We're good.

Okay, I did the gavel, it's official.

All right, welcome.

It's January 5th, 2026.

Happy New Year.

It's the first meeting of the 27th Council, and we will come to order.

All counselors are present this evening.

Tonight we're going to begin with a moment of silence, followed by the Pledge of Allegiance in English and then in Spanish.

You can obtain a parking pass from council staff at the table near the chamber's entrance.

Members of the public, city staff, and the media have the ability to view this meeting in person and on live streams through four different platforms: Gov TV on Comcast Channel 16, the Gov TV website, YouTube, and Zoom webinar.

The live streams can be accessed from most smartphones, tablets, or computers.

Also, this meeting is closed captioned, and you may enable the closed captioning services on your television or device at this time.

The video recording of this and all past council meetings will remain available for viewing at the top any time on the city council's website.

Council staff is available via telephone if members of the public need assistance finding the videos online.

Please call 505-768-310 for assistance during business hours Monday through Friday, 8 a.m.

to 5 p.m.

The council will take a break at approximately 7 p.m.

this evening if needed.

With regard to decorum in the chambers, we want tonight's proceeding to be as civil and respectful as possible.

Please do not make any personal attacks and please no applause snapping or other outbursts during the meeting.

Thank you, Madam President.

Um tonight our proclamation is um because we over the holidays lost one of our best community leaders from District 7, Miss Jerry Griego.

And so we are doing a proclamation in her honor, and we've asked her family to be here.

So I'm gonna ask um Jerry's son Frank to come on down along with her daughter, Mary Ann.

Jerry's sister Jean Cruz is here, and Tony Lopez, a family friend.

So whereas Geraldine Jerry Griego and her family moved to Solano Street in District 7, McKinley neighborhood in the late 1960s, and whereas Jerry was an active member of the McKinley Neighborhood Association for over 35 years, served as president for many years, and made personal visits and calls to keep her neighbors informed about issues and how they could help.

Whereas a young mother, a mother with two young children, Jerry was concerned about the park and recreational facilities in her area and worked with local officials to make improvements to Grisham Park, Montgomery Pool, and other sites.

And whereas Jerry's concern about traffic speed and pedestrian safety along Candelaria between Carlisle and San Mateo led to street lighting improvements along that one mile stretch.

And Jerry also led in getting changes made to the busy intersection of Montclair and Shepherd Road.

And whereas Jerry got the area involved with the city's neighborhoods beautification program, which she promoted by walking door to door through the entire McKinley neighborhood, leading to the planting of hundreds of new trees, and her efforts led to the twice yearly neighborhood large item cleanup with dumpsters at Grisham Park.

Whereas Jerry cared about the schools in her area, including Bel Air Elementary, McKinley Midschool, and Del Norton High School, attending many activities and fundraisers and putting information on the signs at Grisham and Caldware Parks, Caldwell, Cardwell Parks.

And whereas Jerry was a loving friend, daughter, wife, mother, and grandmother, caring for her own mother who lived to be 98, traveling to Colorado to watch games and events involving her twin granddaughters, and making frequent trips to her hometown of Taos to be part of extended family reunions and traditions.

And whereas Jerry wanted to keep local area streets and homes safe and commercial businesses thriving.

And whereas Jerry's can do attitude, persistence, and commitment to her McKinley neighborhood and the city of Albuquerque is honored and recognized.

Be it proclaimed that the council, the governing body of the city of Albuquerque, hereby honors the memory and legacy of Jerry Griego for her decades of dedicated service to the McKinley neighborhood and the city of Albuquerque, and calls on all residents to carry forward her spirit of community engagement and commitment to making Albuquerque a safer and more beautiful place to call home.

I'm honored to be able to give this proclamation to you and the family here.

Half the audience is here for Jerry, which is just a testament to how amazing she was.

So I'd like to, Madam President, give her son Frank a moment to speak if he would like first of all, good evening, um, members of the city council, Madam President.

My name is Frank Griego, and I'm joined by my family and friends, my sister and my mom's sister, Jane Cruz.

I want to sincerely thank you for this proclamation, honoring my late mother, Geraldine Griego from Taos, New Mexico.

This recognition means more to us than I can fully express.

Our mother loved this city and the neighborhood she lived in.

She believed deeply in community, kindness, and showing up for others in our neighborhood.

She would also tell me at times when I asked her to move out of the neighborhood, maybe because of some crime or you know, unruly events that happened in our neighborhood, and she would turn around and tell me I am not moving out of my neighborhood.

This is my neighborhood.

Shh.

She is should be so grateful for this honor.

And really, we really want to express our gratitude to Miss Tammy Febblehorn and Janet Sayers, if you wouldn't mind, I'll stand it back there to helping us, and also the McKinley Neighborhood Association, who helped in this particular honor tonight.

My mother was someone who gave her time and her heart and her strength to those around her, especially her neighbors in McKinley neighborhood.

She taught us the importance of compassion, hard work, and standing up for what is right.

Her legacy will live on through the lives she touched and the value she's passed on to her family and friends.

On behalf of our family, we'd like to thank you for honoring her memory and ensuring that the contributions that she's made to her community in this city will always be remembered.

We are deeply grateful, and whatever we can do as a family or friends for our city, we'd be more than happy to do so.

I like to just mention a couple of people here.

Uh, County Commissioner Diane Gibson helped us, State Representative Christine Trujillo helped in this, and the McKinley Neighborhood Association.

I also mentioned my sister Marion Matuska family, my brothers James and Debbie, Rebecca and Dolores sisters, Jean Cruz, my mom's sister, and Tony Lopez and his family to my left.

My mom does have a husband, and she is in hospice for the last year and a half.

He's in the hospital.

So we lost my mom suddenly.

We didn't think this was, she always recovered off for a cold.

But the flu is real, turned into pneumonia, and we lost her to respiratory failure.

My family, Stephanie, my spouse, my kids, Lauren, Heather, Patalina, Michaela, and my in-laws Lesanchis, and of course, my beautiful friends that are here tonight to support my mother.

Again, Madam President, Ms.

Fiebelhorn.

Thank you very, very much very much.

Thank you.

Counselors, do you have anything that you'd like to say or ask or Madam President?

I would just say we have um we've got it framed, and so the proclamation has been signed by all the counselors.

Oh wow.

And here it is for you.

Again, thank you all for coming out and sharing your memories of Jerry with us and thanks to Jerry for all the amazing work she did for our community over the last 35 years.

Thank you so much.

Thank you.

Thank you.

We're sorry for your loss.

Next, we're going to move on to a presentation.

Counselor Grout.

Thank you, Madam President.

Let's see.

Presentation from Ms.

Jennifer Turner.

She's the director of municipal development.

And she's going to provide an update on traffic safety.

Good evening, Director.

Thank you.

Next slide.

Okay, great.

Madam President, Counselors, I am humbled and honored to give the first presentation to you of 2026, and even more importantly, to present before the first ever historic six female majority member council.

And so thank you for that.

But tonight I am here to provide a traffic safety educational campaign update to all of you pursuant to council resolution number 25-196 enacted in November.

This is the first of six monthly updates that I'll be providing to you.

Next slide.

Okay.

So I'm gonna start off with some of the key points from the traffic code updates that you passed in November, uh, because I think they bear repeating again and again.

So first, drivers shall stop for everyone using marked or unmarked crosswalks.

Uh secondly, uh the legislation defined and protected vulnerable road users to include pedestrians, workers, persons lawfully operating or riding any of the following on a public way bicycle, skateboards, roller skates, inline skates, e-bikes, scooters, wheelchairs, and assistive devices.

The legislation also provides the responsibility on vulnerable road users to cross safely and defines the should not pass a vehicle that is stopped at a crosswalk for a vulnerable road user, and also prohibits parking uh near crosswalks unless designated otherwise to improve the visibility of vulnerable road users.

Next slide.

So uh our progress to date on the educational campaign.

Um we've actually already deployed our vulnerable road user training for city operators.

Um these are city vehicles, and that's already deployed and available online.

Uh we've selected and contracted with our consultants for the campaign.

We've developed the initial branding for the campaign, which I'll get to in a second.

Uh we've started community outreach planning and have had initial discussions with community partners with more to follow.

And we've reviewed and commented on draft state law changes to protect vulnerable road users.

And then lastly, we've updated our city development process manual to incorporate 2024 bikeway and trail facility plan updates, which are best practices for the infrastructure that keeps our vulnerable roads users safe.

Next slide.

So this is our a preview of our branding for the campaign.

We wanted to highlight to stop for everyone and to showcase the crosswalk and all the different users of vulnerable road users that use the uh crosswalks and marked and unmarked around the city, and there'll be much more to come.

Next slide.

So for our next steps, uh, we'll be working on developing a webinar that can be distributed around the city.

It will be available online to educate everyone about our traffic law changes.

We'll also be working with a consultant on a video to be aired on television and also to be available through social media.

Uh, we'll be meeting with community partners and putting together a one-page uh draft of all highlighting all the changes and distributing that.

And then also following closely and supporting state legislation on driver education requirements and all legislation to protect a vulnerable road users.

And with that, I stand for questions.

Well done.

Thank you, Director, for that update.

Counselors' questions, Counselor Februar.

Thank you, Madam President.

Thank you for being here, Director.

In the bill, uh it was very specific about the methods that we were going to be using for education and outreach.

And I know we're at the very beginning, but I just want to clarify that we still are looking at billboards and we are still looking at radio spots as well, because I think one of the concerns was that everybody gets news and and information from different places, and so we didn't want to miss anyone.

That of President and Counselor Feeblecorn, yes, that's all part of our campaign in addition to the videos.

We'll be doing radio billboards.

Um we actually are going to be including the flyer with all of our uh citations under our speed camera citations, figuring that we're catching the drivers that might need it most.

Um so yes, we will be covering all the all the things you asked for in the resolution.

And Madam President, just kudos because I called 311 to report something, and I heard on as I was waiting for my 311 person, it was telling me that I needed to look for people in crosswalks, and so I really thought that was quick and quite effective.

Thank you.

Counselors, any other questions or comments?

Councilor Grout.

Madam President, thank you, Director.

Really great start.

I think you guys are going in the right direction.

I love the logo.

I think it's very catchy, it's simple, um, easy to read.

And so that's really really awesome.

And also you're going to reach out to APS and and all of those folks too as well.

Right.

Uh Madam President, Councillor Grout, we've had a preliminary conversation with APS, um, and we will continue those conversations.

I think they're a really important partner in having kids in APS.

I know they need to hear it more than anyone else.

Right.

So, yes.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Very, very, very excited about this.

Thank you.

And I guess I will say, in addition to the other, the um certified driving schools.

I'm assuming that's on the list too.

Yes, Madam President Correct.

They are thank you.

Thank you.

Any other questions or comments, counselors?

Thank you, Director, very much for the update.

Next, we have a presentation from Miss Christine Berners, the city economist, who will provide an update on cannabis and gross receipts tax.

Good evening.

Good evening, Madam President, members of council.

I know you have a lot on your agenda.

I'll be really fast.

So uh oh, perfect.

Thank you.

So gross receipts for October grew 5.2% this month, bringing the cumulative to 5.7.

And the current budget assumes growth uh of 3.8% over the FY25 audited actual.

Uh but we have to remember that because of the state error and some hold harmless anomalies, uh, this growth actually includes about three and a half million that wasn't supposed to be there.

Um but this does that it is a bonus for this year, it's just not indicative of underlying growth.

Uh let's see.

We this was balloon fiesta, so we're excited that it was um a little better this month.

Last year, this time it wasn't as impressive.

Uh unfortunately, though, lodgers tax didn't reflect that.

That was that was that declined, I believe eight percent um this time around.

Uh every sector showed gains, nearly every sector show gains this month except for real estate whole stuff wholesale trade um and one more public administration.

So it's not often that every almost every single sector is showing growth.

And then when you're looking at all business sectors, not including the impacts of that declining hold harmless uh that was 6.5% growth.

And then I think I mentioned in my email to you that at least on credit cards, consumers were spending more this Christmas season.

So hopefully the next couple of months will reflect that.

And then for cannabis, you know, let's just get excited that it's not negative.

That's let's just do that, right?

Uh 5% growth this month.

And the uh the cumulative growth was then brought all the way up to down to 6.1%, a negative 6.1%.

So we'll just have to keep an eye on that.

So unless you have questions.

Counselor Lewis.

Thank you, Madam President.

Um Ms.

Burder, thank you.

Um so the this is cumulative uh July through October, you mentioned, right?

So July, October cumulative um we were uh 5.7 percent um over what we project, well, over the 2025, correct?

That that was the actual revenue.

Madam President, yes, yeah, 5.7% actual revenue over 25.

Okay.

And then um what we projected was 3.8, correct?

Madam President, yes.

So and our our budget was built on the 3.8, right?

Or close to it.

So that uh so there's a there's a a balance there.

I mean, now and and I get as far as our spending over a 12-month period, um, we may not, I mean, if we were to if we were to divide that budget by 12 uh months um and we'd get a you know clean per month uh uh but I I realize it doesn't work like that.

I mean in a in a budget you might spend more in the spring or you know on certain things it might be up, you know the cost.

But at the end of the year, um it would track, it would track to that uh amount as far as our budget goes and what we spend.

Um so the next six months um are we are we projecting the next six months to follow those same lines about 5.8 percent?

Madam President, uh member Lewis.

I would like to note that I did a quick calculation before coming in this evening, and if we were to remove that extra three and a half million that wasn't supposed to be there, that would mean underlying growth is actually closer to 3.8 percent.

And so while we did get a bonus 3.5 million up front, um the actual underlying growth is a bit lower than what you're seeing here in the middle of the year.

Madam President, what's the bonus again?

What was the three?

About three and a half.

About three and a half million.

Uh about three million was because of an error at the State Department.

They literally made an error and shorted us about three million at the end of the last fiscal year.

So from 2025.

Correct.

Okay.

Correct.

And so we got that in the first month of this year.

And then there were a couple of other ones that totaled about 500,000, and those were I believe uh hold harmless anomalies, the sort that we're used to seeing.

So we're counting that bonus in the 2026 revenues.

Correct.

Okay.

Correct.

Is there a reason why we wouldn't count it in the 25 revenues?

Since Madam President, that's actually a question for the accountants administration, not for me, I'm sorry.

Okay, so it but it was it was revenue from 2025.

Correct.

Well, and and Madam President, TRD was not willing.

Well, they they said it's going in your FY26 distribution, and there's nothing we can do about it.

It's just the that's how the error fell out.

Okay, so uh regardless, then there's a difference between about 5.8, 3.8, what we built our our budget on.

Uh so that money technically would be in our reserves, that's in our bank account.

That's in our checking account.

Um, and it would if it tracked like that throughout the entire year, um, that cumulative money would be in our checking account.

Um so let's let's talk about Madam President, um, talk about 2025 again.

And now so we're we're six months away from the end of 2025 budget year.

And um what what did we um well what were the actual revenues of 2000?

What was what was the the percentage of increase over 24 that we actually uh saw?

You know, this term I knew you had a lot on your plate, and I did not bring additional information.

I apologize.

So I I can't answer that.

I don't have it in front of me.

Was just the projected increase over the year before.

Um not not the projected, but the actual revenue that came in.

Yeah, Madam President, I think GRT came in very close to our estimate.

I am so afraid to say that out loud, my guess.

I I'm not going to.

I really would rather.

Madam President, no problem.

I'm not trying to get to it.

Uh was it was it more or less than what we budgeted for?

It was very, very close.

I mean, within one percent of our of our expectation.

Within one percent.

So it was one percent higher.

Um percent more than what we budgeted for.

If I'm not mistaken, yes.

How much is that one percent about?

I am happy to email this to you, but I am not going to do mental calculations in front of, yeah.

I mean, one percent of our budget of our staff does our calculation real quick.

What's one percent of our 2025 budget?

You'd have to go of just the GRT.

Not the whole budget, just the GRT.

Yeah.

The GRT increase.

Okay, well, I'll give you that.

We can get that.

I'm happy to email that.

There was an increase, right?

So that that money though should be in our checking account, correct?

Madam President, yes.

I'd like to say a little bit more though.

So um, yes, if it were to continue that way, then perhaps that cumulative growth would stay that high.

Um, but we've already started working on the five-year forecast, and um the legislative finance committee and the state have lowered their expectations for FY26, I believe, but definitely FY27, and that's what it's looking like for us as well.

And so um we hope that this continues, but but as you've seen in the the economy is there's there's some worry out there.

There are a lot of you know, Madam President.

So I mean what I read in our five-year forecast is that we're projecting um that we're that's a it's exceeding what we're our revenues are exceeding what we're what we've been projecting.

Is that still Madam President for FY25 or 26 at the beginning of the year, correct?

Okay, so 26 and then the next four years.

Okay.

Um except Madam President, that the that the uh projection for FY26 is actually, I mean, this is very preliminary, but it looks to be a little bit lower than what's currently in the budget.

Sure, but as of now, I mean well, I guess you count the three point three billion, three million dollars.

Um I mean, technically we would have the three million dollars in our three million dollars should be in our bank account, it's excess, it's it's it's more than what we projected, it's revenue that came in more than what we projected.

And by the way, what we project is what this council's budget is, what we what we approve.

Um and and I know you know if there is a fund balance uh from 2025, and really it could be um that uh I mean the three million dollars is uh two thousand twenty-five um, you know, I think it's in the bank account because it's still more than what we've spent this year so far, or what we projected and budgeted for.

Um but you you could really say that in 2025 um we had the one percent or so and then another three million dollars um, you know, at the end of our 2025 budget of an increase in revenue, which is not what we budgeted for.

So those are good signs.

I mean, those are that's that's good budgeting.

Um, my next question really toward the administration would be um uh Madam President, is is that is our CFO here tonight?

Uh that's uh playing a lot of roles here, Matt Mr.

Willen.

Uh Council President and Council, can you repeat the question?

The one percent and the three million dollars is in our checking account, correct?

Um those would be already allocated, correct?

I would assume so.

I mean, yeah, so they've already there there.

It's it's it's in our reserve, right?

So our reserve, part of our reserve, and we have uh Lawrence Davis, our budget officer, part of our reserve was to cover the point five percent that was increased by council for raises.

Um in the in the budget from 2025 that we improved in 2025?

Yes.

Or that we that's on the table right now.

So we sent uh councillor president and councilor Lewis, we sent down a budget with a two percent increase for rate raises.

Yeah.

Council approved 0.5 percent.

So we reserved that amount so that we can make sure and start and be able to fund all of that, not knowing what our revenue was going to be because we hadn't got all the total numbers.

So you're saying that one percent is spent um in in what we budgeted for, which was the increases, correct?

Is Lawrence uh council president and counselor lewis uh our budget officers coming down to explain that?

So if you want to give us a second.

Sure.

Council Lewis, while we wait for the budget officer, do you have more questions?

Or can I go to some of the other counselors who have questions on this?

Madam President is the and then come back.

The budget officer is coming down.

I mean, again, I don't want to put anybody out of life hard on anybody.

I don't know.

Um, okay, let me uh I guess while we're waiting for uh wait for him then um so I do want to get some clarification on that because well, I guess let me ask you this, uh Mr.

Willen.

Are we the the three million dollars are are we going to count that now as 2026 revenue?

We're just gonna add that to our 2026 revenue.

Council president and counselor lewis, whatever is left over, it adds to the fund balance.

So that would drop to the bottom line.

So that but that'll be at the end of this 2020 twenty-six.

We would know that otherwise you're assuming that you can you can spend that.

Oh no, we're uh council president and councilwise.

We're assuming that if that's what comes in, then that would add to our 26 budget.

Okay.

So we're just gonna roll it over.

We got we got the revenue from 2025, you're gonna roll it over into revenues.

You're calling it revenue for 2026.

But so far, um it's it's a balance.

So far, it's a it looks like it's uh it's a reserve, it's a balance, and if you choose to spend that, you're gonna come have to come back to the council um to decide on how you're gonna spend that, correct?

Uh council president, council lewis, yes, because it would be appropriate in 26 for that budget.

Not appropriate, it would be available in 26 to be appropriate.

To appropriate if we want to sometime throughout the year or get to the end of the year, and it's uh you know, three million dollars and whatever else we've accumulated over the year.

So um that calculation, um we're we're six months away from the 2025 budget.

So whether it be one percent, you guys should have that off the top of your head, it would seem like that uh you know, in 2025, which ended six months ago, that what we projected the the delta of what we projected and what actually came in, that here's the difference, and then that should be in our bank account, and you should be able to tell us what that is.

Uh council president and counselor Lewis.

So that this all ties into our fiscal year, year-end act for audit, right?

Because we have to see what the final numbers are.

We have to see what actually came in.

