Regular Governing Body Meeting - Last Wednesday
Wed, Mar 25, 2026 · Governing Body
https://santafeminutes.space/meeting/929

== Executive Summary ==
The City Council meeting covered a wide range of topics, from community reflections and recognition of a local hero to significant financial and legislative discussions. Key among these were the city's capital outlay requests, which saw both successes and challenges, and a detailed review of the Fiscal Year 2025 audit report, which showed significant improvements in financial management despite some recurring issues. The council also approved several important appointments and discussed critical infrastructure projects, particularly at the airport and for water resources.

Public comments heavily focused on bicycle and pedestrian safety, with numerous residents advocating for dedicated funding, a coordinator position, and better integration of safety measures into street projects. Concerns were also raised about nuclear production, city legal processes, and the need for proactive facility maintenance. The council made several key decisions, including approving airport grant agreements, tabling a law enforcement retention fund item for further review, and unanimously approving several appointments, including the new City Attorney and City Clerk.

== Key Decisions ==
- Approval of tonight's agenda (unanimous voice vote).
- Approval of the consent agenda (unanimous roll call vote).
- Approved Request for ratification of aviation grant agreement SAF-26-02 ($56,200) for electrical vault reconstruction at the airport (Passed 8-0).
- Approved Amendment Number One to Aviation Grant Agreement 25-000035, increasing compensation by $61,933 (total $1,296,856) for terminal apron reconstruction, and approval of a corresponding budget amendment resolution (Passed 8-0).
- Motion to table the Law Enforcement Retention Funds item (Passed 8-0).
- Motion to enter Executive Session (Passed 8-0).
- Motion to return from Executive Session (Passed 7-0, with one recusal).
- Motion regarding disposition of city-owned property (no action necessary) (Passed 7-0).
- Motion to move directly to matters from the public (Passed 8-0).
- Motion to remove an unspecified item (10C) from the table (Passed 8-0).
- Motion to approve the unspecified item (10C) (Passed 8-0).
- Bill 2026-2 (Procurement Modernization) approved (Passed 8-0).
- Appointment of Marcos Martinez as City Attorney approved (Passed 8-0).
- Appointment of Interim City Clerk Cardinas as City Clerk approved (Passed 8-0).
- Appointment of Michael Truhill to Occupancy Tax Advisory Board approved (Passed 8-0).
- Appointment of Joe Simmons to Historic Districts Review Board approved (Passed 8-0).

== Motions & Votes ==
- Approval of tonight's agenda — Passed (unanimous voice vote)
- Approval of the consent agenda — Passed (unanimous roll call vote)
- Request for ratification of aviation grant agreement SAF-26-02 ($56,200) for electrical vault reconstruction at the airport — Passed 8-0
- Request for approval of Amendment Number One to Aviation Grant Agreement 25-000035, increasing compensation by $61,933 (total $1,296,856) for terminal apron reconstruction, and approval of a corresponding budget amendment resolution — Passed 8-0
- Motion to table the Law Enforcement Retention Funds item — Passed 8-0
- Motion to enter Executive Session — Passed 8-0
- Motion to return from Executive Session — Passed 7-0 (one recusal)
- Motion regarding disposition of city-owned property (no action necessary) — Passed 7-0
- Motion to move directly to matters from the public — Passed 8-0
- Motion to remove an unspecified item (10C) from the table — Passed 8-0
- Motion to approve the unspecified item (10C) — Passed 8-0
- Bill 2026-2 (Procurement Modernization) — Passed 8-0
- Appointment of Marcos Martinez as City Attorney — Passed 8-0
- Appointment of Interim City Clerk Cardinas as City Clerk — Passed 8-0
- Appointment of Michael Truhill to Occupancy Tax Advisory Board — Passed 8-0
- Appointment of Joe Simmons to Historic Districts Review Board — Passed 8-0

== Public Comment ==
The public comment period was dominated by calls for improved bicycle and pedestrian safety, with residents sharing personal stories of accidents and advocating for dedicated budgets, a bike/pedestrian coordinator, and better integration of safety measures into street projects. Concerns were also raised about increased plutonium pit production at Los Alamos National Laboratories, delays and non-compliance with Public Information Requests (IPRA), issues with the city's legal department regarding a personal injury claim, and the need for proactive, scheduled maintenance for city facilities. Several council members and the Mayor acknowledged the public's concerns and praised the hard work of city staff and lobbyists.

== Topics ==
- Capital Outlay Request
- Procurement Code Amendments
- City Attorney Appointment
- City Clerk Appointment
- Citizen Recognition
- Historic Districts Review Board Appointment
- Water Projects Funding
- Agenda Approval
- Consent Agenda Approval
- Occupancy Tax Advisory Board Appointment
- Conflict in Iran Reflection
- Community Loss and Support
- Roll Call and Quorum

== Full Transcript ==
people. So, go ahead and close your eyes if you're able. Just remain as you are. But I'd just like to take a minute and reflect on those lives lost in the current conflict in Iran. It's devastating to think about all lives lost since this began, but especially the children. As a mother and an educator, my thoughts are with families destroyed by war. I found a quote by Miss Rachel for Little. She's an early childhood educator and it really resonated with me. It says, "I am political. It's political to believe that children are worthy of love and care and that every child is equal and our care shouldn't stop with what we look like, our family, our religion, or at a border. So, as politicians, let's heal and not hurt and use our politics for good." Thank you. If anybody else has

Yes.

So, I, it's interesting. I have a large friend group and normally in life there's maybe one or two of us who are struggling, who have faced loss, but currently every single person that I am close to is facing losing parents, losing siblings, losing friends, losing grandparents. I've lost count on how many people have passed away in my circle of people. And so I think I just want to recognize that this is a hard time for a lot of people and just want to send my love to all of my friends and family who are suffering.

Let's just take a moment to think of those in our community that need our thoughts and prayers. Thank you, everybody. Madam City Clerk, can we get a roll call, please?

Yes, Mayor. Councilor Barrett.

Here.

Councilor Bamonte.

Here.

Councilor Cassett. Councilor Castro.

Present.

Councilor Chavez.

Here.

Councilor Faulkner.

Here.

Councilor Fagali.

Here.

Councilor Garcia.

Here.

Mayor Garcia.

Present.

Mayor, you have a quorum.

Thank you. Next item on the agenda is approval of tonight's agenda. Are there any changes from staff?

No changes from staff, Mayor. Move to approve. Second.

Okay, we've got a motion and a second. Any discussion? Seeing none, Madam City Clerk, can I get a roll call? Oh, no. All those in favor say aye. I'm so used to somebody being away.

Yeah.

Apologize. All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Opposed? Motion passes. Next on the agenda is approval of the consent agenda. Were there any items pulled?

Mayor, no items were pulled from consent agenda. Move to approve.

Second.

Got a motion and a second. Any discussion? And seeing none. Madam City Clerk, can we get a roll call vote, please?

Councilor Barrett.

Yes.

Councilor Bamonte.

Yes.

Councilor Cassett. Councilor Castro.

Yes.

Councilor Chavez.

Yes.

Councilor Faulkner.

Yes.

Councilor Fagali.

Yes.

Councilor Garcia.

Yes.

Motion passed.

Thank you. Next item is presentations. Will you please read the first one into the record, Madam City Clerk?

Certainly, Mayor. 8 is presentations. 8A is citizen recognition for courageous action. Interim Fire Chief Scott is here to present.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor and council members. I'd like to invite up with me our citizen tonight, Mr. Ron Johnson. If you'd like to come up with me, there are certain things and attributes that we look for in firefighters. And one of those is the ability to think under duress, think calmly, collectedly, and make appropriate decisions when a lot of other people don't do that. The other thing that we look for is humility. And I know it's hard for him to be up here right now and he might not know that his actions, although courageous in everything he did, and may not want to be recognized because that's kind of who we are. Also, it shows his humility and we also look for that attribute as well. On the early morning of January 21st, there was a tragic accident down on the south part of town road and airport at the Shell gas station and Mr. Ron Johnson stepped into action when everyone else was either shocked, stunned, not moving, don't know what to do, and or pulling a cell phone out and filming something, right? He was able to know what to do and take action. And to step into a situation like that that you're not ready for shows what kind of person he is and what kind of citizen he is and one of the people that we have in our community. And someone that we want to recognize as the fire department of something that we would also want to be like him and do the things that he does and take those same steps that he does. And he's a great example to us and other community members. And so we have a certificate that we would like to present to him tonight of courageous actions taken in the face of immeasurable tragic incident that happened. And along with that, we'd like to present him the Chief's Coin, which is the gold star coin for making good decisions in face of adversity. And so tonight, we'd like to recognize him for that action.

Any, pass it over to the governing body. Any comments from the governing body? Councilor Garcia.

Thank you for being here and for being a contributor to our community. You know, it takes a community together to stand up and say, "Hey, how can I help?" And so amazing. I think, well, and we talk about this many times when the fire department or the police department, when people are running away, they're running in. And as a citizen, it's, thank you for recognizing that because courageously, it's you don't know what to do sometimes, but you just go into action. So, thank you.

Councilor Bamonte.

Mr. Johnson, I just want to echo that. Thank you very much. You know, I know our fire and our police, they're trained to do that. You know, it takes a certain instinct and a certain will to truly want to help people to run into a situation like that without having that training. And so, just thank you for being such a good citizen.

Castro.

Thank you again so much, Mr. Johnson. I think one of the important pieces of this story is that members of the community who are having a mental health crisis or maybe sometimes don't feel valued can be overlooked. And in this situation, you did not overlook a human being that was in need. So, thank you so very much.

Councilor Faulkner.

Well, Councilor Bamonte and Councilor Castro said what I was going to say. Just thank you so much and you're an example of what all of us should do in these circumstances.

Anybody else? Mr. Johnson, if you wouldn't mind just coming up to the dais and that way we can all shake your hand and thank you. Okay. Anything else?

Yes, sir.

Okay. Thank you. Thank you so much, Madam City Clerk. Next item on the agenda.

