Good evening, everyone.

This is the third meeting of the 27th council.

We will come to order.

All counselors are present.

Um, counselor Lewis will be here shortly.

So we'll start off with a moment of silence and um join us all in the Pledge of Allegiance in English and in Spanish.

But as we do the moment of silence, if everybody could remember it's the 17th anniversary of the West Mesa um discovery of the the women um and child who were found on the West Mesa today's anniversary.

So if we can keep them all in your thoughts and prayers, I appreciate it.

Please join us in the pledge.

I believe to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands.

One nation under God with liberty and justice for all.

So okay.

Thank you, Counselor.

Um Counselor uh Vice President Champaign.

Thank you, Madam President.

Civic parking passes uh are provided for members of the public.

You can obtain your parking passes from the city staff uh at the table near the council uh chamber entrance.

Members of the public, city staff, and the media have the ability to view this meeting in person and on live streams throughout four different platforms.

Gov TV on Comcast Channel 16, the Gov TV website, YouTube and Zoob Webinar.

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

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

The video recording of this and all other past council meetings will remain available for viewing at 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.

If you do, 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 proceedings to be as civil as possible and respectful.

Please do not make any personal attacks and please do not applause or snap or any other outbursts during the meeting.

The president will provide one warning to anyone causing a disruption upon the second or continued disruption.

That individual will be asked to leave the chambers and if necessary, security will be at be asked to escort that person out of the chambers.

Such removal from the city council chambers will be effective for the remainder of that meeting.

If continued disruptions occur, the president may recess the meeting until order is restored and if necessary, may clear the chambers of persons participating in that disturbance.

Have the opportunity to do so.

After 5 30 p.m.

The questions may be directed to the administration.

At this time, counselors, there are any questions for the administration.

Councilor Backa and Councillor Cough.

Thank you, Madam President, Mr.

Vice Chair.

Um quick question.

It's been over six months now since we did the noise camera analysis started, and the ordinance was six months to do the analysis, and then we'd circle back and see where that's at.

So I just obviously doesn't have to happen to right now, but I'd like to get an update on where that's where we stand on that.

Madam President, Councillor Baca, um, we'll happily provide that update.

Uh and I'll get with both APD and planning, I think, are both part of that, and we'll make sure we do that.

Councilor Grout.

Thank you.

Um Madam President, uh, Mr.

Vice President.

My questions are for Department of Finance.

Uh Madam President, Councillor Grout, um, Director Donna Sanaval is here.

Um we also have our currently nominated CFO, um, Carla Martinez.

Um, so hopefully we can answer your question.

Thank you.

Thank you both for being here.

Um, our staff, we asked for the um budget forms, and we haven't received those yet.

When can we expect those?

Um President Pena and Councilor Grout, which budget forms are you referring to?

Which ones?

The budget forms that you're supposed to send earlier in the we've I asked where Mr.

Whalen's behind you, he knows.

Okay.

Um, yeah, I can follow up.

I'm not sure when you requested them, but we'll get them to you.

Mr.

Whalen.

Uh Council President and Council Grout.

As we've been having transition, and because things were pushed one month back, we're working through those.

We're diligently doing that.

Okay.

And we'll be working through that so that we can meet with you guys and so we can get you what we need, but we want to make sure that what we have is accurate and what we're gonna be sending down.

So when will when do you think we'll get those?

I would say within the next seven to ten days.

Okay, as our new CFO is transitioning over.

Okay, and I'm transitioning into another position.

We're working through that together.

Okay, perfect.

Thank you.

Um can we expect to receive the five-year budget forecast for this year?

Uh council president and council group, the five-year forecast.

We just finished it.

We're reviewing it, and we're working through those numbers because the five-year forecast will also help us with our budget documents.

Yes, okay.

So maybe within a couple of weeks.

Yes.

Okay.

And then one more question.

When can we expect to get the quarter centre?

Transportation tax report.

Councilor Grow, um, the quarter cent tax report.

When was it due?

It's it's a yearly report, and it's due sometime now.

Okay.

I'll follow up.

Okay.

Hopefully, in the next couple of weeks.

That would be great.

Thank you.

You know, as we're heading, if you know, we're all busy, and and um, but we'll need it to make some budget decisions too.

Thank you.

That's all.

Thank you.

Counselor Rogers.

Thank you, Mr.

Vice President.

Okay.

Uh, my question is for fire first.

Yeah, come on down.

Counselor Skidini.

Thank you so much.

I just wanted to follow up on.

I received uh quote finally for station 11 for the bunks.

And I wanted to ask, do we have a date of when the construction will start?

Uh great question.

I would need to get with Deputy Chief Marufo to be able to answer that sufficiently.

Okay, awesome.

So you'll ask, or should I what's the best process?

You'll let me know.

That's a great question.

Apologize, Council President, Councilor Rogers.

Uh I'll probably go direct with Deputy Chief Marufo, and then I'll speak with the fire chief.

She probably has the best route to get to you.

Thank you.

I'm anxious to get a start date for that construction.

Certainly.

Um then the other question is I was up at the legislature for um the legislative session, and I received a call from Senator Padilla today that he has not been able to get a copy of the request for the Mesa del Sol fire station.

Um and I know we talked when I was there that or maybe it was not you, maybe it was someone else, but while we were there, that they didn't print those out to have them at all for the legislative session.

So I wanted to see if I could get a copy of that sent to me so that I can send it to the senators who are interested in funding that for my district, and would like to ask if you could please if there's firefighters up there lobbying for this, that they have copies of this request for our legislators.

I'll get with Deputy Chief Marufo on that subject as well.

Awesome, thank you.

And I think a couple of other questions that I have.

I'll send via email for us to get because they're beefy.

So I'll send them via email so we can talk about them later.

Thank you, Madam President.

Dr.

Single, did you want to respond?

Madam President, Councilor Rogers, we'll we'll give provide you all the updates from fire.

I was just nodding.

Thank you.

In a grain.

All said.

Counselors, any other questions?

I just have one, Madam President.

Not for AFR, no.

For uh actually APD.

Chief, I appreciate you being here tonight.

Um just a quick question.

Can you tell me what a neighborhood response team is?

Yes, uh Counselor President and Councilor Champaign.

The neighborhood response team is our team that is currently going out and addressing um encampments and other issues that we see throughout the city.

Okay, Madam President, what uh what are they doing?

What is their SOP for?

Or what are they what is their council president and counselor champagne?

Um essentially uh their goal is to help individuals who are in encampments get resources, and so they work with our solid waste division um and they address, like I said, encampments and the unhoused in the area, uh first trying to get them into housing and offer offer resources, and then if they are violating um any city policies or city ordinances, they would then address that.

Okay, madam president, do they run them for warrants and arrest if they have warrants or do they counselor president and counselor champagne?

Yes, that is part of uh the the process when they are making contact with individuals.

Obviously, we would have to have you know a reason to do so.

Okay.

Uh and that in that madam president, and that reasoning falls under what parts the same as any other investigation by a police officer if you have probable cause and counselor president and counselor champagne, yes, reasonable suspicion and probable cause.

We would have to have um a lawful reason to make contact with individuals as we would with anyone else in the community.

Does that and I'm just trying to get clarification, madam president, on procedures of this of um if they're going out and offering services, that's a casual encounter.

Um do they then check for warrants on that on just the casual encounter of hey, do you guys need services?

Do you need help?

Do you have an ID and let me run you for a warrant?

Council President and Counselor Champagne, no, that is not part of that.

Um they respond to specific incidents.

If they are offering resources, that's you know what they are there for.

We would have to have a reason to run them for warrants, um, like we stated reasonable suspicion or probable cause that some type of crime has been committed or reason to believe.

Okay.

Perfect.

That's an Indian clarification on.

Thank you, Chief.

I appreciate it.

You're welcome.

Counselor Rogers.

So sorry, Mr.

Vice President.

I forgot one for solid waste, if possible.

And while it hello, Director Gagos, thank you for being here.

I just wanted to ask a couple questions.

We have a in my district, we have an apartment complex that I constantly hear from my constituents on the walking school bus uh on Ross and Valencia that every single week I get pictures of, and I'm sorry I should have sent them to Garrett to put them up here, but I'll forward them to you of an overflowed every single week trash bin.

Is there a requirement that um we could call the apartment complex and say you have to get another dumpster because this one's not sufficient?

Uh Councilor President and Council Rogers, yes, we do have that process.

We have uh internal code inspectors that will go out of your you can give me the address, we can definitely look into it.

Thank you.

So I did send it to code enforcement, so I should send it to both code enforcement and solid waste.

Yes, correct.

Okay.

So we do have two different code enforcers, that's make it clear.

Perfect.

So this one is Ross and Valencia.

I'll get the actual address for you for this one.

But it's a problem, it's uh happening every week, um, and the kids have to walk over mountains of trash.

Last question for if there's trash left over around the dumpster after the solid race truck comes and takes it outway.

Who's responsible for cleaning up anything outside that's left over?

Council President and Council Rogers.

Um, it is a responsibility of the apartment complex to ensure that it's clean in that area.

Uh, most of the time the drivers will get out and pick up some of the debris that's left.

Uh, but again, it depends on the quantity.

Okay.

Thank you so much.

I'll be sending.

I'll send that again.

I've sent it to code enforcement a couple times so that they could get them another dumpster, but I I should be sending it to you as well.

I'll do that.

And also too, it just depends if they have a one-time, two time, three times, how many times they get picked up, and that's when we'll evaluate the number of days they need to get picked up.

Oh, awesome.

So maybe we could thank you, Mr.

President.

We could maybe just add another.

I think they need an extra dumpster.

I'll let you the experts figure that out.

I just don't want the kids to have to continue to walk through it every week.

And I know we um we'll be talking a lot about that every time.

Every meeting.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Madam President, I believe that concludes administrative and QA.

Thank you, Mr.

Vice President.

Um, great question, Councilor Rogers.

Yeah, because I think sometimes they need to be um re-evaluated to see how many times they get service during the week.

So thank you.

Um so now we are on to um proclamations and presentations.

We have a proclamation um recognizing um Albuquerque West Side Day.

We have uh a couple of people here to accept the proclamation.

Um, Miss Twilight McComb and Melissa Sanchez, if you can make your way up to the podium.

Um Melissa is with the Albuquerque West Side Business Association and Twilight McComb is the West Central Community Development Um with the West Central Community Development Group, they're here to accept the proclamation.

So we will get started.

Um, Counselor Baca.

Thank you, Madam President.

Whereas Albuquerque Westside Day to New Mexico legislature was founded by Senator Antonio Mo Maestas in conjunction with the West Central Community Development Group in 2007, and whereas West Side Legislators unify in solidarity on this day each year to bring awareness to key issues that are important to Westside schools, businesses, and neighborhoods, and whereas West Side students and community members from the boundaries in between both southern and northern edges of the Bernal County line, west of the river, gather for a rally in the Capitol Rotunda to celebrate their pride of the West Side and Madam President.

Whereas this year's participating West Side Schools are Adobe Acres, Christine Duncan Heritage Academy, Horizon Academy West, Edward Gonzalez, Soler Collegiate, Lava Land, Chaparral, Ernie Pyle, Alamosa, Painted Sky, Marie Hughes, Armijo, Carlos Carlos Rey, La Academia, the Esperanza, Atrisco Heritage, Kit Carson, Mary Ann Binford, and Council Lewis.

Whereas over 700 plus West Side Day participants are introduced to the legislative process, are provided with a civics class, a scavenger hunt, and a tour of our state capital building.

And whereas West Side Day participants are given the opportunity to meet their respective legislators and local elected officials to urge their support on issues that are significant to them.

And whereas the volunteer board members of the West Central Community Development Group, Albuquerque West Side Business Association, and the Southwest Alliance of Neighbors should radiate with pride as they have successfully assisted Representative Antonio Maestis in organizing this event on an annual basis for the last 17 years.

And whereas the 17th annual Albuquerque Westside Day will be held on Thursday, February 20th, 2026 at the State Capitol building in Santa Fe, New Mexico, be a proclaimed by the council, the governing body of the city of Albuquerque hereby declares Thursday, February 5th, 2026 as the 17th annual Albuquerque West Side Day.

Congratulations, ladies.

I'm going to ask them this to say a few words, but I just want to say that these group is all volunteer board members.

If you're familiar with the West Central Group, contrary to what you've heard, they're all volunteer members in the community.

30 plus years, some members, some members 20, some members 10.

But you know, they started working on this, and we said representative, and so it's actually Senator Mo Mayestas, so we're going to make a correction on here.

But you know, started this so many years ago, taking up six, seven hundred students every year, and this is all free.

They raise the money themselves.

Um they just go to businesses, come to local elected leaders and ask for money to take these students where they may not otherwise have an opportunity to go to Santa Fe.

And over the years, I've I think they've taken over 10,000 students who have participated in this, and it's all volunteers.

So thank you.

Um if you want to say a few words, Ms.

McComb and Miss Melissa Sanchez.

Thank you, President Pena and Councilors.

I just like to say to reiterate the 17 years the West Central Community Development Group, Senator Maestas, and the City Council members from the West Side have participated in this program.

We started planning this year's program in October.

If you can imagine, taking that many students takes a lot of logistics.

And I just want to share with you for just a moment a little bit with what that looks like every single year.

So this year, my staff has sent over 250 emails.

We've had five planning meetings with Senator Myestis' office, Counselor President Pena's office, and ourselves.

We've printed and folded 750 flyers, filled 675 lanyards for the children with their school name and bus numbers so that we don't lose anyone.

We have this Thursday, we will meet with uh 48 boxes of breakfast burritos that we purchased from local vendors on the west side and take them to the bus station and then drive to Santa Fe where we meet all the students.

We have a huge rally in the rotunda, followed by self-guided tours, which we have developed curriculum over the years to send teachers out with uh tour places to stop and speaking moments for each one of their student classes so they can learn about the roundhouse itself.

Um, all the children um in fifth grade or above have been arranged to visit the senator chambers so that they can go down and actually see the legislative process happening in front of them, and we'll finish our day by feeding all 600 kids two slices of pizza each in 45 minutes in the Senate Finance Committee room and pack them back on the buses and get them out.

And so that this Thursday will be a crazy, crazy day for all of us.

And um, and as uh Council President Pena said, um, our board is all volunteer, and our volunteers and the two part-time staff members that I have are the best in the world.

I just have to say that.

They work very, very hard to make this a success, and I'm very proud to be a part of a community that makes this important to our students.

I want to just say that I meet people all the time who've taken this, um, have gone as kids.

And I have two students that are very close to me that are grown men now, and they talk about politics, they vote, and they believe in the process, and that's what this is about.

So thank you all very much for this proclamation.

We appreciate it very much.

Thank you, Madam President, council members.

So I actually get the easy part.

Um, thank you, Twilight and the West Central group for for putting the student activities together.

But um, the Albuquerque West Side Business Association for the last three years has hosted the legislative reception.

So this year uh we'll be at Chomp Food Hall from 4 to 6 p.m.

And we do invite all community members and business owners to attend.

And again, thank you for um presenting this proclamation.

I've had the honor of being part of this.

I was looking back on on Facebook memories, and it goes back uh 10 years, so I can't believe that I have been part of this for for that long, and it's just an honor.

So thank you.

Thank you all.

Thank you, ladies, for your hard work.

You can come up and get your proclamation.

So thank you.

Thank you again, ladies.

So our next presentation is from Miss Christine Berner, our city economist who will provide an update on um cannabis and gross receipts tax.

Good afternoon, Madam President, members of council.

And there it is.

GRT.

Thank you so much.

Not that I was surprised.

Thank you.

Uh really quick, then, based on the state shared 1.225 increment, the November GRT grew 1.3% over last November.

So that's slowing uh somewhat, and that brings the cumulative growth down slightly to 4.9% for the year.

Uh if we don't consider the impacts of the declining hold harmless, the business sector growth was about 3.1%.

And this time around, accommodation and food did experience a decline in November, and that pulled the cumulative five-month uh into the negative territory this time.

Uh, similarly for construction, after some uh decent growth in October, that did decline in November as well.

And then other services, after some growth in October, it returned to a decline in November.

However, professional services has been doing well and continues to do well, retail gains slightly as well.

And we can go to the cannabis.

And the cannabis actually increased for a second month in a row.

Uh it was a robust 9.6% for November.

Are we there?

Oops, no, not quite.

There we go.

Uh 9.6% for November.

The cumulative growth is still slightly negative at three negative 3.2%, but at least it's it's been positive for the last couple of months.

And that really wraps up what I have for you tonight.

I don't know.

Thank you so much.

Um, we have a question from uh counselor.

Thank you, Madam President.

This is unrelated, kind of related.

Um several of us are up in Santa Fe right now.

Several bills, and there are several wheels up right now that uh remove GRT based on you know whether it's housing medical or X, Y, and Z.

Have you done an analysis on that or are we doing analysis of that?

Something that you can share with all of us.

I know I know I'm seeing what I'm seeing from this from the state, but I'd like our have our own numbers to look at as well.

