Regular Finance Committee Meeting - Last Monday
Mon, Apr 27, 2026 · Finance Committee
https://santafeminutes.space/meeting/951

== Executive Summary ==
The Finance Committee convened to discuss several key initiatives, including the development of the New Mexico Innovation Hub at the Midtown campus and the implementation of an automated speed and noise enforcement program. The Innovation Hub aims to diversify the state's economy, create jobs, and provide housing, with significant investment planned for infrastructure and modern facilities. The committee also approved a $4 million agreement for automated traffic enforcement to address community concerns about speeding and loud vehicles, emphasizing public education and community service options over fines.

Further discussions included the city's long-term vision for economic development, the challenges of infrastructure funding for the Midtown campus, and the city's stance on annexation. The committee decided against annexing Area 1B due to financial and infrastructure concerns, and directed staff to amend existing agreements to reflect this. The meeting concluded with updates on the Finance Director search, fleet management recognition, and the upcoming Fiscal Year 2027 budget preparation and review process, with a focus on transparency and streamlined communication.

== Key Decisions ==
- Approved the agenda and the consent agenda (as amended).
- Approved a $4 million, five-year general services agreement with Janoptic Smart Mobility Solutions LLC for automated speed and noise enforcement.
- Directed staff to bring forward an amendment to the settlement and annexation phasing agreements to terminate Phase 3 of annexation, waive the city's right to challenge Santa Fe County's designation of Agua Fria as a traditional historic community, and convene with Santa Fe County the extraterritorial land use authority to make necessary ordinance changes.
- Approved an unspecified item related to the Extraterritorial Land Use Authority (ELUA) and Extraterritorial Land Use Commission (ELUC) discussion.

== Motions & Votes ==
- Motion to approve the agenda — Passed.
- Motion to approve the consent agenda (as amended) — Passed.
- Motion to approve the traffic enforcement program — Passed (Coun. Casset: Yes, Coun. Garcia: Yes, Coun. Bamonte: Yes, Chair Faulkner: Yes).
- Motion to approve an unspecified item related to the ELUA/ELUC discussion — Passed (Coun. Casset: Yes, Coun. Bamante: Yes, Chair Falner: Yes).

== Public Comment ==
No public comment period was held at the beginning of the meeting. However, councilors raised concerns about potential high-risk materials impacting water quality, the importance of a comprehensive parking strategy for Midtown, and the need to address housing affordability alongside job growth. During discussions on traffic enforcement, councilors emphasized the importance of public education and community service options. Regarding annexation, councilors expressed strong reservations about the county's previous Traditional Historic Community designation, viewing it as a tactic to prevent annexation and limit landowners' rights.

== Topics ==
- New Mexico Innovation Hub
- Budget Preparation Process
- Agua Fria Annexation
- Extraterritorial Land Use
- Workforce Development
- Midtown Campus Development
- Economic Diversification
- Affordable Housing
- Finance Director Search
- Fleet Management Recognition

== Full Transcript ==
going to get started. I'm going to count that staff is going to get Councilor Bamonte in live. Correct?

We are live.

Thank you. Let me know when you got Paul. So, I think we can start while you work on getting Paul involved.

I think I'm on.

Okay, perfect. All right. I'll call to order this hearing of the Finance Committee. Can we get a roll call, please?

Certainly, Madam Chair. Councilor Casset,

Here.

Councilor Castro presented.

Councilor Garcia,

Here.

Councilor Bamonte,

Here.

Chair Falner,

Here. Madam Chair, you have a quorum.

Thank you. And can we get an approval of the agenda? Anything from staff?

Madam Chair, no changes from staff today.

Anything from the committee?

Move to approve.

Second.

Roll call, please.

Jamie Casset,

Yes.

Councilor Castro,

Yes.

Councilor Garcia,

Yes.

Councilor Bamonte,

Yes.

Chair Faulner,

Yes. And Councilor Bamonte, we can't hear you that well.

Oh.

We have the approval of the consent agenda. Anything from staff?

Madam Chair, we have two items pulled this evening. Item 7F and Item 7J. Pulled by Councilor Cassett and Councilor Castro for 7F and Councilor Cassett for 7J.

Okay, great. Anything from the committee? Can I get a motion?

Move to approve as amended.

Second.

Can we get a roll call?

Councilor Cassett,

Yes.

Councilor Castro,

Councilor Garcia,

Yes.

Councilor Bamonte,

Yes.

Chair Faulner,

Yes.

And that motion passes. All right, we're moving on to public comment. Is there anyone in the chambers who'd like to make comments? Anyone online?

Madam Chair, we have no one present online this evening.

Okay, great. So, let's move on to presentations. New Mexico Innovation Hub. David Pittz, it's your floor.

Madam Chair, sorry. Mr. Pettz, is your mic on?

Yes, I should put it on.

Yep.

Councilor Bamonte was not able to hear any of that, unfortunately.

Sorry.

Sorry about that, sir. So, just starting, we've been in about a three-year process to define the needs of the state to diversify and grow our economy. And so three key issues came out. One was access to capital, and the State Investment Council has dedicated about $1.6 billion to venture capital firms to invest in the state, in our startup economy and so-called innovation economy. The New Mexico Economic Development Department has done a great strategy that we, the Innovation Hub, have aligned with in terms of focusing on specific industry sectors. So, aerospace, advanced energy, bioscience, and high-performance computing, including AI, are some of the key sectors that have been identified for investment.

The other area is workforce development, and that's really a critical area to develop the workforce for today and for the future, and to train our young people in New Mexico generally and in Santa Fe specifically, of how to keep our best and brightest here and give them career opportunities for today and into the future. Third key takeaway was infrastructure and facilities. And we surveyed innovation centers or innovation hubs around the country and around the world, and we had a few takeaways from that. One, New Mexico is not on the map. We don't have one facility that really draws together a center of gravity for our startup ecosystem and for to bring the labs and our universities together to help create those startups.

So, we put together the New Mexico Innovation Hub just about a year ago. We applied for a grant from the state of New Mexico, and we received a grant from the Economic Development Department that helped launch us, and that was announced in February. So, we have begun that here in the Midtown campus and working with Philip Jeze to work on the campus buildings that are available today. I'll read this through you because I'd like everyone to understand the objectives of the Innovation Hub to support economic development in the state and specifically with our location here in the city of Santa Fe. And that starts with developing a modern mixed-use campus that can support the creation and growth of companies with facilities, capital, talent, and a community to thrive.

One of the things we studied around the world is these innovation centers really bring people together, and post-pandemic, it's more important than ever to create that community and that community of our talent coming from the national laboratories and our universities and match them up with entrepreneurial talent. And this Innovation Hub is going to create a collaboration of ecosystem partners to deliver programming to support company development, entrepreneurship training, capital formation, and workforce development. And to that end, we have signed partners for the hub, including the Santa Fe Community College. They're moving their machinist training lab into the hub, and that's going to happen in the next 60 days. New Mexico State University Arrowhead Center, New Mexico Tech, UNM Anderson School, UNM Health Sciences, Los Alamos National Laboratories, the New Mexico Consortium, a variety of other industry organizations that are supporting the hub.

And we want to attract companies, entrepreneurs, and capital from around the world to Santa Fe, utilizing the attraction that Santa Fe already has. Let's use the DNA that we already have as a global destination to help bring these innovators to the city. You're all familiar with Midtown. And so this is an image that drills down on the specific site where we are. Benelis Hall, Driscoll, and Garson are what make up the Aspect Media Village today. The new build, as we're calling it, is where we will develop a live-work campus for the future, and in which we are under ENA right now to purchase those two sites from the city. Lot O, if you see Lot O, that is the lot that is currently in process of being transferred from ownership by the state to the city, which is absolutely fantastic because now it gives us really a comprehensive piece of property in a campus to build on.

This is a little overview shot to show you what's there today. And as you'll see outlined in red, there are a number of buildings and other areas that we will have to clear from the site in order to make it a buildable site. So, site readiness is a big issue among the state and finding sites that are ready for the shovel or shovel-ready as we say. This site is not shovel-ready yet. There'll be a large amount of investment to get it to that point. We have, we're moving forward, and we've hired an architecture firm from Denver, Colorado called Oz. And we chose them after a national search which included local New Mexico and Santa Fe firms. We chose Oz because they've developed college campuses, innovation centers, workforce training centers around the country with facilities at the Colorado School of Mines and the Colorado State University. So, they have deep expertise in not only designing buildings but designing them for these specific purposes.

