Bicycle and Pedestrians Advisory Committee Thu, Sep 11, 2025 · Bicycle and Pedestrians Advisory Committee https://santafeminutes.space/meeting/488 == Executive Summary == The Bicycle and Pedestrians Advisory Committee (BPAC) meeting focused heavily on cyclist safety, particularly in light of recent fatalities like Steven Bellinger's. Public comments and committee discussions highlighted a perceived institutional bias against cyclists and pedestrians within law enforcement and the justice system, leading to lenient charges for drivers involved in collisions. The committee expressed a strong desire to address these issues through dialogue with the District Attorney's office and Police Department, advocating for stricter enforcement and legislative changes. Key discussions also revolved around improving bicycle infrastructure, with updates on the St. Michael's Drive project securing federal funding and the Henry Lynch Road project moving forward with innovative grade-separated bike lanes. The committee also initiated efforts to update its strategic plan, focusing on actionable items and preparing to present these priorities to new city councilors. Several action items were assigned, including inviting police representation to future meetings, researching driver education and police training, and developing a white paper on bicycle and pedestrian safety measures. == Key Decisions == - The amended agenda was approved, moving the discussion on recent bicycle fatalities and driver accountability to the first item under 'Discussion and Possible Action Items'. - The August 14th, 2025 BPAC minutes were approved as amended. - A motion passed to invite the Police Department to a future BPAC meeting for a collaborative discussion on bicycle/pedestrian safety. - Research topics (new driver education, penalties for driver-involved injuries, police officer training, and previous state legislation) were referred to subcommittees. - An ad hoc committee was created to develop a white paper on bicycle and pedestrian safety measures, with Member Wang nominated as chair. - Todd Cannon was appointed to BPAC's Technical Review Subcommittee. == Motions & Votes == - Approval of amended agenda — Passed (6 Yes, 0 No, 0 Abstain) - Approval of August 14th, 2025 BPAC minutes as amended — Passed (5 Yes, 0 No, 2 Abstain) - Motion to invite the Police Department to a future BPAC meeting, refer research topics to subcommittees, and create an ad hoc committee for a white paper — Passed (7-0 roll call vote) == Public Comment == Public comments largely focused on the urgent need for improved cyclist safety and accountability for drivers involved in collisions. Several speakers, including Jennifer Weber, Hubert Feka, Jim Kench, Laurel Mter, Jennifer Bers, Ireina Osula, and Brooks White, shared personal experiences and advocated for stronger enforcement, policy changes (like vehicular manslaughter charges), and a "vulnerable road users law." There was a strong sentiment that current laws and their enforcement are inadequate, leading to minimal penalties for drivers and a sense of insecurity among cyclists. Concerns were also raised about institutional bias within law enforcement against cyclists and pedestrians. Speakers like Gilbert Quintana, Karen Low, David Seaton, John Hinton, Oscar Linquist, and Karen Kessner emphasized the need for better infrastructure, driver responsibility, public awareness, and a "small but relentless push" for change. Robert and Frank Sandoval questioned Santa Fe's "bike-friendly" reputation and the effectiveness of enforcement, while Shaheen advocated for cyclists to "own the roads" and highlighted the importance of civil liability. == Topics == - Cyclist Safety & Justice - Henry Lynch Road Project - Driver Education & Awareness - Police Training & Accident Response - Strategic Plan Revision - Guadalupe Street Project - Road Speed Limits - BPAC Resolution Amendment - Website Links == Full Transcript == Romela, are you ready to go? Right. Is everybody ready to rock and roll? Okay, let's go ahead and call tonight's Bicycle Pedestrian Advisory Committee meeting to order. Miss Glorios, can I get a roll call, please? Certainly, Mr. Chair. Member Angela Bird Gray. Member Brice Farrell. Member Judith Gabriel, here. Member Tony Gerix, excused. Member Mark McConnell, excused. Member Steve Pilchure, here. Member Ben Pengilli, excused. Member Gary Ship Miller, here. Member Helen Wang, here. Chair Michael Garcia, present. You have a quorum, Mr. Chair. Okay. Thank you. Up next is approval of the agenda. Are there any changes from staff? Yes, Mr. Chair. For agenda item five, I wish to add an email from Kai Fion and Kali Spencer. And then for agenda 6.8, Bike Santa Fe, the report will be coming from Mr. David Saton. That's all, Mr. Chair. Okay. Any changes from the committee? Member Gabriel. Since we have so many people here to speak during public comment, I'm wondering if we could move item 7D closer to the beginning of the agenda so that people don't have to stay for the whole meeting if they would like to hear that discussion. Sure. Would you like to move it up before 7A to be the first item under discussion and possible action items, or even sooner? Or even after 6C? Those are generally short reports. That's what I proposed. It be the first item under... Yes, please. Okay. So, we'll move 7D to be the first item heard in item seven. Okay. So there's that change. So, any other changes? May I get a motion to approve as amended? Who made the motion? I made the motion. Okay. But your changes included Romela's. Romela can't make the change. So... Are you talking about a motion on Romela's change first? No, it can include both. Okay. So, oh, I move that we make those two changes. Perfect. Okay. A second by Member Ship Miller. Any discussion or comments? None. Miss Glorio Samos, can I get a roll call vote, please? Yes. Yes. Member Schiff Miller. Yes. Member Wang, Chair Garcia. Yes. Motion passes. Okay. Thank you. Next up is item number four, approval of the minutes. Request of approval of August 14th, 2025 BPAC minutes. Are there any changes from staff? Chair. Any changes from committee members? Member Piltchure. Under item 6C, Public Safety Advisory Committee, just make a note that there was no meeting held in July. That's why there's nothing in the minutes. Okay. Can we add that comment, Miss Glorious? Any other changes? If none, may I get a motion to approve as amended, please? So, okay. Motion to approve and then second from Member Pilchure. Any discussion? Seeing none, Miss Glorio Samas, can we get a roll call vote, please? Yes, Mr. Chair. Member B Gray. Member Farrell. Yes. Member Gabriel. Yes. Member Piltchure. Yes. Member Schiff Miller. Abstain. I was absent from the meeting. Member Wang. Yes. Chair Garcia. Yes. Motion passes. I was not at that meeting either. I abstain. Motion passes. Okay. Next up is communications from the public. So, we've got the email for Mr. Rogers and then the two additional emails that will be incorporated into the minutes. And for the members of the public here tonight, the way we allow for the public to participate is we'll allow folks to speak for two minutes. Any topic you want. I know a lot of folks are here to speak to an agenda item that we're going to be discussing later. This will be the opportunity for the public to provide the input because when we get to the agenda item 7D, that will be a discussion between the committee. We won't be having dialogue back and forth with the members of the audience. So, with that, I invite anybody that would like to come up and address the body. You will have two minutes. There will be a timer that goes on the TV that kind of helps folks to determine how much of their two minutes they have. And we'll just move forward accordingly. Is there any member who would like to address the body tonight? And just to again reiterate, when we get to item, I think a lot of folks are here for item 7D, which is discussion on recent bicycle fatality Steven Bellinger and accountability for drivers involved in collision with cyclists. And that's Member Schiff Miller's item. Just to reiterate, only the body will be able to discuss the matter. We won't be able to go back and have a dialogue back and forth with the audience. So, this is the opportunity for the audience to provide any input potentially into that matter or anything else you'd like to discuss or provide input to the committee. Hello. Hello. Good to see you. And so, just so Romela can document it, just name and council district is fine. I'll break the ice. Jennifer Weber, Council District One. I appreciate Chair Garcia. I appreciate Council Member or BPAC Member Ship Miller bringing this item to the agenda. When you read about cyclists being killed in other states, oftentimes the drivers who hit them are cited for vehicular manslaughter or other egregious, dare I say, crimes. Because that's what it is. When a driver runs a red light, disregards a traffic law, and somebody ends up injured or dead, that is a crime, and it should be treated as so. So, I look forward to BPAC hopefully moving forward a policy, a recommendation, whether it be for the city or the state to change the law as necessary so that people who are cyclists are regarded as people who get to use the streets. They are our streets. They belong to everyone. And that when they're injured or killed, that they can see some justice for people who violate traffic laws. Thank you. Thank you so much. I'm Hubert Feka, District 2. I have two small remarks. One of them is, in many other countries, the vehicle safety requirements include consideration for the safety of people outside. In the United States case, I think fortunately this body is probably... However, there's a small item we might influence, and that is the local driver's education programs. We may want to work to emphasize during the training process, bicycle pedestrian station part of their responsibilities, and perhaps include, emphasize that during the written part of the exam. As for other countries, for example, in the Netherlands, our bicycle, the starting level of ability to automobile, they go up. So, very powerful driver, very... Thank you, Hubert. Any other members of the public? Sure. My name is Jim Kench, Kech, District 1. I've been riding my bicycle here in Santa Fe for 20 years. And early on, I adopted the policy of, I pretend that I'm invisible. And I assume that every other driver in a car is drunk. And I've been hit twice. My point is that one can be a reasonably prudent bicyclist and still get hit. Thank you, Jim. Appreciate the comments. Hi, Laurel Mter. I have not been to one of these before, but I was so moved and horrified by, I haven't been in New Mexico very long, the death of Mr. Ballinger that it brought me out to my first council meeting. And I will say, I am not from here. But I was a long-distance cyclist and I have not cycled here because I haven't felt safe. And this sort of just proves it. And I would just really strongly hope that if there's a city law we can pass or a state-level law that we do that because this is the... All I could do is read about it. But from what I read, it certainly seemed like something that was a crime and deserved more justice than what I feel this young man received. So, thank you. Thank you, Laura. Jennifer Bers. I'm new to Santa Fe. I just recently moved here nine months ago from a very active cycling community. I was really eager to start riding my road bike here in Santa Fe. I should also mention I'm on the board of the Santa Fe Fat Tire Society. I have given up riding my road bike here. I just feel like it's just too dangerous of a community to do so. Everybody that I've met has migrated to the trails because they feel the roads are just too unsafe to ride. I'm not sure what... I don't have a solution for you other than to say the small tragedy that those of us who don't safe riding. So, I hope that someday I can feel comfortable getting back from my road bikes. For now, I will stick to the trails. Thank you, Jennifer. Good evening. My name is Ireina Osula. I'm part of District Two. So, I have a couple items. I brought this because in 2017, I was hit by a car while riding in the bike lane. And I was... I lost my heartbeat on the scene. I was brought back to life when I was taken to the hospital and flown to UNMH. And I've been here before. I made a comment for... And today I brought some items to show... It's anyways, that I was hit and it continues. It continues to happen and there's such little penalty that $150 is what the man received that hit me and killed me. And I'm lucky to be alive. I started teaching. I went back to my high school, St. Michael's High School, to coach running. And two young boys I was coaching, their mother was hit by a car and killed. And same thing, no penalty. And she left behind three children. And this continues to happen. And I think that if there was a penalty to make people a little more aware, to consider they're out driving. We're basically driving is such a huge responsibility and a risk that you're kill hitting somebody is there's no protection. And that having a vulnerable road users law, I think could be a first step in New Mexico to help bring awareness and to people to wake people up a little bit that if you are going to hit a cyclist and could kill them, that something happens. And so, my comment is that I think that penalties need to be increased for the state. Thank you, Irene. Thank you. My name is Brooks White, District Council 2. Thanks for us today. I am a... I almost say former road rider because like many here, I likewise have known too many friends or acquaintances who have been injured on the streets in both Santa Fe and in surrounding county. So, it's a concern of mine and I'm now sticking to trails in the mountains, unfortunately. But my speaking to you, it seems