There were adjustments made, um, there are things that were done by the state that were incorrect that adjusted things.

We have to make sure, number one, we can meet the 25 budget based on our revenues and what we budgeted.

So, for instance, if we would have come in, say one percent less, that means we wouldn't we would have over budgeted because we didn't budget correctly for the revenues we were gonna have.

So we budget to what we think, and that's why our economist does what she does and does the work to get that done.

Now, if we come a little bit over, then that carries over to 26.

As long as we meet the bottom line for 25, that all drops down to the fund balance, and then it goes into 26, but we've already submitted our 26th budget, so that's we'll be submitting that, and that will account for whatever extra we have.

Council Lewis.

Madam President, real quick.

No, and that's fine, and Miss Berner has something that she wanted to add.

That's correct.

Thank you, Madam President.

So the FY25 unaudited, um, very close to being complete.

There were while GRT was slightly above expectations, there were a number of revenue categories that were below expectations.

Property taxes, building permits, charges for services, which meant that whatever extra was in GRT was covering the deficits and the rest of the general fund.

And I believe we total general fund ended up a little bit higher than budget expectations, but um I think a lot of that was in CIP recovery indirect overhead.

So I don't think what you think is there is likely there.

Madam President, I I don't know what's there.

I I don't think you know what's there.

No, Madam President, it's all in the presentation that we gave your staff during the five-year forecast, the preliminary, and so I'm happy to reveal it.

That was about three million dollars.

I think about was it?

I mean, that was a that was an excess, right?

But now what you're saying is um, and again, I I understand where all the different revenue sources come from, and then we have a budget in a lot of different ways that we spend, right?

Um, and then cumulative of all that is we we spend according to our budget for the for the 25 fiscal year, and then all of the revenue comes in, whether some was higher, some was lower, yeah, that might balance it out, but still you have a difference between revenues and what was spent.

And it's this report normally comes to us at beginning of December, and just simply a dollar amount.

I think simply a dollar amount of of uh of that total you know balance, you know, um, is something at the very least is is helpful, you know, to the council who approved this budget um six, I mean a year and a half ago, and now that budget is done six months ago.

At the very least, to be able to say um at when when those books closed at the end of 2025, here's our revenue, and here's what we spent.

You know, here's a whether it's a dollar or whether it's millions of dollars.

I don't know.

Um, all the other adjustments and everything that you guys make, if it takes you six months to do that, I guess.

Is that the parks department spent less, so this department spent more, so we're gonna we're gonna give the parks department to this department and we're gonna show that everything even now, but you still have you still have either an under spent or we overspent.

And those are the dollars.

I think those are the those are the um the basic reports that we would want to, and and now you're saying, I mean, I I think you know we've got a couple bills that just that just you know all dependent upon kind of figuring that out, or at least figure out what it's gonna be.

And um we we've kind of kept saying that well, we don't have it yet.

I mean, do we still not have that yet?

And when and when exactly will we have that uh those numbers?

Mr.

Wayne.

Council President and Councilor Lewis.

So this goes back to we would have had this submitted on December 15th, as we have for the last 10 years that I've been here.

It was due to the state auditor by the 15th, but due to the federal shutdown, the single audit report, there was no guidance on how we were gonna audit that.

So we work with our auditors to figure out, and they extended the deadline to January 20th, I believe.

And so we're still working through those things, and that's why the government for the government accounting standards board says we do this once a year for a municipality of our size.

You can't do that on a monthly basis.

You would have to have a whole team of about 30 people to do this every month to try and figure it to figure those things out because we have so many transactions and so many things that happen.

So that's why we do our ACPR, which is the annual financial comprehensive report, which is at the end of the year, we have that report and it tells you what the bottom line is.

And so we also have people who speculate or who projected our revenue.

See if it came in where it was.

I mean, uh for instance, our gas tax came in lower.

So if our GRT came in higher, but our gas tax came in lower.

Guess that's what we'll have to cover with the GRT because we have to cover that fund because we may have projected our gas tax at one number in our GRT at one number, and if the gas tax comes in lower, it has to be supplemented by the general fund.

So it it it's it's done once a year because of how intense it is now for smaller municipalities, it's easy.

But for the biggest city in New Mexico, it's uh it's a task, and we would have already had it done, but we had to wait on federal guidelines.

Um I know we have Madam President, I know we have uh our budget first server.

The ask our staff, I guess.

I mean, is uh is it typical that um because it's it sounds like the you know there were some projected um you know overages or you know more revenue than what we spent 2025, and then it rolls over it sounds like the administrator is talking about it rolls over into 2026 to cover some 2026.

Not I guess not I'm not you're saying not the budget because those wouldn't be budgeted expenses, but um to cover maybe cash flow maybe or something.

I mean, is that is that what it's covering, Mr.

Mosco?

I mean, is it typical that we would just roll over that money that we think it's gonna have the administration would we think we're gonna have this amount, let's roll it over, put it in the bank account, and that's available for us to spend without coming to the council and reappropriating that.

Madam Council President Bassan, Councillor Lewis.

Uh the short answer, yes.

The the longer answer would be as acting CFO Whalen described the various funds, GRT gas, gas tax, uh, permits collected, etc.

Um the the mid-year cleanup that we have tonight uh addresses departments overages and underages as far as their spending from the FY25 and balances that budget as we need a balanced budget.

So we will have that.

Um in Ms.

Boehner's five-year forecast, uh, in the executive summary, she said FY25 unaudited actual GRT revenue is six point two million or one point one percent over the approved budget.

So we do have that number.

Um but yes, we we have to look at all the various things, and that's what the ACFR is for.

So what what would change that?

Um six point two million dollars at the time, which that report came in like October, right?

Um what would change that between October and now of that going to say zero?

Madam Council President, uh Councilor Lewis, I can't speculate what would cause it to go to zero.

Um the state is um pretty notorious for making changes in numbers, but not from 6.2 million to zero.

Okay.

Did you madam president?

Did you have anything else to add?

Yes, Madam President.

If the council wishes, I can go through FY25 budget to actual at this point.

Thank you.

Lawrence, so if you'd like me to do that, I can do that.

Madam President, if that's okay.

I can be really brief.

Thank you.

All right, so I was really close.

1.1% GRT was over the budget.

And that does calculate to 6.2 million.

And then uh as I mentioned, property taxes were below budget.

Goodness, everything else.

Everything else except miscellaneous and internal payments were actually below the budgeted amount for various reasons.

That's explained in the uh expenditures.

Okay.

And revenue, Madam President, and revenues that were expected to show up, but that did not for various reasons.

And then the overall budget for FY25 was 6.8.9 million over the budget budgeted amount.

But we do have to note that about 5.9 million of that were audit adjustments at the end of the year.

And so a lot of that is hitting miscellaneous.

And I'm forgetting the name of those adjustments, but but that's what those were.

So are that like expenses that we didn't know we had until six months later?

Madam President, I'm sorry, don't understand your question, or I'm not sure what you're saying.

Council President and Council Lewis.

Those are the anticipated income for those areas or those funds that compared to the expenses that they do.

So we anticipated a certain amount of revenue coming in compared to the expenses for those things.

No, yeah, yes.

So for instance, property taxes, enterprise funds, or even stadium, the things that we do, we anticipate a certain amount of revenue, and then if it doesn't come in and the expenses are set because we anticipate our revenue, that's how we send down a ballot balanced budget.

If the revenue doesn't come in, then it has to hit the general fund.

So I will use gas tax again.

So our anticipated revenue for gas tax was at a certain amount and the expenses were at a lower uh higher amount and it didn't come in where we thought it would.

So then the general fund has to supplement that to make sure that we balance that area.

Madam President, last thing.

So at what what what typically at what what point after the fiscal year ends, do we know do we know those those shortfalls?

Is it around October?

I mean, is it I mean, do we know that pretty quickly?

Or does it take six months to understand and know something?

Council President and Council Lewis.

It takes the time for the auditors to do their adjustments and for us to be able to find out what's the actual numbers because we don't want to allocate something, and that's why we've said before in front of this council that we know that for we're confident with the number of 368,000 for fund balance at the end of 25.

Now that could be higher based on adjustments that haven't been completed yet or based on audited numbers.

But until we get the audited numbers that are submitted to the state auditor and for them to review, we can't say we have this amount of money, because if we say that, and there's adjustments that need to be made.

For instance, last year I think the adjustment that needed to be made for grant funds was about one a little over 1.7 million.

So we weren't able to tell that that's our fund balance until after that adjustment was made.

But we're very confident in the number that we have, the 368.

That's we're confident with that.

Now, there could be there is some reserve to make sure that nothing else goes through there because we still have the single audit that needs to be completed, which got postponed because of the federal shutdown.

You know, if not, all of this would have been submitted back in December 15th.

So the 368,000 is what you're projecting after you're seeing some of those shortfalls in revenue, and you're looking at it and saying, hey, now we're thinking it's this, we just need the auditors to check it.

Are you counting the three million dollars that we got from 2025?

Uh Council President and Council Lewis, yes, because there are a lot of shortfalls in many departments as well as some of our.

Including the $300 million, the three million dollars in the $386,000.

That's actually spending that, spending that $3 million?

Uh Council President and Councillor Lewis.

That's because we have shortfalls in other revenue areas where we thought we were going to have more revenue than what we actually have.

So you are counting it in the 2025.

You're counting that $3 million in the 2025 revenues to go against 2025 expenses.

Council President, Council Lewis, yes.

Okay.

Thank you.

Councillor Champagne.

Thank you, Madam President.

Just a couple of points in clarification.

I promise I won't take that much time.

Uh real estate showed no growth.

Is that correct?

Uh let's see.

Yes, that's correct.

Actually, it was 3.4% below this time last year, Madam President.

And what was the lodgers tax?

I didn't quite get that one either.

Madam President, lodgers tax actually declined 8% for October.

Okay.

Okay.

And when we say shortfalls, that's meaning that we projected X amount of percentage and it was below what we projected, correct?

Madam President, uh I really, yeah, thank you for that question.

I want to make sure uh it's understood.

So when we look at revenues month to month, what we're doing is comparing the current month with the same month in the previous year, because it's the most, it's the most like the current month, right?

And so no, it's not a projection of any sort.

It's just sort of comparing, trying to compare apples to apples.

And a lot of times things are happening in the previous year, maybe there was a whole harmless fluke, or um maybe a bunch of construction just completed, you know, and the revenues came in.

And and so by comparison, the current year can look a little wonky.

Um, and so it's always doing our best to see what growth is looking like, but it's always there's always context, right?

Okay, thank you, madam president.

Councilor Baca.

Thank you, Madam President.

Um just another point of clarification.

So Lodger's tax was down eight percent.

And and did I hear you say that it was flat during the Balloon Fiesta?

Uh Madam President.

Uh Lodger's tax was negative for October, but oh negative for October.

What did I did I say something was flat for October?

That's what I thought.

That's what I'm clarifying.

No, yeah.

So lodger's tax was negative.

Um, but something like uh um retail trade was up a little bit for for October, which you didn't see this toll last year.

But the lodger tax was down for and it's not just um I'm sorry to interrupt you, madam president.

Actually, actually I can eight percent down, lodger's taxes accommodations.

We had some record attendance days, including running out of parking.

So it's safe to say that a whole lot of people were sleeping on their friends' couch.

Madam President, well, that's what I wanted to clarify is that it's actually Lodger's tax has been um not just negative in October, but I believe it's been slowing in the and it's because um interstate travel and national travel has been down.

I mean, we're seeing this across the country.

So uh it did show up for for balloon fiesta, but I don't think it's all just related to balloon fiesta.

Right, right.

But but balloon siesta that's when everything books up.

So if it's down that's correct.

If it's down, or even if it's flat, people aren't.

It wasn't enough maybe to make up for what we would normally write.

Um maybe we didn't have enough accommodations.

That's a good question.

Right?

Unregist unregistered accommodations potentially were being used.

It's possible.

Thank you.

Yeah, counselor Teas.

Thank you, Madam President.

Just to confirm and clarify about the the revenue that was sent delayed from the state.

So that's because of the accrual basis.

So we recognized the revenue in 2025 and it was already expended, correct?

Um Madam President, I wanted I'm not sure I understand your question, but this particular instance, yes, there's in a two-month accrual, but this is completely um separate from that.

It is just an error that they made at the end of the year.

They literally shorted us around three million.

Right, but it was we had already expended it in our it was already included as in our budget projections for 2025.

Uh Council President and Councilor Thayas, yes, that was part of our projected revenue and how so when we were shorted, we were going through the year and it looked like we were gonna come in short in our revenues, which is gonna make us overexpended for 2025, which once they corrected it, then we came in right where we should have been.

Right, madam president, thank you.

And so it it's not extra, it's part of what was already um appropriated and expended.

They the state provided it to us late in error, and we're just we cannot apply it to the fiscal year 2025 because it was already closed and it would cause potential misstatements, correct?

Madam President, I believe that's correct.

Okay, thank you.

Counselors, any other questions or comments?

Thank you very much for the update.

Thank you.

With that, we will move on to the journal.

I move approval of the December 15th journal.

Second.

There's a motion and multiple seconds.

All those in favor of approving the journal, raise your hand and say yes.

Yes.

Anyone opposed?

That passes unanimously.

No.

Uh Councilor Teas, how do you vote?

I'll let's do it one more time.

All those in favor, raise your hand and say yes.

Yes.

Yes.

Anyone opposed?

All right.

The clerk got it.

Thank you very much.

Communications and introductions.

I move that the uh to amend the letter of introduction for the purpose of placing OC2 on the January 21st, 2026 council agenda for action.

OC2 is the appointment of member to the Open Space Advisory Board.

There's a motion and a second by Councillor Grout.

And just real quick, the reason for this is we need to make sure to alternate between council appointments and the mayor's appointments.

So we look forward to the mayor's next appointment.

All those in favor of placing OC2 on the January 21st agenda, raise your hand and say yes.

Yes.

Anyone opposed?

That passes unanimously.

Council Feebacorn, R1.

Thank you, Madam President.

R1.

I move that the rules be suspended for the purpose of placing R1 on tonight's agenda for action.

R1 is approving and authorizing a request to increase heading home by $662,526.92 cents to maintain housing for 92 households in fiscal year 2026.

There's a motion and a second by Councillor Grout.

All those in favor, raise your hand and say yes.

Anyone opposed?

That passes unanimously.

Are there any other changes to the letter of introduction?

Seeing none, I move approval of the letter of introduction.

There's a motion and a second from Madam Vice President and many others.

All those in favor, raise your hand and say yes.

Yes.

Anyone opposed?

That passes unanimously.

There are no reports of committees.

We are moving on to deferrals and withdrawals.

OC 59, a request for remediate review of the city attorney conduct and compliance with conflict of interest requirements in mayor versus city council litigation.

I would like to move withdrawal.

Second.

There's a motion and a second by Madam Vice President.

Counselors, I do want to just also say a couple things on this too.

There was a letter that was sent out on behalf of the Madam CAO and myself to ask for the IG's office to go ahead and make sure to conduct an investigation.

The letter actually, I think, strengthened some of the requests and details in it than was originally even in the OC, but in addition to that, the letter also referenced the OC, so it is still out for the public to know about.

It is not that we're saying and changing course on whether or not an investigation should happen.

So I've it's already happening now, and so it's kind of a moot point to actually have this OC.

And I will also add I've been losing my train of thought all day today.

So but I will also add that in addition to the fact that it's already in investigation and that we've strengthened it.

Um still not back.

So I would urge your support on a withdrawal at this time.

And Councilor Champagne.

Thank you, Madam President.

Uh, just one quick question for the administration.

And I know that there is a separation of powers, but I'm just kind of curious.

We have seen in the past where there are investigations into issues and people are placed on administrative leave.

Is there a reason why uh council has not been placed on administrative leave when this sort of uh investigation is being conducted?

Madam CAO, Madam President, Counselor Champagne.

Um investigations uh based upon accusation are not um do not imply guilt, if that makes sense.

And we do employee investigations often that that is not the case.

And so in this situation, we have not made that determination to be appropriate um uh required.

Council?

Thank you.

Uh I did remember too.

I was gonna say that uh well I've had conversations with the mayor and the CAO.

And while I can tell you all that we agree on absolutely zero details of anything that we've discussed, except for the fact that because of that disagreement, we need to have an investigation.

So we do agree that an investigation needs to happen so that we can conduct um and figure out how to proceed moving forward and to prevent something like this from happening again in the future.

With that, I would urge your support on a withdrawal.

All those in favor of a withdrawal of OC59, please raise your hand and say yes.

Yes.

Anyone opposed?

That passes unanimously.

Councillor Grout, R205.

Thank you, Madam President.

R205 is requiring the Albuquerque Fire and Rescue Department, the Albuquerque Police Department, and the Albuquerque Community Safety Department to provide quarterly operations reports.

I um move a deferral to January 21.

Second.

There's a motion and a second by Madam Vice President.

Since we did comments before, it's not normal, but uh anybody?

Okay.

Seeing none, the motion is for a deferral to January 21st.

Raise your hand and say yes if you support.

All right, that motion passes unanimously.

All right, we're moving on to other business.

We're skipping ahead.

Uh, as is customary per the rules at the first meeting in January, we elect a new vice pres president, vice president, and committee of the whole chair.

So we'll start with the election of president.

I will first take nominations for president.

If after the second round there is not a majority vote selecting one individual, I will make a motion to reopen the floor for nominations.

If there are two or more nominees, the clerk of the council will call roll call and we'll start with the first person nominated for that roll call and then move down the list as needed.

Um if there is only one nominee, then we'll ask if there's an objection to uh vote that person in through an acclamation.

Are there any nominations?

Madam President, Councillor Grout, and then Councillor Rogers.

Madam President, I would like to nominate uh Clarissa Pena for president.

Okay, Councillor Rogers, and there's a second, there's not a need for a second, but there can be a second.

Thank you from Councillor Lewis, Councillor Rogers.

Thank you, Madam President.

I would like to nominate Councillor Joaquin Baca.

Okay.

There's a motion, or not a motion, but there's nominations for counselor penya and counselor Backa.

Any others?

Okay, so we will start with Councillor Pena.

Uh, and then there will be a roll call vote.

Madam Clerk.

Councilor Baca.

Councilor Backa, can you turn on your microphone for the record?

Thank you.

Look at the rules as my apologies, uh, Madam President.

And it says it should be in alphabetical order.

Voting will be by roll call and alphabetical order.

That is correct, Councilor Baca, except for the president will the the chair of the committee will end up voting last.

I got it.

I was confused.

All right, no.

No, right.

So I'm sorry.

Councillor Champagne.

Yes.

Yes.

Counselors, if you guys could say the name of the individual you guys are voting for tonight instead of yes or no, because I'm sorry, I thought we were voting on Councillor Pena first, and then we were gonna vote on Councillor Baca.

But if you would like us to start over, and we can go ahead and just have you as you call, okay, counselors, so that we're all on the same page.

As the clerk calls your name, say the counselor that you would like to be president.

Okay, we're gonna yes, counselor Rogers.

I'm sorry, I thought the can we consult the rules?

I thought the rules were we voted by person, not but by the name.

So just want to make sure.

Thank you.

I think counselor just helped my confusion.

So basically, when we vote, we don't say yes or no, we say who we're voting for.

Correct.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Okay, Madam Clerk.

Let's start over.

Okay.

Councillor Bacca.

Bacca.

Councillor Champagne.

Councillor Pena.

Counselor Peoplecorn.

Councillor Bacca.

Councillor Grab.

Councillor Pena.

Councillor Lewis.

Councilor Pena.

Councilor Pena.

Councillor Pena.

Councillor Rogers.

Councillor Bacca.

Councillor Tayas.

Councillor Bacca.

Councilor Bassan.

Councillor Pena.

Councilor Penny is now our president.

Congratulations, Madam President.

I'm going to continue through the elections and then we'll circle back to see how you want to proceed with the rest of the meeting if that's all right with you.

Yes.

Okay.

We're going to move on to the election of the vice president.

Now that we're all very clear on the rules, do we have nominations for vice president?

Councilor Lewis?

Madam Chair now.

I guess so.

Yeah.

Madam Previous Vice President or President.

I nominate uh Councilor Champagne as vice president.

Okay.

Okay, and there's a second from Councillor Grout, although not needed.

Councillor Feeblecorn.

Uh Madam Chair, I nominate Councillor Rogers for Vice President.

Okay.

There's a nomination for Councillor Rogers and Councillor Champagne.

Any other nominations?

All right, seeing none, say the name of who you would like to be vice president when you are called by the clerk.

Councillor Bacca.

Councilor Rogers.

Councilor Bassan.

You're no longer president.

Oh.

We don't need to go with it.

New splash.

Councilor Champagne.

Counselor Champagne.