Next item is 8B. It's the 2026 Capital Outlay Request and Analysis. And here to present is J.D. Bullington of Government Relations LLC. There we go. Sorry. Well, thank you for allowing me to speak. I'm going to be brief. I know you have a long agenda. I first want to thank you for allowing me to have the opportunity and the honor to be the lobbyist for the City of Santa Fe and to represent all of you and the people of Santa Fe up in front of the legislature during the legislative sessions. That's my primary role. It was great to see all of you up there in this last session walking the halls with Mayor Michael Garcia and myself. I really enjoyed that. I think that's a nice touch and I think we should institutionalize that and make sure that everyone has a chance to come up and meet their legislator, particularly when it comes time to ask them for their resources for capital outlay funding for projects that are of interest to your district. So, let me just talk a little bit about capital outlay. I'll be brief and if you have any questions in general about the legislative session or politics, I'm happy to answer them. So, the city had five priorities for capital outlay and it had, of course, had a priority for each of your districts for capital outlay. And overall, I thought we came out pretty good this session. I think it's important to acknowledge the city staff and the officials who really, really went way out of their way overtime to engage the legislative process and the legislators. And I'm talking about Mayor Michael Garcia. He was up there. I lost count of the times he came up to the capital for various reasons. He was very hands-on and I will tell you it made a huge difference. You all didn't get to see all of the sausage being made behind the scenes, but that's what it is. It's a sausage factory and there is a lot of unexpected things that come up and he was gracious with his time and showed up every single time he was needed, many times with just minutes notice. So, I want to thank you for your effort. It really made a difference and it was recognized and noted. We also had strong participation from the county, the City Manager, Brian Moya, and the Deputy City Manager Andrea was there, Peter was there. Sam Burnett came up. We had a lot of meetings with Senator Peter Wirth and other lawmakers to do, to try to do the best we can to get the most resources we can from the legislature. This is a once a year process, but look, it's big money and it's important money and it's money you're entitled to. It's a discretionary process. So going forward, if there's one piece of advice, I would say stay close friends with your legislators. This is a competitive game. The county's up there, the soccer people are up there, everybody's up there clamoring and lobbying for their share of the capital outlay pie and that's the way the game is played. So, please stay close friends with your legislators. It will only, only benefit you and your districts. So, the top five priorities, the large capacity non-congregate shelter got $750,000 and I know you have this document in front of you, so I won't read it verbatim. The Arroyo de los Pinos Royale Wastewater Reclamation Facility came in at zero. Let me address that. So, the last thing I'm going to talk about is the Capital Outlay Reform Bill, which was, I believe, House Bill 247. Yes, it was in House Bill 247. The way it was originally introduced, there was language prohibiting discretionary capital outlay from being used for any water project. So, it's no surprise that we came in at zero for this facility. Now, they struck that language out of the Capital Outlay Reform Bill. However, it is very, very clear that the intent of the legislature is they want to see you keep your water projects on your ICIP, but they want the actual funding to move out of the discretionary capital outlay arena and they want it to go to the Water Trust Board and the money come out of the Water Trust Fund. The way capital outlay works is this: there's a huge pie of funding capacity and off the top comes money for school buildings and construction. Off the top comes money for tribal infrastructure. Off the top comes money for the Colonia's infrastructure projects down in Sunland Park. And also what comes off the top is money for water infrastructure projects. And they want to see more and more money come off the top going to the Water Trust Fund for projects like the Wastewater Reclamation Facility that is an enormously expensive project that just cannot be funded with discretionary capital outlay. So going forward, we'll have more conversations, you know, as we go forward, but the water projects need to stay on the ICIP, but I'm not, I think in the summer when we revisit the priority list, not sure you want to put a water project in your top five projects because they want to see it moved over to a different funding source. Police training facility got money. Airport terminal expansion phase 2, $3,250,000. That's huge. And then Midtown Redevelopment Infrastructure that also came in at zero, but that's because there is currently quite a bit of money on the books that has not been drawn down.

So, nothing to flag there that was out of the ordinary. And then the district priorities, everybody got something. Arroyo Chamiso Improvements, Ragle Park baseball fields came in at the highest, $750,000, followed by Herb Martinez Park Improvements in District 4 at $700,000, and Santa Fe median beautification projects at $450,000. So $2 million total for your districts. This is why I say stay close friends with your legislators.

Now, when Mayor Garcia and I were up there, we had conversations with many lawmakers, and on this subject, we had one lawmaker tell us, "Can you please make sure next time that you have a district priority that is in my legislative district?" because none of them are. And that was something we hadn't even thought of before. So there are areas of improvement, and we are constantly trying to perfect this process and improve it as much as possible. As I've told Mayor Garcia, every little detail, every little thing you do can really parlay into literally millions of dollars. So, that's one of the things we're going to tighten up too, to make sure that every single legislator has a district project in their district.

But look, you get a lot of other money from other governmental entities that request money. It's not just City of Santa Fe project requests. As you can see, NMDOT Transportation Department requested money for the Camino Tortuga loop design. The Environment Department pulled in $375,000 for the Camino de los Aoyos infrastructure improvement. The New Mexico Mortgage Finance Authority is heavily involved in affordable housing. They pulled in $1.5 million that's going to go into this community. On and on and on. North Ridgetop Road, $650,000 coming then to the New Mexico Department of Transportation. On and on.

Now, there's a couple projects that got funded that, pursuant to the reform bill next year that kicks in, House Bill 247, probably are not going to be allowed. And I want to flag a couple of those. $250,000 came in for the Arts and Cultural Building renovation, which I believe is at Midtown. And House Bill 247 has a new rule: no capital outlay project will be funded unless it is on an ICIP, and this one was not. So that's something that will change. So just be aware of that going forward. No project is going to be funded unless it is on an ICIP.

The governor requested a million dollars that came through for Santa Fe Plaza improvements. Now, that's money she requested. That's money that's going to the Department of Finance and Administration, and we haven't gotten the full details yet, at least to my knowledge, Mayor, is exactly what they're going to do with that money. I'm pretty sure it's not for the monument in the center. It's for something else, I think. But that is the money that she requested. That is money that is going to be available. A million dollars for beautification projects directly on the Plaza.

And then the last thing I'll mention, Tierra Contenta. The Workforce Solutions Department, as you may know, is now the fiscal agent for capital outlay that flows to the Tierra Contenta development. And so there was $275,000 for affordable housing improvements there, and also $900,000 for some trail construction. All of that money will benefit your communities, but it is flowing through the Department of Workforce Solutions.

Let me talk about the capital outlay reauthorizations. And this is good and bad news. This was a mixed bag. You may recall during the middle of the session, I sent an email out to all of you that all of your reauthorization requests, all six of them, made the reauthorization bill. We were in the bill. We were working with Senator Peter Wirth. This was full hands on deck. Peter was there, Andrea was there, Brian was there, the Mayor was there, everybody was there, and we thought we had everything across the finish line. But in the end, the governor vetoed almost half of all of the reauthorization projects in that piece of legislation. Her veto message was eight pages long, and each line was one project. And unfortunately, we lost three of those. The ones that got across were Harrison Road, Pacheco Street, and Tierra Contenta Trail Improvements. Those were reauthorization requests where there was some money that had been encumbered and spent down on these projects.

What the governor did is she and her staff went through the reauthorization bill, and any reauthorization project that did not have any money encumbered or any money drawn down got automatically line-item vetoed. It was not personal. It was not political. It was just the new policy. The state is sitting on a pile of $7 billion worth of unspent capital outlay for projects that have not moved forward. And we knew the day was coming, and the line has been drawn, and the new policy is going to be pursuant to House Bill 247. You can reauthorize a project once, only once. It's going to be for two years. And if you don't have at least 10% of that money encumbered on contract within the first six months, you're going to lose the money.

Going forward with capital outlay, it is usually a four-year window. Those rules have slightly changed. If you authorize a capital outlay project or you get funding for it, the city has got to move in getting that project encumbered and shovel-ready because that's what they're interested in. They're even talking about someday probably getting rid of planning and design, which is currently an eligible use for capital outlay. They want shovel-ready. They don't want to see another $7 billion pile of unspent money. So the new rule with capital outlay is going to be you can have it for four years, but if you don't do anything with it in the first three and a half months, DFA is going to freeze it. So that timeline is even shortened as well. So no capital outlay will be reauthorized for any more than two years, and you cannot change the original purpose of the request. This is something that happened all the time. You'd get to the end of that four-year period, and we'd come back, and not Santa Fe, but other entities would reauthorize it for a completely different purpose and get another four years. Those days are gone. You can only request a two-year time extension, and if you don't do anything with it in those first six months, it's going to be frozen. And then each year, the DFA is going to provide a report to the legislature by January 15th before the session starts on what capital outlay projects are frozen.

So no doubt that the challenges that the city had with your audits, which resulted in your capital outlay being frozen, you couldn't even access the money or move on it. We all know that created a significant backlog of projects, and it has taken the city time to dig out from underneath that backlog. Now, you're on a great track. You're making great progress, but just going forward, keep in mind, stay friends with your legislators and just keep moving those shovels. That's all you got to do. So, that's my presentation on capital outlay.

And the last thing I'll say is Mayor Garcia and I have had a couple of conversations about how to improve this process. And we do want to start, we do want to have conversations earlier about it. We want to engage the lawmakers earlier. Last year, we had the breakfast in January. That's probably a little too late because, like I say, it's a competitive game. There are other people out there meeting with them in October and November. So, and Mayor Garcia is already well aware of that. So, that's my presentation on capital outlay. Mayor, thank you.

Mayor: Thank you, Mr. Bullington. Any questions from governing body members? Councilor Faulkner.

Councilor Faulkner: I just want to reiterate, and I've said this before, JD Bullington is one of the best lobbyists in the state, if not the best lobbyist in the state. As a lobbyist, he has taught me a lot of incredible things to help me with my clients, and also as a city councilor, he's taught me a lot. And so I just, we should be very grateful we have JD Bullington.

Councilor Cassid: Thank you, Mayor, and thank you, Councilor Faulkner. I agree. JD, thank you for all the work that you do. Really, truly appreciate it, and we are very lucky to have you. I think this is more of a comment in general, and we've been talking a little bit about our capital funding processes and how we prioritize projects, how we understand the puzzle pieces of funding that we need to put together to move these things forward. So, what I would request as we prepare to have these conversations earlier, taking into consideration some of the changes that have happened at the state, how we start to put this information together in a way that we can really make smart decisions about what we're asking for, what we're prioritizing, how do we put together, you know, the different capital stacks. And so I know that we've been having this conversation around how do we get to a place where we can really understand what's going on with our capital projects in the city and what the entire list is. We know we have the ICIP, and then there's other things that I know are not quite on there, but that we talk about and then they show up on the ICIP. We've talked about our impact fees, but I think that that'll be really helpful so that we can be more strategic, especially since, as you said, JD, we've known the day would come, but that they really are starting to crack down on capital outlay, and it makes sense. And we, I want to make sure that we are in the most strategic place possible to be presenting projects that we're ready to move on, but then also that we have the capability of finishing because we rarely get a project fully funded, or maybe we do over a number of years. But I don't want us to be in a place where, for example, the funding that got pulled for Governor Miles, I do believe that we got dollars before from a previous allocation. Those have been funded, and I believe this may have been the next tranche that we were hoping for. So now we have this kind of half-done project in District 4. So, just more of a thought, more of things for us to talk about. But I know that that's been a conversation already, and to get some of those presentations and conversations going as we move forward over the year. And JD, please give us your expertise as you are able to and really advising us because it is competitive, and we do need those dollars. Thank you.

Mayor: Any other comments from governing body members? Myself, I just want to reiterate what JD had mentioned. We will be starting this process a lot earlier because of the way that the CIP list is created. It is folks that have been on the body and the newer folks. We typically approve that in the summer, and then that list identifies our top priorities that go into the resolution that gets passed, which ultimately JD works off of during the session. So we're actually starting that process right now internally, and so we'll make sure staff reaches out to the governing body members as we work to produce this list. We will also ensure that we're working with our delegation members because again, we want to make sure that going into the approval process for the ICIP list, that we also have any of our delegation members' priorities included in that list. And then, you know, ultimately, I think a major lesson learned is that late audits have consequences, and you know, we heard historically, we're fine.

It's okay. Well, it's not fine. We've lost millions of dollars, and I'm thankful. So, to give an update on some of the stuff that was not reauthorized, we will have to revert the funds for Governor Miles. We will have to revert the funds that were dedicated for affordable housing, which was for the Belloo project, but we will not have to revert the 1.7 million for the medians because that is going to be spent down before the deadline. So, if that's a glimmer of hope, we're at least not losing that.

But it's a whole new process, and with JD's expertise, we'll get through this. We'll build a solid plan. That way, when we go into the next legislative session, which is going to be a 60-day session, a lot more opportunity for us. I think we want to set ourselves up for success. Outside of the money, I know this presentation was focused on the money. We also had a major win with the land swap. So, and JD was critical in helping to usher that through. That was a three-day process where everything got through within the last week of the session, and it was, thank you, JD, for that.

