Welcome everyone.

We have the seventh meeting of the 27th council.

Um will come to order.

All counselors are present this evening.

Um Councillors Baca, Rogers, and Grout will be joining us via Zoom.

And I'm pretty sure they're on Zoom right now.

Um we're happy to be offering English English Spanish interpretation for this session by clicking on the more icon or the globe in your toolbar at the bottom of your Zoom screen.

You can choose your language preference.

Presenters and hosts, remember to choose English in order to hear comments interpreted from Spanish.

Also, please be reminded to speak at a reasonable pace to help facilitate the interpretation.

And then we're gonna have it interpret instead.

No.

And subarra de herramientas in la parte inferior de su pantalla, the very end they poter selectionar um idioma que preferin.

Okay.

Okay, um thank you.

So we are now on to item two moment of of silence.

Um please join us in a moment of silence, followed by the pledge.

Please join us in the pledge.

Thank you.

Um Vice President Champagne.

Thank you, Madam President.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

to 5 p.m.

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

this evening if needed.

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

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

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

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

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

If continued disruptions occur, the president may recess the meeting until the order is restored.

And if necessary, mayor clear may clear the chambers of persons participating in that disturbance.

The meeting will go a lot smoother.

If we respect one another.

And there's plenty of seats here to the to the left.

The admin doesn't bite.

Can't hold in live.

Okay.

Vice President Champagne is everyone's finding their seat.

Thank you, Madam President.

Counselors, administration question and answer period.

Does any counselor have any questions?

Requests, comments for the administration.

They're very eager.

Counselor Lewis.

Thank you, Council Vice President.

No, not a question.

I just want to I guess take some leeway here.

We are uh we have a pretty significant groundbreaking tomorrow for a massive project on the West Side.

And so I'm looking forward to joining the administration, the mayor, and uh and the DMD director and many others um uh to break ground on a uh a massive roadway project that's much needed on the west side.

So we're just excited to get that started.

It's been uh construction has been going on for about a month now, and so um just want to say I appreciate the administration and the uh department for really moving that project forward, of course.

This council for funding it, um you know, ensuring that a big chunk of our capital dollars over the years, and you know, this is a a project that uh is funded through you know previous counselors and um uh and a lot of people, a lot of state representatives and people that have put money into this, but it takes uh really great people in a department um to uh you know to put these bids out and uh to plan these projects, and uh so wanted to say thank you to the administration and to the department and and looking forward to celebrating a really great project, taking off kicking that off tomorrow, uh tomorrow afternoon or tomorrow when is it?

I guess tomorrow afternoon uh out at UNSER Boulevard for the widening of UNSER and Paseo.

Thank you, Madam President Thank you, Councillor Lewis, Madam President.

I believe that's all I'm I have a question.

So um just a couple of comments.

So I have a question for Solid Waste.

Um I'm just hoping this just came on my radar.

Um I just would like to see if we can set up a meeting.

There's a constituent.

I just got a call on the way over here.

I usually call you guys, but um, there's a constituent.

We have some roads that are really tiny where solid waste kind of makes like a U-turn in a small neighborhood.

And I'd like to um see if we can work with this lady to get um the trash picked up because it's so small that the cars get in the way, and then the drivers aren't required to pick them up.

So if we can make some kind of accommodations to kind of address that small street, and I'm sure there's others in the community, and then the second one is just whoever's in charge of the banners.

Um, the ones on central across the river are just kind of coming off, and I know the banners seem to be a topic of uh discussion here at our meetings, but they're supposed to put little caps on the end so that they don't fly off.

So I know there's like a few missing already, so if we can look at that, and then I had a couple of questions for um Mr.

Wayland, but I don't know if you've got the answers to those or if you'll just answer me.

Um thank you so much.

Thank you, um Vice President Champagne.

So we're now on proclamations and presentations.

We're um counselor Grout and Bassan.

Thank you, Madam President.

Um let's see here.

Uh tonight's proclamation is recognizing the Albuquerque Public School Selfless Seniors, Shannon Barnhill, the executive director of the APS Foundation, and the 2026 selfless seniors are here to accept.

Um, if they could just come down to the podium.

Counselor Basson is going to help me recognize these fine young men and women.

Thank you all for being here today to this evening.

Look how lovely you all are.

I'm going to start the proclamation and then counselor Basson will finish it for us.

Whereas Albuquerque Public Schools Education Foundation established the selfless senior program to recognize students who quietly contribute to our community through selfless acts that do not earn a lot of fan care or recognition.

And whereas APS EF has partnered with Frank Frost on this initiative for the last 18 years to recognize and celebrate these students for their dedication to their schools and their commitment to serving others.

And whereas students from APS schools are nominated by their friends, school staff, their families, or community members.

And most have never been publicly thanked or praised for their contributions to our community, and whereas the young people chosen from the class of 2026 represent the best of our city and our hope for a bright future.

And they are Albuquerque High School, Lillian Cochran, Atrisco Heritage Academy High School, Brandon Gonzalez, Sebola High School, Cora Mendel, Del Norte High School, Antwashia, Yatza Yatsati, Early College Academy, Saba, Gasempur, Ecademy High School, Thaniel Lentz, El Dorado High School, Timothy Campheus, Highland High School, Emanuel Salazar, La Cueva High School, Olivia Cherry, Manzano High School, Angela Chavez, New Futures High School, Emily Weber, Nextgen Academy High School, Naomi, Gensell Peters, Rio Grande High School, Jaden Cruz, Sandia High School, Gavin Gallegos, Valley High School, Walter Bradford, Volcano Vista High School, Uleki, excuse me, Aquani, West Mesa High School, Hector Cabrera.