Myself.

Councilor People Corn.

Councillor Rogers.

Councillor Grout.

Councillor Champagne.

Counselor Lewis.

Councilor Champagne.

Councilor Rogers.

Counselor Rogers.

Counselor Kayas.

Councilor Rogers.

Councilor Penya.

Councillor Champagne.

Councilor Champagne is now our VP.

Congratulations, Mr.

Vice President.

Are you going to end up moving over here?

I can't wait to find out.

You're going to end up rotating or not.

All right.

Moving on to the election of the chair of the committee of the whole.

Same rules, different position nominations.

Madam Madam President.

Madam Chair.

Okay.

And Councilor Rogers.

No, Councillor Backer.

Thank you, Madam President.

Madam Chair.

Whatever it is.

I'd like to nominate Counselor Feblecorn.

Okay.

There's a nomination for Councillor Grout and Councilor Feblecorn.

Any other nominations?

All right, please say the name of the person whom you would like to vote for when the clerk calls your name.

Counselor Backa.

Counselor Feblecorn.

Counselor Bassan.

Councillor Grout.

Counselor Champagne.

Councillor Grout.

Councilor Feblecorn.

Councillor Feblecorn.

Councilor Lewis.

Councilor Grout.

Councillor Penya.

Counselor Grout.

Counselor Rogers.

Councilor Feblecorn.

Councilor Teas.

Councilor Feblecorn.

Counselor Grout.

Councillor Grout.

Councillor Grout is now our cow chair.

Congratulations, Madam Cow.

Thank you.

It's always so fun to say that too, especially to a lady.

Sorry.

All right.

So, Madam President, would you like to take over the meeting?

Actually, Madam Chair, I'd like for you to proceed with the entire meeting.

So I'll take over at the next meeting.

So thank you and thank you for all your work this past year.

I think you've done an incredible job, and it's going to be some hard shoes to fill because of your timeliness and your efficiency.

So thank you.

Thank you very much.

Good luck with addressing me for the rest of the evening, everybody.

I won't hold it against you if you get it wrong.

Uh, but thank you and congratulations again.

Okay, so moving on.

Oh, that for the record that clock doesn't have batteries.

Okay, we're gonna keep going.

A move uh approval of committee appointments.

Then I move that the rules be suspended for the purpose of deferring the approval of committee appointments to the January 21st council meeting and the current makeup of the council committees remain in place until the new committee appointments are approved.

Okay.

There's a motion and a second by council champagne.

All those in favor, raise your hand and say yes.

Yes.

Anyone opposed?

That passes unanimously.

We're moving on to the consent agenda this evening.

Are there any changes to the consent agenda?

Seeing none.

Uh for the individuals on tonight's consent agenda who are being appointed to serve on the board or commission.

Thank you very much for your willingness to serve.

I move approval of the consent agenda.

There's a second by Madam President.

Good luck to the clerk as well for keeping that straight.

I believe in your abilities.

All those in favor, raise your hand and say yes.

Yes.

Anyone opposed?

That passes unanimously.

Moving on to announcements.

Councillor Grout.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Uh there will be an intergovernmental legislative relations committee meeting on Wednesday, January 7th at 3 p.m.

via Zoom Video Conference.

Councilor Champaign.

Yes, ma'am.

There will be a finance and government operations committee on Monday, January 12th, 5 p.m.

Uh, here in the Vincent E.

Griego Chambers basement level, uh, and it will be a hybrid meeting.

Great, Councilor Feblecorn.

Madam Chair, there'll be a land use planning and zoning committee meeting on Wednesday, January 14th at 4 p.m.

here in chambers, and it will be a hybrid meeting.

All right, moving on to financial instruments.

We are on 0106, Councilor Rogers by request.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I would like to move our, I'm sorry, 0106 approving a project involving Indus Synergies Incorporated, pursuant to the local economic development act and city ordinance.

I do have a floor sub for implementing legislation for the act to support the completion of a business accelerator project to be located in Albuquerque, New Mexico.

And we have from our department, economic development staff present here, Director Max Gruner, um, to introduce the project.

We have Chris Chavez here and present for staff analysis.

We have Amar Vacil.

I hope I said that correctly.

We'll be on Zoom to speak to any questions we have on behalf of the company.

And we also have Yuri Morales Mangon from the state state of New Mexico Economic Development Department.

And she's here in person, I believe.

And we also have Chris Muirhead, also our bond council.

And I move for a due pass.

And I would like to move the floor substitute first.

Before we get to that, we need to do the motion for a due pass.

Is there a second?

There's a second by Councilor Feblecorn.

Now you can make a motion for the floor substitute.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I'd like to move the floor substitute.

We have a printed copy, and it's while it's in your iPads.

There is a motion for a floor substitute to 0106.

Is there a second?

I'll second that.

And just to cut to the chase, just real quick.

And a nod, I think should suffice.

Is this all the details, Mr.

Mirrorhead?

All of the number changes and the all of the crunching numbers of the last minute everything for LEDA grants and everything.

Thank you, Madam President, Counselors.

The only change was some comments from good comments from Council Rogers to add a reference that the company would focus on local hiring to the extent possible.

That's in the project participation agreement.

There's just further and it's further highlighted there as well as in this ordinance an additional provision in section three addressing that.

Thank you for clarifying for everyone.

So we are on the floor substitute.

Any questions or comments?

All right.

All those in favor of the floor substitute to 0106, raise your hand and say yes.

Anyone opposed?

That passes on an 8-0 vote.

Now we are back on the bill as substituted.

Counselor Rogers.

Thank you, Madam President.

I'm really excited about this project to uh work with economic development to actually have some more business incubator.

Uh if District 6 desperately needs it, but it's actually not just for District 6.

Um, so I'll go to the team to kind of do the presentation of what it all entails, and hopefully you'll be as excited as I can.

Good evening, Director.

Madam Chair, Madam President, uh Counselors, congratulations and happy new year.

Uh thank you, Councilor Rogers.

Uh, we're presenting to you today a project.

Um it comes by a number of names.

Uh New Mexico Nexus, Nemexis in those industries.

It is an accelerator to promote the onshowing of international companies uh to New Mexico and thereby creating local jobs and uh accelerating the local economy.

This is a project located in Mesa del Sul.

The project itself will be or is anticipating to hire about 40 employees that would be paid directly by this company.

But where the real magic happens of this project, and it is a little bit atypical, is that the project is anticipating creating over a thousand jobs over the next you know, X number of years, and some of it depends on kind of the uh geopolitical realities that we're all going to be faced.

Um leader of the local economic development act, as you know, is the only discretionary incentive program that we have in the state.

It's by the discretion of both the uh governor and the mayor to support this company.

Uh we are proposing that the city of Albuquerque will uh serve as the fiscal agent for the state of New Mexico's leader award in the amount of five million dollars, and then the city of Albuquerque wouldn't send a biases program uh with an additional uh 750,000.

And if it pleases, Madam Chair, uh my colleague uh Chris Chavez has the formal staff analysis.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Good evening, Mr.

Chavez.

Good evening, counselors and Madam President.

Um, happy new year.

Um thank you for the opportunity to bring this LEDA transaction before you today.

The Mexic Center is a state-supported innovation and business acceleration initiative designed to attract foreign direct investment, facilitate global technology transfer, and create high value jobs across New Mexico's strategic sectors, including uh advanced manufacturing, clean energy, aerospace, cybersecurity, biosciences, and agtech.

Um operated by STUP LLC, which uh is a US-based strategy and management consulting firm.

Uh the company will handle all daily operations, programming, and tenant management uh at the center through its wholly owned uh subsidiary, Indus Synergies Incorporated.

Uh Indus Synergies is a New Mexico corporation.

Uh they're seeking the city of Albuquerque to be the fiscal agent for uh state leader funds and for the city to provide LEDA funds uh for this lease reimbursing reimbursement project.

Um as uh Director Gruner said the city proposes to provide uh to provide 750,000 uh dollars towards the project.

Upon finalization, uh the project will bring more than 1200 long-term high-paying jobs to Albuquerque uh and as well as workforce development programs and increased regional economic activity.

Uh the purpose of the center is to be a world-class business accelerator and soft landing platform for international companies uh seeking to get a foothold in in uh United States.

So, as Director Gruner said, the employ uh the center itself will have 40 employees, but we'll create um one over one thousand one hundred and fifty jobs over the 10-year uh project.

Um, and it's important to note that although most of the cohort companies are international companies that are gonna be setting up uh uh space here, uh the jobs are gonna be for new Mexicans primarily.

So um the average salary for the newly created jobs will be over 62,000.

Um, and it'll be created in the Mesa do Sol innovation district in Albuquerque.

Um the primary goal of the project is to catalyze foreign direct investment and foster global innovation in Albuquerque.

Um the Mexic Center will be a gateway for high growth enterprises from Asia, Europe, Middle East, and beyond uh South America as well.

Um over the next five years.

Um repeated myself.

I my apologies.

So uh beyond uh job creation, Mexic Center is uh dedicated to retaining top talent here uh in the state and providing the Mexicans opportunities.

The present IDO zone district for the project is uh planned community zone PC.

Uh the purpose of the zone is to accommodate innovative large-scale residential or mixed-use communities that cannot be accommodated through the use use of uh other zone districts.

The provo proposed use of this facility would not require a change in zoning.

Um, and the majority of the 1200 new positions um like I said will be located in the center.

Um each New Mexico uh new pardon me.

Each uh Mexic Center company is projected to create 15 to 25 high skill jobs paying 30 to 40 percent over county median wages.

Uh the specific types of jobs will be d dictated by the new companies at the center and will vary widely.

Uh to qualify for reimbursement, the jobs must be considered full-time and come with full employee benefits.

Uh the project is also create uh expected to create 844 indirect and induced jobs.

Uh the least LEDA staff analysis includes a fiscal impact analysis provided to the city uh from the state of New Mexico.

Uh the analysis showed that the company will uh make a substantive contribution to the community.

Um overall, the city is expected to uh receive approximately 12.4 uh million dollars in net benefits over the 10-year period.

Uh LIDA 26-2 is a qualified project as defined by the state's local economic development act and city uh enabling legislation.

Uh LEDA 26-2 would make a positive substantive contribution to the local economy, and it complies with the adopted city plans and policies and meets community economic development priorities and objectives.

LIDA 26-2 adequately meets the evaluation criteria established by the city for the local economic development act.

And based on these uh above findings, staff recommends uh approval of LEDA 26-2 as proposed by the project plan application.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Councilor Rogers.

Thank you, Madam President.

I urge your support.

Counselors, then any questions or comments?

I know that there are some of the uh we have the New Mexico Economic Development Department if you wanted to add anything.

Uh and then I know that we actually we do have some of the others here on behalf of the company if you would like to say a couple of words.

He's on Zoom.

Okay.

So we'll start with New Mexico Economic Development.

Good evening.

Thank you, good evening.

Uh buenas tardes a todos, Yuriria Morales Mangoni, and happy new year.

Madame President, City Council members, is it's amazing to be here today in the beginning of 2026 and having the opportunity to speak on behalf of the New Mexico Economic Development Department.

You know, we uh have been a great success of different companies wanting to be here in Albuquerque.

In this is definitely a unique uh opportunity that we have with this uh company in particular, new Mexicans, Mexis.

I know that a lot of people keep asking how do we say it as a Mexes, the Mexis, whatever it is.

Well, you know, let's be happy about having this opportunities and I see uh Mar smiling and because they will always have that that question, and you know, uh they had the opportunity to uh have with governor uh be sitting in Asia and India, and that's when they had the the first time that they had the opportunity to discuss about this project and the fact that it's happening and in Mesa del Sol and uh we can say that uh currently we're working with already different other companies that they are already eager to come to Albuquerque, New Mexico to be part of this opportunity.

And you know, uh they had the opportunity to uh have the governor uh be sitting in Asia and India, and that's when they had the the first time that they had the opportunity to discuss about this project and the fact that it's happening and Mesa del Sol, and uh we can say that uh currently we're working with already different other companies that they are already eager to come to Albuquerque, New Mexico to be part of this opportunity.

And once again, you know, all the summary, the the great information that it was presented by Director Gruner and Chris Chavez about specifics of the project, and uh once again I'm here and speaking on behalf of of Secretary Black and the New Mexico Economic Development Department.

We would love to have the opportunity to um discuss further if you have any questions and thank you for the opportunity to allow me to speak.

Thank you very much.

Mr.

Bakil, would you like to add anything?

Welcome.

Thank you, Madam President.

Uh, and council members uh uh happy uh uh I I uh appreciate the opportunity to be uh uh I unfortunately I couldn't be there in force.

Uh but nonetheless I'm extremely excited and eager to get started with this project.

It is unique in its itself.

Uh it is a uh purpose-built accelerator for foreign companies uh which want to have uh uh the United States as a marketplace.

Uh to date, we already have commitments of 100 million dollars in investment.

Uh we are uh talking to over 10 companies at this point in time, and uh we are right on track in terms of meeting our uh job targets.

Um having said that, any I'm open to any questions.

Thank you very much.

Uh and before we go to uh any other questions or comments from anyone, we do have some people signed up to speak on this.

Mr.

Cornelius.

Thank you, madam chair.

We have James Shanley, followed by Crystal Garcia on Zoom.

And but you know what?

I'm sorry, before we get to a beginning on that, uh, before we and then we're gonna do general public comment tonight, but due to the quantity of people signed up to speak overall this evening, we are going to move to one minute for each speaker.

So we can go ahead and start with you said Miss Garcia.

James Shanley.

Oh, James Shanley, I think he's here.

Thanks.

Mr.

Shanley's here in person.

Thank you.

Good evening, madam uh president, uh, and counselors.

Um I uh I am going to deliver to each of you this week the detailed data and survey, very granular.

I've conducted the five of our major corridors in Albuquerque: Central, Zuni, Manal, San Mateo, um, and Lomas Boulevard.

In addition to all the other reflections we observe traveling these roads, it is kind of astounding that with over 3,000 unhoused people living on our streets, there are 165 standalone buildings with over 1.7 million square feet of empty space, unused buildings that have amenities, and in many cases, unhoused people living against them.

There are also 662 closed businesses.

We need economic development, we need it to be local, and we need it to touch the corridors on which we live and drive every day.

And so I hope that is born in mind with our economic development.

Thank you.

Crystal Garcia Um good evening, uh City Councillors.

My name is Crystal, and um my public comment is regarding the proposed IDO amendments.

Um I'm sorry, Miss Garcia, can you hear me?

Yes, can you hear me?

Yes, I can.

I don't mean to interrupt you except for well, I kind of do, and I'm sorry, I don't mean to be rude about it.

But uh we're on 0106 right now, which is a local economic development grant.

So I and it's not to do with the IDO.

I said when I signed up, I signed up for general public comment.

Okay, I'm gonna have our staff go ahead and move you to general public comment so you can go ahead and speak.

Uh and but we're gonna have to get to that in a little bit.

Okay, thank you.

That concludes comment on this item.

Thank you, madam.

All right, thank you very much.

We are on 0106 as substituted counselors.

Any questions or comments?

Councillor Rogers to close.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I urge your support.

I'm really grateful to the department for making the changes.

I felt really important strongly that even though we're gonna be attracting global companies, that we should make sure we're hiring local New Mexicans for these jobs.

So I'm really grateful that the department um reworked the agreement and that the company agreed, and because that's really important to me that that local folks get these jobs.

So thank you, and I urge your support.

Counselors, the motion is for 0 106 as substituted.

All those in favor, raise your hand and say yes.

Yes.

Anyone opposed?

That passes unanimously.

Congratulations and thank you very much.

Thank you.

We have no appeals this evening, so we are going to move on for general public comments.

For the record, I do see Miss Garcia is still listed on the Zoom for general public comment, so she will be included anyhow, but when we get to her.

Members of the public can provide live public comments to the council in person or virtually if they have signed up for public comment for the instructions published on the agenda.

And on our website Friday, the public comment ground rules are that tonight each participant will have one minute to present.

Comments are to be addressed to the counselors only through the council chair acting as president for this evening.

Any disruptive conduct will remove and rem will result in removal from the meeting.

There's a one-minute time limit, and a bell will ring to indicate your time is up.

If you are called on deck, please start making your way down to the front.

Mr.

Cornelius, will you please call the name of the first speaker?

Thank you, madam chair.

Our first speaker is Dr.

Lisa Christofferson, followed by Carlos Michelin.

Apologize.

Sorry.

All right, President Basson.

Oh, wait, do I still say that or President Pena?

I think you can pick tonight.

Okay, all right.

Well, President, uh, whomever and uh city councilors, thank you.

My name is Lisa Christofferson.

I am a voting member of District 3.

Happy New Year, by the way.

Congratulations.

Welcome, welcome.

Um, in September 2023, a spokesperson for the city said speaking of the court injunction pervading the city sweeps.

This dangerous uh ruling would severely limit our ability to keep our city clean and safe while getting people connected to the help they need.

We intend to challenge the decision and protect our ability to enforce necessary public safety measures and quote City of Albuquerque.

So clean and safe is what the city told the public via the journal uh back in September 2023 that that's why they needed the injunction lifted.

We are here asking again, please, for a moratorium instead of sweeps.

The city has been doing sweeps.

Um and are we any safer or are we any cleaner since we've been doing the sweeps again since May of 2024?

No, we have not.

I don't think there's anyone in here who would say that we're cleaner or that we're safer.

So this is the city's argument.

So if the sweeps were allowed, why isn't it safer?

Please have the moratorium.

Carlos Michelin, followed by Jordan McConnell.

Um chair, counselors, my name is Carlos Michelin, and I live in district two.

I'm here to ask you to adopt a proposed ideal updates.

The package before you was developed by professional city planning staff, shaped through extensive public input, and recommended by the environmental planning commission.

It isn't it is an important step towards addressing Albuquerque's housing shortage, improving housing affordability, and reducing homelessness.

Um we all complain about these issues, and you have a chance to do something about it.

Umdates are both modest and transformational.

They're modest at the neighborhood level, where it would re-legalize gentle density, things like casitas and duplexes, not disruptive megatowers.

Um also transformative because at the small changes spread out across the whole city scale up, and they can make a real impact on our house and shortage without putting um development and gentrifying pressure on any one neighborhood.

We've seen it happen across it across the country and even in the state of New Mexico.

Um, I hope you consider passing it.

Thank you.

Jordan McConnell, followed by Maria Elena Johnson, good evening, madam president and counselors.

My name's Jordan.

I'm a resident of District 2, speaking for myself in support of modernizing our zoning and development rules through the upcoming IDO amendments.

These proposals support the kind of project that you just proposed.

Young professionals and downsizers want choice.

Our current zoning code prevents that choice.

Across New Mexico and the Southwest, our peer cities are moving forward.

Las Cruces, Silver City, and now Tucson have moved beyond exclusionary single dwelling zoning through bipartisan action.

They're legalizing housing types, reducing rigid parking mandates, and realowing traditional neighborhood forms like Tianditas.

In Las Cruces, these reforms are already working.

Prices are stabilizing, inventory's improving, new residents and employers are arriving, and realtors are actually making transactions.

And property taxes were not raised or re as reassessed as a result.

These reforms aren't ideological, they're economic.

Housing shortages affect workforce retention, small business, and whether young people can afford to stay.

We can't keep meeting today's needs with yesterday's rules.

New Mexico cities are showing what's possible.

Let's join them and build a stronger, inclusive Albuquerque.

Maria Elena Johnson, followed by Janet Sayers.

Good evening, Counselors.

Maria Elena is sick and asked if I would speak on her behalf.

Is that acceptable?

Sure.

What's your name, sir?

Great.

My name is Javier Benavides.

I'm uh speaking on behalf of the Coalition for a Safer Albuquerque.

And uh just wanted to take this opportunity to congratulate you all on your first hundred days going forward and encourage you to consider taking a different path, a more humanitarian, compassionate, leaning into our our abundance as a state approach to homelessness.

Um thus far, what we've seen is a cruel, inhumane, ineffective uh approach, sweeping people around the city with nowhere to go.

Um meanwhile, I just want to present some numbers quickly to you.

Um the governor spoke uh sent some critique to the city about the operation ZHILD.

Um its effectiveness, it costs $7 million.

I just want to tell you that $7 million could have afforded 700 vouchers for a year for 700 people here in the city.

Um we're sitting on 67 billion dollars at the state level, uh, about four to five billion in our reserves.

Uh so these questions about 40 to 50 million dollars to cover the entire spread of the pit count, which we're about to do in a few weeks.

Um, these are the decisions you can make.

Uh you can go to Santa Fe, uh, start to usher that um abundance in and um show some leadership that leans into your higher selves.

Thank you.

Janet Sayers, followed by Rafael S.

Uh good evening, Madam President.