Mayor: That was a major victory, and I want to tell you, you really, really went way, way above and beyond the call of duty to get that resolution passed. I mean, I got to see what you did on short notice. So, that was the land swap resolution that was carried by Senator Linda Trillo, and that's going to swap out land, a critical parcel of land in Midtown. So, that was, that was probably the biggest victory for the city, in my opinion, one of them.

Yeah, it provides great opportunity for the residents. So, thank you, JD.

Yeah, sure, sure.

Councilor Faulkner: The other thing that we have to recognize as a governing body is we didn't just lose funding with the audits, we lost the goodwill and the trust of the legislators, and some legislators more than others. I encourage every single member of the governing body, JD is correct, build your relationships with your legislators. Part of some of the way things got saved during this session, when I promise you our legislators were not happy with the city of Santa Fe and haven't been for at least three years, if not longer, was engaging with our legislators and having conversations and explaining where this project is and how you're working to get it done. And so, we also have to rebuild trust with the legislative branch and the governor's office, although that's going to change. But I do encourage everyone, invest time. JD is 100% correct. Invest time into the relationships with the legislators that represent your districts. It makes a huge difference.

Thank you, counselor. Any other comments? Well, thank you, JD. Now, thank you for a successful session. Get some rest, and we're going to get back to work here soon. So, thank you. Okay, with that being said, Madame City Clerk, next item on the agenda, please.

Next item on the agenda is 8C. This is the fiscal year 2025 audit report. And here to present is Matthew Bonifer, the accounting officer, and Alan D. AJ Bowers, Junior, Carter Riggs, and Ingram LLC.

Mr. Mayor, members of council, good evening. Good to see you all. I think it's a perfect segue based off that conversation that was just had about the importance of the audit. So, this is properly sequenced tonight. So, I'm happy to be here to, you know, we're going to have a presentation here shortly from our auditor, Car Riggs Ingram CRI, to give you the results of our FY25 audit. You know, I will just quickly say that we submitted it on time, so we are current in that capacity. And I, you know, to not take away from the presentation, I will turn it over to AJ. He'll go through the results of everything, and then we'll stand for questions from there.

Excellent. Thank you for having me. Thank you, Matt.

Mr. Mayor, members of the council, nice to see you again. My name is AJ. I'm a partner with Car Riggs and Ingram, the partner that oversees the audit for the city of Santa Fe. I did send the PowerPoint. I don't know if it is going to be on the screen. I did not bring it with me. It's here. You go and share it. That'd be wonderful. I just want to thank you guys again for having us. It's going to be a unique kind of year the way that this kind of progressed, and we'll talk about that as we walk through the real quick presentation. I don't want to spend too much time on that. But, I know that you've received it electronically and or physically. So, you've been able to look through that. I'll just kind of lean into what's different this year is the two covers, right? So, you actually have two separate reports this year. We'll talk about it as we walk through it, but with the delays from the federal government with the compliance supplement and then the shutdown that altered the way that the timing was conducted within the audit itself. Okay? So, the state had to adapt to that time frame as well as make some changes in the rules to where things were able to be two covers instead of just one. Okay? So, you'll see that, and we'll walk through them of where things are in that area. So, you have a little bit of duplicate information in there. So, that way at least you'll understand where, just one moment, you right down there. So, what we'll talk about here today is we're going to cover four basic items. We'll talk about the scope of work. So, what did we do? What did we look at? What were we tasked to do as it relates to the engagement of the audit itself? We'll look at that timeline, and I'll kind of draw that distinction about what was unique about this year and kind of lean into that a little bit. The responsibilities themselves, just kind of what are we really here for? What does a governing body do? And then really what are the audit opinions? Where do you find them in the report themselves? So, if you'll jump down probably two slides, it's going to get into the scope of work. So, ultimately within the audit itself, when we look at the 2025 year, we're looking at three main areas. Okay. So, there's one, the first part is the audit of the financial statements. Okay. So, that's that 300-page document that's sitting in front of you. That we conduct that audit in order to render an opinion on those financial statements. Okay. So, that's the first thing that we look at. The second thing that we look at is we also conducted a single audit. In the current year, there were three major programs. We looked at the airport improvement program. We looked at the federal transit formula grants, and we looked at the highway planning and construction. The results of that are going to be in the smaller packet that you have about 20 pages. And then we also, and we do render an opinion on that as well. The last thing that we do look at as part of that audit that we are engaged to do from a compliance perspective is we do look at the compliance with the New Mexico state audit rule. So, now they have their rule about a lot of different areas that they like us to look at, whether that's error contributions or whether it's travel and per diem, whether it's procurement, et cetera. And we do test those items. We do not render an opinion as it relates to compliance with those, but we do report anything that we find to you. And so, all of the results of those three items are within the covers of these documents here. So, if we jump down another probably two here, we're going to talk about the timeline. So, just like any other audit, when you're kind of on cycle, right, it's June 30. We start right at the very beginning of that time, sometimes before based on contracting, sometimes after. Where we were is really that July time frame. Okay. So, we had the entrance conference in July. We started working on the audit in July, and it really went till January of 2026. Okay. So, the difference there, and I want to kind of lean into the exit conference itself, what happened with at that point is the federal government had not released the compliance supplement. You are not allowed to submit a single audit at all. You can't render an opinion as it relates to the federal awards without the compliance supplement. They had issued a draft in July or August area, which was a little later than they typically do. Typically, they put it out in May, June time frame and were able to move forward. That draft came out, then the government shut down. Once the government was shut down, nothing occurred. They did not release that compliance supplement until the day before Thanksgiving. So, it was November 26th-ish, whatever that is. Not enough time to respond to the audit as it went through that time frame. We had worked with the state, and the state auditor's office was working through that situation and had started kind of delaying the deadlines. And so, what they ultimately did in October, November time frame is they did two things. One is they pushed, they, New Mexico's always had a one-cover requirement. So, where everything gets reported together in one document. You can't issue a single audit separately from a, from a financial statement audit or anything else. You can do that in other states. There's nothing within the rules that says you can't do that. But New Mexico requires it under one cover. What they did is they made an amendment to their rule to be able to do it under two covers. Do a contract amendment to issue them separately. And the financial statement audit was then due January 20th, and the federal audit February 9th, just to be able to give the time for quality control, et cetera. So, that's what the city elected to do, and we still worked towards getting that financial statement audit completed. We had the exit conference for the financial statement December 19th, as it was kind of working through quality control. It didn't get submitted till, I think it was, it was in January when it got submitted. We had a follow-up call with Mayor Garcia as well to kind of update on where that stance had occurred and the financial statements themselves, but they were submitted ahead of the deadline that was required for that. And then we also had a single audit that we finalized and submitted in accordance with that February 9th deadline when we had the exit conference as well. So, as you can see, they released them. The dates on them are January 16th and February 9th, and then they were released from the state March 3rd and March 16th. So, a little bit of a unique year, but I think what matters is it was on time, right? Both of them were on time, and we're thankful for the state and the city for working through what was unique challenges. So, if you want to jump down probably, I'm guessing two more because there's probably a cover page. Talk about the reports themselves. Okay. So, really the meat of what we look at, right, is what our opinions are. We have letterheads in there that that's what our responsibility is. The independent auditor's report is really going to be on pages 16 to 19 of the larger document of the financial statements themselves. It's an unmodified opinion. So, that's the best opinion that you can get. It means the financial statements are fairly stated in accordance with GAAP. There's no areas where we can't obtain sufficient appropriate audit evidence. Okay. What that means is when we look at things, I call them hard numbers or soft numbers. So, a hard number would be something like cash. I can go confirm it. I can go to the bank. They can tell me how much exists that it's complete. Something like a soft number is an estimate. Something where it's maybe your pension expenses, depreciation expenses, compensated absences, et cetera.

Right? So we look at policies, procedures, what you have in there, and we are able to obtain appropriate audit evidence to say that the financial statements are fairly presented. So you'll see that that's the first report in there, pages 16 to 19. You'll jump down to the next page here. We'll talk about the Yellow Book report. So this right here is actually going to be in both reports. Okay? So it's dated January 16th because every audit in the state of New Mexico is conducted under government auditing standards when it's under the state audit rule, as well as that has to be reported in the single audits. Okay.

What that means is that it's a negative assurance report. So we report anything that we find to you. So this would be where we report any what we call findings. All right. So it's negative assurance, meaning we don't give an opinion on internal controls, but it describes that we look at internal controls for a basis for designing further audit procedures and report anything that we find to you. And so I do like to mention the different levels of findings. So material weakness, there's three levels of findings under government auditing standards. Material weakness is the highest level. It says if something goes wrong here, it could materially affect the financial health or it could affect the user's opinion. This next level down is called a significant deficiency. Okay. Doesn't rise to the level of material, yet still merits the attention of the governing body. It might be policy, it might be dollars, it might be something that you might have to authorize or be knowledgeable about. Also is a material non-compliance. So if you don't comply with a debt covenant or a grant or a statute in a material fashion, that would be reported in there.

In the state of New Mexico, there are also two other levels of findings that get reported in that report. It's an other non-compliance and an other matter. So the definition is an other non-compliance is doesn't rise to the level of material. So if you don't comply with some like a travel or something like that. And then an other matter is doesn't rise to the level of significant. So when I say all that, it basically is saying we report everything that we find to you in that report and we'll go over them here in a moment, but there were two financial statement findings. So there were two material weaknesses and there were three other findings that were reported in the state audit. So two other non-compliance and one other matter. Just so you can see where this report is, it's pages 304 and 305 in the financial statement. It's also in pages 8 and 9 of the single audit report. And then the findings are in the representative schedules in there as well.

If you'll scroll down to the next page, this is where we talk about the single audit. Okay, so this would be where we look at these three different programs: the Airport Improvement Program, the Federal Transit Cluster, and the Highway Planning and Construction. All three of those programs, we have to test controls. We have to test for the compliance and how the city complied with those different compliance requirements that are considered direct material to those grants. And all of those were unmodified opinions. So it means that the city's complied in all material respects with those programs based on our opinions. So clean opinions on those there. We did have one material weakness over internal controls at the Airport Improvement Program, and this was a repeat finding. We'll talk about that here in a moment. The other two programs did not have any findings noted. Okay. So you can find the results of that audit pages 10 to 13 of the single audit report, and then the schedule of findings is going to be pages 21 through 34. That includes all the findings, not just the one for the single for the Airport Improvement Program.

One thing I do want to draw your attention to is the Airport Improvement Program has been audited for multiple years: 21, 22, 23, 24, and now 25. The Federal Transit Cluster was 21, 23, 24, and the Highway Planning and Construction has not been audited since at least 2021. I did not go back to 2020 and before. So knowing that that was a new program that we looked at in the current year and had no findings. So we'll jump forward to the next page here. Just kind of a reminder. I always like to hit on this. What are we here for? Right? We're here to render an opinion on those financial statements. It's not perfect, right? It's a very high confidence level. We look at everything from a material. It's a reasonable. It's not absolute assurance. We test a lot of transactions. We're here for a long time, right? But we don't test down to the penny. We don't test every dollar. We do look to see what would change the user's opinion. And as I mentioned, we do not render an opinion on internal controls. We consider them for further audit procedures and how we need to test. And then we communicate everything to you as part of that process: entrance conference, exit conference, regular updates, board presentation, audit committee presentations. You get communication at the beginning and the end in accordance with standards. So, we've complied with all of those.