like there's two things. I'm trying to think, what does this committee offer to the city council, to the city for some kind of action? And I can't speak to legislation or policy such as Arena was speaking to about the need for some teeth in the law. But what I can address because I've seen it in other communities, in fact in our unincorporated county, is the training of police. The training of our law enforcement, both, well, both in procedure as well as an attitude. When there is an event, when there's an accident involving a cyclist and the driver, that there's not an assumption of a bad bicyclist or they were probably out in traffic. And the police officers may very well never been on a bike in the streets of Santa Fe. That's something I always think about. How many of those people that are driving or are police officers have ever been on the bike on the street? Because they sure would think differently about their job. I think so. I guess what I'm asking to this committee is to recommend to the council, are there ways that our police department can be trained to go there, you know, both in terms of assuming, what do I say? Arriving at a scene, an accident scene, without assumptions about who's at fault and going the extra mile to interview all the witnesses, to collect the evidence that allows... Keep at that. That allows the District Attorney to actually prosecute a case. Because as we know, a lot of times bad things happen, and by the time it lands in the District Attorney's office, they don't have enough to actually do a case and bring consequences to a person who perhaps deserves consequences. Anyway, that's my hope, that this committee can somehow help out in that way. Thank you very much. Thank you, Brooks. Any other member of the audience? And I don't believe, do we have anybody online by chance? Just because these meetings sometimes are virtual. We'll go with the gentleman in the audience. My name is Gilbert Quintana, City Council District 4. I'm a parent. I've been a bike commuter for years. I'm lucky to have not been hit, though I've had several close calls. I have a number of friends who have been hit by vehicles. But more importantly, I have kids, and my kids have friends, and I see my kids and their friends out on their bikes doing what they love. I have a lot of fear for them. I hope that this council could come to the larger council and look at other ways to protect bicyclists in this town because we're not doing a great job of it. My son's currently living abroad, and the bicycle infrastructure there is fantastic. There are protected bike lanes, there are separated bike lanes, and cycling is not just supported or accepted, but it's encouraged. We have a long way to go before we get there, but building out better infrastructure would help us take care of our kids. Thank you, Gilbert. Good evening. I'm Karen Low from District 2. I have to respectfully disagree with one of my neighbors from District 2 earlier who said that in the US, drivers have no responsibility for people outside their vehicle. I know that licensed operators of vehicles have a general duty of care for the safety of others. They have to operate their vehicles in a legal manner. I don't think we can solve this problem without separate bike lanes, without new laws. We need our officers enforcing our traffic enforcement, serving us on our city streets, to understand the charges that are available to them, to use the statutes that we already have. I know you folks understand these laws better than I do, and I look forward to hearing your thoughts on this, but I think we simply need to use the laws we have to instruct our officers who report to our council and mayor to effectively charge motorists for the offenses that they have committed. Thank you. Thank you, Karen. Hello, I'm David Seaton, new to Santa Fe. I'm on the board of Bike Santa Fe. First time I've been here. I, like the other speaker, just got back from riding in Victoria, British Columbia for a week last week, and just blown away with what a biking community is like with dedicated lanes, safety, four-way stops. The trail crosses any roads, that's all four-way stops. I know most of you all probably heard about a young woman hit recently in Albuquerque and killed going on the path and crossing the road and getting hit there. Everybody, the bikes are treated equal to cars, and it's real obvious to everybody, and everybody treats it that way. Obviously, it's a long ways getting there. My background is in traumatic brain injury for the last 40 years, and a big part of what I worked on was safety and prevention: helmets, motorcycle helmets, laws, legislation, those kind of things. I was also the chair of the Brain Injury Association of America when we started the CTE program with the NFL, and that was in 2000. And most people are pretty aware now of all the concussion protocols and everything else. And I bring that up because when we started with the NFL, it was not no, but hell no. We are not doing this. There's no problem, yada yada yada. But once the awareness and the statistics were showing the real problems, the longitudinal problems with it, once the awareness created, then that created the permeability that people started becoming aware of, we need to do something about this, and it trickled down to society as a whole. And now the prevention of brain injuries is very commonplace. If an athlete gets injured, they get pulled out of a game, and they get tested, and they don't get to play anymore until they're cleared. And I bring it up because I think that to move towards a vision of what Canada, Amsterdam, some of these other countries we've all ridden in have, it's got to start with awareness. It's got to start with a willingness to do something about it. And it's going to be baby steps. It's not going to be this huge overall change that's going to happen tomorrow. It's going to change because there's a vision towards what we want to have happen in place. Thank you. Thank you, David. My name is John Hinton, District 1. I moved to Santa Fe four years ago from Texas. And my only comment is for a city that likes to consider itself progressive, the idea that there aren't more severe penalties for drivers hitting bicyclists and/or enhanced bike lane safety is hard for me to conceive. So, I just think there's a lot of opportunities to improve education and to improve the safety of cyclists in general. Thank you. Anybody else from the audience like to address the committee? Sure, come on up. Good evening. Thank you for being here. My name is Oscar Linquist. I've been a taxpayer in Santa Fe for 50 years, plus or minus. I'm a bicyclist. In 2013, I was rear-ended by a Ford Expedition, if somebody can think of how big that is. He was driving at 40 miles an hour, and he rear-ended me while I was on my bicycle. Happily, I survived. St. Vincent's kept me for a month. I learned that injuries cause lots more injury to just the person who's hit by the bike. It's the entire family that's impacted. Everybody around you is worried about lots of different things all about you. This becomes an enormous event, not just for the person who's sitting in the hospital, but people who love another person don't have that. I've ridden a lot in Europe, in the Netherlands, Sweden, and other places on one or two-week long expeditions with life, and of course, in Europe, people have adapted to bicycles a long time ago. Amsterdam and the bicycle lanes that have their own traffic signals. One of the bigger issues in Santa Fe is hopefully a constant, small but relentless push to improve the architecture of how the bicycles and cars cohabitate on the same routes. It takes a lot and a little push here and there and everywhere to get the road architects to begin to implement wider ride paths for the bicyclist, perhaps put impediments in between the cars and the bicycles. I'm sorry for the music. That's the kind of chime to alert folks that the two minutes of, yeah. So that, that's, I apologize. But it's a big problem here. Since I was hit on the bicycle and I'm back on a bicycle, I use the trails, you know, and Rabbit Road going north, River Road, going out to Zuni Road, coming back. Those have pluses and minuses when they cross streets. The issues of how cars are supposed to operate at those crosswalks, it's sometimes mixed. Some streets have buttons that you push, and lights will blink, and some cars will notice that, stop. Other intersections on major routes don't have them. So it's a crapshoot. Put the wrong way and didn't notice a car coming, it could have serious consequences. So it, you know, we've got to have faith in encouraging the architects of the roadways, including the bikeways, to up the ante quite a bit, improve the safety so that cars and bicyclists can cooperate quite a bit more than they can now. Physical environment counts for a lot. You only got a white line and two and a half feet of pavement between you and, you know, the side of the road. That's a difficult point of view when you're on a bicycle when the cars are traveling at 50 miles an hour past you. We've just got to really encourage the architects and implementers of roadways and bikeways to step it up quite a little bit. Thank you for your time. Thank you, Oscar. Appreciate the comments. Any other audience members? My name is Karen Kessner, and I'm in District 2. And my best friend lost his leg in a vehicular accident on his bicycle. Another cyclist lost their life. They were out promoting bicycle safety. This didn't happen in Santa Fe, but this is just so common, it's astounding. And more than hearing about sad stories, I think we need to talk about opportunities for action. And this is a small opportunity for action. And the more we can take those small steps, it incites change. It creates awareness. Public service announcements, these things, you know, they're little, but they help. So, I hope that this body will make this a priority and inspire more people to ride their bikes. Thank you, Karen. Any other audience members? Okay. Is there, Miss Glorio Samas, was there anybody online just to double-check? Michael, was there anybody in the, I don't see anybody waiting just to double-check. I don't see anybody. There's no one in the Zoom room online at the moment. Okay. Thank you, Michael. I appreciate that. With that, one last call before we move on to the next agenda item. I'll allow one more minute. Yes. What you're looking at is my Road ID. This is the thing that alerts a paramedic about who they should call if I'm in an accident. I just bought one for my daughter, and there's a lot of fear in my heart that she might end up in the same situation that Arena ended up in and that so many others have ended up in. And so I come before you asking for, begging for some help and some action because I have seen so many friends hit. Thanks for that. Yes. Thank you, Mr. Quintana. Anybody else? Okay, with that, let's go to move on to the next section, which is item six, communications from other agencies. First up is Bike Santa Fe. Hello. Thank you, Councilor Garcia and members of the committee. I'm back again, but I'm kind of introducing David Seaton, who's a new board member of Bike Santa Fe. I do want to just acknowledge everyone here who is speaking on a very important issue of bicyclist fatalities and injuries. So, I'm glad there's so many people speaking out, and Bike Santa Fe continues to try to get infrastructure improved and separated bike lanes to protect cyclists. So, we just have a short readout. We wanted to report on our bike valet of the year. We did 10 valets altogether. We had 20 community volunteers helping, and we parked over 250 bikes as well as strollers and wagons. So I think the valets continue to show that we need bike parking in the city, and it's needed at various events. For our education, Bike Santa Fe continues to support Safe Routes to School, working with Ryan Harris. Many of our board members are collaborating on various events and programs, including one tomorrow that is at Nina Community School, fixing bikes for kids to be able to ride to school. And finally, just for communication, we wanted to report that we get many emails from community members and residents about ideas and input on infrastructure improvements and safety concerns. We're trying to make this data available, and we're trying to collect it in one place to be able to report it to the city and the county in the future. That's about it. Hopefully, I'll be here on a regular basis, giving her a little bit of a break from having to do all the different duties. So that's one of the new roles of a new board member is to help where I can. So I plan to be here at future meetings too. Any questions from board members? Just one comment for me in regards to the data that you collected. Share it with us and we can make sure Romela at minimum gets it on our BPAC page, and we can maybe work with our comms team to help pump out information as well, whether it's through weekly updates, maybe social media posts, etc. So that way we can make sure it's out there and it helps to bring awareness. : Sure. Happy to do so. So we're going to move on to 6B, Santa Fe Metropolitan Planning Organization. Leah. : Thank you, Mr. Chair, members of the committee. I have a few updates for you. So the first, it's actually Romela's update, but I hope she doesn't mind that I share that we got really exciting news this week that the St. Michael's reconstruction project, which is essentially a road diet, finally has received some funding, $400,000 from the federal carbon reduction program. And that will, well, Romela knows all the details of what that'll entail, but basically it's, it'll be like an evaluation of alternatives, and I don't know if it goes beyond that, but it's huge. This has been the top-rated project in our metropolitan transportation plan