Be a proclaimed that the council, the governing body of the city of Albuquerque, hereby recognizes the APS class of 2026 selfless seniors and thanks them for their service to the community.

Shannon, could you say a few words for us?

Yes, thank you.

Thank you, Chairwoman Pena, Councillor Grout, Counselors and Citizens.

On behalf of the APS Education Foundation and the superintendent Dr.

Blakey, our 26 selfless seniors are quite amazing, and we're certainly very grateful that you are here to recognize these soon-to-be graduates.

As you said, as mentioned before, Frank started this to make sure that the students that were doing something really great for their peers, for their schools, for their community, had a chance to be recognized for the kind acts and their selflessness.

And so these are they're not used to the spotlight, they're not used to being recognized, they're not used to be standing here, and you can kind of see that from their faces.

So we are quite honored.

Each year we remind the selfless seniors that they represent their schools and the philanthropic spirit of all students who walk their halls.

Each year we also remind them that they represent the entire school district, and they serve their inspiration of acts serve all of their underclassmen, all the middle school students, and all even our youngest elementary students.

So with that, I would like to close by saying they remind us all about that there's always time to give, to support those in need, to champion important causes, and to give voice to those who cannot be heard.

So I want to say thank you.

And between us, the city and these wonderful, wonderful selfless seniors, we live in a city that is going to be great.

Not to sound like anybody else that uses that word, but I just want to say thank you so much.

This is a better place to live because of these young adults that are here today.

Thank you so much.

Before you take your seats, did any of the students have want to say anything?

Anyone brave enough?

Well, thank you for being here, and thanks for you can tell they're selfless.

You guys can make your way around and you can accept the proclamation.

Great way to start the meeting.

So um now we have a presentation from Christine Borner, City Economist, who will provide an update on cannabis and gross receipts tax.

And as she's making her way, please, if you can find a seat if you're standing, there's plenty of seats available.

Thank you so much.

Go ahead.

Yes.

Madam President, members of council, glad to be with you tonight.

I'm going to give you a brief presentation on the gross receipts tax uh receipt for December 2025.

And so December GRT grew 4.8% based on the state shared one point two two five increment.

And as a reminder, the current budget growth does project a 3.8% growth over the FY25 actual.

Um when we let's see professional services, other services, arts and entertainment, educational services, all did quite well in December.

However, real estate, trade, business services, construction and health did struggle this um in December.

And then just quickly over to cannabis.

There we go.

And cannabis, uh increased 4.2% in December, and that brought the cumulative growth um up a little bit further, still negative at a negative two point one percent for the year.

Um and then just a couple of side notes, just remembering that um the uh the GRT growth is impacted a little bit by the lump sum that we received in the first month of the year, and that if you were to take the average growth of all the years except for that first, all the months except for that first month, it is about a three percent, three point one percent growth.

So just keep that in mind.

And I I'll stand for questions.

Are there any questions?

None.

Thank you so much.

Appreciate it.

Um so next we have a presentation by um director Turner, who will provide an update on vulnerable vulnerable road users' campaigns and efforts.

Uh Madam President, counselors, today I am going to show and not tell um uh our campaign because on this past Thursday we launched the campaign with um videos and also our website.

So I encourage everyone to go to our campaign website, which Garrett is going to stream if technology cooperates.

It's www.cabq.gov, and it has our stop for low stop for everyone logo and branding, as well as key points from the um up traffic code update, and we also have our two campaign videos.

So with that, Garrett, if you want to show the first one.

In Albuquerque, everyone is protected in a crosswalk.

Marked or unmarked.

Painted or not.

Breaking only takes a second.

Ending a life lasts forever.

If someone is crossing, drivers must stop.

For pedestrians, for cyclists, for people who use wheelchairs for everyone.

Everyone in a crosswalk.

Mark or on mark deserves a complete stop.

Thank you.

And then we have one more video from um, and I again I want to thank the tireless advocacy of Melinda Montoya.

Without her, we would not be here today.

And so uh just a thank you, and then here's Kayla's video.

That day changed my life forever.

My daughter Kayla was 19, riding her bike across this intersection.

She believed everyone deserves safety, dignity, and kindness, but our traffic laws didn't protect her.

So I fought for a change.

Now every multi-use trail crossing is a crosswalk.

Drivers must stop.

No passing, no second guessing.

Stopping takes seconds.

Losing someone lasts forever.

Honor Kayla.

Stop for everyone.

And with that, I stand for questions.

Are there any questions?

Councilor Feblecorn.

Madam President, not really a question.

I just wanted to thank Director Turner again.

The release of all of this was on Thursday night.

It was really well done.

And I do think that this campaign has been incredibly well crafted and the messaging is very clear.

And I think that the entire city owes her and her team a thank you.

Thank you, Councilor Feblecorn.

Counselor Rogers.

Thank you, Madam President.

I just want to echo the same thing.

Thank you so much, Director Turner and the team that put these together.

I think one of the questions I got from one of my constituents after watching that, who's watching the meeting was how do you know that to stop at an unmarked crosswalk?

And so can you talk about that?

Because I think I know the answer to that, but it's obviously looking at our intersections and when people are naturally crossing, right?

But could you talk about that a little bit?

Madam President, Councillor Rogers, thank you for that question.

Um I think the overall message of our campaign is stop for people.