So, we're excited. We've kicked off with them, and we've just started to do our conceptual drawings, and well, I'll just show you a few pictures of some of their work. They do some very exciting modern work. And in our survey around the country and around the state, we found that we just don't have these types of modern facilities in New Mexico today, much less in Santa Fe. So, in order to be on the map, we need these brand new, modern, purpose-built facilities. So, what you see here is the site plan of the sites we're looking to occupy. We've included Site O to give you a sense of scale of what that field of asbestos looks like. And so what we're looking at right now is about 75,000 square feet of lab flex space that's to the left and dark, and about 45,000 square feet of office space and convening space.

What we're finding with our facility at Benelvis now, there is enormous demand for convening space. So, we had the RDC in there for the last two days doing a pitch competition. We've had a quantum investors round table. We've had the city's entrepreneurship training programs taking place, and so we plan to build that, and in addition, we'll have a residence facility on the site as well. So, these numbers are in flux as we're fine-tuning the designs, but we're looking at about 80 units, housing units, and by the code of the master plan, 15% of those will be affordable. This will give you a better drill down on the facility, and we've been really, really pleased with the amount of demand Santa Fe has right now for this kind of space. We have leased or are just signing the final leases for 55,000 square feet of space.

So, when we started this project in the beginning of this year, it was largely vacant. Driscoll was vacant, and then Mr. Jez's property at Shelberger, the old tennis club, was vacant, and we first got companies into Shelberger because they needed that large space. And then Benelis filled up. We just signed the last leases to take all that space. And now we're looking at about 15,000 square feet of Driscoll. We have a company that is a spin-out from Lannel that is looking to lease that space. They do materials testing, and there's also interest from some of the scientific departments up on the hill who are looking for space to be part of Innovation Hub. So, the dark buildings to the lower left are that lab flex space where we see again great demand, and then in the near right will be the office and convening space followed by the residences.

So, our plan in terms of timing is we're in development currently, and as we get through the ENA and get to a DDA with the city, we will be ready to move forward as soon as that document is signed. We feel a great sense of urgency because we are in competition with the world on talent, capital, and technology, and I believe Santa Fe has the unfair advantage to be a winner in these areas. So, if we can act and act quickly, then we can take our place in this burgeoning field. This last image shows what Site O lot might look like with further development. There's institutional, we're hearing institutional demand for quite a bit of space here in Santa Fe, and the way we've just looked at that, again, these are initial site plans. We could fit about 3, 250,000 square feet of office space, and we would need a parking structure. In addition, all of Midtown really needs parking and a parking structure. So, this could be 800 to 1,000 vehicles in a parking structure there, which would not come cheap. So, that just kind of gives you a little a little taste of what a larger campus could be built out to be included. With that, I'll stop and be happy to answer any questions, and Philip is here to answer questions as well.

So, I'm going to start with Councilor Bamonte because he's virtual. Councilor, do you have anything you want to add or question?

No, Madam Chair, not at the moment. Thank you.

Okay, so let's go. Councilor Garcia, you want to go this way?

Sorry, I just feel so bad that I was doing these side conversations. I might as well ask you the questions directly, please. So, thank you so very much. Mr. Bettis, we appreciate you. The two questions that I have written down, I'm sure I'll think of more, is tell me more about this unfair advantage. Why does Santa Fe have an unfair advantage?

Madam Chair, Councilor Castro, we have a beautiful place to live that's a world brand, a global brand. People come from all over the world to come to Santa Fe to visit, and that can be used as an attraction to attract other talent and capital to Santa Fe.

Two, we have this really once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to develop this campus in the center of our city. As you know, with the master plan, the plan is to build a city within a city. Very, very few places have this opportunity to do that and build something new and modern. Three, because of our proximity to Los Alamos National Laboratory, we have tremendous world-class talent in areas of technology and science that are really the growth areas that we have for New Mexico overall, and they happen to be in Santa Fe as well. Those are a couple of the ones that come to mind.

Perfect. I do think that the labs and some of these larger organizations are a big support for what we're trying to do here. Tell me more about the materials testing. What kinds of materials? What are we looking at in terms of technical concerns?

Well, I'm not a scientist. I barely got through Algebra 1. But these are materials that are often being used in advanced energy projects. So we have, across all of New Mexico, great work that's being done in advanced energy. So what does that mean? Fusion energy. Because of the talent in Los Alamos, we have a lot of potential for developing fusion energy. So there are particular materials that are used in fusion, those fusion reactors. Aerospace and space. So materials testing for satellites and space vehicles. Those are the kinds of things we're hearing about.

And again, we're very excited for these. I would be a little bit concerned about some high-risk materials. I know we're having some concern with our airport, for example, and materials getting into our water. So, I just want to know a little bit more about the materials, if possible, that we're dealing with so we could properly prepare, right?

I think we were discussing here sidebar about the parking, right? Why so much parking? But we are, and this is more of a comment, but if you have any comments, please feel free to contribute. I think we want a walkable city, and so having centralized parking isn't just for your development. It's for the entire area, for the Midtown development and for the neighborhoods around. But please elaborate.

Yeah, the parking plan is not just for the development. It is for Midtown in general.

I would say that the first phase, we've developed surface-level parking, and we have a very...

Philip, make sure you're really in the mic, right?

Sorry. First, phase one, we've developed with surface-level parking and a very small parking count, probably half of what you would see outside of Midtown. And we agree and want to make it a walking environment. The same thing with my residential building that's coming out of the ground right now. We have one space per unit, which is unheard of here, but we have 60 spaces in our bike garage and shared bike parking. We're all about opening all of the community up to the retail that surrounds it so that people can walk and do their shopping, and we think that people really want to do that. But what he was illustrating on lot O is the first phase, once you have these people who are interested, which are the tech startups, bigger tech firms follow, and we're hearing people who actually may want to relocate a headquarters here where you could have 200,000 square feet. The problem is, with that kind of square footage, it would either encompass the entire campus if we were to do it with only surface-level parking, or if it wanted to have bigger buildings and be more vertical, we'd have to have a vertical parking garage. The city has also indicated to us that it's interested in having additional parking closer to the little zocalo that's being done so that when public events get done in the evening, people can come in and have that parking. I think what we're looking to do is kind of have our cake and eat it too, and trying to bring in a private firm that can subsidize that parking during the day, and then the parking garage can be empty and used by the public in the evening. So the home run here is to have a private tenant that comes in for headquarters and funds a majority or all of the parking garage that then has a public use afterwards. Maybe we get them to fund the capital, and maybe the city operates the parking garage. I mean, there are a lot of ways that the parking garage can work in a public-private partnership, and you bring somebody on who helps to finance it.

Wonderful. I think it's a great central location where we're going to start developing these projects. We already have the movie theater. We already have a restaurant there. So, we are going to need it. I do have a little bit of concern about the pressure in terms of housing that bringing an industry like that or a headquarters could be, but that is for us to deal with in long-term development. I would imagine, sorry, long-term planning. Is there any thought around that?

That's the best problem you could possibly have. Having more jobs to create more housing to create more jobs. It's the opposite of what we have now. Now, there's an overhang in the residential market of a couple thousand units that aren't being absorbed. The market's extremely weak, and you're going to see a plunge in the amount of permits next year and the following year because it's a scary time to be a residential developer right now. That's because there's not enough job growth to absorb those units. But, you know, the commercial part is the harder part. Getting jobs and getting career opportunities to the city is much harder than developing residential housing. So, we're going to do both. So, that site plan has a big residential building on it. It's a mixed-use. The whole concept here is to have people who can walk to work and provide housing for the people who are going to be coming here at the same time.

Wonderful. Just to close out my last comment, I want to make sure I'm understanding this properly. We will have 80 units, approximately 10 of which will be affordable. Is that correct?

15% as required. Just to pick up on Philip's comment too, I think the workforce development and training is woven through every aspect of the innovation hub. So any company or entity that's coming, we're asking them to provide internships, apprentices, training programs so that we have opportunities to keep our people here in town.

Perfect. Thank you so much, Mr. Bennis.

Thank you, Counselor.

Thank you so much, Madam Chair. Thank you, Mr. Pettis, for being here. Just for context and reference, Mr. Pettis sits on the Economic Development Advisory Committee. So a lot of these conversations are very interwoven into what we talk about with EDAC, with the fact that we lose so many of our college graduates who go off to college. They would love to come home. I know that I've given this spiel a thousand times of all my peers who would love to come home, can't find work. COVID actually shifted that in a really interesting way. But even so, those who weren't able to find virtual positions don't necessarily have the opportunities, and especially this conversation around high-paying jobs in a housing market that has always been extraordinarily high for our area. That said, I do think that this will be for us to figure out, not for you all, around how do we look at some of the communities that had a lot of really exciting innovation happen, including Los Alamos, to be perfectly honest, that way. Because, you know, we had a really, they have a big housing crisis there, and a lot of people can't afford housing there. But what happened in, you know, Silicon Valley and the Bay Area and some of these other, you know, Seattle, these tech hubs that just really grew so fast that they have outpriced a lot of the population. But I think that that's going to be an important policy choice that we have to be looking at. What's wonderful here is that we almost have this foresight of knowing that this is where we're gunning, what we're going for. And then being able to, you know, we already have the neighborhood stabilization plan going with hopeful man and some of these other pieces. So, tract O, interesting, has come up a couple times. I, so, and Cav, I see that you're here. You may be the person to talk about what is next with tract O. I don't, the current ENA does not include tract O. So, this is, or does it?

