: Yes. Clerk: Councilor Michael Garcia? Councilor Michael Garcia: Yes. Clerk: Councilor Lindell? Mayor Weber? Mayor Weber: Yes. Mayor: Motion passed. So it is now about five minutes after seven. I'd entertain a motion to go directly to petitions from the floor and to, after that, then return to the regular order of business. Is there a discussion? Madam Clerk, can you call the roll on the motion to go to petitions from the floor now? Clerk: Councilor Cassett? Councilor Cassett: Yes. Clerk: Councilor Castro? Councilor Castro: Yes. Clerk: Councilor Chavez? Councilor Chavez: Yes. Clerk: Councilor Faulkner? Councilor Faulkner: Yes. Clerk: Councilor Lee Garcia? Councilor Lee Garcia: Yes. Clerk: Councilor Michael Garcia? Councilor Michael Garcia: Yes. Clerk: Councilor Lindell? Councilor Romero Worth? Councilor Romero Worth: Yes. Clerk: Mayor Weber? Mayor Weber: Yes. Mayor: Motion is approved. Very good. So with that, we will go to petitions from the floor. For everybody in the auditorium, if you'd like to come forward to the podium and make a statement to the governing body or give your comments on any subject matter before us that's not a public hearing, everybody will be accorded a two-minute opportunity to speak to us. If you'll please try to observe that time so that everybody gets an equal opportunity. The City Clerk has a timer, and she will politely let you know when the clock has expired. We'll also have a chance to go to people who are in the Zoom room and not here and who would also like to have an opportunity to speak to the governing body. So if you're here and you would like to exercise the opportunity for petitions from the floor, I'd invite you to please come forward. One other thought for folks who may not have done this in the past, we don't clap, we don't boo, we give everybody respect and let them speak their peace and give them the opportunity to say what they came to say. So you can line up, you can wait your turn, whatever works best for anybody. Please just give us your name so we can understand who is speaking to us. I don't think the microphone is on, sir. There's a button to push. Okay, is it on now? Yes, sir. Chaplain Joe Dudak: Okay. I'm Chaplain Joe Dudak. I am speaking in favor of the pallet homes. They, pallet homes have been proven in this community and in other communities also. They've been proven to work. They've been proven to be a benefit for the community and also even a benefit for the neighborhood that they're in, and certainly a benefit for the people that are in them. Also, it provides, I've heard some people say, "Well, we're just trying to store the homeless in little sheds." Well, it's not meant to be permanent housing other than shelters. The shelters in this town are safe, but for the people who can't or won't go to shelters, there's no safe place in town for the homeless. It's very unsafe out there. These pallet homes give a safe place for people to be where they can get the services they need while they transition into permanent housing. So I'm in strong support of that. It'll be a benefit to the community and to the neighborhood it's in, and certainly to the people that are in them. Thank you. Mayor: Thank you. Thank you. Yes, please come up. Anthony Copy: Good evening, everyone. My name is Anthony Copy. I live in District 2. I'm against the pallet homes, and I have a few questions in regards of that. Why are we looking to put these pallet homes in residential areas? I ask that question because I live off of Zia and Yucca, like close to that area where one of those, one of the larger pallet home sites is suggested. My daughter's bus stop, she's 14, my daughter's bus stop is right across the street from where this proposed site is. My son, he's four, he plays baseball at Regal Park, park across the street. We walk our dogs past that area. I'm not against helping the homeless or helping the unhoused. I'm very much in favor of that. What I am against is bringing, bringing that element that comes with homelessness. Sometimes it's drug abuse, sometimes it's alcohol abuse, sometimes it's other unfavorable characteristics into my neighborhood where my children play. I have an arroyo that runs behind my house. I already have an issue with homeless people in that arroyo starting fires, coming into my backyard, messing with my stuff, messing with my dog, getting into my shed. I don't feel like the city's addressing that to bring 127 units into that area. I feel like we just exacerbate that problem. A few other questions, how will they be maintained? And if residents in that area have questions about that or complaints, who do we lodge those complaints with? And is it really a good idea to put one of those pallet home communities right next to Santa Fe High School, right across from Chaparral Elementary School, right across from Regal Park, right in these very heavily populated, family-populated community areas? Mayor, one of your main tenets is to make Santa Fe the most family-friendly community in the country. I think that's a step backwards. Thank you for your time. Mayor: Thank you, and thank you for coming in under the two-minute wire. Appreciate it. Please step up. Matt Johns: Good evening. Thank you, Council. A quick shout out to S3 and the Santa Fe Watershed for their work on the homeless issue. Council and citizens, can we, can we start with your name? Matt Johns. Thank you. I am sad to see our city dividing the issue of providing shelter for homeless people. This is not an us versus them situation. We need to have collaboration on these challenges. I know that there are possible agreeable locations for these solutions, but we need to listen to everyone when looking for acceptable places. I think when people start labeling the arguments against these shelters as NIMBY arguments, that they are ignoring people with real heartfelt concerns, and that's minimizing these people and their concerns. So I don't think that is an appropriate label for people to use when we are concerned about where these shelters are going. The people of Santa Fe have seen city-owned property and city-managed homeless solutions before. It's Pete's Place, and we've seen Pete's Place day in and day out, and it's chaos. We're concerned, more than that, we're alarmed. We worry that the city will take these pallet shelters and scatter many Pete's Places throughout our entire city. Actually, we're more than concerned, we're terrified. We're terrified that the city will anchor these shelters in the heart of our communities, next to our homes, our schools, our parks, turning our safe spaces into high-risk zones. We are terrified that violent, drug-affected individuals will be rooted at our very doorsteps. No one, no neighborhood should have that forced upon them. If you truly care about your fellow citizens, care for your community, then listen to the families who've spent a lifetime building their homes and their lives here. Listen with respect and compassion and the understanding that reckless placement of these shelters destroys what we have worked very hard for. We demand solutions that are fair for everyone. Thank you. Mayor: Thank you. Eric: Is this on? It's not on. Apparently, you can usually test it. It's on now. Yes, much better. My name is Eric. My family goes back to Cortez. I want to discuss the obelisk. The obelisk still, the base of it still has graffiti on it. It has not been repaired and corrected like it's supposed to be, just for the base at this point. I do have, again, my family goes way back. There was a time in this city when we celebrated three diverse cultures in this town. I was on the Fiesta Council. I understand how this went. I don't appreciate that when this obelisk was being taken down, that you allowed that, the police officers and city employees, you prevented them from preventing that from being taken down. I feel that was a unilateral decision. That was your call, and that it hasn't done any good for anybody here in town. All it's done is create excessive divisiveness. Now, again, I have been to Native Americans, I've been, I have friends, a bunch of them. My family goes back generations. I've spoken to people in this town and they don't believe that the city and its constituents and citizens should be paying to put that back up. You feel that it was your decision and that maybe perhaps you should be the person that pays for this. Sorry if I'm coming off rather aggressively, but the point is that it should have never taken place to begin with, and it was a unilateral decision on your part. Thank you for your time. Hi, I'm Danny Katz. I want to speak about the housing crisis among the working, tax-paying citizens of Santa Fe. I feel like it's time that we outlaw Airbnb and VRBO. They are making our neighborhoods less safe while taking housing away from people who are rooted in this community, who are devoted to this community. We have over 3,000 homes, casitas, that are taken off the market for people who could be giving their money to local hotels, local motels, feeding the businesses that keep our city thriving as well. It renders all of our neighborhoods unsafe, even if we're not renters, because it brings people into our neighborhoods who again, aren't invested in healthy relationships with the neighbors. If I ask someone to keep the noise down, they don't care. They're just here for the night. They don't know that that car isn't actually someone who belongs in our neighborhood. It is destroying the entire real estate market and the whole rental community, and I'm inviting us to consider, not just to consider, to get rid of Airbnb and VRBO. I also agree that Mayor Webber, it would be really, really the right thing to do for you to pay for the restoration of the obelisk. Thank you. Mayor, Council, my name is Deborah Dean, and I'm here to speak about and against the pallet homes. There are many problems with this concept. I am not unsympathetic or wish that the unhoused to be left unaddressed. However, the pallet unit concept does not provide treatment, does not provide social services that are needed by the unhoused. Overwhelmingly, the unhoused are individuals with drug addiction problems, alcohol addiction problems, and a substantial portion of the statistics that I have read over many years, not just here but across the country, the average is about 30% also suffer from mental health issues. When you only provide a pallet and a tent or whatever this unit is supposed to look like, you are not also addressing the underlying issues of the unhoused. In fact, I believe you are enabling them to continue a lifestyle that is adverse to themselves and to the community. You are not supporting them, providing them the assistance that they need to face and overcome their addiction, face and maybe address their mental health issues, and there is no infrastructure being provided for these people. On the land that's adjacent to the area in the subdivision in which I live is raw land. There's no sewage there, there's no trash receptacles or up, there is no water, there is nothing. It is raw land. So how are you going to provide sewage, water, electricity? There's no oversight of these units, and everything must be brought. The problem with that is it doesn't again, you're not providing funding for the future. Already just for construction, you are asked, it's over $3.3 million, which you already just for construction are at a negative $1.1 million for construction, let alone future funding, ongoing services, and homes. It is an ill-conceived, ill-planned concept. Thank you. Thank you. Hi, my name is Katherine Kincaid, and I'm a Santa Fe resident in District 1, and I am here in support of buying more pallet shelters at a lower price, which I think is what's being considered before the price goes up in June, because I think this is a burgeoning problem and Santa Fe has a chance to get ahead of it. I have heard from the previous speakers a lot of concerns about these communities, and I think that they don't know about the micro-community model. The model at Christ Lutheran Church has been very successful. There are 10 units. They have staff round the clock from LifeLink who are providing the supportive services that people need to take next steps in their lives. They've already moved several people, I think as many as five, onto permanent housing. So it's kind of a wild success story, and I think that the more that people learn about what's going on there, I know the pastor of Christ Lutheran is happy to come speak to groups. She's got her PowerPoint presentation all set, so if your community wants to know more about Christ Lutheran, if you want to visit their small micro-community, she would be happy to show it off, including their new dog park and washing, laundry facilities. They have a mobile health, I mean, a mobile sanitation unit on site, and so I think that they would remove the problem of people pooping in people's arroyos, which is something I heard earlier. We need to get homeless people off the street where they are often so demoralized that they are doing more drugs or getting hooked on drugs and basically committing suicide by, that's I think a shame on our community. The numbers are currently low enough that Santa Fe has a chance to get around this, get ahead of this. I used to live in Los Angeles, and the problem there is so huge that it's hard to fathom. These pallet shelters would be a great first step, and then there are next steps that these people can take and make room for more homeless people, and I think it's a wonderful thing, and I'm in favor of buying more pallet houses and finding more micro-community sites that are acceptable to the residents and that the residents have all the information about to feel comfortable with. Thank you. Thank you very much. Let's reset that clock if we can, and you, sir, have the floor. Good evening, Mayor and Council. I'm Matthew Downing. I live three doors down from the proposed site six, and I'm speaking against housing at that site specifically. Bottom line, you're inviting more crime, more drug use, and more mental illness into the community without addressing or treating any of it. That you all know all of this and still think moving forward with this plan is a good idea shows a blatant disregard for your constituents. Sandwiching the state's largest encampment in between two established neighborhoods where there are viable options elsewhere is dangerous and irresponsible. We all know Pete's Place is an unmanageable blight on the community, and yet you want to introduce an even larger blight directly next to a neighborhood that is largely comprised of retired senior citizens. It makes zero sense and poses an obvious threat to public safety. We already have a steady flow of homeless in our neighborhood committing crimes. I've personally had crimes committed at my doorstep and directly in front of me. There was a violent assault of a homeless man against a homeless woman in front of me. Councilor Cassutt, I know you're well aware of this because we've communicated for over two years about the issues in my neighborhood. What you're proposing would only serve to exacerbate the issues. My neighbors are people you should want in your community, and instead, you're turning your back on them and quite literally putting them in harm's way. You're also immediately decreasing the value of what is for some of us the single most significant purchase we've ever made. The city of Santa Fe needs to stop enabling and encouraging drug abuse, crime, and violence. Thank you. Thank you very much. Please don't applaud or boo or react. It's really giving everybody the same opportunity to speak in the same respect, and everybody gets a chance to be heard without community response or response from the governing body either. Yes, please go ahead. You have the floor. I'm Jean Palmer, and I am a volunteer with the unhoused, and it's been one of the most meaningful things that I've ever worked on, and I've worked in lots of different projects. I'm wanting to clarify also that at Christ Lutheran Church, they do have security, they do get casework, they get meals, they get an opportunity to live by themselves, maybe for the first time, before they can move into transition housing or into a real house. And they have moved five people already from the transitional to the, to a bigger house or another place to live. And I think that there's a lot of misunderstanding about the unhoused. I also am a volunteer at Pete's Place and cook on Wednesdays. I have my outfit on tonight, and I want you to know that there are a lot of elderly people who have become housed recently, more elderly people I we see every week when we're there. And I think that what's really important is for us to learn more about what it really means to have been unhoused. And one of the things that I'm doing is I have trained public speaking to the either people who are currently unhoused or have been unhoused in the past, and they go out and make presentations to the public. Last Tuesday at La Farge Library, we had four panelists, four people who would either currently or past been unhoused, and there were 84 people who came to that lecture. There was silence as people told their stories. I asked them to say just speak for about five minutes, and there you can hear a pin drop in the room, and you can see tears in people's eyes because they're believing and seeing people who have really had to live through it or are still be living through it. So I really think these transitional homes are a good first step, and I really hope that you will consider that. Thank you very much. Yes, please, you have the floor. Hello, my name is Sheila Kennedy. I live, I'm also here to represent my next-door neighbor. She's 90 years old, Martha Rivera. She's lives at 853 Camino Consuelo. She's lived there since the house was built. She was a government employee and very active in the political community, and it broke her heart when I told her about this today. This feasibility study, I think, is incredibly inadequate. Why 10 sites? Why only these 10 sites? Are there anything, anything else that we can consider than putting pallets in the middle of a flood plain, which also goes to when was the flood plain feasibility made and by whom? Because as we all know, climate change has progressed quite a bit. I've seen the Monis Arroyo Park underwater. If you want to put 22 pallets, have them flood, I don't think that that's really going to be beneficial for, for the city. I think the city really dropped the ball when you sold the former College of Santa Fe campus. That would have been the most ideal place to house and help so many people. But there's something called Midtown that hasn't broken ground yet, and we could, there's open space, there's already infrastructure there. There's got to be other places, is my part of my point. And if these are just locations that the city owns, and the city not buy property that would be more appropriate for to help the unhoused, because I don't see this helping either side really. That's all I really need to say. Thank you. Thank you very much. One sec, Adam, clerk, you're good to go. Yes, you have the floor. Good evening, Mayor Webber and the City Council. My name is Adam John Griego. I'm a member of the Justice Advisory and Accountability Board to the American Civil Liberties Union. I'd like to ask the audience tonight, how many people here are actually unhoused? No, no, please. He's rhetorically asking. This is not a dialogue. Thank you. I'd like to start off by defining the word gentrification: the process whereby the character of a poor urban area is changed by wealthier people moving in. I am here to speak on behalf of the $2 million expansion of the pallet homes. I believe it's a very feasible and good idea for many reasons. What does the architecture of change look like for people here on the council? For those of you who don't know, homelessness is immense destabilization. Pallet shelters are creating opportunities and are strategically placed in a person's life to aid in a na natural transition to more permanent housing and a sustainable, thriving life. The ultimate goal isn't just to house, but to allow individuals to integrate and succeed. I, as a business owner in the city of Santa Fe, am excited to see how we can as a community have a tremendous positive impact in the trajectory of a thriving life for our unhoused population. Please consider the money needed for this already existing and successful program. Thank you. Thank you. One second and we'll reset the clock for you. Very good, sir, you have the floor. Good evening, Mayor Weber and esteemed City Council Members. My name is John Bacon, and I am formally unhoused. I was newly sober and I lived in a tent up in the Santa Fe National Forest. I wouldn't stay in a congregate shelter because I didn't want to have the temptations of drugs or alcohol. I was employed and I took showers at Fort Marcy on my way to work. It was cold and wet every morning. I wish I had an opportunity to stay in a micro-community. Today, at six and a half years sober, I'm a support worker at the LifeLink, where my focus is specifically to help people maintain the housing I help them find. The initial micro-community has been a resounding success. Santa Fe needs to have all options possible to help the unhoused. It's growing. They will be in your backyard, but hopefully sheltered. That's all I have. Thank you very much for your support. Thank you. I'll give us a second to reset the clock and then you'll have the floor. There has to be a way to short-circuit that. There you go. Yes, you have the floor. Good evening, Mayor Robert and counselors. My name is Lyla Casey. In January of 2022, I was homeless. My mom had just passed away. I was very depressed, distraught, very traumatized by the experience. I left all my belongings and went to the Casa Familia shelter. During that time, I became a lived experience Advisory Board member and was invited with Christ Lutheran Church to go to Aurora, Colorado, where we visited a safe outdoor shelter space. We found out there that one of the organizers was a retired police officer, and so he explained to us that they did some studies and found out that the safe outdoor spaces actually made the area safer. It made their community members feel safer. I was living at Casa Familia at that time, and I was really hoping that the shelters came really fast so that I could get to stay in one for a short time with my pet. I wasn't able to, but I did get to volunteer afterward and help with the gardens and give some suggestions on building design. That community is going great. I now live in my own apartment at Santos, which is wonderful. That's right down the street from the safe outdoor shelters, and I see some of those people. They're now my neighbors and community members, and we meet crossing in the grocery store and at the gym and gas station. So they're really great neighbors to have. I don't see drug problems or any of the other things that people are talking about. As Adam said, integration is so important for us. Today, I work at Casa Familia, the place that sheltered me, and I'm a board member with Chaplain Joe Street Outreach. I'm hoping and I really support these safe outdoor micro-communities. Thank you. Thank you very much. Please come forward, and you may need to bend the microphone down a little bit. Perfect. You have the floor. Hi, I'm Tulie Johnson, and I live near the number six site. I consider the homeless situation here the saddest thing that I have really in my life, and I've tried to help, like at the Casa Familia, to cook for them, and I wish there was something more that we could all do. But I'm not sure that I, since I live in that site six, it's next to