Madam President, um, Counselor Baca.

Yes, there are two of them top of mind.

The one for medical deductions, GRT deductions.

Uh, when you look at that, there's a hold harmless mechanism built into it that will supposedly shouldn't say supposedly right, it's it it's going to be directly related to the um the deductions that are claimed.

So if it goes forward as it's designed, it wouldn't impact uh local governments, it wouldn't impact Albuquerque.

Um I'm forgetting I want to say, yeah, I don't remember exactly how much the total impact was for um all municipal all local governments.

Um I'm not re I'm not remembering, but yes, there were supposed to be a fix in there for local governments.

Now the other one that I'm thinking of it's the housing correct, that's correct.

And so I believe that one was about four million for all local governments, and um, these bills are extremely hard to uh analyze.

Um the uh the FIR that was put out at the state level did um estimate around 4 million for all local governments, and they stipulated that hey, you know, we don't know what what the uptake will be, we don't know how many you know housing projects this could spur.

It's really hard to make an estimate.

Um but what we typically do because of the size of Albuquerque and and the population, um, we tech it's very loose, but it's like 40 to 50 percent of some of these recommend or uh forecasts estimates would impact Albuquerque.

So a rule of thumb um could be that 40 to 50 percent of that impact would hit Albuquerque.

But like I said, it could be more, it could be something quite different, but that's it's what we have to go with.

You're good.

Dr.

Single, yeah.

Thank you, Madam President and Councillor Backa.

Um, our we shared with our intergovernment and governmental relations committee um earlier this week on sat this weekend, actually on Saturday, that the uh high-end estimate or general uh estimate is about 54 million statewide across all of the GRT proposals for exemption, and and our estimate in that analysis is that the city would be about 50 percent of that, and that's 54 million in the in the year, so we would see a significant impact in our GRT.

Now, each one of those pieces of legislation.

I understand there are some hold harmless and all of that, but the the just straight analysis of all of those packages.

Right.

Can you send that to us to for review?

Because we get a that I imagine the same for all my colleagues, but we get asked to speak on a lot of these bills for and against and be helpful if we have that information.

Thank you.

Councilor Rogers.

Thank you, Madam President.

In line with that, I when I was up at Santa Fe, a lot of a lot of questions about the particularly the one for housing construction for affordable housing.

Is the city administration gonna put out a statement as far as where we stand on that particular piece of legislation?

Because I've also been asked to speak and I read through it and what interested in what you all think.

Um Madam President and Councillor Rogers, our lobbyists have been paying close attention, obviously, to this item, and we are coordinating with others, other municipalities and and the municipal league.

So those that work is very active for all of us.

Um I don't know that we had planned for a proactive statement, but that we are very clear in terms of uh an expectation or hope for a local hold harmless in the direct impact that it has to our budget in terms of understanding that when GRT is how we fund the programs that support the individuals and and these programs as well.

Thank you, Madam President.

I think in addition to what you're sending, Counselor Backa, if there's any position by the city, I would love to know that too, so that I can um echo the same.

I think in district six we need all RGRD.

Um so I'm worried about giving it to anyone else.

We I mean we have a lot of housing going up that will benefit the community through that.

So for me, I'm like that would help a lot.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Any other questions?

Um, seeing none.

I just have one comment.

I'm always asking about internet sales.

Have we ever have we figured that out?

Are we almost there?

Uh Madam President, uh the tax rate, the tax department is still maintaining that splitting out the uh the internet sales from GRT is just not something that that they can provide.

So basically, we just don't know what kind of revenue and how much GRT we're gonna be getting from from that revenue.

Madam President, it's it's it was also commingled with the recovery from COVID, and so it was hard enough as it is, right?

And then you've got that happening at the same time, and so um it is all pretty much leveled out at this point, and that's correct.

It's really hard to tease out just what is internet sales.

Okay, thank you so much.

Thanks.

We're now on to other on to other business.

I move um that we uh go to accept executive session to discuss matters related to 10151 H7 discussion subject to attorney client privilege pertaining to litigation in Mayor Tim Callor versus City of Albuquerque uh council.

There's a second by Vice President Champagne.

We need a roll call vote.

So um Miss Michelle Councillor Bacca, yes, Councillor Bassan, yes, Vice President Champagne, yes, Councilor People Court, yes, Councilor Grout, yes, Councilor Lewis, yes, Councilor Rogers.

Yes, Councilor Teas.

Yes, President Penya, yes, passes unanimously thank you.

So I affirm that the matters discussed in executive session were limited to those specified in the motion for closure.

We are going on to approval of committee appointments, but before we do that, I just wanted to say that the reason I um made the disclaimer that I did ahead of time was that people can um carry a conversation, but if that you carry it quietly, or if you want to have a loud conversation, you carry it outside just to keep the decorum of the chambers because while we are an executive session doing the important business of the city of Albuquerque, we can hear everything.

So it kind of echoes in there, it's really loud.

So um, so for future reference, um, we'd appreciate that.

Thank you so much.

Um, we are now on to approval of committee appointments.

I move approval of committee appointments dated February 2nd, 2026.

There's a motion a second by Vice President Champagne.

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

Yes, yes, yes.

Opposed, say motion.

Motion motion passes.

We are now on to the journal.

I move approval of the January 21st journal.

There's a motion and a second by um committee, the whole chair, uh Councilor Grout.

All those in favor say yes and raise your hand.

Yes, yes.

Opposed, same motion, motion carries.

We are now on to communication and introductions.

Are there any changes to the letter of introduction?

Councilor Rogers.

Thank you, Madam President.

I move that the rules be suspended for the purpose of introducing O-11 and placing it on the February 18th council agenda for action.

O-11 is establishing the African American Advisory Board for the City of Albuquerque.

Second there's a motion and a second by um Councilor Vice President Champagne.

So this needs a two-thirds vote.

All those in favor say yes and raise your hand.

Yes.

Motion passes unanimously.

So I move approval of the letter of introduction.

Second.

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

All those in favor say yes and raise your hand.

Yes.

Opposed, same motion.

Motion carries.

We are now on to reports of committee.

Councilor Basson.

Madam President, the land use planning and zoning committee met on Wednesday, January 28th, 2026, and reports out the following items in the matter of O2 that it do pass as amended.

In the matter of 02 that it do pass as amended in the matter of 06 that it do pass, I make a motion to accept the committee reports.

There's a motion, a second by councillor Grout.

All those in favor say yes and raise your hand.

Yes.

Opposed, same motion.

Motion carries.

Deferrals and withdrawals.

Counselors, are there any deferrals or withdrawals at this time?

I move to this button.

I'll get it.

Madam President, I move to a different EC 549 community planning area assessment report to February 18th.

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

All those in favor say yes and raise your hand.

This yes.

Opposed, same motion, motion carries.

We are now on to the consent agenda.

Are there any changes to the consent agenda?

Seeing none for the individuals on tonight's consent agenda who are being appointed to serve on a border commission.

Thank you so much for your willingness to serve.

If there's anyone in the audience, please raise your hand.

Seeing none, um, thank you for your willingness to serve.

I move approval of the consent agenda.

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

All those in favor say yes and raise your hand.

Yes.

Yes.

Opposed, same motion.

Motion carries.

Um we are now on to announcements.

Councilor Basson.

Madam President, there will be five intergovernmental legislative relations committee meetings on Wednesday, February 4th at 3 p.m., Thursday, February 5th at 3 p.m.

Saturday, February 7th at 10 a.m., Wednesday, February 11th at 3 p.m., and Saturday, February 14th at 10 a.m.

All will be held via Zoom video conference, and there will be a land use planning and zoning committee meeting on Wednesday, February 11th at 5 p.m.

in the Vincent Ingriego Chambers, basement level of the Albuquerque Government Center.

This will be a hybrid meeting.

Thank you, Councillor Lewis.

Madam President, there will be a finance and government operations committee meeting on Monday, February 9th at 5 p.m.

in the council committee room, ninth floor suite 9081 of the Albuquerque Government Center.

Thank you, Councilor.

So we are now on to finance financial instruments.

There are none.

Appeals, there are none.

We are now on general public comments.

Members of the public can provide live public comments through council in person or virtually if they have signed up for public comment per the instructions published on the agenda and our website Friday.

Here are the public comment rules, ground rules.

Each participant has one minute to present.

Comments are to be addressed to the counselors only through the council president.

Any disruptive conduct will result in removal from the meeting.

And there is a um there is a one-minute time limit, and the bell will ring to indicate your time.

Mr.

Cornelius, um, if you can please call the name of the first speaker.

Thank you, Madam President.

Our first speaker is D Ivey, followed by Natalie Vargas.

Madam President and Counselors, some of the obstacles that students in the international district face are sidewalks, littered with little pieces of trash as they travel to try and get to school.

Drug laden um and needles, feces, condoms, and even more.

And because the city has refused, our kids have been walking through this since we beginning of this school year.

City councilor Rogers has contracted to have someone come before seven o'clock every morning before a walking school bus starts, because this is when the children start their journey.

Thank you, counselor.

The Safers to School Committee has prepared a mid-year report card.

I think you have it in front of you, and I'm sorry to say that the city has earned an F.

But don't be discouraged because we believe that you can do better.

And on the back of your report card, you have a rubric, and it gives you all the details of what we expect to bring your grade up to a C.

So we'll be back at the end of the year to see how you've done.

Good night and good luck.

Natalie Vargas, followed by Francesco Artist.

Thank you.

And if we can have the administration go, you know, check that out, please.

Yeah, we have another alley on the way to school.

Um, the Merida alley where the students walk in the Alamosa neighborhood, and there's one in Westgate, and I can't think of the name of it.

If we can have them, because yeah, um, kids are walking to school and they're seeing this kind of thing.

So welcome.

Welcome, Madam President.

Um, in this small area, which is the international district that I represent, just four blocks by eight blocks.

We've seen a 30% increase in unhoused individuals and 40% increase in trash.

Nearly 60% of the city's social services are concentrated here.

Yet the conditions continue to worsen.

These numbers matter because children live here.

They walk to school here, and the environment that they're forced to grow up in directly affects their development.

Within the same area are two ACS buildings located within blocks of each other, both designated for community safety citywide.

ACS is praised for its work, but the here, their presence has no has not translated into safety, cleanliness, or meaningful support.

That is a failure.

Children in this neighborhood walk past open drug use, drug paraphernalia, unmanaged encampments, and individuals in crisis every single day on their way to school.

The fact that this is happening in the immediate vicinity of multiple ACS facilities is unacceptable.

This environment is detrimental to the children's development.

Thank you.

Francesco Artist, followed by William Bowen.

Super neighbor's Madam Council Councillor.

Please confirm on the record.

I have a packet here for all complicit counselors and council services.

Let the record show the city council, the governing body of Albuquerque are on notice of my intent to suit for including but not limited to holding the purse strings that harbor criminals from federal authorities.

You have my blood on your hands.

No one is above the law.

No one.

Hi there.

Uh I'm William.

I am the Alkerky program manager with the New Mexico Coalition at Homelessness.

Um I am the overseer of the annual point in time count that we do for people experiencing homelessness.

Um I am just here today to thank the counselors who assisted with uh distributing some of the um resources that we get out to people during the count and also to individually thank the counselors who joined us on the count this year, Councillor Rogers, Councillor Grout, and Councillor Thaez, as well as encouraging our other counselors, if you didn't join or if you haven't joined before, um, to join us.

I think that it's a valuable and uh useful use of your time.

That's it.

Thank you.

Lisa Christofferson, followed by Janet Sayers.

Albuquerque City Councilors, my name is Lisa Christopherson.

I know we're limited to one minute, and there's probably 10 empty rows.

You can limit our comments all you want to, but you're not gonna limit what we have to say this entire year.

So this is the first city council of Black History Month 2026, and I know you all do not see me.

Trayvon Martin was seen.

Now, how we want to be seen by gun-toting unchecked wannabe law enforcement in the city, you would the cabal wouldn't help us.

So we're here to help ourselves.

For those people just now connecting the dots to this America that has always been, okay.

The natives told us with the blood of the slaughtered millions under smallpox infested blankets of kindness from colonizers.

This is America, the America that has always treated us differently.

This year, we want our justice.

Either participate and help us, as some of you have.

We will come with receipts.

We will be here every single week in this room or outside or wherever you try to relegate us.

Don't shush me again.

Janet Sayers, followed by Thomas Abeta.

Madam President.

On the script it says two minutes.

Is everyone receiving two minutes to speak tonight?

We didn't last week.

No, it's it's in the it's in the front.

They put notice in the front, right?

When people signed up to speak, then it would be what's drive to the so madam president.

I'll move to overrule the decision of the president and allow people their full two minutes.

If there's a second, um there's a motion and a second.

So any discussion on the motion?

All those in favor.

If counselor champagne.

Point of clarification, just why was it reduced from two to one?

Well, we have to stick on the motion right now.

So that's part of the motion.

Oh, so you have a question.

Okay.

Is there a procedure?

Is there a rule within our guidelines of reason why we bring it from two minutes to one?

Madam President, Councillor Champagne.

What has gone on pretty for the last couple years is that if their total number of speakers have exceeded 50, then the council president has reduced the time to one minute.

There's nothing in the rule that says 50 is the cutoff.

That just seems to would have been happening.

Thank you.

That that's the practice.

And why is that that that practice is that Madam President, Councilor Champagne, that was before my time.

I don't know.

I would assume, and I'm just guessing here in my limited experience on three years on this council that if we have more than 50 people at two minutes each, we're going to go into two hours of public comment, which doesn't take me away from the fact that the public has a right to speak, but at the same time, the same public complains that we go till midnight.

So where is the balance?

I think the balance is what we do when we reduce it from two to one so that we can get the government's work done at a reasonable hour so that people aren't here till midnight, as much as I enjoy being here at midnight.

So I guess I answered my own question.

Thank you.

Thank you, Councillor Um Vice President Champagne.

Counselor of Basan.

Madam President, uh, based off of what Mr.

Pidio is saying, I know that I'm not sure about prior to last year, but when I was council president, I did direct staff that I was going, and I said it at the beginning of the year last year when I was president that I excuse me, I wanted to have a metric for making sure when we do change it from one minute to two rather than just whether my mood wanted it or not.

So I made sure to inform everyone, the council, the public, everyone, that as soon as we went and exceeded 50 people, I was I was going to change it to one minute.

And in the course of all of that, staff also changed on the agenda to make sure that the verbiage did say with a maximum of two minutes.

Our council rules, I believe, also say that the council president has the discretion to limit it to under two minutes if the council president sees fit.

Councilor Lewis.

Thank you, Madam President.

I mean, this is you know, in 16 years, I think we've at times had two minutes, one minute, I think even at times 30 seconds.

So this is not anything new.

Um there's nothing new about this, and it's always been the discretion of the president who's tasked with you know managing this meeting and make sure we get to all the people's business at a at a reasonable hour.

I think we get the same complaints sometimes when we go to midnight or one in the morning, and uh you know, usually at the result of uh long-winded city councillors, but also uh when we have um uh you know several hours of public comment, and so the intentions not to limit you know speech and public comment.

I believe that the council the president has the right to you know to manage this meeting in a way that it's most productive, and uh and sometimes you know that decision uh means uh you know um you know changing that time period.

Thank you, Madam President.

Um thank you, Councilor Lewis.

Yes, so that's what I was gonna say.

Those are the rules, everybody asks us to follow the rules.

The rules say you have a maximum of two minutes.

We use the discretion when we have lots of speakers to give people an opportunity to speak.

This is something not outside of the ordinary, as Councilor Bassan stated, she's done that, and um previous council presidents have done that.

So this isn't anything new.

So please please read the council rules, and you'll know that um that that's um that's the discretion of the president, and yes, it does make for a long evening to try to make sure that everybody has an opportunity to speak.

And this is really the only forum in the city of Albuquerque where community members have an opportunity to come in front of their elected officials outside of the county commission to come in and speak to us, and so that your voices can be heard.

I mean, um the mayor's office doesn't have public comment opportunity, and this isn't to suggest that you should, but this is really a great opportunity for public voices to be heard.

So um thank you very much.

And with that, there was a motion and a second.

Um I believe I get to close on my motion.

So um so I agree.

Um folks could should read the rules.

Um I'm reading the script that we were given today, and it says two minutes, and so I'd assume that everyone would be getting their two minutes.

There are 23 people signed up for general public comments.

I, for one, am more than willing to be here 23 minutes extra tonight so that everybody can have their say.

So again, earlier support for this motion.

There's a motion and a second on the floor.

All those in favor say yes and raise your hand.

Yes, opposed, no.

No, no, motion fails.

So we'll move on.

Um, and we were on our next speaker.

Thank you, Madam President.

Janet Seders.

Okay.

Followed by Thomas Abeta.

Uh good evening, Madam President, members of the council.

And uh so I'll be fast.

Um good news, we're now at a million dollars on the famous Project 599 main library, HVAC.

And that became because of um more money that was given by the county commission.