Does not.

Okay. Okay. Let's talk tract O for a moment here and what this starts to look like potentially.

Madam Chair, Counselor Cassid, thank you so much for the question. So, as you'll see on Wednesday night, we will have the conveyance of property, that being A, B, and D, and three first. And then tract O will be conveyed once, if you approve this memorandum of understanding, it will be conveyed once the remediation is completed by the state. So, we were able to negotiate that they would remediate that with statewide funds, and they've already assigned a project manager. We will get quarterly updates, but they want it out of their hands as quickly as possible.

Great. We want it cleaned. So, and so then at that point, would we be putting it out for, I forget what we, which RF we use for Midtown? Yeah. Request RFI, RFQ, RFP. Which one is not a Q? But will we be putting it out similar to how we've been doing with the other tracts in Midtown?

Yes, in a similar manner. So, this would be a direct disposition. After speaking to our Chief Procurement Officer, Travis, he's assured us that this actually falls outside of procurement, and we've been using direct disposition consultant JLL Jones Lang LaSalle to help us dispose of that in the way that they bring in nationwide attention as well as our local talent to go ahead and have a competitive process that's open, and we get the best contenders for that land.

Wonderful. Great. Glad to hear. Thank you again for all your work on that. I mean, it really, the fact that that is happening now is miraculous in my opinion. I don't have too many questions because I've, again, I've had the opportunity to have a lot of these really interesting discussions that are related but not necessarily exactly about the innovation hub. I would just recommend, we do have some recordings of some really interesting presentations in EDAC, if you all are interested. We had, what did we have? We had advanced manufacturing. We had the one that...

Performance computing.

Yep. High-performance computing. There was quantum. There was a word quantum somewhere.

Yeah.

Yep. Quantum was in the word.

Yes. Yeah.

And so, and then I would just also say that we are going to be hosting, or actually you all will be hosting us for EDAC on Wednesday, May something, 5th, I believe. First, first Wednesday in May, from 11:00 to 1:00. We'll be doing a walking tour. So, if anybody is interested, this is obviously a public meeting, so we don't have to worry about quorums or anything along those lines. So if anybody is interested in coming along, that will be just another opportunity to really, to really get on the ground and see what's happening here. I actually do have a question. And I do want to talk about parking for a minute because I think that there's, and you all may not have the answer to this right now, but I know that there's been conversations and a lot of the work that or the proposal already has a lot of live-work. There is already parking in the conceptual design. Are you looking at that model where if the, you know, the units are being used or the parking spaces are being used by business during the day, not necessarily needed for residential at night, that it would be open to the public?

Yes, counselor. I believe we could accommodate that depending on the space and the amount of places that are available to park because the commercial side, mostly at night, that would be empty. So I don't believe we intend to close that lot at all.

Wonderful.

That would provide parking as well. That's a good point.

Great. I'm happy to hear that. That's been something we've talked about in the downtown area, a little bit of, banks close at 5:00, and those lots are just there. And while I do agree the conversations around having a very livable, walkable area, representing many of the neighborhoods that are right around Midtown, they're actually really nervous about people coming and constantly parking in their neighborhood. So that balance of how do we get people to use public transit and walk and bike, et cetera. But we know a lot of people are going to drive, and so having the opportunity for them to park on the campus, I know that would be beneficial for many of my constituents who live in the surrounding neighborhoods. So, looking at those parking share models just from what's already here, I would be really interested in exploring as well as moving towards a, if we get to a parking garage, that'll be a fun conversation. I know there's a lot of really interesting ways that parking garages are no longer these awful concrete structures that don't have any other use. There are ways that they've been used as green spaces, as vertical gardens, as renewable energy sources. So, I think that that could be a really interesting conversation to have in the future that I would really want to look at.

Yeah, there's the counselor there. I'm glad you brought that up. There are a lot of opportunities that we're exploring right now. You mentioned renewable energy. Our intention is to put solar panels on all the rooftops, all the buildings we're developing, and obviously following all the requirements of the master plan for water capture reuse, so to make it as energy efficient as possible. We'd like to generate as much electricity on site as we can.

Awesome.

And thank you for mentioning my service on the EDAC. I will say over those years, many of those conversations have informed how we're doing this and why.

Well, that's really exciting. We have a lot of conversations about how do we make sure our resident advisory committees actually generate proposals and policies. So, I'm happy to hear that. And then, I'm sorry, one question following up after Councilor Castro's concern around materials. Cav, we're C2 zoned. We're a PUD. I'm sure we have some restrictions around what can be done in this area. Can you provide a little bit more insight there for individuals that are worried about, especially the conversation about Lannel? They can't develop pits here. So, that's not allowed with this zoning in case people were thinking that that was something that was going to occur. So, Cav, can you provide some more information?

Yes, of course, Madam Chair, Councilor Casset, that would not be permitted by the master plan. They are permitted to have office and research labs only. And then that change of use permit through land use would also assure that any sort of fire inspection or protection certificates are also acquired.

Wonderful. Thank you. Thank you so much. Really excited to come and visit on May 5th. Thanks, Madam Chair. Councilor Garcia.

Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you guys for being here. It really is important to have all this information. The first two issues, I'm not going to ask for any dialogue because this is just going to be statements or points. I know we've kind of worked on this before. I was part of a resolution that failed in previous years. It required every individual that was going to develop there to provide at least 30% of the housing. We wanted to remove the exempt this from the affordable housing inclusionary zoning that would require everyone to provide that. And so, just think about this. I know you'll be providing 15% as required under the rules, but I'd like to see how you guys could contribute a little bit more. I know it's an ask because how can we all share in it? One of our concerns was that if we only provide the bare minimum, I think you could probably even pay the fee in lieu of if you wanted to for your particular. So I do thank you for doing the 15%. And that might be under the negotiation between this development and the city. But one of our concerns was that all of the majority of the affordable housing units will end up being in the corner somewhere, and spreading it out throughout the whole property is beneficial. So, whatever you guys can do to just give a little bit more would help.

On the other part, the parking issue, I see that, you know, just take example the rail yard. That parking lot isn't always full, but it's three stories underneath, but when that place gets going, it uses every bit of it. And so the vision area of this area with activity is kind of that. And so, how that can be incorporated into the parking stuff, you know, theoretically we want to make it walkable, but the reality is that people here still have cars and they want to park. And so to not have people have to be far off. Another thing just to think about on your designs when you're moving forward. Back to maybe one of my questions, which would be overall benefit, how do we measure, how do we measure the overall benefit because once this is all said and done, it's buttoned up. We can right now probably put a metrics or a measurement of what we receive by the rail yard being fully developed out. What do we envision for this area that the innovation hub is going to be, not the whole campus because you're not taking the whole campus, but what kind of economic benefit do we get from this because that's where it's at for future years? You see Sawmill Market in Albuquerque or other areas or maybe other innovation hubs throughout the country that how do we measure that metrics of what we get back because that's really where our long-term investment is going to be.

Thank you, Councilor Garcia. Madam Chair, there are multiple benefits that will occur to the community by this development. First and foremost, the weeds and crumbling buildings don't pay taxes today, and they haven't for eight years. So, there'll be a tax base that will be created from this of both real estate taxes, GRT, and income taxes from folks who are coming to live and work here in the community. There'll be net new jobs created. Again, the weeds don't create jobs. And so we're going to be creating jobs here that by and large have not been in great numbers in Santa Fe. So by bringing in startup technology companies, we'll be able to create jobs from technicians or even custodial jobs to chief executives. We can train our students, our best and brightest in Santa Fe to stay and take those jobs. So you think about marketing people, salespeople, financial people to manage it, chief executive officers. These types of corporate jobs we don't see a lot of in Santa Fe, particularly doesn't hold that many corporations. So having the jobs, the taxes associated with them, and to keep our people who want to live in Santa Fe living here by having a vibrant community in the center of town, building the city within a city. Again, I've used the word once-in-a-lifetime opportunity. It really is. I can't tell you how many people have come for a tour that said, "I've lived in Santa Fe for 20, 25 years. I've only ever been here once." Or they say, "I graduated from the college. I've never been back." And so creating that vibrancy and community, I think, is also a great benefit. That's you can't put a dollar on that, but the other ones you can put a dollar on. So this is really what's driving us. And as I mentioned, being part of the EDAC, that was what I saw the need for here in our community.