a community that's very crowded, and the houses are close together. We also have a whole bunch of unhoused people there already. I've seen three women fighting. The police didn't really get there very soon. People who have Ring cameras pick up at least two people going by at night and trying to open the car doors. I don't feel safe at night. Everybody will say the same, "I don't want this in my neighborhood," but it seems like there could be a space with more space to have, maybe not in the middle of town. Especially, I've heard that there would be like over 200 people. Did you speak a little bit closer to the mic? And I don't know if that's true, but that's just too many. I could see how like something under eight people added to the community would be practical. There's already lots of unhoused people walking in and out, and so I agree when these communities have to live together. I don't think this is a good place either because I saw, I heard about a homeless person drowning in the Arroyo over there. It's just very prone to flooding. I just think we really have to plan it really well, put it in the right place. Maybe it's too bad it can't be out of town or something and do what they are doing at the Lutheran Church. They're really helping the people. You know, you can't just set a bunch of houses out and expect it to go well. So thank you so much. Thank you very much. Appreciate it. Yeah, you have the floor, sir. Hello, my name is Art Spra. I'm the developer for Kachina Ridge subdivision, and I would take up my two-minute time with a little film of when I was trying to shut off the Game and Fish to Kachina Ridge, and I have a film of hypodermic needles all over the place and the trash, which was everywhere. The people are coming into the neighborhood. They're stealing from us, and I've had four houses broken into when I was building them with fentanyl sitting there in the middle of it. The policeman said, "We cannot have you touch this." My problem with this is Kachina Ridge has 82 houses. We did 25 affordables for local people. That's teachers, firemen, policemen, all these local people. I find that your policy now to be building all these apartment complexes all over this town and having them do a fee in lieu of building affordable housing, and you're using that money to buy hotels, the motels that you're using to house the homeless, and you're doing it around neighborhoods. These people are not taxpayers. They're not local people. I find that when I talked to the city staff about this, you could have asked these people building these apartment buildings to provide some affordables. When I asked the staff, they said to me, "Oh, it would be too difficult." Good minister, I think that I know this is a problem, but to put it right next to 300 units right next to Kachina Ridge, all these local people, just about everybody who lives in that subdivision is from here, and I find it appalling that you're putting your emphasis on people who are not from here and not taking care of the local. Thank you. Let's reset the clock for a minute and then give you the floor. Okay, you have the floor. Mayor, City Councilors, my name is Karina Lopez. I'm the Executive Director of the Interfaith Community Shelter at Pete's Place. I am here tonight to express my support for anything that gives homeless individuals an option that will hopefully lead to their housing. I do want to point out that the pallet shelters micro-communities are obviously not a solution to homelessness. Housing is a solution to homelessness, and I strongly encourage the city of Santa Fe and our city councilors to make that a primary focus. That being said, people who are unhoused are statistically higher, or experience violence at a statistically higher rate than those who are housed. Not everybody who's unhoused is violent, aggressive. The average age at Pete's is 50 years old, and the more chronically homeless, the higher that number goes. What's exacerbating this issue is dehumanizing this problem to look at it like, "Oh, those people don't need to be in the neighborhood." Those people are people, and yes, there's stuff, there's a lot of trauma that comes with it, but as my predecessor would say, "There but by the grace of God go I." And the other part I would like to mention is yes, there's services wrapped around with all of it. One of the things Pete's is, Pete's, one of the things we do is not only help the unhoused, help the people who are on the brink, like the woman who pointed out earlier that she's close to being unhoused. Pete's will be there for you when you are, because not only do we help the people who are already unhoused, we do homeless prevention. We help people with utility assistance, rental assistance, vehicle repairs, the things with the hope that people do not end up in that position, that do not have to make that decision of, "Do I eat today? Do I pay my car? Do I pay my rent? Do I end up at Pete's?" It is really hard, and I am so proud of the people who are unhoused who came and spoke today or have been unhoused, because it is not an easy situation to be in. I can happily share I'm with lived experience as well. So my last statement, the micro-community initiative adds needed shelter options to the city of Santa Fe. We hope the city council will find the courage to support not only this, but also the other shelter, this effort, but also the other shelters who desperately need your support. Thank you very much. Hold the clock for a minute. There we go. Yes, sir, you have the floor. Hi, I'm Max Avery. I live in District One. I have been working at the edges of lots of the social services organizations, including Pete's Youth Shelters, for the past 12 years. Like I think most people in Santa Fe, if I didn't have a social network of friends, family, I would be a mental health break and a medical crisis away from needing Pete's and needing other social services organizations. I would really want something like the pallet homes, something that helps to, something more. I would want that for myself. I would want to go into that situation. I would also want that to be there for everyone else currently in that situation. I want that to help relieve some of the pressure that's on Pete's all the time. We keep talking about faith shelter, and they are there for everyone. That's the point. I really appreciate that. I would want this to continue to offer. Thank you very much. Let's reset the clock, and you will have the floor. That good. Wait one sec. Okay, you have the floor. My name is Adam King, a property owner. I raised my two kids to adulthood in the city of Santa Fe. Thanks, Mayor, Councilors, for doing the jobs you guys are doing, taking care. The question I think is pretty easy. I think this issue of the pallet falls under the S3, no, you're fine, S3 Santa Fe Housing Initiative. I could be wrong. You're fine. If it does, and I'm trying to read through it, I feel like there's a point where pallet homes could be put on private land. I haven't found her. I'm not sure where to city land. My easy question. Thank you. Thanks for being here. Hang on one sec. Councilor Castro, can you hear people? Your hands up. Yeah, just the last couple speakers were a little bit hard to hear. If folks could speak into the mic, please. Yeah, we have people, not only our council member, but others who are watching on Zoom and on other external devices, so make sure you get the mic nice and close and everybody can hear you loud and clear. Very good, you have the floor. Good evening, Mayor and City Councilors. My name is Paris Rubio. I am actually a current site coordinator at the current micro-community, and I'm in support, of course. I apologize, I'm a little nervous. I think what we take pride in and what we do really well is give clients autonomy, and I think, you know, we tend to forget they are humans and we should treat as such. But just some info to give out, of course, the site is staffed 24/7. We have case managers, so these clients are receiving, you know, behavioral health services, services that they want to enroll in, and services that they choose. We're not forcing them, and of course, we're not forcing them to stay. But we do take pride in our community. And so we do, sorry, we do have good rapport with the neighborhood around us. We have monthly meetings that anybody can bring up concerns, questions that they have. And we have built that strong relationship. But the clients take pride in their environment and the space that they have. We do weekly room checks, just teaching them daily living skills that they've forgotten when they're on the streets and in survival mode. So I want to thank you for the support that we've gotten so far. Thank you for being here. Reset the clock, and then you will have the floor. Hi, my name is Jennifer Lopez, and I live in District One. And I think that the issue that I have is, I know that thank you guys for coming and speaking about your experience, but I also, as a property owner, I don't like the pallet home structure. As someone who saved for years to buy a home, I would much rather see stick-built homes. There's a Camino Air in my neighborhood, is a great example of subsidized housing. I think some of the issues from property owners is we saved, a nurse saved a long time for a home. Across the fence, I don't want to see a bunch of pallet homes there because the reality is it would affect my property value. But if it was an actual like apartment building or something, that would be different. I think that what's happening at Christ Lutheran Church is a great example, but I think it's an island in between three roadways. It's on private property and it's fully staffed. And I don't want to sound rude, but in a city that can't control, can't maintain roads, can't maintain sidewalks, can't maintain parks, can't cut weeds, is somehow going to have these situations on potential pallet homes and private or on city property and not private property. I just don't think that it would be the same thing that's happening at Christ Lutheran Church. I also have a problem with, I know that the feasibility study, there might not actually be pallet homes that's happening there, but we don't know. And I found out about this through a Facebook post. I didn't find out about it through my city counselor. I think that everyone within a three-block radius should get letters about this at least. And a lot of people that are for it, I think that's great. Maybe you could find a place next to your lot, want pallet homes. But if it's not somebody that wants it there and they want an actual stick-built place, I think that should be honored as well. But the feasibility study had nothing on the East Side. And I also think that a city that will sue because a house is painted green, but this, nothing like this is proposed for the East Side, that always talks about being equitable to all of our citizens, it really feels like you're crushing the middle class and the people that have second homes, the tourists, rich people. You've got Patrick Smith, you've got Fort Marcy, you have lots of city property over there. So I don't understand how that, why that is, why that wasn't in a feasibility study. Thank you. Please, next person. You have the floor. My name, my name is Phyllis Johnson, and I collect items, warm clothes, blankets, hand warmers, shoes, socks for the homeless every Saturday at the vendor lot from 12:00 to 1:00. I have seen so much gratitude, so much thankfulness for the things that we give. It cracks my heart open. The first time I gave blankets to a group of homeless people, I was scared because they looked terrible and they looked terrifying. And they were, they didn't rush me. They were so grateful. I got back in my car and cried. My heart just cracked open. So that's when I started collecting. So many of people that I meet have had terrible traumas that leave them out on the street. Right now, there are homeless in California because of the fires, but no one is treating them with disrespect and with derision. They're still homeless. People here are homeless from trauma, from violence, from an 18-year-old being told, "You're 18 now, you're out on your own. Get out." From, I can't remember because I'm nervous, but there is a model in Madison, Wisconsin called Occupy Madison. And they are charming little houses. They're tiny little things that look like Hansel and Gretel just stepped out of them. And they've got little gardens around them. People work in the community workshop and make birdhouses that look like their little houses and sell them and arts and crafts. It's like a little Madrid. That model has been 10 years in the community and the crime level has gone to zero, they say. I'm supporting it. Vote for it. Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you. Yes, you have the floor. Hello, Mayor and Counselors. My name is Claire Boyce, and I am here to just kind of echo what people have said and to do everything that you can to support our unhoused community, as well as do everything that you can to support affordable housing. I believe that housing is a human right. Safety, health, and sobriety are just a few of the things that start with housing. So many of these people, including myself, who have spoken tonight, would not be where we are at if we did not have the help of affordable housing at one point in our lives. And many of the people here have, are giving amazing contributions to their communities. They're helping other people get sober. They're doing wonderful things. I myself too am helping the community in the ways that I can. And we would not be able to do this without housing. It is such a fundamental human right. And I just really encourage you, I know it's a complicated, it doesn't have necessarily an easy solution, but it is something that we absolutely must consider and take seriously. We are not separate from one another as a community. When one person suffers, I believe everyone suffers. We might not always feel it, we might not always really be aware of it, but when we open our hearts and understand that it is not right for people in the wealthiest country, in the one of the wealthiest countries in the world, in a very wealthy city, that people tonight are out there freezing. And again, I know that there are, there are many considerations, but I just really please would ask you to, to really consider that and just consider how much people can give back to their communities, how much we're all capable of when we have safety and stability. Thank you. Thank you very much. Hi, good evening, Mayor and Council people. My name is Kathleen Labroke. I live in the Kachina Ridge area, which abuts 1085 Richards Avenue, which is one of the largest areas being considered for pallet homes and all the different housing options. I wanted to share that I am an Army veteran. I experienced homelessness for a short period of time, thankfully. And I also worked for the New England Homes, New England Shelter for Homeless Veterans when I lived in Boston. This whole subject is very complex, has a lot of moving parts. And I would just ask that, you know, for transparency, especially when it comes to things such as the feasibility study that recently came out. I thank Representative Garcia for ensuring that it was distributed in the manner it was. But in my short period of living here in Santa Fe, which has been three years, and being a homeowner, it's just extremely difficult to get information on things that are happening in my community until they've already happened and until the bulldozers are out there or you see the gas line markers. I have a dog, I walk a lot, a lot of these areas. So again, I think that's my main thing is, is coming together as a community. And that means elected officials, city employees, community members, and just trying to come up with solutions that will work for all of us. So thank you. Thank you. Please, you have the floor. I'm here. My name is Daniel Maiz, Council. Born and raised here in Santa Fe, New Mexico, 40 years old. As well, I am a recovering addict as well, through the ringer. I am for these homes, of course, and for recovery. I also do know that, you know, I had to make that decision for me to stay sober. Nobody else forced me. Just because we give, everybody can give them homes, we can give them these pallets, we still can't force them to do. And I, as an individual, I said, I'm off of recovery, I'm off of reaching back to the, that's where it is. And I just, Monero Park is what my concern is. I'm sure there's parks that aren't really visited, that parks are for our children, youth. I'm not against building homeless. I'm just, that's where some of them, you know, if there is going to be security, if there is going to be programs in line for these, for these pallet homes, yes. If there is not going to be no security, nobody to pick up the areas all over the floor, nobody to clean up, who else is going to clean it up with us as a community? And just with some more affordable housing. Thank you. I wanted to go last. My name is Francesca Boni. I live in District One in South Capital. I'm not talking about the pallet homes, except maybe I will. I'm talking about the Santa Fe General Plan update and the historic district. What defines a historic district and what is a contributing versus non-contributing house? A contributing structure is a structure located in the historic district, approximately 50 years old. What's 50 years ago? 1975. We're going to be in 1980. A house built in 1980 is now historic. Also, the definition of contributing is really broad and general. It's not, is it on the street? Can it be seen? Therefore, it allows the, I'm sorry, the Historic District Review Board tremendous discretionary power. And sometimes, and they do a lot of stuff right, sometimes they do a lot of stuff bizarrely. So we need to redefine what historic, contributing, non-contributing, what the statuses are. Make it specific so that people's whims, passions, and emotionality doesn't affect quality housing within the historic district. Talking about his quality housing, I also want to talk about the pallet issue. How much, what's the budget for these, for these homes? Three, three million? I don't, I don't know what's being approved here. Three million or so. You need a $30 million budget. You need to allocate the resources to this issue. It's a moral issue. Mayor Weber, you talked about the moral character of the city. What is it? This speaks to that. And you need to reorganize under this new zoning plan. You need to really forcefully demand that this zoning plan considers affordable housing because that's at the core of all this homelessness. And pallets are great. They're temporary. And you can't just put a pallet in a neighborhood and have people freak out. It's not going to work. You need community involvement. You need to spend the money to get the community involved. You need advocates in each and every one of these communities. You need to spend the time and the resources to make this city a loving city. It's no longer, I'm sorry, it's no longer a small city. You guys have got big city problems and you're operating with a small city mindset. Thank you. You have the floor. My name is Pelican Lee. I lived in District Two for 35 years until my landlord sold, and I was afraid I was going to end up homeless. But I was lucky. I ended up, now I'm in District One. I want to say that Pete's was not a problem for many years when it first started. It's only when homelessness has exploded so much recently, or maybe in the last 5, 10 years, I don't know, that it's been a problem. Pete's wants to move as much as any of us want them to find a better place that is larger, has room for more services. We haven't kept up with the homeless problem here in Santa Fe. People that are opposed to pallet shelters in their neighborhood need to go and take a look at what's happening there and pallet homes at Christ Lutheran Church. I'm hearing a lot of false rumors tonight. And what's happening at Christ Lutheran Church is a very successful example of pallet homes that would not be a problem in a neighborhood. People need to look at that. I'm totally for more pallet. If I understand that the reason this allocation needs to be is to take advantage of a price that's going to increase. I do want to know why we have so many pallet homes already that haven't been cited. I think the Midtown campus is the obvious place. Consuelo's Place has been there since 2020. There haven't been the kind of problems around Consuelo's Place that we have around Pets. I was part of the public process for Midtown when all of that happened, and we all talked about affordable housing. That's what we thought this community needed at that time. Of course, when we were talking about affordable housing, we meant all the housing at Midtown should be affordable. Homelessness at that time was not the problem that it is now. Now I'm seeing that the homeless problem is what really needs to be solved, not only with affordable housing but all levels of shelter. Midtown campus is the obvious place. There needs to be a place for people who can't go into a congregate shelter like Pets. There needs to be a place where people who live in their vehicles have a safe place to be. There needs to be a place where people can put up their tents if they can't get into a pallet shelter. We need every level all the way up to affordable housing that's affordable to people that are leaving homelessness, not just our police force and our teachers, but people leaving homelessness. We have to look at what affordable housing means. Thank you. Thank you very much. You have the floor. Good evening, Mayor Webb and councilmen, councilwomen. I'm not in favor of the pallet. We need your name, sir. My name is Mike Supple. I'm in District 4, part of the Cacina Ridge area, and I bought my home almost 20 years ago. I've seen a lot of things happen in that neighborhood. Yes, there's been a lot of crime. Yes, there's been a lot of transient people coming in and through there. What I'm more concerned about, and yes, we do need to address the issue of homelessness in the city, it's a part of our responsibility. But at the same time, when we do that, we need to look at the infrastructure of such a community. I was a little taken back when I just found out three days ago what was going on. I had no idea. There was no communication, nothing out there with regards to what was going on in the neighborhood and what's being planned. I'm for the concept of pallet homes, but I don't see an infrastructure, and I don't see additional services being provided to maintain that over the long term. As the woman before me mentioned, you're taking a sweet advantage of $2 million to get it in place for the City of Santa Fe, but have you really looked at the implications of what that is for all the residents in that area and actually for the homeless people themselves? I thank you for your time. I value your judgment. Please be wise in your decision. Thank you. Thank you very much. Is there anybody else who's here in the room who would like to speak on any issue? Now would be the time to come forward before we go over to the Zoom room. If we have no other people here, Madame Clerk, are there people in the Zoom room waiting to speak? Yes, there are. If you would like to speak in the Zoom room, raise your hand, and I'll call you in order. Bob White, I am allowing you to speak. Thank you. Mr. Mayor, counselors, I come here tonight to... I'm in favor of the pallet homes. We need... We need your name, please. Bob White. Thank you. Yeah, she had announced it. But I'm in favor of the pallet homes in large part because of my position in my career in the criminal justice system. I