Now I would like to comment on our 25217, which was on the consent agenda.

But I I looked at that before I came, and I'm glad to see that 27% will go towards facilities in animal welfare, arts and culture, senior um affairs, and youth and family.

There are 51 buildings, ex 51 buildings in that category.

And even if the rehab amount is something like 50 percent of 90 percent.

I I just don't I don't see how we can there'll be enough money to rehab roofs plumbing.

So I would highly suggest that the council start thinking about a gross receipts increase of an eighth or a sixteenth percent, sixteenth of a cent that might be used for um rehab of these big ticket items like roofs, electrical, and plumbing.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Sorry about Thomas Abeta, followed by Trevor Selby.

Don't worry, uh President Pinna.

Uh this is the generation of TikTok.

I can I can tick you off in 60 seconds.

Don't worry.

Uh but of course, as always, I'm here looking for some clarification.

Uh Dan Lewis, I was talking to your buddy Greg Hull.

Uh, and I was asking him about the influence GAR has over our legislation, because as you remember, I sent a text message to this whole council from GAR that's talking about the amendments that they believe you're presenting on their behalf.

Uh and Greg Hull said he talks to you all the time that you see this stuff all the time.

Uh and I just actually want to ask for clarification on your words, because you said GAR has already had a lot of influence on this bill with several amendments added that were recommended by the realtor groups.

Uh so my question is actually for my representative, Councillor Rogers.

What is he talking about?

What are these amendments that were getting added on behalf of GAR to your legislation?

Would you mind telling me on the record, Councilman?

Your time is that very much.

This isn't a uh question and answer period.

Okay.

Thank you so much.

I did ask her a question and she's responding.

So may I hear the answer?

Thank you, Madam President.

I would would be happy to respond.

I think what he's referring to are the meetings I had were both with advocates and uh professionals from a lot of different parts of real estate to work on um the bill.

So I personally had meetings with both our advocates and our real estate professionals.

Um, and that's my process is just to do that before I introduce a bill, and then had to do it three more times after that.

So what were some of their interests?

Um, all of the amendments that you pretty much saw during that meeting.

Uh you can go back and watch them came from our real estate professionals.

Thanks.

Yeah.

Trevor Trevor Selby, followed by Joe Cardio.

Good evening, counselors.

I'm a full-time worker, and I barely take home 2100 a month.

I'm currently looking on the rental market for a place to move in this supposedly affordable city.

Uh right now, that is looking pretty difficult, and it likely will uh cost me about half my uh income for all my expenses, uh, rent, utilities, and so on.

Uh on the 21st, this council shot down uh Rogers' ordinance, the rental practices ordinance, which would have eliminated junk fees, hidden fees, and the misuse of landlord authority to neglect tenants.

This bill was rejected by Pena, Lewis, Champagne, Basan, and Grout.

I'm deeply disappointed in this decision to represent the landlord lobbies and the neighborhood interest groups rather than your constituents and common voters like me.

I want to thank the rest of you for doing the correct choice as supporting affordable housing.

Joe Cardil, followed by Chrissy Greenha.

Good evening, Council President Counselors.

My name's Joe Cardillo.

I'm a resident of District 6.

I don't think it's a secret to anybody in this room that costs are going up, the rent is going up, the costs for pretty much everything are going up.

Our utility bills are going up, the cost of groceries keeps getting raised by our corporations.

And now pretty much every day for a working person, the costs just keep going on and we're getting squeezed and price gouged by big companies.

You know, I'd say most people I know in Albuquerque believe in values of community and of fairness and of looking out for our neighbors, but somehow this council seems to have missed that picture.

Because last meeting, as this gentleman before me just had mentioned, uh, you know, y'all, y'all went ahead and just denied the most basic of protections of rental protections for folks who are working people, so that we couldn't even have some protection or some guardrail against someone double charging us for an application fee.

By the way, that has happened to me before many times, just like the banks that charge us and gouge us with their junk fees and their service fees and their maintenance charges.

Y'all should be ashamed of yourselves.

You missed the memo.

Working people have had it with our costs going up and our prices going up and our houses going up, and we're not gonna be put out on the streets and dealing with financial insecurity.

Y'all should be thinking carefully about what comes next.

Thank you.

Sorry, there's no applause, there's no no talking out loud.

Someone's talking, so please follow the decorum of the chambers.

That's right.

That's right.

Okay, this is that's the first warning.

Call the next speaker.

Thank you, Madam President.

Chrissy Greenhaw, followed by Lily Schuster.

Lily Schuster, followed by Brick Jonasy.

I apologize, I'm not a public speaker.

Um President Pena and Counselors.

Last meeting, some of you argued that six months is too short to prove a bill's effectiveness.

But this has not been a six month conversation.

It's been a multiple years long one.

Counselor Rogers, the own data provided a total failure of enforcement.

Renters needed protection yesterday.

If public demand in six months of formal debate aren't enough for this council to act, the problem isn't the policy, it's the lack of will to protect your constituents over special interests.

We can't wait for you to catch up to a reality we've lived in for years.

Renters need action now, not more excuses about timing.

And Vice President, again, this week I don't understand.

It wouldn't have been two more hours, but thank you.

Brick Jonasi, followed by let's outvote Councillor President, Counselors, thank you, Miss Feeblecorn for uh notifying us who the real tyrants are.

One, two, three, four, five.

Um, we brought you a story about a year and a half ago about an individual named Jonathan Borella who uh did an unlawful welfare check.

Now the man has killed somebody, we found out.

A 67-year-old man killed in a welfare check.

And we told you five months prior that he was a bad apple.

You did nothing about it.

That man is dead because he didn't do anything about it.

Yeah, that 67-year-old man got a welfare check done on a bad apple who's ready to kill somebody.

That's what he wanted to do to me that day when he came to an older gentleman, 67 years old at that time.

His house and didn't did a welfare check.

Um, the other thing is, uh, yeah, it's another bad apple out there.

We're gonna tell you about, he's gonna show you a picture here in a minute.

He's gonna show it to you.

Guy grabbing his nuts in front of the children's center or family center or whatever it is.

Uh, same guy.

You'll see it.

He's gonna show you the picture, telling you about the bad apples, you're doing nothing about it.

Just do something about it.

Thank you.

Let's outvote, followed by Marcelin Costner.

Over here, please.

This guy here today, we paid a revisit to the public defender's office where we are lawfully trespassed by the police who seem to want to give the wishes of these private property owners in the city that are housing public entities the right of way to trespass people from public.

When we went there today to do a recheck, dedicator's yourselves telling us that we have to leave because they've got clients in there that deserve their policy, their privacy.

There's no expectation of privacy in public.

Then we got this nut hugger is going to start swinging his nuts again in public, claiming that we've been trespassed before from his property.

We've never been trespassed from his property.

I got a criminal trespass today for that goddamn property.

And I'm tired of being.

Article uh, what is it, 21 of the New Mexico State Constitution, acknowledges that.

That is the supreme law of the land.

And we guaranteed everybody here that serves in the public, we the people put you here.

You have no power.

You have what we give you, and we have mechanisms in law to take it away if you do not behave.

Power to the people.

Okay, this is the third part.

So I'm gonna ask.

Okay, can we can someone ask um Ms.

Christopherson to leave?

You don't want to hear from the dependent.

Tad Numinsky, followed by Shannon Molina Cordova.

Thank you.

What I have question.

My name is Ted Nemeiski.

What's happened to final auction?

Only two.

And one, I don't care.

Now why?

Because that stays a government body, move and voted by one vault.

Whole consent agenda.

That's what kind of people cuts they are.

Louise, last time you said that his uh about end.

You made it because you made a statement, but this fella was listening that the council's gonna do anyway what they wanted.

We could go on and on one minute, three seconds, and so on.

We going to federal the to the court.

Thank you, Mr.

Can you call the next one?

You called ice for women and men.

Thank you, sir.

Ma'am.

Yes, I will or thank you.

Shannon Molina Cordova, followed by Simon Polakowski.

Hi guys.

I've come to you before.

My husband's a whistleblower for the county.

He will um received a traumatic brain injury.

An inmate ran and kicked them.

The county is covering it up.

Like I said, this is the third time I've come to you.

And not one of you have said anything to even help us out because they are covering this up.

I can even give you all the names, the proof, everything, and this close with the disciplinary board.

You guys are supposed to be working for us.

I think we should work on removing you from your seats if you cannot work for the public.

Thank you.

Can you hand us to them, I later?

Simon Polakowski, followed by James Freeman.

Good evening, Council, Council President.

Uh, this uh two minutes, this is this is something that has happened years ago under a prior council.

Uh people are uh, as we see tonight, uh, very frustrated and communicating their concerns about the city.

I think you should go back to the old format where people were allowed to sign up and donate their time to somebody who they thought better represented or voiced their concerns uh about the city.

Uh one minute is nothing.

Uh maybe uh we that you know it's just symbolic.

And we don't want to be yelling at you and then just leaving.

I think people really want to have a dialogue with our government.

Thank you.

James Freeman, followed by Kristen Cummings.

I'll just say good evening, y'all.

I really like the two minutes because I get to actually say my name and say district four, and you know, be really respectful.

And uh in one minute, I that's the first thing I cut from my script is my name and what district I'm from.

But I'll proceed.

Uh I really uh I'm here to speak in in strong support of O5.

I really think we need to limit the S the STRs, the Airbnbs and the Verbos.

Every time a property turns into a short-term rental, it drives up housing costs, and it makes all housing less affordable.

I think this is this is another common sense thing is to limit all we're trying to do is put a cap on on how many are in the city, and and this is a reasonable request.

So I I strongly urge your support.

Um I just think it's common sense when we're having such an affordable housing crisis.

Thank you.

Kristen Cummings, followed by Joe Calkins on Zoom.

My name is Kristen Cummings.

Today I rent a nice duplex in District 6.

When I was 13, I became homeless.

He had half a foot in height on me and probably 100 pounds.

But when he threatened my safety or the safety of my mom and my little brother, we got in a fist fight.

I was 13.

We had nowhere to go, but my mom didn't want those scenes to become normal.

So we moved in with one of her friends at first until she stole from us.

Well, I applied for high schools and took standardized tests.

I got athletes' foot.

I got lice.

I missed school because of the lice.

I missed school through to depression.

One night we stayed at a homeless shelter.

In the morning, we were sent on our way with one baloney and American cheese sandwich each.

That would be all our food for the day.

She was raped when she was a child by her father, so this triggered a flashback.

In the car while I assured my sobbing mom that she was not a bad mother, and encouraged my four-year-old brother who didn't understand what was happening to eat the sandwich because it was the only thing he was going to eat that day.

It was in that moment I realized we were poor.

I'm one of the lucky ones.

I got out, but I had to go back to my abuser to get out so that I could have an address to apply to colleges, so that I could have an address to get a job, so that I would not lose my documents in one of the sweeps that are so frequent here.

This should not be the only option for victims of abuse.

We should not have to choose between harassment on the streets or violence at home.

When you pass ordinances that ban camping, when you ban private businesses like Quirky Books from allowing camping on their private properties, when you endorse the construction of hostile architecture like divided benches or loud light and sound devices to prevent sleeping, or the addition of sharp rocks on medions to prevent panhandling.

You are declaring war on the most vulnerable and marginalized in our communities.

When you vote against the barest of tenant protections, such as 025102, you condemn many more people to fall through the cracks and then you seal those cracks up behind them by blocking the efforts of any social safety nets.

If this body will continue to vote this way, if you will continue not to protect tenants and not to protect the homeless, to actually criminalize homelessness, and I want you to be honest.

Somewhere where you didn't have to watch it and you didn't have to be accountable for it.

Thank you.

So um is Mr.

Venegas here.

You had added his name.

That was two oh five.

Okay.

Up next we have Joe Calkins, followed by Nicole Finch.

Okay, I'm on muted.

Hi.

Um president and council members.

I spoke uh at the last meeting, and I'm speaking at this meeting about the same thing, uh, so that I can continue and get more information to you.

Um I agree with the last speaker on all of her points, but I'm coming from a different point.

I have homeless camping on my block.

And that's why I'm not talking to you from home now.

I'm talking to you from fine star because the noise and the disruption was so intense that I could not concentrate or focus to even complete a sentence if I were at home.

I could not plan this uh speech tonight because there was just too much noise and cacophony.

Uh especially dogs barking.

So 15 seconds, 14.

Um I have hyperacusis and I have ADD.

Uh, the combination of all of the disruption with those makes my handicaps into disabilities.

Please find a place for them to live.

Uh where they don't have where they can just camp without being kicked out every day.

And not camp on my boss.

Thank you very much.

Nicole Finch, followed by Ambrose Vernon Stark, Madam President and Counselors.

My name is Nicole Finch.

Members of the Library Advisory Board participated in library legislative day last Friday at the state legislature.

We visited the offices of every legislator with a district in Albuquerque and made a request for capital outlay funds for the main library HVAC, in addition to the rest of the slate of library uh capital outlay requests for those legislators with those other branches in their districts.

We had many positive interactions with the legislators and their staffs.

They have until the end of this week to decide how to parcel out their capital outlay.

If we make our two million dollar goal, we understand that the city will cover the difference to complete that main library HVAC project, and we will be monitoring that as the funds come in.

Thank you.

Ambrose Vernon Stark.

Eight years ago, I moved to this city, and I was ready to be happy and proud of living in a city such as this week.

And yet instead, eight years ago, I found myself quickly made homeless by the sudden jumps in rent in undisclosed fees and maintenance fees for buildings that are still able to do that today.

We have people out here who are living on the sharp rocks on divided benches, and we are seen as the problem rather than victims of the malicious incompetence that you have displayed for more than just since your last meeting.

I expect you to do better.

I expect you to do the bare minimum of your job, and I expect you to take accountability for yourselves, the people that you are harming.

Now move forwards, fix things, help and protect your community.

Put every IC agent in a fucking federal prison where they're belong.

Madam President, that concludes general public comments.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr.

Cornelius.

So we are now on approvals.

Um ECH um Vice President Champagne.

I'm sorry.

Might have been one person that was missed for some reason.

Can we find out why?

Yes, you, ma'am, in the back.

Yeah, sure.

Thank you, Madam President.

Thank you.

She she signed up on another bill.

That's correct, madam.

Okay.

Thank you.

Okay.

Thank you.

So we are now on approvals.

EC 18 revenue and expense report for fiscal for first quarter fiscal year 2026.

And we have Ms.

Brokaw here.

If you want to just talk a little bit about the EC and then unless anyone has any questions.

Oh, I'm sorry.

Um, motion for approval.

There's a motion.

Oh, sorry.

Receiving noted.

And there's a second by Councillor Grout.

And then I guess is there anyone signed up to speak on this bill?

The person that signed up for this bill, Madam President, um, notified me that she also signed up for 026.5.

And so I've moved her.

Okay.

Thank you.

Okay.

So, Ms.

Brokaw, you want to just give us Madam President.

Uh, this is the revenue and expense report for the first quarter of 2026.

Um, it does go over various revenue sources for general fund and other funds, and includes a table of year-to-date expenditures with projections for the remainder of the year.

So, are there any questions from any of the counselors?

Counselor Grout.

Thank you, Madam President.

Um, I do have a couple of questions.

I'm not sure who from Admin to ask.

Madam President, we have um Director Sandoval and um budget director um Davis here can to answer any questions that you may have.

Um we can't answer.

Hi, Mr.

Davis.

Thank you for being here.

Um, the administration is projected to overspend by 18.8 million dollars this year, according to this first quarter spending.

APD is overspending by 3.4 million projected, city legal overspending by 825,000 again projected.

Uh DMD overspending by 5.2 uh projected.

And I know that AFR is typically projected to overspend, but this year they're projected to spend even more than half a million dollars from last year.

Can you tell me the main reasons why these departments are projected to overspend so much so early in the fiscal year?

Madam President, Counselor Grout, yes.

I have generalized a generalized overview for you, and if you'd like additional detail, I could also provide that after tonight.

And if you'd like additional detail, I could also provide that after tonight.

So fires generally an increase in operating costs, such as pharmaceutical, um, cleaning, um, operating costs and contracts.

Um, like you said, this is uh typical for AFR because they're fully staffed.

Um that's that's for fire uh legal.

What's for some personnel and operating activity that we need to review in fiscal year 27 as a result from fiscal year 25 and uh 26?

Um as far as municipal development, there are three primary reasons.

Um we got some pump service uh contractual services um with Albuquerque uh Bernalio County Water Utility Authority.

That's uh slight increase for fiscal year 26, um, some street lights um costs that um that came online that we uh need to review for uh budget purposes, and as you all know, we have a big service contract for a contractor that goes and replaces knockdowns and traffic lights and copper thefts.

Um from what I heard from the department was um a lot of the times, even though there's no copper, they put aluminum, uh they still break in two of them thinking there's copper in them, and so they have to go repair that, but that's the big contract that we have uh with municipal development that they uh spend they're currently spending a lot on uh police uh again contractual services in general it's primarily two contracts, shot spotter and our drone program uh that we're bringing online for 26 and increasing um and I think that sums it up, Councillor Grout.

