Regular Finance Committee Meeting - Second Monday Mon, Aug 10, 2026 · Finance Committee https://santafeminutes.space/meeting/943-finance-aug-10-2026 == Executive Summary == The Finance Committee met on 08/10/2026 to discuss several key financial and operational matters for the city. A significant portion of the meeting focused on the Police Department's vehicle procurement, an amendment to DWI grant funds, and the implementation of a drone as first responder program for both police and fire departments. The committee approved the purchase of 24 police vehicles to address current shortages, and an amendment to increase DWI grant funds with Santa Fe County, after clarifying concerns about data sharing and immigration status. The drone program generated considerable discussion regarding data privacy, ownership, and potential misuse. City staff assured the committee that the city would own all collected data, strict policies would prevent misuse, and audit logs would track access. The program was highlighted for its potential to enhance public and first responder safety, particularly in search and rescue, fire assessment, and responding to dangerous incidents. Despite some financial concerns, the drone program was approved by a 4-1 vote. Additionally, the committee reviewed a proposed resolution for general obligation bonds totaling $25,000,000 for various city improvements, which will be presented to voters in November 2026. == Key Decisions == - Approved the purchase of 24 police vehicles to address current shortages and replace aging fleet units. - Approved an amendment to the Memorandum of Understanding with Santa Fe County to increase DWI grant funds. - Approved the contract with Axon Enterprises Inc. for a drone as first responder program for the Police and Fire Departments, along with a related budget adjustment. - Reviewed a resolution proposing four ballot questions for the 11/03/2026 general election to issue general obligation bonds totaling up to $25,000,000 for citywide streets, recreation improvements, Swan Park Splash Pad, and Midtown Capital Improvements. == Motions & Votes == - Approval of Agenda — Passed unanimously - Approval of Consent Calendar (as amended with Items 7E, 7F, and 7I pulled) — Passed unanimously - Approval of Police Vehicle Purchase (Item 7E) — Passed 5-0 - Approval of DWI Grant Funds Amendment (Item 7F) — Passed 5-0 - Approval of Drone Program — Passed 4-1 (Councilor Castro voted No) == Public Comment == No public comment period. == Topics == - Police Vehicle Procurement - Drone as First Responder Program - General Obligation Bonds - DWI Grant Funding - City Financial Situation - Data Privacy and Sharing - Fire Department Drone Use - External Audit == Full Transcript == We will be live shortly. Let me know when you are. Madam Chair, Councilor Faulkner, we are live. Alright. Thank you so much. Alright. Call this meeting to order. Can we get a roll call, please? Councilor Cassette? Here. Councilor Castro? Councilor Garcia? Here. Councilor Bustamante? Here. Councilor Faulkner? Here. Madam Chair, you have a quorum. Thank you. Approval of the agenda. There are no changes from staff this evening. Move to approve. Second. Can we just get an "aye" vote because we're all here? Everyone in favor? Aye. Good job, everybody. Approval of the consent calendar. We have some items pulled. Correct, Steph? We do have three items pulled this evening. Item 7E, Item 7F, and Item 7I, all pulled by Councilor Castro. Move to approve as amended. Aye again? Everyone in favor? Aye. Boom. Public comments? Anyone in the chambers? Anyone online? Seeing none in the chambers and none presently online. Okay. We have no presentation, so let's move on to the next item, Steph. The next item will be Item 7E, request for approval of the purchase of 24 police vehicles, including equipment and labor costs associated with each vehicle in the total amount of $2,209,187.75 from Chalmers Ford MHQ and Code 3 Service LLC. And this evening, we have Chief Ben Valdez, Interim Chief. This was pulled by Councilor Castro. Correct? Do we need a presentation, or you just want to jump into questions? I'd like to jump into questions. I think that my questions might not be addressed in this particular legislation. It has to do with going forward. Alright. Awesome. Thank you so much. Wonderful to see you. Just quickly, if I could get an overview of sort of the base where we stop using a vehicle, because I know that we have pretty high standards for our current vehicles. And I know that we help potentially donate some of those vehicles to other agencies, so they're still being utilized. But what is, like, the threshold or the level that a vehicle is no longer usable by Santa Fe PD? Currently, our vehicles, or I'm sorry, Madam Chair, I'm a member of Castro. Councilor. Sorry. Currently, our vehicles are five to seven years of road use, or about 100 to 110,000 miles. After that, existing maintenance costs and just overall wear and tear of the vehicle necessitates the replacement. So just to clarify, potentially, the maintenance is outweighing the benefit of that vehicle? Yes. Thank you. So, sorry, will you say the amount of miles again? Five to seven years or 80,100 to 110,000. 