think a lot of us saw what was coming, and here it is, and we've got to be creative in how we deal with it. New Mexico has a broken criminal justice system, and that's going to impact any sort of project like this, where you put it. That's, I guess, what I'm trying to get to. The problem at Pets is not Pets. It's the fact that the city and the police force, for lack of resources or lack of ability, whatever reason, can't police that area. Until they can, it's going to make where you place these shelters really important. The other thing that I want to say, I couldn't believe it when I saw this proposal because of what happened when they were looking at the sighting of the large tent camps, and they came out with a proposal that Asa Park was the only site that was not south of St. Michaels and east or west of St. Francis. When I see this, you all done it again. Essentially, this contractor has done it again. Homelessness is a national problem. It's a complicated problem with a lot of issues. But in Santa Fe, a big factor locally is the displaced population from the east side of Santa Fe. You separated two cities, and the folks who made it impossible to have the Santa Fe where it used to be. In Santa Fe, there were no rich, poor neighborhoods. Everybody lived next to each other. Well, that's gone now. To think that the people who help contribute to the problem are not part of the solution is just wrong. I'm an FDR, LBJ Democrat. I see things not left or right, but rich or poor. I feel like the wealth on the other side of Santa Fe needs to bear some responsibility for what they caused in the destruction of this city. This city as it existed in 1980 does not exist anymore, in large part because of development on the east side. So they need to be involved in this. But we do need the shelters. You have an ideal location at Christ Lutheran. It's going to be hard to find another place that's in a little pocket like that because when you put them on the public roadways, you're going to have the open-air drug markets like you have around Pets. So I don't envy your job. It's tough, but please involve the whole city, not just part of it. Thank you, sir. Next, Stephanie Beninato, you've been unmuted. Hi, can you hear me? Yes. Okay, great. Stephanie Beninato. I'm a little confused because I thought this was about a budget request, and I also thought that, and maybe it was just for the pilot projects, but I thought that pallet houses were permitted uses, that is, they just happen. It's not a special use where there's public input. I just feel like people are just misinformed, and also about, I mean, I would like the city to give the public reassurance that if they used parks, number one, that they would be subject to the same requirements of security and services, and that that would be somebody, a third party, not the city, providing those kinds of things. So it wouldn't be the police force, it would be somebody else, some third party. If you really are going to use parks, I think that you have to figure out a way to use it for pallet houses but not interfere with the use of the park for the residents surrounding that park. Because to take over the park is a little bit different than sharing the park, in my opinion. I also think, I mean, I think there was one park where the estimate was like 256 units. That is way too many. I mean, I think like maybe 20 at the very most would be something that could be absorbed into a park. I do feel it's unfortunate that there aren't locations on the north and east side, but I also realize that a lot of that space is so infilled that there probably isn't a public land that would be big enough unless you wanted to take over Fort Marcy, for example. So I hope that, you know, again, I would like some explanation about whether this is a permitted use or not. Is it different because it is a park? But I think your focus should be on, do you really need these many pallet houses, and why, if private entities, nonprofits, haven't gone forward, how much does the city really want to get involved? And definitely on a long-term conversation about where would you really put them, how many would you put actually, and how many at any one location, and how again to share a park or are you taking it over? Thank you. Thank you very much. Madame Clerk, more hands. Jared, you're allowed to speak. Hello, my name is Jared O'Dell. I live in Area 1B. In 2008, the city and county signed a settlement agreement concerning the annexation of a number of areas around the city. This 20-year agreement covered a transfer of services and jurisdiction, as well as a number of provisions. The deadline signed by then the then leadership attorneys and attorneys of both the city and county was five years to annex these areas. In 2013, there was a resolution to extend this timeframe another five years. It was never extended again. This city has failed to provide services outlined to already annexed areas in this agreement and has not outlined plans to do so. They have just three years left in this agreement. This is not only the only part of this agreement the city intends to break. A provision stating the rural zoning in Area 1B is to be respected and no urban zoning shall be established, but they have taken the county to court, which is a violation of this agreement in the release of claims section, over the interests of Homewise, who is not an affordable housing developer, only a money redistributor that makes market value on every unit and has announced an ultra-high density urban zoning required development there. Another provision states outright the residents of Area 1B shall be permitted to submit a petition to join the Village of Agua Fria, but the city sued the county and threw a slew of technicalities in the face of this agreement and its provisions. The city has put us in an illegal and unconstitutional presumptive city limits hold when the ELU stands on this agreement to justify its authority. The only window to annex us has expired. It's abusive to then to continue to impose city rules on us when we cannot vote in the city, and you have violated this agreement and intend to violate it further. The residents of Area 1B do not wish to be added to the laundry list of problems you cannot handle or try to fail, try to and fail at the last minute or way too late, like the roads and this homeless problem that you're coming up with with band-aids instead of real concrete solutions. Deteriorated parks are now homeless camps. Is that the future for our kids? Every road in the city is shredding my tires, and you can't upkeep what you have. Stop trying to do more than you can handle. Area 1B is not for the city to fail on. This city should be able to follow legal documents if they wish others to do so. Thank you. Thanks for your comments. Madame Clerk, is there another person in the Zoom room? Yes, Molly, sorry, Nulton, you are allowed to speak. Hi, my name is Molly Nulton. Good evening. Thank you, Mayor and council members. I'm thankful for a public discussion regarding pallet houses. While I welcome and support helping the less fortunate residents of our city, I question why 80%, or eight out of ten, of the proposed sites are south of Cerrillos Road and St. Francis Drive. The other two proposed sites are on Agua Fria and the old city dump. I'm hoping that the city-owned land would be more broadly considered. Currently, most of the city's growth, traffic, and development is happening in and affecting the south side of the city, south of Cerrillos Road and St. Francis Drive. I would like more equitable spread to city-owned land on the north side of the city, for example, La Tierra, Upper Canyon Road, Old Santa Fe Trail, etc. Arroyo and river trails and city parks should be a low priority in the interest of public safety and our youth's recreational needs. Thank you. Thank you very much. Eric Smith, you're allowed to speak. My name is Eric Smith. I live in District 1. I am in strong support of the pallet home initiative. I think that's necessary. I just want to make one comment, that a UCSF study has shown that 75% of the homeless come from the county that they last had permanent housing in. These are our neighbors who are in dire need of help directly. Pallet homes are part of... a system that will be required to build beyond congregate and non-congregate housing. We also need to have more affordable housing within the community. Thank you very much for your time. Thank you very much. Vin Compos, you're allowed to speak. Hi, can you hear me? Yes, very clearly. Okay, just making sure. Hi, my name is Compos, and I work for the New Mexico Coalition on Homelessness. And I am, of course, strongly for the pallet homes. We wouldn't be here in the first place if housing was affordable and if there wasn't gentrification, all of the above. It's crazy to live here, and it's crazy that people will put their property worth over people's lives. Nobody really chooses to be homeless. It is that we're here because it's very unaffordable to live in Santa Fe, and it's catered for the rich people. As many people have shared that actually work directly with unhoused individuals, the safe outdoor space is successful. I have worked, I work with youth, and a lot of youth do not feel safe to be in adult shelters, and a lot of times that's really all the options that they have. It's either living in the streets or in a shelter. And yeah, so I think the pallet homes would be a great alternative for people that cannot be in either. I'm grateful that you are for this, and our community needs to be more community-oriented and less about their property values or what they would like to see or what they wouldn't. The whole reason why there's drug usage and all of the things that have been mentioned is because of the trauma that comes with being homeless. People seem to forget that it's not something light, and it's not something easy to go through, and people forget to see homeless individuals as human. But yeah, thank you for being for this, and I'd say, as other people have mentioned, if we could put this all across the whole town, even downtown area where rich people live, and not just trying to make it like a Southside thing or an Agua Fria thing. Very good. Thank you. Yeah, it would be great to see it all across the town because homeless people live all across Santa Fe. Thank you. Thank you very much. Diane Yokum, you're allowed to speak. I am. Could you hear me before? Now we do. Now we can. Okay, I'll start again. Sorry. Hi, my name is Diane Yokum. I'm a homeowner here in Santa Fe for 10 years. I'm a senior. I live in District 4, and I've got a couple of rentals. I want to cast my vote for all of you voting for the budget to spend the money on the new pallet houses before the June contract ends. I just want to tell everybody, I just joined the S3 Santa Fe Housing Initiative a month ago because I keep seeing so many homeless people everywhere, and I'm like, well, I can complain about it, or I can see what I can do about it. And just in the last month, I've learned so much. So the first thing I want to do quickly is encourage everybody that has qualms about this or input to come to the meetings, which are the first Tuesday of the month from 4:00 to 6:00. So that's my first point. Second, just tonight, I'm hearing a lot of misinformation about the locations, the quantities of the pallet houses that would be in each location, the lack of infrastructure, et cetera. And these things are, there's a lot of misinformation. At the same time, it's hard to get information. So I would encourage the council to, as they are deciding things, to make sure that they get it out to the public or to let the public know, this is coming to your theater soon. We're going to let you know what's going on, but it hasn't been determined yet. I've heard a lot of people say tonight, well, the homeless people, I don't want more homeless people because I already have homeless people in my area, and they're causing a lot of problems. Well, the pallet houses are to help alleviate that problem. They're to help encourage people to get off the street into this stepping stone housing. So, even though I don't think the pallets are as, look as good as they could, I think there's... Your time is up. Thank you. Thanks, everybody. Charles Burkhart, you're allowed to speak. Hi, can you hear me? Yes. Great. My name is Charles Burkhart. I live here in Santa Fe. I'm the owner of Bill Swift Modular. I just wanted to say a couple things really quickly. I would encourage anyone that has doubts or questions to maybe just drive by the shelter setting over at Christ Lutheran. It's very well taken care of, very clean, not at all like some people are imagining that it is. So, secondly, I've actually sent emails to all of the city councilors as well as the mayor regarding an alternative option for the temporary houses. It may ring a bell with some of you. I haven't heard back from any yet, but my company can provide these temporary shelters and at the same time save the city at least half a million dollars. So, I won't go into all the details. I don't want to make this a sales pitch, but I did just want to remind all the city councilors to, excuse me, to maybe check that email out and please feel free to reach out to me with any questions you might have. That's all I have. Thank you. Thank you very much. Is there anyone else who wishes to raise their hand and speak? I don't see anyone in the Zoom room. Very good. And if there is anyone here who missed your opportunity, now would be the time to step up to the microphone and take the chance to speak on this issue. Good. I'm happy you took the opportunity. You have the floor. Mr. Mayor and councilors, this is just a procedural question. I know there are some people here that are planning on speaking on the muffler issue. I don't think we got your name, though. I'm sorry. Tim Langley. Thank you, sir. District Two. I for procedural, so he's here to speak to the ordinance later, not... Okay, so you have, there is a public hearing coming up, so we haven't lost our chance. No, sir. That's this. We typically don't use the petitions from the floor when there is a public hearing that's reserved for that, that particular agenda item. Stop talking. All right. Thank you, Councilor Garcia. Good catch. If there's nobody else in the room or in the Zoom room who wants to use the opportunity afforded by petitions from the floor, Madame Clerk, could you move back to the regular order of business? Yes, returning back to item 11B, request for approval of a budget amendment resolution, BAR, in the total amount of $2 million from the general fund balance. Mayor, point of order. I think we were, yeah, I believe we actually executive session first. Yes, we, we, if you go back and look at the agenda, there's no action item under executive session. That's under appointment. There isn't an action item. That's a regular. Okay, sorry. Thank you. I thought that as soon as we finished petitions from the floor, we were going to 11B. But we also have... I think that is correct. I just think we did. There was no action item identified on the agenda based on the executive session, and that may have been confusing. That will be taken up later when we do appointments. So, in returning to the regular order, we'll go back to the item that was postponed until after petitions from the floor. Then we'll pick up where we were with matters from the city clerk, communications from the governing body, and so on. Item 11B, request for approval of a budget amendment resolution, BAR, in the total amount of $2 million from general fund balance to construction work in progress for site planning, development, or purchasing of a building or property for non-congregate shelter, sheltering solutions. And Henry Hammond, Paul Community Health and Safety Department Director, as well as Julie Sanchez, Youth and Family Services Division Director, are both here. What I would do is entertain a motion. Then we'll go to the presentation, discussion, and then we'll go from there. To approve. Second. We have a motion on the floor. That's just a procedural matter, but please, if you, I believe, have a presentation you'd like to make to the governing body and the public on the issue of, it's the BAR, but interpreted more broadly about non-congregate housing. So, go ahead, sir. You have the floor. Mayor, city councilors, good to see you all. Glad the public came out today. I think, actually, there's a couple things I'd want to say prior to starting. First, I'd like to see if there's any questions before I start that you'd like me to answer. I hope a lot of things will be answered in my discussion, but more than anything, I hope that this presentation clarifies some misunderstandings that I think are a little proliferated throughout the community at the moment. In its bare essence, what this item on the agenda is actually about is about taking $2 million that was previously allocated to purchase a building for non-congregate solutions. Just as a reminder, there were 11 attempts to do that, all of which were unsuccessful for a variety of reasons. And we're simply asking for that money to be given another attempt at delivering on non-congregate, which is an important keyword, non-congregate shelter and housing solutions in Santa Fe. So, to start, I think just level setting on a little bit of the state of homelessness here. Homelessness is notoriously difficult to measure and count. There's a variety of reasons for that. One of the most consistently used statistics is called the point in time count, where people just go out on a single night once a year and count individuals. And we have a little bit more of a nuanced system here in Santa Fe that is a combination between a couple different measures. But effectively, we have a by-name list that names 385 individuals in Santa Fe who are unhoused. Our emergency housing capacity in the city is 280 beds. So, just on some back-of-the-envelope math, that's about 105 beds. There's some issue with this math, though, and this isn't specific to us. This is a national issue with math, which is that we really undercount homelessness. So, the true rate of homelessness is really 2.5 or sometimes up to 10 times higher than these traditional measures because people can be homeless for one week, being kicked out of a home. People can be sleeping in their car. People can be children running away from abusive family situations. All of these folks end up being uncounted. So, when you really, and I think when you talk to law enforcement, when you talk to many folks that work in this space, a truer estimate of the people experiencing homelessness in Santa Fe is at least twice what our number shows at the moment. I also want to challenge some assumptions about who homeless people are. So, there's a measure... Hang on a minute. We have a little malfunction with the screen at the moment. If you can just wait while we try to correct the technology. Sorry. Were none of my slides showing? Okay, it got off to a good start, and then we had a glitch in the technology. No fault of yours. We're back on. Great. So, challenging assumptions. I think there's a lot of assumptions about who homeless individuals are in our city, in the country. So, 5.9% of youth from 9th to 12th grade in Santa Fe County experience homelessness. In 2024, Santa Fe Public Schools reported 741 homeless youth in our public school system. Granted, these measures are a broader and more true measure of homelessness in some regards because they count people who are housing unstable, like sleeping on a friend's couch because they don't have a home to be in themselves, or people who are doubled up. So, are they people who are street homeless? Not necessarily, but their housing unstable, or as the Santa Fe Public Schools reported, homeless. There's also an important fact here, which is that youth homelessness begets adult homelessness. This is also not a specific problem to Santa Fe. These are national challenges. They're caused by a confluence of different factors, including affordable housing, access to incredibly addictive and destructive drugs like opioids and fentanyl, and the lack of behavioral and mental health services writ large across the country. And we see that similarly here in our community. So while there is a homelessness challenge in Santa Fe, it is also a homelessness challenge that we see mirrored nationally, with more than a 23% increase from 2019 through 2023. Again, for one second, we're having another technological little overlay that shouldn't be on there. Not sure where that came from or how to get rid of it. Okay, it's gone now. So we are going to talk about pallet communities because I know there's a lot of eagerness there. You keep bringing something onto the, or somebody keeps bringing something onto the screen by accident. Okay, it's gone again, Henry. All right, this is good. I'm getting into a rhythm and then slowing you down so you don't wear yourself out. Thank you, sir. So part of the big picture, and I think this is something that's going to be again relevant to a lot of folks in the audience, is that this is a piece of the puzzle, but it's not the only piece. Across the entire housing spectrum, we need additional investment and resources. So that is, we need to have more emergency shelters. I'm from New York City. There are 100,000 homeless people in New York City. They're all sheltered. We need transitional housing. That means places similar to these pallet communities where people can be for short periods of time while they transition into more stable living. We need supportive housing that is for folks who maybe won't ever get to a point of being fully independent but still need a dignified place to be. We also need affordable and below market rate housing in this city for all types of workers and residents, and we still need more market housing. So there's up and down the spectrum need here, and we need to understand that as we invest in one part of the spectrum, we need to simultaneously do that across the entire spectrum. I want to quickly speak to some of the results that have been seen out of the Christ Lutheran Church interim safe outdoor space, which started in April 2024. And before I get into these data, there was an extensive community engagement process that happened prior to that site being launched. It was months and months of meetings with community members, talking through what a site like this would be, how it would be managed, how it would be run, how issues would be surfaced and addressed. So to quell some of the misinformation that might be out there about these units just being plopped down somewhere unsupervised and, you know, like a cabin you'd find in the woods, these are 24-hour supervised with wraparound services, really working. There is an intake process to make sure that the folks who are going into these units are prepared for the conditions that are set by the people managing them. So it's an organized enterprise. Since April 2024, the Christ Lutheran Church safe outdoor space has had 29 residents, and only five had stayed less than one week. That's an important number because that means people are going there and they are staying there to try and get better. And again, there are restrictions on the length of stay, so it's not just an unconditional long-time residence there. So people are staying and doing the work that they need to move on. I'll also say that people aren't asked to leave during the day. These are places that people have that they can be inside, whether they want to apply for jobs from inside their residence or watch TV or do whatever everybody else does in their free time. These people are allowed to be where they want to be in