for probably a decade, and it hasn't gotten any funding. So we're ecstatic that finally this project has some momentum. And so the first step is still a very long road to getting actual change on the ground, but, pun not intended, but you're welcome to appreciate it, because after this, then we'll have to do full preliminary engineering, that'll be additional funding, and then construction, which will likely be millions, definitely will be millions. So, it's just the first step, but we're very excited about that. It's a huge win for improving the safety and bikeability of that road. Also, we've been, I think, periodically updating you all on the street design guidelines, that process. So, thanks to the leadership of the new senior planner, Nathan Lindquist, we are working now very closely with land use to figure out the best way to get it adopted. It's looking like we'll pull out some very specific criteria into a manual that will be referenced by the code, and then the design guide will be more additional information for city projects and for if developers want to go above and beyond in their design, but they may be required for their development. So, and that requires doing a text amendment to the code, which is also a process. So, we're trying, the wheels are in motion. It will probably also take some time to get it adopted. All of our transportation plans were adopted by our transportation policy board a few weeks ago. So, that's exciting. The metropolitan transportation plan, the amendment to the bicycle master plan, designing for safer cycling, and our public participation plan. And then I did want to provide one update. We had a few months ago the conversation about bike racks, and I looked, I actually got a new quote for the custom Santa Fe bike rack. I can't remember if this quote includes shipping, but it was about $630 per bike rack to get those. So if there is still funding, and I think as we discussed at that time, they are already approved by the Historic Review Board, so they could go in the downtown. So, I wanted to share that information, and I also found our the assessment that was done in the early like 2013 or 14 around potential bike rack locations in the downtown area. So, I'm happy to continue to support on that issue if funding is identified. That's all I have. I'll stand for questions. Thanks. : Any questions for members? Member Border. : Thank you, Chair. Thank you, Leah. I'm glad to hear about that. When you talked about the St. Michael's grant that you received, congratulations. How does it relate, and it probably doesn't, to the intersection, big intersection improvements or redesign of St. Michael's and St. Francis? I know some of our members are on the technical committee for that. : So yeah, I'm not sure how that relates. So that project can include St. Michael's from Pacheco to Galisteo, and currently that section of St. Michael's is already two lanes in each direction. So this project, the end points are Pacheco to Rio. : Or Botello. Okay. Well, so it'll, okay. So, well, yeah, from Rios to Botello. So, but the main element is the road diet component will only be from Siosco, and then we included through Botello just because we know that there are some improvements that are already desired. And then we will be coordinating with the NMDOT on their project at the St. Michael's St. Francis interchange, and they already have a preliminary design concept for St. Michael's underneath St. Francis, and that does include elevated bike lanes, sidewalk level bike lanes. So it's likely that we would continue something like that or make sure that they integrate well. : Thank you. Is it possible for us to see current or preliminary, you know, state transportation designs, because I've been curious about what's even being contemplated with respect to the change as it affects, you know, pedestrian and bike ways. : Do you have them? We've gotten it as a committee before because we've discussed it. So, I don't know where we're at, but we've seen the initial design phases and we've provided feedback as a committee on some of the bike proposed bike paths, etc. So, maybe Romela, you can at minimum provide us what we've seen in the past and maybe investigate if there's been additional changes. Go ahead. : Thank you. I realize that too, and I'm being visual too. I don't know, are there, you know, axonometric drawings of what it's, you know, underneath cross section? : Yeah. What are we talking about? What are we looking at? You know, what's in? : What's available? : What's the DOT willing to look at? So, yeah, I would like to see that at our next meeting. Respectfully requesting. Yeah. Thanks. Any other comments? The only thing I've got, Leah, is let's connect offline because as I mentioned in the past, I know I've got my counselor budget that I, that's typically used for travel. I don't travel as a counselor. So, I believe I've got $10,000 there that can at least get us 10 bike racks. Let's figure out how we need to create a bar, get the money because it's 6,000 or 600 for the equipment, but then we've got installation costs as well that I think Eric said he went and installed them himself. We don't want Eric going and installing 10 of them himself. We can figure out how we can identify how they can get installed. But let's, since we've got the identified potential locations with the 2014, 2015 plan you said, let's get this done. : Great. : Okay, we'll connect. Any other comments, questions? : Okay, thank you. : Sorry, one more thing. I said this earlier that really we really owe Romela with her leadership to get the St. Michael's funding that she didn't let us give. We didn't give up. She continued against many obstacles and was able to get the grant application through and she, well, I think I helped write it, but we both, she did so much work for it. So just kudos to her and hope she gets that credit. : Sure. Good job, Romela and Member Bertigary. : Thanks. I'm not taking credit. Those guys get it. I have another question for Leah just with respect to the complete streets odyssey and congratulations on getting that and how it will become part of the land use code, I guess, as I understood. : The manual that's. : Street design guidelines. : Street design. So will say planning and land use staff be accessing that when they're reviewing, you know, development proposals, etc., like a planner, not just an engineer or just the folks over in, you know, public works? Like how, I'm just trying to see how that'll come together as a planner who reviewed plans for development. : So, so the idea is that all of the, all of the specifications will be very clear for a developer in the manual. And so when it comes to development, it'll be a little bit different because in most cases they're not designing, doing a lot of street design for major streets in Santa Fe. So the idea is that they should be able to follow the manual, which is separate from the street design guide, which we already have. So this manual will take components of that, take components that are in the code now. Then it'll be more of a living document that the city traffic engineer is able to update without going to governing body, just using their own expertise. So then, yeah, so then the planners can also reference that to make sure the developer has followed and met all of the criteria that are listed in the manual. : So it's becoming ordinance, it's mandatory. It's not policy or advisory guide. : So the guide will still be guidance. The components of that will be in the manual, which will be referenced by the code. And so through the code, saying you have to use the guide, then yeah, it'll. : Okay, thank you. : Any other comments, questions? None. Let's go to move on to item 6C, Public Safety Advisory Committee, Member Pilt. : I'd like to recognize the power of the press, which I assume is the reason why there's a lot of people out here this evening, since it's been an article in the paper about this particular issue, meaningful stress. And the press articles about the Public Safety Committee has helped kick it into gear after kind of, I don't know how long it's been kind of wandering around and not having a lot of luck getting forms together. But we're now examining what the purpose of the committee is, reviewing the adopting resolution, or I think it was a resolution with establishing committee. So that's the main exciting thing, I think, coming out of that is that we're now at a, we're beginning to see some more focus what the committee ought to be doing. I would hope that similar to what we do here in BPAC, that the citizen represented at least once, great. And also look at better define what issues we should be looking at. You know, how long ago, a year or so ago, about it some controversy about the large, oh, I'm sorry, whether there might be some more, there were some concerns about buying some large pieces of equipment by the police department. To me, that seemed like a thing like maybe the Public Safety Committee could be discussing more, getting some more input into things. So, anyways, that's what we're doing. We will be meeting next Tuesday, so two months in a row. Thank you, Member Piler. Any questions or comments from the committee? Okay. Well, good luck next Tuesday. Let's go to move on to section seven, which is discussion and possible action items. We went ahead and moved item D up to the top, which is discussion on recent bicycle fatality, Steven Bellinger, and accountability for drivers involved in collisions with cyclists. And Member Shift Millers, this is your item, so I'll hand the floor off to you. : Thank you, Chair Garcia. Well, this is a painful subject. Another bicyclist has been killed in Santa Fe, and I wish we didn't have to have this discussion, but we do. As is often the case, the driver who killed Mr. Ballinger received minimal consequences. And we've seen this happen time and again. And although having stronger laws would be good, part of the problem is that we're not enforcing the existing laws equitably. And I guess I have to say that I believe there is an institutional bias on the part of the police and the District Attorney's office against bicyclists and pedestrians and in favor of motorists. And I don't say this lightly, and I don't know if you all saw the article that was in the New Mexican recently. I'm going to, I'm going to read the quote from Deputy Police Chief Faldz. He was talking about the difference between careless driving and reckless driving. The driver who killed Mr. Ballinger received a citation for careless driving, which is really pretty minimal. I believe he should have received a citation for reckless driving, and actually, reckless driving is a prerequisite for charging him with homicide by vehicle. So, without the reckless driving charge, you can't charge him with homicide by vehicle. And I think this is partly why the police are reluctant to charge with reckless driving. But let me read what Deputy Chief Valdez was quoted as saying. Valdez pointed to the language in the reckless driving statute requiring "willful or wanton disregard of the rights or safety of others," saying, "If it's willful or wanton disregard for the safety, that's more of a deliberate act of driving the vehicle into someone to cause harm or dismemberment." So, what Deputy Chief Valdez is saying is that the willful act was the driver hitting the cyclist. That's a misreading of the law. I don't know if it's an intentional misreading of the law. Either he doesn't understand the law or he's misreading it. The intentional act was the disregard of the safety of others. That is, running the light and failing to yield. That's the intentional act. If the intentional act were hitting the cyclist, that would be aggravated assault with a deadly weapon or some such charge. To give you an example, some of you may recall several years ago there was a group of cyclists out by Galisteo, and a driver passed them, and there were some angry words exchanged. Then the driver pulled in front of the bicyclists and backed into the bicyclists, severely injuring one and injuring a little less severely some others, and then took off. Well, that driver, the sheriff's deputy, actually found the driver and charged him with improper backing. Now, those charges were later revised, thankfully, and the guy, I'm not sure if it was assault, but the guy actually was convicted and sentenced to about three and a half years in state prison. But the fact that the sheriff's deputy only charged him with improper backing speaks to this idea that there's an institutional bias. At the time of the sentencing, I was the president of Bike Santa Fe, and I attended the sentencing hearing, and I made a statement on the record in court saying that I talked about the institutional bias. And the judge, his response was, and these are his words, he says, "It's worse than an institutional bias. It's an asymmetry in the law." And what the judge said was, "If that guy had taken a baseball bat and beaten the guy up, he'd be looking at 5 to 10. But because he did it with a car, he was looking at a maximum of five." Unfortunately, the law doesn't take injuring bicyclists and pedestrians quite so seriously, but it could. My own personal experience with this is I was hit by a car. I was rear-ended on a low-speed street. I was dragged about 100 feet. And the only reason I wasn't seriously injured or killed is because I was able to grab the bumper of the truck and just be dragged instead of being dragged underneath the truck. I got dragged for 100 feet. I did the Indiana Jones thing. And when the police officer came, it became apparent that the reason this driver hit me was that they didn't clean the frost off their windshield. I had red LED lights flashing. I was wearing a fluorescent windbreaker, and they couldn't see what was directly in front of