Thank you.

I hope that answers your question, sir.

Yeah. And I know it's hard to put a dollar amount.

We'll put estimates on those as part of the DDA, sir.

Right. Right. And so, and that's difficult because I think the community say, "Well, we have this property and you guys are selling it on pennies on the dollar." That was one of my biggest heartburns when we first came to the initial one. And I know Philip, you're here, and I was one of the ones that was holding it back to saying, "Well, it was going to pass more than likely," but you know, had those questions and how do we put that, that confidence in the community that this is going to work. We can be our own worst enemy as a municipality too because we put so many restrictions on individuals or companies or corporations. I mean, I hear of companies that want to come into the city, but they won't because we have so many rules, regulations, and it's like, "I just go to Albuquerque and travel back and forth." And so, we're missing the boat on that. And I think we really need to through our economic development and our own policies, I think, again, we could be our own worst enemy for this. We could be the deal breaker. And so, we don't want to be that. I think we want to, we want to make this something that we can be proud of for in the future. And so, those numbers are great to have that again, forecasts are forecasts, but you know, if they build it, they will come, right? Yet we can also try and build it and then it just goes boom because of our partnership didn't work out. So, the last thing I would have is, you know, obviously from the city's perspective, what, what are the investments from the city side, because that's what we need to be very focused on. What is the cost and then how do we get the funding because that, that is the hardest part. You know, we can throw a dollar amount. The infrastructure is the biggest deal right now, putting in the, putting in the pavement, the curb and gutters, all the sewer, all that stuff. And until we have a good estimate of what that is, and partners, whether it's the state or even federal money, whatever it might be, wherever we can get the money from, you know, we work very slow. Private business moves fast because they can just move along. It's us municipalities that hold things back. And so those are the areas where I think we need to really focus on as a, as a governing body to work together to see how we get this done because putting dollar amounts to that and it could be 20 years from now. We don't want to see that because that's the other thing that'll kill this project. We're not working alongside with you. And so I think that's really important that we have all the data and all the information so we can make good conscientious decisions to make this something that we're proud of. And so yes,

More than a statement, and you can comment on that if you like.

Sure. Absolutely, sir. Madam Chair, Councilor Garcia, thank you. A couple of points on, as a municipality, you're charged to think a hundred years in advance, right, in the future. We're a 400-year-old community. So I think sometimes citizens think about property sales as they do for their own private self, right? So an individual citizen wants to sell a piece of property. They want to maximize their return because they're walking away.

They're not going to have that. What we're doing is we're developing an economic development project with the city that's going to benefit for 100 years plus. So I think the municipalities and folks like yourselves who run municipalities are thinking long-term. It's not about getting the last dollar out of the transaction. It's about laying the foundation for future growth in my humble opinion.

So the other piece is, if you remember, our ENA was approved because we're able to plug into all the existing infrastructure that Philip Jesuit updated and invested in on the south side of the campus. And so that's a main reason why we chose those two lots so that we didn't have to wait and that we can use all the infrastructure. Now some roads and sidewalks and curbs need to be built on the southern side in order to tie it together. It's all dirt, as you saw the other day, dirt roads and gravel.

So I think what's really exciting about this project is that we're able to move the southern side of the campus forward. We don't need to wait for the big $77 million, whole huge infrastructure plan. We can move that and then that can follow as that does. Is that helpful?

Yeah, I mean, it kind of maps out a bit of the process, but again, we still, I think, have a lot to think about from the perspective of a municipality and our investment in this, looking out at developing out the whole infrastructure of the whole, what is it, 64 acres?

Something like that.

Yes.

You know, big undertaking.

Starting here. So, I think that we need to really think about, you know, we see how hard it is just to finish out an intersection on South Meadows because of property issues and utilities and things like that. I wouldn't anticipate that in this property because we own it, but just kind of getting us ready for the obstacles ahead. I think that's just where I'm at with this. So, but I appreciate the beautiful presentation, talking about jobs. We need this. We need the opportunity for our younger generation to come in and want and be able to stay here and be able to earn an income that will keep them here. So,

I raised my children here. In some ways, this is a selfish endeavor, if I may be so bold. Yes.

Thank you. Yeah. My daughter's living in Los Angeles right now and I want her back here. She may not want to come,

But she'll have the opportunity at some point to say, "Hey, you know what? I can get a job down here." And that's the biggest reality. So, thank you.

Thank you.

Great. I want to check on Councilor Bamonte. Anything yet?

No, Madam Chair. I think everything's been answered. Thank you.

Okay. Councilor Cassett.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Following up on the conversation around, again, this, thoughts around this is such a big project and how we figure out how to lift this up. Deputy City Manager Phillips, this may be for you, but I know part of the conversation we've had around this, I mean, essentially this idea of like a financial packet, a funding packet, financing packet that's going to somehow come to us at some point. I know we've had this conversation, but as part of that has been these bids and TIDs that are reliant on there being economic activity on the campus. Correct.

Yeah. Thank you for the question. Yes, to your question, Madam Chair, members of committee, yes, we are talking about the tax increment financing or TIF option, which would create a baseline for assessed valuation. Then, as economic activity occurs over time and development occurs, it's built out and there's tax revenue generating activities, we'll be able to capture a portion of that increment. So there are some steps involved in setting up the TIF, which governing body will have the pleasure of exploring and then making some decisions on. We're also waiting for the infrastructure estimate. So I think we're about, we're about maybe two-thirds of the way there in getting the final estimate for what that looks like. We have asked about whether we could do this in a phased approach because $77 million in light of all of the other capital needs we have across the city is a big chunk of funding. So there's going to be some pretty impactful decisions that you all will need to make as we bring this forward in terms of phasing it and, you know, do you want to issue bonds for the entire amount? So the idea is that the tax increment financing revenues would pay down those bonds over time, but again, that'll be something that will come to governing body, I'm sure, in the near future for discussion and then looking at options and then potential action.

Okay. Wonderful. Thank you. That's helpful. And then I know also part of the conversations that we've had around land sales on Midtown has been, as Mr. Jesuit did, we cut down some of our land sale prices, but that is because we are asking developers to take on some of that infrastructure cost, which if my understanding, that was a big part of our agreement with you, right? Right, Philip? Am I remembering correctly? You did our P&M stuff or electric?

No, we had other community benefits that were part of our DDA. I think we're relying, and all the businesses that have just opened are relying on you to put infrastructure in, and hearing this now is a little, you know, a little bit eye-opening for me, but, you know, we're, one of the things that we wanted to mention is this project is a very timely project, and it's timely for two reasons. One, there's an incredible amount of financing that's coming out of the state right now to promote these types of industries, and two, these businesses want to come here. And three, we have the ability to phase the infrastructure in the southern part of the site. So, right now there's one or two streets which service all of our properties, and they're really only like two very large blocks. So, one of the things that we've been pitching is the ability for the city to come in and really start some of this infrastructure now so that it can service the businesses that are open and the residents that are going to be moving in in 60 to 90 days. And then, first of all, it shows the community what kind of great things can happen there. And secondly, it buys a lot of time for the subsequent phases, which other than David's, which is connected to a lot of my infrastructure, won't happen for many more years. So, we're hoping that the city and we together can come up with a phased plan that utilizes a much smaller capital contribution now for the streets that we've already put the infrastructure in. So we, we've put in, we

Okay. So you did do infrastructure.

We put in gas, electric.

Build the streets.

Not the streets. We put in, we brought in electric infrastructure to the south. We brought in gas infrastructure to the south. There's existing sewers in the south, and the south is basically the innovation hub and Aspect Media Village all the way down to Seringo. There's water lines. So unlike the northern part of the campus, which is everything north of those two places, we really just need street surfaces to be, and I think that's the opportunity that we're looking for the city to take advantage of. And it's partially because the timing for all of this, there's a tech boom going on right now that's driving a lot of this. So it's not, you know, it's not something that I think would necessarily work as well in five years. It may or may not.

Okay. Okay. Thank you for reminding me of all of that because that was a big piece of that conversation. So, I guess we'll get to have that one when we get to a DDA here. So, but that's all. Thank you. One more time, Council Busonte. Anything?

No, Madam Chair. Thank you.