100,000. Thank you. And then the other question is, as we're moving into spaces where gasoline is very, very expensive, is there any potential for moving to an electric vehicle? Madam Chair, Councilor Acosta. We're doing on-the-job training. I'm getting them up to speed. So we're working on this together. So we have been meeting with staff from the City of Santa Fe on the use of electric vehicles and charging stations. But based on our initial assessment, we kind of jumped into the realm of looking at alternative type of fuel sources for us to realize an electric fleet. It would require almost an impossible amount of infrastructure just for us to have these vehicles being able to roll 24/7. In addition, we did field hybrid vehicles that were pursuit-rated. They're the Interceptor Hybrid platform. And, unfortunately, we've had a lot of mechanical challenges with that platform. We've had engine failures where two of them had to be replaced. We get charging issues with the battery core because they have large batteries on them, lithium batteries. So those have spent a lot of time in the shop, and we're hoping that we'd be able to see a lot more return on our investment with those. But right now, the cost for the hybrid vehicles are about, I think, 8 to $10,000 more than the internal combustible engine platform. With the hybrids as well, our current fleet maintenance shop is not well equipped to maintain that platform. It would be the same position right now for an electric fleet. So if we do look at as technology is advancing and it might become more of a feasible platform for us in the future, I think it's still something worth looking at. I don't think we need to rule it out at this point. But, as of right now, it is not a viable option for us for a patrol vehicle. We do have a Chevy Bolt that our staff that comes to downtown daily utilizes to come downtown. They love the platform. It works really good for what their use is. But for a law enforcement vehicle, the technology is just not there yet. Perfect. Thank you so much. And I think just my last comment would be just we are in a very difficult place in terms of funding at the City of Santa Fe. Finding equipped vehicles the way that other agencies do that we could repurpose, I don't imagine, is something that we're looking into. We want new vehicles that we are equipping. Is that correct? What I can say with these vehicles is right now, we're out of vehicles. Even with the vacancies, we have positions that are yet to be filled 100%. So we have some folks that do not have a vehicle assigned. So this request is going to get us to a point where we're going to break about even. Our vehicles that we have in our fleet, our replacement schedule is five to seven years and over 100,000 miles. Again, depending on the wear and tear because some vehicles may have high idle hours, which is really damaging to vehicle engine parts. But we're having to run these vehicles a bit longer because the money we have right now used to purchase about 38 to 40 vehicles. Right now, we're purchasing, I believe, it's 24. So it's quite a deficit we're trying to overcome, but this is because of rising manufacturing costs and other costs that come with it. So we're trying to extend the life of these vehicles as best we can. There are some things out of our control that, if a vehicle is struck by, let's say, an impaired driver, which has happened, our insurance isn't covering it. We're self-insured, so that vehicle's a total loss. And to make repairs on that, it's impossible. There's also been some vehicles where we have been at fault where we spent several thousand dollars to get it back into running conditions so we can still utilize it. So we're being very mindful of that. But once we do have vehicles that maybe don't meet the requirements of the Santa Fe Police Department because of wear and tear, but it could be utilized with a city different city department, we are offering it to them first, so they can make use of that, and we can help out our partners within the city first. That's what we've been doing. We have helped out other agencies because we had older vehicles that technology-wise, they were not running very well, and some departments needed a vehicle for about a year to hold them over. And instead of stripping them and sending them off to auction, we did request permission from a governing body to make those transfers. As we stand this year, every vehicle that we have is going to be held, because we're in a position where we need a lot more vehicles than we're ordering, frankly. Another question check. Alright. Anybody else? Move to approve. Second. Roll call, please. Councilor Castro? Yes. Councilor Cassatt? Yes. Councilor Garcia? Yes. Councilor Bustamante? Yes. Councilor Faulkner? That motion passes. Next item, please. Item 7F, request for approval of Amendment Number Five to Item Number 23-0551, Memorandum of Understanding with Santa Fe County to increase the compensation by $20,000 for a new total amount of $245,000 for local LDWI grant funds. And I believe we have Eric Ramirez, Police Captain, and, again, Chief Valdez. So Councilor Castro pulled this. Do we need a presentation, or