If you see kids crossing the street in your neighborhood, if you see them, you know, running across the street, like look out, watch, heads up from the phone, keep an eye out, and and really just remember that if you hit them, you're taking a family member, you're taking you know a colleague, like just look for people and and drive, you know, keeping a lookout.

And so that's you know, I know in my neighborhood, I know where all the kids cross the street.

Like it's just a reminder that where you you know when you see people, stop.

Thank you.

Said it, okay.

Thank you.

Um, Councilor Grout.

Thank you, Madam President.

Um, I wanted to thank Director Turner for um, she came to a neighborhood meeting in my district over the weekend and um presented um this information, and that we had several good questions, um, just like this evening.

Um, but I think this campaign is wonderful.

I also want to thank Kayla's mom.

Um brought tears to my eyes to hear what what you said, and but I thank you for being an advocate for Kayla and for the other families.

Um all of us, because I I don't want this to happen to anybody else.

So I want to thank give her an extra thank you for participating.

I know in your grief, you're not just you're gonna get up and do something.

I can I really commend you for that.

Um but I'm looking forward to more and more people learning the new rules and um making us make sure that we're looking around and um slowing down a little bit.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Seeing no other questions, I'll just end by saying, yeah, I think this is phenomenal and please related Kayla.

Um appreciate um what she's doing, you know.

Um, you know, it it affects people, right?

I have a cousin who this has been probably over 25 years ago, but over there on Real Bravo, and um, I think that's when they first started doing the bikes, but it was um it was on Real Bravo and Second Street, and he left behind two very young children, and just to see his kids now and know everything that he he missed out on, and you know what a tragedy that creates in a family.

So thank you.

Thanks, Kayla, and thanks to you and your department.

Thank you, Director.

Thank you.

Um, we are now on to the journal.

I move approval of the March 2nd journal.

Okay, there's a second by Vice President Um Champagne.

Um, Madam Clerk, can you please call the roll?

Councillor Bacca.

Yes, Councillor Bisson?

Yes, Vice President Champagne, yes, Councillor Febalcourt, yes.

Counselor Grout, yes, Councilor Lewis?

Yes, Councilor Rogers.

Yes, Councilor Teas.

Yes, President Pena.

Yes, passes unanimously.

Thank you.

We are now on communic um communications and introductions.

Are there any changes to the letter of introduction?

Councilor Bassan.

I move that the rules be suspended for the purpose of placing R7 on tonight's agenda for action.

R7 is amending the adopted capital implementation program of the city of Albuquerque by supplementing current operating grant appropriations and approving new projects.

Second.

There's a motion and a second by Councilor Feblecorn.

Um this will require two-thirds vote.

Although oh, Madam Clerk, can you please call the roll?

Councilor Bacca?

Yes.

Councilor Bassan.

Yes.

Vice President Champagne?

Yes.

Councilor Feblecorn.

Yes.

Councilor Grout.

Yes.

Counselor Lewis.

Yes.

Counselor Rogers.

Yes.

Counselor Tayas.

Yes.

President Pena.

Yes.

Passes unanimously.

Thank you.

Counselor Febalcorn.

Madam President, EC45, I move that the rules be suspended for the purpose of placing EC45 on tonight's agenda for action.

EC45 is the mayor's recommendation of citywide on call for traffic engineering services.

There's a motion and second by Councillor Champagne.

Vice President Champagne.

Madam Clerk, can you call the roll?

Councilor Bacca?

Yes.

Counselor Bassung.

Yes.

Vice President Champagne?

Yes.

Counselor Peoplecorn.

Yes.

Counselor Grout.

Yes.

Counselor Lewis.

Yes.

Counselor Rogers.

Yes.

Counselor Tayus.

Yes.

President Pena.

Yes.

Passes unanimously.

Thank you.

I move approval of the letter of introduction.

Second.

There's a motion second by Vice President Champagne.

Madam Clerk.

Counselor Bacca.

Yes.

Councilor Bassan.

Yes.

Vice President Champagne?

Yes.

Counselor Peoplecourt.

Yes.

Counselor Grout.

Yes.

Counselor Lewis.

Yes.

Counselor Rogers.

Yes.

Counselor Teyas.

Yes.

President Pena.

Yes.

Passes unanimously.

Thank you.

We are now on to report subcommittees of Vice President Champagne.

I'll do it.

Thank you.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Um the fact of EC19 received a noted effect of EC20 that it'll be approved.

Exponent meeting which is reported in the matter of EC404245, they'd be approved in the matter of O3 that it do pass as substituted.

I move to accept the report.

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

Madam Clerk.

Councilor Baca.

Yes.

Councilor Bassan.

Yes.

Vice President Champagne.

Yes.

Counselor Febalcorn?

Yes.

Counselor Grout.

Yes.

Counselor Lewis.

Yes.

Counselor Rogers.

Yes.

Counselor Tayas?

Yes.

President Pena.

Yes.

Passes unanimously.

Thank you.

Counselor Peoplecorn.

I make a motion to revive O2613 and place this item on the April 6th Council agenda for action.

O 13 is adopting a ranked choice voting system, repealing and replacing Article 2, Section 7 and 8 of the city charter and directing the city clerk to develop educational materials.

Second.

There's a motion and a second by Councilor Teas.

Madam Madam Clerk.

Councilor Baca.

Yes.

Councilor Bassung.

No.

Vice President Champagne?

No.

Counselor Peoplecorn.

Yes.

Counselor Grout?

No.

Counselor Lewis.

No.

Counselor Rogers.

Yes.

Counselor Teyas.

Yes.

President Pena.

No.

Pass us on a four-five vote.