Right. I will be brief because we have several more items to go into. First of all, I'd like to say that this is, this is an amazing asset that we have as a city, the Midtown property. One of the concerns that I have is the city tends to say they value something, but we don't fund like we value things. And this is an incredible opportunity. I know that the state has invested like $400 million into quantum technologies. This hub is a perfect location because it can draw people from Los Alamos and Sandia, people from Silicon Valley. We can draw a lot of people into Santa Fe, get New Mexico Tech. There's so much we can do and a lot of the opportunities we have in the innovation hub will not just employ PhD people. They will employ electricians, people who don't necessarily have a four-year degree but have a trade skill. We can give them an opportunity to make a living with healthcare and some other things, right? So, this is, this is bigger than just like Los Alamos and Sandia. This is an opportunity for the city and I do believe that the south entrance is important in that you're kind of ahead of the rest of the Midtown project. And I think that if we invested in some infrastructure for this part of the project that is already kind of vibrant and moving, that it would be a good thing because I will tell you, if I was coming out of Silicon Valley, if I was Los Alamos or Sandia and I saw the way the streets are and I saw the way the property looks, I'd be like, the city of Santa Fe isn't on its A-game, right? That doesn't mean we're not. That just is how I would perceive it if I was looking at investing and being a part of something like this innovation hub. If you say innovation, you expect it to look a certain type of way. And I personally will be fighting for infrastructure that will help get the south part of the property where it needs to be in order to draw more businesses in. I would also say that I really want to appreciate Carly, all the work they've been doing. Super asset. Super asset. And so, I think I just know you have a champion in me and I'm pretty certain on the committee in general. And so, thank you for making your presentation and hopefully we will have more presentations and the city will make some good decisions about how we support a vital asset like this vital asset.

Thank you, Madam Chair. And just one last comment on the timing. I think it's very important to note the state has allocated $1.3 billion to be invested in economic development over the next three years. And our biggest competitor for those funds is the city of Albuquerque and Bernalillo County, and they are moving very aggressively to capture as much of this as possible. The innovation hub and the campus creates a landing pad for that capital in addition to people. So we, the city of Santa Fe, we want to fight to get our fair share of that state funding as well. With that all, thank you very much for the time and attention that you've given us.

All right. Just let us know what we can do to help.

Okay. Next.

Next item.

Madam Chair, we have item 7F, request for approval of a general services agreement with Janoptic Smart Mobility Solutions LLC for automated speed and noise enforcement services in the total amount of $4 million for a five-year term. And this evening we have Ben Valdez, Deputy Chief of Police with us for

And I believe Councilor Cassett and Councilor Castro pulled this item. So we'll start with Council Castro.

Thank you so very much. And as DC Valdez gets down, I'm going to wait and see if he wants to give us a presentation or any general information about the program.

Madam Chair, Councilor Kaso, I think this is a familiar topic.

We've talked about it over several years. This last iteration was asked by the previous administration for us to identify money, which was granted during the budget process, to bring automated speed and sound enforcement devices to our community. Much of it has been at the request of members of the community that have been frustrated, fearful because of unsafe driving related to speeding and also quality of life issues related to loud exhaust noise.

Thank you so very much. And one of the reasons that I pulled this item in particular was some details around having stationary cameras versus mobile cameras. There is the option for both, but my understanding in those presentations is we're only doing mobile cameras. Is that correct?

Yes, Councilor Costa. We're going to be deploying six mobile devices in our community. Three will be assigned to the north side and three will be assigned to the south side. Of those six, all six are going to have speed enforcement devices and two of those devices will also have sound enforcement. So we'll have three speed and one sound enforcement platform on the south side and then the same on the north side as well.

And really quickly, for those of us who aren't lucky enough to know why we need sound enforcement, why would we need sound enforcement on some of these? A lot of people have heard a lot of loud noises after we came out of the pandemic related to exhaust noise. The council has done a lot of work to increase penalties to discourage folks from putting modified exhaust on their vehicles. Done a lot of research concerning even emission testing to see if we can maybe require that in Santa Fe. That has not been adopted yet. But we've done education. The police department has done enforcement as well to let people know that modified exhaust in our community is not permitted. Many have had to go see our municipal court judge to demonstrate that they've made repairs in their vehicle. But unfortunately, sometimes people still roll the dice and hope they don't get stopped by our officers.

And sorry, that was going to be my next question. Perfect segue. There's some concern, I imagine, in the community that we're going to be punitive to folks who can't afford some of these fines. What are other remedies? What is the process if I were to get a fine for a loud muffler or exhaust?

So, there's two options. One, you could pay the civil penalty. For the speeding violations in most general areas, it's a $50 fee. If it's in a school zone, then it's a little bit higher. I think it's like $100. For the sound, it's a bit more. I think it's somewhere around $500 for the first offense. But if folks don't want to pay the fee, there's an option to complete community service. And if someone does request to do that in lieu of paying the fee, then the city will pay for the fine. And the person that requests the community service will be directed to one of our nonprofits in our community. That's one next thing we're going to be working on as we launch this program. So we're looking at things like the Food Depot or even our Parks Department to help with community cleanup. Something that's going to be impactful for the city of Santa Fe that's going to again give them purpose, let them contribute back and again hopefully learn their lesson and but give back in a good way. We don't want it to be punitive, but that was a change in the ordinance that was done around 2020 to allow for community service in lieu of a fine.

Thank you so much and thank you for saying parks. I know that we've been getting a lot of emails about the weeds, so we could definitely use the help. I will pass it over to Councilor Casset for other concerns, but I appreciate your time.

Councilor Casset: Thank you so much. Thank you, DC Valdez, for being here. As you know, we've been on this journey before. And so I do have a couple of questions of some of the issues and concerns that I had had in previous iterations of this type of proposal that unfortunately wasn't able to get answers to last time and that didn't move forward. I know this has been a really big challenge because we do have a lot of requests from the community for this type of technology. This technology can sometimes come with some concerns around data and data ownership. From what I am understanding, this data will be kept and stored by Genoptics. Correct?

Councilor, on the contract, if you go to item 5.2.1.2.1 under program data, it clearly states that the customer shall retain all right, title, and interest in and to any information, data, study findings, or report created by Genoptics related specifically to our program and our operation. So that program data is going to be ours.

Okay.

Entirely. Genoptics may utilize our name to say that the city of Santa Fe is utilizing this technology, but that's all they can share with other folks if they're going to be utilizing our name for bargaining. But the program data and everything attributed to it, it's going to be the property of the program, which means the city of Santa Fe.

Okay. I thought I'd read somewhere, and maybe I had the wrong party that was in charge, that essentially said that we were going to, that it was going to be held for three years. Was that us holding it for three years? So, Genoptics will hang on to it for three years in case there's any concerns that come forward for torts or things of that matter, or if there's a challenge that exists. If we need it to be held for a longer period of time, we can let them know, "Hey, this is going through a process, so hang on to this data." Most of it's going to be held and it's going to be aggregated and de-identified. So it won't be tied to a specific name. It will be just bulk numbers and data.

Okay. And you said most of it. What would be a scenario where it would not be aggregated and de-identified? If it is going through a challenge or a legal process or?

That would be where it would be. So if it's going through the civil process where someone is challenging it or we receive a tort because of it, that would not be de-identified, but it'll be available for the court process.

Okay. And so, with Genoptics, so we own it. It's ours. They are holding it though. What are they allowed to do with it or not? Can they sell it to ICE? I mean, let's let me stop beating around the bush. Can they sell it to ICE?

Should have led off with that, Councilor, but the answer is no.

Okay. Thank you. I mean, it is helpful. And is there, and in general, can they sell our data to anybody else or our residents' data to anybody else?

No, Councilor, that has been something that we've expressed to our contractors and it's something we included in our RFP as well to let them know, like, this is our data and we have to give express permission for them to release any of that information.

Okay. Sorry, I need to tell my mom to give my kid medicine. Sorry, that was that alarm. Good. I'm glad to hear that because I know that was a big point of conversation. So I really appreciate that you guys heard us loud and clear and have made those changes. I know that we've talked about this with other technologies and so I'm happy to see that consistency across the board. A couple other things. So payment of fines, 35% goes to the company. If community service is chosen, then obviously those individuals are not paying a fine. I imagine Genoptics is not going to accept that as part of their payment. How are we going to fund those citations that, and community service is chosen? We still are on the hook for what would 35% of that fine be? Could be up to, I mean, we go pretty high with those mufflers.

So with the mufflers, I'll see what the muffler violation is, but I think we go up to five. Now, the way it's going to work out is 50% goes to the state right off the bat. So, for a $50 fine, the state gets 25 bucks. I think it's 15 or $17 of that goes to the contractor. Then we get the rest of the 25 bucks for the program. When we put the request together and the budget was approved to fund this program, there is a million dollars that was allocated to this program. So, when we first get started, if everyone says they're going to take community service, we have money to cover those expenses. Then anything that is generated through penalties that are paid, that's going into the program, will be kept in a balance. So if people do want to utilize community service, we can pay the contractor for their service, we can pay the state their portion, and we can continue to keep this running.