we can jump into questions? Questions. And I'm so sorry, Eric. I have not gotten to meet you yet, but please feel free to ask me any questions before or after these presentations if you ever want to. My concern really is with this contract as a vendor. We are in a difficult time when it comes to federal law enforcement, and there are some concerns that I have with data sharing at the county level for inmates that potentially are being arrested at the Santa Fe Police Department. Is there any way that if the policies at the county jail do not fit the policies of the Santa Fe Police Department, we could have a conversation or potentially put that into the contract that we are having with this vendor? Madam Chair, Councilor Acosta, so with this contract, it's kind of a boilerplate contract. The county is the conduit from NMDOT to pass on this grant funding, which helps us out with enforcement operations in the area of DWI. I think it'd be more appropriate if we were to have conversations government to government with the county on their practices when it comes to that. As for the City of Santa Fe Police Department, we have policies in place that doesn't take us into the realm of utilizing any city resource for the purpose solely or used for immigration purposes. So, for us, we follow our policies with this area. If we do make an arrest, that is not a question we're asking someone. We're getting their driver's license, finding where their address is at, sharing that information, their residency status or immigration status is not relevant to what we're doing in this room. Okay. Perfect. So at least and and I feel comfortable in this contract. We're not providing them with that information. And I'm hearing that potentially in the future, we want to create some sort of government to government conversation about how we could be upholding sort of the policies that City of Santa Fe has voted on and is implementing around immigration. Is that what I'm hearing? I think that'd be the most appropriate place, if we were to have a discussion maybe around our jail contract. But even there, we we don't have anything about sharing immigration status with the jail, again, because that would not be in compliance with our standing contract. The stats that are is provided through this agreement is how many DWI arrests were done, how many seatbelt violations were there, how many checkpoints were conducted, when were they when did they occur, how many officers worked that checkpoint, what are the hours, and what was the overall cost. Great. Thank you so much. No further questions, sir. Anybody else? Move to approve. Second. Roll call, please. Councilor Castro? Yes. Councilor Cassett? Yes. Councilor Garcia? Yes. Councilor Bustamante? Yes. Councilor Faulkner? Yes. That motion passes. Next item, please. Item 7I, request for approval of a goods and services contract with Axon Enterprises Inc for the purchase of the drone as first responder program in the total amount of $2,168,020 until 06/30/2031. And along with that, we have a request for approval of a budget adjustment request in the total amount of $433,604 from the general fund reserves to the inventory exempt equipment account for FY 27. Right. Again, this was pulled by Councilor Castro. Sorry, gentlemen. Very quickly, I understand the benefits of the program. I'm in favor, in particular, around keeping first responders' lives safe and not having to go into spaces like buildings that are about to collapse. I totally understand. My concern here is that there's been a lot of discussion around Flock and the data and how we're storing it. And Axon, which is our vendor and, I felt a little bit better about has currently been under some scrutiny in a similar fashion. What can you tell us about who has access to these cameras, where the data is being stored, and if these cameras can be tapped into remotely by some third party that we don't know about? Madam Chair, Councilor, thank you for the question. First of all, these devices are not Flock cameras. These devices are drones that are utilized as first responders. In these contracts, and again, with any contract we've had with the Santa Fe Police Department and our vendors, we make sure that we include information where the data is ours. If it is going to be shared, we have to give our express permission to do so. The only case where we would see that is if, let's say, New Mexico State Police has an incident that comes into the city of Santa Fe. We capture some of the event on a drone video feed, and we share it as part of evidence. We don't plan on sharing this with any third parties. I know with our speed and sound cameras, we're actually paying a higher price because we're not sharing with third parties, which again, that is our position, and we're happy to do so. But we're not selling to third parties to subsidize the cost of this. We're paying what the value is. The privacy controls are in place. It's property of the city of Santa Fe, and it would be utilized for our purposes in sharing this information. As for the folks who'll have access to it, it'll be members of the Santa Fe Police Department and members of the Santa Fe Fire Department that