So now we are on to deferrals and withdrawals.

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

Seeing none, we are now on to the uh consent agenda.

Are there any changes to the consent agenda?

Councilor Grout.

Madam President, I'd like to pull EC60 off the consent agenda.

EC60 is the transportation infrastructure tax report.

Second.

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

Oh, you don't need a motion.

I'm sorry.

Um for the individuals on tonight's consent agenda who are being appointed to serve on a border commission.

Thank you for your willingness to serve.

I move approval of the consent agenda.

There's a motion second by Vice President Champagne.

Madam Clerk.

Councilor Bacca.

Yes.

Councilor Bassan.

Yes.

Vice President Champagne?

Yes.

Counselor Peoplecourt.

Yes.

Counselor Grout?

Yes.

Counselor Lewis.

Yes.

Counselor Rogers.

Yes.

Counselor Tayas.

Yes.

President Penyan?

Yes.

Passes unanimously.

Councilor Grout.

Thank you, Madam President.

EC260 is the transportation tax report.

And in section 4-3-7-5B, it requires report on the total amount for tax collected to date and a reconciliation of appropriations.

Mr.

Motsco, can you were the life to date collection and appropriation totals included in this report?

Councilor Grout, um, I think we have Miss Brumler here.

Okay, Miss Rumler, can you answer that for me?

Uh Councilor Grout, the EC provided us a report of FY25 to 26.

Okay.

Um, part of the it's a supposed to, if if I read correctly, we're supposed to get a light to date collection um appropriations included in the report.

And so my next question is for the administration why wasn't this information included?

Madam President and Councillor Grout, um, Director Turner is uh prepared to talk with you about this uh report.

Uh Madam President, Councillor Grout, thank you for that question.

So the um totals related to past um infrastructure tax collections were provided by EC to this council um and were accepted last summer, and so I apologize for the oversight that that information was not combined with 2012, 25 and 26 um uh appropriations and expenditures, but that information was provided by an EC last year, but I apologize it was not combined.

Okay, okay, thank you for that explanation, director.

It is supposed to be included in each report.

We're supposed to have light to date um information on on the report.

So um in the future, let's let's add that in.

Um make a bullet point to to remember that.

My next question um fiscal year 26 revenues were budgeted at 92.8 million, but it looks like we've only collected 25.9 million as of February 3rd, and that's only 28 percent of the budget.

Is there a lag in reporting or what might else be going on there?

Uh Madam President, Counselor Grout, can you explain where that 92 million dollars came from?

So let's see.

Well, I'll have to go back and let me find it here.

Uh let's see.

Uh with me here just a minute.

So let's see here.

I'm just going through the staff report that's the quickest here.

But um did I notice that okay?

So on the the fiscal year transportation infrastructure infrastructure tax revenues are budgeted at approximately 92.8 million.

I just said that while revenues collected to date are at 25.9.

Um this is in the report that you all provided to us, and so um that's quite a difference in um reporting or you know the numbers and the years almost over, so I I do have some great concern.

Um, and I don't know you all have the numbers.

I do not uh madam president councillor grout.

I I see the chart where you're referring to the budgeted amount versus the revenue collected, and I will there always is a lag in in accounting for that revenue, but that is a big difference.

So I will have I will follow up with counsel on the exact discrepancy.

Okay, that's great.

I'm sure I'm sure there's a good explanation.

Um as we move forward, we have to make sure that we get that figured out.

Understood.

Yes, okay, thank you.

All right, um that that's all I have the questions.

So at this time I'd like to move.

Uh I think it's receipt denoted.

Correct.

Second, okay.

There's a motion and a second by counselor feeble corn, madam clerk.

Counselor Baca.

Yes, Councilor Basson, yes, Vice President Champagne, yes, Counselor February, yes, Counselor Grout, yes, Counselor Lewis, yes, Counselor Rogers, yes, Counselor Teyas.

Yes.

Counselor Rogers.

Yes.

Counselor Teyas.

Yes.

President Pena?

Yes.

Passes unanimously.

We are now on to announcements.

Councilor Bassan.

Madam President, there will be an intergovernmental legislative relations committee meeting on Wednesday, April 1st at 3 p.m.

via Zoom video conference.

Thank you, Councilor Bassan.

Now financial instruments.

Councilor Bassan.

Madam President, R 7 is amending the adopted capital implementation program of the City of Albuquerque by supplant supplementing current operating grant appropriations and approving new projects.

I move it you pass.

There's a motion and a second.

There's a motion.

Is there a second?

I'll make it, I'll make the second.

So there's a motion and a second for a due pass.

And Madam President, this came to me by request from the administration regarding Pajarito.

Uh and there's somebody that we had unanimously, and I kind of want Director Gruner if he's here to speak to it more so because he's the one that reached out to me or somebody or Madam CAO.

They had reached out for some assistance based off of things that are going on, and we had unanimously uh approved their LEDA grant a couple years back.

So I don't know if it's okay for somebody else from the administration to explain it further.

Madam President, um Deputy Director Mitchell is here and can explain specifically uh what Pahadito Power's uh request is and what this is related to good evening, Council President and Councillors.

Um I just have brief comments.

Max was gonna be online, and if he's not, uh I just have brief uh comments to provide.

So I don't know if you can check and see if he's online.

Okay.

So um basically the city is eager to receive the money from the state to support this local job creator.

There is zero cost to the city due to federal delays of government shutdown.

The state has decided to increase the lead of funding uh to Pajarita powder, and we are in full support of this LEDA eligible project.

Thank you.

Are there any questions from counselors?