DC Valdez, I'm so happy by this answer because last time I asked that question in 2021, there was no. So, thank you because I'm very excited and that was, I just remember that conversation and there was a lot of like, "Well, we'll save money in parks maybe from community service." And so, thank you. Appreciate that.

Let me thank the council because they're the ones that put forward the funding for this, which made that possible. So that was a huge help.

Well, wonderful. Well, wonderful. Thank you. Thank you. I do really, really appreciate that. The other question that we had last time that still concerned about is that at what point is a citation given? So I know in the previous iteration of this program, it was like, as soon as you're going 10 miles an hour over, that citation is being delivered. My concern had to do with who was, what is the word I'm looking for? Basically, who's, who's setting up the technology? How are we making sure that it is at the right, that the, gosh, there's a word for this.

Calibration.

Calibration. Thank you. So who's calibrating and we did not have the ability to basically check their calibration with the previous iteration with this? Obviously with our noise ordinance, we have specific decibels that are identified, but with speed, is it going to hit at one over, five over, 10 over? And how do we make sure that it is calibrated correctly because obviously there is a financial motivation for more citations from the company itself.

Councilor Casset, so whenever we deploy the trailers, we have to coordinate with the company and they're going to train our folks that are doing the deployment. Once it's set, they're working with the technology folks back at Genoptics. They're going to calibrate it, make sure that it's properly calibrated on site. It has the calibration tools on board. Once it validates that it's properly calibrated, now we know that any violation that's over 10 miles per hour in that zone will be a violation. In addition to that, there's going to be quality control where our staff are going to be trained to view the violations, ensure that the technology is working correctly and identifying the proper vehicle. And if they meet that criteria, then a violation is going to be issued and it'll be put in the mail. If they can't validate it or if there's any question about it, they're not going to validate it. They want to make sure that it is set up for a valid violation. And at that point, they'll be just logged as unable to validate or improper identification of a violation and nothing will go in the mail on that one.

Wonderful. So, we will have the opportunity to say, "Hey, we know the technology is working correctly and we can test that."

Yes, Councilor. And every time we set up the device, they validate that it's calibrated because it's not beneficial to us, the city, but also the contractor to have equipment out there that is not properly working or properly calibrated.

Wonderful. Thank you again. Much better answer than last time. Thank you.

So, I know, right? Thank you. I mean, honestly, I really do appreciate this because I know this was a really robust conversation and this has come up multiple times. So I just love feeling heard about all the things that we were concerned about. And then we had also talked about previously that we weren't trying to do big gotchas. We were going to put up signs that are like, "Hey guys, you're coming up against the speed." And part of it was we know that there are people that are speeding because they are being reckless and breaking the law. We also know that there are people that just, you know, you're on Zia and Zia's built to go.

Zia is built to go 55. The speed limit's 35. But let me tell you that road.

Coverage for another day.

Exactly. But so are we still going to be doing the same type of really trying to do a lot of public education? Are we going to do warnings or are these going to be unmarked when they're being deployed?

Minutes, Counselor.

So, Counselor, first of all, when we start with the program, we're going to do a big media blitz, educate folks on what the devices are and what we're trying to achieve, and that's a change of behavior with both unsafe speeding in our community, but also loud mufflers that are causing quality of life issues. So, that's going to go for about a month. Once that's done, then live violations will be issued, and we're going to go above and beyond. So, for one, I'd encourage everyone to follow us on our Facebook and Next Door. So, we're going to put out the locations of where they're at. Secondly, when we deploy them, there'll be signage on both sides of the device. And if all that fails, and the paper, we're going to encourage them to and ask them if they want to put in the paper. That'd be great, but it's within their purview. But this is going to pretty much exhaust all arguments that I didn't know was there. We're going to say, "Did you go to our Facebook? Did you go to Next Door? Did you see the signs ahead of it that says warning automated speed enforcement ahead?" And then there's going to be a big trailer with a solar panel on it that's going to be a dead giveaway. So, if you're not paying attention, there's other things at play, but yes, we want people to pay attention and drive safer. So,

Wonderful, wonderful. Well, I have one more question. I'll obviously yield the floor for now, but again, DC Valdez, thank you. Thank you. Thank you. I really, really appreciate how much of that feedback and those conversations were really incorporated into this proposal. I can tell that it was really thought out and both addressing the variety of concerns that we have throughout our community that sometimes can feel like they're opposing. But I really, I just really want to tell you how grateful I am for the development of this program. So I will yield the floor for the moment. Thank you, Council.

Hey, Counselor Garcia.

Thank you, Madam Chair. All I've got to say is that our community is already requesting this on Airport Road in Jaguar because we got a really nice drag strip there that's been paved and so including officers out there patrolling. But, I'm excited to see how this will work. And it really comes to us making it work. You know, we can put things out there all day long and if we don't make it work, then it just doesn't. So that's all I had as far as a comment. Thank you.

Thank you, Counselor Bamonte.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I'll follow up Counselor Garcia's comment. I know it's very much requested here right off of Zia and St. Francis, especially on a Friday and Saturday night. You can hear them for miles. So I just want to say thank you to everyone who has made sure that this program is moving forward. I would say of the emails and conversations that I have with people during the week, this is probably in the top three asking when is this coming, when can we expect this. So once again, just want to say thank you to everyone who has made forward movement on this. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Okay. Thank you. Counselor Castro.

I do have a couple more comments. Thank you so much. So this is intended to potentially help out our force, have a little more capacity, and I know that there's been some concerns around other areas. I'm just going to plug for my own concerns, the weight enforcement on some of our roads. There's some really big infrastructure costs that we could incur by some of this overweight. And so I'm really hoping one of the reasons that I'm a proponent of this is one, we're not taking any photos of individuals. We're only looking at license plates. Is that correct, DC? Right.

And the second is that we are now the owners of the data and we are a lot more in control of where that's going to be used. But also that we need to be able to use our law enforcement in the way that folks are requesting. So this is a virtual assistant and we're going to be able to use our other folks to potentially enforce some of our other laws. Is that the hope?

That's my hope and I'm really trying to talk the interim chief into transferring folks to the traffic unit and the DWI unit. Right now we have like six officers that are trained as DWI officers. That is a big issue that's been plaguing our community. In addition, I know earlier this year we had a lot of folks that fortunately died as a result of a vehicle crash because they were not wearing seat belts. So, this will give us an opportunity to address those other issues as well. But we're not going to be abandoning our efforts in our traffic unit. So, staffing is looking better. We're down to three vacancies we can fill. We should be hopefully full next month. I'm hoping as long as we don't lose any more folks. So, I'm hoping that we can at least hold the line with that, use these devices, transfer folks where they need to for traffic and DWI so we can make some headway in that area and really push the education part. I think a lot of it is some people don't know the consequences or the dangers frankly of not driving safe. So that'll give us some chance to do some outreach in those areas.

Thank you so much. And then just a comment that one of the ways that we're trying as a city to reduce some of these drag strips is road diets. So when you hear road diets, it means slower cars, more safety. Thank you so much. And I'll yield the floor to my colleague.

Counselor Cassid. Thank you so much. All right. The one last thing that I want some clarity on was on page 10 of the packet, page seven of 18 of the contract. It's 5.1.3 and it says, "Except as otherwise provided in this section 5.1, the parties expressly disclaim all warranties of any kind, whether express or implied, including but not limited to the implied warranties of merchantability, fitness for particular purpose, title, and non-infringement, as well as all warranties arising by usage of trade, course of dealing, or course of performance." And then B, this one I think was one that raised my little antenna. "JSMS makes no warranty that the services, the equipment or the system will meet customers requirements or that the services and systems will be uninterrupted, timely, secure or error-free. Nor does JSMS make any warranty as to the results that may be obtained from the use of the services, the equipment or the system. The program data and program materials are provided as is without warranties of any kind." Now I know with this technology there can sometimes be challenges and this is why you've talked about verification that has to happen at the police department level of making sure that systems are working and making sure that you can verify that there was an actual violation. But this still did cause me a little bit of alarm in terms of, you know, I'm assuming that if we have faulty equipment, are we going to be able to get that replaced? But it also kind of raised some alarm that I'm going to guess they had some challenges in other locations that there potentially there were citations that were given that maybe were not appropriate. So I do know this is emerging technology. We've had this conversation quite a bit. It is not perfect and I think that the community needs to know that it's not perfect. So one, what does this really mean in legal, you know, from legal ease to normal human speak around what guarantees we have from the company and how the equipment is going to perform? And then you did already touch a bit on what's in place for us to make sure that we are ensuring that it is a valid violation before we are doing out citations. That's kind of a double question. If there's anything else to add on that second part, please do. But sounds like you covered it. So the first part around what we can reasonably expect to receive as part of this package.