their homes and are not forced outside of these walls like some more congregate shelters. So there's a big difference and distinction between the models there. Seven of the residents total have either completed detox or started medical assistant treatment programs. Five have moved into permanent housing, and five more are currently on a waitlist for housing. Additionally, about 11 individuals have secured either birth certificates or IDs, which is an incredibly important step to getting the resources that one needs and assistance that one needs and is able to get through federal benefits or other types of benefits that can support them in moving into additional permanent housing. So why are pallets a good investment, or non-congregate shelters more broadly a good investment? So first off, they're cost-effective. The proposal that my team has been working on, which again is a separate issue than what is at hand, which is about $2 million being a budget adjustment resolution into the next fiscal year, but we are hoping to add a total of 100 units across the entire city. So I know there's been some misinformation about some sites having 200 and some odd units and things like that, and I'll get to that in a moment. But 100 units total across the city. Just for kind of a point of reference, I don't know if we have any developers in the room, but to add 100 units of apartment buildings is orders of magnitude more and would take many, many years. This is a temporary solution to a long-term problem that we still need to invest in. So this is beneficial because we can execute on them quickly, and they're considerably less costly than permanent infrastructure that we still need to develop. It improves neighborhood safety. Studies show that there are 30% fewer police calls where these programs have been implemented in other cities. Also, my background is in emergency management. These are reusable assets. So when, God forbid, an emergency happens in our city, when not if, resources like these are on the table to be able to use for people experiencing need of emergency shelter. So it's a long-term investment that we can have as an asset that's movable, so there's flexibility there. It's a pathway to permanent housing, which is in many ways the end goal of a lot of these programs. So in other cities, we've seen 60% of people who enter these transition into permanent housing. It's temporary housing, and it's not shelter. That's an important distinction. Congregate shelters, while they're an essential resource in cities for very acute moments of need, they don't necessarily provide the opportunities for people to get stabilized. So shelter would be the first step, but getting people into temporary housing like these is a pathway to get them further along the path towards independence or recovery. This is public, so I hope some folks can have the opportunity. I'm not going to read through these, but these are testimonials from people who've been at the pallet shelters. For the sake of time, I won't read them out, but I recommend if people are interested to hear about the experiences of individuals who've been served by this program. Our local newspaper has also covered the issue extensively. So I don't think I can advocate for subscriptions, but I recommend people try and find a little time to read some of the articles that cover both the process by which these were established, but also the reality of how they've been implemented and managed in the communities. Some counselors have requested some accounting because after all, what we're discussing is a budget adjustment resolution. I'm happy to refer back to these slides during questions. I won't necessarily walk through them line by line, though, unless someone wants me to. I think there's a big piece here, and as much as I'm speaking about a budget adjustment resolution, I'm also making, hopefully, an argument for the importance of this kind of work and funding writ large in our city. And this is not a cheap problem, neither is housing, neither is healthcare. So these are expensive problems, and we have to find ways to fund them. I think someone had mentioned, we have big city problems now, and I think that's, I think that's right. So in addition to this money that we have asked for from a previously allocated $2 million, we are working to secure other funds from state and other resources to help support this work. In regards to that funding strategy, the city has some opioid settlement money that we could use for services. We are asking the county to step in and support this work. There's the S3 Funder Alliance, as well as the New Mexico Governor has identified homelessness as a priority area, and my team has already asked for funding to support case management at these services. Before I jump into this infamous report, I want to quickly say something that's, and I want to say it as emphatically as I can, these sites are not just plopped down in a community. I will speak in a little bit about what community engagement happens before something like this is established in a location, but I also want to make it very clear that there is an operator who runs these sites. The current site is run by the LifeLink, and there is 24-hour staff on site supporting individuals. In addition, they have security cameras and a variety of other resources to make sure that both the folks living there are supported and taken care of, as well as the community members have a name and a person to go to to talk about issues that they might be experiencing. So now the report. So I believe, I think it was 2023, the Office of Affordable Housing and the Office of Economic Development commissioned a study. And I want to actually read one quick line, which is, "The primary goal of the feasibility study was to answer one key question: Does the city of Santa Fe currently own land that could be potentially used and developed into housing?" That was, that was the purpose of this study, the intent of it. The contracted party assessed 10 city-owned sites for residential development feasibility. Again, residential development feasibility. So many of the numbers that folks have been referring to are for 800-foot units, permanent development, and they considered a variety of factors in these. There was a proposed disposition strategy for the sites that were analyzed. So some of the sites, maybe it made sense to sell them to market. Some of the sites, maybe the city donates or sells for affordable housing development. And then there were some other sites that didn't necessarily fit into either of those buckets. There was nothing in this report that spoke to congregate shelter or congregate pallet homes. It was specifically for affordable housing and housing development. So again, the numbers that are cited in this report are 800 square foot units, and it was the potential of what the 10 sites could actually have on them in terms of permanent affordable housing. I think many folks here are familiar with the map. So I also want to be clear that none of these sites, so first off, the numbers, this is an important piece. The city has said, my team has said, no site anywhere in the city will have more than 30 units on it. So those numbers that have been referred to previously, 260 something, I think there's one that's 120 in the study, those again were for permanent housing, 800-foot units on them. The city, we, part of this model is that keeping things small and having them integrated into parts of the community is the success of the model. So none of these sites have actually been approved for anything, at least when it comes to pallet communities. This is just a starting point for my team to say, "Hey, where are there potential places that the city could think about working in part?" partnership with communities to support pallet communities like the one that exists at Christ Lutheran. There's an incredibly robust process for actually standing one of these things up. So in October 2024, and listen, I'll be the first to admit that maybe there are better ways to communicate this, and I welcome—I'm very liberal with my email address and phone number—and I welcome the opportunity to talk to people and explain things. But there is an extensive process that we want to go through to make sure that if we do work with a community to put one of these items, pilot communities, in the community, that we've done it through a good process, that there's buy-in. So in October, we convened a Community Advisory Board, which is comprised of a variety of different both technical experts in the provider community, as well as folks with lived experience and other community members or people who have worked in this space. That board is actually developing a community engagement plan that we are going to use as we move forward with thinking about sites. So there is a process. Starting this winter, we are hoping to do community engagement and neighborhood meetings. So I think someone had mentioned everybody in a radius should get a pamphlet inviting them to a meeting. That is part of the process we want to have. Part of the idea is to give people who live in communities the opportunity to voice their perspectives from that community. Also essential to this work is establishing a good neighbor agreement, which outlines responsibilities, communication protocols, problem-solving processes, and things like that between the community, the service operator, as well as the residents. And these are jointly developed between the neighbors, service providers, and city staff. Staff will also be supporting that. Lastly, once a site is established with an operator, it doesn't end there. There are ongoing meetings. I believe someone mentioned earlier that there's a weekly/monthly meeting at this point with the community members and the LifeLink and the Christ Lutheran Church who are hosting the current pallet community. So there are ongoing meetings and feedback opportunities. I believe, oh, so just very quickly on neighborhood agreements, Good Neighbor Agreements. So we have one in place at Christ Lutheran Church. The purpose again is to build trust between service providers and the community surrounding it. There are clear roles, expectations, regular communication, processes for conflict resolution, as well as accountability measures. And these are a best practice nationally, and I think that's a—we're not in this alone. This is a national problem. There are national models for how this is being addressed elsewhere, and we're very much relying on those. So I'll pause my presentation there, and I'm happy to answer any questions from councilor through the mayor. Mayor: Thank you for taking the opportunity to go beyond the very narrow issue that's in front of us and take this time to expand on the issue of homelessness more broadly. I know there is on the city's website an even more expansive series of slides that lay out a more comprehensive approach that you and your team and others in city government across different departments are working on. The pallet community proposal is just one part of a much more expansive strategy because it has to be. There has to be much more done, and I think we have a—if people want to access that website, it's available on the city's website simply by looking under the homelessness agenda. But with that, I'll begin. I'm sure people on the governing body have questions or comments. We'll do what we've done before. We'll just go around. Everybody, we'll start with a 10-minute opportunity to ask some questions or add their own thoughts before we go any further. If it takes more than one time to go around because people have more to talk about than in just 10 minutes, this is a subject that is worthy of full discussion and I think going as deep as people are prepared to go because homelessness is a serious problem. It involves many different factors, and as you said, Santa Fe is part of a national effort to address this very, very serious problem. It affects people, it affects neighborhoods, it affects businesses. It's a public health issue, it's a mental health issue, and it starts with getting people shelter. So with that, let me just start. Councilor Castro, if you want to kick us off, and we'll just go around this direction, and the city clerk will do her best to politely keep a clock running so that we give everybody a first 10 minutes, and then as we go further, if we go around again, we go around again. So Councilor Castro, you have the floor. Councilor Castro: Thank you so much, Mayor, and thank you to all my colleagues for being here and listening to the community. It's been quite a difficult time, I think, for all of us to grapple with the elephant in the room, which is homelessness, and where are we going to put these shelters, right? And so I want to reiterate that we have not chosen any sites, that we are still in the process of figuring out what the best strategy is to communicate to our constituents and our residents where and how these are going to be managed. I also just want to remind everyone how difficult it is to not know where you're going to stay tomorrow or to stay in a car, and anything we can do to support folks, you know, like Mr. My or Mr. Bacon that we heard from today from our community who are facing homelessness every single day. And I'll end with that. Thank you so much. Mayor: Thank you. I appreciate the comment. Councilor Chavez, you have the floor. Councilor Chavez: Thank you, Mayor. I do want to clarify a few things. I think moving forward, we do have to have clear communication when we get to a place where we're deciding on sites. So there's a lot of confusion because the feasibility report, a lot of our community saw it, and I think thought it was initiated by this bar, but it's not. It existed from a couple years back when we were looking at places to build affordable housing, so it's completely separate from pallet homes. What it does provide, though, is a reference to what properties we own and how they've existed in the conversation of affordable housing. But what you saw in regards to a map or a feasibility report was not brought on by this, this budget adjustment. And I think that's—or budget adjustment—I think that's really important to understand. It's separate from pallet homes, correct? Director: Yes, Councilor. Councilor Chavez: I also think that we may not be prepared as a community to dive that deep into this because of the fact that what we have in front of us is a budget amendment resolution. It's just saying we're going to buy the resources or reserve the funds to be prepared to put up shelters. There's a lot of unknowns for us to dive that deep, and I may be wrong, but that's where—that's what I'm getting is like we don't know where these are going to go. We don't know what other community partners we have that would be interested in supporting them. Those are all unknown questions that we can't dive into very far right now. Is that correct, Mayor? Mayor: Councilor Chavez, I think if I understand the question, and maybe some, like, reading into it a little bit, is this a fair rephrasing: Is why would we buy these now if we don't know where they're going to go? I think we're buying them now just to have them as resources for when we're actually prepared and resourced enough to put them up in the community, correct? Director: Yeah, well, so I just wanted to make sure. Yeah, so the reason why we want to buy them now is so that there's a—we can accomplish a lot of things simultaneously. Purchasing them, it will take, I believe, 14 to 16 weeks for items to arrive. There's a lot of work that needs to happen to get anywhere close to having them installed in a location. Sorry, I can say that again. There's a lot of work that takes to get them installed into a location, so having them on hand is an important step to making sure that once we have all the other pieces, we can move quickly. Councilor Chavez: And so my big point, because I feel like we have a very involved community, which is amazing. Thank you all for being here. But I also don't want anyone to be out there right now thinking we have the answers to some of the questions, which is where is this going to be? Who's going to be partnered? We don't have that. What we have in front of us right now, which is unfortunate if you got misinformation about us having sites and us having this plan, because we don't. What we have in front of us right now is a budget amendment resolution so that we can just get these resources. What I think is clear and what you all really spoke very powerfully about is, okay, once we have these purchased, you better involve us as a community. And I think that I know for myself and some of my colleagues, that's something that we very much so want to emphasize with this purchase, right? With this, because we say, as we just heard from our community, they want to know. They want to have a voice. They want to have an understanding. And obviously, there's a lot of misconception that we have to clear up, which I think is very obvious right now. So, you know, I feel like I'm in support of this with a commitment from us as a city to involve governing body, involve the community, and be very transparent about this process as we go through it, as we consider sites. I think our community needs the answers. I think that they need information easily accessible. Like, you know, if we're going through this process, we should have a live page on our website about where we're at, what kind of conversations are being held, and how they can get involved in those conversations along the way. But even though you all brought your expertise and so much—so many questions, unfortunately, I don't know if we're that prepared to answer some of them because right now, all we're doing is purchasing, purchasing the pallet home, if that makes sense. And I just want to clarify that immediately because I know there's a lot of people on the stands that want answers to some of the things we're not prepared to answer yet. But what's exciting is that gives us an opportunity to involve you all along the way. So I know I'm in support of the purchase, but I'm also in support of the fact that we make you active members in planning what we do next with these resources. So, and I think you're committed as our director in this process and doing the same. Director: Emphatically, yes. Councilor Chavez: All right. Thank you so much. Mayor: Thank you, Councilor. Appreciate it. Councilor Michael Garcia, sir, you have the floor. Councilor Michael Garcia: Thank you, Mr. Mayor, and thank you, Director Paul Hammond, for just continuing to provide more and more and more information. As you can see from folks that showed up, they can't get enough information. And, you know, unfortunately, because of the lack of information and the lack of clarity, and this is no fault to you, Director Paul Hammond, it's—I'm going to say the city in general—it's led to a lot of assumptions and misinformation being out there in the public, which the city should not be doing in the first place. And so, just want to reiterate again that this proposal is just to move money, not approve sites. That's—am I correct that that's correct? Director: That's correct, yes. Councilor Michael Garcia: Okay. So with that being said, I appreciate all the time, energy, and effort that went into the proposal in front of us to justify moving the money, which is three proposed sites, 30 shelters per site, location TBD, right? I really think for something like this to be successful, we just got to scrap that plan, unfortunately, start anew, and look at it from the perspective of this is an issue that has to be prescribed equitably across our community. And what I mean by that is we have four city co— council districts. The proposed plan in front of us, even if you did one per district, one district's not going to get it, and we're going to raise questions, assumptions, et cetera, why didn't this district get it? So what I'd like to propose is that we move forward with looking at one micro-community per district with roughly around the same size, that is, with Christ Lutheran, maybe 15. I mean, something that shows that we're moving forward with what has proven to be successful. We engage the community on the front end, and what I mean to engage the community on the front end is after this meeting concludes today, we begin the engagement process and working with city staff, the city council representatives for those particular districts, and the community. And we began to have these community engagement conversations and not solely looking at the map that's been provided for the affordable housing study, because I think that's a flawed process, as you mentioned, that is, that map was developed to build brick and mortar housing, and there are sites identified on there that I just have challenges with from the onset. I mean, Monac Lucero Park, really? I mean, that is an active park. And so I think this is where we need to start afresh. We, I'm happy to reallocate the money so we can begin to get the necessary resources to properly plan and implement a process, but we began to work with the community is to tell the community we heard. I mean, we heard loud and clear from folks saying this isn't going to work here. Well, let's pose the question in a different way: if it's not going to work here, where is it going to work? And we work with the community to get a solution to that answer, because I am confident, one thing I've learned living in this city is sure, people love to come and provide input, but more importantly, people love to come and help with solutions. And if we engage the community on the front end, I am confident we will have four successful sites similar to what we have at Christ Lutheran that has 100% buy-in from the public, because the concerns brought forth are real. Whether there's data to back it up, those are concerns that residents brought forward. They're the same concerns that were brought forward when the pallet shelter was proposed at District 2, the first one in Christ Lutheran. I heard those same concerns, and I don't hear those concerns anymore because of the engagement that's been there. So there's things such as if we worked it out to do one per district, part of the plan you proposed was to have an advisory board, right? Let's not have an advisory board for the entire city. Let's have an advisory board per district that's made up of the community members that are experts of their community that can help us navigate through these challenging situations. So let me ask you this, how can we make that a reality? I mean, I know we're not giving a proposal now. How can we move forward? Because I want to move forward with a different matter. So I think we could come forward with a resolution directing a community process. So right now what we have in front of us is just the bar. Can we just stick to a regular order of business and we'll go around and you can make a proposal at that time? Sure, I know, but it's Councilor Garcia has the floor, and if we start doing cross-talk, we'll never have any real order. So the question that you were asking, Councilor, was how do we... Mayor: I'm sorry. Councilor: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. And I think Councilor Chavez answered it, which is we bring forward a resolution directing city staff to move forward in that direction of, you know, we have an equitable process of prescribing a solution to this challenge that's not only affecting one part of our city. We've got to be honest, a lot of folks see the challenges on the main streets, but as folks testified, and I will testify, I see it in my community every day. This is an issue that we need to address holistically, and