I think that was all of them.

Thank you, Madam President.

Um, just to follow up, what are your plans to kind of rein that in?

Because what are how are you gonna get back to balancing the budget?

Uh Madam President, uh Counselor, um first quarter projections are really uh generalized and really uh conservative.

So we work with the departments, it could be a number of things.

Um, do you really really need to spend this amount on this contract?

Do you need to travel?

Do we you know manage through a potential vacancies?

So it's a variety of activities that we'll manage for these first quarter projections.

As you know, we've second quarter is is already gone, so um we we started plans on managing through this as soon as we started seeing this, so we monitor them throughout the year.

Okay, thank you.

And it is that service contract with Dalkia?

Is that Madam President?

Uh Councilor Grout, yes.

Okay, thank you.

All right, one final question.

Um let's see the fiscal year 25 revenue for CIP funded positions was 4.8 million, we're 34 percent below the estimated due to lower than expected capital expenditures in the budget, and the fiscal year budget provides a 58% increase over the previous year.

However, this may be adjusted downward at the five-year forecast.

So, my question to you is for the public, there isn't an actual dollar amount here for fiscal year 25.

What is the actual dollar amount?

Uh Madam President, Counselor Grout.

I give me one second and I will find out.

Is it in your estimated?

Ms.

Christine Brenner, a city economist who manages revenue.

She might be able to find it quicker than me.

Thank you.

I believe this we have 525.

Yeah.

Madam President, for um and counselor grout, um, for FY26 CIP transfers for CIP positions are actually budgeted at 14.3 14.3 million.

14.3 million.

Okay, thank you very much.

Thank you.

That's it.

Thank you.

Any other questions?

Councilor Rogers.

Thank you, Madam President.

I just had a question about um was the audit the audit wasn't completed when this expense and revenue report was done?

Madam President, Councilor Rogers, correct.

Okay.

So given the final audit at FY25 weren't available.

How will council be briefed now that the audit's done?

Um Madam President, Councilor Rogers, the audit isn't complete yet.

Uh we're anticipating a completion date and review of from the state auditor's office by February 20th.

February 20th.

Okay.

Thank you.

And then how will we ensure transparency and accessibility of these financial reports to the public?

Uh Madam President, Councilor Rogers, these um are in legislatar.

So if they're looking for them, they could pull them up.

Legistar, these reports are on Legistar.

Thank you, Madam President.

Outside of Legistar.

People aren't gonna like we have our budget on the website, they don't have to go to Logistar to find it.

What about this being in the same space?

Madam President, Councilor Rogers, we could discuss that.

Yeah.

Okay.

Thank you.

That's just some questions I'm getting from my constituents that outside of Legistar, where can they find this similar to where they're used to going to look for the budget?

Um and then just I'm just can you explain?

And I know we've talked about this, but I've slept a lot since then.

Yeah, why was this so late?

Uh because this is the for the first quarter and it's January.

So we should have gotten this a while ago.

And Madam President, uh, Councilor Rogers, typically we're running uh through different processes.

Uh this year, typically, like what delayed it was actuals for 25.

Um, I would love to say we're always on time with all of our documents, we're hitting our targets.

Um, we are not immune to turnover, so we experienced some turnover.

We have two uh new budget staff, so um they're in a very steep learning curve, but um it was a combination both of you know uh delay in it in financials and staffing issues.

Thank you, Madam President.

How are we gonna um what's the plan to plan to make sure that that this doesn't continue happening?

This type of a delay.

Uh Madam President, Councilor Rogers, um, you know, besides just the you know, put our nose to the grindstone and working.

Um I we turn them out as quick as possible.

Um I would love to tell you we can get them done, you know, um, soon after we close the books.

Um but the matter fact of the matter is um it's all a calculation of staffing and uh accounting closing the books.

What I would want to say is when the fiscal when the when a quarter ends, that's not when the financials are prepared.

Accounting does a great job of closing the books, but they can't close the books typically until two to three weeks after until the final payroll runs, they'd run their accruals.

So at the very earliest, we can start our projections are about three weeks after.

Um but I I mean in actuality I want them done as soon as possible.

Thank you.

Um, Madam President, I think Mr.

Leland has something to add.

Council President, Council Rogers, as stated before, everything was pushed back by one month because of the federal shutdown.

So things that would have been submitted on December the 15th, and we said this uh prior, then we would have had those numbers by January 15th, but it was pushed back to January 20th until we got the federal guidelines for single audit.

So to do our projections based on numbers that we haven't submitted or aren't solid is one big reason why we are one month or a little bit less than one month behind, as well as the the uh thing uh things that Mr.

uh Lawrence said right here, but that had a big thing to do with it because you don't want to do projections on books that haven't been adjusted or haven't been submitted.

Thank you.

Thank you, Madam President.

That's a that's I understood that part.

We don't control the federal government as much as I'd love to.

Um but that's what his answer was is more what I'm trying to get at.

What we can control and making sure we have processes to to help with those things, I think are important to me.

Um last question just about risk management.

And so speaking of our federal government shutdown impacts, um, what are there any risk mitigation strategies that we're using on economic issues?

Like I think as soon as we had a trend transition in our federal government, I asked what are the federal implications if we lose funding and so we put together a large list.

Is that at all in your forecasting?

Funding loss of funding from the federal government, shutdowns?

Is that how does that affect your work?

And Madam President, uh Councilor Rogers, it it goes into the planning process as we go through this budget cycle.

So any we I know we have a list.

We have a list of all our federal funds and potential uh uh takeaways or losses.

So as we prepare the fiscal year 27 budget, we'll be reviewing all of that and how it plays into uh the 27 budget going forward.

Thank you.

And then the last thing is just uh are there earn early warning or triggers in your department that trigger you to do some look at our finances outside of a mid-year?

Are there any processes or triggers that would trigger you to say, oh, maybe we should take a look at X, Y, or Z.

Um, Madam President Councillor Rogers, for example?

Federal shutdown, federal cover, yeah.

Federal, if that's one of the biggest ones.

So, Madam President, Councilor Rogers, yes, um, especially up at the state.

Uh we talked discussed about some potential impacts um uh up at the state, so we constantly monitor city economists myself, uh, and we do uh through our lobbyists also get you know, hey, you might want to look at this, look at the fiscal impact of this.

So we're really well versed in going into the federal website looking at legislation, even though I don't like reading 2,000 pages of legislation and trying to interpret it.

But yes, we're constantly monitoring, especially for the session.

Thank you.

And then just specifically about HUD funding.

There was a notification coming out about HUD funding and citizenship.

Um, are you dealing with that when we look at our budgets, or is that only an HHH?

Uh Madam President, Counselor Rogers, I haven't really heard too much about it, so I depend on Triple H and letting us know about the fiscal impacts and what they're receiving yet.

Thank you, Madam President.

Thank you, Counselor Teis.

Oh, I'm sorry.

Um Dr.

Single.

Thank you, Madam President.

I just wanted to follow up on that last question.

We have multiple um departments that are actually focused in monitoring on any notices or any indicators or signals that we see within the Department of Finance and Administration.

We have both a our grants um manager, and I that's not her official title, and I can't remember it at the moment, that is making sure we watch all of our federal dollars and any notices that we get, and we watch that very carefully, as well as within any department that receives federal dollars, both the directors and the deputy directors that oversee any one of those programs are watching for signals at any time so that we have both communication information as well as any um media information that might be indicating something or proactively also reaching out any time we have that information to ensure that we're communicating with our key partner or key uh contacts within those federal departments to understand um if it has a direct implication for our specific grant or uh meaning rather than asking about the city of Albuquerque but asking about that grant program that we were funded through, and so we're doing full monitoring all at all times.

Thank you, Madam President.

I just want to say that we you know in studying that list over and over and over again, there are several HUD positions that are funded by HUD federal dollars.

And so if we have any slipping in our HUD funding, that's 12 positions within HHH that hopefully the administration are planning for how to fund those.

Um, or it would fall on council when it comes to budget time.

So I just want to make sure we're extra cautious, especially for, I mean, I even saw some police officers that were funded through federal funding, which I don't anticipate we would lose that before we would lose HUD.

I did send an email to the department asking specifically what is our practice is gonna be around this with our providers, and so I look forward to hearing back about that so that I can answer the questions I'm getting.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Um Counselor Tays.

Thank you, Madam President.

Um so from what I can see from the information that has been presented to me, it looks like the majority of the overspending is coming from Fund 50 personnel.

Is that correct?

Uh Madam President, Councilor Teas, um where are you looking?

I am looking at the general ledger with the fiscal year actuals.

Do you not have that?

And sorry, Madam President, Counselor Teas, what is your question?

Well, my question is are we budgeting personnel appropriately?

Are we budgeting overtime as a permanent substitute for staffing?

And why isn't this well?

Yeah, that's my question.

Are we budgeting overtime as permanent substitute for staffing?

Uh Madam President, uh Counselor Teas, I would say no.

Um we we budget overtime at what we anticipate for the year.

Um we never know what it might be, especially for police and fire.

Um it's a number we really look at every single year.

So if we increase wages, my team actually goes in and increases the the overtime uh anticipated.

Um but on any given year, uh depending on the activities in the department, it could either you know spike or go down.

Uh typically it's always higher depending on our estimations, but um I uh no we don't inflate over time to to offset in person now.

Okay, well, how much, madam president, how much of the projected 18.8 variants is attributable specifically to fire and police over time.

Uh Madam President, Counselor Teas, I can review that.

I don't have that specific detail in front of me.

Um, but if you would like I could dig into uh that after and meet with my budget analyst.

Okay, um let me see.

Madam President, um our what's the administration?

I know I know uh counselor Rogers asked this as well, but I just what's the administration's mitigation plan for the remaining fiscal year?

What are we doing?

Plan for hiring acceleration, schedule changes, um staffing.

I'm just curious what we can realistically claw back before year end and how madam president uh uh counselor teas, yeah.

We anything's on the board.

Um like I said, if it's a certain contract, if it's you know, typically in the past, um, what city and local governments do are you know, no more travel, no more um potential, you know, uh leaving positions vacant.

Um is this contract really necessary?

What we always say are the only the essentials.

We revert back to only the essentials and start stopping everything.

Madam President, do we not do that when we're drafting the budget?

Uh Madam President, Counselor Teas, uh there is a certain amount of travel, contractual services and personnel that it's considered for the budget and it is inserted in in the budget.

Madam President, how many um contractual service contracts do we have?

Uh Madam President, Counselor Teas, I will have to get back to you on that yeah, and from which departments I would like to know.

Okay, um, and how that's affected with the vacancy rates in those departments.

Um just a couple more questions, Madam President.

I know I'm I'm speaking robustly.

Um will the will this over variance require a formal budget adjustment or anything like that?

Uh Madam President, Counselor Teas, um hopefully not.

Um hopefully we could rein it in, and hopefully we'll have enough to offset in other departments.

It's always a give and take between departments that overspend and departments that kind of underspend and what we actually can control throughout the fiscal year.

Um and my final question, Madam President, you know, as counselors here, we have fiduciary responsibilities to public funds.

So how are we supposed to responsibly vote on future appropriations without any sort of standardized performance measures tied to the budget requests?

Uh Madam President, uh Counselor Teus, we have performance measures.

Um, you know, performance-based budgeting.

Uh we have the IPC that rolls up to the five-year goals, performance measures that in theory directly tied to the budget that you guys appropriate.

Um those performance measures are inserted in the document.

Um, as far as directly tying to each dollar, I can't say that they do.

Okay, Madam President, and uh, can you send me those performance measures that are tied for each department?

Thank you.

Thank you.

Um Counselor Vice President Um Champagne.

Thank you, Madam President.

I just have two quick questions going through the the analysis of this, and it probably is for Miss Brokaw.

Um it says in there for FY26, the GRT growth is expected to increase by about 3.4 percent.

Is there is there a known reason why we expect that it doesn't have to be specifically for you if administration knows as well?

Madam President, uh Counselor Champagne, I would refer to um Christine Berner.

Perfect.

The economists.

Everybody's waving the right person on.

Thank you.

I'm not paying attention now, so I apologize.

Madam President, Mr.

Vice President, Mr.

Vice President.

I think I need you to repeat your question.

I'm pretty sure I just I'm looking over the analysis that we would that we're provided.

It says for FY26, GRT growth is expected to increase by about 3.4 percent.

Do we know the reason why we expect it to increase?

Uh Madam President uh Vice President Champagne.

Why, yes, I put a lot of work into that number.

Um just briefly, the city has a few econometric models that we use.

I use um data from an internet from a national source, so I get projections for CPI, projections for consumer confidence.

I use data from UNM Bieber, so I get projections for employment, projections for housing permits, and I put those into uh an econometric model um which will uh forecast expected uh GRT growth.

And so, and we also because of the declining hold harmless, I also pull out the hold harmless component and I estimate sort of the food and medical growth, take the deduction of you know the the phase out of that, and then and then I have my models for the the rest of GRT.

Um what else can I say about that?

That's the that's the high level.

Um so a considerable amount of work goes into that.

Thank you, madam.

Uh then one final question then.

It also stays on here, and this is just a property taxes are expected to increase by about 3.5%.

How did we come up with that projection then?

Yeah, Madam President, uh, Mr.

Vice President Champaign.

Um, that is a little bit harder to project, but we do get information from the county for um property taxes and what those are doing.

There's also some mechanisms in there that keep property taxes from increasing too much for residents, right?

Um, and then we've got the uh the uh new uh deductions for veterans that we were worried could impact revenues, but we we've been assured that that's probably not going not going to impact our revenues.

So um I yeah, I work with the county on that when trying to get a good estimate of what those revenues will be.

Okay, and that's why that's why I asked that question because out of curiosity, I understand uh with the lightning tax clause that it can't go over three percent with regular property tax residentials.

So where's the point five then?

Are we projecting are we getting new properties?

There's new housing, is it renovations and now old houses that weren't being used and or the reassessing property values?

Uh Madam President, Mr.

Champagne, Mr.

Vice President Champagne, that's correct.

Champagne, that's correct.

Which one new property?

All of the above.

Everything that I just mentioned.

Okay, thank you.

Councilor Grout.

Thank you, Madam Chair, uh President.

I have one final question, or I have two questions or one comment and one question.

I think we need a study session for sure to answer a bunch of questions like this.

This is a good reason for that.

When will we receive the second quarter projections?

Uh, Madam President, uh, Councilor Grout, as soon as possible.

With that being said, we need to finish uh like uh Mr.

Wellington said, five year forecast first, and we're actually working on second quarter projections now, so I'm hoping before the end of the month.

By the end of the month?

Yeah.

Okay.

And hold you to it.

Okay, thank you.

Thank you, Councillor Ground.

Thank you.

That just brought up one more question for me.

Thank you, Madam President.

So if the government continues to be shut down, will we be the delayed a month?

Just make a share.

Madam President, uh, Councillor Rogers, no.

Thank you.

And then one more, I just wanted to add to what counselor Teas asked for.

I'd like to specifically dig into fire.

Um, because we had a report from Chief about 12% vacancies for lieutenant paramedics, 18% vacancies for driver paramedics, but we already appropriated funds for those positions.

So I'm interested in what the overtime costs for those positions are, and if that's why um we have a lot of vacancies in those particular positions.

Um, and so I'm just interested in that.

Thank you, Madam President.

And Madam President, Councilor Rogers, if you want to follow up specifically, maybe I can contact you after.

Absolutely.

Thank you, Councilor Rogers.

Counselor Tayus, and then we're gonna close the floor.

Thank you, Madam President.

Just a couple more requests.

Um can you provide some information about how your budgeting for those type of factors like furloughs, government shutdown, reduced work weeks, hiring freezes, any sort of position expansions, and then can you also provide a description of the major issues that affect the budget, the any sort of economic local economic factors in greater details?

Are there business closures, new business expansions, anything, any other sort of revenue declines?

I know we got that from our wonderful economists, but just kind of a more um I guess I just want to see specifics.

Thank you, Madam President.

Thank you.

Did you the administration have any questions?

Madam President, thank you.

I just wanted to respond to Councillor Teas.

I think um we'd be good for us to if we if you to have a meeting.

I think our economist has a really actually sophisticated way of pulling all of this information.

It is built into our budget documents, um, and we have multiple like uh ways in which the team does this work, and I think I know as a new counselor, probably we great way for us to do as we get ready to go into budget an opportunity to do a little bit of the orientation of all the ways in which we pull this information into together because I think there's I found it, and by the way, I almost have an orientation for a year when they do it.

I found it incredibly valuable.

Thank you, Dr.

Single.

Thank you, Madam President.

Last question.

Who's operationally accountable for the budget department, CFO, CAO, mayor's office, who uh madam president, all of the above.

I mean, we we operate at the executive level to monitor and then the directors run their departments and operate their budgets and accountability.