will be part of the drones first responder team, and they will utilize that for the purposes of accomplishing their mission that they're given, but not for anything concerning imposing on people's privacy and things like that. It's for a public safety mission. I'm going to try to be sensitive with this. I am not trying to accuse anyone, but we do know that potentially, this could be used internally to find out things about people that we want to keep an eye on. Santa Fe Police Department members might decide they want to check someone's license plate or find out where someone is. Is that possible? It wouldn't be because this is for a drone. These are not capable of checking license plates like an LPR. And we also have policies in place which prohibit the misuse of this type of technology. In addition to that, there are audit logs available. So if we have any question, if someone did conduct an inquiry or if they were looking at a video they were not authorized to look at, then we can look at the audit log and hold that employee accountable. Thank you so much. No further questions, Chair. Anybody else? Thank you so much, Madam Chair. I actually, given what is happening just north of us, Roland, I would love to hear about how the Fire Department utilizes drones. And I believe it's both identifying fires. I think that there was one that actually a drone did catch. There was a lightning strike, and the drone was able to catch them. You guys were able to take care of it quickly, as well as potentially finding individuals that may be lost in the mountains. So can you provide some more information there as well? Yes. Yes. Thank you, Councilor Cassatt and Madam Chair. So when we first originally kind of started down this path from the Fire Department, and PD has been incredible about helping us kind of get up to speed. It's been great having a partnership with them, which is a good opportunity for us. We identified probably four or five immediate areas where we could incorporate this. We do have a lot of unhoused individuals. So when we have an immediate fire within the city vicinity, we're able to identify that rather rapidly as well as how to access that. With the dry conditions, you can see how quickly fires grow. So being able to find that fire as well as kind of how to get to it has been extremely key for us, and we've already dispatched it to multiple fires, multiple search and rescues, places within the city and outside the city. So that part has been incredible. As well as Code Blue, we talk about kind of finding the same unhoused individuals in freezing temperatures. The crews spend a lot of time hiking through different places, traveling to known spots. Now we can actually use the thermal to identify their camps, map where they're staying, and be able to better check on them, better go and see them as quickly as possible, and check on their safety, which is going to be a great resource starting this winter. We saw in the fire, the Saint Catherine's fire, which I think was maybe the biggest fire in the history of the city. We were able to utilize drones immediately to kind of see the growth of the fire, but also as everybody kind of saw, the roof collapsed. So you can see the structural frame of the buildings start to deteriorate and alert the crews that they need to get out of those situations. I'm a hand talker. My daughter teases me. I'm sorry. But, and on top of that, we can identify where the crews are from above. So we can watch those guys operate in the field and kind of keep track of them from the chief's unit, which has been extremely helpful. We're seeing, and even on that fire, it's hard to kind of see how effective the fire stream is when you're fighting a fire. So in this particular situation, initially, we were fighting the fire, but the water stream was shooting over a wall and over a tree, but we couldn't see where it was hitting. With the drone, we were able to adjust the stream of the fire and actually hit the fire, and effectively put it out more quickly. And then like we said, last winter, I went to a search and rescue at the ski hill, and we were able to locate that lady right before the sun went down into freezing conditions and get her out, which was extremely effective. So search and rescue is going to become incredible. And we're currently working with the chiefs. We have the whip that has met response that goes through our city, on that 599 bypass. So that's radioactive material where we are currently looking at drones that can monitor air quality. So if you have a large wildland fire, we could send a monitor into that smoke and check the smoke to see how damaging it is for the people downwind because we are learning that a lot of these fires can be extremely dangerous for the public that aren't even part of the fire, but just happen to be downwind from that. And the same goes for the hazmat trucks. If we did have a hazmat spill or something like that, rather than sending crews into the scene and potentially risking their lives, we would be able to send a drone in, identify what substance we're dealing with, monitor the air quality around it, and use the drone to kind of guide people out from that scene