the only way we do that is an equitable manner where we, unfortunately, got to break it out district by district, and we can come up with solutions. So with that, I'll yield the floor, and I guess support the request for a resolution that we move forward in that manner. Thank you. Mayor: And we can come back around, Councilor, if you have things that come to your mind later. Councilor Lindell. Councilor Lindell: Councilor Chavez, I think that you said pretty much what's on my mind. I'm not going to engage in the location of these pallet homes. We're talking about a purchase. We're not talking about the location tonight, is that correct? Councilor: Yes, Councilor. So that's the future. We need to purchase them. We're trying to purchase them now. I forget what the numbers were. We talked about the other night at Finance, how purchasing them now and when the price goes up in June, weren't we talking about saving, I don't know what the number was, but it was hundreds of thousands of dollars to purchase them now rather to wait until June, is that correct? Councilor: Yes, Councilor, there's, we're subject to a 15% price increase. Councilor Lindell: If, if there should be hundreds of thousands of dollars. Correct? Councilor: Yes, Councilor. Right. Councilor Lindell: So I'm going to support this purchase, and unless I'm forced to tonight, I'm not going to engage in location because that's not what is in front of us. Thank you. Mayor: Thank you, Councilor. And Councilor Faulkner. Councilor Faulkner: I'm going to support this as well, but I am of the mind of my colleagues Chavez and Garcia in that you clearly have the community concerned about this issue. Rightfully so, this is a very difficult issue for the city, and I think there's a lot of fear and disempowerment around this issue. And my experience has been the sooner you plug in community and you partner with community to get things done as a collective, the better it goes in the long run. And I think it's one of my biggest soapboxes is that we need to be transparent with the community. And I also think that I like the idea of specific, every district having pallet shelters, but I also think, or pallet homes, but I also think that it is important that we go district by district in the conversation and in the decision-making to work with the activists in that district, to work with the city councilors from that district. And I think why we're having this kind of dovetailing of engaging in the dialogue about locations is because some of us are trying to get out ahead of the community being felt like it's being left out of the dialogue. And so for my part, I do think a resolution is a good idea, and I don't necessarily think we have to discuss that tonight, but I do think it's important that it's clear that there's a decent amount of councilors who feel like it needs to be said tonight that in this process, we want to make sure that we're as transparent and fair and equitable as we can be as a collective between the executive as well as the city council and the community. These issues are going to take everybody to manage. It's going to have to be all hands on deck. And so we might as well start right now philosophically and strategically saying that we want to move forward in a manner that includes all the stakeholders. Thank you. Mayor: Thank you, Councilor Mayworth. Councilor Mayworth: Thank you, Mayor. Apologize for my voice. I think we're not understanding where we are, and there's, I think there's two different things here going on. So Henry, maybe you can, Director Hammond Paul, maybe you can help us. We currently have an RFQ and an RFP out on the street. Can you help us understand what those things are asking for? And my understanding is that we are looking for sites to create more of these micro-communities, no more than 30 in a site, but we, we, the RFP is asking for people, for organizations, either faith-based, whether they're churches or nonprofits, because they work in this area, to come forward because they have maybe like Christ Lutheran space on the property they inhabit where they could host one of these micro-communities. And so we have basically cast our net out there to say, is anybody interested in being like Christ Lutheran and hosting one of these? And my understanding is also that the RFQ is, we can't go forward with a site until we have both the site, somebody willing to provide the place, and an operator. So we have an RFQ out on the street looking for, asking places like LifeLink, other organizations in the community to provide those wraparound services that are absolutely critical to making them be productive. And so right now we're doing that. But then as a, as a yet another issue, we have thought that maybe there's city-owned land that could be used to host a site. And as has been pointed out tonight, the feasibility study that's been put out there is, was not done as what we need to do. It was not done looking for a micro-community. It was done to, as you've pointed out, to, and people come to us all the time and say, why don't you use city land? Why don't you donate city land to developers and have them develop affordable housing on city land? And so that study was done last year in the spring, I believe, to address that and and to begin to look at what city-owned land do we have and is any of it appropriate for affordable housing and could we donate and what are the challenges and and what are the things that would make it more feasible or not. So those sites were not about this micro-community thing. Those sites were about building actually affordable housing. And so, you know, maybe as we start to look at a city-owned host, we may be able to, you know, use that as to see whether there's anything there. So I guess confirm for me and dispel me where I'm wrong in terms of where we are and the fact that we were sort of look, we're looking for three different things: city-owned property, maybe a faith-based organization or other nonprofit, and we actually have RFPs on the street right now asking for people to come forward. Director: Thank you, Councilor. That is correct. And, you know, I think we may have got the the RFs reversed, but we have an ask out, and I'll use lay terms, an ask out for people with land. So there's two components here: land and operations. We have an ask out for groups like Christ Lutheran who want to come forward and say, I have land that this could be on. Then we have another piece, which is operations, and we have another request out for operators to come. You don't have anything until you have both land and operators together. Every single step along the way, though, the community will be engaged and brought into the process. So I just wanted to add that as a component. So it's really three pieces: it's land, operators, and then buy-in. Councilor Mayworth: Okay, so hopefully we're going to get two sites. I mean, in an ideal world, we might get two sites from either faith, one from a faith-based and one from a nonprofit. Maybe we'll get none, you know, that's possible. And maybe we need to do more education and ask, you know, and help people understand what these are and what they're not so that maybe people look and say, oh, actually we could support this. So yeah, so I, I just want to be clear, and the reason I use the alphabet soup, the RFP and the RFQ, is that those processes are dictated by state law and have specific rules about, so we have bidders coming forward, and until an evaluation committee selects the bid, the the awarding, the winning bidder, those things can't be disclosed. Am I correct in that? Director: I might refer to Council, City, that that is, that is correct. But I, I also want to maybe add that in those processes, the the RFQ where we're asking community organizations or people to come up and and suggest plots of land that they have that similar to Christ Lutheran Church could be used for this purpose, are obviously land specific. But the operator RFP does not, is not site specific. We, we need someone who can work on a site. Is that, is that a correct articulation, Julie? Okay, bringing up the real expert in the brands. Councilor: Mr. Mayor, Councilor, so you're correct. The RFP is a closed-bid process, and as we're going through that process, of course, we cannot disclose any information about bidders. But yes, I would add that in the RFQ, there are site-specific qualifications. So, for one, the city can only enter into a lease agreement, unfortunately, with nonprofits and the faith-based community. And so that's one of the big criteria that we have for those private spaces. I just want to make sure that's clear. Okay, and if I may, just to reiterate, the RFP, which is the closed bid, is not—there are not sites identified in that that are going to be revealed. That is, it's for an operator, right? And I guess I'm almost out of time, so I'm going to have to wait until we come back around to me again. But I want to be clear, though, that as soon as there is a site and an operator, and so we have the two, which would then make it worth going forward, there immediately begins this public engagement, starting with the people who are—I think somebody in public comment said, "Get notice out to a three-block radius." And I don't know what block radius you use, but that is absolutely the next step: to begin the conversation with any surrounding neighbors so that they understand what's being built, what concerns they have. I know, for instance, at Christ Lutheran, one of the things that was done was to put up a coyote fence because that was a neighborhood concern about kind of containing that micro-community. And I think it's ended up being good not only for the neighbors but I think also in terms of creating a place for the people who live there. And that's also something, back to the cost, site-specific cost. It's not just that we're buying the shelters, but then depending on the site, we may have to do other things like build a coyote fence because that's something that helps the micro-community fit into the space and into the place where it's being brought. So I just want to emphasize, we're not hiding this and then springing it on everybody. But we are in the middle of a process, and there are three different types: a faith-based, a nonprofit, and then the city-owned. But I think to the resolution piece, we'd have to have an operator, and maybe we do need a resolution that describes how we go about selecting a city slot. I don't know that we have anything that's actually even going to be appropriate. But anyway, my time is up, and I'll wait to come back around. Thank you. Thanks for the self-stop, Counselor Cassid. Thank you so much. I'm going to look at my start time. All right, yeah, that's helpful. So first of all, I do want to thank everybody who has come out, who has reached out. I, unfortunately, was not as on top of getting back to people as I usually am. I've had a sick kiddo for like three weeks. But I was able to talk to a few of my constituents today. I actually had a really interesting experience talking to two of them, both in the Kachina Ridge neighborhood. What I think was really important about that is, you know, I think we've all acknowledged that communication is actually really challenging and how we do this. And we've tried different ways. We are dealing with very complex topics and how we can get information out in a way that is going to make the community feel that they are informed. However, we also have a risk that I feel that we're seeing tonight, which is that when information is put out of context, and or sometimes with misinformation, as I did see in this arena, that it can cause a really large concern that then we have to spend a lot of time and resources and energy with each other trying to kind of get back to a place of, "Here's where we are." When I was talking to two of my constituents in Kachina Ridge, two things: one, again, sites have not been selected. There is a process already in place that has successfully been utilized to engage the community when a site is deemed as a potential. And so before we're even approving that site, before we even approved Christ Lutheran, that robust community engagement process took place. Those plans were in order, so that is part of this process. And that point of clarification, Mr. Mayor, because that's not true. We approved the RFP, and then the community engagement process happened. Okay, yeah, we're going to go around again, Counselor, and if you want to add some thoughts, then that'd be great. You remember where you were, Counselor Cassid, you have the floor. Thank you. So there is a very robust community engagement process. There's a good neighbor agreement. There is this opportunity for the community to understand what these look like. Now, when I spoke with two constituents today, one actually said, "You know, after hearing more about this model, this process, I'm okay with this in my neighborhood." The other one was like, "Maybe it softened me a little bit, but I'm still not convinced." But that is why this is so important. And what I really appreciate about that conversation is, you know, we were talking about how the only model that they are really familiar with is what we are seeing with kind of the overflow on Cerrillos Road. This is a different model. As mentioned, Interfaith is a congregate shelter, but it's also a model that unfortunately the world outgrew. Things changed. And Interfaith has done a lot of incredible work, as they were mentioning, you know, it's not just the emergency shelter. But there have been a lot of challenges that have occurred. And so I understand a lot of constituents having a lot of kind of misbelief that this does not cause a negative impact because the only model that they have seen has really—there are real issues that are happening along that Cerrillos Road corridor. I talk about it all the time. When the first safe outdoor space was going, I told staff, "Don't you dare bring me anything along the Cerrillos Road corridor because it will fail in the court of public opinion, even if it is a success, because of all of the noise on Cerrillos, it will fail." Again, to the point of what we're deciding today is whether or not this is a model that has seen success, that can assist us with this issue, and should we continue to pursue it, to which I am very—we'll say my answer is absolutely yes. This model has been seen both here and in other communities. As somebody mentioned, we have seen in other communities that they've actually seen a reduction in crime when they have had one of these safe outdoor spaces in their neighborhood. And I understand that that probably sounds unbelievable to individuals who have not gone through this really large community engagement and conversation. I do want to say that if we're talking about equity of services, serving the homeless population, the safe outdoor spaces are one strategy out of a whole spectrum of strategies. I believe that right now District 3 is the only district that does not currently have a homeless shelter of some sort. Is that correct, Julia? So, Henry, can you reiterate to the Zoom public if that is correct? I personally don't have that information, but I will reiterate that Julie Sanchez, Director of Youth and Family Services, did say that that is correct. No, I'm not saying this means, "Oh, we need to go throw this in District 3." I just want to—what I'm pointing out is that when we are looking at the whole spectrum of services, there are a wide variety of services. Interfaith is technically in District 1, although I'd say with a pretty heavy overflow into District 4. St. Elizabeth is in District 1. The safe outdoor space and Santa Fe Suites, District 2. Lamplighter, I believe, is technically District 1. And then with District 4, we have Consuelos, we have the recovery center. So we actually do have a lot of resources spread throughout the city. And I think that we do need to be thinking about that as we're looking at it. The other thing—I feel like I'm a little all over the place. The other big thing that I would want to point out, the homeless population is a heterogeneous population. And unfortunately, we will see a lot of individuals feeling like some of our most challenging people that you may see on the street that may or may not be homeless, to actually be perfectly honest, there's a lot of them who are not, who are causing some of our challenges. There are a lot of other people in the community that are, you know, maybe not necessarily the ones that people are seeing on the street. And Henry, so to bring back to the process of how people are chosen, this is a process where residents are vetted, and we even are having discussions around specific populations that may have very specific needs, for example, families, veterans, seniors. On that list, it does talk about in some of these areas that we're looking at different populations. Can you speak a little more to both the individuals, how they get into this program, but also there are rules that they have to follow, and if they are not following those rules, if they are causing any disruption, they're not welcome to stay? Thank you, Counselor. I think to sum it up, it's not a one-size-fits-all model, and that the buy-in to this model is understanding that different populations have different needs. On the graph, the table that I didn't go into detail on, I think some folks saw that there are 120-square-foot units and 70-square-foot units. 120-square-foot units are designed to accommodate families. So some sites might be specific for families, some might be specific for veterans, some might be specific for disabled people, some might be specific for sober centers. So there is an operational aspect where we would work to make sure that we are putting sites and populations in places that will ultimately mesh and work the right way. I don't know if that answered your question. That does, and I think that that's really important that there is this component that—and what I would hope is that that includes not just the individuals within the community but also that neighborhood. Am I correct there? Yeah, and I think also, I think there's a lot we can talk about in the homeless response system that exists here in Santa Fe, but we do have multiple different assets in the community serving different populations already: men's shelters, women's shelters, domestic violence shelters. We do have low-barrier shelter, which is the lowest barrier for anybody to access. We have a shelter at Midtown that has a school bus stop at it because there are children living there. So it is a wide berth of individuals who access these services. Right, and again, I think to that point, that it is not only is it not a one-size-fits-all, but you cannot categorize one individual who is housing insecure based on another individual that you have interacted, that you know to be or assume to be housing insecure. I know that I am running out of time. The last thing that I will say, I think this is really important, cannot be said enough, for the feasibility study. So this is a feasibility study that simply looks at the highest and best use when it comes to the number of units you could put on a location. So you're looking at zoning, you're looking at floodplains, you're looking at, you know, what is developable. It does not necessarily mean that that would—if we say we could fit 300 units on that site, that does not necessarily mean that if the city were to move forward with developing, we would actually definitely be putting 300 units on that site. Now, that would be a conversation to have as we are looking at each. of these units, but I think that that is really important. I know that we had this conversation when we purchased Game and Fish, that yes, this is a potential, you know, great property for a lot of housing, but there would also be conversations around what other community amenities are needed in this neighborhood. So the land use feasibility study, it is a great place for us to get started because we know what land we have and what are some of the possibilities there. And, you know, we have to have that information to go ahead and move forward. I would also say that the reason that we are seeing the properties where we're seeing them, remember that earlier, if any of you were here in my earlier comment about how land use seems boring, but the general plan is really, really important. This is part of it. There are patterns of development that have occurred throughout our city that have led to all of the open space being over on the south side, and all of the density really coming in on the south side. Now, there are still patterns that are going to be leading to that. So I would just put in my earlier pitch for getting involved in that general plan conversation because that impacts things like where can we put 300 housing units and why can't them out other places of the city and why does the city own land here and not here? Thank you, Councilor. I'm out of time. Mayor: Thank you. May I quickly, I just want to, for the sake of clarity for everybody, when we anchor to numbers, the 300 units are not the pallet units that would be for affordable housing, permanent structures. We, as a city, are looking to put no more than around 30 on a given community site. Thank you for the clarification. Councilor Lee Garcia, thank you for your patience. You have the floor. Councilor Lee Garcia: I want as much time as she had. Mayor: You get exactly. I'm just kidding. You have the exact, you'll get the exact same amount. Councilor Lee Garcia: It seems like it's taking an eternity to get here. That being said, Councilor, I'd point out that I'm last, not you. You'll be, I just, you know, for the sake of time as well, I mean, a lot of the things that have been brought up from my colleagues here are addressed. You know, I think before I go into either my comments or questions, I would like to reiterate that yes, we are discussing moving $2 million from a previous budget to a current budget, and that's what's important here. And it gives us one opportunity to either agree that we're why we're going to move this money, or disagree why we're going to move this money. So that's the power that we have tonight to either approve or disapprove this BAR. The second opportunity we have as a governing body is going to be when those RFPs come to us for approval because that's also an approval of money. Now, I think it's up to a certain amount. And so, you know, I think that the concerns of the community are very well received in regards to, well, let's just go ahead and do whatever you want to do with it. And so I think that given the fact that many of those questions have been brought forth in regards to the community engagement, there is a process that's going to be utilized, which models out over the first project, which was a pilot project, which has had good success. And so, you know, community engagement, management, and support, safety, these are all things that the community brought forth during their public comment. You know, can there be a reduction in size of some of these? How do we identify how many homes actually fit on any given property? New land use code or so on and so forth. I mean, what is going to be the rule that we follow? You know, notifying, is it a three-block radius? There was a question about that, or is it, you know, square miles? I don't know. You know, being noticed and then obviously full transparency. I think that that is really one of the biggest things that our community wants. You know, when I've been asked about this issue, and those that are concerned about it, and they do raise the question about, you know, there's people on the arroyos and says, well, they