Seeing none, we'll move straight to uh public comment.

Thank you, madam president.

We have signed up Todd Reed, followed by Jasmine Arias, Jasmine Arias.

My first he's first, no I'd like to put an opposition packet on the record for the tax.

Can I bring that to you?

Um, this is not your main.

Are you here to speak on our seven or on the tax on the tax?

Okay, I think you signed up on the under the wrong line item.

Um can you verify with Mr.

Um with Garrett to So do I need to wait or you'll have to wait, yes, sir.

Today or do I need to sign up for another day?

No, well, let's find out from Mr.

Cornelius.

We'll have a Madam President Jasmine.

Yes, perfect area, and then I'll discuss.

And you'll work with Mr.

Reeves.

Perfect.

Thank you.

Hey Jasmine.

Hey President Pena, um, I'm sorry, but I think what happened is especially with him, the public speaking comment area was full, so it just kind of flushed everybody into different sections.

So I think that's where the miscommunication would happen with tonight.

Oh so you can sign up on the bill, and there's no limit on this the particular bill.

So if you want to work that out with Mr.

Cornelius as well, that'd be great.

I appreciate it.

Okay, thank you.

So um there being no um comment public comment on our seven.

Any questions from counselors, the administration?

Madam President, I just wanted to clarify that this item is specifically uh we are accepting the grant funds from the state on behalf of this project.

So it is is the acceptance of those dollars.

Yes, thank you.

So seeing none, there was a motion in the second.

Madam Clerk, can you please call the roll?

Councilor Baca.

Councilor Baca.

Councilor Papelcorn, yes.

Councilor Grout.

Yes.

Counselor Lewis.

Yes.

Counselor Rogers.

Yes.

Counselor Teyas.

Yes.

President Penya?

Yes.

Pass this on the zero.

Counselor Bacca here, yes.

Thank you.

Passes unanimously.

Thank you.

So we are now on appeals.

We have two appeals this evening.

Um one of them is the adoption of findings.

So we have ACO5 María Gonzalez, um, agent appeals the zoning hearing examiner's decision to deny a variance of 30 inches to allow a 66-inch projecting wall sign at the property located at 3715 Silver Avenue Southeast, Zone MX M.

And so I don't know if we have a motion.

Madam President.

Counselor Lewis.

Madam President, I move to adopt findings.

There's three pages of findings.

So and I don't think we have to um I'll ask the attorneys.

We don't have to read the findings into the record, correct?

If anybody wants to see them, they can go online and okay.

Thank you so much.

So your motion, Counselor Lewis, was what?

To adopt the findings.

Second.

There's a second by Vice President Champine.

Are there any questions?

Counselor Feblecorn.

Madam President, I have a um amendment to the findings.

Is it okay to move it now?

Yes.

All right, thank you.

I'm going to move floor amendment um one to AC 2505.

Add the following conditions of approval to the findings of approval.

Adopted conditions of approval.

The city council may adopt any or all of the following conditions or may adopt any other conditions of approval that it deems appropriate.

Add one, no sign or any part of the sign shall move, rotate, or change illumination to produce any apparent motion of the visual image, including but not limited to illusion of moving objects, moving patterns, or bands of light, alternating lights, expanding or contracting shapes, or any similar effect of animation.

And two, the sign shall not be illuminated between the hours of 10 p.m.

and 7 a.m.

Uh the reason for this amendment is that this is all things that have been agreed upon with the neighborhood association during the initial negotiation.

So we just want to make sure that that follows through into this finding.

So I'll move floor amendment one.

Second.

There's a motion and second for floor amendment number one, and I think that was Councilor Rogers.

Are there any questions on the amendment?

Councilor Lewis.

Madam President, I guess let me ask our our legal here.

Um anything in this amendment that um uh just would would reverse um the the findings or the decision that was made by this council.

Um again, with with a you know, full hearing, I mean several other hearings, and then a full hearing that went on at our last council meeting, a lot of discussion about this.

Um I'm just wondering if we have some findings that are contract contradictory to the conclusions and the decision that was made.

Um I mean, wouldn't we need to go through a whole nother um uh you know legal proceeding again council uh president Pena, Counselor Lewis, uh these conditions uh were discussed in the uh by the neighborhoods and the applicant, and so they are reflected in the record.

It would be uh appropriate to add them in if necessary to these.

They would not alter the current uh drafted uh adoption of findings.

Uh and Madam President, we we confirm that with both parties?

Both parties, I guess on the record that they confirmed that they would be okay with these findings.

I mean, are we opening ourselves up to another appeal uh by you know making a decision outside of a legal hearing?

Uh Madam President, Councilor Lewis, these um specific uh conditions were discussed during uh the proceedings for this matter specifically, including the council's hearing at our last meeting.

Um, and so we did not reach out to the parties um as we were drafting proposed findings, either the larger list um that's before you or these um two additional conditions um that's not um usually part of our process for these, but this was drafted based off of discussion at the last hearing.

Uh councillor president Pena, Counselor Lewis, the record did uh make mention in the uh independency of the ZHE's decision and Lou Hos decision, the applicant submitted written uh documentation reflecting that they would uh make adjustments to the illumination of the sign um and that they have were in were in talks with the neighborhood about the conditions regarding the illumination of the sign and when it would be illuminated uh within a certain site line.

So the record does reflect that there are conditions that were uh you know were dealt with this uh proposed amendment to these uh these uh proposed findings.

Um so I mean we can you know take some time to find those uh citations that might take a little bit of time to do, but the record does reflect that particular these particular aspects.