their car because they chose to continue driving with their windshield completely occluded by frost. That's a very intentional act. I think that that is a willful disregard for the safety of others, as is, those are the words of the statute. And I would also point out that that's the state statute. The city statute is exactly the same, except paragraph B says in the reckless driving statute, "A person operating a motor vehicle shall not endanger a bicyclist." That's part of the reckless driving statute. So, the officer gave her careless driving even though she willfully disregarded my safety. I went to the district attorney, and I made the case that she should get reckless driving. The district attorney flat out refused. Flat out refused. And he said his reasoning was, "She's elderly. I don't want to treat her so harshly." So my question is, how old do you have to be before you're absolved of your responsibility to drive safely? And this is absolutely ludicrous, this attitude on the part of law enforcement, including the DAs, treating bicyclists as if their lives are worthless. I know those are some strong words, but this is how I feel. If that driver who killed Mr. Ballinger had killed another motorist, I don't know for sure, but I doubt they'd have given him just careless driving. This guy ran a light and failed to yield. I'm not saying that every motorist who runs a light should get reckless driving, but if it causes a serious accident, particularly a fatal accident, then yes, he should get reckless driving. Let me read the statute just so you all understand. I've already read parts of the reckless driving statute, but vehicular homicide says, "Homicide by vehicle is the killing of a human being in the unlawful operation of a motor vehicle." It doesn't say anything about it being intentional. So, Mr. Ballinger was killed by someone operating a motor vehicle unlawfully. That person should be charged with homicide by vehicle. Another provision in that statute, I won't read it to you, but I'll just paraphrase it: reckless driving is a prerequisite to that. And it specifically says that speeding in and of itself cannot be the reason for the reckless driving charge. Okay, but this wasn't a speeding issue. This was a failure to yield issue. There's no reason why this driver who killed Mr. Ballinger should not be charged with reckless driving and homicide by vehicle. But it hasn't happened. And personally, I believe it's because of a personal bias. And I think this bias exists because, as someone mentioned earlier, every cop, every DA, they're a driver. Very few of them are bicyclists. And a lot of drivers hate bicyclists, fear bicyclists, don't know how to deal with bicyclists, and they have a personal bias against bicyclists. Police are not supposed to enforce the law on the basis of their personal biases. And I believe that's what's going on. I'm not sure what to do about it, but I need to call it out. Thank you. Thank you, Member Schiff Miller. Any comments, or just go ahead and go down the line? I can personally say that I have experienced the bias of law enforcement against cyclists. In May, I was hit by a driver running a red light. I was in the crosswalk, and I had the right of way. This driver hit me, and he was blatantly running the red light, hit me from the middle. I got flung into the middle of St. Francis, blocking the rest of traffic. And when the police got there, he tells them that he was actually waiting to go right on the red, which was not true. And where I landed in St. Francis couldn't have happened if that was where he hit me. But the police chose to believe him. And part of what was also very infuriating and discouraging for me was then seeing the cops talk to this guy and then pack him up and send him away in his car. In my opinion, he's already proven that he isn't able to drive safely. I mean, you just hit someone with this vehicle, and to just be put in there and shipped off and sent on your way like you just ran a stop sign is ridiculous. I mean, I suffered a very severe concussion that I'm still healing from, going through being at the hospital and being told by every single person that saw me that the only reason I'm alive is because I was hit by a sedan and not a truck. And to have the cops tell me that you really shouldn't ride your bike here, meaning Santa Fe, because it's dangerous. And that they also told me that there is not enough police to catch everyone running red lights, so to just kind of deal with it. So I think that a lot of what you said is, at least in my experience, true. Any other comments? I'm just going to come down this way. Member Wang. I agree with everything you said, Gary. I guess I just, exiting this session, I just wonder what we can do as a committee. I think we often make recommendations to the city council, but I don't know if we've recommended anything to the police before, or if recommending something directly to them is even the best way, like the police or the DA, to affect any action. I'm just throwing it out there. I want to do something about this. I just feel like we need, I'm not clear yet, or I feel like we need to do some reflection, or if there are any ideas on what concretely we can do. And I can maybe help clarify that. So we as a body have the authority to make recommendations, whether it's policy, training, whatever it may be. Then it's up to the governing body to take action. So for clarification, I'll just leave that there. I've got some comments later, but I'll let the rest of the committee go ahead and speak first. Member, did you all have a chance to read former member Spencer's email? It seems like there's a couple bills up recently at the state level that for whatever reason stalled out in committees. So, it does seem like some of this action needs to occur at the state level. I'm not familiar, since I've been here for four years, of what the interaction is between state traffic laws and local traffic laws, but maybe we need to approach both levels of getting the laws fixed. It does sound like it'd be good to have some dialogue with the District Attorney's office and the police department. This cultural attitude of not, it sounds like, being willing to take a very strong stance of charging drivers in the event of some negative interaction between a car and a bicyclist or a car and a pedestrian. I totally support the idea of us recommending to the councils that we begin that type of dialogue. Member Piltchure. Member Gordary. Thank you. I have a question for Member Piltchure about that. Do you know who the bill's sponsors were for those bills? I don't know if Cal had that in his letter, but just in terms of maybe going to those who are already spearheading this. I don't recall. I'd have to go back and take a look at it again. Might have been Senator Worth. I can't recall. Okay. Thanks. I was thinking the same thing. You're a planner, too, about for our committee, how to facilitate or host more of a dialogue with the police. And we could talk about this. I guess that's part of this item here right now. But how, how could we do that in terms of, you know, jurisdiction and turf? Like Councilor, or Chair Garcia, maybe you could respond to this, how it would fly to see if we couldn't get some dialogue with someone in the police department, you know, if that would be possible to do that, you know, so it's not confrontational. It's like, really, let's, let's have, you know, let's start talking about this. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair. So, I am really befuddled about this issue of careless versus reckless driving because it doesn't make sense to me that somebody who runs a light and doesn't yield, endangering both cyclists and drivers, is not driving with wanton disregard. So I appreciate the comments from the public about the police and perhaps the attitude of police, and also I really like the idea of having a dialogue and understanding how such decisions are made. And if it is bias, which it certainly sounds like, that we have a conversation about it because the roads belong to all of us, and clearly that is not the philosophy in Santa Fe. People run red lights constantly in this town. I have made a constituent request to monitor Zafarano and St. Francis, where there is a very obvious sign that you cannot turn on red. It just happened to me this morning. And the city needs to get off their behinds and do something. And I feel like the only thing that is going to make somebody do something is if they lose a loved one. We all have loved ones and we deserve the same treatment. So, I'm very upset about this, and I feel like a dialogue with the Chief of Police about this issue of the law and how somebody who really was reckless in their driving gets away with this. And I also wonder if charges can be changed. I don't know enough about the law or law enforcement to know that if there is enough advocacy and outrage in Santa Fe, can the charges be changed? So, that is a big question that I have. And then I also feel like I know there are many mayoral forums and City Council forums. I encourage all of us to go to those and hold the people who are running for office accountable. There's going to be one at Tumble Root that I know, I think Bike Santa Fe is possibly co-sponsoring. I think we should show up in the hundreds and ask the questions that need to be asked and hold our potential elected officials responsible. So, I'm wondering, Chair Garcia, if you know more about if charges can be changed, or if anybody knows if there is a possibility that this could be changed from careless driving to reckless driving if there is a complete demonstration of outrage in Santa Fe. Thank you. Before I answer that question, I just want to make sure if there's any other comments, questions from the committee. I just want to clarify. I found Mr. Spencer's email. So, actually, Senator Wirth voted against the bill this last session, which would have increased penalties for drivers. It's not clear why. So, the legislation was proposed by Senator Muñoz. Muñoz. Muñoz. Okay. Thank you for correcting me. But it didn't get anywhere close to adoption. And he, as he says there, oh, and Senator Peter Wirth voted against SB265. Just wanted to make sure I give you the right information. Thank you, Member Piltch. Any other comments or questions from committee members? Sure. Membership Miller. I can speak a little bit to changing charges. Like I said, in that Galisteo incident, the charges were revised by the District Attorney. I don't know what sort of timeframe there needs to be. I don't know how it relates to once the investigation is closed, but in that instance, like I said, the original charge was improper backing, and it was elevated to a much more serious felony. And I would point out at the time of that incident, the driver left the scene with serious accidents, which is in and of itself a felony. Yet the officer didn't charge him, let him go. Unbelievable. And I don't believe that officer ever faced any disciplinary action for it. Thank you, Member Schiff Miller. Any other members? There was a lot of show. Sure. Go ahead, Member Board. Thank you. I meant to add that perhaps if you aren't already going to address it as a member of the Public Safety Committee, you are, aren't you? Yes. Okay. Because you've gotten it back up and running. This is a topic that will certainly come up and be discussed at length, and maybe that's the place to really dig into what the laws are and how they're not enforced or they are misinterpreted. But that'd be a good place to bring this to at least that committee's attention. Member Gabriel, Member Piltch, can you tell us all what time that committee meeting is and what time in case people are interested in going to the Public Safety meeting? Next Tuesday at 4:00, right here. Thank you. Any other comments, questions? So to answer the question around, can files, I mean, charges be refiled? Yes, there's got to be evidence to warrant such action. That can be done on many fronts: advocacy, litigation, etc. Now, when it comes to what this body can recommend, there are many things I think we as a body should do, and it's up to us as a body to take action because I'm only one of nine of us. One is, I would recommend we invite whether it's Chief Joy or DC Valdez to come to our next meeting, but more so, as mentioned previously, to have this engagement to really understand why certain charges were filed, could they be refiled if additional evidence was proven? And ultimately, how can we best support them to ensure that this type of instance doesn't happen should another fatality happen? It all comes down to training, I think, at the end of the day. How can we ensure that our police force is properly trained? We give them enough tools to respond and act accordingly. And so I think that's where the dialogue with the chief, but there's a parallel process where we can also recommend to the governing body that such training be implemented. We, I want to work in collaboration with the Police Chief, but I also want us to ensure we're doing everything we can as a committee because the Police Chief might say, "Well, we don't need the training." That doesn't mean we as a body don't disagree with that, and we can still move forward with the recommendation. So that's one. Another avenue I would like for us to move forward on is what type of training would be appropriate, and I think that's where we can have maybe the policy committee look at that and provide the recommendation to us and bring it forward, and then we give that recommendation to the governing body, similar to the way we've done other work. Now, as we move forward, I want to ensure that, especially the members of the public, this is your venue. We are the committee, but you are also part of the solution. And so providing comment tonight just doesn't