This um quarterly projections give us the opportunity to not only re check in with them but also then report out publicly as to where we are in the health of the annual budget and the operating um and it's you know budget to actuals is our opportunity to really begin to do the work at any in any quarter and for the remainder of the year to ensure that we are keeping an eye on the ball that each of them have in their budget.

Thank you.

Thank you so much.

Okay, so on that we have closed the floor, and there is a motion for a receipt be noted of EC 18.

We've not seen any additional questions.

All those in favor say yes and raise your hand.

Yes, yes, opposed, same motion.

Motion passes.

So with that, I think there was a little bit of a toss-up.

I was asking questions on whether people wanted to take a break or just plow through.

And I think everyone is um, I think it's decided that we'll take a break.

So we'll be back at um 740.

Thank you.

I know.

These guys are up there with the okay.

We're back in session.

We are now on um final actions.

Councillor Backa, Febalcorn, and Rogers O five.

Well, let's chat.

Thank you, Madam President.

Oh five amending the short-term rental ordinance to add a separation requirement for short-term rental permits.

I move due pass.

Second.

There's a motion and a second for approval of 05 counselors.

Do you want to open on your bill?

Uh thank you, ma'am.

Madam President.

Who's gonna do we can do the opening?

Thank you, ma'am.

Madam President, my apologies.

You're fine.

It looks like we have three amendments.

So um there was a motion and a second for a due pass.

We can go to the amendments, or you can open on your bill and then we can go to the floor amendments.

Perfect.

We can go to amendments first, no problem.

Okay.

Thank you, madam president.

Let's start with floor amendment one on page two, line sixteen.

Amend as follows.

An SDR permit shall not be approved located within 100 feet in all directions of another approved SDR permit.

Uh this amendment proposes reduce the buffer distance between short-term rental permits to 100 feet from 330 feet.

This is working with folks to try and find a little bit more reasonable um approach to the distance.

Um given that SCRs are so concentrated in certain parts of the city, especially in district two, um, even the 100 distance, well, not that far actually makes a difference, especially if you think about places like Barelas where there's 70 Airbnbs crammed into this little tiny neighborhood.

Second, thank you.

Move do pass.

Um, there's a motion and a second by counselor feeble corn for floor amendment, which was A is now one.

Are there any questions on the ammo?

Administration, no?

Okay.

Um, seeing none, all those in favor.

No, shrinking.

You had a question?

Oh no, yes, me a question.

Okay.

All those um in favor of floor amendment number one, please raise your hand and say yes.

Yes, yes.

Opposed, say motion.

I'm sorry, should we do that again?

No, okay.

So that motion um passes.

We are now on floor amendment um labeled B, which is now two.

Um, Councilor Baca.

Thank you, Madam President.

Number two on page two, line 14, amendment is follows.

Separation requirement contains section 1319-6D shall apply within the and this takes out from citywide to council districts two, six, and seven only.

Uh this is because by far, a you always want to have flexibility in all of this um going citywide, maybe not as flexible.

Uh however, all on top and uh the vast again, the vast majority of Airbnbs are within just a small part of the city, and so if you want to adjust and and help and find some balance in the city, you don't actually need to do the entire city in this case.

Um I move due pass.

There's a motion, is there a second for floor amendment number two?

There's no um second, so that motion that amendment fails.

No fails.

So um floor amendment number um uh labeled C is now floor amendment two.

Floor amendment two B then, I guess.

Thank you, Madam President.

On page three, line eight, amend as follows.

Section four effective date, the order shall take effect on July 1st, 2026, after publication by title and general summary.

This is a change from five days after passing.

And the reason for this is um working in good faith again.

Uh right now, I in fact I got the most recent numbers.

Uh we have something close to 2,000 short-term rentals in the city right now.

Uh of those 2,000, only around 800 are actually registered.

So we have close to 1,200 short-term rentals that are not paying their annual fees, not uh contributing to the lodgers income tax.

Uh literally just flaunting the system.

And so all that said, you know, I do believe in helping small business as we find balance in all of this.

And so this would allow all those folks to register with the city, and they would then be grandfathered into this bill and be protected.

Their business would be protected as we work to balance out the needs of all of our city.

So I move due to pass.

Second.

There's a motion.

Um there's a motion and a second for floor amendment number two.

Are there any questions, counselors?

Um, counselor um vice president Champagne, followed by Councilor February.

Thank you, Madam President.

Um Councillor Backup, we brought up something where you said that um the lodgers tax.

The lodgers and just clarify with me on this that lodgers tax is taken if you were with the RBO or Airbnb and advertise your law um register with them and use their platform for your renter, uh, that's already taken out.

Uh those two platforms do that already and then submit the money to the city for that uh deal.

So when you say that half are not contributing to the lodger's tax, what can you clarify that?

Right.

Uh thank you, madam president, ms uh counselor champagne.

Um while some platforms are that not all Airbnb, sorry, not all short-term rentals follow those two uh platforms.

And in fact, um, as we noted last council meeting, our lodgers tax was down eight percent during a historically busy balloon fiesta.

Lodger's tax was down for the entire year, but eight percent just during the month of October.

So um, yes, in some cases they do get it, but in many other cases they do not, and that's one of the issues we need to fix.

Thank you.

Thank you, Madam President.

Thank you.

Um any other questions?

I think we have that council Feebacorn after Councilor Champagne.

Thank you.

Um, so I I definitely seconded this and I plan to support it, but I do think we need to be clear about why this amendment is needed.

Um lots of folks called me very very upset that they were worried that this bill was going to make them stop their current businesses.

And I said, no, no, read the bill.

Um there's clearly in the bill it says that if you are an existing short-term rental um with a short-term rental permit, you are exempt, right?

As long as you maintain that um permit.

And then it becomes very clear.

Oh, but I don't have a permit.

So well, if you're not following the law, I can't help you, right?

Um, and I don't think that we should necessarily be helping folks that aren't following the law.

But the point of this amendment that counselor um Bacca brought forward is to say if this passes, you get a certain amount of time to get legal to get your permit, um, so that we don't have the situation where folks that have been operating a short-term rental illegally um suddenly cannot continue to do that.

So I do appreciate your willingness to work with folks more than I am willing to work with folks uh to find a solution to allow people to get their permits in a timely manner and start being part of the actual system rather than just continually concerned about um processes like these, um, encouraging folks to do the right thing.

So thank you.

Are there any questions?

On this amendment, yes.

No.

Seeing none, there was a motion and a second for floor amendment number two.

All those in favor say yes and raise your hand.

Yes, opposed, same motion.

Motion passes.

So then we are back on the bill as amended.

We have um several people signed up to speak, so I think we'll get started with that.

Um for speaker.

Thank you, Madam President.

Our first speaker is Carl Videl, followed by Thomas Abeta.

May I please have an overhead.

I've got two different uh things I just wanted to show here.

Okay.

Thank you.

Okay.

Uh thank you, Carl Videl with the uh New Mexico Short Term Rental Association.

Uh the first thing you're looking at here is an excerpt from the short-term rental economic impact study.

As you can see here, uh, there's about 1,400 short-term rentals that are rented out less than 90 days per year.

They're part-time rentals.

These owners rent them out when they're out of town or traveling for the summer or when they just need extra income.

So we are down to about 2,000 short-term rentals.

We've lost 5% of our short-term rentals in the city, and as an industry, we're struggling.

Uh, overall, I uh also have a map here that uh shows the 330 foot setback.

This is right next to the hospital.

This is a very important map, and I don't know if I can convey this in one minute, but uh changing it to the hundreds foot setback, we would probably have two and a half circles within this, which would allow two units out of over a hundred houses.

It's still a 98% ban on short-term rentals.

Thomas Sabeta, followed by Trevor Selby.

Well, uh, as me and Lewis got a chance to talk about over the break.

I'm really just here to rail against uh the the concept of lobbying and money being speech in this country.

Uh and the thing is is I really just wish there was transparency on these things.

Bacca, uh when I asked you last time who here owned short-term rental properties, you were the only one who was here and honest and raised your hand and said, I do.

I wish we got that kind of transparency from all our city councilors.

And I think what really bothers me is on the Bernalillo County website.

Uh you can't look up pro uh property by name anymore in ownership, so I really don't know which of you guys owns any property, which is being honest about that.

Uh and I I don't feel like you guys have been honest with me.

So uh I I understand uh you know you guys are upset about these public comments, but the reason we have them is because we want to get to the truth, and this is a good opportunity to ask.

So, do you guys have short-term rentals yourselves?

Anyone else on this council?

Are you also self-interested?

Thank you.

Trevor Selby, followed by Susan Fong.

This is just the beginning of respecting and advancing renters' interest.

In addition to my support for ordinance five, I want much more to follow, including reducing or eliminating the parking minimums in the IDO, allowing permissive use of duplexes, triplexes, and quadplexes, as well as expanding dense mixed-use zoning.

I want tenants' rights to be protected, and I want us to penalize the land speculators who are sitting on vacant property.

Holding the reins on short-term rentals and reeling in landlord greed is a necessary component of a larger affordable housing policy suite.

Show that you are here listening tonight to your constituents.

Vote yes on ordinance five and aggressively pursue renters' interest.

Thank you, February, Baca, and Rogers for showing a willingness to represent and lead with dignity.

I hope the rest of you redeem yourself tonight.

Susan Fong, followed by Ryan Swinney.

Madam President and City Council members, I just wanted to say um I'm a small business owner, and one of the things I'm proudest of are the number of people that I employ.

And these people do a range of services for me, and they're all from Albuquerque.

They're everyone from contractors to to gardeners, people who come in and are techs, there's housekeepers, there's pest control people, there's there's old school plumbers who know how to fix my old school low technology fireplace.

If you vote for this, if we continue to limit opportunities to make income for everybody from young homeowners who are maybe renting out a room in their house to retirees who want to make sure that they have uh income coming in once they're no longer able to go to jobs.

The the impact is going to be felt exponentially.

And to the matter of um wanting to work with small business owners who might be in default of some of these uh permits, do it.

Always support business owners.

Thank you.

Ryan Swinney, followed by Tad Niamitsky.

Good evening, Madam President, and members of the council.

I'm Ryan Swinney.

On behalf of the Greater Albuquerque Association Realtors representing 3,900 real estate professionals in our community, GART opposes ordinance 02605 because it misdiagnoses the problem and will not deliver housing relief in the Albuquerque area.

The data is clear.

Short-term rentals represent approximately one percent of the Albuquerque's housing stock, depending on whose numbers we are hearing from or what time of the year it is.

Uh, this is simply too small to materially impact housing availability, rental prices, or home affordability.

Um independent peer-reviewed research consistently shows that short-term rentals do not drive housing shortages.

What these studies do show is that restricting short-term rentals reduces tourism revenue, reduces tax revenue, eliminates jobs and property management, as we just heard about in related industries, and fails to improve housing affordability.

Our housing crisis stems from a systemic underbuilding, rising construction costs, interest rates, and overregulation, not from the one percent of housing stock.

Thank you.

Tad Numinsky, followed by Alex Francis.

Thank you.

My name is Ed Nemeeski.

Are you not okay?

I have a question to these government buddy.

Are you working for every renter who pays rent?

Or you working for these fat cats, re estate agents, Mr.

Number.

Who say they're not only sending me the owning and many and managing on the everything.

Let's be thinking.

Well, Louis, also my statement.

Uh that they're gonna do it.

The council's gonna do what they want it.

What the coward uh are you right here.

Thank you.

Alex Franzen, followed by Vincent Martin.

Good evening.

I've come here to represent the little guy, so to speak.

My wife and I own and operate a short-term rental, our home.

We rent out our home on a part-time basis when we are out of town for work and when we visit family, etc.

The extra income allows my wife to stay home with our two young children.

But the impact of our little family business extends far beyond just our family.

Consider our guests.

In the few short years we've been hosting, we've hosted families in town for graduations, birthdays, holidays, and so many other wonderful life events.

But our home has been a place for peace for other guests during challenging times.

Just a couple months ago, we hosted a family that came into town to say goodbye to their father and grandfather as he passed.

This family told us they were comforted by our home because it is in the same area they grew up in and had much of the same decor.

We have even hosted a family that was interviewed by a major TV show regarding the tragic disappearance of their daughter, and if in some small way we can be a part of bringing their daughter home, we're deeply honored to do so.

Thank you.

Consider the guests, consider the people that visit the city.

Thank you, guys.

Vincent Martin, followed by Melissa Sawyer.

This amendment opens by stating that short-term rentals can negatively impact neighborhoods.

Let's be clear.

Neighborhoods aren't harmed by short-term rentals, they're harmed by bad hosts.

Noise and disturbance come from poor enforcement, not the numbers of permits that are issued.

This amendment doesn't identify and fix bad at bad actors.

It just limits responsible hosts from expanding and that are already following the rules.

It prevents new responsible hosts from ever even emerging and starting their own small business.

Backer said that there was 1,200 non registered Airbnbs.

This amendment does nothing to enforce what permitting or any of those things have done.

I don't think limiting the amount of permits is enforcing this.

The bad actors are going to be the bad actors no matter what the amendment is.

So can we get something that actually contributes to enforcing the laws that we already have in place instead of trying to patch things together to thinking that they're gonna magically start registering just because this is a new amendment.

Melissa Sawyer, followed by Darren Sue.

President Pena and Counselors, my name is Melissa Sawyer.

I'm an active duty military member stationed at Kirtland, an old town homeowner and a New Mexico resident.

Kirtland was my first duty station back in 2008.

My husband and I moved away from our home in hometown in Minnesota and became enchanted with New Mexico.

This time, stationed at Curtinlit again to our delight, I wanted to put down roots, so I bought a historic home, formerly owned by the COIAR family as my family's forever home.

The economic reality of interest rates and home prices when we moved here in October 23 means that my monthly mortgage is $4,363.

But my military housing allowance is $2,871.

To bridge that gap, I started a small business, Colibri Courtyard Casita, to rent out my properties casita as a properly permitted short-term rental.

Just last week I received notification that I am to PCS back to DC.

I desperately want to keep this home until I retire and return to Elbuquerque, but under this short-term ordinance amendment proposed tonight, my main home would be denied a short-term rental permit because it sits only five feet from my already permitted casita.

Thank you.

Darren Sue, followed by Anthony Zamora.

Good evening, counselors.

My name's Darren, born and raised in New Mexican and a small business owner here in town.

I and many others are not a faceless corporation.

We're your neighbors, homeowners, and long-term residents who rely on short-term income to support our families.

We also support local jobs, cleaners, maintenance, plumbers, among others who depend on this work for their livelihoods.

Our guests aren't just vacationers.

Many are traveling here to fill critical but chronically understaffed industries like healthcare, construction, and trade work, among others.

If you make most STRs disappears, those visitor needs don't vanish.

They shift into costlier hotels or they don't come at all.

That means fewer dollars for local restaurants and shops, entities that make our city so vibrant while redirecting money to out of state corporate hotel ownership instead of local businesses.

If the goal is housing, broad short-term rental crackdowns don't deliver the promise.

Look at New York.

They banned in 2023, and what happened for affordability?

Absolutely nothing.

Tourism dropped, rent climbed higher, and hotels charged more.

Hotels were the only owners.

I'm asking you to see local SCR operators not as a problem to eliminate, but as partners.

Thank you.

Anthony Zamora, followed by Diego Lopez on Zoom.

Good evening, Councilman.

My name is Anthony Zamora, and I grew up in the South Broadway neighborhood.

It was a neighborhood many of us knew for drugs, gang activity, and violence, like many families.

My mom told us to be home before the street lights came on.

We all knew which houses to avoid, places with people coming and going at all hours of the night, loud fighting, drug activity, and aggressive behavior.

Those properties had common traits that they were run down, neglected, and left without accountability.

One of those properties was in my neighborhood.

Today that same property is a legally operated short-term rental.

Since being rehabilitated, it no longer has illegal drug activity, gang presence, or violence.

Families no longer avoid walking past it.

The home is maintained, monitored, and held to standards it never had before.

Operating that property has also changed me.

It taught me how to own and run a small business, manage money, understand taxes, create work for others, cleaners, contractors, and local service providers, helping others to better afford the rising cost of living.

I'm the first person in my family to do anything like this.

More importantly, it created hope for the people in my neighborhood, and they can see a different path that you can invest in where you're from and make it better and not abandon it.

This amendment suggests that short-term rentals are bad for their neighborhood, but my experience shows that it's actually good for the neighborhood.

Thank you.

Diego Lopez, followed by Shane Dolinski.

As he's waiting making his way to the podium, Mr.

Benegas, was that the Madam President, the rest are on Zoom, including Minister of Nase.

Okay, thank you so much.

Thank you.

Council President Pena, thank you for allowing me to speak.

My name is Diego Lopez.

The council and mayor express the need for more housing.

I applied for a permit to build a casita in my backyard in 2022.

In 2024, I came before the council and expressed my frustration that I hadn't gotten my permit yet.

Actually, someone on the council at that time called me a liar, and that I was making a story up about how difficult it is to get a permit.