The next page here is just basically a reminder from that for management, with the oversight of the board, of course, is establishing those internal controls. The audits are a great thing. They're regulatory. They're required, but we're not part of your internal control system, right? So you set up internal controls with your monitoring and your processes to consider and detect, prevent, and detect fraud, all of that kind of stuff. You are considering the financial statements. We do prepare them as a service, but they're yours. Okay? So we take them from your records and your information, and you take responsibility for them because we're not here making those types of decisions. You select all of the accounting policies and principles as well. And then, of course, you guys have participated in this process: entrance conference, exit conference. We're here having these conversations. You have access to us at any time, right? So, we appreciate that.

We'll move forward here to the, I think, the final pieces will be into the just kind of where the findings are. We'll just kind of mention where they are. If you've got questions, we can hold to the end or you can ask how we move forward. But the first couple here, I just want to point out the way findings are written. Okay? So, FS, that's going to be financial statement. It's just something that related to the financial statements as a whole that is reportable under government auditing standards. The number, it's the year and then finding number. So it's 2025 finding number one. When you see parentheses, that is the original finding year and number. Okay? So what that'll show is that it's a repeat finding from 2024. And at the very end where I have in brackets there, parenthesis, it says MW, it says material weakness. So it's showing that this is a repeat finding from last year and it's in material weakness, and this is over the controls over the construction in progress, and this is going to be, it's in both reports from a standards perspective, but pages 308 and 309 of the ACE or pages 22 and 23 of the single audit report.

The next finding, okay, is also a repeat finding from the prior year. It's a material weakness as it relates to general ledger corrections. So these are some different journal entries or adjustments or error corrections that were proposed and posted into the financial statements themselves that were caught and needed to be corrected to the city's books. Okay. So you'll see that, and again, pages 310, 311 of the AER or pages 24 and 25 of the single audit report. You'll move down to the next page. We'll have the federal finding here. This is only going to show up on the single audit report. It does not show up in the ACER, but this is a repeat as relates to the Airport Improvement Program. It's a material weakness. Okay. So it's a repeat from 2023 that has been carried over relating to the equipment and real property management process, and that's going to be on the details, you know, the management responses, all those pages 26 and 27 of that single audit report.

And then we'll jump down to this next one here. This is the state audit rule finding. So, this is kind of an other non-compliance, other matter. It's a new finding in the current year. It's going to be 2025-003. It's not a repeat. It's a budgetary compliance matter. Okay. So, you'll see that all the details of that finding pages 312 to 314 or 28 through 30 of the single audit report. We'll jump down to the next page. Okay. This one here again, another state audit finding, other non-compliance. It's the cash appropriation. This is again a budgetary function. It basically is saying that the way the budget was done, the cash appropriations needed to be adjusted to be able to have that to cover. This has been a repeat from 2021. And so you're still seeing that here now. So it was finding number four in the current year. In 2021, it was finding number 20, right? So that gives at least a little credence to the numbers decreasing over the years. So pages 315, 316, and then pages 31 and 32. And then lastly, the state audit rule finding 2025-005 for stale-dated checks. This is another matter. It's a new finding in the current year. You'll find all those details on page 317 and 33.

We'll run down to the next page. I think is the final one, just as a we always have to follow up on all findings. Okay? So, every finding that's in the report, we have to report. Have they been corrected? Have they not been corrected? Have they repeated, modified, etc.? So I do like to point out that there were these four findings that were resolved from the prior year. So you had a reimbursement request that was resolved. There was an activities allowed relating to federal award that had been a repeat from 23 that was resolved. Subrecipient monitoring which was resolved, and then a pledge collateral finding which had actually repeated from 2021 which was also resolved in the current year. And I believe that's it. Pause for questions.

Any questions from governing body members?

Councilor Castro: All right. And I know that we had a lengthy discussion in finance, so I'll try not to ask the same questions. But just to recap, there are some programs, in particular around the airport, that were sort of waiting for some of the equipment to phase out or potentially not be as much of an asset. So maybe we want to touch on that before I ask about the other.

Mayor: Councilor Castro, yes, from the discussion that we had earlier this week at Finance Committee, it's certainly an undertaking that we're working on at the airport. The biggest issue right now is the older assets that are in service at the airport and making sure and identifying those that had federal dollars spent in terms of those capital acquisition. We're in a point right now where we have a divide where a lot of the current data or the current acquisitions at the airport, we know we can clearly identify and have, if have, can designate as federally acquired using federal dollars. The issue, which is why it's been repeating and we've been struggling to at least whittle down the population of the unknown, is on those ones that are out there. So, we certainly have different ideas that we're working on. One of them, as you kind of suggested, was at least the dollar amount will be decreasing on some of these since they're so old.

We'll have a zero book value or will ultimately be replaced, which would then put it new on the book, which then we can clearly identify for it. And then the second path is conversing with the federal agencies for guidance on how we can delineate known versus unknown quantities.

Mayor: Thank you so much. And thank you, Councilor Garcia, for bringing this up in finance. My understanding is mostly we deal with this when we're trying to sell some of this property and where we got that funding, but that's a separate issue from the cash balances. Where are we with the cash balances? Why is this still a recurring issue from 2021?

Mr. Mayor, Councilor Castro, the cash balances, which are you referring to exactly? Is it the same finding that you're referring to?

Mayor: I apologize. The finding is the cash appropriations and cash appropriation.

Sure. This is something that we're actively having discussions with within our budget. The biggest cause of this is a timing gap that we're having on this. So the requirements to the state for our budget precede our known ending balances. So from Andy in budget submitting what our budget is that you all will review and approve during the course of May, and he submits that at the end of June. We don't get final numbers on an accounting basis until August, at least knowing where our final GRT, which is about two months in arrears, is from. So we're budgeting without actually knowing where final cash is, which opens us up to that cash available might not be enough. So we're having discussions to see how we can better estimate and project, because it's not all the funds that we're having this issue with. It's particular ones and it rotates. If we were to go look back through each of the year's financials, there would be different ones that this would impact, but that's ultimately the cause is that timing gap from when we need to submit and then we know the known numbers and just in terms of how we're projecting inputs.

Mayor: Thank you so much. And that makes me feel good that we're at least having those conversations because I know that cash balances and different sources of cash has been an issue for a while. So I'm excited for that. And I appreciate that we're also, it looks like we resolved three and potentially had three new ones, but we had a discussion about generally these are never going to be perfect, right? We always want to have some things that we can improve on. Do you want to speak to that?

Sure. Mr. Mayor, Councilor Castro, it's certainly, I think as we look over the course and the trend that we've had over the last few years, I think we were at somewhere like 21, then we're at 13, then we're at eight last year and down to six. So we're certainly on the right track for it. Councilor Garcia certainly had ambitions and I agree, we'd like to get to zero ultimately for it. In a world of realism, is it possible? Sure. But would you ever feel comfortable knowing, are we really never doing anything that could be improved on? I mean, this certainly speaks to areas that we want to put focus on and do more work in. Certainly we don't want us to have stuff that's material weakness, which certainly would be a rise of concern for things could go wrong, which could sway. So we'd really want to pay extra attention and address those. Some of the stuff that we have from the findings, finding 002 this year is doing just that. It's actual work that we're doing internally to correct known things that the city staff is finding. So certainly written up as a finding, but it's work that is actually, we're self-reporting on ourselves to better the position of what the city should be reflecting. So if we get one like that, it might not be great, but I think the work, underlying it is good work at least to put us in the spot we should be ultimately.

Mayor: Greatly appreciated. It's a big, it's a heavy lift as we like to say, and we appreciate you very much. No further questions.

Councilor Cassutt: Thank you, Mayor, and thank you, Matt and AJ. It's great to not see you so often, as much as we enjoy having you here, but it's kind of nice. I feel like we haven't seen you in so long.

I won't take it personal.

Councilor Cassutt: Thanks. Going back to the discussion around finding for the cash appropriations and excess available cash balances. Matt, you were talking about how this is essentially a timing issue with us needing to project and then not getting information back from the state. Is it information not back from the state for the next two months because it has to do with GRT reports or can you go into more detail about that?

Mr. Mayor, Councilor Cassutt, so it's the GRT remittances that we receive. So any of the activity coming in from May and June of the fiscal year we don't receive for two months after. So we don't know what those final cash numbers are that would be dispersing throughout the city ultimately, sure, up until well after when we're submitting the budget numbers for the final or for the following fiscal year.

Councilor Cassutt: Yeah, that's what I thought. So glad to know I was on the right track. I'm curious and I don't know if either of you will know this. Is this a common finding in New Mexico for municipalities given how municipalities are primarily funded by GRT? And I mean, I would imagine we can't be the only ones that are dealing with this because this is the established pattern at the state for primary funding mechanisms for municipalities and the fact that the state's not remitting for two months. So is there anything we can learn from other communities or is this common?

Mr. Mayor, Councilor Cassutt, I would think not. I mean, I think as it, it's certainly, the funds are changing each year. So it's certainly, I think an exercise in us being better at projecting that we certainly need to figure out and be better at. So that's what we're trying to do internally now to see if that ultimately will resolve it. I'd be curious to hear your thought.

The other couple areas, so this is a, I would say this is a more common budget finding than over expenditure. And the reason for it, normally what I'll see is there's two areas that come up in practice. One is a lot of times because people are really focused on the expenditure line items that they'll make an adjustment on the expenditures but won't adjust the revenue considering the revenue is coming in or maybe there's a transfer coming in and they might not pick up on those. I can't lean into that and speak into that for these particular funds, but that's an improvement point that I recommend to a lot of people is don't only focus on those expenses because, oh, we don't want to overspend the budget, but you then under report it because what it is is when you look at a budget statement, you got your original column and you have your final column. This is driven by that final of your final budget after everything else. And if the revenue, and I'm just going to use round numbers, right? If the revenue is 8 million and then the expenses are 10 million, you've got to have 2 million in cash ready to go. And they're like, "Oh, wait, but we got all this money and we didn't adjust for it." Right? So it's something to pay attention to is like a lot of people are really good at those expenses and they're not as good on the revenue side. So I'd zero in on that. The other that's kind of different is you budget on an accrual basis, but this is required on a cash basis. To lean into it a little bit more, I called the state to try to advocate to not have to deal with the cash side because I'm thinking that doesn't make sense to me. You don't budget that way. So you're kind of having to use another, a third way, right? So those were a couple little nuances I think that are, that I can see in practice a lot that I think might be of assistance to you.

Councilor Cassutt: Yeah. Well, thank you. I appreciate that and, yeah, it does definitely sound like a system challenge that we have to overcome. So thank you. I don't think I have any other additional questions. Thank you as always for meeting with us and being able to have these conversations. Really want to thank Matt and all of your work. I would be remiss if we did not recognize former Finance Director Emily Oster and not just the work of this audit, but again for how much we saw at AJ. I think she got four audits done in 18 months and really got us on a track. And I believe, oh gosh, if I'm thinking back to, I don't know, four audits ago, I mean, we had what, 20-some findings and we're down to two.

Six.

Councilor Cassutt: Six. Well, two. Oh, did we, was the 20-some findings including everything? Okay. Regardless, it's been quite the improvement and I know that it's taken a lot of work. And, Matt, you've been here and you've been helping a lot and really, really just want to recognize how much work finance has done and how much work Director Oster did and really moving through. And AJ, thank you for CRI and all of the assistance there. But this is a far cry from where we have been and, it's nice to not be reviewing audits every few months now and going back to once a year. So thanks everyone for that. Thank you.