stop with the process. I want to ensure that we all have a hand in making sure we're providing a solution and ultimately a long-term sustainable solution because I think I'm also in agreement that penalties are too low. I mean, if it's a $100 infraction, $150, I think it was cited earlier, if somebody gets injured, I mean, that in my opinion, that's too minimal. That's not going to change behavior. And this is where we need to also work on how are we going to change behavior not only of current motorists, but our younger folks who are going to be motorists. And I think the plan to work with DMV and driving schools to provide recommendations to them how they can ensure that they're teaching drivers at an early age to respect cyclists and pedestrians will help with the long-term impact. That's going to take long-term change, but we can begin that work now because there's some short-term work we can get on, but there's also the long-term work ultimately. But it's up to us as the body. These are some ideas, thoughts that I'm throwing out. I would also pose the question to members of the audience if there are any gaps in the conversation we're having in regards to how we can build a better support system that ultimately ensures cyclists are safe in Santa Fe. I mean, I think the infrastructure is something that's going to take decades, unfortunately, to unravel the way our city has been built to prioritize vehicles. We're getting there. And Shift Member Schiff Miller, you'll talk about it later around how we're beginning to redesign roads, but that is again a long-term effect that we can't wait for. We just cannot wait for it. So, I would encourage community members, and I'll use the prerogative of the chair to, once again, open up the floor to any of the community members. I know we had the floor open for petitions earlier, but because this is such a serious matter and I sincerely feel we have experts in the room, I want to ensure that we are not missing anything as we move forward on this very important topic. So if there are any ideas, suggestions from folks, I would say please feel free to step up. I'm not going to impose the two-minute limit, but I would respectfully ask don't make it 10 minutes either. We want to, I want to encourage this as a community collaborative effort. Thank you, sir. I really appreciate the opportunity. My name is Shaheen, District 1. You know, I'd love to see billboards or signs in the city that prioritize cyclists' lives. I don't see that. I'd love to see instead of a Meow Wolf billboard coming from Albuquerque, something that mentions we have cyclists in Santa Fe. Respect people on two bikes, two wheels. Some signage in Santa Fe that just alerts people in vehicles that we share the roads would be really helpful. I'm on the roads all the time on a bike, and I really appreciated the signage that's come up that allows me to actually control a lane, and I do control a lane, and I'm not going to get off the roads because I feel fearful. And I would encourage people who are here to own the roads. One of the problems with being in a car is you have cyclists who are fearful, and they don't know how far they need to go. I love being in a car, and I've always loved the thrill of driving, but the worst thing for me when I'm sitting in a car is a cyclist who's all over the road, who's trying to get as far off the shoulder as possible because they don't know their rightful place in the lane. Encouraging cyclists to take the roads for me is really important. And I think these forums offer a space for people who do ride to be reminded that things are only going to get worse the more they get off, the more we get off the roads. The more present we are on the roads, the more we control the lanes, the more we are interacting with drivers, and sometimes that's a threatening thing to do, but that raises the awareness. Mr. Schiff Miller, we need attorneys who are litigating these cases because the reason why you are compelled to be a safe driver in a car is not just a criminal liability. It's that you're going to have to deal with your insurance company that's going to ding you. And a 140-pound body is nothing compared to a 6,000-pound steel cage with 400 horsepower that's belching out diesel. There is no competition. And when I get flattened, no one's going to go after the driver of that truck. No insurance company is going to go after them. That's the incentive in this system. It's the money. The criminal fine is minimal. Now, aggravated assault with a deadly weapon to hit a motor vehicle or aggravated battery with a deadly weapon to hit a motor vehicle, those are there, and the officer can collect what he or she needs and present that file to the DA's office, or they can direct file that in magistrate court or in district court. The DAs, the prosecutors take it from there, and they can refile that case to their heart's content, and they do. You get DWI cases that are dismissed and then refiled, dismissed and refiled, dismissed and refiled for years. So the officers don't have much of a role after they get their complaint, they get a couple witnesses, they get the lapel cam, they download it, it's sitting there in Axon. It's the DA needs to say there's going to be criminal accountability. It's insurance and litigators, plaintiffs' attorneys who say there's going to be civil liability. And it's cyclists who need to go out and take the streets to remind everybody in a car, "I'm a body. I'm a father. I'm a citizen. I'm a racer. I'm a commuter." I'm a human being, and your car is not going to have precedence over my body. So, I thank you for this space. I thank you for hearing from everyone here. It's an issue that's really close to my heart. And these deaths without accountability, they're ringing the bell. My daughter is on a bike as well, and I want my partner to be safe, and they're not. I'm at war whenever I'm on a bike. I'm on the bike all the time, and it's a constant sense of warfare. Vehicles, things running across the street with nature, with my... But I'm not going to leave the roads. Well, thank you. Thanks for the space. Shane: Thank you, Shane. Any other members? Robert Garcia: My name is Robert Garcia, District 2. It's the first time I've been to one of your meetings, so I'm not familiar with the etiquette. If I'm out of order, please tell me. But I appreciate you opening back up. I didn't realize, perhaps I should have been here earlier. I just want to add my voice to those who have expressed their outrage at the current situation, the lack of accountability. I appreciate your advocacy on our behalf. So, if anything I say comes across as negative, it's not directed at you. I know quite a few recreational bicyclists. We're mostly older. We're not commuters. Most of them will not ride in the city of Santa Fe. They'll take a mountain bike and go into the hills or out to the Galisteo Basin, or they will drive way out of town and then go for a ride. I think one way to apply, I almost hesitate to bring this up, a little pressure to the city. I think from what I've read, the city is quite proud of its ranking nationwide as a bike-friendly city. It's not. It's not safe to ride a bike on the city streets. I hope Santa Fe does not put itself in a position to lose that reputation. I would also mention there may be another group of allies you've overlooked, or maybe overlooked, and those are motorcyclists. Yes, they are on a motor vehicle, and yes, sometimes they can make an aggravating amount of noise. Some years ago, I went to a rally at the Roundhouse to try to impact state laws. I thought it was going to be a rally of bicyclists. That's how it was sent to me. Turned out there were 10 times as many motorcyclists there as there were bicyclists. And as I listened, I realized they have the exact same problem. Drivers don't pay attention. Drivers don't see them. That's why so many motorcyclists make their motorcycles so noisy. At least the drivers will hear them, maybe look and notice them. Bicyclists don't really have that option. Finally, I was going to suggest that perhaps you might consider, after you gather more information, maybe have more meetings, is to prepare a report, a white paper if you will, to present to the City Council, but also send it to the press. Because if the press was interested in telling us about your meeting tonight, which in fact is how I read about it, they might be very interested in your report. So again, thank you for your work on our behalf, and I hope we can see some results. Thank you. Shane: Thank you, Robert. Come on, the mayor here. Frank Sandoval: Everybody, I'm Frank Sandoval, and District 2. I represent District 2. Obviously, there are some issues here. It seems like enforcement is one thing I'd be very curious about. This is probably somewhat resource-intensive, but are we really any more dangerous than other towns of the same size with the same number of bicycles? I've ridden all over this great country of ours, and it's always dangerous. So, how do we compare to Bend, Oregon, or Boulder, Colorado? Are they safer? What have they done? I feel it's a worthwhile project. Shane: Thank you, Frank. Bill Adrian: My name is Bill Adrian. I'm with District 1. I'm also a lay member of the Policy Committee for BPAC. And I just thought of, in 2023, BPAC decided to delay the 10-year requirement of revision of the traffic calming policy, and we still have not gotten back that updated. If you look at the policy, the title page says "Engineering, Education, and Enforcement." And in August 14th, 2013, the City Council approved recommendations that came from BPAC, which were at that time the Bicycle and Trails Advisory Committee. And some of those recommendations were regarding enforcement. So, I think this might be a good time for BPAC to pull up the traffic calming policy, update it, focus on the enforcement part, and maybe working with the police and get some revisions approved by the City Council. Thank you. Shane: Thank you, Bill. Any other members of the audience that would like to provide some feedback on this matter? Okay. Any members from the committee? Member Gabriel. Member Gabriel: Thank you, Mr. Chair. So, some of the comments made me realize that I think there are some other opportunities for us. But first, I'd like to acknowledge the comments about taking the streets. I think everybody needs to do what they're comfortable with. If you are not comfortable on the streets, that is your choice to ride on the trails. And it's important that you do what makes you feel safe. I ride on the streets, and I am afraid might be too strong of a word. I'm extremely cautious and extremely aware of my surroundings at all times. And the reason I ride on the streets is the same as what you said. I want drivers to see that there are cyclists on the street. I want to own the street as I do. And I think for people who can stomach that, I think that's a good approach. So, I appreciate your comments. I also appreciate the comments about the motorcycling community because there have been campaigns, "Motorcycles are everywhere. Look for us." And it seems that we could do a similar campaign for cyclists. So, I like the idea of raising awareness that way and perhaps participating and collaborating with the motorcycle community. I also think there is a huge opportunity for advocacy here and that we could have a coalition of coalitions. Bike Santa Fe. There are numerous biking clubs and other clubs that share our goals and our interests. And working with our state representatives and senators is worth doing. We know that Senator Wirth has played a role in this issue, and Senator Muñoz. And I propose that we engage in some advocacy with the upcoming state legislative session and could also involve some of the cycling community from Albuquerque and elsewhere. Thank you. Shane: Thank you, Member Gabriel. Member Piltch, just a quick question. There are a few police officers who do bike patrols for some events. It'd be interesting to find out what type of training do they get, or are they just given bikes? Is it good luck, or is there something, or do they go through some formal training at the police department before they're allowed to be bicycle cops? Here's just an anecdote about that. One time I was riding down West Alameda, and I'm a certified bicycle safety instructor through the League of American Bicyclists. So I know a little bit about bike safety. And I saw two bikes riding towards me against traffic far away, and I thought, "I'm going to say something to these guys when they get here." And as they approached, I realized it was two bike cops. The number one reason statistically why bicyclists get hit by cars is riding against traffic. Number one. And that's exactly what they were doing. I guess the answer was good luck. That's the type of training they get. I think we can ask the chief that we are able to get him to our next meeting. Any other comments, questions? What's the will of the committee? How do we want to move forward? And so we, there were several recommendations made by various members, whether it's on the body or members of the public. Do we need a motion to say that we would like to set up a meeting with police and/or district attorneys? Yes. And so what I would recommend, what might be easiest, if we were to jot down a list and make that a motion, and if folks, we can have the conversation around what should be added, omitted, etc. But we can make a motion for one fell swoop. We can make several motions on each individual item. It's up to the committee. I mean, I think the way we at least should begin to approach this is to begin a list of actionable items that we would like to see. I think at minimum, inviting police representation to our next meeting. At minimum, begin to investigate what training is given to the police force on this matter and