Luckily for me, someone from zoning was in the audience and was called to the podium after me.

That person stated that I was telling the truth, and my story was not the only one.

That the city wasn't paying competitive wages.

No one on the council, by the way, ever made an attempt to apologize to me.

Here we are in 2026, and the same Casita permit are still stalled, a plumbing truck.

Thank you.

Shane Delinski, followed by Greg Kaufman.

Before the next speaker comes up, Mr.

Verala, if you can if we'll share with you the name of this man, if you can give him a call.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Um Madam President and City Councilors.

My name is Shane Nolinski, and I own uh a few rental properties in Albuquerque.

And unlike the gentleman who spoke about being a fat cat, um, I've actually worked, you know, between 50 and 60 hours a week for the last 25 years of my life with real estate as an investment opportunity for me uh to um not work so hard, which I still do, but it's okay.

I'm leaving generational wealth for my kids, which is something that I really enjoy doing and teaching them how to run a business as well.

With one percent or less, even of the homes um that are available, the doors that are available in Albuquerque, New Mexico as short-term rentals.

I see this as low-hanging fruit for the city council, and this is why this is the seventh time in four years that I have spoken up against this because for some reason this low-hanging fruit is an easy culprit to blame for homelessness or the lack of housing.

One percent does not equal a housing shortage if you free those up.

Please help us keep our businesses.

Thank you.

Greg Kaufman, followed by Cherish Mullins.

Uh, good evening, uh, Madam President, city councillors.

My name is Greg Kaufman.

I live and work here in Albuquerque.

I uh I'm here to speak about the proposed destiny rule on short-term rentals.

I want to be clear up front, this isn't about protecting my own business.

Even though I end up being grandfathered in, I don't believe this rule is good policy for the city as a whole.

This proposal is being presented as a solution to affordable housing, but there's no clear evidence that eliminating or restricting short-term rentals will meaningfully increase affordable housing supply.

Most short-term rentals in Albuquerque are existing short-term single family homes, taking them out of service does not automatically convert them into affordable housing.

In many cases, they become long-term rentals at market rate or simply return to own optic homes.

This is not solved the affordability problem.

We if we truly want to be more affordable housing, we should focus on converting vacant and abandoned buildings into livable units, encouraging new construction and redevelopment, supporting mixed use and higher density projects along transit corridors.

These approaches actually increase housing supply.

Thank you.

Cherish Mullins, followed by Teryn Rivera.

Good evening.

My name is Cherish.

I am a proud woman-owned small business owner here in Albuquerque.

There was a time in my life when I was a single mother struggling to make ends meet.

I was on every type of government assistance you could think of, just trying to survive and provide for my child.

Well, started with just me into well, it just started with me, turned into a small local cleaning company.

Today I have a small crew made up of incredible women, made many of them are single mothers, students who needed flexibility, and still could be there for their children while earning a living.

Because of this industry, many of us were able to get off assistance, gain financial stability stability, and finally do more for ourselves and our families.

This isn't just about cleaning homes.

It's about empowerment, it's about independence, it's about giving people a chance to build something better.

Every dollar I earn goes back into our community, buying local, supporting small businesses, and investing right here in Albuquerque.

This is not just for me, but it's for the women I employ and the families we support.

Thank you so much.

I appreciate you.

Hello, my name is Tara Rivera, and I'm here to urge you to vote no on the proposed ordinance regulating short-term rentals.

This is not a hobby for me.

This is my small business.

It supports my family and more than 25 local cleaners and maintenance workers who depend on this income.

This ordinance threatens real jobs and real people while offering no meaningful solution to housing affordability.

There's no credible data showing short-term rentals are a cause of Albuquerque's housing challenges.

They make up a fraction of the city's housing stock.

Eliminating them will not suddenly create affordable housing.

Targeting small operators is easier than fixing zoning failures or addressing public safety, but this is not honest policy.

The only winners from this ordinance are hotels and large corporations.

Homeowners who invested in property in this country should have the freedom to rent responsibly without government overreach.

Small business should not be sacrificed to appease powerful lobbying interests.

I urge you to vote no and focus instead on the real solutions, zoning reform, responsible development, and public safety.

Thank you for your time.

Thank you, Madam President, for the opportunity to speak.

As chair of GARS Government Affairs Committee, I work closely with local officials on housing policy.

I want to highlight why this ordinance is problematic from both a policy and implementation standpoint.

First, there's no data presented showing that a 330-foot separation requirement will convert short-term rentals into long-term rentals.

The ordinance assumes that eliminating short-term rentals will automatically increase housing supply, but that assumption is unsupported and unrealistic.

Second, this creates an enforcement nightmare.

This city will have to map every short-term rental, calculate distances, deny renewals for compliant operators, and defend legal challenges from property owners who've invested based on existing regulations.

This diverts resources from actual housing production.

Third, it undermines permit compliance when property owners see arbitrary restrictions imposed after they've followed all the rules, they lose trust in the system.

That drives operation operators underground, making actual nuanced problems harder to address.

Thank you so much.

Josh Price, followed by Dupe Cole Wadwalla.

Thank you, counselors.

My name is Joshua Price.

I'm a realtor in Albuquerque.

I don't actually own any short-term rentals, but I want to talk on on behalf of my neighbors that do own them and have ran them very well.

I lived on the corner of Morningside in Roma for over 15 years.

I had two short-term rentals on either side of me.

They first started off as very bad uh properties.

They were derelict and going downhill had crime and problems with them.

Because of either uh purchase of the properties, a second home from from one or inheritance from another.

Um, they were able to stay and generate supplemental income to cover their mortgage, property taxes, and maintenance, and they require the permits, they followed city regulations, and they provided 24-7 contact information to their neighbors, and they have never had noise or parking complaints.

Their guests spend money in Albuquerque, restaurants, shops, and attractions, and they employ local cleaners, landscapers, and handyman.

They pay lodgers tax, they there isn't corporate speculation.

Um I not on your time is up, sir.

I'm sorry, it kept telling me that I was not on the on the Zoom.

So I keep I okay.

We heard you thank you.

Thank you very much.

Short-term rentals are good for our economy.

Thank you, sir.

Dupe Kalawadwala, followed by Prakash Sandara.

I have two quick reasons why we should support 265.

First is physical separation standard is a tool the city has that directly reduces rental clustering and creates a hurdle for out-of-state corporations that buy up homes.

Second, in my role as a lodger's tax advisory board member, we see irregularities in short-term rental property business registrations.

At any given month, only 50% of short-term rentals are registered to do business, but yet they continue to rent.

That's unnerving because it raises questions about consistent permitting and whether taxes are being reported the way they should be.

STRs are sophisticated lodging businesses with commercial marketing tools that make money and collect taxes, and they should be treated like lodging businesses from a city process and other zoning compliance standpoints.

Residential property conversion to a commercial business without rezoning is a problem and creates unsafe neighborhoods.

At a minimum, a short-term rental property should be required to permit like other commercial businesses.

They need to keep a valid city business registration and comply with taxes.

This ordinance helps push short-term rental properties in that direction.

Prakash Sandaram, followed by Krista Kelly.

You are muted, sir.

Hello, my name is Prakash.

I'm in the hotel industry, and I'm here local in Albuquerque, so are my investors.

We're all members of this community, and we all pay our taxes.

And all we want to see is this bill passed, because what this bill does is it creates a level playing field, so everybody's paying their fair share.

We're taxing all these uh 800 or so or actually 1200 uh STRs that are currently not paying any lodges tax, sales tax, uh gross receipts tax.

Currently, STRs aren't part of the tourism marketing district, they don't pay that tax.

We do, they clearly benefit from that.

They're not taxed as a commercial business.

If you take a home out of circulation uh from our from our housing inventory, you're now operating a business.

I got news for you.

So you you gotta pay your fair share.

You gotta register your business.

We're not against STRs.

We're we're for fair business.

Thank you.

Krista Kelly, followed by Chris Venegas.

Good evening, members of the council.

I wanted to express my strong opposition to ordinance uh zero-25-5.

Uh research from other cities shows consistent economic harm from broad short-term rental restrictions.

Evidence shows that in San Francisco, the National Bureau of Economic Research found that stricter STR rules reduced listings, but did not increase long-term housing supply, lower rent or lower rents, and local economic activity declined significantly.

In Maui, economic impact analysis estimated hundreds of millions of dollars in lost annual visitor spending, harming small businesses and local workers, and failed to increase affordable housing.

Most SDR owners are local residents, not big hotel corporations.

Policies like distance-based caps disproportionately harm local communities, small businesses, and our economies while failing to address the root causes of housing affordability.

I urge the council to rely on data and outcomes and to apply scrutiny to all lodging sectors before adopting this ordinance that has clear bias towards supporting and being heavily influenced by the hotel industry.

Chris Venegas, followed by Marcelin Costoner.

Evening, I'm the president of GAR, and just a few stats to give to you guys.

It's an estimated 91% of short-term rentals nationwide are owned by individuals, families, or small LLCs, not corporate investors.

When we look at values of properties, which we try to compare apples to apples.

So if my neighbor has an STR and I don't, and I go to sell my property, I know I now have shortened my pool of buyers that are available because my house isn't as effective as that house being STR because I would no longer be allowed to have an STR of my house.

So you're punishing the current homeowners, and you're also punishing future um mom and pop business owners of the city, making Albuquerque more non-business friendly, making it harder to do these businesses for people.

Um but I just want to remind all the counselors here today that GAR is a big resource for you guys.

We have plenty of stats, plenty of numbers.

We're happy to share with you guys, and thank you to our counselors that have uh reached out to us so far.

Thank you.

Marcelin Costner.

I appreciate it, Mr.

Cornelis.

Um I just want to highlight something for the small business owner rental uh folks here.

A big part of this bill is that if you are currently registered, you are unaffected.

If I am reading this bill correctly, you are unaffected if you are currently registered, and you have till July to get registered.

So it's not trying to destroy current short-term rentals.

It's coming to the fact that we have a threat and it's called private equity, and it likes buying up homes and turn them into short-term rentals.

This is a threat.

This is a threat to housing.

I like that people have mentioned that this isn't a one all.

This is not a one-all.

It's something that's really important that needs to be passed, but we need more than just this.

This isn't gonna fix our housing crisis, but it's gonna play in a role in it to protecting that small bit that's affected by this.

I think it's really important, and I think we should think about this.

I think we should really try to understand this bill rather than listening to talking points told us by men and polos with very tacky logos.

Madam President, that concludes comment.

Thank you.

Thank you.

So we're back on the bill as amended twice.

I think we'll go to some city counselors.

Councilor Bassan, I have you listed first.

I thought you guys did.

Oh, you didn't?

Okay, I apologize.

Yes.

Thank you, Madam President.

I come before us to present Council Bill 0265 as amended to Albuquerque's short-term rental ordinance that establishes a minimum separation requirement between short-term rentals.

I bring this forward with my colleagues, not as an effort to eliminate short-term rentals, but to better balance their presence with the needs of our neighborhood, neighborhoods, and our housing market.

Over the past several years that I've been on council, I've heard consistently from residents across the city, homeowners, renters, neighborhood associations, and small landlords about the impacts that concern concentrated short-term rentals have on community stability, parking noise, and most importantly, the availability of long-term housing.

In some parts of Albuquerque, like in my district in Knob Hill, we're seeing clusters of short-term rentals that change the blocks that were once primarily residential.

This bill seeks to address the issue in a measured way by requiring a reasonable distance between permitted short-term rentals.

We aim to prevent over concentration while still allowing property owners to participate in the short-term rental market.

This is about providing neighborhood quality of life, supporting housing availability, and ensuring fairness in how we regulate the industry across the city.

And thank you to my co-sponsors, city staff, community members who have engaged in this process.

We appreciate the thoughtful questions and concerns of the public speakers and that have been raised along the way.

These discussions have helped shape a better policy.

And I respectfully ask my colleagues to support this ordinance, and we stand for any questions.

Thank you, Councillor Rogers.

Any of the other sponsors?

Council February?

Thank you.

Um, Councillor Thaez was just coming on to council, and she did not get her name on this bill, but she has indicated that she'd like to be added on as a co-sponsor.

So I'd like to give her a moment to do that if she'd like.

Yes, thank you.

Thank you, Madam President.

Um, yes, I would respectfully request that the sponsors add my name as a co-sponsor to the bill.

Can you reflect that in the record?

Thank you so much.

Okay.

So Councilor Bassan.

Madam President, I'm wondering uh if the short-term rental industry has any theories because I'd made my piece about data and statistics and how we can prove them one way or the other, but any theories on why lodgers tax and business registrations are down.

Is there anyone here who would speak on that?

Okay.

Good evening.

Um Q4, we had the government shutdown.

And I can tell you it was devastating to not just short-term rentals, but also to the hotel industry.

I do sit on the board of visit Albuquerque, and uh it's well known that uh the government shutdown really harmed travel, and that's one of the biggest reasons and indicators that uh the lodgers tax would be down for last year.

Uh total short-term rentals are also down.

Uh we've lost five percent of the short-term rentals uh across the city.

I think it is very important to understand that short-term rentals are uh high turnover.

It is a very hard job to run a short-term rental.

So, what you have is people will open up a short-term rental.

They may do it temporarily.

I showed the data earlier, 30, 60 days.

They find out it's not for them, that it's a tremendous amount of work.

Um, those people, if this passes, will no longer be able to get a permit because if their neighbor has one, they will be ineligible.

Uh, that's why it's uh very concerning to limit it in this manner and to make it geographically uh, you know, basically a near ban is what this is.

And so I hope that answers the question.

Madam President, uh, is do you have any theories about the um effectiveness of business registrations?

Yeah, so I I think number one, I I've been told by numerous people as the you know, one of the board members for the short-term rental association that Albuquerque has one of the longest uh periods of time to get a permit.

Uh you have to have your tax ID, you have to have a floor plan.

If you don't correctly mark every single thing on the floor plan, it gets denied.

Uh when that bill first passed about four years ago, uh the city at the time told us to submit us a floor plan.

We don't care if it's on a napkin.

Uh then it just started getting more and more strict.

Uh there uh I've been told the shortage in that office and not enough people to be able to process the applications.

We have seen permits take over 30 days just to get a permit.

Um, you know, I think it's also very interesting.

If you own a short-term rental, if you rent your property for over 30 days, you're legal.

If you choose to uh rent your property for 29 days or less, you now need a permit.

We have a hotel industry that requires a $35 business license to operate.

But a short-term rental that brings in an average of $28,000 a year in revenue has to get $150 permit and wait a month for it and fill out all these checks and balances to get that done.

Um that's why the permits are taking long.

That's why not everybody does it.

And then the data I showed earlier, I believe is very clear that uh, you know, the vast majority of our short-term rentals, over $1400 of them were rented less than 90 days.

And most people just aren't going to hop through a permit for just temporarily renting their house.

Thank you.

Thank you, Madam President.

Um Council Pass.

Councilor Bassan, we have another gentleman who's on Zoom who um wishes to respond as well.

Would you like that or not?

His name is Mr.

Kaufman.

Um I as I guess Madam President, as long as they're from the short-term rental industry, I don't see my question there.

But also I had some questions for Mr.

Vidal.

Oh, you did?

Yes, that's what I was referring to.

Okay.

If you can remain up here that way, and let this other gentleman then we can get all the questions out of the way.

So um, Mr.

I mean, I don't know.

I guess I don't is Mr.

Kaufman from because I know Mr.

Videl is from yes, he is.

It's my understanding that he is, correct?

I believe so.

And Madam President, we also have uh dipesh call a lotwana.

Okay, I I don't know if we're gonna get everybody to respond, so I think for now we'll stick with Mr.

Lisseck.

And then if there's anything in addition that any of those other people who are on Zoom want to add to that, since they're from the industry that he maybe failed to mention, I'm happy to hear that real briefly, but we'll go to uh question from Councillor Baca to Mr.

Glasek.

That's what I'm next.

I can't.

Listen, Mr.

Videl.

To Mr.

Videl.

Thank you, Madam President.

Um so how long have you been on Visit ABQ, Mr.

Videl?

Um three months now.

Three three months.

Yes, sir.

So you're speaking on behalf of visit ABQ after three months experience.

I am uh speaking for the short-term rental industry.

But you I wrote 2023 economic impact study.

I can ask you another question weeks of this of my life dedicated to data and short-term rentals.

Can I ask you, are you an economist?

I'm sorry?

Are you an economist?

I I didn't know.

Are you an economist?

That's an economic analysis, right?

Oh, well, I can't.

Are you an economist?

That's the question.

I was reviewed by a PhD economist.

Okay.

It's peer-reviewed then?

Yes, sir.

But you're not an economist.

I am uh graduate of the University of New Mexico.

What's your degree?

Extremely marketing.

Okay.

And I'm extremely good with data, data analysis, and uh I'm very good at breaking things down.

I believe you've read the study.

I think you'll enjoy it.

So, yeah, as a scientist here.

Um I do look at numbers.

I do not share Councillor Bassan's belief that they can be used.