Mayor: Thank you, Councilor. Any other comments from governing body members? Seeing none, just want to kind of reiterate what I've always said that audits are your kind of bill of health for this government and so definitely shows us where we have some work ahead of us. Many thanks to Acting Finance Director, Deputy City Manager Andrew Phillips. I mean, we're taking these findings and we're not waiting. We're, and with Mr. Bonifer's help, hopefully AJ, and I don't think we'll ever get to zero, Councilor. And if we do, I echo what AJ and Matt say that that's more worrisome when you got zero because human error comes into play. There's always going to be something, but one or two, I mean, zero, I think that's more red flags. But just thank you all. A lot of work was done, not only in the present, but as Councilor Cassutt mentioned, with also with former director. And let's, let's move forward. So thank you. Any other comments? Okay. With that being said, Madam, thank you for the presentation. Madam City Clerk, on to the next agenda item, please.

City Clerk: Next item, there is 10 action items on the discussion agenda. 10A is a request for ratification of aviation grant agreement number SAF-26-02 with the New Mexico Department of Transportation Aviation Division in the amount of $56,200 for the reconstruct of the electrical vault at the Santa Fe Municipal Airport. And I'm not sure if, okay, let me check to see if he's in. Looking for interim airport manager.

I can make a couple comments. I don't see.

Mayor: Yeah, Mr. Mayor and members of council. So this, the purpose of this item as well as the one following is to ratify signatures for that the Mayor had signed on these grant agreements. These are both aviation grants through the New Mexico Department of Transportation Aviation Division. One's in the amount of $61,933 for reconstruction of the terminal apron and then one is in the amount of $56,200 for reconstruction of the electrical vault at the airport.

Mayor: Okay. Any questions from governing body members? What's the will of the body?

Councilor: Move to approve on 10A.

Councilor: Second.

Mayor: Okay.

We've got a motion and a second. Any discussion? Hearing, seeing none, Madam City Clerk, can we get a roll call vote, please?

**Councilor Bamonte:** Yes.

**Councilor Cassett:** Yes.

**Councilor Castro:** Yes.

**Councilor Chavez:** Yes.

**Councilor Faulkner:** Yes.

**Councilor Faggali:** Yes.

**Councilor Garcia:** Yes.

**Councilor Barret:** Yes.

Motion passed.

Okay. Next item on the agenda, please.

Next item is 10B, request for approval of Amendment Number One to Aviation Grant Agreement Item Number 25-000035 with the New Mexico Department of Transportation Aviation Division to increase compensation by $61,933 for a new total amount of $1,296,856 for reconstruction of the terminal apron and a request for approval of a budget amendment resolution in the total amount of $1,296,856 to increase WIP Construction Fund using NMDOT funding for the reconstruction of the terminal apron.

Questions from governing body members?

Move to approve.

Second.

Okay, we got a motion and a second. Any discussion?

I just have a quick comment. I know that this is something we might want to talk to county commissioners about. I have gotten a few emails about the sound and some of the concerns around construction and displacing folks. So, if we could reach out to the county to see how we can mitigate some of that, that would be great.

Sure.

Any other comments?

Okay, seeing none, Madam City Clerk, can we get a roll call vote, please?

**Councilor Cassett:** Yes.

**Councilor Castro:** Yes.

**Councilor Chavez:** Yes.

**Councilor Faulkner:** Yes.

**Councilor Faggali:** Yes.

**Councilor Garcia:** Yes.

**Councilor Barret:** Yes.

**Councilor Bamonte:** Yes.

Motion passed.

Next item on the agenda is a request for ratification of a notice of intent to disperse law enforcement retention funds from the New Mexico Department of Public Safety in the total amount of $14,783.97 for the purpose of providing retention differential disbursements to eligible Santa Fe Police Department officers and a request for approval of a budget adjustment request in the total amount of $14,783.97 from New Mexico Department of Public Safety to police incentives and police FICA. Let me allow DC Valdez and Anamarie Bowen to answer questions. DC Valdez, can you hear us?

Yes, Madam Clerk.

Okay, Chief, do you want to give an overview of this item?

Yes, Mr. Mayor. So, this request is for consideration for ratification of an agreement that was given to us by the Department of Public Safety for the disbursement of retention funds, which we have done for the past four years. This money was allocated through the legislature and the governor's office to try to keep law enforcement officers to stay longer in their career. The way they've established the fund is police officers that are eligible will be eligible to receive their disbursement at years 5, 10, 15, 20, and every subsequent year after 20 if they remain in service as a law enforcement officer.

Okay. Thank you, DC Valdez. Any questions from governing body members? Yes, Councilor Cassett.

Thank you, Mayor. My only question is I don't have any packet materials for this item. So, I know those of us who have been here, this is a very familiar item. But I don't know if we can maybe table this item and have these sent to us. I don't know if it would have an impact on the program to delay this to the next meeting until we can actually have materials. DC Valdez, I would look to you for that response.

Mr. Mayor, Councilor Cassett, so the agreement's already been signed. It's just for the ratification. So, we're just waiting for that to get signed off so we could do that and get the BAR done. I'm unsure why the packet material is not included. But we can send it over shortly after this to have it be reviewed or be asked to be put later on in the meeting to have an option for you to review it and then we can see if that'll be considered for approval.

Okay. Thank you. Then I would move to table this item until we can get materials.

We've got a motion to table and a second. Any discussion?

I have the packet material I can forward to you if you want that right now.

Madam City Clerk, can we just post it? Can we table and then just can you post it and then we can come back to it? I think that that way the public has access to it as well. Are you able to post in the middle of a meeting or isn't there some? Oh, you're fancy with Civic Clerk then. Never mind.

Thank you for the update, Madam City Clerk. So, we've got a motion to table and a second. Any discussion? None. Can we get a roll call vote, please?

**Councilor Castro:** Yes.

**Councilor Chavez:** Yes.

**Councilor Faulkner:** Yes.

**Councilor Faggali:** Yes.

**Councilor Garcia:** Yes.

**Councilor Barret:** Yes.

**Councilor Bamonte:** Yes.

**Councilor Cassett:** Yes.

Motion passed.

Okay. Next item on the agenda, please.

Next item on the agenda is matters from the City Manager.

Mr. Mayor, members of governing body, I have no announcements this evening.

Okay. Thank you. Next item.

Next item is matters from the City Attorney.

Yes. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Members of the governing body, I recommend that the governing body go into executive session for the matters as indicated on the agenda. I move that we enter an executive session pursuant to the Open Meetings Act Section 10-15-1H Subpart B for discussion of the purchase, acquisition, or disposal of real property or water rights by the governing body.

Second.

Okay, we've got a motion and a second. Any discussion? Madam City Clerk, can we get a roll call vote, please?

Certainly, Mayor. Councilor Chavez.

**Councilor Chavez:** Yes.

**Councilor Faulkner:** Yes.

**Councilor Faggali:** Yes.

**Councilor Garcia:** Yes.

**Councilor Barret:** Yes.

**Councilor Bamonte:** Yes.

**Councilor Cassett:** Yes.

**Councilor Castro:** Yes.

Motion passed.

Okay, so we stand in recess. I'd like to move to return from executive session once we do have a quorum. Governing body shall make a motion. So, pursuant to the Open Meetings Act Section 10-15-IG, I move that the governing body return from open session, reconvene in open session and state for the record that the matters discussed in the closed session were limited to those specified in the motion for closure.

Second. Mayor, I have to recuse myself.

Okay. I note for the record that Councilor Faulkner recused herself from the executive session. Any discussion on the motion?

Seeing or hearing none, Madam City Clerk, can we get a roll call vote, please?

Certainly, Mayor. Councilor Faggali.

**Councilor Faggali:** Yes.

**Councilor Garcia:** Yes.

**Councilor Barret:** Yes.

**Councilor Bamonte:** Yes.

**Councilor Cassett:** Yes.

**Councilor Castro:** Yes.

**Councilor Chavez:** Yes.

Motion passed.

Great. Thank you. Next item on the agenda, please.

Mayor, would you like to entertain a motion that no action is necessary for Item 13A, which is discussion and action regarding the disposition of city-owned property? So to approve.

Oh, she can't. I mean, yes. No, she, you can't be here yet.

Yeah.

So moved.

Sorry.

Second.

So, we've got a motion and second on this. Any discussion? Seeing none. May we get a roll call vote, please, Madam Speaker?

Certainly, Mayor. Councilor Garcia.

**Councilor Garcia:** Yes.

**Councilor Barret:** Yes.

**Councilor Bamonte:** Yes.

**Councilor Cassett:** Yes.

**Councilor Castro:** Yes.

**Councilor Chavez:** Yes.

**Councilor Faggali:** Yes.

Motion passed.

Okay. Thank you. Next item, please.

Next item on the agenda is matters from the City Clerk. I just want to remind everybody about the annual Easter Egg Hunt event, which is on Saturday. The event starts promptly at 10:00 a.m. The gates open at 9:00 a.m. and I hope to see a lot of people there. That's all I got. Mayor, next item is communications from the governing body.

Start on my left. Did I start on my left? I remember. Start on my left and we'll go right. Okay.

**Councilor Cassett:** Thank you, Mayor. Not too much tonight. Just want to wish my partner's father, Eric, and his sister, Marisa, a happy birthday coming up at the end of this week, beginning of next week. So, happy birthday to both of them. Hope they have a wonderful day celebrating. Thank you.

**Councilor Castro:** I want to thank everybody who was at the event last night around affordable housing. Please reach out if you have any questions, comments, concerns around affordable housing. Really excited that we are on our way to getting staffed up and hiring some new folks. And very, very excited to hear that the interim title has been removed from our City Clerk. So, thank you.

Nothing for me tonight. Oh, I do want to thank everyone for Agri and South Meadows, all the work that's getting done there. And I do have to thank staff and the contractors. Airport Road is moving very, very fast and I'm hearing more good things about it than bad things, which is refreshing. Okay. Thank you, Councilor.

**Councilor Garcia:** I don't have anything tonight. Thanks, Mayor.

**Councilor Chavez:** Thank you, Mayor. My bonus son, Victor, turns 14 tomorrow. I was able to be principal of the elementary school he went to. And somehow I was able to become his caretaker. He's been with me for a year and he's completed our family. He has his biological family, but he has an extra family that'll always love him and take care of him. And tomorrow we will be celebrating with him big, a bunch of people that adore him, including some people here. He's a great kid. The example of resiliency that we don't even see in adults sometimes. So, I'm just very honored that, you know, I used to hug him as a principal. I used to run down the hall and he saw me, "Miss Amanda, can I have one of your hugs?" And now I get to do that every time I send him to school and every time I put him to bed. So, I'm very grateful that he has joined us in our chaotic world at home. So, thank you. Happy birthday, Victor.

Thank you, Councilor.

See everybody at the Easter Egg event. I'll be there, maybe in the golden egg section. And then I know there's a No Kings event at the Roundhouse.

Thank you. Yeah, the No Kings event is Saturday at the Roundhouse. I think it starts at 11:00. There is the first seasonal community cruise bike ride April 4th, which will be before our next governing body meeting, 10:00 at the Plaza on Saturday, April 4th. And we'll have some more fun events to announce soon. Thank you.

Okay, I have no updates either. Just see you all on Saturday. Look for me. I'll have a basket of goodies handing out. I'll entertain a motion to move directly to matters from the public.

So moved.

Second.

Okay. So we got a motion and a second. Any discussion? Seeing none. Madam City Clerk, can we get a roll call vote, please?

**Councilor Faulkner:** Yes.

**Councilor Faggali:** Yes.

**Councilor Garcia:** Yes.

**Councilor Barret:** Yes.

**Councilor Bamonte:** Yes.

**Councilor Cassett:** Yes.

**Councilor Castro:** Yes.

**Councilor Chavez:** Yes.

Motion passed.