and into safe situations. So, I mean, we're just finding every time we get more and more people involved, we're finding better and better situations where we can utilize it. It's been a, I think PD says a force multiplier. It's been incredible for the guys, and we're getting a lot of really good buy-in. Wonderful. Thank you so much. And also, I mean, just the aspect around safety both for individuals responding in both departments, but also the public at large. I think that that's a really important point. Chief Fulda, as you know, my favorite questions, Councilor Castro just asked one of them. I'm sure you can guess the other ones. How long do we keep the data? What is our data erase policy? What is the data trash policy, essentially? What are we capturing? Are we capturing anything as it's going to a scene? Roland just mentioned, if we're kind of looking for those heat maps, what are they catching on the way? Councilor Bustamante just brought a very valid question. Are they subject to IPRA? So, all that fun stuff that I always ask. Oh, thank you, Councilor Cassatt. So, first of all, yes, the video is a public record. So it is subject to IPRA. When we fly these drones out, the first thing they do is they look at the launch pad. They go vertical. Once they're vertical and before they start traversing out horizontally, they're going to move the camera towards the horizon. So it's not going to pan down till it's nearing the scene and it's looking at what's going on there. So, it's not going to be doing a scan of the city as it goes there. It would be going to places where we would otherwise be getting access either through the Fire Department or the Police Department for a call for service. Aside from looking for fires in public spaces like parks, open spaces, and areas like that, it's going to be deployed when we get a call for service. If it's going to be something proactive, like for an investigation, we're going to be mindful of the privacy that is in place. So if it's at a commercial business district, we may go up and check the area if we're working that area. But if it is going to be deployed, it's not just going to be sent out to do a close patrol. Unless someone says, "Hey, I'm going to be out of town for the next month. Can you check on my house?" Then we'll have that call there, so that'll help us out. Or, otherwise, we'd be able to go look at the front, maybe make sure the doors are not locked. Now if they do make the request, if they request us to, we could even check the backyard, especially if they have foliage or that kind of stuff to make sure that everything is as it should be. But this could be utilized for cases where we would otherwise get some police officers or firefighters. For data retention, it's going to depend on what that video is linked to. So if it's linked to a crime, it's going to fall under the same schedule as it would for misdemeanor stuff, which is about a year. If it's a felonious thing, then it'll be there till the case is resolved. We have to hold it for a tort. It'd be maintained for that time frame. But we're looking at these things falling off at about five years for sure. Now if it's something that is, we go out, there's nothing to it, it may be gone in about ninety days. It's going to depend on the schedule we have for those types of retentions, which should fall into line with our body-worn camera policy as well. Wonderful. Thank you. And then, what would be the interaction with the drone program? And the ShotSpotter is the one that I can think of of our other technology. But if there's anything else I'm not thinking about, feel free to elaborate. So once we get this program launched, when we get a ShotSpotter activation, we're going to be able to send out a drone to go do an assessment on that location. ShotSpotter has been very effective with us getting notification of shots fired calls. What we have seen is a trend of decreased number of calls that we're getting for shots fired. But when we do get alerts, in most cases, we're finding shell casings, which are being collected. They're being sent off for analysis. So we could tie them to other firearms that may already be in evidence or might come in evidence at a later time. So the response time for those incidents is going to decrease exponentially, which will be helpful for us, but also give us a good size-up of the situation. Right now, our officers with the data that they get from ShotSpotter, they could see where the shots were discharged so they know their approach. The drones could add an extra layer of protection. So if we do find the offender on scene, our hope is that we can get eyes on, see the direction of travel. We could track the vehicle. We don't have to do a stop immediately. We can wait until they stop, get out of the vehicle, and then safely conduct an apprehension at that point. So it's going to be a big game changer with that. I'm glad you mentioned about members of the community as well. One thing that got us into the drone game, unfortunately, were situations concerning suicide by cop. Our hope is if we have a situation that unfortunately happens like that again, now we have time and distance for our first responders