I'm Janet Sayers, a resident of District 9, but I grew up in District 7.

And I'm here tonight to say January 6th, tomorrow belongs to New Mexico.

That is our statehood day, 1912.

We became the 47th state.

We only had our uh glory for one month because then Arizona came in on uh February 14th and became state number 48, which was the way things were as I was growing up until Hawaii and Alaska became uh states.

But I just wanted to say I hope all of you we're all part of the New Mexico history.

We're all part of uh Albuquerque history, whether you've been here for 70 years, 100 years, 200, whatever.

And and we're all writing New Mexico history.

And uh again, yes, I am wearing my my library badge, and we're hoping for support for um uh downtown brand.

And uh uh brand new counselor Teas came off of the library board.

Thank you for Sayers.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

I'm beating beat back.

Rafael S.

followed by Marcelin Costner.

Hello, um, I'm a district uh resident too.

Uh I'm showing general support for what was mentioned before with alternate approaches to uh the question of homelessness in Albuquerque, um, and general support for Quirky Books.

Um he's been fined $15,000 by the city for what he's chosen to do on his own property.

Um reminder that homelessness has increased in Albuquerque by 108% since 2017, and this is most likely a grand underestimate.

Um statistics are in uh housing and homelessness.

Um I'm glad that the housing affordability uh question has been brought up and um is being put into uh action here, but the fact that it has taken this long and what has happened in the meantime to the citizens of Albuquerque should be thought about.

Um I think there should be alternate approaches and more humanitarian approaches to homelessness and um.

Yeah, thank you.

We ask Corky Books for doing what it can to help, but not the landlords who exploit renters into homelessness.

Is it the man without shoes and housing that makes my rent go up?

Is it the woman without food, shelter, or services that to blame for my rising cost of groceries?

Judging from the city's actions, I would guess so.

So an APD moves my homeless neighbors from street to street to street to street to street, displacing their lives.

Should I expect cheaper rent?

My guess is no.

So can we just admit that this is one big cruel waste of resources?

What are we doing here?

It's crazy to put people in this.

You want people to have stabilized jobs, housing, etc., sweeping them every single day when they take a second to sit down, doesn't do that.

Not giving them decency and a place to put their things doesn't do that.

You can't expect people to find resources to get out of this if you do not bring the resources to them.

This is crazy.

What are we doing here?

It's broken, we're throwing money at it, and it's it's money down the pit.

Do something better this year.

Thank you.

For whoever is being very clever with clapping and whistling and can you please stop?

Thank you.

Mr.

Cornelius.

Thank you, Madam Chairman.

Brittany Means, followed by Loretta Naranjo Lopez.

Hi.

In late 2024, I came here and spoke against the proposed ordinances against our unhoused neighbors.

At the time, many of us cited personal stories and statistics about the harms of criminalizing homelessness and performing sweeps.

We shared the city's own report on what measures will actually improve housing insecurity and homelessness, including the fact that sweeping only impedes people's ability to find housing.

The next year, 2025 showed a 35% increase in people experiencing homeless and housing insecurity, with nearly half of those surveyed citing missing documentation as their primary barrier to finding housing.

That's 2,960 people living on the streets, having their belongings stolen, being moved around, dying in the cold.

From 2021 to 2024, the city spent one million dollars on labor and equipment to perform these sweeps.

Imagine how many people could have lived safely and comfortably if the city had instead invested that one million into affordable housing, housing resource funding, treatment programs, outreach, etc.

Uh, also leave quirky books alone.

Bye.

If if I hear somebody, I'm gonna ask security if you can if somebody is clapping and continues to clap, we're gonna have to ask you to leave the chambers.

Will you please stop clapping?

Thank you.

Loretta Naranjo Lopez, followed by Steve Holman.

Good evening, President and Counselors.

My um I'm here representing the Stark Neighborhood Alliance and the Santa Barbara Martinez Town Neighborhood Association.

We oppose 02602.

We are asking that you provide a 90-day review with um the neighborhood's input on the amendments to the IDO and to protect the health safety and welfare of the residents.

We oppose 02604.

This is the owner Lopez tower.

I have to stop you there.

That's a quasi-judicial matter.

So we cannot hear comments on that matter because it is one of those that we can't hear from unless all parties are present.

Okay, well, let me just finish on this one.

We oppose the process and recommendations.

Are you finishing on this one as in OpenSource?

On O20 on O2602.

Okay, as long as it's O2, please continue and can we add a little bit more time onto the timer.

Thank you.

So we oppose the process and recommendations to upzone our residential areas in this dark neighborhoods.

We ask that reman to the city be city planning to allow a real public process and include our input to these um current recommended detrimental zone changes.

I thank you for this opportunity to speak.

Steve Holman, followed by Patricia Wilson.

Hi, counselors.

Um, thank you, President.

Um start the IDO amendment process over and do not introduce it to council today.

There is serious need for investigation from the inspector general.

The planning department and EPC use the ability to make small editorial amendment changes to instead forcibly rezone nearly all single family properties citywide.

This was done after EPC recommendation and is not documented in anything except for the red line that was submitted to the city.

It did not allow for public comment in any capacity.

And that demands investigation.

Also, we need to investigate the further council of Fevercorn being a lobbyist, being on the land use planning zoning committee, and on top of that, having direct contributions to the IDO.

We also have to investigate organizations and lobbyists like the Nationally Backed Strong Towns Group, who might have said some falsehoods earlier.

Um, and their involvement with the city planning commission.

Um they are trying to say that there is no tax um situations that will happen.

Changing zoning removes the 3% property tax cap.

I ask you, I beg you investigate, investigate, do not move this forward.

Thank you.

Patricia Wilson, followed by Ilsa Beale.

The number of adopted and proposed amendments since the first IDO update in 2019 totals approximately 711.

The amendment process is broken, and for years many of us have begged for a better process.

This year's most egregious change was slipped into the post-EPC red line draft with no public input.

The R1 single family zone was deleted and replaced with RL low density.

The justification for this change is the citywide spreadsheet item number two editorial changes.

Changing the zoning of 68% of the properties in the city without notification is hardly a minor text addition, with and it's fraught with unintended consequences.

Upzoning is a silver bullet aimed at the wrong target.

We should be aiming to rescue our collapsed commercial corridors, and as goal number 9.4 in the comprehensive plan states make homelessness rare, short-term, and non-recurring.

Thanks very much.

And thank you for taking public comment before dinner break.

You're welcome.

Ilse Beal, followed by Bianca and Seneas.

Good evening.

Happy New Year and all.

Thank you.

Bianca Encineas, followed by Joseph Greenwood.

Good evening.

Thank you for the opportunity to speak and congratulations on the new leadership.

My name is Bianca Encinas.

I'm a business owner, formerly a renter, property owner.

I'm a product of team parents.

I came out of one of the lowest income communities in Bernalillo County.

And most importantly, I'm a professional planner.

And I'm here today to speak against 02602.

And the reason why is because as Mexican Indigenous people here in New Mexico, we have fought out our lives for our land rights and our water rights and for transparency in the process.

And unfortunately, this process is flawed.

And the reason that we don't have affordable housing is the failure of local government and state government.

We're in a reactive mode and have been, it's affordable housing.

Well, the reality is we have sufficient units out there for rent.

What we don't have is sufficient affordable housing.

And when I mean affordable housing, I mean housing that people who are making 12 an hour can pay, not 1,350 for a studio apartment like Bernalio County that's offering with the new purchase property that they purchased off forestry.

So I come here today to say send property owners notifications on any zoning changes that happen on their property.

That's true democracy, and that's true transparency.

Thank you so much.

Have a wonderful day.

Joseph Greenwood, followed by Thomas Abeta.

Good evening, Madam President and Counselors.

My name is Joseph Greenwood, and I'm a resident of District 2 in West Downtown, a neighborhood filled with a diversity of housing types and a vibrant community.

I would like to speak in favor of the upcoming IDO amendments that have passed through the EPC and will be seen by LUPS very soon.

Specifically, I would like to express my support of allowing duplexes and townhomes to be built in R1 zoning.

Helps young families start up the housing ladder, and helps seniors downsize to appropriate housing types.

It's critical that we make the identified reforms outlined in the IDO amendments.

Allowing our neighbors and our neighborhoods to build this affordable middle housing would make our public transit system more useful, as well as reduce the expenses of our infrastructure.

I thank you for your time, and I ask you to please pass the upcoming IDO amendments as they relate to middle housing.

Thank you.

Thomas Abeta, followed by Janet Lente.

Nicholas Maduro, Xi Jinping, Clarissa Penya.

Name three dictators who have been in power since 2013.

That's nothing.

You've been in power since uh Bibi and Yanyahu since 2009, and his honorable and venerable mayorship for life will be here for another 12 years.

Do you want it to be 16?

I think you lazy capitalist pigs have been here so long you can't stomach to listen to your own people for two minutes each.

I think we all practiced here for about two minutes, and you've been watching us stumble over your words, so we know what kind of president you're gonna be who watches us stumble our words and not extend our time and hear what we have to say.

There's a rumor going around town that you spent something like a million bucks on your campaign.

If you know someone who's got that kind of money to spend in town, have them spend it on our city, not you.

Your uh your uh uh sorry, uh uh your uh policy analyst told me that she can't control how your PAC spends the money.

Thank you, Mr.

Abeda.

So stop taking it.

Janet Lente, followed by Brandon Cottle.

Brandon Cottle, followed by Let's Otvo.

Apologies, I don't move as fast as I used to.

Uh good evening, City Council, Madam Chair, Madam President, happy new year, Feliz Año Nuevo.

My name is Brandon Cottle, I'm a resident in District 4, and I'm a veteran of the U.S.

Army.

I like to say like Johnny Cash, I've been everywhere, but I'm now a Bircanio, pay my taxes and vote in District 4.

I'm not gonna read anything because our time got cut.

Uh one of my early degrees is a history degree, and I'm just here to encourage the city council to consider and make positive changes.

I'm proud of New Mexico.

We're leading the nation in taking care of people in many ways.

A lot of historians, a lot of social uh social scientists, a lot of economists would say decisions made here affect the population much more than an hour north or almost 2,000 miles to the east.

I might have gestured to the wrong direction, sorry, under here.

But there's a lot of things that are gonna happen this year.

My ask is please take the challenge to help every Albuquerque resident and our surrounding area.

Thank you for your time.

Happy New Year.

Let's Otvo, followed by Brick Jonas.

Madam President, Council members, to whom it may concern.

We often view property as binary.

It's either private or public, but today our cities are operating in a gray zone where private buildings become an essential public services, like social services and municipal clinics.

When our local police force attempt to trespass individuals from these hybrid spaces, they're not just enforcing a property line, they're walking into a legal and ethical minefield.

First, we must consider the constitutional risk.

The Supreme Court has long held that while the government can set reasonable content neutral restrictions on property, it cannot exclude citizens for impermissible reasons.

When a public entity operates inside a private building, that space becomes a quasi public forum by using a trespass order to municipality, maybe violating a person's First Amendment right to petition their government or the 14th Amendment due process.

You cannot simply cancel a citizen's access to their own government because a landlord holds a lease.

Madam President, Counselors, Chairwoman.

Yeah, two minutes.

One minute is not enough.

Three minutes, you never get a three minutes.

Why would we uh substitute that for one minute?

But I'm gonna try to follow up on Let's Otvo because he didn't even get his two minutes.

Uh next, he would have probably spoken about litigation, about how you find yourself in litigation, and then he would have spoken about the vulnerable individuals in our city who get trespassed from public property because what?

They're sitting on a sidewalk.

Let's point at this man here who likes to do that downtown in the middle of the night when people are trying to leave their bars.

That officer right there, Officer Harris.

Told me I was loitering.

Really?

If I'm ordering, then I must be loitering here.

Define loading for me.

Because I'm pretty sure that maybe there might be some ordinance that you've passed in the past regarding uh young people under the age of 18.

But I'm an adult.

I'm an adult.

Have the right to assemble, have the right to press, have the right to press in every public space, every public access.

Remember that.

Because if I go into a private building that has houses public access, I'm allowed to be there and I'm allowed to press.

Thank you.

Tyler Richard, followed by Anami Das.

Good evening, uh counselors.

Happy New Year.

My name is Tyler Richter.

I'm a resident of D7.

I'm here to speak in strong support of their proposed IDO development update.

Yesterday I attended the inauguration for the city council and the mayor.

Congratulations and thank you for your service.

I was not there as an official cap capacity, but as a parent.

My son plays the saxophone in the Albuquerque High Mighty Bulldog jazz band.

And I volunteer as uh and I transport the instruments.

I hope you enjoyed their participation.

I certainly did, and I was incredibly proud.

That pride is what brings me here tonight.

I have three sons, my oldest 15.

He plans to attend UNM under the Opportunity Scholarship.

I was fortunate to be among early reciprocity recipients of the lottery scholarship when I graduated high school.

But after college, I looked around Albuquerque and felt there wasn't a clear path.

So I left and spent 18 years living the war abroad.

The story isn't unique.

Our citizens are coming back.

Supporting this IDO helps answer the helps to increase my pride in this community.

We need more neighbors.

Please support the IDO updates.

Thank you.

Anami Das, followed by Sarah Azebo.

Hi y'all.

Happy New Year.

Um I wanted to talk about the moratorium idea that has come up earlier.

Um actually, no, I wanted to talk about the enforcement efforts of the encampment ban that went into effect last year.

Um the encampment ban for the full city uh didn't exist until last year.

However, open spaces have had an encampment ban for at least uh like since uh I have data from 2017.

It might have been before that.

I wasn't paying attention back then.

Um the enforcement efforts for the citywide encampment ban have pushed people into open spaces and now they're camping there, as you were all warned.

Um the 2023 uh number of citations that were um given each month was about 4.3.

2025 in open spaces it went to 203.

Um that was a four times increase.

I think.

Anywho, happy new year once.

Sarah Azebo, followed by a Tad New Minsky.

Good evening, Council President and Counselors.

I am Sarah Zibo District 2.

Counselor Backe, thank you for the Portland loop.

Appreciate that mid progress.

Um I find it a sad reflection on our shared humanity in the state of when Albuquerque win the city joins an architect, a realtor, and a healer who are blaming a used bookstore owner for homelessness crime and lack of public bathrooms because he allows people to camp in his parking lot.

At 5 a.m.

today, people from Quirky Used Books went with me to a recovery center that was serving 40 people in November, jumped to 150 in December, was supposed to reopen to new intakes today, but because of a staffing shortage, it's closed to intakes until February 2nd, devastating 35 people who risked sleeping outside in 20 degree weather, so they could line up at 4 a.m.

for help.

Many of them for a repeated attempt, clearly showing that unhoused people with substance use disorder do want treatment, resources, and community support.

Many of them for a repeated attempt, clearly showing that unhoused people with substance use disorder do want treatment, resources, and community support, contrary to the narrative spun by this administration that fails to provide it.

Excuse me.

Tad Numinsky, followed by Sarah.

Thank you.

My name does the Nemeeski.

Well, that's our day.

Driving South from South San Pedro, approaching central.

Look at my right.

Into the L.

South from Central.

Dump.

Trey O'Lovere.

And the end side.

Our block.

Weed City fans.

That's it.

Sit this sake's council.

Domb side.

That's I guess she's enjoying homeless people.

And that area.

Thank you.

Sarah, followed by Crystal Garcia on Zoom.

Thank you, Counselors, Madam Presidents.

I'm Dr.

Sarah, and I'm the pastor at Church of the Good Shepherd in the Northeast Heights.

We gather tonight on the eve of Epiphany, Three King's Day, the night when wise travelers followed a star to find a child born without shelter.

Mary, Joseph, and Jesus were forced to seek shelter wherever they could.

If that holy family arrived in Albuquerque tonight, would we welcome them?

Or would we sweep their belongings, cite them, send them to MDC?

The latest housing needs assessment shows a shortage of nearly 22,000 deeply affordable units, and more than 6,000 of our neighbors are on the street tonight, including kids.

We don't have the capacity to house everybody right now.

You heard that people are trying to get help, and there's just not space.

So my recommendation is also for a temporary moratorium on sweeps, a winter eviction freeze, and a renewed homeless coordinating council with real authority that could develop lasting solutions.

Epiphany teaches us that wisdom is found when we follow the light towards compassion.

So let's be a city that chooses justice and dignity and lasting solutions.

Thank you.

Crystal Garcia, followed by Nicole Finch.

Good evening, counselors.

My name is Crystal with the Historic Neighborhood Alliance.

The proposed IDO amendments are not a plan.

They are a land grant.

They put homeowners and historic neighborhoods at risk, threatening seniors, low-income families, and long-time residents with being priced out of their own homes.

I am concerned that the recent IDO amendment proposals include substantial changes that many residents were not clear on, and that the public notice and engagement process did not provide adequate opportunity for meaningful input.

I am also concerned about the level of professional advocacy and outside influence involved in the ideal process.

Well, Councillor February has extensive experience in environmental policy and advocacy and has been closely involved in discussions around the IDO does make transparency and accountability even more important.

I am further concerned about the influence of outside advocacy groups such as Strong Towns, and believe there should be greater transparency around how these groups interact with city council and planning staff so the public can trust that all voices are being heard fairly and equally.

Thank you.

Nicole Finch, followed by Aaron Thornton.

You are muted, Nicole.

Cannot hear you.

Mr.

Cornelius, Nicole, we're gonna come back to you.

We'll circle back to you at the end so that you have a few moments to be able to troubleshoot that.

Thank you, madam chair.

Aaron Thornton, followed by William and Delicato.

Hi there.

Good evening, Madam Chair and City Councillors.

My name is Aaron, and I'm a homeowner in District 6.

As we move into the IPO amendment season, which is honestly more like two or three seasons, I wanted to express support for many of the ideal amendments included to help our city meet the housing and livability challenges we are facing head on.

Amendments labelizing housing options across the city will help us make space for people who want to live near where they work and learn.

And welcoming neighborhood corner stores creates opportunities for neighborhood neighbors to connect and have their basic needs met where they live.

And reducing the arbitrary parking minimums is a win for affordability, business flexibility, financial spaces and water.

I know we have a long season of lively discussion ahead of us.

No single action or zoning change can solve our homelessness and affordability prices.

And I'm grateful for everyone working up and downstream to care for the people in the meantime.

I'm so excited what we can achieve with bold action and strong political leadership.

So I urge you to treat this problem seriously and support these meaningful updates to the IDO.

Thank you very much.

William in Delicato.

Please accept promotion to panelists.

Now it's been embedded in ideal amendments.

How about non-conforming uses?

Changes in taxes from uh changing zoning.

Uh people ask me questions about this.

I've been following it for months, and I have a still have a very difficult time answering them.

Thank you for your time.

We'll now go to back to Nicole Finch.

Please.

Thank you so much for your patience.

I appreciate the help.

Um, I'm Nicole Finch, a resident of District Nine and a member of the library advisory board.

Um, as you know, the main library branch needs a new HVAC system.

Their HVAC system is 50 years old.

Um, if the main library branch goes out, that's going to affect operations all throughout the city and the county.

So, as you know, we've been um looking for set aside funds from city councilors.

In addition to that, the New Mexico State Legislative session is starting up uh very soon here, and we have been in contact with all the legislators in Bernley Oak County, and we are also asking them for capital outlay funds.

It's an official capital outlay project for this legislative session.

It's it's um out there for people to support, and so we're just hoping to get support from everyone we can, and if we all work together, we can come together and get this HVAC system replaced.

Thank you.

Madam Chair, uh uh Rose Bennett Herrick and William in Delicato have dropped offline.

So I believe that concludes general public comment.

Thank you very much.

We're going to take a break and we'll return at 7 35.

Welcome back, everyone.

All right.

We are currently on approvals.

Uh EC four eighty two is five sixteen arts operating and facility lease agreement twenty twenty-five to twenty thirty-one.

I move approval.

There's a motion and a second by Councillor Grout.

I don't see anybody signed up for public comment.

Counselors, any questions or comments?

Seeing none.

The motion is for approval of EC four eighty-two.

All those in favor, raise your hand and say yes.

Yes.

Anyone opposed?

That passes on an eight zero vote.

Moving on.

OC fifty eight is five oh one first streets northwest essential for municipal purposes.

I move approval.

There's a second by Councillor Bacca.

Any questions or comments?

Counselor Rogers.

So we just approved the lease.

But this is to make that same property essential for government.

So just wanted to ask about that.

Mr.

Padilla.

Oh, Mr.

Hall.

Council, uh, President Council Rogers.

Yes, this bill would identify this property as essential for municipal purposes for the uh making sure that it doesn't uh it wouldn't be um sold again unless it was designated as non-essential.