Okay. Thank you, Madam City Clerk. So, we are now on Item 17, Petitions from the Floor. If the public would like to address the governing body, please do so. Go ahead and line up on that side. And then after the comment here in chamber, we'll get to comment online. And so, just refresh folks' memory as you step up. Just state your name. If you would like to state your address, feel free. State your council district.

Thank you. Good evening, Mayor Garcia, Councilor Garcia, Mayor Pro Tem, and other members of City Council. My name is Dina Vargas. I am a native New Mexican here on behalf of the Los Alamos Study Group and the Call for Sanity, Not Nuclear Production at stopthebomb.org. You may have seen the front page of the Albuquerque Journal, to include the Santa Fe New Mexican, specifically on March 2nd, provided exclusively by the Los Alamos Study Group's Executive Director, Greg Mello, reporting on a newly released, leaked federal memo urging increased pit production at Los Alamos National Laboratories. Plutonium pits are the radioactive core of the nuclear weapon. They are the heart of the new bomb, not cleanup or community care. In plain language, the federal government is asking New Mexico to double down on being a plutonium bomb factory while our community struggles with housing, healthcare, addiction, and climate stress. This isn't just numbers in a memo. It is more contamination, risk, more secrecy, and a deeper dependency on an economy of weapons instead of an economy of life.

As New Mexicans, we know what it means to be used and then left with the mess. From the Manhattan Project forward, the land, the water, and people have all absorbed the cost. Yet, we are still cleaning up. People remain sick and are being told that if we just accept one more project, one more expansion, prosperity will finally trickle down. Life does not come from a plutonium pit. Hope does not come from a plutonium pit because it cannot. New Mexico's future does not come from a plutonium pit because it cannot. It comes from New Mexico's children who actually come from the land itself.

Tonight, my ask is modest but urgent. On behalf of the Los Alamos Study Group, we would like to urge you as an individual and as a body to read and sign the Call for Sanity, Not Nuclear Production at stopthebomb.org. In conclusion, Mayor Garcia, Councilor Garcia, and members of the City Council, I would like to thank you once more for allowing me time to speak tonight and for your service. It is our hope that you will sign the Call for Sanity, Not Nuclear Production at stopthebomb.org. It is paramount to life. Thank you very much. I did also leave some stuffing up for everybody. I don't know if that's permitted.

The City Clerk can distribute it.

City Councilors and Mr. Mayor, my name is Judith Gabriel. I'm a member of the Bicycling and Pedestrian Advisory Committee, but I'm speaking as a District 2 resident. Please establish a dedicated budget that will make biking and walking safer and more accessible for all Santa Feans. Mayor Garcia has informed me that there is insufficient budget to add a bike and pedestrian coordinator to oversee projects and improve cross-department coordination because the city is in a flat budget year. He said he'd consider this when the city has resources to add new positions. In the meantime, perhaps the city can find a creative solution for supporting this work. One option could be to hire a part-time contractor. The Mayor also said that he's providing funding in the proposed budget as required by the BPAC maintenance resolution. Thank you, Mr. Mayor, for both of these considerations.

A good start for these funds would be for the city to support staff time and resources to use their new assessment tool for ongoing bicycling and pedestrian infrastructure monitoring and improvement. Also, I know we've received $25 million in general obligation funds to repave and restripe streets and that those streets have been identified. I request that the city work with BPAC, Bike Santa Fe, and other stakeholders to coordinate the work on those streets to prioritize bike lanes, neighborhood greenways, safer crosswalks, and curb extensions.

Finally, the maintenance resolution requires the city to develop a formula that identifies a certain share of funding for annual maintenance and repair of bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure from the budget for vehicle infrastructure. It also states that the BPAC and Mayor's Committee on Disability is to provide input on and review of budgets designated for biking and pedestrian safety. I hope that both committees get the opportunity to do that at their upcoming meetings before the budget is finalized. The budget reflects a community's priorities. Commit to public health, equity, safety, the environment, and our quality of life by allocating funding to expand, improve, and maintain bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure. Thank you.

Good evening, Mayor Garcia and City Councilors. I'm Phil Lucero. I'm the President of Bike Santa Fe. I'm here on my bike along with a lot of my friends. We're here, we did a pack the rack. We're here to advocate for bike infrastructure and bike funding projects around the city here in the future. I've been riding a bike in Santa Fe since I was a kid, going to work, going to school, and just for recreation. I've always called Santa Fe my home. I'm here because the streets in our city shape everyday life, and this feels like an important moment to get things right.

First, I want to recognize what the city has done well. The River Trail and the St. Francis underpasses have made a real difference. They're safe, easy to use, and people actually use them. I can attest to that. We've also seen better bike connections incorporated in newer Southside developments. When it's part of the plan, part of the code, it works. People ride more and neighborhoods feel more connected. I understand funding is tight, but even with those constraints, we can be smart about how we use what we already have. Cities our size, like Fort Collins, Colorado, have shown what's possible. According to the US Census data, about 6% of people biked to work there in Fort Collins, compared to less than 1% here in Santa Fe. Fort Collins didn't build their system all at once or with massive spending. They did it over time by coordinating across departments, using repaving projects to add bike improvements at a low cost.

The good news is we don't need major new spending to improve our bike and pedestrian network. When we repave, we can restripe for safer crossings and add protection for bike lanes. Small intentional changes can make a big difference. That's why a part-time bike and pedestrian coordinator would help keep this work aligned and moving forward. I also encourage you to move forward with the maintenance resolution and assessment tools so that we're fixing worn striping, damaged bike racks, and faded signage before they become safety issues. As the $25 million GO bond for repaving is implemented, I hope there's a focus on streets where simple restriping can significantly improve safety at a low cost. Investing in bike and pedestrian infrastructure also supports a more vibrant, economically strong city, bringing more people to local businesses, and making Santa Fe an even better place to live and visit. I appreciate the work you're doing and the constraints that you're working under. I'm hopeful that we can keep building on what's already working and make steady progress where it's needed most. Thank you for your time and consideration.

Hello, City Councilors. Mayor Garcia, my name is Arya Kyoto. I was in District 1. I've recently moved to District 2. I'm also on the board of Bike Santa Fe and I am a bike commuter. I ride my bike almost every day to work, about four or five miles. So I wanted to kind of reiterate the maintenance resolution. I was part of Bike Santa Fe when we really tried to get that passed and we were really happy when it did. So I really hope you have that as a priority because maintenance is the least we can do to at least maintain the infrastructure we already have. Just one example, when I ride on the River Trail every day in the winter, we didn't have much of a winter, but when it did snow, it was icy and a lot of patches for a long time and it never got cleared, never got salt on it. So it's a hazard. Yeah, that's just one example that the maintenance resolution can really help out. And, yeah, I also just want to make sure you try to prioritize simple infrastructure changes such as restriping and prioritizing protected bike lanes, not just a stripe in the road, using parked cars. There's a lot of different solutions and creative ways to make protected bike lanes. Thank you.

Good evening, Mayor and City Council members. My name is John Pile. I'm a District 2 resident. I'm a member of Bike Santa Fe. I am a subcommittee member of the Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee, a bicycle commuter, and an educator. I too am in favor of the part-time coordinator position when money allows. I think that communication between all departments when bike and pedestrian issues are being discussed is a good thing. I also am in favor of communication with the county and working in concert with them. I commute to work at the SFCC campus. Occasionally I take Richards Road and it is scary. A protected bike lane on city land to the county line would be much appreciated. And I also like the efforts for the multi-modality connecting the train to the city and the bus. And I just really think that bikes attract people to our city and bike infrastructure helps draw people to Santa Fe for living or vacationing. Thank you very much.

Mayor, members of council, I'm Hubert Tonka. I'd like to speak in support of the bicycle infrastructure. I've lived in Santa Fe for 40 years now.

If you wouldn't mind stepping a little closer to the mic just so the folks online can hear you.

I've lived in Santa Fe for 40 years now, but I was born in Amsterdam and I grew up there. Many of you know that when it comes to bicycle infrastructure, the Netherlands is as good as it gets, and I know what can be achieved if we put our minds to it. I find it a little embarrassing that in Santa Fe there are no streets or roads with protected bike lanes. Not even on high-speed roads like St. Michael's, Airport, or Cerrillos. There's not a single business, school, or theater or restaurant that can be reached on a street with protected bike lanes. Designing, building, and maintaining a bike-friendly environment is not rocket science. It's just money and that's where you come in. Allocating funds to improve the road network should always include funds for bike and pedestrian infrastructure, not as an afterthought, but as an integral part of the process. It's my two euro cents.

Hello. I'm Chandler Moore. I'm a resident in District 1, Santa Fe, and I wanted to say first, thank you and good job, at least as far as events that I've been to. I've seen a lot of involvement from a lot of the people that are up here representing us, especially in my district, District 1, and Mayor Garcia. Getting to volunteer with you some of the events that we've worked out and seeing you at our New Year's was great. But when we look at the budget for next year, I'm echoing a lot of what other people have already said. It would be great to see more money allocated to some of our committees like BPAC, some of our priorities like our bike trails, and also using that bond wisely. If we did get $25 million in the GO bond, make sure that striping our roads also includes striping our bike lanes, right? We're already doing that work. It would be great to address our pedestrians and our bicyclists as well.

And then additionally, sidewalks, transit systems like our bus system, and crosswalks. It's really important in parts of our town that might be underserved. So, if that gets on our radar, we can allocate some of our resources to things that might help people get to work or get to school. That would be great to see. So, good job. And it's great to see what we're going to achieve, I think, in this next year.

Genevie Morgan: Hey, Mayor and Counselors. My name is Genevie Morgan. I am a resident of District 2. I've had a really interesting, I think, distinct experience that a lot of residents have had. I've lived in two different residences in the city, and I have come to believe that Santa Fe is a tale of two cities when it comes to cycling. I had one, my first experience when I lived here. When I first moved here, I said, "I'm a daily bike commuter." I wanted to ride from anywhere I live to my workplace and for chores and things like that around town. My first residence that I lived at, my commute from home to work was not pleasant at all. There was no bike infrastructure, not a single bike lane, no sharrows. It was extremely stressful and dangerous. Fortunately, I didn't have any crashes or anything like that, but I would arrive at work really upset a lot of days from close calls and just how stressful it was. My next move offered a totally different experience where I live close to the Rail Trail, and I can take the Rail Trail basically the entire way to work, and it is the most stress-free, pleasant, lovely bike commute that I wish everyone in Santa Fe could experience because it's the best way to get to work, I think. And so I've seen that we can do it right. We can do the bike paths and really designate infrastructure for the town in a way that people want to ride and they feel safe because I think a lot of people truly don't ride because they don't feel safe here. And if there were more bike paths, especially where we can keep cars and bikes separate, that's ideal for everybody, drivers and cyclists. But again, I'm going to echo what everyone before me has said. I'm here to advocate specifically for designated budgets for protected bike lanes. And the reason why I'm doing that is because that's what our membership has specifically asked. Thank you for your time.

Kai Fillian: Mayor and Counselors, my name is Kai Fillian. I live in District 1. My request is that you dedicate part of the budget towards enforcing traffic laws so that the people of Santa Fe can feel safe in our streets. When I ask people why they don't bike in Santa Fe, the most common response is that they don't feel safe, and I don't blame them. Every day I see drivers running red lights, speeding, and driving dangerously. There were 2,400 crashes in Santa Fe in 2024, almost seven per day. That number has increased every year since 2020, and this is because these drivers know they're not going to get caught. Just ask yourself how often you see drivers breaking the law and how often you see them getting pulled over. And drivers also know that even if they do get caught, they'll get minimal punishment, if any. A few months ago, a teenager from Santa Fe was caught doing 100 and running a red light. He was given no ticket, just a safe driving class. And the horrifying result was both predictable and avoidable. A few months later, that same driver was again doing 100 when he crashed and killed his 15-year-old passenger. Another example is a driver who killed cyclist Steven Ballinger. This driver broke the law, killed someone, and wasn't even given a ticket. Every day, the city tells drivers, "You can break the law, and nothing will happen to you. You can kill a cyclist, and the city doesn't care." When drivers have no incentive to follow the rules, they drive recklessly and people get hurt. The people of Santa Fe, including cyclists, pedestrians, and drivers, deserve better. We deserve safe streets, and we deserve to know that people who break the law will see reasonable consequences.