how could we help provide additional supports. I liked community member Bill Adrian's idea of bringing back our traffic calming proposal we had been working on. So those are three items. We can also refer any additional recommendations to the Policy Advisory Committee. So that's where things like advocacy billboard signs, investigating higher penalties can be done. But when it comes to things like the legislature, I think we would need to parcel that out just because we have to be sure that we're not violating any laws. When it comes to going to the legislature, you have to be a certified lobbyist to begin to lobby. But that doesn't mean we can't go and advocate for certain issues such as bike safety. And I think that's definitely within our purview of this committee is the advocacy realm. And we can discuss further how we want to as a body move forward on that because, for example, we all couldn't show up there because we would violate Open Meetings Act and quorum. We would have to coordinate how that looks and how this committee would be represented on that matter. So, lots that can be done. Lots I think this committee can really begin to initiate action. It's just up to how much this committee really wants to get involved. And I think there is the will, at least from what I'm hearing. It's just where do we begin to start this process? And so I'll leave it up to the committee. I'll end it off. Question: The city put together a legislative agenda for each session, which then it carries forth. Or are we talking about us going around the city's legislative agenda process? Shane: I'm talking about us individually or as a committee advocating to your point. Yes, absolutely. The city creates what we have as our legislative agenda, which then in turn the city's lobbyist advocates for. So that's another action we can take is to, and we'll have to act pretty quickly on that. And what I mean by quickly is this, the legislative agenda resolution typically comes in November, December timeframe. And so I would recommend that if we want to have any legislative priorities, that we put it on next month's agenda. That way we can hash this out. And I'm happy to take that recommendation to the governing body when it comes before us and incorporate it as an amendment to that resolution. That way, the city's lobbyists can ensure that it's part of their lobbying marching orders. Great, great call, Member Piltch, Member Gabriel. Member Gabriel: Thank you, Mr. Chair. So, I have another question that may or may not lead to action. And this came up last night when I was on a walk. We were talking about the yellow flashing lights that are now new all around town. And I'm wondering if there is a role to play in educating the public about that. And I don't know if that's a police issue or a traffic engineer issue. So, I'm wondering if perhaps we should engage with traffic engineering or whoever to have a conversation about that because I think, and I'm not sure, there might be confusion about those yellow flashing lights. So that's another thought about an educational role and who would have the best information about how to explain that to the public. Thank you. I'm looking at you just because this is your wheelhouse, and I don't know, that could be a tandem. I mean, because ultimately it comes down to enforcement. In regards to the police department, they would enforce any infractions. But I agree with you that Public Works might have the responsibility to begin to educate the community on these are new devices. I know we have installed signage that says "new" that helps to alert community members, but "new how," what does this mean? And I think that's where maybe, yeah. Unfortunately, our traffic operations engineer has resigned several months ago, but he was the one who instituted that. Right. Well, I mean, And we don't have an engineer at this point in time. I definitely understand where you're coming from around the vacancy, but that doesn't limit the city's responsibility to inform the public. You just, someone who can educate the public. We don't have that person until we hire a new traffic engineer. Our two traffic engineers have resigned. Well, and I think that's maybe something I can do on my own in regards to, we don't need the city to take action. I mean, this committee, I can reach out to our Public Works Director because it is a completely separate topic from what I'm feeling from this agenda item that's more so focusing on educating the community in regards to new signage, traffic, traffic signage, etc. So, I don't want to blur that up with what we're trying to accomplish here because I think I can work with the Public Works Director to begin some education outreach on that front. So, let's, I'd say let's, because there is a lot that we can actually begin to work on on this, and I don't want to pull away because that is pulling us away. But Greg, I'm happy to investigate that. Member Wink. Thanks, Chair Garcia. I'm on board with all the motion ideas you suggested. I think maybe some additional items. I think if we, you had mentioned inviting the police to come, I think doing some baseline research on current driver education, or what the MVD is doing, what driving schools are doing, like you said, would be helpful to inform future recommendations. And I liked Robert's idea about the white paper. I don't know that it has to be that formal, and I don't know if there's someone on city staff who could support, but if there isn't, I'm happy to help with some kind of analysis just to show, like, I think by law cyclists and cars are equal on the road, but like Gary said, it doesn't really seem from the incidents we've observed that charges are like to measure it with vehicle-on-vehicle crashes versus vehicle and pedestrian or cyclist. So I think if either someone in the city in a timely manner can pull that data and run that analysis, or if someone can just help me get that data, this is kind of like work I do for my job anyway. I'm happy to try to help assemble that. Okay. Mr. Chair. Sure. Yes. Yes, Miss Glorios. In the list of your motions, the traffic, pulling the traffic calming and prioritizing it. The reason why BPAC policy planning and law subcommittee chair Yolanda Eisenstein postponed the review of the traffic calming process or procedure was that the city Public Works is going to replace it with a traffic impact assessment. And that was done and presented to BPAC several months ago. And so the traffic engineer, Wolfenberger, has sent it to the Land Use and it was adopted several months ago before she resigned. And I have a copy, and I, so it was stated August 29th last year, 2024, when the traffic impact assessment has been adopted by the Land Use, and I can send a copy to every member of the committee, and we can put it up on the BPAC website. Okay. As a resource. Yes. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. And so right now, just to come back to what we're talking about, I've got invite a police representative to a future BPAC meeting. Then we will refer a couple research topics to the committees. One on what education is currently being done for new drivers. Research the penalties in such instances, should they be, to investigate, should they be higher? And this is where the committee would look at maybe what other cities are doing, etc. Research the training that's currently being given to police officers on this, on cycling and pedestrian instances. And then I just added to create an ad hoc committee to develop a white paper because we have our three subcommittees, but we can, I think we can create an ad hoc committee to get this done. And with an ad hoc committee, we can have some members of the committee as well as any members of the public that would like to be involved in this process that would allow for collaboration to occur. Is there anything that I'm missing from the committee that folks would like to add? I think we, excuse me, I think we should look to what that legislation that was in front of the state. What did that say? I was not aware of it until receiving this email. So let's see what that says, and it might be a good starting point. And so that would be research previous legislation. Right, at the state legislature, unless Yeah, the ones that they didn't get passed last session. Okay. Any other topics? Anything we folks think we're missing? Member Bigary. I like the structure of this, and I think as we wish to see police representation here, that we thoughtfully craft an agenda about, you know, to guide the discussion. So it's not a presentation by them, but it's a dialogue. I don't know how you facilitate that, but so we're not just saying, "Come before us and then we're going to have a free-for-all." That we, and some of those things. So I suggest that, and that we know what we want to actually cover, and one is, you know, like the legal definitions of reckless driving. I'm not really sure I can package this up right now. We've talked a lot about law, but somehow package it so that we can cover the topics with them, they come, that we've been discussing, not to put them, you know, it's not an interrogation, but we want to guide, you know, versus getting a pat presentation. So, so what, the way I will frame that is to invite police to come to a meeting to cover this topic in a collaborative manner. Does that work? Okay. Any other recommendations? If there's none, I'll go ahead and since I have the list in front of me, it might be easier for me to make the motion. So I'll make a motion that we invite, send an invitation to the Police Department to have representation at a future BPAC meeting to cover the topic that we're discussing tonight, and to ensure that we work to cover that topic in a collaborative manner. We send several research ideas to our subcommittees. We send the topic of researching what education is being given to new drivers around the topic of bicycle and pedestrian safety. We research penalties that are currently given should a driver injure a bicycle or pedestrian. We research what training is currently being given to our Police Department regarding bicycle and pedestrian safety. And we create an ad hoc committee that will begin to create a white paper. What was first? What was the topic of the white paper you wanted to lead it on? And, and sorry, Board Member Wong, but I'm going to lean on you to chair this committee. Yeah. I don't think of it as, I don't know that there's like, I have a specific topic right now. I'm open to suggestions. I think just as a, I think it's important to have a fact base to go off of when we bring things to, like, when we go to advocate or when we speak with the representative from the police. And so I, I think the primary thing in my mind is just assembling the baseline data around like, hey, if you say cars and cyclists are equal, like, are they when we look at, when we look at outcomes in, you know, reckless versus careless driving? So if I was to say, create a white paper, an ad hoc committee to develop a white paper on bicycle pedestrian safety measures. I, yeah, I, I think that's right because I don't, I don't want to assume right now that the outcome is like, oh, definitely, you know, pedestrians and cyclists get short shrift. I think, you know, we look at the data and then depending on the results of that, that's like what the white paper says. Okay. So, part of that motion is to create an ad hoc committee to develop a white paper on the topic of bicycle and pedestrian safety involving any vehicular accidents, and I will nominate Member Wang as the chair of that committee, and we can further develop the structure of that at the next meeting. How many committee members, how many community advisory members, and we'll be, we'll appoint all those folks at the next meeting if that's okay with that. So that's the motion I'll make. We have a second. Sure. Oh, yes. Yes. And then research any previous state, any legislation that has been introduced at the state legislature. That is, yes. Thank you for catching that, Miss Glorios. Okay, second. We've got a second by Member Pelture. Is there any discussion on this? Okay, hearing none. I do want to thank the community members that showed up not only before, the ones that stuck around with us tonight. This is a process that I will encourage and ask that you help us along through with this process. So with that, Miss Glorio Somas, can we get a roll call vote, please? Mr. Chair, Member Bordigore, Member Farrell, Yes. Member Gabriel, Yes. Member Filcher, Yes. Member Schiffmiller, Yes. Member Wang, Yes. Chair Garcia. Yes. Motion passes. Okay. Thank you. And thank you, Membership Miller, for bringing up this very important topic. Lots of, lots of work ahead. With that, let's go and move on to the next agenda item, which is 7A. Welcome and introduction of new BPAC member representing Santa Fe County. Is it Beatatric or Beatatrice? Beatric. Beatric. Beatric Ferrell. And so welcome. And so, tonight's your first meeting. Feel free to introduce yourself with as much as little. We just want to invite you and thank, thank you for being part of the team. You, super excited to be a part of this. Really the whole reason why I'm here is, you know, I've been a, I've been commuting predominantly by bicycle in Santa Fe for the past six years. And not just riding to work or riding for fun. I'm riding to get my groceries. I'm riding to go to events. You know, I rode my bike to my friend's wedding. And that is something that is so important to me, and it's so much a part of who I am and what I'm all about. And getting hit by a car and the general attitude of the people that I am working with to resolve that big issue. It has been just so infuriating that, like, I have to do something. So that's why I'm here because if there's one thing I've been taught in my life, it's if you want