Madam President, so I I would um and that very may very well be the case, and maybe all the parties are fine with this.

Um but I think we could come back and amend this later on, right?

After after at least notifying could we could we do this later?

Could we could we make other like say this this the specific amendment a few weeks from now?

Uh Councilor President Pena, Counselor Lewis, uh I'm afraid not.

Uh this is an adoption of findings hearing, so we'd have to make these findings tonight.

Okay.

So then Madam President, I I want to trust the record.

I want to trust the uh uh the the long proceeding that we had, uh the conclusions that were articulated during that time.

Um and uh if uh you know uh I I think at the very least these are some changes uh to um at least what we had discussed, you know, that appellants.

So I mean without without having uh a confirmation that you know both parties I think would be okay with this language, I I would vote against this.

Thank you.

Counselor Rogers.

Thank you, Madam President, and thank you, Councillor Fidel Korn for bringing this forward.

I think I made it clear during the last um hearing where we talked about I asked very specifically of both parties what would be the compromise so that both parties could live with, we don't have to all love it, but be able to cohabitate as neighbors.

Um and I think counselor feeblecorn's amendments get at that.

The both parties, if you remember Councillor Lewis during our last hearing, both mentioned that that they talked about what compromises they wanted to make.

Um and so I think this amendment gets at that and how's helps us straight strike that balance.

Um so I would uh urge your support, everyone's support on this because that's exactly um what we're trying to do here.

And then I would just like to ask our legal team if you could summarize um what's in here for the public.

I think it's important um for folks to know what we're voting on and agreeing to today.

Counselor President Penya, Councillor Rogers, certainly the uh adopted conditions of approval do two things.

The first of which is that they would uh stop the sign from moving, rotating, or changing elimination, uh i.e.

flashing, um you know they would prohibit the illusion of moving objects, moving patterns, bands of light, alternating lights to uh restrict it to just what it would appears to be just a uh a standard illumination.

Uh the second thing is that the sign would not be illuminated from the hours of 10 p.m.

to 7 a.m.

So at from at during the middle of the night.

Thank you, Madam President.

And last question, one of the big things that kind of helped my decision last time was we didn't have any information on the lumens, like how bright is the light.

So based on did we find that out that it fits with our dark skies ordinance?

Um did we ever get that information from the applicant?

Councilor President Pena, Councillor Rogers, we do not have that information as to the specific level of lumens uh within this amendment or within the proposed findings.

Thank you.

After we're done with this amendment, I would like to do one to say that it should at least follow the dark skies ordinance and make sure even if we don't know the ordinance, we know what the illumination rules are per our dark skies ordinance.

So I would just want to add that after we finish this amendment.

Thank you, Madam President.

Thank you, Councilor People Corn, too close.

Thank you.

I'm sorry.

Did you have a question?

Madam President.

Oh, Counselor Lewis.

Madam President, thank you.

So I mean, my understanding is that okay, if these were things that uh that were articulated that the two parties would have agreed on, then they're gonna do it anyways.

Um but I I do wonder um, so was this was this were these findings they were written, they were written based on uh what followed the meeting, and then our our staff wrote these findings up, you know, correct at a certain point over the last few weeks, and then um again I because I think this is important to know was this something and nothing wrong with this.

Um was this something that one of the counselors uh read, looked at, and then later on said uh we need to add this, or how did this amendment come about to the to the findings?

Why wouldn't it have just been written into the findings?

Councilor uh President Pena, Counselor Lewis, uh this amendment was uh created today.

Uh that's why it hasn't been incorporated into these proposed findings.

Uh the proposed findings were drafted based on the direction of counsel at the last meeting to incorporate the facts required and the the notations specifically required uh from the record.

Okay, and Madam President, so I mean that's my point.

I mean, we we had a again long proceedings, both parties uh uh testified, uh good discussion about it.

Our staff wrote findings uh at our direction based on the decision that was made.

Um and so again, uh I guess you're allowed to do this.

I mean, there's I'm not saying you're not allowed to do this, but I I think uh um I don't think we should allow it because uh again it's it's written after those findings were already created.

Um and they they should have been in the original findings based on the discussion that we had uh in the decision that we made at that last meeting.

So thank you, Madam President.

Council Basson.

Madam President, I apologize I had to step away just for a quick minute, but did I did I miss how this amendment is it going to drastically change the illumination of this sign that's being proposed to be hung?

Uh Madam President, uh Councilor Passan, no.

Uh this does not have anything to do on the lumens and how bright the sign is.

These were just two um parts of the discussion last time that I thought were really important because they were what had been agreed upon by the neighborhood association and the applicant, and they were not in the proposed findings that were um released by um staff early like on Friday, and so I thought we should add it in to make sure that those agreements that were made by the neighborhood association were actually reflected in the new findings.

Madam President, and you said the applicant and the neighborhood association?

Yes, Madam President.

That's I heard it from of course I heard it from the applicant because the neighborhood association was not allowed to speak last time, but I did heard from the applicant last time that these were things that they had agreed to.

Thank you, thank you.

Thank you.

Uh Vice President Champine.

Thank you, Madam President.

Just a point of clarification.

If I remember the sign right, it read certain words, then the link letter was A.

And it was crossed.

The shape is a cross.

And it's got a word that goes up and down and a word that goes sideways, and the link was an A.

And when one word was illuminated, the other one was not.

And then the A was stayed on, and then the other word is illuminated, correct?