They can be, but um you know, expertise matters, right?

I don't I don't call a surgeon to uh do my plumbing.

I don't call a dentist to do my electrical work.

So all that said, um if you're gonna present an economic analysis, I hope it's peer-reviewed by multiple uh economists and written by an economist.

Um but that aside, I was on visit ABQ last year, and you know, during the balloon fiest, the everything was full.

Uh despite in fact we had our record year, right?

We ran out of parking at the Bloom Fiesta multiple times.

So when we talk about we do the hotel industry say why our numbers are down.

I I appreciate Councillor Bass, because I think it's important that we hear from the industry why we think that is.

But uh I also think we should be speaking from a position of expertise.

And and while I know you're in the industry and I appreciate your time in the industry for sure.

You you know a little bit more about that industry than I do.

Um also let's let's not inflate our credentials either.

So thank you.

Thank you, Mr.

Biddell.

Thank you.

I appreciate you all for letting me come tonight.

Thank you so much.

Okay, I won't comment on that.

So um I think what we're gonna do is go on and Councillor Basson, did your question get answered?

Thank you so much.

Um Counselor Lewis.

Thank you, Madam President.

Um, I'm I'm I'm opposed to this bill, and uh you know, for for many reasons, but I but I am I am you know open and I've made the made you know some of these you know clear to the sponsor about look I want to I want to win on the ideas and not just uh you know but but talk about the the nuances and the the ideas uh that ultimately would would help me decide on a choice um between voting for this bill or not and um and I certainly appreciate hearing from the the the public on this uh whether you know we think they're qualified or not.

Um you know I'm not sure if that's the best question to be asking those who've come and take taking their time to come down here and uh you know from an industry perspective from a resident perspective uh to be grilling them on their qualifications of what they know and what they think.

Um but uh um but I do appreciate the you know the comments from everybody.

I you know I was gonna have the director you know come up.

I'm not I'm not sure if that's necessary because I I you know we've had a lot of discussions, some discussion over uh the registration process, microphones on the uh the registration process, um, and but I am interested in how difficult that it might be.

Um you know, I'm concerned that we're we're making a registration process for short-term rental uh rentals a little onerous.

Um and I think we should look at what other you know states and cities are doing because I think that should be an easy process.

Um and I think we should be actively uh you know pursuing you know those who are operating short-term rentals and um uh ensuring that they're um uh you know that they're permitted and and uh that our department is actively actively doing that according to the ordinances that are in place right now.

But I I would also be open, I'll say this.

I I would be open uh to to doing away with with large corporations and outside the state owners of short-term rentals.

So because I I believe that would actually help solve some of the bad actors and some of the problems that we're talking about.

So I've offered some of those ideas.

I think those can go uh away.

And that's that's from somebody who's not uh real big on you know regulating something, but letting the you know letting the market dictate um you know how that how that goes.

And so uh, but yeah, is there is there an issue with um you know large corporations or people outside the state?

I do believe that people that own that are new Mexico residents that live in old town that live in parts of the city of Albuquerque that operate short-term rentals, uh, they care about those homes.

And uh they care about their business, and uh, you know, they're gonna operate those those rentals according to our our rules, and they're gonna be you know pr productive.

And they're also the the they they also you know promote the city of Albuquerque.

You know, they promote our amenities, they promote old town and downtown and all the great amenities that we have as a city, and they provide an incredible service.

Um so I am you know open to some some changes, you know.

I don't believe this bill, you know, answers those questions and helps us anyway.

In fact, I think it has the opposite effect.

Um I'm against allowing caps, and and and part of the reason is because there are a lot of nuances to those who own short-term rentals.

You know, I know folks that uh who acquired a home from a parent who passed away, they inherited a home.

Um, and uh they're they're they're finally given an opportunity uh to create some income.

Uh I mean, we're about affordability, right?

We're about helping lift people out of poverty in this city.

And so I I know many people who have had that opportunity and decided that they'd go the route of short-term rentals, and they again they take care of that home, uh, they promote our city, and they're able to provide some income for their family, you know, and for their kids, and that's what we want.

Um, and I also there's many other nuances.

Uh, you know, I know folks who uh decided to go and uh particularly one that decided to go and live out of out of the country for a year.

And uh, and if it weren't for the option of offering that home as a short-term rental, they would have never been able to make that work.

And so whether you have you know traveling nurses or many folks that um that that you know again a lot of nuances of of folks who who own short-term rentals and and utilize uh a great service and and utilize their property in that way.

You know, I I believe this is calling winners and losers.

I think again the winners of the hotels, um the winners are the corporations, um, if we're if we're you know, if we think that's the problem.

Um doesn't level the playing field.

Um the fact is this this will hurt somebody.

Um I mean, regulating this way and putting a cap, and by the way, it is a cap.

I mean, when you when you have distances, I mean, and and and by the way, even I mean, we're we're talking, you know, large neighborhoods that could be affected by this, you know.

And uh, and many people would be limited from the opportunity to be able to utilize uh their their property in this kind of way.

And so the fact is there will be be people who will be hurt, you know, by this by this cap.

Um so for a lot of reasons.

I I think, and again, you know, I want to win on the ideas.

I I I I want to go in the direction of the best ideas for our city.

And I think it's been pretty clear that the best decision, you know, of of this council and law would be uh to not go this direction with it.

Thank you, Madam President.

Thank you, Councilor Lewis.

Next we have um Councilor Champine.

I mean Councillor Tayas, followed by Councillor Champ, Vice President Champagne.

Thank you, Madam President.

Um Mr.

Vidal, I just have a question about the one percent.

Was that who I'm sorry, was it Mr.

Vidal or was it um I apologize?

Ryan Sweeney who said the one percent Madam President, uh members of the council.

Um yes, ma'am, I made that reference.

Okay.

When you are talking about the one percent, um you mean the housing market?

Correct.

So we're looking at approximately 2400 uh short-term rentals.

Hard to say that word, short-term rentals out of 240,000 approximate housing inventory.

Oh, okay.

So you're speaking of the total housing units, correct, full housing stock, not the housing market.

Correct.

For like houses for sale.

Correct.

Okay.

Um thank you for clearing that up.

I also um sorry.

Where's my house?

Do uh Madam President, um, do we do you know if the marginal STR growth creates more of a total benefit than the housing harm it causes?

I wouldn't have that specific data or any specific data with me tonight, but um Okay, because GAR has a lot of resources, right?

So can we get okay, yeah.

So do you think the 400 or you know, 40 million to replace STR units um costs more or less than the 100 million it would cost to build those homes that to replace the homes?

You know, um Madam President, uh members of the council wouldn't have that information with me here this evening, but I'd be more than happy to get something for you, Councilwoman Tays.

Without information, what's more 40 or 40 million or 100 million?

Yeah, without the information, obviously 40 million is less than 100 million.

Thank you.

And thank you.

Thank you.

Um again, I madam president, thank you so much for allowing me this opportunity.

I just, you know, um the idea that it hurts small local owners just doesn't match with the policy here.

Um there's a separation requirement, right?

It's built in to exclude those owner occupied room rentals, owner-occupied ADUs, those are small local mom and pop models.

And it grandfathers in those existing permits allows for renewals, you know, unless permits lapse.

And it listen, we we're not cracking down on small STR owners, right?

We want that.

We want a small is beautiful economy in Albuquerque where we're supporting our local entrepreneurs.

This is a guardrail against exactly what counselor Lewis is talking about, commercial clustering of whole home uh STRs.

And so I just you know, I really really do urge uh support of this.

Thank you, Madam President.

I understand um counselor feeble corn also I wanted to make a statement.

Thank you.

Yes, Councilor February, and then um he deferred his time to you and then he'll speak.

Next.

Thank you.

Um I have a couple questions, and I'm gonna direct them towards Miss Delgado if that's okay.

Um, but anybody else could answer to.

So I just kept hearing a couple things I'd like to just clarify because um it's my understanding that this bill does not close down any existing short-term rentals.

Is that correct?

Council President Penya, Councilor February, that is correct.

Any active short-term rental permit would remain in place.

Thank you.

And um the example was given of someone who left the city for a year and rented their house out.

What's the time limitation on a short-term rental councillor Pena, uh, Councilor President Pena, Counselor Feeblecorn, are you um referring to the lapse in permitting or no?

Madam President, I am asking about what what is the definition of short-term rental in this bill.

It is uh the definition of short-term rentals 29 days or less.

Okay.

Thank you, Madam President.

So obviously, a one-year rental would not fall under this ordinance that's proposed here tonight.

Um I don't know that this is a question from Miss Delgado.

I'll just say in um I kept hearing about how we are um employing plumbers and um folks to maintain homes, and I just would really hope that um no matter if you're a short-term rental owner or a long-term rental owner, you you're maintaining your property.

And so I would I would certainly hope that we don't stop maintaining plumbing and the like just because someone is a longer term rental.

Um so I did want to clarify a few things and then make a few statements.

Um, I just looked it up because we kept hearing some incorrect information on what the bill is that was passed that actually requires short-term registrations.

That bill was passed in 2020, so that was six years ago.

It was done by my predecessor, um, Councilor Gibson, honored to follow in her footsteps.

Um, and I just looked up what's required, and I do agree that there have been some hiccups in this process.

Um, but here are the requirements in the code in the existing ordinance that I don't think are very onerous.

It requires a physical address of the short-term rental unit, the name, phone number, email, and business address of the agent, a floor plan, a statement signed by the short-term rental owner that the short-term rental will be operated in compliance with laws, and proof of insurance.

And so I just want to clarify, I don't think any of those five things are super onerous.

I do agree that there have been some hiccups with our planning department getting those permits out, but that is not a problem with the onerous nature of the requirements in the bill.

And then I just lastly wanted to talk a little bit because we hear a lot about and I got a lot of emails about how this is not going to provide affordable housing, and we can argue that either way, but I do want to say that the reason that I support this bill is because I get calls every single week from someone in my district, um, usually more than once a week, saying I'm really worried about the character of my neighborhood.

I'm very concerned that someone's gonna come in, buy up a large percentage of my neighborhood, rent them out as short-term rentals.

I will no longer know my neighbors, I will no longer feel the same sense of community that I feel now.

And I totally understand that, right?

My house, my house is on a block with with 14 homes.

And so if I suddenly have four of those homes, which is a very small amount compared to some of the neighborhoods that are experiencing, you know, really saturation of short-term rentals.

But even at four in my street, which is 14 homes, 29% of the homes are no longer people I know.

I know the names of, well, to be honest, I know the names of every dog on my street.

Um, my partner knows the names of every human on our street, and so that would be a lot.

30 percent, a third of folks that I don't know anymore.

And I do think that impacts your neighborhood's character, it impacts your sense of community, and I don't think that there is a problem with limitations with the new limitation that Councillor Backer shows tonight.

Um, that's every hundred feet.

You could still have two or three on my street.

Uh, I think that that is a really legitimate compromise that still gets to the point where, particularly in old town, particularly around Uptown and around Los Altos Park.

I have neighborhoods that have a majority of the homes on a street that are short-term rentals, and I do think that is very problematic for folks who are used to living in a quiet residential area where they know their neighbors, they see them every single day when they walk their dog to the park, they see all their neighbors, and that changes when the majority of homes in an area are short-term rentals, which are quite frankly often empty a large percentage of the time.

Also has safety repercussions that I will not get into.

But um, so I I just think that there's been a lot of misinformation provided.

Um, but I think if we really look at this, this is about maintaining neighborhood character, about maintaining housing of all sorts, uh, and making sure that we have a preference for rather than expanding the short-term rental market, maintaining that, and then making sure that we do not lose further existing housing.

I'm not saying affordable housing, I'm saying housing of any sort.

Thank you.

Thank you, Counselor Lewis.

Thank you, Madam President.

Well, I mean, I think there's a tendency to think that we're just, or even to convey that uh that there's nothing wrong with this.

I mean, this doesn't hurt anybody, and and uh there's misconceptions about it all.

Uh well, what's real clear in the examples that I gave, um you make the assumption we make the assumption that um a a 30-day rental is better than four one-week rentals or or four weekend you know rentals.

And regardless, is we're we're limiting and capping uh someone's ability to operate their home in a legitimate way to bring income, you know, to their family.

And so the example of you might you know 29-day short-term rental.

Well, when someone's gone for a year, with the example I gave, they could choose to either rent it for a year, and you make the assumption that that's better, that somehow that's better than uh then doing 29-day or 28-day um you know short-term rentals over the course of that time.

Uh so it's limiting in the ability to be able to utilize your property in a way that's not only best for you, but could be the very best thing for the neighborhood and for the you know the folks that want to rent.

Um, and then and then this is also a limit on new short-term rentals.

You know, you might say, well, everybody, you know, just get registered and you're good.

Uh well, what about our kids?

You know, what about the next generations?

Um what about uh you know the the young folks who you know might inherit a home or young folks who have an opportunity to be able to utilize their property, um, but they're limited because their property happens to be 99 feet from uh from somebody else who has the same opportunity and yet they don't.

So the point is it's gonna limit somebody.

Uh and uh so you know I want to think that you know somehow uh this comes across as hey, it's not gonna hurt anybody, everybody's good.

Thank you.

Um, counselor um vice president Champine.

Thank you, Madam President.

Airbnbs are down five percent, down to two thousand from twenty four hundred.

So I don't think the abundance and everybody's gonna be joining in and getting buying houses and buying up neighborhoods when we're showing the trend is going down five percent.

Less than one percent of the housing market.

So it's not really gonna affect rentals or uh homeownership when you're talking 24, what did he say?

240,000 homes in the market for 37 on the market for sale right now, according to Gar, if you uh if I remember my email correct.

Um so what we're really coming down to is one thing we have noticed is a lack of enforcement, and I'm going to pick on zoning, and I do it with the most respect because I love you guys, but we're not the it at FGO they even admitted we are not enforcing this because it costs more money to put out the letters that you're not enforcing than it does to for the for the for the uh uh the fine.

So we can't.

We're overwhelmed.

What I'm keep on hearing, and whether you're for hotels or for short-term rentals or long-term, midterm, you know, you have you have a 30-day weekend warriors that are coming in every weekend and they're they're living uh uh in old town and then uptown.

How many counselors or how many people go to a town and say, I want to go to San Diego, I want to go to New Orleans and stay two miles out?

I want to stay in the French quarter.

Guess how many Airbnbs are in the French quarter?

Because that's where everybody wants to stay, that's the whole point.

The biggest thing that we're missing right now is the fact that they can enforce it.

They don't have enough people.

So instead of limiting the numbers that we are every hundred feet, we are only gonna do so many, we're gonna only do this.

Why are we not?

And and I it's it's a tone of what Counselor Lewis had said, the idea.

Why are we not saying we need code enforcement with another 30 people?

If we're going to, if if this is that that that short that it's 2,000 of these, but we're only got 600 registered, and some of them are bad, or some of them are good, or they're not paying their lodgers tax this, then why aren't we advocating for 30 more people in code enforcement to go after this and make sure that all 2,000 are registered and we're getting lodgers tax from that.

Why are we not making sure that code enforcement has 40 people so we can go after the bad renters, the bad landlords?

Because, oh, and the air conditioning people and the code enforcement with the bad water heater and the weeds and the I can keep going on this.

The biggest thing that we're missing, instead of creating more rules and more regulations and capping things, empower the people that enforce this and give them what they need in order to get out those bad actors in order to have those registrations.

And I clocked my own minutes on this, so I'm at six yield my position.

Uh I again it we go back to this.

I think it's being misdirected.

I think that uh the premise is right, and a lot with the renter deal, the premise is right in the sense of the idea and what we need to accomplish.

I think the process and the path that we're going down is not the right one, but we can tweak it uh and go in the right direction to accomplish what we're all trying to get done here.

All nine of us are trying to get done here.

So uh thank you for the time.

Thank you.

Um I I don't see that there's any more questions on the floor.

We'll um put it to the sponsors to close, but I just wanted to go to oh, you wanted to do a follow-up to that?

Yes, Councilor Feborn.

Thank you.

Um so I just wanted to quickly say, I think um I appreciated the comment that was made about what's you know what's the difference between 30-day rental and four weekend rentals, and um I think for folks that live next door to an empty house 30 percent of the time, I think the the difference is really clear.

If I have a neighbor who is there all the time, that is very different than having a house that is empty except on weekends.

So, in that example that was given, I could have someone next door to me 30 days out of 30 days, or I could have someone next to me eight days out of 30 days, and I'm gonna feel much more calm and safe as my as a neighbor when there is continual presence in each of the homes on my street.

Thank you.

Thank you.

So before we go to close, I just um had a couple of uh questions.

I guess for umega, I just wanted to ask.

So, you know, we're doing the update updates to the IDO, and so one of the updates is to allow for businesses in everybody's houses.

So, would this fall under that?

Council President Pena.

Uh, the answer is no.

So, short-term rentals are not uh regulated through our zoning code.