so they don't have to peek around that bush or that corner to be exposed to harm. We can start communication early on. Worst case, if a drone gets damaged, that's a loss we're willing to take. But again, if we can resolve it peacefully and get that person the help they need, that's what we're looking for. That's going to be our goal standard. Wonderful. Thank you so much. Did you have something to add to it? Yeah, just really quickly from the fire department side. We recently, I've recently learned about a software program we called Pano, which is at the top of multiple mesas in areas around Northern New Mexico. There's a camera that will kind of search the area and be able to detect early smoke plumes and things coming up from a wide angle. And we anticipate being able to get the early detection on those from that camera and then be able to deploy our drones directly to those for investigations. Wonderful. Well, thank you both so much. I look forward to getting an update on this. I really hope maybe in six months after the program launches that we can hear some more of the stories and the scenarios that have been utilized. Because as Roland, you're pointing out, every time you all are thinking about it, there's something else that this can really be a benefit for. So, I really appreciate it. I appreciate all the work around the concerns around data. I know what you felt as you were with me in whatever '21 it was with the initial cameras. And so as I said, when the cameras came back and again, I really appreciate, I felt like you really listened to that feedback and those concerns five years ago. And I'm seeing that manifest in these different ways that technology is being brought forward. So thank you all so much. Appreciate it. No further questions. Councilor Garcia? Thank you, Madam Chair. I just have a quick question about registration with the FAA. I mean, we all kind of know it's been reported that there were drones in the area of the Frijoles Fire, and that actually put flying in that area by our support aircraft that were fighting that fire grounded for the moment. So how do we, how do we communicate and how do we work with the FAA and other areas? Because these are, these are that will have to be registered. Correct? Madam Chair, Councilor Garcia, yes. So these devices and the way we're going to be flying them, they're going to be visible to other aircraft, but we also have to check in with the FAA who we're going to be operating them. So when we are doing missions, there's different things we could do. Either we can operate at a determined altitude, and we have to stay at that altitude, and we let them know, "Hey, we're out operating this altitude." Now as we get closer to the airport, then there's going to be additional restrictions because it's going to be, there's different altitudes that planes come in on approach. So there has to be communication between us and the tower here in Santa Fe. We have to get our folks, especially when we're not flying off the docks, they have to be part 107 certified. So some drones will be flown from the docks. Some will be flown either if they need to hike it out, if it's beyond the distance where a dock can support it. But anytime we put that drone up in the air, it again, it is utilizing airspace, so we have to get those clearances ahead of time so we can avoid any type of mishap or collision with other aircraft. Yeah, thank you. I am just from our side, I know that that last, that fire, the Frijoles Fire, with the drone that downed the aircraft. We currently with our guys that are responding as well, they have to, anytime they're flying on fire, they have to contact the drone commander before they fly just so we can go over the phone numbers that they're contacting, the apps that we all use. You can monitor airspace through different apps on their phones that each of them have. And like the chief had said, the newer drones actually will have something called ADS-B exchange, which will detect different drones within the airspace. But that's something that from a fire side, we've been extremely diligent on kind of monitoring that. And even, you know, some of the public safety news helicopters that are coming out, you know, just letting the guys know that you're going to be flying at 50 feet for this operation, you know, rather than going up to a higher height just so we aren't even risking it all because that would be kind of our biggest detriment on these flights. Yeah, thank you. It just sounds like training, training, training, and they almost have to have a pilot's license. Thank you. Yeah, I just, a couple of things in kind of alignment with my colleagues. I think when it comes to technology, we have to be mindful that we are doing, we're accepting technologies that will help protect, first of all, our first responders and then second of all, the community. We will also be mindful about what things can be used or weaponized against the community. So I do understand some of my colleagues' concerns about data sharing and some other things. I do want to take time to recognize Sweeney and Roland Jones. Both these guys have done a really good job of building up what is going to