Uh so that's it does seem a little I can understand the concern about it being a little backward as it was granted and then later done, but that's the this is just to make sure that that property at least is held for that time.

Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you, uh Mr.

Haw.

I think I I remember approving the the I think at the end in 2024 we approved the non-essential um designation, and at that time I brought it up.

Are we sure we kicked out warehouse 508?

If you remember they came and did public comment about being removed from this building because the city was gonna sell it.

And then now we're putting in, which I've toured it, so no disrespect to the 516 arts team.

Um they have great plans for it, but we displaced youth from this building.

So I just have to be on the record to say that again.

We displaced youth who use this building for youth programming to now put art there.

So just want to remember have us remember that.

Thank you.

Counselors, any other questions or comments?

Thank you for the reminder of that, Councilor Rogers.

The motion is for OC50.

Oh, Councilor Champagne.

Thank you, Madam President.

Um Madam Chair, President, Chair, President, President Chair.

Um I think I asked this at FGO when we talked about the renovations that are being done to this location.

Um, do we have a total amount of what we've spent so far on the renovations that are the city is paying for, but we're working off of the designs in preparation for the lease agreement with 516 Arts.

Madam President, Council Champagne, um, Director Sanchez, Dr.

Sanchez is here, can speak to our uh the work that we are doing at this location, or if I relate it to 516 arts and the state appropriations uh that are tied to that.

Hi.

Hi, Madam Chair and Councillor Champaign.

Um I believe that the amount of state capital outlay that we have for this renovation is um somewhere between five and six million dollars, and that's what we've been working with in to do um phase one renovations for 516 arts to then occupy the space.

And that that's all state capital money that was advocated for um by 516 arts and uh outpost at the time okay, madam chair.

So so the city isn't spending any money, it's state money that was given to 516 arts that we are doing the construction on and being re reimbursed, or the money's being money's being funneled through us, or how does this actually work?

Because we're doing the work, correct?

But it's state funding that's going toward it's kind of helped me understand it, please.

Madam Chair, Councillor Champagne.

Um, yeah, this money was given to the city for this purpose.

It's state capital lay funds, it was given with purpose to develop um an art center.

Um 516 advocated for that money.

Um the reason that we moved it to 508 First Street, um, kind of at this time where there we were already talking about making that property non-essential, is that another property that they were hoping to construct on fell through.

So then we had to work with them or we wanted to work with them to find another place.

Um this money as state capital outlay needs to be spent on a city or municipal building.

So it is the city's building.

Um all improvements belong to the city.

So we we were in charge of uh the architectural design.

We're overseeing and leading the construction with uh city contractors and city project managers, so it is all public property, and like um Explora, which I feel like is always that makes sense to a lot of us, that it's a another public-private partnership.

So it will continue to be city property.

We will have the operating agreement which you just approved, um, that ensures that the work that is done there is for the benefit of the city of Albuquerque and its residents.

And Madam Chair, and that's why we're moving it back into essential purposes.

Correct.

Um Madam Chair, Councillor Champaign, yes.

Uh, I believe that um Councillor Baca, I don't want to speak for him, but Councillor Baca's intent was to just ensure that all of that was very clear that we are now um committed to this building long term as a city property.

Because of the grant, okay.

Okay, thank you, Madam Chair.

Councilor Bacca.

Thank you, madam.

Chair.

No, to thank you, Director Sanchez.

I've been engaged with this project the entire time, make sure everything's on the up and up.

Just what Dr.

Sanchez said.

You know, making sure our investment stays with the city the way it should.

Always happy to meet with my colleagues on the on the dais on projects or anything happening in D2.

I'm usually pretty well engaged with most things.

Not everything, but but most things, at least I'm aware of it.

And the youth are in a much better spot right now than this whole building was and the condition it was, just so folks know.

And they're doing fantastic.

Thank you to everyone who's helped them with funding in the past as well.

So uh urge everybody's support.

Thank you.

Councilor Rogers.

Thank you, uh, Madam Chair.

So thank you, Councillor Backer, for that.

I just my question is we talked a lot about the disrepair of the building and why it wasn't suitable.

So why didn't we do all of this and help Warehouse 508 get capital funding, be their fiscal agent, bring the building up to what it needs to be?

Um why did we not do that for them?

Um, Madam Chair, Councillor Rogers.

Uh it was a very expensive project, and to be clear, 516 Arts and Outpost at the time, Outpost um removed themselves from the partnership uh and decided to reinvest where they are.

But 516 Arts uh advocated and made plans and came up with a vision for this, and they spent about three or four years working on public fundraising as well as some private fundraising.

So they really led all of the efforts with the legislature to secure all of this public funding.

And so, to your question, why didn't the city um act in the same way with Warehouse 508?

Um, I would say that the city would have if Warehouse 508 had gone as a nonprofit and worked um over three or four years to secure the level of funding, five to six million dollars needed to make substantial improvements to the facility.

Thank you.

I'm grateful outpost state and district six.

I don't just have to say that.

Thank you.

Counselors, any other questions or comments?

The motion is for approval to OC58.

All those in favor say yes and raise your hand.

Yes.

Anyone opposed?

That passes unanimously.

We are now moving on to final actions.

Councilor Rogers, 0102.

Thank you, Madam President.

I would like to move 0102 adopting the rental practices ordinance to codify provisions of the New Mexico Senate Bill 267 passed in 2025 regarding rental practices, screening fees, fees disclosures, and late fees, and requiring owners to offer a no-fee payment option.

There's a motion and a second by Councilor People Corn.

Counselor uh Rogers to open.

Thank you, Madam President.

This is uh direct related this bill is directly related to a lot of things I hear from my constituents on a regular basis about some of the difficulties around being a renter.

I'm very proud that this to hear that the state legislature took this up.

Um, but we have some issues with codifying that in city law so that we can actually help enforce that.

So there's a lot of like confusion around who enforces who doesn't enforce.

So I do want to have um our council staff help us with a little presentation, and then I want to talk about some of the research that I did regarding who is supposed to enforce this.

I do want to thank our advocates that met with us from lots of different orgs and our landlords, rest of the apartment association, uh, and I thank my colleagues for allowing us to defer this because we were able to find some common ground.

I think they had some really great feedback that we were able to incorporate.

So I would like to go to our uh Abigail Styles to help us just do an overview of what the bill did at the state.

Um, and the only addition that I'm adding that I'd like to add to the what the state did is requiring a free payment option for folks to pay their rent.

Um, and so that's a big one.

We have um some folks in my district that will charge $50 to pay their rent through an online fee through an online portal, right?

Those types of things is just you know for folks in poverty like myself, just make it much more expensive.

Um and so I would love to go to uh Abicon.

Ms.

Stiles Thank you.

So I'm just gonna go over what this uh ordinance does.

Um the ordinance would create a new Article 27 under Chapter 14 of the revised ordinances of Albuquerque 1994, known as the rental practice ordinance.

Next slide.

Uh the ordinance would codify the provisions of the uniform owner residential relations resident relations act into city code.

It would provide a framework for enforcement to the city, and it would add a requirement that all owner operators provide tenants with a free option for paying their rent.

Next slide.

Next slide.

The ordinance establishes several uh standards governing rental application and screening fees, including disclosure and limitations on how much uh such fees may be charged.

Next slide.

Um in researching, staff found that several instances of Albuquerque apartments that were still charging more than $50 in application fees.

Uh, this is an example that was taken from January 2nd of this year, um, where a uh an apartment, and I've I've um redacted where uh was charging a 250 dollar administrative fee at the time of application, which is um not allowable under the state law.

Next slide.

Uh I just included another screenshot as an example of another apartment that's uh charging an application fee of 225 dollars.

Next slide.

Um the section describes protections related to screening fees, including restrictions intended to prevent duplicative or unnecessary charges.

So the owner must place a hold or delay depositing funds until the prior applicants are screened, rejected, or declined for the unit.

The applicants must receive a written or digital receipt for their application fees, and the fees must be refunded within 30 days if the screening is not completed, and uh there are refunds required if another applicant is accept accepts the unit.

Next slide.

Um the ordinance places limitations on the use and scope of background checks in the rental screening process, and also requires that owners provide copies of any screening reports used, and that owners don't charge a second screening fee if an applicant applies for another unit that has the same owner owns within 90 days of the first application.

Next slide.

Uh owners are required to provide clear notice of rent increases and newer increased fees, giving the tenants adequate time and information to plan or plan a response.

Uh next slide.

The ordinance requires owners to offer at least one.

Sorry, I think I skipped that.

Um for late fees and rental payments.

I'm sorry.

Uh late fees are capped at no more than 5% of rent, and um to assess a late fee owners must provide no uh notice no later than the last day of the next rental period.

And rent is payable without demand at the agreed time in place, so renters are expected to pay their rent on time as is in their lease.

Uh, rent payments can't be applied to damages or deposits unless it's agreed upon in writing, and owners cannot charge extra fees for guests staying for a reasonable period of time.

Next slide.

This provision is not in the state law, and this is the provision that the sponsor wanted to add that owners must provide at least one free option for paying rent, and residents that does not impose additional late fee or I'm sorry, additional fees or payments.

So, just as a final uh takeaway, the ordinance um would align local code with state law and establish a um rent fee-free payment option for tenants.

And I can stand for any questions from you all already.

Councilor Rogers.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

And so, in further research, and again, I really want to thank our the landlords I met with, the apartment associations, landlords and advocates that I met with because you know they really urged us to do a little bit more research on how what is the enforcement as it is, because let's be clear, this is already New Mexico state law, it went into effect July of this 2025.

Um, and what we did is so right now if a renter had uh was charged 250 dollars for an application fee, they could report that to the attorney general.

So we've tested this.

We sent it one that we found to the attorney general's office, and you know what they did, they kicked it to the city of Albuquerque.

So, and so we called around the city of Albuquerque to find out where did you send it to?

Did you send it to consumer protection in equity inclusion?

And consumer protection said no, we don't have any record of that at all.

Um I asked for we asked some more questions around, okay.

So, and they that even they, the consumer protection um liaison that we have said, well, I wouldn't be able to enforce this anyways because the city of Albuquerque doesn't have any ordinances to allow me to actually enforce this.

So that is why this is critical that we have the ability to enforce this because right now we tried it.

We tried to see what would happen and it got kicked to the city of Albuquerque.

And so I'm asking that my colleagues help us uh be able to hold folks accountable who are violating state law because this is already the law of the land here in New Mexico.

And so with that, I'd love to move some amendments that are in our packets in our iPads.

First, I would like to um move it on our packets, it's B, but we're gonna call it number one.

I'm gonna start there just because it's the shorter one.

And again, I wanna thank our uh landlords and our and our apartment associations because they brought this up.

Um, and so we'll start on page one lines nine through 15.

We're gonna strike this whereas clause.

And the reason we're going to strike that and take out any reference to the Unfair Practices Act is to clarify that the standards adopted by this bill are from Eura and not from the unpair unfair practices act.

So that's just so we have continuity, we don't have any preemption issues.

Um, and uh again, I appreciate uh the folks from our community bringing that up because it was a valid point, and we want to make sure we don't do that.

So I would move uh floor amendment number one.

There's a motion and a second by counselor Baca.

Any questions or comments, counselors on the amendment number one to our 102.

All right, seeing none, the motion is for amendment number one to 0102.

All those in favor, raise your hand and say yes.

Anyone opposed that passes, I think on an eight to one vote.

Counselor Rogers, amendment two.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I'd like to move amendment number two.

This one is beefier, and again, this is uh feedback directly from landlords, um, our code enforcement around enforcement.

So uh we're gonna begin on line on page six, line 15.

Um, and we're going to strike it in its entirety and move to A, and this clarifies it so much better.

And so I thank our team and the advocates and everyone who weighed in on this.

So a notice of violation.

If the uh if the city identifies conduct by an owner that violates this ordinance, the shit city shall promptly notify the owner and or the owner's agent of the violation of the notice of the violation with a notice of violation.

And then it talks specifically about how we do that.

Um, I want to just point out on item two, this was something directly from our landlords that wanted it to be sent certified mail so we know when the time clock starts, which I appreciated.

Um, response.

This was about if the owner shall pay any penalty imposed and cure any violations as applicable, they can request mediation or request a hearing by the response date as indicated on the notice of violation.

Again, this came directly from our landlords that said we need a recourse rather than like an actual uh hearing officer, which is further down in the amendment.

The B for the penalty, we updated the penalty to just be a 250 dollar fine, and that is in direct relation to the state law.

Originally, we had had that you would get a 250 fine for each violation subsequent to that, and so based on the feedback, we got rid of the subsequent fees just to match what the state uh statute says.

Curing, so we wanted they wanted to make it very specific about what is what how you cure a violation, so we have that.

We added mediation with our city legal for we have an alternate dispute resolution office so that a landlord could request mediation, and then on top of that, adding a hearing officer.

And again, uh I think the amendment here replaces the enforcement section based on feedback directly from landlords, tenant advocates, and code enforcement.

The amendment uh section explains how the city enforces the ordinance when it believes a property owner has violated it.

If the violation is identified, the city sends written notice, the owner must either fix the issue, pay a fine, request mediation, or request a hearing by the stated deadline.

Each violation just carries a 250 civil fine, which is very important to point out, it's a civil fine.

And these this only applies to this ordinance.

So some of the feedback we got from our landlords was well, it might take us longer than 30 days to get an air conditioner or to get something like that.

This only applies to these types of violations that are in this ordinance, which means the what the examples that we pulled up about 250 dollar application fee, right?

That shouldn't take 30 days to cure, they should be able to return that fee.

But we still left it at 30 days just for uh to make sure that we are working with both sides.

That's my heart to make sure that we're all working together to strengthen and codify the city laws.

So I would urge your support.

All right, the motion is for amendment number two.

Is there a second?

Second from Councillor Vaca.

Counselors, any questions or comments?

All right, seeing none, the motion is for amendment number two to 0102.

All those in favor, raise your hand and say yes.

Yes.

Anyone opposed?

That passes unanimously.

We're back on the bill as amended.

Uh and I know that we do have some public speakers.

I'd like to go to them next, and then we can go to discussion from the council.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

For speakers, Dr.

Lisa Christofferson, followed by Raphael S.

Thank you very, very much.

Wow.

Thank you.

Thank you very much, Counselor Rogers.

That it was tremendous amount of work.

Thank you.

As uh somebody who has rented, and uh the reason I live with my parents is because of all those fees, and even though I'm at the top of the teacher salary in New Mexico, I cannot afford to live by myself.

I would have to have roommates uh in Albuquerque.

So I would be homeless uh if my parents did not let me live with them and help take care of them.

So I would I thank you so very much.

I'm in huge support of um affordable housing and all of the efforts that you all have made um in this last uh last two years to get housing.

So uh thank you for that morator moratorium on instead of uh sweeps is really what we're asking for.

Where are people supposed to go?

Can you guys please declare a state of emergency?

We need more uh locations, we don't have enough places.

We're trying to put people in homes.

There are people who want homes or want beds, but we don't have enough.

Please, moratorium, Raphael S.

Followed by Marcelyn Costiner.

Hello, you might remember me from the earlier.

Um I'm a renter in Albuquerque, so I was lucky enough to find a place that does not have hidden fees because it's an individual person, and I got very lucky, but I'm also aware that I'm very lucky.

Uh, many of my friends and family here uh do have to pay hidden fees.

Um, and when searching for a rental unit, it adds a lot of time to try to find a they show the price, and then you go in and shows like 10 extra prices that you're not aware of, then you have to pay a lot to even have a chance of getting the apartment, which you might not get.

Um, so this would be very welcome.

Um, and would be very different from many other places I've lived in.

Uh yeah, so please don't mess with this amendment.

Thank you.

Marshan Costner, followed by Brittany Means.

Thank you.

Thank you.

If this passes, thank you.

Many of us live paycheck to paycheck and plan our rent into our monthly budget.

Allowing landlords to change that with little to no notice puts us all at danger.

This is a no-brainer.

We should know as renters what we're going to pay for shelter, period.

You, as our legislators should understand that.

You should try to sit in my shoes for one second and not the people that line your pockets and pay for your campaigns.

And think about what we go through, please.

Because being paycheck to paycheck, month to month, and one little fee can change between being homeless and being housed.

This is really, really, really important stuff for us.

And if you guys could get you know down at our level and understand that, even if you have other, you know, just please pass this.

This is really basic stuff.

We need this, we're renters, we need help.

It's hard, it's expensive living here.

Please help us just a little bit.

Brittany Means, followed by Anami Das.

Hi, can you hear me?

Okay.

I'm here to support 025102.

Another reservations about attracting investors to build more housing supply.

But I hope you'll consider the following questions about these reservations.

Why would we want to attract property owners who would be put off by renter protections?

Why would we prioritize the interest of hypothetical investors over the current material needs of people in our community?

Why should we concern ourselves with potential profit interests of a handful of business owners over the thousands of people in this city who need fair and safe housing access?

The Albuquerque Affordable Housing and Homelessness Needs Assessment from the Urban Institute cites renter protections as one of the key measures for ending homelessness and housing insecurity.

As do the National Law Center on Homelessness and Poverty, the Department of Housing and Urban Development, the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, the National Alliance to End Homelessness, the Yale Department of Economics, the United States Interagency Council on Homelessness, et cetera.

This is really common sense ordinance backed by data that can only benefit our community and help keep all of us safe and well.

Please vote yes.

Anami Das, followed by Winter Torres.

Winter Torres, followed by James Freeman.

Do I have one minute or two minutes?

Madam Presidents, uh, my name is Winter Torres, and I am the CEO and founder of New Mexico Eviction Prevention and Diversion.

Uh we ran the court connected eviction prevention program during COVID and still run programs in different areas of the state.

We have been seeing a degradation in the condition of housing.

Um if you're familiar, folks, and we've had it happen at the city of Albuquerque.

When there is um a finding that a place is uninhabitable, then there's a bunch of people that are unhoused.

And so folks don't report.

Um, and then we have a complaint-based system, but then nobody investigates in it.

There's no investigation by any state agency.

Department of Work for Solutions is if they do it, it's for employment.

The AG's not doing it, the county's not doing it, the city's not doing it.

Um tenant in theory could do it themselves, but legal aid is not been doing any housing cases for at least two years, and court interpretation also um is not helpful.

James Freeman, followed by Reverend Dr.

Sarah Towns.

I remember when I first started reading about this bill, SB 267.

Uh, Rachel Biggs, my buddy and advocacy was was the legislative expert.

I actually went up to Santa Fe and spoke at a Senate hearing about my experience with this.

I'm originally from Texas, so I've only been here about 10 years.

I this is completely illegal in Texas.

There's no, you can't you can't charge somebody $600, and then when they bring you 600, say, I'm kidding, it was 900.

I didn't think that was possible because that doesn't happen in Texas.

And I started looking into it, and I heard client after client after client, and they were just making up these absurd fees.

Uh, and I so I thought there must be some commonality here.

There, no, there's no commonality.

It doesn't matter what color you are, it doesn't matter your gender, they were doing it to every single person.

It's almost like they were doing it as like a housing voucher discriminatory tool.

That's what I actually discovered.

That was the only commonality I could come up with was they think they might have a voucher.

We can't have any voucher people here.

Reverend Dr.

Sarah Towns, followed by Ryan Swinney.

I recently walked with a family member, as she got her first apartment last week in Albuquerque, and that was a revelation.

In addition to all the upfront fees, right when she was moving in, they sprung a $60 cleaning fee on her.

And let me tell you, they did not clean very well because we found bugs everywhere.

What is she to do?

And luck, she didn't have the money to pay the $60 fee.

Luckily, she had a family member who helped her out.

But how many people aren't in that kind of situation?

These surprise fees really do prey on vulnerable people, and I think it's a compassionate thing to do just to declare up front what people are gonna owe.

Thank you.

Ryan Swinney, followed by Andrea Calderon.

Wonderful.

Madam President, members of the council, thank you.

My name's Ryan Swinney.

I'm here to speak in opposition to 25102.

But first, the realtors would like to sincerely thank Councilwoman Rogers for meeting with our organization and engaging in thoughtful open dialogue about the challenges facing her constituents.

Despite the proposed amendments, the bill still raises serious concerns related to conflicts with state landlord tenant law, due process protections, enforcement authority, and the risk of unintended consequences for responsible party owners and renters alike.

We believe these issues warrant a more collaborative and comprehensive approach, one that aligns with clear clearly, one that aligns clearly with state law and ensures fair notice and enforcement and effectively targets truly problematic properties without creating unnecessary legal risk for the city.

Thank you.

Andrea Calderon, followed by Alan Lisseck.

Hi, good evening, Council.

Welcome back.

Um thank you for allowing me some time to speak tonight.