are in the arroyo, they are sleeping behind your house right now. I don't know if this is going to fix that because that's probably a whole another issue. It sounds like what we're trying to do is giving people a transitional opportunity to get stable and onto greener pastures, so to speak. And in regards to this, I'm going to ask about the money situation because we are approving $2 million or disapproving it depending on what the board feels like. But initially, we approved just shy of a million and a half for what was supposed to be 100 units of pallet shelters. Is that correct? I'm not sure that if I, when we initially approved money to buy pallet homes, it was in the range of about 90 to 100 pallet homes, if I remember correctly. I mean, well, this predates me, but I think it was up to, it was to start the process of purchasing up to 100, but it wasn't, I don't believe it was intended to cover the complete 100. Sure. So we bought, I think what was it, the 40 units, and then the remainder of that money that was appropriated actually went into probably the support of the community that's already up. Yeah, the construction cost and things like that, right? Okay. We're looking at buying more. That's one of the big things that we're looking at now. That's the main issue of buying more pallet homes. And then as you have here, you have put out the costs of these sleeping units, whether they're 120 square feet or 70 square feet, community room, bathrooms, and laundries. So, you know, that's in your projected cost here. You're looking close to $3.3 million. So $2 million is not going to cover everything. Where are we getting the rest of the money? Thank you, Councilor. So there's a couple additional sources that we'll be looking at. We, at the legislative breakfast, I believe it was in early December, the number one priority from the city to our state legislators was money to support non-congregate and affordable housing solutions. So hopefully, I mean, and I say that in that if money is brought in through that, there's a lot of different tools that we need to put in place and again, thinking of that whole spectrum. So it's not like all of the money that would come from the state for capital would be applied to pallet communities. We need to also invest in affordable housing and other types of solutions. So a portion of that could help fill that gap. And we have some additional resources to help fill that gap as well, hoping that the county perhaps can come in to support and other local philanthropies and entities like that. Thank you. I guess the last question I'm going to have is, we do currently have organizations that have submitted RFPs that are in the process of being evaluated. Yes, sir. So connecting the dots once again, the money, the RFPs are in process. And so again, going back to transparency, I think it is imperative that we do make certain that once these are out, you know, the public is notified of what's potentially going to happen in each of the districts. I'm not opposed to having something in District 3. Councilor Folkert and I talk about this all the time. I think that everyone has to put their efforts together to solve a very real issue that's in our communities. And I do feel that, you know, trying to share this throughout our whole city, and I do understand and I do know that there are non-congregate shelters in other districts, and I know that, but this is the pallet model of what we're trying to do, and it is somewhat different than just putting up a building and letting people stay there. It is a strategically, scientifically utilized, and hopefully it has to be managed properly throughout the whole process because once it isn't, then I think that it is very important for myself and others that I have spoken to that we make sure that it is done right and it continually is managed properly. And I think through those RFP proposals, we'll have the opportunity in the future to either again, say yes or no, depending on who we feel is there. So I think just looking at the data, looking at the information that's proposed and giving our community full transparency because this, the fear is out there, it's going right behind your house and you don't know what's going to happen there. And yet there's maybe somebody sleeping right there already. And so, you know, someplace that is managed and controlled seems a lot better than just anyone's in any given place at any given times. That's all I have, Mr. Mayor. Mayor: Thank you, Councilor. We'll go back around again in a minute. I'm going to take the privilege of the chair to make a few remarks. First, I want to thank everybody for coming out tonight, and whether you're here or you are on Zoom, I think this was an incredibly constructive evening. We talked about more than a BAR. We talked a lot about a very complicated issue, and we also talked about the depth of feelings and sincere emotions that people have, whether they think pallet shelters are a thing that they endorse or something that they are very concerned about. Everybody demonstrated a great deal of respect and listening to each other, and I think we learned a lot tonight. I know I did, and I appreciate the spirit of the dialogue was really important. I do think that we learned, I learned a few things. One is that community engagement never stops. It's a constant activity. There's an old saying, you don't wait to fix the roof until it starts to rain. And I think the same thing goes for issues that we know people are very concerned about. We don't wait to choose sites before talking about why the city has endorsed pallet communities as one of our solutions, before we talk about what the other elements of our program are. If you are interested in the broader picture and you have access to the city's website, simply by looking under homelessness, you'll find a work in progress that was dubbed an emergency action plan to address homelessness in Santa Fe, and it's got quite a few different components to it, including and starting with community safety as the highest priority. So I think Director Hammond Paul and his team here, as well as all of us up here on the governing body, hear very loud and clear that there are a number of values that need to be embraced even as we address homelessness. They are transparency, fairness, equity, respect, open exchange of ideas and opinions. We need to do a better job always of communicating. You can't overcommunicate, and we need to remember that not everybody follows these issues as closely as some of us who are elected do. Mr. Hammond Paul has provided a very interesting timeline that goes back to 2020 to 2023, identifying 10 or 11 different attempts that were made to purchase buildings for non-congregate shelters. That's a very interesting fact. The city has been out looking for ways to address homelessness that would use already existing structures, and because the market is so hard, we haven't succeeded. That's why this BAR is coming forward to repurpose that money so that it can be put to constructive use to address homelessness, but not the only possible solution. There were two very successful town hall meetings over at the convention center where we had roundtable discussions around what a pallet community looked like. There was a model of the pallet. Many of us had never seen one before, and simply having those two town hall meetings back in August of '22 was a really constructive step toward dialogue, not around specifically, but around pallets as a part of a solution. We can do more of those. We can do more engagement and more dialogue. In 2023, the governing body endorsed a Safe Outdoor Spaces resolution, which is the policy of this government. And with all of the discussion about where to put potential sites or potential communities, I haven't heard anybody on the governing body say they don't think that pallet communities are part of our solution, nor seek to do away with the resolution that was adopted endorsing these safe outdoor spaces as a part of our response. So the question is not at the moment whether we should do them, but how we should do them so people feel consulted, engaged, and involved in solving homelessness in Santa Fe. There is no doubt that the Christ Lutheran Church pilot project is a success. To the best of my knowledge, the people who have stayed there are finding stability and safety. The neighborhood is enjoying a safe outdoor space in their community. People have moved on in some instances to really good housing options, which is what that pilot project is supposed to provide. And if we can replicate that model, we will cut into the numbers that Director Ham and Paul started with, which really ask us to face the brutal fact that we have a lot of people in Santa Fe who are homeless, and many of them are kids. And we can't do nothing. We have to take action as a community to address this crisis of homelessness. And I, for one, welcome more dialogue and more exchange, more back and forth, information based on our shared values that tell us we don't want people sleeping in arroyos. You saw, maybe in the paper, the remarkable response that happened when the Arctic blast hit Santa Fe, and a group of people and our team, the Farmers Market, the Red Cross, individual residents, rallied so that in a period of three to four days, we sheltered 85 to 90 people who otherwise might have been, they might have died. Lives were saved. I think if we embrace that spirit toward housing people in some pallet communities we currently unhoused, I think we'll find the same result, which is we rise to be our best selves, and we end up making a significant improvement in our sense of housing people and in our sense of community safety. So I think this is a really robust conversation, and I really appreciate all the dialogue and the input. I don't think we should wait for site selection to do more community engagement. I don't think you can do too much, and I think we need to continue to provide good information, good data, good options. I think we need to have the kind of meetings where people who have lived experience can speak their hearts, their heart's feelings, to everybody else. And when we do that, empathy and understanding inevitably happen. So thank you for the presentation, Director Hammond Paul, and I will start back around if anybody wants to say a few more words about this issue. Councilor Castro: Yes, thank you, Mayor. I'll try to be brief. I just want to commend Director Hammond Paul. I think I have definitely given him a hard time this week, so I appreciate all the answers to the questions and answering the phone calls and the emails. Would you please just speak to some best practices at Christ Lutheran and some of the lessons learned? Thank you, Councilor. Maybe I'll start with the beginning, and actually echo some words from Councilor Chavez from earlier in the night with regard to the general plan when she was speaking towards outreach as an important part of engagement. So I know that there was considerable outreach, and not just only seeing who showed up, but going out and finding the people who might have something to say to balance out a full perspective of a community. So that was an initial best practice. Continued engagement with the community is another best practice. Good neighbor agreements, regular meetings with the community, also operators and organization is a best practice. These aren't one-size-fits-all models. So there are clinical ways to deal with substance use issues or other mental or behavioral health issues. So those are clinical decisions that an operator may choose to build into a specific model, whether a model has sobriety as a condition or not. But they are employing best clinical practices when it comes to mental and behavioral health, as well as substance use disorders. Good intake processes, making sure that the people who are being considered or referred to these units are actually going to be on a path towards success. We don't want to put people into a place where they're not going to do well. Having security is another best practice. I can, maybe I'll pause there and see if there's additional questions. No, I'll just add a few comments that some lessons learned I've heard of is to have security budgeted for, right? We learned that we needed to have a sanitation unit. We learned that we had to have places for folks to do their laundry. So we are doing better. We will continue to do better. We will definitely include community in any conversation and decision. And I yield the floor. Thank you. Thank you very much. Councilor Chavez, Councilor Garcia. Councilor Garcia: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Director Hammond Paul, can you clarify for me because I want to make sure we're talking this topic at hand that we've been talking about for the last month. These three sites that have been proposed to us have been proposed to us as city-owned sites. Am I correct in that understanding? Councilor Garcia, I don't believe in the past month any sites have been proposed. No, we're not talking about site selection. So the proposal in front of us is we're purchasing all of these pallet shelters. We're identifying, we want to identify three city-owned sites to develop these 30-unit micro-communities. It is, it is, there's moving parts in that. It wasn't locked into three city sites versus one private site. The, the, the basic math that we have is that there's a number of units that we want to put out, and how we can engage the community and find places to put them is, is how we want to move forward. So city-owned sites are part of the equation. It's for a couple reasons. They make sense, including financially. Councilor Garcia: Okay, so with that being said, I understand the alphabet soup, RFP, RFQ, whatever you want to call it. The city-owned sites, this is where the transparency process comes into play, and the public ultimately loses trust in us because we're not being forthcoming that this is a proposal at hand. We're not forthcoming that, you know, these are sites that we're investigating. It's because the matter of fact is, I'm not even as a city councilor getting clear and constant information. I had to submit an IA to try to find information around what's being proposed. That is not how a project of this magnitude should be moving forward. Now, it's been stated by, you know, one of my colleagues that you can never do community engagement enough. Well, let's reflect back when this whole pallet shelter conversation began. It was only because of my urging that we had these town halls. Community engagement, unfortunately, is not in the vocabulary of this administration. Community engagement is something that needs to happen anytime the city wants to utilize city resources. And in this instance, the city resources that are planned to be utilized are not only the $2 million to purchase pallet shelters, hygiene units, operators, so service providers, but also the land. And then when you start bringing into the context of the land where we're going to place these, the public has a right to be confused due to the lack of information that's being provided to them. Okay, that's all right. So I think this is where we can do better. We must do better. We have to do better, especially on a project like this. This is why I would like for us to rethink this process, especially with city-owned property. We, we, we've had the conversation around, well, we're following the process that we did previously. We cannot, we, we, we are holding our hands tied if we follow that process because that was a private property process. We're talking public property now. There's nothing that prohibits us from having proactive conversations with community members, and that unfortunately is not happening. And I think that is what's concerning for the public right now. We heard it loud and clear from folks coming in, whether folks are in full support of it. You heard folks that are saying, hey, look, we, we've got concerns. Let's work to address them. That's what community engagement and dialogue is all about. And so with this being said, Councilor Garcia mentioned, I'm, I'm now having some concerns about allocating $2 million because now we've said we don't even have sites selected. Do I need to refresh the memory of the public that we have 29 pallet shelters sitting in storage right now? The last thing I'd want is for us to have another 70 or so sitting in storage. And I understand the urgency of, we've got to get this to, to get the discount at, at hand. Well, I'm not confident that we're, we, we have our thumb on the temperature in regards to how many we actually need because right now it's hypothetical, at least to me. I know there's an RFP out, but it's all hypothetical in the sense there's no justified, there's no approved RFP right now. We've got potential identified sites through this study that is not even directly relevant to pallet shelter communities. It's, it's completely only relevant to the development of affordable housing. And I, I, at the end of the day, I believe every single one of us, whether it's on this dais or in the audience, wants to work to address the unhoused issues. But as a city councilor, I have the responsibility to ensure that we are expending taxpayer resources appropriately and ensuring that we have the full faith and confidence that whatever we spend it on is going to be fully utilized, supported, and successful. And so I guess let me ask this question. If we've got, if we've had 29 pallet shelters sitting there in storage, why have we not developed a micro-community on public property to talk the talk? We're talking the talk here saying it's successful on privately owned property. What is ultimately holding us back from posting it on a, on public property now? Besides needing operator and the social support services, is there anything that's holding us back from saying we are going to deploy those 29 sites at such and such location? Does, does, does such a move like that require approval of the city council? There were a couple questions in there, Councilor. I'll try and answer them. I think per the conversation tonight, we have discussed community engagement as a precondition for, for establishing a site. So that, that is a condition that we would want to really buy into and, and use for the deployment of those purchased assets. Second is the operator needing to have a contract in place for an operator. The, the sooner we can begin and move forward with these things, you know, from my perspective, Sarah, there's, the urgency to provide these kind of resources for the community is immense. So I'm, I'm eager to move on a quick timeline, and I respect and, and agree with your urgency there. And I want to balance the, the urgency with making sure that a process is brought forward that respects the council's as well as the community's desire for community engagement. So, so those sentiments heard loud and clear, and we couldn't agree more that they're essential components to making anything work well. Councilor Garcia: And one thing I'll just ask, and I've asked for it again in the past, and I'll ask for it again, which is what is the overall plan for the city? Because we are now taking $2 million from congregate shelters, which we saw was highly successful over the past week. We're now moving all of those resources into pallet shelters. What is the long-term? long-term plan for us because to be successful, we've got to have congregate shelters, we've got to have pallet shelters, we've got to have transitional housing, we've got to have affordable housing, we've got to have workforce housing. Where are all those dots being connected? Because right now, all I'm seeing is one issue having money taken from it, being put into another issue. We need to have a long-term plan in place, and I hope we can get there because I don't see one right now. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Councilor Lindell, you have the floor. I'm going to call the question, Mayor. We've all had a go with this. We haven't had a chance to go around again. The Mayor said we could go around again, and I know this is a non-debatable motion, so we can vote on it, but technically, if everybody's had one chance to speak, we've filled that requirement. We can vote down the motion to call the question if people feel they want to keep talking. Was there a second to that motion? Second. There is a second. So, Madam Clerk, can you call the roll on the motion to question? Councilor Chavez? Yes. Councilor Faulkner? Councilor Lee Garcia? Yes. Councilor Michael Garcia? Yes. Councilor Lindell? Yes. Councilor Romero Wirth? No. Councilor Cassutt? No. Councilor Castro? Oh, I didn't get that vote. Sorry. No. Thank you. Mayor Weber? No. If people want to keep talking, I think we should allow them to keep talking. I think we will call the question soon, but there are folks on the other side of the who feel they need a few things. May I get a quick sip of water, please? Yeah, we, well, you don't have anybody at the podium at the moment. Then we'll come back around as Henry gets. Take your time, Mr. Hammond Paul. You've been up there for a while, and you should enjoy a little. No, no, I think it's important for you. You've been holding the microphone for a while, and you need a break. And as you noted, you've got some strong support with you. Councilor Faulkner, you have the floor. I want to thank you, Director. I know you've been on the hot spot this entire time, in the hot seat, and I know you're very passionate about this issue, and I really respect you for how much you care about this and what you bring to the city on this topic to help us resolve this problem. I just want to put that out there first. I do have one question. In the RFQ, is it RFP, RFQ? Is it in the RF, whatever? Does that include, like, in that process when we award that, does that include the sites having already been selected? Thank you, Councilor. First, for your thanks. It's a pleasure and honor to do this work. So, the Q is for a private operator, a private site, and the P is for, I'm trying to come up with a mnemonic, but the P is for a provider. So, the Q for the private site, we would basically enter a lease agreement with a nonprofit or a faith-based organization. As part of that lease agreement, we would be able to include in that agreement making sure that there is community engagement as part of any work that we do with them. For the P part, the provider sites are not part of that RF request for, I've had a very, very long day, and so I'm going to get loopy on this topic. So, there, in the Q part, there will be no city property selected. That process, I just want to be clear because I'm trying to track it, and it's confusing to me. It's probably confusing to you. Okay. And then I would just like to reiterate that as we go through this process, I would really appreciate it if the community was part of helping us select sites, that we don't pick sites and then let the community know what they were. I think we're going to face a lot less pushback if the community is allowed to have some ownership in the decision-making. Thank you. Thank you, Councilor. Councilor Romero Wirth, you have the floor. Thank you, and thank you, Councilor Faulkner, for going through the RFQ, RFP, private, public, because I do, again, we're looking for a private site from either faith-based or nonprofit. We're also talking about a city site. But has there, Director Hammond Paul, have we picked a city site? Is there a proposed plan in front of us anywhere? There's not a proposed plan. There's a variety of factors that go into optimizing any kind of decision like this. We have to understand the value of, first, the feasibility of a