Hana Burnham: Hi everybody. Thanks for having me, and it's nice to see you again. Some of you might remember me. My name is Hana Burnham, and I used to work for the Santa Fe MPO. So, I am well-versed in this issue of bike and pedestrian safety. And it's nice to see you here tonight. Thank you for your work, and thank you for the work that has been done because we do have infrastructure that does work for a lot of people and is awesome. However, with a few key investments, you could really, really expand that. And that's what's amazing about it is it's really like there are people who work for you who know where these connections are where you could really make a big impact with a small amount of dollars. Another thing is if you had a budget, if you had a dedicated budget, you can do a lot with a little. One key item that hasn't been discussed yet is driver education and just visibility. We used to do these pop-up bike lanes, and it's just good visibility. It just makes people recognize that people both want to cycle and are out there cycling. So they start to realize like we can go, it definitely makes the traffic go slower as well. And I'm the one who should know because I took that data, watched everybody slow down. Construction is actually amazing because it chills the drivers out. So I recommend more construction, but I also, but I recommend using visibility and small tools. Denver has some amazing infrastructure that they have put in that is just, it's not permanent, and it's not, it's just to get the people out there and so that they can do the permanent fixes and the more expensive fixes over time. But we have a gas crisis coming. It's coming. If you can't see it, you're not reading the news. And people are going to be, their wallets are going to be hurting very shortly. This is actually a potential way to save people real dollars is to allow them another way to get around this city without always buying gas or paying for insurance in this town. We know that people spend like 24% of their income, and some of them are paying that much on their cars, and it just doesn't need to be like that. We need to offer people options, and it's really, really doable, and I know that for a fact. So talk to the people who, talk to the people who are your staff members and find out what the plans are and find out where the key spots are. Also, you have some big—

Mayor: Can I have you wrap it up because it's past the two-minute rambling?

Hana Burnham: Okay. No, it's just past the two-minute mark.

Mayor: Okay. Thank you.

Hana Burnham: Is it, are we sure the mic is on? Okay, there we go. Perfect. I should know by now. You'd think, right? It looked green to me, but now it looks even greener. Okay, that's, we like that. Should I start over again? Anyway, Mayor Pro Tem, all of you, I'm very impressed so far with what you're doing, but I'm not here to give you a compliment. I like doing that. I was stopped by one of you on the street several months ago in the previous iteration. And this woman said to me, "You know, we kind of like it when you're there because we know you're going to be try to be nice most of the time." And I said, "Well, that is such a great perception on your part." I mean that. Anyway, and then Counselor Castro, you said, "Were you worried last time?" I said, "No, I had a frog in my throat. You know, it's too bad. I failed fine." But I'm old. So that has to do with the second thing that I'm going to mention to you all. First thing is I am going to send you again information of why you should just require the arm of your body, your governing body, to designate status. Then you'll be safe no matter what treatment you decide to do with the Soldiers Monument and the Plaza. Therefore, you'll be safe. Nobody will take you to court. It's as simple as that. But I'll send it to you. The second thing is I have 40 seconds. I would like, I really agree with the biking people, and I have a bike in my backyard, but I haven't ridden it in a long time, and I'm 81, and I'm a little waggly. But I'm pretty friendly and nice. By the way, I want to interrupt myself and say congratulations to you two. Probably some other people too. But I'm thrilled. I read about it in the paper, and I assume it's true. It's great. I really, it's, it's good. Oh darn. 10 seconds. I will volunteer as a grandmother to go ride on trails that I think are sensible, and I will prove to people they can ride. But I am terrified to ride in town. I am very pro-riding, and I promise to keep my clothes on. I'm not going to be amazing. It's not Lady Godiva, but I will draw attention to it. We must make it safe for even people like me. Thank you. Thank you.

Mayor: Anybody else in chambers would like to address the body? How about online, Madam City Clerk?

City Clerk: Mayor, there is one person with their hand raised. Stephanie Benonato.

Mayor: Okay.

Stephanie Benonato: Thank you, Stephanie Benonato. Can you hear me?

Mayor: Yes, we can hear you.

Stephanie Benonato: And I hope I'll get a few extra seconds as everyone else has who have presented in person. I can't say more than that I agree with the people who are speaking about bike safety, having been hit by a truck from behind when it was broad daylight and the woman just didn't see me because she was distracted by some other activity. But what I really want to bring up again is lawyers and scheduled maintenance. So, IPRA, I have IPRA requests out that have been out for well more than three months. Not only am I not getting the information in a timely way, but I am not even getting notices about how long or when I can expect those requests to be fulfilled. I believe that the city is required to at least give me some timeframe as to when they're going to fulfill those requests. And it's getting pretty discouraging that the city is not following the law. And again, asking why you want it is again, as far as I'm concerned, a violation of that law. It doesn't matter. You're just supposed to provide the information. In terms of lawyers, I know there's some bill coming up tonight about legal fees, and I have to say that it's really disappointing. I sent a motion for a mediation in the personal injury claim that I have against the city at the because of the wait room at Fort Marcy, I mean at Salvador Perez. I had a read request. I sent it to Marcos Martinez since he was the new attorney and also to the paid attorney Scott Hatcher. I did not get any kind of response and even an acknowledgment that they got it, and I asked for a turnaround time, a reasonable turnaround time, and after waiting for three and a half times the amount of time I asked, I finally filed the motion. Still no response from either Mr. Martinez or just one more thing, facilities. We now have had us closed because there is a filter that has died. According to one of the lifeguards, the filter was older than he is, but the city's haggling over like, "Well, let's not pay $20,000, let's pay $19,000." I really think, and I believe, Mayor, that you brought this up before, that there needs to be scheduled maintenance. There needs to be like every three years we look at this. Do we need to replace it? You pay, put it into the budget so that we don't have these surprises because now it's going to be a lot more expensive because that filter no longer exists. There has to be an equivalent on one found, and then—

Mayor: If you could please wrap up your comments.

Stephanie Benonato: The connections and the support will all have to be changed. So again, scheduled maintenance, I think, is important to city budget and being efficient. Thank you.

Mayor: Are there any other folks online, Madam City Clerk?

City Clerk: Mayor, there are no other hands raised in the Zoom room.

Okay, with that being said, let's go ahead and resume to our regular order of business. We will move on to introduction of legislation, which is item 16. 16A is consideration of a resolution sponsored by Councilor Amanda Chavez. It's a resolution authorizing City of Santa Fe representatives and agents to sign agreements and requests for payment regarding New Mexico Office of the State Engineer Grant Agreement DSB-FY26-HPD-01 to plan and design the rehabilitation of McClure Dam.

Okay, Councilor Chavez.

Mayor, I think it speaks for itself. Thank you.

16B is consideration of a resolution. This is sponsored by Councilor Alma Castro. It's a resolution approving the consumption of beer and wine during Site Santa Fe's annual gala dinner event on July 1st, 2026, at the Ramada in the Railyard Park pursuant to subsection 23-6.2C SFCC1 1987. And if all goes well, this will be the last one of these that we see. Okay. Thank you, Councilor. Next item.

Next item is consideration of a resolution. This is sponsored by County Commissioner Lisa Cacari Stone, Mayor Michael Garcia, and Councilor Pilar Faulkner. It's a joint resolution recognizing the value of periodic joint meetings between Santa Fe County and the City of Santa Fe and establishing a framework for conducting those meetings. I think this speaks for itself. This is just the legislation that will initiate joint City of Santa Fe and Santa Fe County governing body meetings as discussed previously. So, I look forward to working with our colleagues on the County Commission as we move forward.

Mayor, we still have DC Valdez online. Is there a desire to un-table item 10C? Mayor, I'd like to move to remove item 10C off the table.

Okay, so we've got a motion and a second. Any discussion?

And Madam City Clerk, can I get a roll call vote, please?

Certainly, Mayor. Councilor Barrett.

Yes.

Councilor Bamonte.

Yes.

Councilor Cassett.

Yes.

Councilor Castro.

Yes.

Councilor Chavez.

Yes.

Councilor Faulkner.

Yes.

Councilor Fagaley.

Yes.

Councilor Garcia.

Yes.

Motion passed.

Okay. So that item is off the table. Now that folks have got the packet materials. Any questions, comments?

Motion to approve.

Second.

Okay, we've got a motion and a second. Any discussion on the motion? Seeing or hearing none, Madam City Clerk, can we get a roll call vote, please?

Yes, Mayor. Councilor Bamonte.

Yes.

Councilor Cassett.

Yes.

Councilor Castro.

Yes.

Councilor Chavez. Councilor Faulkner. Yes.

Councilor Fagaley.

Yes.

Councilor Garcia.

Yes.

Councilor Barrett.

Yes.

Motion passed.

Okay. Thank you. Next item on the agenda, please.

Next item is 18. This is public comment on bills. This is the first public comment. No action. 18A is consideration of Bill Number 2026-8 and adoption of an ordinance. This is sponsored by Councilor Alma Castro. It's a bill amending Section 23-6 SFCC1987 to remove the resolution requirement for the purpose of approving sales and consumption of alcohol at public events on city property and requiring that the governing body approval be recorded in regular governing body minutes upon the City Clerk's recommendation for approval. To comment on this item. If there is anybody from the audience that would like to speak to this, please step forward now.

Sworn in or anything?

No, it's just the same process.

Same deal. I just like to comment. This seems to make sense to me. I haven't really studied it, but it's a reality that people like to drink alcohol. And maybe if we treated it a little bit more the way this resolution seems to be pointing us, we might know how to consume it better. So I'm basically in favor of it.

Okay. Any other comments?

Madam City Clerk, is there anybody online?

Yes, Mayor. Stephanie Benonato.

Stephanie Benonato. I too am in favor of this change. I believe that the city went from having full hearings to having a hearing officer make recommendations, and then they would pretty much approve it every time. And I think that was an added expense in time that was unnecessary because almost always these requests are approved. In this way, I think it streamlines it. It's going to be said, you know, you're going to approve it no matter what. So again, I think it's just more efficient to do this. Thank you.

And I will say I'm not in favor. I don't favor alcohol and needing alcohol to be at an event, but it does seem to be a reality. Thank you.

Thank you. Any other comments from online folks?

No, Mayor. No other hands are raised in the Zoom room.

Okay, with that being said, let's move on to the next item on the agenda, please.

Next item is 18B. This is consideration of Bill Number 2026-5 and an adoption of an ordinance. This is sponsored by Councilor Amanda Chavez and Councilor Pilar Faulkner. It's a bill authorizing the execution and delivery of a Water Project Fund Loan Grant Agreement by and between the New Mexico Finance Authority and the City of Santa Fe in the total amount of $2,500,000, including a loan in the amount of $1 million, evidencing an obligation of the borrower grantee to utilize the loan grant amount solely for the purpose of financing the cost of designing McClure Dam to the outlet conduit and spillway, including related work and revisions, and solely in the manner described in the loan grant agreement. Providing for the pledge and payment of the loan amount and administrative fee solely from the net revenues of the water utility system of the borrower grantee, certifying that the loan grant amount together with other funds available to the borrower grantee is sufficient to complete the project. Approving the form of and other details concerning the loan grant agreement, ratifying actions heretofore taken, repealing all action inconsistent with this ordinance, and authorizing the taking of other actions in connection with the execution and delivery of the loan grant agreement.