Um I am not speaking on behalf of the Affordable Housing Coalition tonight on this particular bill, but I am speaking as a resident who has been renting the entire time that I've lived in Albuquerque.

Um there have been some very significant fees that have been charged both to myself and to others that if I did not have the ability to advocate for or against I would definitely have been subject to paying.

Um there are a lot of municipalities across the U.S.

that go beyond what is required of SB 267, such as in California, which does not, which which has multiple municipalities where uh there's lawful alternative evidence of payment ability uh outside of poor credit um that um is encouraged.

Uh we all I also um encourage a restriction in charging application screening fees um if the property is not available.

That's something that I've definitely been charged with, amongst the other slew of elements and and very much um support Councillor Rogers' um introduction of this bill.

Thank you so much.

Alan Lisek, followed by Hannah Epstein on Zoom.

All right, uh Madam Presidents, my name is Alan Lissec, and I'm the executive director of the apartment association in New Mexico.

We represent about 40,000 rental doors across the city here.

I do want to thank Councilor Rogers for meeting with us to try and find a solution on this bill, but unfortunately, we stand in opposition due to the legal challenges and some lack of clarity.

The bill still attempts to override portions of the Uniform Owner Resident Relations Act where the state has clearly outlined what the prohibited acts, who enforces it, which remedies apply, and the claim and how claims are adjudicated.

This bill would override these processes and move them to a city-run enforcement process that directly conflicts with state statute and the New Mexico Unfair Practices Act.

Uh by removing the new Mexico or the whereas statement on the New Mexico Unfair Practices Act, it did not change the legal challenges with preemption.

Uh, this bill duplicates a penalty that's already governed by state law in the attorney general's office and would actually allow for a double penalty from both the city and the state and creates a parallel enforcement that's fundamentally inconsistent with the judicial remedy structure.

We believe there are better ways to enforce the laws that we already have on the books without passing something at the municipal level that conflicts with statewide laws.

Thank you.

Okay.

Hannah Epstein, followed by Ian Robertson.

Good evening, everyone.

Um, my name is Hannah Epstein.

I'm a constituent from District 6.

I want to thank uh Councillor Rogers for bringing this bill to the floor.

And um I want to give my support to it.

Um, I used to rent, now I'm a home homeowner.

That does not change my feelings, but this is extremely necessary uh to reduce the burden on renters.

Um I would not have been able to afford my apartment as a grad student if the kind of fees that we're talking about now would have been levied on me at the time.

That was uh as recent as uh 2007.

Um so things have changed a lot.

Um I just want to say that uh it's an undue burden on renters to have these fees.

So I support this, and I I do think we can go further as well.

Thank you so much.

I hope you have a good night.

Ian Robertson, followed by Adriana Wyake.

Go ahead, Ian.

Hello.

Hello, can you hear me?

Uh first up is Ian Robertson and then Adriana.

Go ahead, Ian.

I apologize.

I I uh saw you there.

Um Madam President, members of the council, thank you for the opportunity to speak today.

I want to start by just genuinely thanking Councillor Rogers.

I know uh Council Rogers worked very hard to work with various groups on this bill and just try to get something that made sense for a lot of different uh interests and also just uh objectives.

Um I'm very sensitive to this issue and obviously really appreciate what what is trying to be done.

Um my biggest issue that I have with this current uh execution of the bill is that the council is trying to basically duplicate efforts at the state level, which I think creates complex compliance issues.

And the other issue I have is that it sets a precedent that every time the state fails to enforce its own laws, the city has to step in with some sort of stop gap and drop that onto our budgets.

Um I think a more elegant solution at this point would be for us to find a way to get the state to enforce the law that had already passed, and then uh put that burden onto them rather than duplicate at first and create a very confusing legal system for landlords.

Um that said, I I understand um the objective here and appreciate all the effort that's gone into it.

Thank you.

Adriana Wyake.

Hi there, can you hear me?

We can hear you, please proceed.

Hi, my name is Adriana Wiaki.

I'm a housing justice organizer at Olay.

I'm speaking in favor of this bill because this would help renters have more transparency, which is very much needed in Albuquerque.

Um, as somebody who rents in the city and speak to renters every day, this would stop hidden fees, so we are blind-sided with new costs upon move-in.

We deserve transparency.

The capping of application fees at 50 percent 50 dollars is extremely important because you shouldn't allow your community to be taken advantage of when they're simply looking for housing.

Um I believe that this gives real power to for renters to enforce their rights with clear penalties and city enforcement.

This could be a tool for real change.

Um, this is important to be passed at the city level because landlords and management still continue to break these laws even though they've been passed since the middle of last year.

Uh please give your community a chance to have a home.

I urge you to pass this ordinance.

Thank you, Councillor Rogers, for standing up for Albuquerque Renters, and thank you for your time.

Madam Chair, I was able to find unable to find Raul Kobos.

So that uh concludes comment.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

All right, counselors.

We are on 0102 as amended.

Counselor Champagne has questions to start, and then if anyone else does, let me know.

Thank you.

Um Madam President.

Somebody said that and I liked it this plural.

Um I want to first start off before I start answering my questions.

I want to apologize to my colleague.

Um she had reached out to me and asked me to assist her in this.

And uh, due to a crazy life between this and and other responsibilities that I have, I I failed to assist her in writing this.

Um so I apologize for that.

I really do because um reading it and going through it.

I have a very long list of questions and and clarifications that I need, but I think a lot of it could have possibly been possibly been alleviated if we could have worked together.

So I do apologize for that.

Um moving forward.

I hope that um we can do so.

Uh that being said, um let me dive into this.

And and I say this, and I then the line of questioning I have, and I I I I want some leeway or some with this because I know it's gonna take up a little bit of time, but I grew up renting.

Uh my parents didn't buy their house until uh later on in their life.

In fact, my my wife and I had to help assist them buy a house.

Um my mom reminded me that that we we had um for lack of better terms, bad landlords, slumlords that um the roof leaked in seven different places when it rained.

Uh uh.

And when I told her that, and she goes, You don't remember this, Dan, but we lived without hot water for a year and a half.

Uh and being you know eight or nine years old, I I obviously didn't remember that.

I just remember putting out pots every time it rained, and it's my locations or my responsibility.

So it does hit close to home knowing that that people live like this, but uh uh I always want to approach these things, not looking just for one side or the other, but a neutrality in both to to hold people accountable for what they're doing.

But uh I always want to approach these things, not looking just for one side or the other, but a neutrality in both to hold people accountable for what they're doing in being renters uh and hold people accountable for uh the responsibility of renting to people.

You were providing a service and a home that people rely on, and it's important that you adhere to the laws and and put forth a good product if it for I like a black a better term.

So uh with that being said, I have a few questions.

Um in this, and I'll start with uh I believe it's 1427-4A4.

It's page four, line 15.

I just kind of explain the reasoning behind the time delay of uh holding the money.

It would be A4, I believe it is.

Um, and it says that the the time delay of holding off on these thick checks and the cashes.

Uh and I'm kind of concerned the question is is why the 30 days?

Um, because it worries me that uh a landlord has to hold on to cash if that's deposit or a check, uh, and there's uh concern about the cash go missing or the check being stolen or stuff like that.

Is there a reason behind that delay?

This is your question to Councilor Rogers?

I believe so.

She is the sponsor of the council Rogers.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Councillor Champagne, for the apology first.

I appreciate that because I always look to colleagues who have experience in in this room in this field, um, where I don't.

My lens is a renter, so I understand myself too.

I'm trying to be mindful of my own lived experience and making sure that we have some some um somebody else with some different lived experience to help me navigate some of this.

But this is but directly from the state law.

So I specifically can't speak to why the state did that, um, but this is exactly what's in the state law.

So I didn't change anything other than adding the payment uh free payment option.

So this is what's already passed by the state law, and I don't know if our team has any any inclinations into the into why that was.

Um but I I know that that was a part of the state law.

Okay.

Okay.

As is everything else except for the one thing I added.

So if your questions are around the state law, it would be hard for me to answer that because I um I was not privy to all the conversations in the debate at the state.

Okay.

If we're if we're mirroring or we're copying what the state law is, and we're putting it forth, we're obviously backing what the state law says if we pass this.

Um so it kind of we have to be able to explain why we're agreeing to what the state law says.

If we're trying to change this, and and we say that we're just doing everything but that one thing, but there are several issues inside this that don't match what the state law says.

Um and the second question is is the is the how is the fair rental value established and by whom?

And that goes into 1427A.

Uh I believe it's page five, line eighteen.

Um who determines the the established value of a rental.

Thank you, madam, or thank you, madam chair.

Um just from my own knowledge, it's based on the property, right, that you're renting.

So I think the county assessor would assess the value of that property.

Not the city.

Well, and the rental value of it.

So if I I'm renting it out for 1,500, um, is the state or the city going to come in and actually say that's wrong?

Um it should be lower, it should be higher.

I mean, we're we're putting these words in here, madam president.

We're putting these words is the fair value rental.

If it's a disagreement that I think I should be renting it for 1200, and you say as the as the landlord it's 15, can I then go to the city and say it's unfair?

Yeah, thank you for that question.

I think as an expert in a landlord yourself, I would ask you how do landlords look at fair market rent now?

Market value?

Market value.

So the same as the lot of people come.

Oh, sorry, thank you.

Yeah.

Uh the third question.

Um 2477B, page five, line 23.

Unless otherwise agreed upon, rent is payable at the rental unit, the landlord is required to travel.

Is the landlord then required to travel around at the first of the month to each place that they own and accommodate to night, day, working, not working?

Is that the idea of what this the sentence says that it's a president?

Can you tell me which sentence again?

I'm sorry, I'm looking at page.

Page five, line twenty three.

So it says it's uh line twenty-three, the whole thing.

Is it 23?

It might have been moved around based on the amendments, ma'am.

So I'm looking at page five, um, lane starts on page twenty-two, unless the rental agreement fixes a definite term, definite term, the residency is week to week in the case of a person who pays weekly rent, and in another in all other cases, month to month.

Is that what you mean?

Then I apologize for the numbers.

This was based off of uh an earlier deal, but in the rent it says in the ordinance, it says unless otherwise agreed, rent is payable at the rental unit.

And is that my my question is are we requiring as a city to require the landlord to then travel around to each one of their rentals or their rental at the first of the month?

Counselor Rogers?

Thank you, madam chair.

I don't think that's the intent, but I'll go to Julia because I think she has a uh answer.

Ms.

Cluidon.

Uh Council President, Counselor Champagne.

So I think we're looking at page five, line 18 in the version that I have pulled up, which reads, unless otherwise agreed, periodic rent is payable.

Um somewhere in that section, I apologize.

Um so again, this is a section of the state statute that is being mirrored exactly in our code.

And so unless otherwise agreed by the parties, rent would be payable at the unit, and typically we would see an agreement within the lease about where where to pay rent.

And so this is not creating a requirement to mandate that rent is payable at the unit, it can still be agreed as otherwise by uh the landlord and tenant.

Okay, and Madam President, then I ask this to the to our attorney.

Are we then dictating contract law?

Uh Council President and Councillor Champagne, we are allowing the parties to otherwise agree.

And so, no, we are not mandating um the contractual agreement between the parties, we're allowing them to work that out amongst themselves.

Uh Madam President, same section 1427 7D, page six, and I want to say it's line five.

Uh, to assess a late fee.

Can you explain the details the of the late fee as assessed in the month following the order the uh occurrence?

The way I read, and this is for clarification, I just it reads that it can't be assessed till a month later, even if it's in the contract that if you're five days late, it's a ten dollar fine or fee.

It it I again the the lines might be off based on how this changed from my reading of it the original time.

I apologize, counselors.

Um, Counselor Champagne, can you repeat the question since I was trying to find the the line numbers to read?

Yeah, the quote the quote in there is to assess a late fee.

Uh and I'm my question is can you explain in detail the late fee as assessed the following month of the occurrence?

So that if they fail to pay in January, that the landlord cannot assess the fee until February.

Madam President.

Council Champagne, yeah.

Council Chair.

That's fine.

I'm just trying to understand this.

Yeah, thank you.

I think first of all, we should pull up the current copy of the bill.

Um page five, I think what you're talking about is on line 30, where it says to assess a late fee, the owner shall provide notice of the late fee charged no later than the last day of the next rental period immediately following the period in which the default occurred.

So if it occurs in January, Madam President, then you have till February to tell them that it was late and then assess it in the Well, um, Madam Chair, I think the the based on the rental agreement, the tenant knows they're late.

They know when they're supposed to pay the rent.

Um I think this is talking about the assessing fees that the landlord can choose to assess based on the rental agreement or not.

Um so I think that's what the state is getting at here.

And again, this is an exact mirror of the state law.

So I did not change anything that was already included in the state law, other than adding the one different change, which is a free payment option.

Okay.

Well, let me address that then, Madam President.

When we talk about this, and we've used the word codify several times in this stuff, but and I looked up the definition, the legal context of codifying states that codifying does not create new laws, but organizes existing ones typically by subject.

And when I say that, it leads me into the next set of questioning.

Uh looking at the two, the act of SB 267 and what's put forth to us in this ordinance.

There's a lot of things that one that you that was put in, but two was left out.

Um of which goes under the terms.

Um we left out an abandonment, we left out action, we left out amenity, we left out eviction, you left out good faith, you left out normal wear and tear.

Uh transient occupancy was left out as far as the definitions.

And we're codifying or we're trying to mirror or just do what everything the act says, but we left out information in a simple thing.

Abandonment was the term or the definition was left out, and means the absence of a residence in a dwelling without notice to the owner in excess of seven continuous days, providing such an absence occurs only after the rent of the dwelling unit is delinquent.

If we're mirroring what or we're copying or whatever term we want to use to do this, why are certain things left out that seem to be in favor of the landlord?

Thank you for that question.

I'm pretty sure it's because we're sticking to what's in the Aurora, but I'll go to uh Ms.

Culadon for that question.

Ms.

Gludon.

Council President, Counselor Champagne.

So your the definitions you were referring to that were omitted from uh our bill here before us tonight were not included because those terms do not appear in the sections of URA that are being added to the city code.

So those terms are in state law in URA throughout the I think it's 50 some section um statute.

Um the handful that are being added to the city code of ordinance um don't use all of those definitions.

Okay, then I'm a little confused, Madam President, that if we're doing this to to that essentially code enforcement can then have some power in saying that they can't enforce a state law, we have to have a city ordinance, but we're leaving out certain protections and verbiage that code enforcement isn't allowed to enforce.

Ms.

Glodon.

Council President, Councilor Champagne.

So this bill does not codify state law in its entirety.

Only a handful of sections are being added to the city code to allow city enforcement, and those are the sections we're so madam president.

So basically what we're saying is that we're using SB 267 as a as a template, but not really doing what SB 267 fully is.

We're picking and choosing.

Council President, Councilor Champagne, SB 267 likewise amended a handful of sections of UARA, not the entire existing state statute.

Okay.

I don't want to go through the rest of these questions.

I I really wish that, and again, this falls on me and my responsibility of not stepping up and helping my fellow colleague on this, but I I really think that creating something that the state has that already in place within the city is misguiding what we should be really accomplishing.

And I and I really I I want to put forth the idea that, and I say this in the sense of knowing this and and living it, was renters.

I don't I don't think renters have they don't have a good hand dealt to them to begin with for the most part when you rent from a person that takes advantage of other people.

And I would much rather have a service, and I don't know, and I talked about this before with uh several other people of uh do we have a process where 311 or renters can go to the legal department and they say here's this packet.

Metro court deals with this.

They deal with with contract law, that's what the court's for, and here just take this packet and we will guide you through this and help educate and and help the people to learn more about it, to learn and and actually advocate for the people, not just put in laws that we can't enforce already, um, that aren't enforced on the state level, that that we tax code enforcement if that's what they're gonna be doing with already, uh, that they're overworked, that this is gonna fall on deaf ears.

Why can we not educate and empower the people and help them learn more so that they can spread the word and then say, hey, call 311, they have legal action, a team of legal five people from you know, and I said this people from UNM, if you have legal people are going through this and they can uh develop a program and they can come and volunteer their time to say here, here's what is the state law, here's what the city ordinance are, hear what landlords are supposed to be held for, and we will walk you through the court system.

Um I would much rather do that and empower people than present a whole bunch of laws that we can't even we can't follow up and enforce even though if they're though they're there.

Um that being said, I can't I I I can't support this, but I would love the opportunity if this dies to come back and actually draw something up that will help empower the people that need this help.

Um, because it is, it's it's it's it's not a hundred percent of landlords out there.

It's it's a it's a percentage of them that are taking advantage of people, and it's wrong.

So thank you, Madam President.

So thank you madam president Counselor Teyas Madam Presidents thank you so much.

I just have a question about any historical um process where we have codified um state law through city ordinance in the past for other are there any other examples um council presidents counselor Teyas um so a couple of examples would be um civil rights ordinance um which we recently um amended um in this c in the context of rental housing as well to um prohibit sorts of income discrimination and that exists at the state level as well um other things like speeding and criminal criminal code um is um duplicated somewhat okay thank you madam president um presidents um so we're not displacing any existing law at the state level by codifying this correct okay so madam president um presidents counselor um we are really just ensuring policy intent into enforceable law correct for a law and order kind of point of view we want to ensure policy intent by enforceable law that's what we're doing with this amendment council presidents counselor teas uh correct we are uh adding this to our code so that the city has some enforcement ability we we can only we can only enforce this if it exists in our ordinances okay so madam presidents um so it's protecting due process uh madam presidents counselor teas we uh have done our best to build in uh due process protections into the enforcement section of this ordinance correct madam presidents and thank you so much I just want to ensure because I know the big issue or question here is um due process access to the law we already have a metro court system we can go that way um but if we're gonna talk about equal rights and um due process we gotta you know kind of think about well if our renters are having a problem paying arbitrary fees already are they going to be able to afford legal fees to fight this in the court and when we talk about you know source of income discrimination this could potentially be um arguably one of those source of income discrimination issues without passing it through policy and with a forcible action correct uh council presidents counselor teas I'm I'm sorry could you repeat the question well I'm just concerned that you know we want to ensure you know that we're not violating we're not causing source of income discrimination by forcing renters to go through the court process when we can provide um an equitable more enforceable law for policy intent purposes by you know mitigating that additional risk cost for both landlords and renters council presidents counselor teas thank you um yes this this um additional enforcement mechanism could um help address some of the challenges that tenants have in exercising um their rights going through the court process which can be um sometimes cost prohibitive okay madam presidents um thank you so much I just want to just to clarify so codifying it does not displace existing law um we're basically creating policy intent into enforceable law so a law and order issue and we're mitigating risk for both landlords and renters yep okay thank you counselor backa thank you madam chair um you know very complex issue a lot to be said on both sides of that um codifying this the state law is not that's a good thing um you know as someone who's been a landlord many many years not currently one um there's nothing unreasonable about this not at all um and to say the the burden you know or educating the people looking for for a place to live is is essentially just putting the onus the responsibility on them instead of the person putting on ridiculous fees um it's kind of ridiculous to to say that um in any case i i support this bill thank you counselor uh madam madam president thank you madam president um i i think this would fall under um director varelay i see him here would that fall under your department yes if you can come down just to ask a couple of questions just related to you know uh we're here we're hearing all these conversations about you know codifying law and creating new enforcement um opportunities here in the city and I know we struggled to enforce some of the things that we already have and I just was wondering about you know our capacity to be able to um implement something like this staffing and

the the burden you know or educating the people looking for for a place to live is is essentially just putting the onus the responsibility on them instead of the person putting on ridiculous fees um kind of ridiculous to to say that um in any case i i support this bill thank you counselor uh madam madam president thank you madam president um i i think this would fall under um director varelay i see him here would that fall under your department yes if you can come down just to ask a couple of questions just related to you know uh we're here we're hearing all these conversations about you know codifying law and creating new enforcement um opportunities here in the city and I know we struggled to enforce some of the things that we already have and I just was wondering about you know our capacity to be able to um implement something like this staffing and you know what this would require on your department and do you have the ability to do it um now council president and sponsor uh we agree that everything in this legislation is reasonable these are important protections for renters I especially like the additional um requirement that there be a means for people to pay that does not have an add on fee to that I think that that is uh an honest way to do business and it's a reliable uh measure that tenants should have in their agreements of course there is always a capacity issue and that's true anytime that code enforcement or any other department is responsible for new obligations and so there will be a balancing act so you know there will be prioritizing that has to take place but you know that's that's that's a given and you all have heard me often say that code enforcement has a lot of capacity they're they're uh very adept at uh taking on new challenges if we had a hundred code enforcement officers we could keep all of them busy uh and so there will be there will be some sort of balancing act that does have to take place but that does not diminish the fact that these are very important protections thank thank you director so I mean I think you know your response was very um neutral in terms of just saying that you guys really are are able to um you know jump to the the task at hand and try to get things done um but do you have the manpower right now to be able to do something like this there and uh council presidents and and uh council president pena there will be a trade off of some type yes and and we always have to do that when we prioritize for example what are life safety issues uh cooling in the summer for example heating in the winter hot water those are going to be more important if uh we get a call and we have one person to go than a weed and litter call and and that that will be the case here but in an ideal situation yes we would during the next budget process talk about uh the impact that it has on our capacity and talk about uh additional staff in order to take these these important uh duties on yes thank you madam president just uh just a couple more questions so um if we were to if we were to adopt this um what kind of staffing needs do you think that would require in terms of just people dedicated to to these this position or positions and uh council presidents and uh council president pena in an ideal situation uh I we would pick up possibly uh about four uh additional code enforcement officers and a couple of support people for that as well as the tools for doing the job this would also help us with the uh additional measures you know such as taking on the cooling uh obligations and and those it would be wonderful to have those but in the meantime uh we work with what we have and we and we make it work through prioritizing calls depending on the uh the the nature of the uh of the of the harm that's happening to the person thank you um madam president so do you have any knowledge of history of the landlord renters um agreements that they used to have in place I remember years ago I mean um rusty but we rented as well and you know if you had issues with your landlord that you'd call the landlord tenant hotline and can you tell me what happened to all of that or do you I'm just asking if you have any knowledge on that and uh council presidents and uh council president pena I do have some knowledge of that uh my son-in-law worked for legal aid as an attorney uh he specifically handled landlord tenant cases representing uh tenants uh their fees are based on a sliding scale I believe and so some of those services do exist out there and they and they have for quite a few decades madam president but not at the level that they used to because I remember any time you rented you'd get a pamphlet that you'd pick them up and you know you could call a hotline I don't know if the hotline still even exists or at what level that it exists anymore I I don't know if it does um but the thank you so much director and then um madam president if you can indulge me I'd like to ask um the gentleman Allen um to come up and and I have a couple of questions for him yeah yes ma'am so um you know uh of the understanding that you've been working with counselor rogers and and you know can you tell me where kind of the um the

Um but the thank you so much, Director.