Counselor President Penn and Counselor Champine, that's the that's correct uh recitation of the application at the time that it was applied for uh the one thing that is uh might adjust that a little bit that stated a little bit is that after the ZHE's determination, uh applicants submitted uh notice that they would be willing to change it to just a non-flashing standard simple.

But yes, that's generally the words won't alternate or just stay on the entire time.

That's correct.

Thank you, Madam President.

Counselor Lewis, Madam President, I mean, this is just not good precedence.

I mean, I don't think I've ever seen this before.

Uh probably hundreds of appeals like this that this council's done.

I've I've never seen an amended uh findings that have come, you know, uh two weeks later.

So um it's bad this is bad precedence, uh, number one.

Uh number two, if both parties agreed to this to these to these changes uh, you know, based on the record, then that they're gonna do it anyways.

I think we can trust that they're gonna they're gonna follow these things that they discussed.

If they're not, if they're contradictory, you know, to what is on the record and what we decided on two weeks ago in a legal proceeding, uh, then uh you know, we're retrying, we're we're retrying and rediscussing a legal matter right now.

Uh and I think it's bad precedence.

Um, and this this amendment should not be passed.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Any additional questions, Councilor Pieber?

Madam President.

Oh, Councilor Rogers.

Thank you, Madam President.

Just have a couple more questions for our legal team.

Um, Ms.

Kuladon, can you tell me the purpose of this hearing today?

The adoption of findings, what's the purpose of why we're talking about this today?

Madam President, uh, Councilor Rogers, the purpose of uh tonight's hearing is to adopt findings that are consistent with the council's um hearing at the last council meeting.

So based on the discussion that was had um staff staff puts together a preliminary list of proposed findings um for the council to then approve at this meeting.

Thank you.

And so during this hearing, we're able to add or amend those findings.

That you a staff wrote up because you weren't directed by any.

I definitely did not even have a briefing on these adoptions so that I can remain impartial given that this is my district.

Um and so is it correct that at this hearing today, right now, counselors have the ability to amend these findings.

Madam President, Counselor Rogers, that's correct.

Which is part of the process, and that's why we go through this process.

And unfortunately, you know, the findings were public.

Uh Julia, when did we get these findings?

Madam President, Counselor Rogers, these uh proposed findings were distributed to the counselors and the parties on Friday afternoon with our um our meeting uh documents.

Thank you so much.

And then um, and you said also the parties, so that would be the applicant and the appellant uh madam president counselor rogers.

Yes, this was shared uh with the applicant, who is also the appellant, um the planning department, and then several members of the community who participated in the underlying um hearing on this application.

Thank you.

Thank you, and Madam President.

A couple more questions.

Um Ms.

Kuladon, did you get any feedback from any parties regarding the proposed findings that we're looking at today?

Got them forward.

Uh Madam President, Counselor Rogers.

Uh, to the best of my knowledge, we did not receive any feedback from uh the parties or members of the public.

Thank you.

Thank you, Madam President.

That's all I have.

And I would urge your support.

Thank you, Councilor Rogers, Councillor February to close.

Thank you, Madam President.

Um, so uh appreciate the conversation.

Um I sat through the hearing at the last meeting.

I heard several points of agreement from the appellant who was standing before us, and he indicated that they had agreed to these things.

When I saw the proposed findings that came out on Friday, those things were not included.

And so all I am doing is saying that we should amend those to include those things that we heard from the appellant that he had already agreed to.

I will point out that there has been no opportunity for both parties to see any of these findings.

Um these are new findings that this council um voted to create that were just released on Friday, and this is how the process works.

They are proposed.

We are hearing them tonight.

I have every right to propose an amendment to make sure that the neighborhood association voice is heard.

And so with that, I urge your support.

Thank you, Councilor People Corn.

Um, there be no other discussion, Madam Clerk.

Counselor Baca.

Yes.

Councilor Passon, yes.

Vice President Champagne, yes.

Councilor Feblecorn, yes.

Counselor Grout.

Yes, Counselor Lewis, no.

Councilor Rogers.

Yes.

Counselor Teyas?

Yes.

President Pena.

Yes.

Passes on an 8-1 vote.

Thank you.

So we're back on the um adoption of the findings.

So there was a motion in a second to adopt the findings with um amendment number one included.

So are there any other?

I know there was some discussion about an amendment.

So with that, I think we will um go to the vote.

Madam Clerk.

Councilor Bacca.

Yes.

Councilor Passan.

Yes.

Vice President Champagne.

Yes.

Councilor Feblecorn.

Yes.

Counselor Grout.

Yes.

Councilor Lewis.

Yes.

Counselor Rogers.

Yes.

Counselor Teyas.

Yes.

President Pena?

Yes.

Passes unanimously.

Thank you so much.

We are now on ACO1, the Pueblo of Santa Clara and the Pueblo Laguna and the West Side Coalition of Neighborhood Associations.

Wiscona appeal the Environmental Planning Commission EPC decision to approve a site plan EPC for all or portion of track 1B plat of tracks 1A and 1B, block 2.

Uh Volcano Cliff Subdivision Unit 6, a replat of track one, block 2, and lot 5, block 6, volcano cliff subdivision, unit 26 containing approximately 10 acres of the intersection of Kimmick and Rosa Parks Drive just south of Pasel Ver Norte zone MXL PR 2207 00712 SP 2025 00093.

So Mr.

Hall, can you please explain all that?

Councilor President Penya Counselors, uh this appeal concerns the approval of a site plan by Albuquerque Environmental Planning Commission EPC for 9.5477 acres at the of land at the intersection of Kimbock Drive Northwest and Rosa Parks Road.