Okay, so and I'm only asking that question because I remember when we first started talking about the short-term rentals, the short-term rentals, all the comments, those of you that were here at that time where this was going to be something too that was gonna help the economy, it was gonna help small businesses, it was gonna provide an opportunity for people who had houses or had a little casita or a room to share to really be able to generate money.

It was gonna be an economic stimulator for people maybe that didn't have the resources to have money.

So I mean, it was something that was really positive.

Um, and then now we're kind of talking in reverse of that, so it has me a little thrown off.

But I I do want to say that you know, I I would agree with Counselor Lewis and some of the comments that he he made.

I I think you know, I mean, living in the neighborhood that I live in, um, there's uh a few, there's not too many.

Not a very highly desirable neighborhood that people want to put short-term rentals, but there are a few.

And um, I just want to say that you know, when you when we're picking and choosing, and I think he said this best when you're picking and choosing winners, it's really a challenge because what if you have you know you have five houses on a on a street and and then you have one who is grandfathered in, and then you as a neighbor who you know, maybe some of the examples that he used, you know, you're just really trying to raise some money for your family to keep your house, and then you can't because you don't fall within that, but then your neighbor does, and his property becomes more desirable than yours does.

So um, I really think it's a it's an economic disadvantage for um for people who who would be excluded from this, and then we're we're talking about enforcement again.

Um Platinum, you guys do a great job.

You do a great job.

You do the best you can with the resources you have, you know.

So, but this really isn't talking about enforcement.

This is talking about the current enforcement that you have and what you would do to enforce some of these things, you know.

So I know you you know you'll do the best you can with that if this were to pass.

This is really about prohibiting some of these in some places and and creating um and creating uh a separation and and and yeah, picking and choosing winners.

So um with that, I will turn it over to I think I went to first to Councilor Backer or any of the sponsors to close.

Thank you, Madam President.

I'll I'll close.

I don't won't say too much.

We we've talked a lot about this, but I do have four main points.

One um we keep talking as if we're choosing.

Oh, I'm sorry.

Um, because of one of the amendments that was passed earlier, we have to pass that created uh a technical amendment that's needed to be done before we so this would be floor amendment C number three on page two line 25 amend as follows.

And because we passed the previous amendment, this is in internal the 330 shrunk to 100.

So it's just technical amendment.

Okay.

Okay.

So there's a motion.

Is there a second?

There's a motion second by counselor rogers for a due pass of um floor amendment number three.

All those any questions?

No.

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

Yes, yes, opposed, same motion, motion carries.

No.

Only he doesn't know every thing.

Thank you, madam president.

Um we keep talking about this is winners or losers, um, you know, hotels versus STRs, and and really as counselors our job is to find balance, not uh to pick winners and choosers as best we can, right?

And we all know one of the great things about our city is just how diverse and amazing it is, depending on you know, to counselor penia's point.

I've I've been to her neighborhood, it's a good neighborhood.

There's a reason why there aren't short-term rentals there, though.

Um, there's a few, but they're not clustered like they are in other parts of the city.

Um and and it it really is a question of balance, balance a question of fairness, not just between the hotels who who when I talked to them told me a permit for them is you know 18 months minimum plus all the cost and fees, plus having to go to a hearing in front of the associations or the other neighborhoods, whereas an STR, when I talk to our folks, uh five to seven days, um, you can even submit a floor plan on a napkin and they'll accept it.

Um those are discrepancies.

That's a that's a question of fair fairness there, uh, much easier for an STR.

But it's not even just that, right?

It's also about our communities, right?

Our part of our job is um, can we how do we balance out the needs of each of our neighborhoods, all of our communities?

Um when I bring up district two, this is the historic part of our city mostly.

Um predominantly people of color, predominantly people with uh lower incomes, and this is where STRs tend to be located.

Part of it is because it's where people want to be because of downtown movie industry hotels.

Um but it also matters, right?

When we talk about one percent of the total city stock, that may be true, it's also misleading, right?

Because the vast majority of these are located in clustered areas.

So you literally that one percent translates to a much bigger impact in say it neighborhoods such as Barelas.

I bring up Barelas because it's easy.

Also, they submitted me a peer-reviewed paper on their demographics, um, which shows they're not only do are they running an average about 70 Airbnbs and I'm sorry, STRs in that neighborhood, population has dropped, schools are closing.

Um it has had a very definite negative impact on that area.

Um that's just real.

Um and so we're finding that balance for those folks.

And and we also, you know, to Mr.

Vidal's point, you know, he brought up the picture of next to the hospital.

Like you want short-term, not short-term rentals, you want medium-term rentals near the hospital.

Um, you want traveling nurses, like we want that here in our city.

Uh, how often, I mean, there's so many bills right now.

The big debates up at the at the session is medical care.

Well, very few traveling nurses use a weekend Airbnb, but they absolutely use those medium-term rentals for six months to a year.

Um, we do want to do that.

Um, the other point, you know, when we talk about neighborhoods, you know, it's a Mr.

Champ Counselor Champagne, right?

The French quarter.

I was just there six months ago.

And I and to be honest, it's the one Airbnb I've stayed in in five years.

Um hotels were booked.

Um, and they have a cap on short-term rentals in the French quarter.

Um it does happen, and it still works, and I still had a great time.

Um, no complaints there, right?

I don't, you know, I've used Airbnbs myself.

I am a landlord, I have a rental property.

So I'm not against that.

Um, and so I bring that to my third point, you know.

Um Ms.

Franson, Mr.

No, Mr.

Franson, Ms.

Sawyer.

Your property's protected.

Uh, thank you for your service, Miss Sawyer.

Uh, I'm a fellow veteran.

Um, it's directly written in there.

If you have a home, your casita can still be used and it's protected.

If you're currently renting it, it is protected.

You will not lose anything else if you have registered.

I think it is important to point out that it's that easy.

Right.

Enforcement matters.

But it's that easy to avoid enforcement in this particular case.

In which, and I'll get to that in a second, but um I do like Counselor Lewis's idea of tweaking or finding ideas being open to it is we did actually research uh out of states uh in corporations and we weren't able to do that, unfortunately.

And and I know that's a real thing because I had a rental that I sold, and I I just didn't want to be a landlord.

Um and I didn't look to see who was buying, I just took the the highest price, right?

Because that's capitalism and my own fault for not looking, and it was purchased by an out-of-state person who now runs an Airbnb in a place where there was a family.

And right next door, there were two homes.

Uh same thing happened to those ones.

I talked to both the previous owners who were my friends because we all had our kids growing up together.

Um that neighborhood 100% has been impacted by out of state owners of short-term rentals.

100%.

Um now, whether or not they're registered, I don't know about that.

Um I hope they are, because then I hope they're solid contributing members of our community who are doing their part.

Um I do hope we find more ideas.

I think the last thing I'll I'll point out is um oh no, well last two things.

Uh Greg Kaufman and Ms.

Rivetta both were against the bill, uh, but both also cited work on the other things that help zoning changes, um, turning small homes into businesses, all the stuff that was voted down recently, is what they're asking us to do.

I mean, if you're gonna be against STRs, at least before zoning.

Um, let's do the other things that need to be helped because it's it's a still a balance.

There are so many things that need to be addressed in our city, so many issues.

Um, and then that's the final challenge.

No matter the outcome of this bill, um, this body should be working on adding at least two FTEs to our planning department.

That's our choice to enforce, right?

It is wrong that we have that many STRs that are not A, not registering, not paying their bills, and nothing's being done about it.

I I agree with everyone up there that spoke.

Those are there's some bad apples out there, and they should be held responsible 100%.

Um and so I would say here coming up in another couple months.

I challenge us to find those two FTEs, which is not going to be easy because every department needs two FTEs minimum, um, which is part of the problem, and we all know that.

Um but I do challenge everyone to find those two FTEs regardless of the outcome of this.

But I do want to finish by saying this is about balance, it's not just about hotels, it's not just about STRs, it's about people people just trying to buy a home next to their parents, people trying to fight by their first home, people who do want to actually do that as business, even if they're gonna quit after 60 days per uh Mr.

V Mr.

Vidal.

Um, because it is a distance gap, it does create flexibility.

There can be shifts, there can be changes.

Someone quits after 60 days because it wasn't their thing.

Well, guess what?

The person next door can now do it.

So it does is this is a reasonable approach for an issue that affects a very small part of our city uh in a very big way.

So I urge everyone's support.

Thank you.

So that was a closed any do any of the other counselors want to close?

No.

Okay.

Um so now we are back on the bill as amended three times.

Um there was a motion in a second for 05.

Any other questions, comments, admin, city attorney?

No.

Um, all those in favor, um, say yes and raise your hand.

Opposed.

Same motion, no.

Motion fails.

So we are now on um 07 amending ROA 1994, section 210, repealing the administration question and answer period.

I move a due pass.

There's a motion and a second for a due pass of 07.

And I think we have Victor here.

Um, and Victor is gonna talk a little bit about what we're doing here because there's been a lot of comments about um taking away the question and answer period, which is not correct.

We're just really undoing um something that was done.

Uh and you know, I mentioned this at the first council meeting that we had of the year, that yeah, um that we um that you know, just talking with the admin and really trying to really find some cohesiveness and to really kind of unstick some of the things that we're stuck in in terms of having communication and dialogue with um council.

That's hence why we passed this.

Now we're kind of just undoing it and going back to the way we were before.

So um, Victor, if you want to just kind of give us a brief upshot of the bill.

Council president, that's generally correct.

This provision in the ordinances was amended by O 2450 to require several different requirements during uh question and answer uh predominantly it required lots of uh participation by the administration to answer questions after they were asked if uh answer hadn't been provided uh at that particular meeting.

Uh this ordinance um all that it does would be to repeal those portions of the question-answer period, and that's the title of that section.

Thank you.

So thank you.

So I don't know if there's any questions from any of the counselors.

If not, I hope that clarifies things for everyone.

Counselor Teis.

I I have a question just because I'm still learning the thing.

Was are these items?

Sorry, Madam President, are these items addressed in like an SOP so we can still address this if needed.

Is that um Madam President, Counselor uh Teas, what we did when this legislation was first passed, we developed processes it's inside council so we could follow the legislation.

Those continued, I mean what we could do is potentially carry on with those processes so we can have Danielle who is the person that goes through question and answer to determine what questions were asked but did not have a response.

We could continue with that if this were to pass so that we would track question and answer, and if we didn't get a response, we could contact the counselor and contact the proper department.

But yeah, once this was passed, we had to create a process for it.

Thank you.

Yeah, Madam President.

Thank you.

I just wanted to make sure just you know, as applicable, if we need to develop some sort of SOP might be helpful.

Okay, thanks.

Thank you.

Any additional questions?

Counselor Counselor Rogers.

Thank you, Madam President.

I'm just gonna ask a question that one of my constituents asked me.

If oh if we this passes, what assurances the public have for transparency from the city?

Justin I APD and Finance are going to have to get back to counselors on answers.

When would the residents receive those responses as well?

I guess uh I can tackle this because you guys are just gonna be guessing.

Um, again, in the spirit of collaboration and working together, you know, some counselors felt the hence the the what the reason this bill was passed um originally was because we kind of came to an impasse as we've been talking about these impasses, came to an impasse in terms of feeling like we're getting our questions answered or not.

And so um, I think um, in the spirit of collaboration, we're just trying to kind of undo some of that and take away some of the bureaucracy and better we've actually had the um the directors here, which we haven't had in quite some time.

The directors here present at um from 5 to 5 30 to answer any of our questions.

Um, those were part of the reasons I think why we were doing this initially, but this really gives an opportunity for the public to hear some of the questions we have and concerns, and if there are longer questions that need more um thought behind them, similar to today, they will bring those back to us.

Thank you, Madam President.

So the process will be for an answer that they couldn't provide during the meeting.

We'll put that back on the record once we get the response.

Sure, we we don't have a process anymore.

We're just going back to where we were before.

So, yes, if they didn't answer your question, it'll be back to before where you would ask them again and they would provide it and working in good faith.

Um they're committed to um going back to where we were before all this had happened.

Sure.

No, I think thank you.

I I appreciate that, madam president.

I definitely understand, but I think some of the folks in the public have gotten used to being able to see the responses, um, even if they weren't given on the record.

And so I just before we repeal this all together, I just want to iron out a process so that responses that we didn't get on the meeting can still be made public.

And so I'm open to how we do that if it's not the same.

Um, but I think constituents really have liked to have a running response list, even though um so I think it's for us, it would just just be exactly if we don't get a response.

I think my process then would be every time I'll read it on the record.

I mean, that's if we don't have a identified process.

Correct.

And that's why we're hoping we don't get back into that position that we were in before, right?

So and um the question and answer period is not official business, if you will, of this council.

So it's not where we're you know, this is really just an opportunity for us to ask questions whether there's potholes in our neighborhood.

So this isn't really something about um you know having to have some official um response, right?

I think it's up to the individual counselor to make sure that if they feel it if their question didn't get um answered, that they can bring it up at the next.

But I think um counselor um Dr.

Sangle may want to add to this.

Thank you, Madam President.

Um I think uh our historical experience has been that when a counselor has questions, we make sure that we provide those responses, and sometimes it takes a few steps to go back and forth and get that information, and of course, any counselor who wants to share those responses with the constituents that may have raised those questions to them, we would recognize that our responses are always public in that regard.

Um and we can work with council services staff on any any counselor that wants us to post something or provide additional information, we can absolutely uh create that process to make it feasible based upon each counselor's request.

Thank you, Madam President, thank you, Madam CEO.

I think for my constituents to be feel comfortable with me voting for this, I will pledge to my constituents.

If there's not an answer given on live on and you have to come back to us, then the next meeting I'll read that on the record um for the public just so that they do receive that response.

Thank you, Madam President.

Perfect, and I think that's what we were doing before.

So counselor Teas.

Thank you, Madam President.

Can you so the development of this was to address an impasse?

Okay, it was an accountability and transparency measure initially initially.

No, it was trying to get the administration to answer some of our questions.

So accountability.

Um it was an accountability measure.

Um if the administration change and the council changes and they meet an impasse, are they gonna just refile these?

This is a new bill, or what um what sort of risk mitigation is being put into place to ensure that we can still, you know, this is still accessible should we come to another impasse.

I'm all about good faith.

I don't want that to happen, but you know, planning I'm a risk management specialist, so I plan for that.

You would you would um do uh an ordinance change?

Yeah, so okay, so we're gonna get rid of appeal and ordinance, and then with the notion that we might have to re file it if that counselor felt the need to okay.

Thank you.

Uh-huh.

So I think we have some public speakers, so we'll go to that.

Thank you, Madam President.

Thomas Abeta.

Madam President, our two Zoom sign-ups are not online, so it'll just be it'll just be Thomas of eight.

Okay.

President Pinya, you must be a lot more comfortable now that this room is a lot more empty.

Uh but the person who's here that still matters, that I know you're afraid of is the camera that's staring right at you and has a very good shot of you right now.

And the reason is because this is why you don't want public answer from the administration during this period.

You were perfectly confident in your ability to negotiate with the administration behind closed doors.

But this is where the cameras are.

This is where media like myself is journalists who want to hear what you're doing.

What it what you're attempting to do here is very obvious and very plain.

You do not want these answers on the record.

You just said this has to be in good faith.

And if you feel like being honest with us, you can, but you have no good faith, and you aren't an honest person.

So I don't believe that those are things you're going to do.

The reason you want this bill passed is because you do not like the amount of scrutiny you were under as one of the most bribed politicians in Albuquerque history.

That's the truth.

Madam President, that concludes comment.

Thank you.

Um I guess I have a question for first for our city attorneys.

When people make statements up here, you know, it's public comment, we all kind of absorb it and take it in and and just kind of ignore statements that are being made.

When people are making false accusations, is there liable for some people when they're doing that counselor?

There is a possibility of liability for any speaker who says something that could be uh saying something that would be untrue.

Um there's it's not quite as cut and dry as just any falsehood, but there is a legal analysis that we could provide that would be more in-depth if you would like to.

Okay, thank you so much.

Okay, so with that, um, are there any more questions from the counselors?

No, okay.

So there was a motion and a second for um seven, correct?

Yes, oh seven.

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

Yes.

Yes.

Opposed, no.

No.

Motion passes.

Motion passes.

So now we are on to other business.

I move um to executive session to discuss matters related to NMSA 1978, Section 10151 H2.

Discussion of limited personnel matter pertaining to the Inspector General investigation of the city attorney Lauren Keefe.

Um this recall requires a roll call vote.

So there's a second by counselor um vice president Champagne.

Counselor Baca?

Yes.

Councilor Grasson, yes.

Vice President Champagne?

Yes.

Counselor Peoplecorn, yes.

Councilor Grout?

Yes.

Counselor Lewis?

Yes.

Councilor Rogers?

Yes.

Counselor Teas?

Yes.

President Penya?

Yes.

Passes unanimously.

Welcome back, everyone.

I affirm that matters discussed in the executive session were limited to those specified in the motion for closure.

So there being no further business this evening, this city council meeting is adjourned.