So with the equipment again, if they have equipment that is not working correctly or it's showing errors for us, there's a portion of this where we're going to have them out there 80% of the time. To be honest with everyone here, we're going to have them out there 100% of the time because we want to make that difference. But if there's a piece of equipment that is either showing an error or there's an issue, when that error is there, that's when they can't cover with the warranty. Right? So that's why it's good for us to verify both by looking at the violation and then also looking at the calibration of the device to say is it registering where it needs to be and then we can validate the violation. Now the warranty is going to be there. So or there's no warranty because let's say we have human beings there, they make an error, right? Someone challenges it and they prevail. Just because they prevail in that one doesn't mean that the entire system is not working properly. Maybe there's something that's off with calibration, but they're going to work with us to get that result. Also, for deployment, if there are issues with deployment where equipment gets damaged by weather or other items that affect the calibration, if we do identify that or it does a self-check and brings that up, then they'll flag it. And if anything comes through and let's say our people didn't catch it and they issue a violation, then that's where that would come into play.

Okay, got it. Thank you so much. I appreciate that. Thanks, Madam Chair. That's all.

Okay. Anybody else?

Okay, so what I will say about what Counselor Cassid just brought up, one of the failures in the system is that there's no face recognition. And so what happens in other cities is it doesn't recognize the face. So then the owner of the vehicle can say I wasn't driving the vehicle. And then it doesn't matter because you can't prove it at that point. That's a side note. Can we get a motion? Move to approve.

Second.

Any more discussion? Hey, let's get a roll call, please. Counselor Casset.

Yes.

Counselor Castro. Counselor Garcia.

Yes.

Counselor Bamonte.

Yes.

Chair Faulkner.

Yes. And that motion passes. Thank you. Can move on to the next item. And thank you, DC Valdez, as always. So, we have item 7J, consideration of resolution number 2026-TBD, sponsored by County Commissioner Lisa Kakari Stone, County Commissioner Adam Fulton Johnson, Counselor Al Alma Castro, Counselor Patricia Fagali, and Mayor Michael Garcia.

a joint resolution directing staff to bring forward an amendment to the settlement and annexation phasing agreements to terminate phase three of annexation, to waive the city's right to challenge Santa Fe County's designation of a traditional historic community of Agua Fria, and to convene with Santa Fe County the extraterritorial land use authority to make any necessary extraterritorial land use ordinance changes to effectuate the city and county's decision to terminate phase three of annexation. We have Heather Lamboy, Land Use Director, with us this evening.

**Councilor Cassidy:** Great. Councilor Cassidy, you pulled this. We'll start with you. Thank you so much, Madam Chair. I do want to say right off the bat that in general, when it comes to annexation, I think that there's been a large conversation around Area 1B, and I am more than happy to not annex this area. I think that when I had sat on the annexation negotiation team, there were concerns about the city's ability to pay for this, to conversations around how the roads are not up to our code, and we have regulations around not accepting roads unless they are up to city code and what that was going to mean. The complexities around this are immense, not to mention that there is a large portion of this population that does not want to be part of the city. So I want to be very clear that I am perfectly fine with not annexing.

I had two areas that I have some concerns about. One, and my memory is a little bit fuzzy, but there was conversation around money that the county was supposed to give the city for drainage issues, I believe, on West Alameda, and that was somehow tied to these annexation conversations. I don't know if it's part of the original agreement or if this just somehow got wrapped in. I didn't see it mentioned, but I do have some concern around this not allowing us to continue to explore what that agreement needed to be. I know that there was something we had to fix. We didn't fix it, and the county didn't pay. There was a lot of back and forth as to whose problem it was, whose fault it was, but in the end, it didn't get fixed, and the cost has gone up. I think that there were some pretty valid arguments on both sides as to whether the city or the county was responsible for the delay in this. So I don't want our ability to negotiate dollars for fixing Alameda to go out the door. Does this do that?

**Councilor Casset:** Chair, I will just do a little intro and then hand it over to Director Lamboy. But we were actually very clear in the negotiating team that we didn't want to prescribe too much to staff. So the things that we were talking about in terms of relationship with county and city are on the resolution. Anything else is actually still able to be negotiated. We have not set any final decision. We will see the final agreement at the governing body before there's any final decision.

**Director Lamboy:** Thank you, Chair Faulkner, Councilor Castro, Councilor Cassid. Those are really good questions, and actually, I did not know about the money issue, and certainly I do know about the concerns regarding drainage on that corridor. It is a big issue. So I will be happy to do research on that. I'd also like to point out that this is just a start. It's just a resolution to begin a process. So it will be going through the extraterritorial land use authority as well as the extraterritorial land use commission. So the commission is comprised of planning commissioners from both jurisdictions, and then it gets to the elected officials, the county and commissioners, and the city councilors. So it would be great. I'm taking notes to know all of the concerns that you have so that we can make sure to address them.

**Councilor Cassidy:** Okay. Wonderful. Wonderful. Thank you both. That makes me feel better about that one. The other one does have to do with challenging the designation of a traditional historic community. Just for a bit of background for those of you who are not here on what happened here, there were confidential negotiating meetings that I cannot reveal what happened in those, obviously, because they're confidential. But essentially, it was a team of myself and former Councilor Lindell, former Commissioner Hansen, and Commissioner Hughes. We had gotten to a place where we were ready to bring out a proposal when I get a call from Commissioner Hughes saying, "By the way, you need to pay attention because we're about to try to basically..." So there was this petition that nobody had discussed with us around this becoming part of the traditional historic community. I understand that there are a lot of members there that would like to be part of the traditional historic community. My understanding was that because this actually prevents annexation from the entire area. My biggest issue with this was one, the manner in which it was done was, for lack of a better word, chaos, and it really did not follow what we felt were proper processes.

But the other piece that I was really concerned about was it one did not allow some of the landowners in there who would want to be part of the city to petition us. So it was really trying to prevent other landowners from being able to petition the city if we did not move forward with annexation. But two, when we were looking at the state statute of designating a traditional historic community, from my opinions and from the city attorney's office and from a variety, it did not meet those standards. So I'm struggling with this one because I guess the concern becomes whose job it is to police other municipalities or counties at this point from doing things that potentially are not within state statute. The reason that we had the ability to challenge this was because it did potentially impact us either now or in the future. So I've been struggling with this one.

Now, I already know probably some organizations or some landowners within this area that if they do designate, they will go ahead and challenge it. But I just have a lot of concerns around this because it does almost create this precedence for if they don't want us to annex, rather than dealing with it through the appropriate channels, which is this. This is absolutely the appropriate channels and these conversations of applying this idea of a traditional historic village. I mean, and it was really like, "Oh, well, you know, once upon a time, people gathered berries and food here." I'm like, "Well, that's literally every single part of this community." I mean, the logic was really hard to follow. So I do have a concern around this because I don't want this to be a situation where in the future if there are other annexation conversations that, you know, we've set this precedence. Again, I struggle with the idea, is that our job to police this? I mean, it does actually impact us. It only specifically discussed this area. But I am struggling. This is the only piece of this that I am really struggling with because it really just was such a tactic to not allow us to have these really important conversations and to prevent other landowners from the area from being able to petition the city. So I don't know, maybe if there is some piece in this of adding in like, "Hey, we want to give those landowners that want to petition. I want to give them the opportunity to do that." Honestly, I don't know if we want to take it, but I want to give the opportunity.

**Councilor Casset:** We're running up on minutes, so I'll just answer. Feel free to respond, and then Director Lamboy, if you want to follow up. But this was a really important discussion in particular around the negotiating team, but also in the community input session that we did at the Food Depot recently. So we're not in any way trying to skirt our responsibility, but I think the crux of the decision for most folks, and especially in the community input session, was this idea of policing. I think folks at the city really feel that that jurisdictional distinction between decisions made by the county and decisions made by the city is important. And one thing that in our discussion that night, we made very clear was it is not the city's decision whether or not this area comes into the traditional village or not. That is very much a Board of County Commissioners decision, and we don't want to step on their authority. So we didn't want to enter into the conversation of what the traditional village might look like, but we definitely wanted to leave the door open for folks who wanted to be annexed into the city. And so in those conversations and in the discussions, that still is a possibility that hasn't been taken off the table by this resolution in any way.