site being even in a community, feasibility of that land, how many parcels it could accommodate, things like that. It's, so there's a matrix that we need to use to identify sites, but then also the component of community engagement that needs to happen. But none of those pieces can stand alone. They all have to be brought together for any type of proposal for a single site. And we have to have an operator. Yeah, so we don't have yet from operator engagement, the provider of a location. Yeah, the provider. We, and we don't have that yet because the RFP is still out. It's still being, I believe, in the RFP process of awarding. Okay. That's helpful. And I also, I want to be really clear, the money, the $2 million, where it sits right now is $2 million that we're trying to use to buy a building, an existing building, to create non-congregate shelters. We're not taking money from congregate whatever strategies and moving it over to non-congregate. It's, this is non-congregate money. We couldn't buy a building, so now we're taking it and we're putting it again towards non-congregate concept in these pallet shelters. Correct? That's correct. The non-congregate concept is consistent, right, between the initial use and the use that we're hoping to use it for now. And then quickly, City Attorney, it's not necessary for us as councilors to IA information to get it. If we had wanted that feasibility study, we could have just asked you for it, and it would have been provided to us. Correct? May councilors, you all have the right to any information that is subject to IPRA pursuant to city code. And my understanding is, excuse me, I have the floor. My understanding is the report that was IID was provided to the council not pursuant to the IPRA. Okay, thank you. And in terms of, can you repeat again where the strategy, so we've talked about the fact that these, these shelters, these, these pallet shelters, sorry, are one piece of a broad strategy to address homelessness. Where can the public find that broad strategy? It's on our website, right? That's correct. I believe it's SantaFeNM.gov/homelessness. Okay, so that strategy is, it's on the, that's been there, and we do have a plan. Some of it, well, I'm not going to get into that because I don't have time, but there is a plan. It's out there. It's on the website. Correct? That's correct, Councilor. Okay, thank you, Mayor. That's all I have, and apparently my voice is not going to, it sounds like it hurts. Councilor Cassutt, you have the floor. Thank you so much, Mr. Mayor. I'll be quick. I just want to again confirm there's a scenario in which we use only private sites, and there's a scenario in which we use only public sites, and there's a scenario in which we might use a combination of private and public. And at this moment in time, we do not know which scenario is going to come into being, and that is forthcoming and part of that community engagement process that we've discussed. Correct? That's a fair articulation of it, yes. Great, thank you. The other thing that I, you know, I do think that looking at this in terms of the broader strategy is really important. I also think that it is crucial that we recognize that we cannot wait until we have everything in place to get started. So, we know that part of this issue is housing. Housing is an issue we've been struggling with for a very long time, that we've been looking at different ways that we can increase our housing supply, especially our housing supply at the most affordable rates, that, you know, when we're, we, as somebody said, somebody who is coming out of homelessness, and it also has to do with our entire housing spectrum. You know, that our housing supply at the low end, that there, this is a fluid conversation when we talk about what our housing needs look like. We do have to continue to pursue those to the best of our ability, as we have continued to do, and looking at solutions. We will not have a perfect system in place, probably ever. I've yet to see, well, apparently, you were saying Madison, maybe we should take a look at what they're doing. But I would be remiss for us to start implementing strategies that we have seen success until we have an entire system built, because then we are just going to continue to watch this problem grow. And so, I think that that is an important piece that we, we may not have, we do not have, we don't, we do not have every building block completely in place. We are going to be building this entire strategy as we go. Housing is an extremely complex issue. I highly recommend taking a look at some of the livability series talks that really dives into a lot of the complexity around housing and a lot of the challenges that we have with how many units we're short and making sure that we have those units. So, I think that having the larger plan, the larger vision is extremely important, and we do need all these different pieces. We need day services, we need, in an ideal world, congregate shelter would be like emergency shelter that somebody is coming in and out within 72 hours because then we're able to get them into, you know, temporary non-congregate shelter. We've seen the models work so much more successfully, and then moving them into other areas. There are also aspects of this that are, you know, kind of part of some of our wider state challenges. Mental health is a really big issue, and having mental health providers, there's a statewide network concern here. Some of our public safety issues, actually, this is a great time to be talking to your state reps. We're in a 60-day, there's a lot of conversation going on around all of these topics: homelessness, housing, crime and safety, and mental health, and they're all interconnected here. And so, please do take the opportunity to reach out to your state reps. But I would just say that, you know, we do have to be very strategic in how we are implementing. We do have to make sure that we are setting ourselves up for success, that we're using the best practices. But unfortunately, you know, there is going to be a scenario where there might be an individual in a micro-community, safe outdoor space, pallet shelter, whatever you want to call them, we've used different names. They may be ready for independent living, and we do not have a space for them at that moment, and that is something we have to continue to work on. But I, I, I think that we need to, we won't, we cannot have the entire system in place before we get started. There are people on the street, and we need to do what we can. So, I would just say, oh, I'm going to be Carol's voice, or sorry, Councilor Romero Wirth, it's late. I only have tourist info from last night. When you house people, they won't be causing problems. There have been no calls for service at Christ Lutheran. Oh, that is good information. But anyway, that, that is what I would say, that we continue to work on this broader strategy, but we can't, when we have the pieces in place, we're going to have to jump at that piece, even if we don't have every single thing in place, and just keep working towards it. So, thank you. Thank you, Councilor. Councilor Lee Garcia, Councilor Faulkner, I'm going to call for the vote. Call the question. Second. There's a second. Please call, please. To the Councilor Castro? Yes. Councilor Chavez? Councilor Faulkner? Yes. Councilor Lee Garcia? Yes. Councilor Michael Garcia? Yes. Councilor Lindell? Councilor Romero Wirth? Yes. Councilor Cassutt? Yes. Mayor Weber? Yes. Motion passing. Okay, we have before us a motion with regard to the $2 million bar, and it's time to call the roll. Councilor Faulkner: Yes. Councilor Lee Garcia: Yes. Councilor Michael Garcia: Yes. And I'd like to explain my vote. Councilor Lindell: Yes. Councilor Rorth: Yes. Councilor Cassett: Yes. Councilor Castro: Yes. Councilor Chavez: Yes. Mayor Weber: Yes. Motion is approved. Thank you, Councilor Garcia, you have an opportunity to explain your vote, sir. Councilor Michael Garcia: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. First, thank you, Director Paul Hammond, for everything. I voted yes because we need to have the resources to move forward with a project like this. I can't stop stressing enough, community engagement is a must, and I believe we've got to get that started tomorrow. Thank you, Councilor. Mayor Weber: Madame Clerk, we're back on the regular order. If you would take us to the next item. I would also, for the benefit of everybody who is here, thank you for coming in and sticking with us and listening to the conversation. And we will continue to work on this issue and take it out to the public, not only when there are specific items to discuss, but just to get input. Okay, Madame Clerk, item 15, Matters from the Clerk. Clerk: I have two items I wanted to tell you about. A bit of a Civic Clerk update. So we do have instructions that we have sent out to the public about how to access Civic Clerk historic minutes and other documents that they're requesting, like how to upload documents for the agenda if there is public comment. So if you have any constituents who have questions about that, please reach out to me, and I can actually send you a little cheat sheet because it has hyperlinks to it that are very easy to use. But currently, if you have questions about minutes, previous minutes, please reach out to Jocelyn. She is the person who is right now providing historic minutes that go between 2020 and December when we start... Sorry, Henry, Henry, Henry, can you guys take it outside? Thank you. Mayor Weber: I'm sorry, Madam Clerk, I was getting distracted. You were mentioning a cheat sheet that you can distribute. Clerk: Yes, I will just send it to all of you tomorrow morning so that you have it for anyone who has questions about minutes. We have teamed up with IT and have received the historic data from PrimeGov, and they're helping us to rename and upload. We apologize to you and the public that this has taken so long. Unfortunately, Jeff Norris was helping and implementing this. He had such a big role in PrimeGov, so it's taking us a little longer than expected. So if you have any questions, please reach out to us. I did want to tell you that the events for city-sponsored events have been booked throughout the year. Our first one will be starting April 12th, which is our egg hunt and our big truck event. I'll be sending, if I haven't sent you all the calendar invite, I will be sending you all the calendar invite, but our team is gearing up for that. And that is all I have right now. Thank you. Mayor Weber: Then the next item, Madam Clerk, item 16, Communications from the Governing Body. Well, let's do that. Councilor Lee Garcia, you want to kick it off, sir? Councilor Lee Garcia: I have nothing tonight. Thank you, Mayor. Mayor Weber: All right, Councilor Cassett. Councilor Cassett: Thank you so much, Mr. Mayor. The only thing I have, I've been trying to remember to do this, don't always remember to do this, is letting people know what presentations have been at Quality of Life, in case they are interested in watching the videos. We had one at the beginning of January, our first meeting in January, on a the education, the program that Community Services is spearheading with working with education providers in the city to really expand opportunities for education and coordinate those. I'm forgetting precisely the name, but if you're interested in education in our city, watch that one. Coming up in February, at the moment, unless things change, we're going to be doing a couple of different presentations looking at some of the collaborations between Julie Sanchez's Department, Youth and Family Services, and some of the work she's been doing with police on youth violence and, I believe, also some of the other violence prevention measures that there has been collaboration on. So those are coming up for our February meetings at the current time. There's a couple other things that may come in, and if that changes, I will be sure to let everybody know. But please watch Quality of Life the opposite Wednesdays of Governing Body at 5:00 if you're interested in any of those topics. Thanks, Mayor. Mayor Weber: Thank you. Councilor Rorth, with her voice. Councilor Faulkner. Councilor Faulkner: Just want to urge everyone in the public, please track the legislature. There is a ton of legislation coming out around behavioral health, around medical services, health care. There's a lot of money, and they're making pretty big decisions at the Roundhouse. And again, people, people do not get involved. The legislators don't have as much information as they could have to make the best decisions for their constituents. So I'm just encouraging everyone, stay involved in the legislative process. Thank you. Mayor Weber: Councilor Lindell. Councilor Michael Garcia, sir. Councilor Michael Garcia: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I just wanted to thank Director Randall. I believe this might potentially be your last meeting with us, so just thank you for everything. I know you'll still be with the city, but it's been a pleasure to work with you in this capacity, so thank you. And then lastly, I just would like to publicly request that the City Council or the Governing Body have a special Governing Body meeting on the topic of the Soldiers Monument. This is an issue that is near and dear to every one of us on the dais, and there's been information that's brought to my attention that, and I don't know if it's true, that there's been conversations with the SHPO office. And I think it's critical that we as a Governing Body have a discussion in regards to what is the path forward. We all be able to provide our input. We all have the same information, and most importantly, we allow for the public to participate in the process. And that's why I've called for a special Governing Body meeting because that allows for public comment to be given and for us to move forward with the monument. We must engage the public, as we just heard during this previous topic, community engagement is a must, and the topic of Soldiers Monument has divided our community so much that we need to begin to heal. And having a special Governing Body meeting will allow for that. So I'm calling for a special Governing Body meeting solely on the topic of how to move forward on the Soldiers Monument. Thank you. Mayor Weber: Councilor, nothing. Councilor Castro. Councilor Castro: Thank you all. Briefly, February 3rd is Indigenous Day of Action. A coalition of organizations will be coming out to support immigrant community at the legislature. Yes, definitely always be aware of what's happening. And I'll invite folks, I know there's a training happening at the railyard, and for any legislators and elected officials, you guys are very welcome. We'll be staging at the Toas at 9:00 a.m. Thank you, Mayor. Councilor Chavez: I'm sorry, I have one thing to add. Mayor Weber: Yes, of course. Councilor Chavez: I wanted to wish Councilor Castro a happy birthday. It was yesterday. I don't know, days are all bleeding together, but happy birthday. So we hope that you had a wonderful day traveling across the country. Happy birthday. Mayor Weber: I have a couple things I'd like to quickly run through. I know it's getting late, and we've still got work to do. We had the audit released by the State Auditor. The news is very good. We had a clean audit. We reduced our findings to only eight. It was an on-time audit. We are back on track, and I think Emily Oster and all of the directors and folks who contributed to making that happen deserve a tremendous thank you from everybody in the community and everybody in city government. This is a tremendous achievement. Similarly, I think the work done to remove the box around the aforementioned Soldiers Memorial was really well handled. We met the judge's deadline. Our Public Works team, our Parks team, worked hard in cold weather and adverse temperatures to really bring the box down in an orderly way and to remove as much of the graffiti as possible so that the remaining part of the monument can look as good as it as it possibly can look. And I think they deserve again a round of thank yous for working under pretty adverse circumstances. I mentioned earlier when we were talking about our response to homelessness, the amazing job that was done when we were struck with an Arctic blast, and 85 to 90 beds were rapidly created with the help of people in our government. Henry and his team, Public Works, supported it. Our Emergency Management team stepped up. Karen Fine, an amazing volunteer in our community, spearheaded a lot of it. The folks at, folks at the Red Cross and at Farmers Market again just did a super job not only providing housing, there were 20 or so dog cages provided by Petco so that homeless people who have a dog didn't have to leave their dog behind or choose between freezing or not having their pet with them. Tremendous, tremendous community response, and it really is the best of Santa Fe when that happens. I want to give a shout out to my soup buddies, Dean Bernie, who closed Señor after decades of providing some of the best food in town. I was a, I was a regular. Everybody knows I'm a soup addict, and they, they reached the point where age and running a restaurant and the community demands and the hard work, I gave them the reason to call it a day. But they were such great stalwarts in Santa Fe for so long, and I'm already looking for soup if anybody has an alternative they'd like to recommend. Councilor Cassett: Cobbles. Mayor Weber: I'm sorry, you've already had your turn. But while we're on the subject of food, we have three James Beard nominees, another testimony to the food culture in Santa Fe. Fernando Ruiz, Christian Ponia, and Joseph Reed are all in the running for James Beard Awards, and that's pretty special for Santa Fe to be recognized that prominently. We're facing a very serious set of challenges right now, and it starts with the federal government's threat of mass deportations and uncertainty and fear in our community around that. Every one of us has a responsibility to talk about know your rights and inform everybody what it means that Santa Fe is an open and welcoming community, what our policies are with regard to our residents who are immigrants. We don't ask whether they have documents or not. We don't collect those that data, and we don't have it on hand whether at the library or with the police department. We simply don't ask that question. There are constant opportunities for each one of us in our district and in our daily life to reassure our residents that the City of Santa Fe is and will be a welcoming and open community. And there are opportunities to rally with our residents, and we should all consider that a responsibility that we bear as leaders in this city. Thanks, everybody. What's next, Madam Clerk? Clerk: Item 17, Introduction of Legislation. 17A, Consideration of a Resolution Number 2025 TBD, sponsored by Councilor Amanda Chavez, a resolution authorizing representatives and agents for New Mexico Department of Finance and Administration Appropriation ID Number I 3318, New Mexico Department of Transportation Control Number C52 43318, to acquire rights of way for and to plan, design, and construct a road connection from New Mexico Highway 599 Jaguar Drive Interchange to the Santa Fe Regional Airport for the City of Santa Fe in Santa Fe County. Councilor Chavez: This is among multiple items that we have coming through for road improvements and just assigning a grantee to sign for funds. So this is among a couple that we've already seen come through. Thank you. Clerk: Next item, Madam... Madam Clerk: Item 17b, consideration of Resolution Number 2025 TBD, sponsored by Councilor Jamie Cassutt and Councilor Carol Romero-Wirth, a resolution supporting the New Mexico Food Charter's Report Card for 2023 through 2024 priorities and identifying priority food policies. And I assume Councilor Cassutt, you will act as the voice on this. Councilor Cassutt: I will act as the voice. We have been doing this resolution for, gosh, the last few years. But again, we have a wonderful Santa Fe County Food Policy Council that really works on how to support our farmers, how to get fresh and healthy food into the hands of our residents, specifically looking at our seniors and our students, as well as how do we just support the ag and food industry within Santa Fe County. So this lets the legislature know that we really are supporting the work that they're doing. They have a whole host of really wonderful recommendations to move us closer to that goal, and we want to make sure that we are supporting them and letting our state lawmakers know. Thank you. Mayor: Thank you, Madam Clerk. Take us to the next item. Madam Clerk: Item 17c, consideration of a Resolution Number 2025 TBD, sponsored by Mayor Alan Weber, Councilor Jamie Cassutt, and Councilor Michael Garcia, a resolution accepting a donation for the design and construction of a new Championship soccer field and associated infrastructure and directing next steps upon receipt of the donation. Councilor Cassutt or Councilor Garcia, say a word. Councilor Cassutt: Sure, thank you. You know, this has been a project long in the making. I also want to recognize Councilor Rivetta and all of his work on Soccer Valley and the RC during his time. And something that I know Councilor Garcia has worked very hard on, as well as Mayor Weber. So this is an extremely wonderful donation that we will be accepting to help complete the Soccer Valley master plan. And I really want to recognize the soccer community. Oh, actually, Councilor Faulkner did a lot of great work, not in her role as a City Councilor, but actually as a lobbyist for this group. So thank you, you helped us get here as well, to continue to create fields for our kids, create a champion field so we could potentially bring in tournaments. But the soccer community in Northern has been absolutely incredible in their advocacy and their organization to both get these dollars, as well as get kids out there and provide a safe and healthy space for them. Councilor Garcia: Your turn. Councilor Cassutt, many, many thanks to the private donor. Thank you. Mayor: Madam Clerk, take us to the next item, please. Madam Clerk: Item 19, public comment on bills. 