And then um, Madam President, if you can indulge me, I'd like to ask um the gentleman Allen um to come up and and I have a couple of questions for him.

Yes, ma'am.

So um, you know, uh of the understanding that you've been working with Councilor Rogers and and you know, can you tell me where kind of the um the or came into a gridlock to where you guys really weren't agreeing because you know, reading it and codifying something that the what that the state is doing, I always worry about creating two levels of bureaucracy.

I always feel like you know, if we already have it in place at the state, we should work together to really make them make this stuff enforceable because then we create two systems and then we're adding additional staff, and you know, and then some of the things that are in our ordinances are aren't in theirs, and then it creates more you know, bureaucracy, and so um can you just tell me where the hiccup is, and then also um, you know, could you potentially go back to the drawing board with her if this didn't pass tonight, or if we deferred it, um, go back to the drawing board and really come up with something that you guys can work on together to get to where it's uh you know, um creating something that's um digestible for both both sides.

Yeah, absolutely.

So I think that the fundamental issue is the duplicativeness of this in state law.

Um it is already state law, it already has been outlined by the state law is what the remedies look like, the judicial process looks like.

Um you don't have to go hire a lawyer to file this.

The complaints are done through the attorney general's office.

That was actually what was in Senate Bill 267 as the Unfair Practices Act, and that was referenced in here.

I know we removed the whereas statement, but this is in direct conflict conflict with state law, and I think that's the real challenge here is it's we don't disagree with any of the provisions.

That's already law.

I mean, that has we don't have any problems with any of that stuff.

It's the duplicative process that we're gonna try and do a we have this state run, you know, that the because technically a tenant right now, if this were to pass, they could file with the city, they could also file with the attorney general's office, and you'd have two different agencies with two different audit processes, and all of that would come down on basically a screening fee.

Um I think that a much better approach is something similar to what uh counselor Champagne said is that this is already law, and we need to figure out if there are bad actors, how do we enforce that law?

And maybe it's not a new penalty system through the city of Albuquerque, maybe it is an educational program, or maybe it is you know, better the three a special 311 line where someone can call and get the resources.

I think that's a much better use of our time because this is already law, and we don't have like I say, we don't have any issues with the law that already exists.

It's just the duplication of processes and really taking out that judicial realm.

I mean the state clearly is outlined this.

There's a bunch of preemption law that would this doesn't stand the test of time to.

Um I mean, I think that that's really the challenge, and that was where the hiccup.

It's not that we don't like the tenants' rights, we don't have any problems with the 5% late fee, we don't have any problems with the disclosure.

I was in the room when we when they wrote Senate Bill 267.

We agreed to disagree on certain parts, but at the end of the day, that's state law, and we've all become accustomed to it.

That being said, it's only been law for roughly six months now.

I do believe that there's landlords out there that clearly that don't know um what the state law is, and they need to be informed too.

Um, and that maybe that falls on me or falls somewhere.

I mean, I you know, I I don't I don't have every I don't have it, not everyone that's a you know a landlord is a member of ours.

We've sent out tons of information, but the reality is you have about a hundred thousand rental doors in Albuquerque, and so to get that message out, it's only been six months.

I don't know if we have any data on how many complaints have been filed through the AG's office, but I think that would be something interesting to to look at as well.

But there's definitely a need for an educational process around this rather than just implementing a new duplicative system that's gonna penalize for something that already is law.

I don't know if that answers both questions, but I'm yeah, absolutely happy to come to the table to talk about what that education process can look like.

I think there's great minds between us, there's the realtor association.

I mean, there's a lot of people that are involved in landlord tenant law, and there's literally hundreds of years of expertise around my boardroom table in landlord tenant law that can help assist and figure this out.

Thank you.

Thank you, thank you, Madam President.

Council Lewis.

Thank you.

Uh just real briefly with Director Rilla.

Uh, thank you again.

Um director, I know you mentioned just a trade-off and resources.

I mean, you you mentioned about like for something like this, I mean, uh, to be able to do the cut enforcement.

I mean, need more personnel.

I mean, and and you also admitted that there would be a certain amount of trade-off, you know.

I mean, and and you also admitted that there would be a certain amount of trade-off, you know, I mean, of your time and resources that department has right now with court code enforcement that I imagine is is always stretched like every uh department.

Um, a few things.

You um you don't need like your court enforcement officers, I mean, um, for a variety of different things that you all investigate and and and um you know uh and and enforce um you don't always need um a specific city law in order to do that for for example eviction notices, things like that.

I mean um a lot of those things fall under state law, other laws, and you can go and enforce those things as a as the uh code enforcement without having a duplication in a city on the city charter in that regard, correct?

Director, uh council presidents, uh that would be incorrect.

Uh our jurisdiction is limited to uh powers that are granted us through ordinance only to the city ordinances and that and that it that is correct.

We have a whole slew of ordinances that we enforce on.

We um sometimes through the legal department can seek, for example, legal actions where you're also taking advantage of statutory measures that are there.

But as far as the code enforcement officers go, we spend all of our time enforcing city ordinances.

Yeah.

So for example, um, you know, incident and and actually in my neighborhood, you know, this this last week.

I mean, a pretty good amount of your resources that were spent on that, which your your you know, officers and all your personnel did a phenomenal job, you know, responding to that along with the uh police department and a lot of your you know folks walk into some pretty you know really downright dangerous situations, you know, and so um and they do a phenomenal job.

But uh I mean this is a situation where you have uh uh an owner um who was just desperate, had some renters that were I mean building tunnels, I mean massive tunnels underneath the property.

Um the US marshals pulled a child out of that tunnel a few months ago.

Um and this is in you know neighborhood that's not real common.

I understand that in a lot of other areas around the city, I mean, these are just kind of common, you know, everyday things that I know you guys respond to and in challenging situations, but I I guess for the point of the resources, I mean I I know that that was a massive amount of resources that you spent on that.

I know you spend those resources in a lot of other areas, and I know you already acknowledge this that like when we when we you know I think when we duplicate um you know you know some of these things that obviously there's a trade-off and there's there's personnel that's needed, there's finances that's needed.

Um I you know, with that experience it it helped me see once again how um so many of our laws or are are um they're unfavorable toward the landowner, you know.

In this case, where even with everything, and these are tenants that that have terrorized the neighborhood that even up to a few days ago are taken um uh property off of people's porches, and um and and we still have um the inability um you know to be able to evict them pretty quickly.

Um we can go through a process, it's a pretty long process, but uh um but again, and the reason for that is because so many of our laws are are are just unfavorable toward um those that own the property.

And um and I and I will say, I mean, I I think there are a lot of laws that you have to enforce and that you have to put a lot of resources into, you know, that are um really you know not as helpful as much to the to the renters.

And Madam President, I I mean before thank you, thank you, Director.

Um you know, in these in these chambers, um there's there's the freedom in these chambers to come down here and to say whatever you'd like to say.

You have two minutes or one minute to say it.

Um participate, and I want to make sure that we're always you know protecting your ability to be able to say whatever you'd like and say whatever you want to us or anything like that.

Um and we'll we'll do everything we can to protect that.

Um I will say it's really disheartening to see that when uh uh there's people here, including Mr.

Laseck that came down here, and to hear him being called names and shouted at by the people in this chambers that disagree with him.

Um, we we allow that too.

You know, you can come here and you can say whatever you want to each other, um, but I also want people to come in these chambers with whatever position they have and whatever you know um uh wherever they had on these on these issues that we're discussing and and not be yelled at, not be called names, not be intimidated to come down here to that microphone and answer questions.

Thank you.

Uh I know Council Champagne, I know you have something to say about you you've already talked, so I'm gonna take just one minute to ask a couple questions and then I'll come back to you.

Uh I have two questions, Miss Coolidon, uh to clarify.

Uh, because of the state statute, or Mr.

Hall, either one of you, uh, because of the state statute, is due process available for renters.

Council presidents, um, are you saying under the state statute or I mean because we have a state statute with all of this stuff?

Do renters still have the ability to have due process?

Uh council presidents, uh, yes, renters do have an avenue to um pursue relief or violations of um these provisions using the process in the state statute.

So it's I mean, my point with that is that I don't think that we need a city ordinance in order to make sure that renters have due process.

I do believe that to some of what we heard, I think that there needs to be some more education and availability.

My next question is if this ordinance passes, is it possible that there could be duplicative fines for landlords?

Council presidents, uh count um council member Rassan, uh there's a possibility that there could be uh fines that could be assessed by um you know through state statute through a private right of action by the tenant and then also by the city.

Okay, so uh I mean those two things are I do agree that this is an important issue.

However, I don't agree that we can say that there's no due process if this doesn't pass, and I don't agree in offering duplicative fines to people when we do have a housing shortage, and I agree there's bad actors.

I think that that is a problem, but duplicative fines is not gonna help the situation any uh for any renter or or landlord in the city in that regard, in addition to the fact that there's an amendment that councillor Grout and I have coming up to give code enforcement more funding to do what they're already doing in Albuquerque, and I don't think that we need to by duplicative efforts add to some of the requirements and need in the city of Albuquerque when it is already on such a tight budget and a zero zero sum game budget and all of that, and and putting more burden in a lot of avenues when we really should focus our efforts on educating and helping people gain access to the resources that already exist.

Council Champaign.

Thank you, Madam President.

I withdraw my request for the time.

Counselor Teas.

Thank you, Madam Presidents.

Um I guess I just have a question regarding um the duplicity.

So you said it's duplicit because it goes to the AG's office in the statute.

Is that they're the enforcement Mr.

Hall.

Council President, uh, Councilor Teas.

It would be uh duplicative only a sense that one could assert a private right of action to receive that 250 dollars in return, and then one could uh and then a landlord, a bad actor landlord would then also have to pay 250 dollars to the municipality that would be enforcing us the city of Alcurke.

Okay, so it duplic duplicity is in the court of law, and then with the city, right?

So, but anybody can do that.

You can get a fee assessed for practically anything through city codes, and then a private citizen can also choose to file a lawsuit should they choose, and if they win in court, is that also duplicity, or are we not council president?

Um counselor Teas, there are uh different uh regulatory and lawful schemes where you have private rights of action that exist alongside existing regulatory enforcement.

Um there are different examples depending on the severity of things, but there are those there are certain uh uh, for example, construction industry's licensing acts can have certain events that serve the basis for breach of contract or for breach of different um common law actions that also serve the basis for regulatory actions that could be enforced by the state.

Okay, thank you.

Um, Madam Presidents.

Um, so I have another quick question.

Can I uh Mr.

Lisack?

Alan Lissette, may I ask you another question, please?

Okay.

Welcome back.

Thank you.

I appreciate your time.

Thank you so much.

Um when I'm just trying to understand, I'm new, so give me give me that.

I'll use that for two weeks, I promise, and then I won't anyway.

Um, but I just wanted to you mentioned that there's an existing enforceability through state statute through the AG's office, is that right?

Correct.

Okay, but the AG's office is kicking it to us.

Yeah, and I think, and I I do that is concerning.

I will absolutely tell you that.

Um the whole idea when they added in Senate Bill 267, they added about four pages of the New Mexico Unfair Practices Act.

The idea behind that when they drafted the bill was so that basically you didn't have to go through this private right of action.

You did the land or the resident didn't have to go to court to say, you know, Councilor Bassan charged me too much money for my you know fee or whatever it was.

They could simply file a claim through the AG's office, and that is the action through that is directly related to the provisions that would be in this bill.

So we're it's kind of we kind of have this real hodgepodge now of you've got state law that's gonna govern 37 out of the 40 pages, and then you've got three pages that technically the AG's office should be looking at, and then now we're also saying those three pages also the city of Albuquerque is gonna look at.

So it's it's kind of this weird scheme we have going on, and that's really what overcomplicates this bill too.

Okay, well, thank you for that, and madam president.

So I just want to add one last thing, and I agree with counselor Lewis.

Um, you know, we really need to be thinking of the work that the AG's office does and how we can maybe help alleviate that because they really should be focused on you know, human trafficking and child abuse cases and not dealing with landlord disputes like this, which is probably why they're kicking it over to us.

So I would gladly take over that complaint issue so that the AG can focus on protecting our children and human trafficking and child abuse cases so that we can handle these um you know, these type of transparent fees, and again, it doesn't displace any existing law, and really we're just taking the policy intent into enforceable law because right now it's kind of sitting in uh legal limbo over enforceability, and if we can move that out, I I am gladly in support of this bill, especially if it alleviates the work from the attorney general's office so that they can focus on the real matters like child abuse, human trafficking, and and whatnot.

So thank you for time.

Counselors, any other questions or comments?

Oh, I'm sorry, counselor people call.

Thank you, madam um chair.

Uh so I um obviously thank you to counselor Rogers for bringing this forward.

Um I truly do I'm a little surprised that the discussion has gone um this way.

I I will just say that in my mind it is the city's job to protect the people who live in our city.

Um and if maybe the the AG should be doing that.

Um I don't have any control over the AG, but I do have well, not a lot of control, folks, but um a vote on whether we take care of our own citizens, and so um I find that very interesting.

I will say that we pushed for these protections here at the city level three years ago.

Um, and um thankfully we have a state legislature that is a little more compassionate and passed this bill.

Um, but just a couple months ago, we passed legislation unanimously, I believe, on this dais to say that we are going to prioritize tenant protections within the planning department, and we funded a new position in the planning department specifically focused on tenants, and so I think that you know I thought that we had prioritized the well-being of some of our lowest income, most vulnerable people during that debate, but I I guess we've changed our minds now.

Um so I I would like to just ask um director Varela one more question because I'm I'm very confused by this concern over um your ability to do your job.

Um so the decision between what you would have to trade off would be whether to enforce laws that protect some of our most vulnerable residents, or it would be like weed enforcement.

Is that is that the trade-off that you're discussing?

And uh counselors, uh council presidents and councillor feeble corn.

The example I gave was that we would prioritize uh life safety issues.

Shelter is certainly in that category over non-life safety issues, which is my neighbor's weeds are a little too tall, and it's really getting on my nerves.

Okay, thank you, Director Varella.

I I agree 100% with uh that choice, and obviously I agree that we should be protecting our most vulnerable citizens.

Um I can see that there's some interesting um messaging going on up here, and I I find it very um upsetting, but I do want to just once again thank counselor Rogers for her work on this issue, Madam uh Madam President.

Madam Vi uh, Madam President.

Um thank you, Madam President.

Um I would just like to ask the sponsor.

Uh I too agree.

I think this is important work.

Obviously, I was my we lived in the projects, I was a renter, my me and my husband were renters, we had good landlords and bad landlords.

So, you know, been there, done that.

Um, so I I know that you know there's still some concerns that exist out there, and I would um ask the sponsor if they would consider a deferral to work with the um organizations and and advocates again just to try to come up with some compromise and um give it about a I don't know a month.

Councilor Rogers.

Thank you, Madam President, and and Madam Chair.

I appreciate that.

I just I worked with the landlords and the partner association before I introduced it.

I met with them twice afterwards and rewrote the entire enforcement section based on their feedback.

Um so I feel a little slighted by them saying in one breath, thank you for the collaboration, and then we need more collaboration, right?

Like I I I went above and beyond.

I asked for help from a colleague on our dias that has knowledge, didn't get the help from my colleagues.

I asked for help from our advocates, I asked for help from the state.

I did an immense amount of research building on what Councillor People Corn has tried year after year after year.

Um and look, I think the bottom line for me is like if this doesn't pass, then we can come back together and figure that out.

But I just feel like strongly that we've worked, I've worked hard in collaboration with these folks three different times.

Rewrote the entire enforcement section based on their really good feedback.

And I think that it is up to this body.

We have the power to meet the needs of our constituents.

And I mean, the duplicative nature of the conversation, there is city ordinances all over the place that I can reference that are literally in state law, but we choose to do something different, like source of income discrimination.

How are we enforcing that now as a city?

Based and that's one example of that.

We have the human rights act, we have the short-term rental regulation where the city has something different from the state.

The point is is that we as a body have under New Mexico state law, you municipal ordinances may duplicate or supplement state law so long as they do not conflict with it.

And this does not conflict with the state law.

Um and I just it this is hard for me to hear from colleagues who have experience and are law enforcement professionals who don't want to enforce state law.

And I don't know how it works.

I'm not a law enforcement professional, but I think that's a problem picking and choosing which laws to enforce and against who.

It's not what this body should be standing for.

And so I ask my colleagues, like, and I know if it sounds like a close, but I don't want to defer um because I felt like I went above and beyond to try to get the help to make this something that's neutral that can actually for my district and yours, Councillor Penn.

Yeah, this is huge for our our constituents.

So I would just ask that we take the vote and come back if it does if it fails.

Um Madam President, so I have another question.

I hadn't um Councilor Champagne, you know, you had mentioned about um working to kind of do the education needed to address this.

I would like to defer it because I think there's things that when we're gonna have double fees and you know, all that.

That's not that's not fair.

Um, so um, I I really thought that another chance at going back and really working with them and just trying to create a create some compromise would be helpful.

So um, you not wanting to do that, then I'm going to defer to um Councilor Champagne and ask him that if it does fail to tonight, um, you know, would you work with Counselor Rogers to really come up with some education and some additional planning and maybe bringing this ordinance back?

Councilor Champagne.

Madam Presidents, yes, by all means I will.

Okay, thank you.

Counselors, any other questions?

Counselor Lewis?

Madam President, I'd I'd support a deferral.

Uh there's a version of this bill I I think I would absolutely support, and thank you.

Council Sun.

Uh R209 is amending the City of Albuquerque component capital implementation program to include a roadway facilities project.

We ran a boulevard between Cayenne Street and Universe Boulevard Northwest.

I move it due to pass.

There's a motion and a second by Councilor Champagne.

Counselor Lewis to open.

Then uh council, I need to move the floor amendment as well, right?

So I'm gonna I'm gonna move floor amendment A that's in your iPads.

All right, the motion is for second amendment number one to R209.

Delete attachment two to this resolution and put replace it with the attached amendment.

There's a motion, is there a second?

I'll second that.

Thank you.

Um so this is uh I mean just another step and in getting this section of this roadway uh built.

Uh much of this is uh from the city standpoint as is funded.

Um and then uh this is uh some things we need to do mechanically to um uh allow for really you know partnership with some of the development along this road uh that uh um uh normally would be um assessed impact fees and you know um they have the option of building the road or you know paying the impact fees and by uh putting it in the in the program here it just be able is able to allow us to utilize uh that program so it's just another step in uh getting this section of this roadway built.

Thank you.

Councillors, any questions on amendment number one to R209?

Seeing none, the motion is for amendment number one to R209.