something done right, you have to do it yourself. You got to get some skin in the game. Otherwise, you don't have the right to complain. So I am, you know, going to do whatever I can do to try to make this community that I'm not only a part of, but have so much respect for and love, a safer place for cyclists. Yeah, those are, those are my people, and, you know, the more people on bikes, I think, the better. It's the best thing you can do for the planet in terms of transportation. So, yeah, just whatever I can do to make it better in this community for everyone. Well, thank you. Welcome. And, you have any questions? Got a lot of folks that can help you out. Thank you. Thank you. We'll go to move. Any comments from the committee members? Welcome. Let's move on to item 7B: appointment of Todd Cannon to BPAC's Technical Review Subcommittee. So I will make such appointment as Gloria. Sorry, it's getting to the end of the night. Item 7C: recognition of Mike Santa Fe's Past President, Jennifer Weber. This is my item. Thank you for sticking around with us. Thank you for starting the conversation earlier. You definitely, as always, lead by example, and you got folks moving forward. So thank you for that. We want to recognize your efforts not only as Bike Santa Fe's Past President, but the enthusiasm and engagement you've brought around cycling safety in our community is much, much appreciated. Do you have this certificate? Oh, it's hiding behind my... Sorry, I apologize. My laptop's hiding it. So, we've got a "muchas gracias" we want to give you. I'm going to read it just for folks that aren't able to see it. It says, "Muchas gracias from the City of Santa Fe. This certificate of recognition is presented to Jennifer Weber, President, Bike Santa Fe, 2023 through 2025, in recognition of your outstanding leadership and dedication to making Santa Fe a safer, more accessible, and bike-friendly city. Your efforts have strengthened community engagement, expanded cycling education, and advanced the mission of Bike Santa Fe. Thank you for your lasting impact on our streets and our future." Presented by the Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee at the City of Santa Fe City Hall on September 11th, 2025, signed by me, Michael Garcia, BPAC Chair. So, thank you. As you heard, I know you're always willing to participate. We have a new ad hoc committee creating a white paper. Feel free to pass your name in the hat for that one. But I just wanted to thank you, and I know that again, the encouragement and excitement you've brought has been felt in the community. So, thank you. Chris: All right. With that, let's move on to our next item, which is 7E: discussion on developing rules of procedure for BPAC. Steve Pilcher, this is your item, so I'll go ahead and hand you off the floor. Well, actually, I discovered we may not need to develop rules and procedures. If you look at your packet, you'll find that back in 1984, back when I was just like two, the city adopted rules and procedures for all city committees, not specifically just for BPAC. And then there's, so there's an initial resolution. Then you'll see the rules of procedures are included there, and they've been amended a couple times, once in 1990 and the last time in 2009. I don't know how often the city looks at these. There seem like there might be a few things that could use some updating, but since they're city-wide rules, rules of procedures for all committees, of which there are an incredible amount of committees from the city, I assume we don't have the ability to modify anything on our own. Chair: Is that correct? That is correct. We don't have the ability to modify our own. So from my understanding, we follow the, this committee would follow the procedures you cited. There are separate procedures for the City Council committees: Quality of Life, Public Works, Utilities Committee, and the Financial Committee. Right. So, we would follow that. If folks feel that they would like to make any recommendations for changes to that, I'm always happy to modify and adjust accordingly. I thought I had heard at one point in time that there might be an update to that, but I have not heard anything. Well, I know a couple of years ago I expressed concern that we were, you know, we were definitely trying to keep two members from each council district. And you know, what was the basis? Not that it's not a good idea, but what was the basis for that? There is a basis for that here in the, here under Article 7 that says the city will strive to obtain and retain on the membership of each citizens board, commission, committee a geographical balance between the four voting districts for municipal elections. So that, that made me feel a lot more comfortable because I, again, my concern is someone ever asked, "Why are you not filling this position? We all want, not me and someone else or district. Where does it say that you're supposed to do things that way?" And so I, I found these to really be pretty thorough. I don't see the need for us necessarily to do anything about them other than one, one crazy thing, terms of officers. As written for this, I don't know if all committees do it this way, but they're for one year, which seems like an awfully short appointment period unless they're removed from office or no longer in office due to resignation or illness or unless the enabling legislation specifies otherwise, which ours does with our, but that separately would be a recommendation. The city is going to, at this, I can't imagine appointing members to committees and only have them last for one year. Barely learn what you're doing unless you're a fast learner like this. But anyway, so again, at this point, I don't think we need to do anything for our own committee here. It looks like this is all covered here under this master one. But I'm glad we all have it. We all have it in our possession. And thank you, the Public Safety Committee, for unearthing this material. Okay. Any questions, comments? None. Is there any action to take? None. We'll go ahead and move to the next item, which is 7F: preparation for strategic plan update at next regular BPAC meeting. Mike, can we get some technical assistance to help with the presentation, please? There we go. Perfect. Thank you, Mr. Chair, members of the committee. I would like to present to you the PowerPoint presentation made by former Policy Planning and Law Subcommittee Chair to the governing body in October, yeah, last year, with BPAC Vice Chair Vulture. This is a summary of the strategic plan. The Bicycling and Pedestrian Advisory Committee was established by Resolution Number 2003-87 in September, on September 24, 2003, and the former name was Bicycle and Trails Advisory Committee. It was amended on January 27, 2021, by Resolution Number 2021-8, and the name became Bicycling and Pedestrian Advisory Committee. Because a number of you are new, I just want to briefly describe how the, how the BPAC has been formed and the organizational structure. In fiscal year 2020, before the resolution was amended, there, there were two departments that played a major role in BPAC. The first one, of course, is the Public Works Department. The second one was Parks and Recreation Department. Public Works Department has some other divisions that I did not put in this slide. The, the, the division that I put in this slide are only the divisions that have direct responsibility or with BPAC. So the first division was Engineering Division, and the second division was Streets and Drainage Maintenance Division. The Engineering Division had three, three sections at the time: the Roadways and Trails, Traffic Engineering, and Drainage Engineering. BPAC was and still is the advisory committee of Roadways and Trails. You're not the advisory committee of Traffic Engineering or Drainage Engineering. At the time when we meet, the, the support staff and reporting parties at during the meetings from 2020 through 2022 were the Roadways and Trail staff, Parks Division Director, SFMPO, which was under Land Use Department, the SFCT, who was the contractor, they were contractor for Parks Division, the Engineering Division Director, and the Police Chief used to, he used to attend our meetings, not regularly, but sometimes, like every two months, they come to our meetings. In 2022, there was a, sorry for my misspelling there, there was a reorganization that happened in, in fiscal year 2022. So the Public Works Department had three divisions: the Complete Streets Division, the Parks Division, which was a Parks Department before, became a division under, under Public Works Department, and the SFMPO, which was under Land Use, became a division under Public Works Department. The Complete Streets Division was combined. This is a combination of Roadways and Trails and the Streets and Drainage Maintenance Section and the Traffic Operations Section. There were two divisions before, and it was combined into one, which is now called the Complete Streets Division and the support staff for BPAC. BPAC is still the advisory committee for Capital Project Section, which was Roadways and Trails Section before. So the Capital Projects Manager, me as your staff liaison, the Streets and Drainage Administrator Manager became our clerk, Lucrecia Diaz. The SFMPO Director, SRTS Coordinator, the Bike Santa Fe Community Director, Public Safety Advisory Committee member reports to the BPAC. So what is the purpose of this strategic plan or the purpose of BPAC? It is to provide input and advice that supports the ongoing development and maintenance of a transportation infrastructure that makes bicycling and walking in the City of Santa Fe safe, equitable, viable, and comfortable modes of transportation, commuting, and recreation. At the time of this presentation, the members of the committee still were 10 members: City Councilor, made up of one City Councilor, Councilor Michael Garcia as the Chair, eight city residents, and one county resident. There were, there were and still are three BPAC subcommittees: the Policy Planning and Law, Promotion, Education and Communications, and Technical Review. The strategic planning was developed based on 2021 key survey results, and because of time, we will skip that. And the methodology that was used was the multiple strategic planning process, and the, the strategic plan is a living document, and it was adopted, first adopted on October 22, 2022. First update was July 13, 2023. The second update was June 13, 2024. This will be the third update. This is a living document. We monitor our actions and tasks, where we at, are we succeeding or not. And so, so the strategic plan has a vision, which is Vision 2050: Diamond Level Bike Friendly Community, 20% of Santa Feans commuting by bicycle, 90% of arterial streets have bicycle lanes, two fatalities, and third of walkability of city of our size. That's our vision. The mission is within 10 years, by the end of this planning period, which is 2033, the City of Santa Fe has successfully obtained the League of American Bicyclists Gold Level Bicycle Friendly Community designation, increasing city's bicycle ridership from 1 to 5.5%, and 65% of city's arterial streets have bicycle lanes. Santa Fe also improved its walkability score from 39 in 2023, which restarted the strategic plan, to 56 in 2033. I will skip this part. So every time we update the strategic plan, we debate the methodology, the formatting, the language we use, the words we use. This update, I suggest to the committee to focus on the action plan because we always fall short on the action plan, which is the heart of your strategic plan. So what is your action plan? It answers why you're doing this, who are going to do this, how is it being done, what will be done, when will it be accomplished. So I, this is, I will put this in the minutes. But I would like to suggest all subcommittee chairs to, to review the action plan. What is action one? What are the tasks? For example, task 1.1. When we update the strategic plan, we always say, "Oh, for example, task 1.1, work with Land Use Department in updating the city's general plan and the land use code, advocate for bicycle and pedestrian-friendly land use codes." We always say, "Oh, it's in progress." Do we really work hard or actively do task 1.1? Who is the lead subcommittee to do this? When we provide reports from subcommittees, do we think, "What did my subcommittee do to achieve task 1.1?" We accomplish it. What I find is it's a lot easier to say that, "Oh, we will draft an ordinance or we will draft a resolution and pass this resolution," because it's very specific and we can push the committee to work on that and those things. But in more general terms, we usually forget, "Oh, my subcommittee needs to work on task 1.3 in progress. Task 1.4 is a new task. 1.5 is a new task. Oh no, we accomplished that 1.5." So when we update the strategic plan, I would like the subcommittee to say, "Okay, we're working on this. We are at this. Can we accomplish those tasks? Are those tasks really realistic, or do we remove those tasks and maybe replace them with other tasks?" Some of these new tasks came from the feedback of the League of American Bicyclists when we applied for silver designation. They had feedback because we were applying for a higher designation, like gold, but they said, "No, your designation is silver. But these are our recommendations. So next time you apply for a bike-friendly community designation, you know what to do." So most of these new tasks are from those, but my question is, are we doing this to have committees working on this? So when you see "continuous" and you have a copy of the updated strategic plan, are we doing this, or do we just say "continuous" because we're updating the strategic plan? We have another two years before we apply for the bike-friendly community designation. That's it. I just wish we present to the governing body yearly. Next month is already October. We have not updated what percent. Sorry. I guess this meeting, and we will present to everyone. So when we vote to amend this file, >> Thank you, Romela. Any questions, comments from the committee? Member Gabriel. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. So I have a question for you, Romela, about one of the things in the plan, and a comment about when we should present it. So there's "in progress" and there's "continuous." What is the distinction between those two? And should we use one or the other unless they're very distinct? >> What I notice is that when we say "in progress," there's some work that started. When it says "continuous," you don't really know. The guidelines for reviewing plans were passed and started, but those guidelines that developed, they say, "Oh, we're continuously working on tasks." So I think we should clarify what "in progress" means. >> Well, so I wonder if "continuous" is not appropriate if, for instance, something hasn't started yet or has become not realistic. It seems like it would be more honest to say we haven't started it due to whatever. I don't know. It just seems a little bit confusing. So that's one comment. My other comment is that the subcommittees could meet over the fall and update our sections of the plan. And I would suggest that we present to the new city councilors versus doing it in December, which is a crazy month for a lot of people. And I just think it's a good way to educate new city councilors as to what BPAC is doing. And so that's that would be my suggestion. Thank you. >> I'd also like to suggest to the committee that every meeting we allow 30 minutes for this and don't do what we do at all. We only discuss a strategy. I believe it should be 30 minutes every meeting. I think we can accomplish what we've done. >> Member Pilchure: I had a comment on this "in progress" versus "continuous." Now, to me, "in progress" implies something we're working on and there is a completion date for it, whereas "continuous" is something that you just do all the time and never gets done. I know. And like the budget process, the city's always worked on it, eventually adopts a budget, but there's going to be no one next year. It's not like, "Okay, we're done now. We don't have to worry about that anymore." We're like doing the dishes at home. It's just a continuous process. >> Especially with teenagers, it's continuous. >> There you go. Anyways, that's the way that's the distinction it makes in my mind, at least, that "continuous" means we're never done because it just keeps coming back. >> It's ongoing. Ongoing. >> Thanks. >> Any other comments? >> Vertig: I agree with members. >> Thank you, Judith and Hilture. I want to put in a plug to say that I do think we ought to present this to the next council, and you know, it won't be probably January, just realistically, whenever it'll be. And I just want to editorialize and say, "Let's just tell them what's what and what we're doing. How can they get on board and make it happen?" Because this committee does a lot of work and has done a lot of work, and we don't need new ideas coming out of, I'm sorry, councilors, but we got this. Thanks. >> Any other comments? Okay. Any other, do you need us to give you direction or support? They need to follow what they have found, one class two, so it's more focused. >> Okay. >> Thirty minutes at every meeting seems like a lot to me, and we quite frequently run overtime. I'm wondering if for each of our subcommittee communications, we could give a very quick update if we have anything relevant on our progress on the strategic plan versus having a set 30-minute agenda item, just because there's, it seems like there's so much work to do. So I wonder if we might consider that instead. Thank you. >> Yeah, I'm actually talking about the 30 minutes at the meeting, but you're talking about us submitting our progress reports to Yolanda and she compiled it. Yeah, that seems like a great idea. And that is you now, Steve. Okay. So I'm wondering, that seems like a really good plan. And I'm wondering what people think about just including relevant strategic plan progress during our subcommittee communications updates. >> I think I'm a little confused about the 30-minute proposal. I think the subcommittee report out is one thing, and then are you suggesting we spend 30, like instead of doing a big workshop, it's like 30 minutes every meeting to revise the strategic plan? Could you speak into the mic? >> It needs to be posted as a special meeting because we might have a quorum. So I do not know if you want to have workshops rather than discussing this at a meeting because we cannot discuss any amendments, any updates without posting it as a meeting because we will have a quorum. >> Thank you for bringing that up, Helen. I think maybe I misunderstood the 30-minute thing. So I was thinking we would somehow have 30 minutes at every meeting to discuss the strategic plan. Last time what we did was we had this offsite meeting that got posted. But I'm wondering if the subcommittees all meet and we update our portions of the plan, and that we do have at either, I don't know, October, November, December, probably not October because that wouldn't give us a chance to meet as subcommittees, but towards the end of the year or even at the beginning of the year, bring that all together and discuss what those changes were. And then on a regular basis, if we are making progress on the strategic plan, include it in our subcommittee updates. So any thoughts on that? >> Sounds good. >> Okay. Any other comments? Seeing none, I think we've figured out how we're going to move forward on that item. Let's go ahead and move to item eight, subcommittee communications. First up is policy, planning, and law. Member Pilchure. >> Excuse me. Nothing new to report, but we got a lot to do. >> Okay. Next up is item 8B, promotion, education, and communication. Member Gabriel. >> Yes. Thank you, Mr. Chair. We have a few things to report. So we met to discuss educating the public about the Idaho stop, and we have reached out to various organizations, and Angie is actually going to be talking to the DMV, and I think we could probably incorporate asking them at that time what type of bicycle education they offer in their DMV classes or whatever. So we kind of had a side conversation, and we would like to include that. I'm really happy to report that the state of New Mexico is going to incorporate the Idaho stop into their defensive driving classes. That covers a lot of state employees in Santa Fe as well as around the state. And defensive driving classes in New Mexico are offered, like private ones, are offered through a national organization called ID Drive Safely. And I had a conversation with them, and they said they stay up to date on state laws, and they always incorporate changes related to transportation in their classes. So that's really, really good news and covers a lot of drivers. And one of our other subcommittee members, John Pile, has reached out to the ABC driving school, and they are also very interested in incorporating information in their classes. We need to follow up with them. Most likely what we're going to do is use Bike Santa Fe's brochure. Just send people the PDF. They can make copies, incorporate them into their training courses. And then the last thing I wanted to just mention is at a previous meeting, Councilor Garcia, you mentioned that we were allowed to have links to outside organizations on our website. We had been told we couldn't do that. That is not true. And we will be linking to Bike Santa Fe and Santa Fe Conservation Trust on our website. So we'll be updating that, and I'll be working with Romela and making that comm's request. So that's all I got. Thank you. >> Thank you, Member Gabriel. Item 8C, technical review. Member Schiff Miller. >> Well, the main thing we've been working on lately is the Henry Lynch Road planning, and I believe we're at 60% at this point. Is that, are we officially at 60%, or we're very close? Sorry. So we've passed 60%. Okay. So I think it's been a really, really great collaboration between the city, the county, the engineers, the SFMPO, and us. I feel like it's gone really well. I think we've gotten pretty much everything we've asked for, and there was a lot of push and pull to get there, but what I can report at this point is that Henry Lynch Road will have two driving lanes in each direction. It'll have intermittent left turn lanes, and then it will have a curb and gutter, and then the bike lanes will be grade separated. This will be the first separated bike lane in Santa Fe. And so there will be a grade separation and a bike lane, and then there will be another buffer with landscaping and another grade separation and a sidewalk. And it's going to be really beautiful and I think pretty safe. And there is also another feature that we pushed for and eventually got is there will be a multimodal trail connection between the river trail and the Acequia trail once it is extended all the way to Henry Lynch Road. So what we came up with is we're going to build the sidewalk to six feet now, but plan for and make sure there is right-of-way available to expand it to 10 feet once the trail gets to Henry Lynch Road. So there will be separated bike lanes for those bicyclists who want to go fast, and there will be a multimodal trail for people who want to walk or ride at a leisurely pace. I think it's got something for everybody. And I think, I think not only is the project itself possibly precedent-setting for Santa Fe, but I think the process as well. I just think it went really, I don't know. I'm not trying to toot my own horn or anything, but I just think it went really well, and the engineers were really willing to listen to things were a little bit outside the box, and they decided to go with it. I think it's great. I think it's one of the best projects I've seen. Two, three years. When does construction start? We lost the construction funding. Oh. Because when I applied for construction funding, I thought that the plan sets would be delivered or completed in October or November. But because of all the changes at the 60% design, the consultants cannot deliver it on time. So, the beauty of this is next cycle funding cycle, the city and county will apply for funding together. So, the construction funding will not be only city portion, but city and county portion for the whole roadway. One of the reasons also is that the change in methodology or process is that we received one of the feedback that we received from LAB when we applied for silver designation is that it's good that BPAC is involved in reviewing plan sets, but they want BPAC to be involved from zero to 10%, not 30%, which is in the resolution, 30%, and before it goes to the NMDOT for review and approval. In practice, we don't do that. We include BPAC from the very beginning, from conceptual through completion, through 100%. And changes can be made at any level: 30, 60, 90, 100%, like Bishop Sludge wrote. But we cannot say that to the committee, to the reviewing committee. They will only see that the resolution states that BPAC is involved at 30% and before the plan set was revealed or approved by NMDOT. So, maybe that's one task for this committee is to amend the resolution. Thank you, Member Schiffmiller, for that very exciting update. Matters from staff. We are planning the ribbon cutting for Guadalupe Street Project on September 30. There's some hiccup. The mayor cannot attend the ribbon cutting on September 30, so we're trying to find a date that the mayor will be available. But it's a huge accomplishment. It's for the Guadalupe alone, not the bridge, because that's a separate funding. It's $11 million for construction alone. That came 100% federal funded. There was no city funding. So, that's a lot of money that was spent in our community, and we have a new road. The Guadalupe did not have a makeover. It was a total reconstruction from surface down to the storm drain. We replaced all pipes. The utilities are replaced. So, we will have a new road, and with proper maintenance and applied at the right time, we can have that road in good condition for 25 to 35 years, and storm drain that can manage a 100-year storm event, and that will last at least 50 years. That's a good thing, and I hope the community will realize that. Thank you for the update, Roella. Good job. Matters from the committee. I just had one comment to make. It doesn't require any action, but I think as we look at bike safety and everything through town, at some point it'd be nice to have a discussion or get some input on speeds that are allowed on streets. I know moving here four years ago, I was surprised how many 40, 45 mph streets there are in Santa Fe, and how wide some of the streets are, which also makes it very unfriendly for bicyclists. But admittedly, I moved from the congested Puget Sound area where you were lucky if you could even go 60 miles an hour on the freeway because there's some traffic. So, having 75 passing by Santa Fe was quite shocking. But high speeds, I think I recently saw, I can't remember where, obviously they cause greater harm to people in the event of an accident the faster the cars are going, and certainly in just in general, it makes for a much less friendly cycling environment when someone's whipping by you going 50 miles an hour and you're in a 4-foot wide bike lane. But the loop is 20 mph, and as I reported last month, we are reconstructing eight roadways. So, we'll get there. Okay. Any other comments from the committee? Matters from the chair tonight? I have none. So, with that, I thank you all for a productive meeting. I look forward to seeing you all next month. Have a good night. Y'all be safe.