be, I think, a very effective drone program. And I think the police department and the fire department have also done a good job of making sure that we're not crossing the line on what's acceptable or what could be used against communities. And so I think I just want to commend both the fire department and the police department for the work you guys have done because this has been, you know, you guys are doing it the right way. I love that you're collaborating. This is huge. The cities that are most successful, police and fire collaborate on drone programs. And so I just want to thank both departments and both interim chiefs for the work you guys have done on this and also Sweeney and Jones for the work they've done as well. Any other questions? Can I get a motion to approve? Second. Roll call, please. One minute. I forgot it was two. Councilor Castro? No. And I'd like to explain my vote. Councilor Cassett? Yes. Councilor Garcia? Yes. Councilor Bustamante? Yes. And Faulkner? Yes. Councilor Castro? Yeah, sorry. Very quickly, I hesitated because Inspector Jones did do an amazing job of selling this program, and I really do believe in it. My no vote was really because we're at finance. The price tag gives me a little bit of a heartburn. We have a lot of things that we need. And so if there's anything that I can do to support in terms of beefing up our support for law enforcement and first responders, I want to do that. We're just kind of in a difficult financial situation right now. Thank you. Okay, next item, please. Okay, next item is, give me a second. I was waiting for the front door, it was accidentally locked, and people were trying to get in the building. Our next item is an introduction of legislation, and we have consideration of Resolution Number 2026-TBD sponsored by Mayor Michael Garcia, Councilor Pilar Paul Bustamante, Councilor Jamie Cassette, Councilor Amanda Chavez, Councilor Lee Garcia, and Councilor Elizabeth Barrett. It is a resolution proposing four ballot questions to be submitted to the City of Santa Fe voters at the November 3rd, 2026 general election relating to the issuance of general obligation bonds. Give me a second. I smoke. Okay. Number one, up to $11,111,250,000 for citywide streets, sidewalks, curb, ramp, and pedestrian accessibility improvements. Two, up to $4,500,000 for municipal recreation and complex Soccer Valley improvements. Three, up to $4,250,000 for Swan Park Splash Pad and related improvements. And four, up to $5,000,000 for Midtown Capital Improvements for a total maximum principal amount of $25,000,000 to be repaid from property taxes. Okay. We have some of the sponsors. Anyone want to go on explanation? I think it's kind of self-explanatory. I mean, I can, I can give a little bit of thoughts around this. I still have a number of questions. This is coming fast and furious, so I'm looking forward to the conversation that we'll be able to have a governing body. I was speaking with Ms. Tapia earlier today about, for just recommendation for us since we're only seeing it at governing body is to get those questions in ahead of time. I've already been able to get some of those questions answered by Director Burnett as well. So, you know, for me, this is, these are some high-priority projects. We know that we need to get them funded. We know that we need to move forward, and bonds are a great way to give the public an opportunity to weigh in on whether or not they see these as worthwhile enough for, if we're a small tax increase and for their tax dollars to go there. So, I look forward to discussing this on Wednesday, and thank you, staff. I know this has been, this has been a lift. Welcome, Monica. And I know I really appreciate all the work that has already gone into it and that I know continues to go into it as you're speaking with bond counsel and looking at the projections and estimates. So, excited for that further conversation on Wednesday. Okay, next item. Matters from staff, and I believe Monica has some updates. Madam Chair, members of the committee, good evening. I just wanted to let you guys know that we did have our entrance conference with our external auditor, Carr Riggs and Ingram on July 30th. So getting into audit season mode. Super excited to start that process. And again, thank you, Councilor Cassett. Any questions that you have to help me get you, any that you need for Wednesday, please let me know, and we'll try our best to get all your questions answered as best we can. That's all I have. Matters from the committee. All right. I just wanted to thank Monica. I actually did ask for a bunch of stuff last finance committee meeting, and I got it in a very timely fashion. So thank you. Right. Matters from the chair. Just, I encourage everyone in the committee. If you have any questions, get it to staff between now and Wednesday so we can get these questions answered. I think that tends to streamline the process. And I do want to reiterate that I, I think it's important that if you answer our questions and it's appropriate to make those questions and answers public, that we do so so the public also gets questions answered in this process. Okay. And our next meeting is August 24th.