Thank you. Are there any members of the audience that would like to provide public comment for this? Well, is there any members online that would like to provide public?

Yes, Mayor. Stephanie Benonato.

I'm sorry, I just forgot to lower my hand from before. I don't have any comment. I just think it's a necessary expense and I'm glad that it's being proposed. Thank you.

Are there any other hands raised?

No other hands are raised, Mayor. Okay, let's go and move on to the next item on the agenda, please.

Next item on the agenda is 19. This is final action on legislation. This is a public hearing. 19A is consideration of Bill Number 2026-2 and adoption of an ordinance. This is sponsored by Mayor Michael Garcia. It's a bill amending SFCC1 1987 Section 11-13 to expand exemptions permitted by NMSA 1978 1978 Sections 13-1-98 through 13-1-98.2 to include certain purchase types and legal service types, adding exemptions for certain prepayment requirement items not exceeding $100,000 and for lobbying services representing the City of Santa Fe's interest, requiring procurement manual to be adopted by resolution, establishing an 8-year maximum term for professional services contracts, authorizing the Chief Procurement Officer to approve purchase orders and to approve the use of requests for applications, adopting construction manager at risk delivery method procedures, modifying certain amounts listed in NMSA1 1978 Section 13-1-125, authorizing the City Manager to approve contract amendments that do not materially alter the scope of work.

So this is a public hearing. Mr. You're done online with us.

Okay.

Mr. Mary can try to represent this item.

Would you like a short presentation on it?

Yeah, if you want to give an overview.

Okay. Sure. Yeah. So the procurement modernization bill seeks to further streamline our procurement processes. So this does do a few different things as well as cleaning up some of our procurement portions of the municipal code. First of all, it does provide for some exemptions and clarifies exemptions within our procurement code. We mentioned some of those earlier. So that would be for certain professional services like lobbying, purchases of publicly regulated utilities, including information services, updating that to include refugees collection services and internet legal services, including but not limited to advice, consultation, representation, research services, and litigation expenses in connection with proceedings before administrative agencies or state and federal courts, including experts, mediators, court reporters, process servers, and witness fees. It also increases the threshold for small purchases, bringing that to $100,000, and also clarifies that the city may procure services up to $60,000 for those small purchases. It provides for clarification of the City Manager's authority for contract amendments. So that would still stay within the City Manager's contract authority of $200,000. And it also provides for clarification around emergency procurement. So if an emergency exists and upon written determination of that fact, we can go ahead and procure the service or the good that we need to and then bring it for ratification to governing body. So I'll stand for any questions that you have and I apologize if Travis wasn't able to get in, but I'll try to answer any questions that you have.

Okay. So given that this is a public hearing, we'll first go to any members of the audience. Any members of the audience like to speak to this item?

Okay. How about online?

I'm not sure if Stephanie still has her hand raised or I'll allow her to talk.

It's better not to. The floor is yours.

I did actually raise my hand on this one. I think that eight years is a long time to have a contract with somebody without any kind of review. So, I would hope there would be a review there. I do understand that you want to streamline the procurement code and I think in some ways that's okay. I'm really opposed to the legal fees, having had to deal with Cuddy McCarthy and their seemingly resistance to actually assess facts and give good advice to the city. I feel like they prolong the process so that they can make more money. They can do billable hours to the city and employ experts without need. And I just think that farming out legal matters to third parties is just a disaster. It's a, I'm sorry, it's not coming to me, but somewhat of a disaster because they are self-interested in prolonging the legal matter rather than trying to settle it. And I would think that starting a mediation, having somebody who is interested in getting a list of mediators and then trying to mediate these cases before you start hiring lawyers to prosecute or to represent the city would be a way to be very efficient. And again, that person couldn't be the mediator, but definitely they could get mediators and go through the list and as they do at district court for settlement referees, as they call them, which are in effect mediators. And I would urge the city to think about that because again, I have proposed this before. As a mediator, of course, I have an interest in trying to promote mediation. But I do think that it would serve the city in terms of time and money given to outside lawyers. Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Madam City Clerk, are there any other individuals online that would?

No, Mayor. No other hands are raised.

Okay. With that being said, any questions, comments from the governing body?

Motion to approve. Second.

So, we've got a motion, a second. Any discussion on the motion? Seeing none, Madam City Clerk, can we get a roll call vote?

Certainly, Mayor. Councilor Casset?

Yes.

Councilor Castro?

Yes.

Councilor Chavez?

Yes.

Councilor Faulkner?

Yes.

Councilor Fagali?

Yes.

Councilor Garcia?

Yes.

Councilor Barrett?

Yes.

Councilor Bamonte?

Yes.

Motion passed.

Okay. Thank you. Next item on the agenda, please.

Next item is 21 appointments. 21A is appointment of Marcos Martinez to City Attorney, term ending December 31st, 2029. Move to approve.

Second.

Okay, so we've got a motion and a second.

Thank you, Mr. Martinez, for agreeing to take on this role and look forward to working with you for the next couple years at least.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor, members of the governing body. I appreciate the confidence you have in me and I will strive to do my best to work together with you all. Thank you.

Okay. Any other comments or questions from the governing body?

Councilor, I have to say it's been incredibly refreshing working with you. I think that it's really nice when we get the legal advice that we need and the guidance around policy, but you also are our thought partner. So even if things don't work, we never leave your office without a solution. And I think that that has not existed. And I think that's that approach. So your leadership, your collaboration skills, just the way you think, your knowledge, your expertise, and your willingness to make things happen is going to move Santa Fe forward. So I think we're very lucky to have you in this position. I'm really excited about all the things you're going to help us create. So, thank you.

Yeah, Councilor Casset.

Thank you, Mayor. I second everything that Councilor Chavez stated and also I want you to know that your staff have already expressed to me how your leadership has really helped them and that they really are very excited to have you lead. They've been hoping that you would be taking this position permanently. So, I love that it's not only those of us who have been working with you and are all very excited that you will be taking this position permanently, but I have heard from your team how wonderful your leadership is for them. And so I know that that'll really bode well for the success of the department. So, thank you and very excited to continue to work with you in this capacity. Thank you, Mayor.

Councilor, any other comments, questions? Hearing none, Madam City Clerk, can we get a roll call vote, please?

Councilor Castro?

Yes.

Councilor Chavez, Councilor Faulkner?

Yes.

Councilor Fagali?

Yes.

Councilor Garcia?

Yes.

Councilor Barrett?

Yes.

Councilor Bamonte?

Yes.

Councilor Casset?

Yes.

Motion passed.

Okay. Congratulations.

Next item on the agenda, please. Next item is 21B. This is appointment of Gerilyn Cardinas to City Clerk and Director of Community Engagement, term ending December 31st, 2029. Motion to approve.

Second.

Okay. You have this, I'll leave it up to you. You're the stenographer.

Again, just thank you, Interim City Clerk Cardinas, for all the work you've done and wanting to continue to work in this capacity. So, thank you. Thank you. Thank you.

Thank you. I appreciate the opportunity and I look forward to working with you all for the next four years. Thank you all. I appreciate it.

Absolutely. Councilor Faulkner.

All I can say is that I'm just, I think you're amazing. Some of the work that other people in staff should have been doing, you have done around helping people with disabilities. You worked very, very hard with me and came up with amazing solutions so that our website was accessible and you've been incredibly helpful to me personally as a City Councilor to make sure I have what I need. And what I love about it is you're not just changing it for me. You're very vested in making sure that the community has the same access that I would have as a Councilor. And so, and also you're just amazing.

Any other, I just, I admire amazing leaders. Even in your prior role, you do everything necessary and you do it in the background. You don't need anyone to notice. You don't need to be asked twice. You truly just care about supporting individuals, getting things done and being successful and leading and collaborating with your team in order to do so. No excuses ever. You'll find a way. You'll be supportive and you don't require any recognition for it. And so I'm just really excited that we have two incredibly exceptional leaders on staff doing very important jobs. I think that the city probably doesn't realize just what a great transition this is and what great impact you guys are going to have on the future. So thank you.

Castro.

Thank you again. I can't build on what my colleagues have said, but there is an ideology that when people want to be in positions of leadership, they're probably not the right people. And when they're dragged into it, it's because they are true leaders. And I know that both of you had some hesitation. I don't know how you got them to do this, but thank you so very much. And we are blessed to have you. Thank you.

Any other comments? Hearing none, Madam City Clerk, can we get a roll call, please?

Mr. Mayor. Councilor Travis?

Yes.

Councilor Faulkner?

Absolutely.

Councilor Fagali?

Yes.

Councilor Garcia?

Yes.

Councilor Barrett?

Yes.

Councilor Bamonte?

Yes.

Councilor Casset?

Yes.

Councilor Castro?

Yes.

Motion passed. Thank you.

Congratulations.

All right, moving on to the next item. It is 21C. This is appointment to the Occupancy Tax Advisory Board. Michael Truhill. Appointment at large. Move to approve. Second.

Got a motion and a second. Any discussion? Seeing none. Madam City Clerk, can we get a roll call vote, please?

Yes. Mayor. Councilor Faulkner?

Yes.

Councilor Fagali?

Yes.

Councilor Garcia?

Yes. Councilor Barrett?

Yes.

Councilor Bamonte?

Yes.

Councilor Casset?

Yes.

Councilor Castro?

Yes.

Councilor Chavez?

Yes.

Motion approved.

Next item is 21D. This is an appointment to the Historic Districts Review Board. Joe Simmons with an appointment term ending January 2028.

Move to approve.

Second.

Okay. A motion and a second. Any discussion?

I do have one thing I'd like to say in regard to the Historic Review Board. I personally feel like this, and this is not a reflection of the person being appointed tonight, but I do feel like the Historic Designer Review Board has taken a lot of leave where it should not have. And so I would caution anyone being appointed to this board to reflect upon the decisions they're making because some of them are very unpopular with me as a Councilor.

Any other comments or questions? Hearing none. Madam, oh, yep. Sorry. I apologize. Councilor Casset.

Thank you. And I think that, you know, Councilor Faulkner and I, we've also had conversations. I think a lot of us on this dais have had conversations about HDRB and some concerns. What makes me happy about this appointment is Councilor Fagali and I met with some individuals who had a lot of concerns around historic and they specifically mentioned this upcoming appointment and some of the, and that this was a good appointment. They mentioned it in a positive way. Thank you for making me clarify. And so I am, I'm really excited to continue to have these conversations. We have an individual who's an architect who's thoughtful. I think we have a lot of work to do around historic and I think getting some of these thought partners and these individuals that, you know, really do have a lot of the architect community, some of the individuals who work on development and reconstruction and rehabilitation in the downtown area that they're excited about somebody, this individual, not just somebody, this individual coming on to HDRB, I think is going to be wonderful as we move forward with these conversations. Thank you, Mayor.

Councilor, any other comments? Seeing, hearing none, Madam City Clerk, can we get a roll call vote, please?

Yes, Mayor. Councilor Fagali?

Yes.

Councilor Garcia?

Aye.

Councilor Barrett?

Yes.

Councilor Bamonte?

Yes.

Councilor Casset?

Yes.

Councilor Castro?

Yes.

Councilor Chavez?

Yes.

Councilor Faulkner?

Yes. Motion passed.

Okay, with that, that completes our agenda tonight. So, we are adjourned.