19a, consideration of Bill Number 2024-20, sponsored by Councilor Michael Garcia, a bill relating to City Administration, amending Section 2-8 SFCC 1987 to change the title from Community Health and Safety Department to Health and Human Services Department, remove the Police Department and the Fire Department from that section, and create two new sections, 2-8.8 and 2-8.9, for the Police Department and Fire Department, respectfully, respectively. This is a public comment. If there's anybody in the room or on Zoom who would like to comment on this bill for two minutes, if you're here and it's your topic, please come forward. Madam Clerk, is anybody on the Zoom room with a hand up? Madam Clerk: I see no attendees with their hands up. Mayor: All right, in that case, seeing nobody coming forward, could you take us to the next item, which I believe is a public hearing. Madam Clerk: Item 20a, final action on legislation, consideration of Bill Number 2024-25 TBA, sponsored by Councilor Signe Lindell, Councilor P. Fulmer, and Councilor Michael Garcia, a bill amending Schedule A of the Uniform Traffic Ordinance to increase penalties for muffler noise violations, eliminate a distinction between the categories "second offense" and "subsequent violations," recognizing community services as an alternative to all traffic violation penalties under the city's general penalty, and establish an effective date to approve. There's a motion to approve this. We have a presentation, and we also have the opportunity for the public to come forward and speak on this bill. Why don't we go to the public first and then see if there are questions from the members of the governing body. If you would like to speak on this matter, please come forward and take up a position behind the podium. Mayor: Yes, please go ahead. Hang on one second. There's a hand up. Can you not hear him again? Is that the problem? Speaker: Correct. Mayor: Yeah, I'm afraid you're going to have to really get in front of the mic and make sure that it's on green light. There you go. Thank you. Speaker: Start, want me to start over? Mayor: Yes, please. Adam Werman: Mr. Mayor, members of the Council, my name is Adam Werman. I'm a member of SAD, Stop Aggressive Driving Santa Fe. I live in District 2. I just wanted to make three brief points. First, I strongly support the initiative to raise the fines for noisy and modified mufflers and making community service an option for paying the fine. Second, I appreciate the work of the Council from two years ago, I think it was, to tackle this problem, imposing fines and working on this issue. It did lead, I think, to additional citations by the police, which was a good first step. Unfortunately, there's no evidence from my own experience or from what I hear from other members of SAD or the community that there's less noise on our streets or fewer loud mufflers on cars. So I think we really do need this new initiative to do more. And the third thing is, at the last discussion that we had on this issue last summer, as I recall, there were a number of suggestions from the floor and from members of the Council to spend money to look into technology, specifically noise cameras and speed cameras. And I would certainly appreciate an update on where this stands and what, if anything, is being done to implement this and put some particularly noise cameras on our city streets. Thank you very much. Mayor: Thank you. Kathy Rivera: You have the floor. Thank you. Members of the governing body, I don't know how each of you makes your way to this facility, but within steps of this building and within blocks of here, there are visual representations of aggressive driving. We know who you are. But for the record, I'm sorry, Kathy Rivera, I'm in District 1. Thank you. Within steps of here, around the Federal Place, you see the broken fence because somebody actually drove down speeding and landed up in the middle of the Federal Park here. We've also seen the fence down recently at Palace Avenue and Paseo, and that has damaged the property of La Posada. Furthermore, some of the poles right around the Hilton Hotel were damaged recently also because of aggressive driving. I'm not attributing those to muffler noise, but I do appreciate this ordinance with the muffler noise. I do appreciate it being sponsored by somebody in District 1 because it is impacting District 1. It is actually disrupting the daily lives of many people who live here and people who visit here. I would also encourage that you think about doing more, but also in relation to these historic properties. I've had a conversation with a couple of you that we may want to think about what kind of ordinance would we want to improve on or have higher penalties or damages done to historic properties that are not easily repaired. I do appreciate you guys putting forth this ordinance, and I look forward to your support. Thank you. Mayor: Thank you. Molly Langley: Like a broken record, I always appear on the early notification. This is Molly Langley. I always appear on the early notification calls. I want everybody to slow down. So I'm a member of Stop Aggressive Driving. Naturally, I'm in favor of controlling the muffler noise. I believe it was you, Councilor Garcia, when we raised it from $25 to $100, you predicted it wouldn't work. I'm sorry to say you were right. We listened to it all last summer, the racing and the mufflers. And so anything you can do to amend that, that we would welcome that. But there's more out there to be done, and you know that, and it relates to what you spoke about for two and a half hours tonight, infill. More people live here. We have safety issues that are related to housing. And so we're no longer a small town, and so we need more sophisticated methods to make everybody safe in their homes and in the street. So I just urge you to do that. Thank you. Mayor: Thank you. Jennifer Reed: Yes, step right up to the mic. We can't hear you. Jennifer Reed, District 2. I too am SAD, and I hope this goes without saying, any increase in fines is great, and they are meaningless if they are not enforced. And that's the missing piece, is the funds for the enforcement. And there's no harm in getting the penalties in place first, but it can't stop there. I was strongly appreciating your comment too, Mayor Weber, about you don't wait till, you don't wait to fix your roof until it starts raining. And the fact is that the most of the really intense muffler noise isn't just noise, it comes from street racing, which is incredibly dangerous. I mean, I can't believe all of you haven't seen it live and in person on the streets around town. They're weaving in and out of lanes. This is freaking dangerous. I clinch my teeth not out of a sense of personal unsafety because I know I'm a good, you know, defensive driver, but someone is going to get slammed. And I just hope that you guys don't wait until it starts to rain, when in this case, will be deaths. You know, I get those notifications every time there's a traffic investigation that usually means a very bad accident. I drive by them all the time with the smashed cars and the ambulances. This is serious, and it's going to mean more enforcement, which is probably not all going to be able to come from mechanized devices. So I just really hope that is in all of your mind that, okay, you're taking the first steps, but this is not the effective step. Effective step is enforcement. But thank you for making this first step. Thank you so much. Mayor: Others who wish to be heard? Anyone on the Zoom room who wishes to be heard? Madam Clerk: I am not seeing any raised hands. Mayor: Anyone in the attendee room want to raise their hand to comment on this legislation? No hands are up. No hands. Are there questions for staff at this time? Councilor: Motion to approve. Councilor: Second. Mayor: We already have a motion. There's a motion on the floor. The question is whether there are questions. If there are no questions and we have a motion, Madam Clerk, could you call the roll? Madam Clerk: Councilor Lee Garcia? Councilor Lee Garcia: Yes. Madam Clerk: Councilor Michael Garcia? Councilor Michael Garcia: Yes. Madam Clerk: Councilor Lindell? Councilor Romero-Wirth? Councilor Romero-Wirth: Yes. Madam Clerk: Councilor Cassutt? Councilor Cassutt: Yes. Madam Clerk: Councilor Castro? Councilor Castro: Yes. Madam Clerk: Councilor Chavez? Councilor Faulkner? Councilor Faulkner: Yes. Madam Clerk: Mayor Weber? Mayor: Yes. Motion is approved. Thank you. Thank you for being here and the sign of your confidence that nobody had any questions. It's all so well explained. I'm not quite done yet. There's one more. All right, well, don't, don't go away, but congratulations. Can we, can we go to the next item then? Madam Clerk: Item 20b, consideration of Bill Number 2024-20, adoption of an Ordinance Number 2025 TBA, sponsored by Councilor Signe Lindell and Councilor P. Fulmer, a bill making a technical correction, relocating subparagraphs A through G of Section 12-1-23.1 of Article 1, Definitions of Exhibit A, Chapter 24 SFCC 1987, to Section 12-10-110 of Article 10, Vehicle Regulations of the same exhibit. Councilor: Move to approve. Councilor: Second. Mayor: There's a motion and a second. Is there public comment on this part of the legislation? Are there questions for staff? Madam Clerk, can you call the roll? Madam Clerk: Yes. Councilor Michael Garcia? Councilor Michael Garcia: Yes. Madam Clerk: Councilor Lindell? Councilor Romero-Wirth? Councilor Romero-Wirth: Yes. Madam Clerk: Councilor Cassutt? Councilor Cassutt: Yes. Madam Clerk: Councilor Castro? Councilor Castro: Yes. Madam Clerk: Councilor Chavez? Councilor Chavez: Yes. Madam Clerk: Councilor Faulkner? Councilor Faulkner: Yes. Madam Clerk: Councilor Lee Garcia? Councilor Lee Garcia: Yes. Madam Clerk: Mayor Weber? Mayor: Yes. Is approved. Thank you. Thank you for being so patient and being available. I really appreciate you being here. Madam Clerk, can you take us to the next item then? Madam Clerk: Item 22, consent to appointments. 22a, City Manager Mark Scott. There's a motion and a second to approve Mr. Scott's appointment as our City Manager. Mr. Randall has already been appropriately thanked, maybe not enough, but thanked for his amazing service. Are there questions about this appointment at this time? Councilor Michael Garcia: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I do have one question for Mr. Scott. Mr. Scott is in the audience. Thank you, Mr. Scott. Make sure the mic is on and you're close enough to be heard. Thank you. It is now. Thank you for letting me get up off that chair. Well, your first meeting is just a test run because sometimes these meetings do run late. But I've been to, I was in a meeting in Burbank one time that ended at 3:40 AM. Yeah, see, worse. Well, we don't want to duplicate that here. So, my question revolves around communication and engagement with the governing body. Your appointment ultimately comes from the mayor, but the responsibility of coordination, collaboration, and work is you work alongside the mayor, but you work alongside the governing body as well. How do you see that working out? How would you implement that? How would you ensure that the governing body is well informed of any piece of information you deem that's worthy of being brought in front of us? Thank you for the question. Good question. In fact, probably among the first couple of questions I asked the mayor when we first... Mr. Scott, if you wouldn't mind just bringing it closer, just because I know we do have folks online. You almost have to eat it, to be honest. Oh, am I too tall? That's my biggest talent. Yes, I, one of the first things the mayor and I talked about was my, I've worked in strong mayor cities. I've worked in cities that are considered council-manager form cities. So I've worked in a whole variety of different types of governance. And the one thing that I have always felt strongly about in working in a strong mayor city, this would be the fourth time I've done that, is that I, as a city manager, need to be able to relate credibly not only with the mayor, who is by charter the supervisor of the position, but also with the members of the governing body. It's critically important. If I don't cooperate in that respect with the members of the governing body, then they don't feel invested in my success, and my success is frankly your success. So, I feel very strongly that a city manager, even in a strong mayor city, benefits his own performance and his community by making sure that he's very accessible to council members. And the mayor has told me he's absolutely in favor of that. I do a lot of information sharing with my councils. I figured out a long time ago, it does me no good to be the only one who knows something. They can only get me in trouble. So I like to share information with my councils. I like my whole team, and I like the public to know what it is that we're doing. So that kind of communication for me is second nature. I do a lot of that. So I believe that one thing people could find looking to people that I've worked for, council members in various cities, is that I do share. I do participate in a collaborative manner, and in that way, I think I serve myself and the community much better. And the mayor assured me that that philosophy was going to work here. Thank you for your response. I appreciate that. My next question, I don't know who it's directed to, but the question revolves around salary. So can I get the information, and it's not for you, Mr. Scott, it's for city staff. So I don't know if it's or the mayor or who would answer this, but can we confirm the salary that the previous city manager, Mr. Blair, was getting versus the proposed salary that Mr. Scott has been offered? Mr. Mayor, if I could go ahead and answer that. Mr. Blair was being paid approximately $182,000, I think it was. And the offer that's been made to Mr. Scott is $225,000. Okay, no other questions. Thank you, Mr. Randall. Thank you. Other questions? Councilor Cassid: I did want to follow up on that. I know that there is a benefit difference. So the $182,000 for Mr. Blair was his base salary. Mr. Mayor, Council, that's correct. And do we know what his total compensation was? Oh, total compensation, I think, was around $240,000, $245,000. And that's an estimate. I need to calculate that, but that includes the health benefits and retirement with PERA and all of their benefits. And then Mr. Scott, it is my understanding that you will not be taking healthcare from the city. You have that covered elsewhere. I hadn't. No, I don't need it. Okay. I have healthcare covers me and my wife, and I have said, don't need that. I don't need the help. So the city could save money off of that. I'm hope. Okay. Okay, wonderful. Thank you. That's helpful. And so that do we... It's very unlikely, unless you find a way to keep me for long enough to vest in the retirement system, very unlikely I'll ever benefit from your pension fund either because of my advanced age. Well, you're looking young and full of energy at what time is it? 10:55 at night. I'm a young 75. Yes, there you go. Well, thank you for that information. That's helpful. As we look at total compensation, I did, I actually just wanted to comment on some of the things that I really enjoyed about our opportunity to meet with you. I really appreciate it, first of all, that you came out. I will fully admit that before I met you, I did not think that you were who I would be looking for in this position. But there were a few things that really struck me that I do want to share with the public because I think it is really important as they see who's coming in to manage our city. First of all, I truly appreciate your professionalism as a city manager, and that was very apparent very quickly. I think that there is, you very much came with the approach of you are a city manager. This is not a political position. And I think that's something that's really beneficial for our community. I think our community has been at times concerned about the city manager being a political appointment as opposed to a, the city needs to function appointment. And I really did get that impression from you. The other thing that I really appreciated and I'm really looking forward to doing is you discussing how you get to know a community and that you will request of every single one of us that we give you a tour, not a sit down in the conference room, but a tour of our district and the city from our perspective. I know that coming into a new city, especially a city of Santa Fe, can be challenging. And Santa Fe is, we call ourselves a city different, as I mentioned earlier. And I feel we live up to that name. So I felt that commitment to really understanding from the perspective of those of us who love this city enough to be here extremely late a lot of Wednesdays to really be working for our community. I truly appreciated that as well as the collaborative approach that you discussed and how you work with the council and how you approach budgeting in a very collaborative way. And so I was very impressed with all of those components of your presentation to us and what you will be bringing to the city. So thank you for being willing to take this on. It'll be fun, but sometimes not the way you think. I absolutely agree. It'll be fun. I won't do this kind of work without having fun. And I consider it a real privilege. Thank you. Thank you, Mayor. Other comments? I just add a few more grace notes to what Councilor Cassid said. I want to, fortunately, our HR Director, Bernadette Salazar, is sick tonight. Otherwise, I know she'd be here to answer other questions. But in her absence, I want to celebrate the process that she took us through. This was a wide-ranging effort to bring potential candidates forward. We had, I think, more than 30 people who applied for this job, which is, I believe, an indication of just how desirable a community Santa Fe is for professional city managers. We offered our department heads a chance to meet the final candidates. City Council members had the same opportunity. I think it really speaks well of the process that we have in front of us, a candidate who is a professional's professional. When I first met Mr. Scott, having looked at his resume but never met him, I was struck by the remarkable string of cities and years that he had devoted to this work. And what Mr. Scott told me was, this is his life's passion. Other people do other things, but he has always, after a brief stint in the private sector following getting his MBA at Stanford, he quickly realized that being a city manager was not a job, it's a calling. And his record of service, I think, reflects that. I look forward to the opportunity to work with Mr. Scott on a day-to-day basis. I think he really is an individual who lends a great deal of professionalism, integrity, experience, knowledge of what works based on the best practices of ICMA. And that the chance to have Mr. Scott at the helm with his background and experience, I think, is something that will serve all of us and the community very well. So I thank Bernadette in absentia for her effort to organize all of these interviews, and I thank Mr. Scott for throwing his hat in the ring. And if we succeed in this appointment, I think we will all get to know Mr. Scott and work with him very well, very collaboratively, and for the benefit of the people of Santa Fe. If there are no other hands, Madam Clerk, could you please call the roll on this appointment? Councilor Lindell: Yes. Councilor Romero-Wirth: Yes. Councilor Cassid: Yes. Councilor Castro: Yes. Councilor Chavez: Yes. Councilor Fowler: Yes. Councilor Lee Garcia: Yes. Councilor Michael Garcia: No. And I'd like to explain my vote. Mayor Weber: Yes. I believe the motion carried, but Councilor Garcia, you have the opportunity to explain your vote now. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I could not in good conscience vote in favor of this appointment just due to the drastic increase in the salary from the previous city manager position holder. I don't know why it's always upper management that sees these drastic salary increases. We have a dedicated, skilled, and professional workforce that doesn't see these drastic salary increases, and they're the ones that make the city go round. So I hope that we can ultimately support our workforce in the manner with salary increases such as this. Very good. Congratulations, Mr. Scott. And I believe your start date will be February 10th. We look forward to your orientation and your first day on the job. Thank you. Thank you, everybody. Let's go to the next item then, please. Item 22B: Appointments to Immigration Committee. Jessica Noemi Aid, appointment term ending February 2027. Gina Aho, appointment term ending February 2027. Julie Anne Ball, appointment term ending February 2027. Ivan Coro, appointment term ending February 2027. Marcela Diaz, appointment term ending February 2027. Ciana Horado Herrera, appointment term ending February 2027. Ryan Lee, appointment term ending February 2027. Maria Jose Rodriguez Cadiz, appointment term ending February 2027. Rebecca K. Rowley, appointment term ending February 2027. Marisol Suarez, appointment term ending February 2027. Thank you. Is there a motion? Move to approve. There's a motion to approve, and there is a second. I just want to put in a comment about this committee. I think the time is right for this committee to be reestablished. I think the people who have stepped forward to submit their names as candidates are outstanding. We're going to need their help. The community in Santa Fe of immigrants are afraid. They are fearful of what might happen to them under the actions of the Trump administration, and the ramifications and implications are truly, truly troubling. We may end up with red winners staying home. We may end up with kids not going to school. We may end up with... the need for guardianship papers to be filled out by parents in case they aren't able to be there for their children. And I am eager to call the first meeting of this committee so they can begin their work assessing the resources that are available in our community to help our immigrants and also do outreach, education, and other forms of support for both employers and employees to recognize that Santa Fe is a welcoming and open city. And we will do everything in our power to remain that way on behalf of all the people who live here. It's in our city charter, it is in our values, and we need this committee to do the work to live those values. Next item, Madam Clerk. Oh, we didn't vote yet. I took it for granted. I apologize. Please, please call the... Oh, I'm sorry. I offended Councilor Faulkner and she's going to try to... Go ahead, Madam Clerk. I apologize. Councilor Romero Wirth: Yes. Councilor Cassutt: Yes. Councilor Castro: Yes. Councilor Chavez: Yes. Councilor Faulkner: Yes. Councilor Lee Garcia: Yes. Councilor Michael Garcia: Yes. Councilor Lindell: Yes. Mayor Weber: Yes. Thank you. Next item, Madam Clerk. Item 22c, Transit Advisory Board appointments. Andrea Sarita, appointment term ending March 2027. Aurora Black, appointment term ending March 2026. Owen Conley, appointment term ending March 2027. Juan Colon, appointment term ending March 2027. Marcos Maez, appointment term ending March 2026. Colin Messer, appointment term ending March 2026. Marie Meyer, appointment term ending March 2027. Delores Shapiro, appointment term ending March 2026. Susan Sheldon, appointment term ending March 2027. Motion to approve. Second. There's a motion to approve and a second. Are there questions or comments about this? Very well, please call the roll. Councilor Cassutt: Yes. Councilor Castro: Yes. Councilor Chavez: Yes. Councilor Faulkner: Yes. Councilor Lee Garcia: Yes. Councilor Michael Garcia: Yes. Councilor Lindell: Yes. Councilor Romero Wirth: Yes. Mayor Weber: Yes. Motion is approved. Item 22d, Public Safety Committee. Bruce Finger, reappointment, term ending March 2029. Motion to approve. Second. Councilor, did you want to say anything about this? I just want to say that Mr. Finger has served on the Public Safety Committee, and we're happy to have him back. There was a little hiccup in time where he wasn't able to sit on the committee for a while, but he will be joining us again and he brings a wealth of knowledge, so we're happy to have him. Thank you. Madam Clerk. Councilor Castro: Yes. Councilor Chavez: Yes. Councilor Faulkner: Yes. Councilor Lee Garcia: Yes. Councilor Michael Garcia: Yes. Councilor Lindell: Yes. Councilor Romero Wirth: Yes. Councilor Cassutt: Yes. Mayor Weber: Yes. Motion is approved. Very good. And then I believe we have one last item that's informational. Yes, item 22e, Santa Fe County's appointments to the Buckman Direct Diversion Board for information only. No action required. Commissioner Justin S. Green appointed on January 14th, 2025. Commissioner Hank Hughes appointed on January 14th, 2025. Commissioner Adam Fulton Johnson appointed January 14th, 2025. Very good. I think that concludes our business for tonight. Thanks again, Mr. Randall, for your outstanding service. We're adjourned.