**Director Lamboy:** Chair Faulkner, Councilor Casset, I mentioned to Commissioner Kakari Stone that there is an existing traditional village plan for the traditional village of Agua Fria that has a map associated with it, and that it would be in their interest to engage the community because certainly this was a smaller group of residents and did not engage the entire community that would be impacted. And she seemed to be open to that idea that the county would embark on a process to update that plan. And all of the entire time in all the discussions, we have really been open to making sure that the petition, the ability to petition for annexation. We have very specific criteria in the city code that could allow for that, that that can remain an open question and will not be closed off by any type of community plan that is associated with a traditional village.

**Councilor Cassidy:** Okay. Thank you. And then just for clarification, obviously, as you said, this is putting forward a process. Times up. Can you pause so we can give the other shot? Thank you. We'll come back to you, Councilor Bamante.

**Councilor Bamante:** Thank you, Madam Chair. I don't have any questions at this time.

**Councilor Cassidy:** And just point of information, Mike, could we get a timer on the clock so we can sort of police ourselves a little bit? Thank you.

**Councilor Garcia:** Thank you, Madam Chair. I just a comment. This is a very important topic. I mean, I know that the topic around annexation is a difficult one because we, Councilor Faulkner and I, deal with this day in and day out over us annexing areas that were previously county. And for whatever reasons, obviously for the reason stated, is that roads, infrastructure, sewer, I mean, you name it, we don't adopt because it's not up to our city code and our city standard. And so I had a lot of heartburn over this annexation in the past few years over why do we want this because it's going to be a big issue and a huge undertaking. We can't afford that. So those are my comments on this, and so I do support this resolution. And I do understand and realize the concerns, the real concerns, because I know Councilor Cassid worked very heavily on this for how many years? Over a year. And it's like, "Wow, okay, how much time did you waste on that?" Not waste, but how much education did you get over it? And so I think that's the reason why there's you're passionate about the questions and knowing and so on and so forth. And so I think in future years, maybe there is a conversation for this, but at this point, I think the whole reason why this is brought to us today is because we can't deal with it right now, not with what we've got going on. So, thank you, Madam Chair.

All right, sir. Cassid, back to you.

Thank you. Just a procedural piece. The 10-minute rule is not an automatic rule. We normally invoke it, so just for the future, that'd be helpful for me. So, when this resolution passes, with the conversations with the county, at this point it's a bit of a handshake, and although there are different parties at the table, you can see why I might be a little hesitant with handshake agreements. After, as Councilor Garcia said, a lot of time and energy spent towards having a giant blow-up that was very unnecessary, are they going to give an option to those landowners to take a look at this before they go ahead and just decide that this is a historic? I mean, and again, back to that conversation around policing, but there are also landowners that are there because they assume that this would be part of the city because we were supposed to annex and we didn't. This is on us, so I don't want them to lose that opportunity. To Director Lambo's, I'm not even sure they'll qualify, but I do want them to have the option to explore that.

And I think, so I'm trying to be cautious to not break any confidentiality in negotiations, but what we're seeing in front of us as the first step really is the concrete things that we feel are important to lay out. The rest is really going to be up to the expertise of staff. And the staff that was in the room during those negotiations, I think, understood the sentiment of the group and how we wanted to find middle ground and make sure that the folks who owned parcels were part of the conversation of the future plans of this area.

And will you be able to be part of that as the final agreement is?

So, this governing body will actually, along with the Board of County Commissioners, will see the final agreement before anything moves forward. But in terms of like the conversations as it's developing, will you be able to be part of that like monitoring piece as part of the negotiating team, like that other community or those landowners are included in this conversation?

We will, and we are also hoping to have plenty of public meetings and community input sessions so that all of us can be a part of that conversation.

Okay, that does make me feel better. So, thank you.

If I may, sorry, Director, Councilor Cassid, there also will be public hearings associated with the Ilooka and the Alua, the extraterritorial commission and authority. So, not only are we going to have these public meetings, but actually very specific legislative process that where there'll be additional input offered.

Right, when because that's going to have to go through that process again just to change the annexation agreement, or no, I thought that was just part of if we actually wanted to annex. We have to go through the process to change the agreement. Great.

And just point of information, that was my question. Could you clarify this third point, why we need the extraterritorial land use authority?

Chapner, Councilor Castro, the reason is that one is a recommending body and the other one actually renders the decision. So, similar to our planning commission and governing body setup, it is set that way. There's also probably the AUA would have a reporting requirement to the governing body and the Board of County Commissioners, but there are representatives from each body on that authority.

And when this annexation agreement was entered into, this body existed and that was the body that approved it. So, we needed to sort of reconvene that body so they could undo what they did. Is that correct? Correct. And also maybe add things that may not be addressed clearly as a result of what we're doing now. So, that's going to be an an important piece. And the follow-up was in each jurisdiction. There was an ordinance that was adopted here with the City of Santa Fe. There was an ordinance adopted with the Santa Fe County as well. So, that's the follow-up that this body, the governing body, would have beyond the ILUA.

And just so for the members of the public, the ELO, the extraterritorial land use commission, is a combination of planning commissioners from the city and planning commissioners from the county. The extraterritorial land use authority is a combination of city councilors and planning commissioners. On the Elook, the city has the majority. On the UA, the county has the majority, if I'm remembering correctly. Is that the?

Yes. Okay. Correct.

Just so we all remember that part. Okay. Well, I have no other questions or comments about this, but Councilor Casher does make me feel a little bit more appeased that as part of this conversation there is going to be a lot of this process as well as yourself and Councilor Faggali still at the table. So, thank you. Okay. Anybody else? Can we get a motion? Approve.

Second.

Any more discussion? Can we get a roll call, please? Councilor Casset?

Yes. Councilor Castro?

Councilor Garcia, Councilor Bamante?

Yes.

Chair Falner?

Yes. And that motion passes. All right. Next item, please. We have item nine, matters from staff. Anything from staff? Yes. Thank you, Madam Chair. Maybe just a few items to mention. We are getting close on the finance director search. While I've enjoyed serving as acting finance director and the finance team is amazing, I will be excited to bring on a finance director and help transition some of those duties. We were named one of the an honorable mention at 100 Best Fleets recently, which is the National Fleet Association, Fleet Management Association. So, that was very exciting. That's a nationwide conference that was held in Cleveland. We applied to become one of the 100 Best Fleets. We didn't make it on that list, but our team met with the evaluators and looked at all the different criteria that we need to do to just up our game. So, we'll go for it next year. But being an honorable mention is still an honor and I'm really excited about the work that our fleet team in finance has been doing to implement professional standards and new technologies. We are deep into budget preparation, and I know that's an item later on in the agenda. Staff has been working really well with the departments to just pull together the different pieces for that document. Our plan is to get it to the printer on Friday and get you a copy in your hands by Wednesday of next week so you can begin looking at it and we can begin the discussions. And then finally, we are working on year-end. So, we do have a series of year-end closing dates that we've communicated to our departments. And so we'll be working on wrapping up our 2026 fiscal year here in the coming months. Thank you.

Great. Next item.

Next we have matters from the committee. Anybody? And now we have matters from the chair, which is item 11A, fiscal year 2027 proposed budget hearing process. And that is Chair Fulf.

Right. Great. I just wanted to brief the committee on the process that we're going to use to go through the budget. The budget is going to be heard by the full governing body on the 13th, 14th, and 15th. The 13th will be a discussion. The 14th and 15th we can propose amendments if we want to. Then it will be before the finance committee on the 26th. I will also, like we will also be doing amendments if necessary on the finance committee. I would encourage everyone, we're getting the packet early as far as the distance between when we get the budget book to when we start hearing the budget. It would probably expedite things. If we had questions, if we could ask them via email and the full council will get the response. So, we'll all, any questions anyone has, you have the opportunity to ask the question of staff. Staff will respond and send it to the full council. And any amendments probably we should, once you get the book, start thinking about them and then we're also prepared that if there for some reason we need an extra day on the finance committee, we are prepared to make that happen. And I have worked extensively with Andrea and Armenia to make sure, I know I talked to the full committee. I asked permission from our attorney. The attorney said it's fine. We've worked very closely with staff to get the concerns of the finance committee, things we want to see in the budget book that we may have not seen in the past. We've worked very diligently to try to get that information into the budget book. And we kind of have a process where things that don't change, like there's some stuff in the city that don't change. It's just reoccurring, basically the same amount of money. Those things I don't think we need a deep dive on with based on my conversations with the committee. However, anything that's a major change, we need to know where it's coming from, the money, what happened when we move the money, what it's going to be used for, and then any additional information that might be pertinent to the discussion for the governing body. So, I wanted to provide this opportunity to let you guys know what was going on and that we've been working together to make sure that this budget process is more transparent than we've seen for more than a decade. So, that's what I have. Next item.

I think we have our next meeting Monday, May 11th, 2026. And that is it for the items on the.

Right. We are adjourned.