All those in favor, raise your hand and say yes.

Yes, yes.

Anyone opposed that passes on a 7-0 vote.

We're back on the bill as amended.

Councilor Lewis, did you want to open?

Uh yeah, thanks.

And that and then and again, those that amendment was simply um updating some of the numbers correct that we had in there.

Um so just to get the get the numbers in the bill prep.

I just support counselors.

Any questions on R209 as amended?

Councilor Champagne.

Thank you, Madam President.

Um, I just have one question, it's more of a detail that it the streets, and maybe you can correct me on this, but it says the the Cayenne Street.

Um but looking and and just looking at a map right now, it shows that east of Cayenne Street is a single lane road, but we're gonna go double west of it.

I am I reading the map wrong.

So if you look at that map, uh Cayenta goes right up to where there's a there's a four-lane bridge.

Um four-lane road that goes up to that four-lane bridge.

Um the specifically where the uh the the impact fees would apply are or west of Cayenne there, um, but the whole roadway where it needs to be you know four laned is from uh where that bridge is uh to universe uh boulevard right there.

Am I saying that correctly, Tom?

Okay I I'm I'm concerned about this Madam President.

I'm concerned about the the section east of it from and I'm trying to pull it up on the ding map, but east of it going to from Cayenne East to I can't even pronounce that word.

The next street over.

It's Sagittarius.

I'm gonna do that because I'm seeing it as a one lane.

So we're gonna go two lane west of this this location, but then there's a stretch that looks like it's maybe 300 yards that's a single lane.

Are we gonna concerned about two lane to single lane to two lane?

Um madam president, uh councillor champagne, correct.

So what it is is that there's two sections that there's two sections that need to be done, and that's the area you're looking at.

And I believe I can't remember the name of the street.

I think it's like River Rock or some exact name.

And it goes to I believe yeah, it's either goes to Cayentry universe, and that lane that is actually on public property.

So that is the reason it wasn't built out was and it's not because it's public and so it's not responsibility of developers, it goes over in a MAFCA channel.

So Councilor Lewis and I has been working on year for a number of years now at the legislature, working to raise funding, and I believe some of it's in the 2026 geobond to go ahead and build that section.

So we're in I think 90% design on it, or the Department of Missile Development is nearing 90% design completion.

The rest of it is just to finalize funding in a capital LA request.

The counselor submitted capital requests this session to complete that funding.

Um this section then goes further west, um, which would also need to be done, but that's next to private lands, so that qualifies for the impact fee program.

And the landowner on the south side of that section is going to develop a commercial development.

So they're gonna have their there they will build that section, but at per our development process manual.

However, because that section of roadway serves the whole city and it's and there's a growing demand for it, they qualify to receive impact fees because they address growth and infrastructure as stated in state law.

Okay, perfect.

And uh Council Lewis, I I I'm not I agree with what it needs to be done.

I've driven that road uh going on to double eagle uh many of times, and it always I just wanted to be concerned if we need to advocate for a further one or how I can assist if you need it to get that other section to make sure it's completely all the way through.

So thank you, Madam President.

Counselor's any other questions on R209 as amended.

Seeing none, Councilor Lewis to close.

Or just support, thank you.

The motion is for R209 as amended.

All those in favor, raise your hand and say yes.

Yes.

Anyone oppose that passes unanimously.

Moving on to R212, Councillor Baca by request.

Thank you, Madam Chair, R212 relating to the approval of a redevelopment tax abatement for the Fourth and La Plata multifamily residential development project developed by fourth and La Plata LLC.

I move due pass.

There's a motion and a second by Councillor February.

Councilor Baca to open.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Um this is I'll I'll leave it to MRA to answer any questions.

Uh however, I highly seek everyone's support.

Thank you.

Any questions, Councillor Champagne?

Uh Madam Presidents, if this is really just goes to the administration.

We talked about this in FGO where it died about the criteria that was set forth by the uh um the MRA team.

Have we gotten any closer to the five requests that were made or set forth?

Madam CAO, Madam President, Councillor Champagne, um Director Bruner and staff, uh Ms.

Osborne are here.

They can speak specifically to this agreement and the progress.

Trying to find my notes from it.

Good evening, Director.

Good evening, uh, Madam Chair, Council President, Councilor.

Um I believe your question was about the community benefit aspects to this agreement.

Uh Director, I believe there was five criteria by the MRA committee that said five things need to be met.

One of the planning, the plans need to be submitted before construction starts.

Construction already started.

You advised during FGO that uh can construction can start, uh, and you've they've made amendments to the plans to include like the dog run that was what's part of it, but um one of the simplest ones was a banner.

Um I drove by it today, and there is no banner fixed to the fence that's surrounding the construction.

So again, this isn't a question about and and I support the the idea of what it is.

Um it's just there's a process, and it seems like we're not following a process.

We're just kind of putting I hate the term a car before the horse on it.

And it in developers are getting a bad taste, knowing that you know we're not we're trying to build places for people to live, but yet we can't follow the own instructions that were given.

So there's not a banner up.

There's we're not following the rules.

We're not following the guidelines that are set forth.

So are we even close to being accomplishing those five tasks that the MRA committee said you need to do these?

Yes, uh, Madam Chair, Council President, Councillor.

So the banner will not go up until we get the approval from council.

That's our process.

Because we don't approve it's not formally a city project until you approve it.

Okay.

Well, you have me because I can't find the the uh I can't find it in my my iPad right now of reading those five things.

So it seems counterproductive that they say these five things need to happen before.

Um, but you're saying those five things don't need to happen before.

So the first one that says the plans need to be submitted prior to construction, adhering to what the MRA says, they don't need to be submitted then.

They can start construction halfway through, we can kind of just do whatever we want.

Um Madam Chair, Council President, Counselor, so that's one of the things that has to happen.

We can't approve a project that doesn't have plans.

So we need those plans.

It's one of the first things that's gonna happen.

So those are things that um that uh are part of that criteria along with the community benefits matrix and other things.

But typically we are not issuing this abatement until this project's basically done.

So it it is a little different than you might think of a traditional city project in which everything is kind of put together and then we begin.

Um, but in this case, we're entering the process a little different way.

Okay.

Well, I guess I'm gonna be taking a leap of faith too.

And if this is approved tonight, then I I would hope that the five things are then done, even just a simple banner put up that is requested that we seem to be saying we'll do it when we want.

So I hope that it is done.

Thank you, Madam President.

Counselors, before we go to Councillor Bacca to close any other questions or comments.

Council Councillor Champagne, did you?

Yes, I'm sorry.

Uh I was just advised that Ms.

Omega can help with this.

Uh I guess I can't find it.

Or Delgano, sorry.

Uh Council President, uh Chair, uh Councilor Champagne.

So what you're referring to are the conditions of approval.

Um, the five criteria that you say.

Yes, ma'am.

The yes.

So the first one would be uh prior to construction, the applicant must submit the final approved building permit plans to MRA staff for review and consistency with the community benefits agreement.

The next one was the uh promotion promotional banner, as you stated.

Um and then the third one would be um that the applicant should provide uh the final certificate of occupancy and prior to signing the the um prior to going through the city uh ribbon cutting ceremony.

And then also that the lease documents obviously must be as executed prior to that tax abatement starting.

Those are conditions of approval.

And so, like Mr.

Bruner stated in terms of the banner, the tax abatement isn't approved quite just yet until the council does vote on vote on that.

Madam President, so the paragraph before, does it emphasize that these need to be done before the approval, or does it emphasize that they just be done after the approval?

I can't remember how it's council.

How it reads.

Council President, uh Councilor Champagne.

So in the uh redevelopment tax abatement instructions, page six, um, criteria six, building permit approval.

There is it does state that prior to submitting for building permit, the applicant must provide MRA a final site plan, building elevation, and any other outstanding requirements and the condition of approval.

Um that is in order for MRA to ensure that uh what the applicant stated on the community benefits um matrix, you know, the project is complying with those criteria.

Um the MRA did state that uh the project does meet those criteria regardless.

So it is a procedural question here.

Perfect.

Thank you for the clarification.

Madam President.

And Councilor Bach, I apologize.

Before we go to a close, there are people signed up to speak.

Mr.

Cornelius.

Thank you, madam chair.

We have Shaston Bloomquist to speak.

Good evening, council.

Thank you.

Uh, my name is Justin Bloomquist, and I am the developer of the Fourth and the Plata multifamily project.

Uh the city, obviously, as we've talked about, has identified this need for in-field development that is meaningful to the city and um is using the MRA tax abatement to incentivize that development.

I specifically chose this lot because it was part of the MRA, meaning the metropolitan redevelopment area, and it was designated as such.

Uh, I did that because I believe in their mission and I would like to be a part of revitalizing our city.

Given that the project was designed from the outset to not only meet but exceed the standards of the MRA.

And not just for the MRA, but because that's it's it's it aligns with my personal belief systems in development.

Um we also made sure that we executed a content-aware design, a context-aware design, where we were very sensitive to the two-story townhomes to the north and uh to the east.

And so I hope that you guys can Madam President, we can I request that she allowed to be finished, please.

Okay, okay, please continue.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you, Councillor Champagne.

Um were very aware to make sure that this was appropriate to the context of the neighborhood.

We kept we limited it to two stories instead of going higher as zoning might have allowed us because we realized that the neighborhood needed to stay a neighborhood.

We pushed the building towards the four street side to foster walkability on the north fourth corridor.

Um the parking being in the back of the building.

We have three EV stations.

We have bike parking and storage.

We have um over the limit of like excuse me, over the requirements of what the landscape would require.

There is that public bench that is outside and available to the neighborhood.

And also, as Councillor Champagne mentioned, we responded to a request from the neighborhood to include a dog waste station that's available to the public.

Um all of these are included in our designs and in what is approved by the city.

So the city is going to be coming and inspecting and ensuring that we are complying with what is in our approved plans, and that includes the landscaping, it includes the bench, it includes the water, water sense, uh water saving appliance, excuse me, fixtures.

It includes the fact that we are all electric and no natural gas to be um with a sustainability requirements and also uh desires of the city.

Um, as we've all been talking about tonight, there's much needed housing shortage, and I just want to be a part of helping with that.

This is going to be attainable housing.

It's not something that I'm trying to make a ton of money on.

I'm just trying to help the city with in-field development.

Um this project was fully reviewed by MRA process, and it was recommended for approval by the um development commission who I had a very lovely meeting with in October, and it aligns with the purpose of the metropolitan redevelopment area.

It complies with the requirements, it reflects thoughtful context to where it design, and respectfully ask for your support and approval of our request.

In return, the city gains new housing, long-term tax growth, and an activation of a long vacant infill site, exactly as a tented under MRA.

Thank you.

Madam Chair, that concludes comment.

Thank you.

Is Mr.

Jacob Trujillo here?

Madam Chair, he's for he was a write in for 215.

Okay, thank you.

Oh, I see that now.

Thank you very much.

All right, so we are back on the bill.

Councillor Backa to close.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Quick thank you to Miss Bloomquist for this thoughtful design.

It really fits in with North Valley and what it stands for.

Uh and in field designer really appreciate it again.

An open invitation to any of my colleagues when you want to when there's questions about a project within D2.

I'm usually heavily involved or at least heavily aware, and I'm always willing to work with you so we don't have to always litigate everything.

Um I'm a big rule follower.

We just spent an hour talking about duplicative government and the heavy hand of government, and you know, do we really need to worry about the banner?

Let's follow the rules, of course, but let's also be reasonable and move things forward in our city.

Thank you.

I urge everyone's support.

The motion is for our 212.

All those in favor, raise your hand and say yes.

Yes.

Anyone opposed?

That passes unanimously.

We are moving on to R215.

Councilor Grout by request.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Um, our 215 is adjusting the fiscal year 2025 appropriations for certain funds and programs to provide for actual expenditures and adjusting fiscal year 2026 operating appropriations.

I move a dupe pass.

There's a motion and a second by Madam President, Councillor Grout to open.

Thank you.

Okay.

Councilor Grout, did you want to start with an open?

So, well, this is something we've been working on for a while.

Um, I would like to ask our staff, budget staff, to maybe go over it a little bit.

And then we have a few um amendments, and then we will also talk with admin.

Ms.

Rumler.

Ms.

Rumler.

Madam President, Madam Chair, and Counselor Grout.

Uh, this is uh 2025 mid-year cleanup.

This is so that the administration can submit for the audit.

Um, in here you'll see typical bounces um where departments have overspent and then where departments have underspent.

There will be several amendments tonight if the counselors so choose to move.

Is there anything else you'd like us to cover?

Not really.

Thank you.

Um let's see.

Can we just get to the amendments?

Yes, we can.

So before we Miss Brokaw, you just handed us another packet.

Is it different than the one that was already on the dais when we started uh Madam President, Madam President, these are corrected pages, page numbers.

Okay, so go off of the one you just handed out just the same substance, just correct page numbers.

Correct.

Okay, counselors for your information as well.

Okay, so we're gonna start with amendment A in your packet, Councilor Rogers.

We'll call that amendment one.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Amendment one starts on page five after line 13 and sent insert the following council services 200,000.

This amendment will provide necessary funding for a program through our homeless coordinating council to provide some case management.

I've talked about it on the dais um for the last six months trying to work with the administration to find the funding to do this.

Um and so um I worked with them on this amendment so that we can get some much needed case management.

It's coming to council services and not senior affairs specifically because again, I've waited for six plus months for help for the administration.

I our seniors can't wait six more months, and so this is something we can do in our office rather quickly.

I'm also um to the point of a lot of the public commenters that were here tonight about an all different response to homelessness in district six.

This will help us begin to map out what that should look like and keep data on how many people were actually able to house with 200,000.

And so I urge your support.

Uh before we go to a close counselor's questions, counselor feeblecorn.

Thank you, uh, madam chair.

So um, and this is a question for all of the amendments tonight, so I just want to ask um the budget folks.

So it's my understanding that this bill, as it was sent down, gets us to a zero um gain, a zero balance.

So all of these amendments would take additional funds from the general fund.

Is that a true statement?

Ms.

Rumler.

Madam Chair, Madam President, Council People Corn.

Um the fund table that came down to council services left a fund balance of 357,000.

Okay, thank you, Madam President, or Madam Chair.

So um we are taking from the 351 thousand dollars that we have in the general fund balance that came down for all of these amendments, which equal more than that.

Um, and so if they pass it no matter which ones, um, that would lower the amount of money available to pay for um the turf um emergency bill that this council passed, and then also potentially the um bill that is up later tonight to pay staff um an additional one-time payment.

Uh is it it's my understanding that that each thing we could pass tonight takes away from those two um things.

Is that true as well?

Madam Chair, Madam President, Councilor People Corn, we are drawing from the general fund balance, the balance that we were told after that's unaudited at this point was 357,000.

This amount, without speaking on behalf of the sponsor, if I am correct, um, came from the administration of where to draw the funds from.

Okay, thank you, madam president.

So I'll ask the administration.

Um, do you have a secret stash, or is this coming out of the general fund dollars that would go for both the turf emergency and the one-time payment for city staff?

Mr.

Whalen?

Council President and the Council Feeble Court, all we can draw fund from at this point is the fund balance that comes forth once the audit is complete, which is close to being done, and the the number that was sent forth, that's the funds we have to draw from because everything else has been appropriated for fiscal year 26.

So, unless we pull from another program or division that's the available about at this point.

Okay, thank you, Madam President.

So um, so again, not saying anything about any of these amendments.

I just want us to be cognizant that we will be taking money potentially from things that one thing that's already been passed, and one thing that I certainly hope does pass um because there's only so much money that's gonna be left in the general fund.

Thank you.

Uh, on that note, and I will I will I want to clarify just one thing that Councilor Feeblecorn said.

It's my understanding.

I had discussions with uh Mr.

Motsko earlier today.

Can we clarify?

I thought this was two separate concepts.

We had FY25 funding that might be audited that's going to be audited, and that's what we're talking about in this cleanup bill, and then we have the FY26 cleanup information, and I I thought it was two different things because I specifically asked we have the TERF bill, we have this new one coming tonight.

Are we now dibbing more money before we even do that?

And I wanted to clarify.

So can I please have clarification?

Uh, whether it's from Ms.

Broka, Miss Brumler, or Mr.

Motzko.

Um Madam President, Madam Chair, um, and the admin can correct me if I'm wrong.

We're using we're showing they're showing us FY25 fund balance that will be going forward that we could use in FY26.

And that's why we're increasing the FY26 amounts.

Okay, so just to make sure to confirm we're talking about this just please a yes or no.

Just real yes or no.

We're talking about the same pot of funds for these amendments, the TERF bill, and the employee raises benefit one-time supplemental fund semantic bill coming forward.

One group of funding for all of us.

Thank you.

Councilor Rogers.

Thank you, Madam President.

And I too asked all these questions because the administration agreed that they were gonna send this down already included in the cleanup bill.

Um that didn't happen, so I reached out to them specifically and said, Okay, like where do where do I pull it from then?

And the answer back from the administration was we'll have it in the fund balance, so take it out of the general fund.

That's what I was advised.

And so that's why I made this decision, because I was given the impression that we would be able to do all of the above.

Madam President, um, Counselor Rogers, um, any one of the discussions about any one of these um amendments would be related to funding source, available funding source, and that is the general fund balance.

Um having not been part of the a formation of every one of these uh amendments, we would not have knowledge nor the ability to talk about the interdependencies of the amendments and the items.

We've been really clear that we have 350 one, 357 um uh thousand dollars uh three uh available in our current fund balance based upon unaudited um at this point financials, um and that includes our ability to ensure that we have available funds for what we project are possible adjustments required by that audit.

It's the same discussion we had earlier uh with counselor Lewis.

Uh the source for available funds is the general fund balance, unless we are in FY26 making budget cuts um to programs or departments to accommodate.

So that when the qu when asked where do you expend funds from, it is the general fund balance unless we want to make a change to the FY26 budget.

Uh counselor Lewis.

Wait, before we do that, I'm sorry, who was the second on this?

Was there a second?

And can I get a second?

I'll second it for the discussion purposes.

Thank you, Councilor Lewis.

Thank you.

So for like for our staff, um the so they're talking about a fund balance from 2025.

Okay.

The the way the way that you get a fund balance to to increase these different departments, so these are over expenditures, correct?

These are these are overspent from their budget, right?

I mean it happens.

Yeah.

And um, but the way you get a fund balance is you have some departments that underspend.

That's where this is coming from, correct?

So that's all we're talking about.

We're just we're talking about underspent departments, and then the administration, you know, showing where um some of these departments that overspent, you know, this is the amount, and they're saying the fund balance coming from the fund balance, that's from other departments that underspent.

And then when all that's uh balanced out, you're expecting about 380 or so million, 380 so thousand dollars.

Um I mean, and typically in a budget, that's why you'd put you know, start off with five million dollars in a in a fund balance, which we typically do.

We didn't last year, but um, you know, then it kind of helps some of these things, you know.

Um you get a little easier at the end of the year to come to a you know come to a balance.

Um but um so do you all know just just one?

I think I think that there was about so for an example, one of the departments that underspent uh was the parks and recreation department, correct?

By about a million dollars.

Do you have that number?

Two.

Do you all have that number?

Two.

It was two.

About two million dollars.

Okay, Madam Chair, Counselor Lewis.

Um, according to the FY25 cleanup, it was 2.25 million.

Yeah, so that's that's how you get a fund balance when you overspend in other departments.

And so um, again, I'm not saying there's anything wrong with that.

I'm just saying that this is this is how you how you try to balance a 1.5 billion dollar budget when you have um you know different uh things that happen throughout the year, whether it be you know vacancies and um you know projects that could get done or couldn't get done, you know, during the year.

So nothing wrong with that.

Um but uh um so I mean I think this is pretty typical of what we do every year in that regard.

And then about you know, 380 million or thousand dollars or so that could be um after this is audited left over in that way.

But I think it is important to notice that that's how we do our budgeting.

It also it it does reflect also that uh these departments I mean it didn't necessarily follow you know the the budget that we gave, you know.

And again, is that wrong?

I'm not saying it's wrong, I'm just saying that that's that's uh this is the operating of what happens throughout the year, um, which I think is you know good good lessons for next year that we have a good amount of that we start with a good amount of some margin there, some fund balance.

Um I mean the administration has to have the ability to be able to have some um some flexibility in there, um, but also it also is telling when it comes to um you know a department like parks, and again, I'm not saying that parks did anything wrong either.

Um, but there was I think we and the you know the people of Albuquerque, and when we see different areas where we see there's some um some definitely areas of need, some things that we might have missed, um, you know, can whether it be the condition or parks like that where you go, um, you know, there's you know, there's some things that happen.

So when it came to the the bill, the parks bill that we passed at the time that was on the table.