This is zoned MXL for a new 238 unit multifamily residential development.

This site plan was submitted by Jubilee Development LLC, the applicants.

The issue is whether the EPC's approval of the site plan should be upheld.

The EPC approved the site plan, find the site plan is consistent with the goals and policies related to Chapter 4 community identity, Chapter 5 land use, Chapter 7 Urban Design, Chapter 9 Housing, and meets the site plan EPC repeat review and decision criteria in the IDO Section 66II.

The Pueblo of Santa Clara, Pueblo of Laguna, and the West Side Coalition of Neighborhood Associations Wiscona jointly, the appellants appealed, asserting standing and rating five issues on appeal.

After a hearing by the Luho, the Luho made his findings.

And we'll first start with standing.

The Luho found that while the Pueblos, the Pueblo of Santa Clara and the Pueblo of Laguna both found both had standing under the IDO 64U2A2.

The Luho found that Wiscona had not shown standing because the petition that was kind of submitted to demonstrate authorization to appeal was not signed by a majority of property owners or tenants located within 660 feet of the application site inclusive of rights of way.

This is required as a part of the IDO under IDO section 64U2A5B.

However, out of an abundance of caution, and that's a specific uh term used by Luho, the Luho went to the merits of Wiscona's arguments as well as the appellants uh as well as the Pueblo appellants' arguments uh due to uh just concern about the uh intermingled nature of these um uh issues that were raised.

The first issue that was raised uh by the appellants was that the application is based on an allegedly invalid plating action previously approved for the site.

Um the Luho found that the applicants, the appellants did not meet their burden of proof in showing that the plat is void, and that there is substantial evidence on the record showing that the plat is not void.

Um this platting has gone through several rounds of appeals up to the court of appeals and down below and have been remanded several times on different sort of stages.

Part of the crux of the appelle's argument focuses on the nuances of that.

The Luho uh rejected that concern as being dispositive and rising to the level of substantial evidence.

The second issue is that the uh uh appellants argued the EPC's findings and conclusion that the site plan is generally consistent with the comprehensive plan was inadequate.

Um the Luho found that the EPC's findings that the site plan is generally consistent with the comprehensive plan satisfies the requirements of the IDO.

Uh in doing so, the LUHO indicated that while there is a distinction between consistent and generally consistent, that's without difference under New Mexico law and doesn't have the same force of effect to make a noticeable distinction or departure from uh what would be consistent or generally consistent.

So therefore it meets the requirements of the IDO.

The third issue is that uh the um specifically the uh Pueblo appellants noted the um that the referral of application to comment uh to the uh Pueblo appellants was inadequate.

The Luho also rejected this argument, noting that the referral notices sent to the Pueblo appellants notifying of them of the application substantially satisfied the requirements of the IDO.

It provided them notice of what details were going to be uh heard regarding this uh uh regarding this appeal, uh, including information that they can follow up on to then participate in the EPC hearing, which they in fact did.

Um the fourth issue is that the appellants argued the EPC disregarded building height restrictions under the VPO2 regulations.

The Luho found that the VPO2 height restriction sub-area regulations of the IDO are inapplicable to the site.

Uh this was a finding that was made at one stage of an appeal, and the Luho uh noted that this is uh falls under the proclusion doctrine law of the case, uh which holds that prior um findings are not to be really relitigated again at this stage of remand.

Finally, the uh appellants argue that the EPC inaccurately stated that no comments were received from the Indian uh tribes.

That's the term they use, uh, when in and did in fact participate in the EPC hearing and did provide comments via testimony.

Um the Luho found that the record indicates the EPC afforded appellants an opportunity to testify, cross-examine witnesses, and submit evidence at the EPC hearing.

Therefore, the statement by the EPC that no comments were received from the Indian Nations tribes or Pueblos and tribal representatives was harmless error that did not prejudice or adversely impact the rights of the appellants.

Uh in conclusion, LUHO recommends that the appellants appeal should be denied, and the decision of the EPC should be upheld because the appellants have not shown that the EPC decision is not supported by substantial evidence on the record.

Uh with that, I'll stand for questioning.

Thank you.

Councilor Lewis.

Thank you, Madam President.

So it looks like you know, like not you mentioned nine or ten um, you know, decisions on the merits that the Luho made to deny the appeal, uh, which is all on the on the specific you know merits of the appeal that uh the Luho rejected.

Um but so that that's significant enough.

But the one the first one you mentioned was um uh was on standing.

Uh the Luho the Luho um uh rejected the uh Westside Coalition's um I guess uh declaration of standing, I guess in some way.

Um but they specifically were in violation of one of our ordinances that we you know passed a year ago.

Um I I would have to think that they knowingly did that.

They did not have standing and yet they appealed anyways.

Um what what is what's the recourse when a neighborhood association knowingly violates one of our our laws?

Is there any I mean we have a we have a neighborhood association office set up to ensure that our neighborhoods are neighbor associations are compliant?

Um and yet this is a case where specifically a neighbor association knowingly violated one of our ordinances.

Uh council president uh penya, counselor Lewis, uh standing is a threshold issue that the parties uh may assert, um although in this instance the LUHO and perhaps the council might not find that they have standing, uh their recourse then uh to determine whether they do or not is to you know appeal continuously uh up to district court if necessary and beyond.

Um so in in terms of whether a violation uh occurs or not, they're uh within their rights to at least assert standing and then have the luho provide a proposed decision, and this council ultimately decide whether they have standing or not.

Yeah, thank you, Madam President.

I I'm I move it uh accept the uh accept the Luho recommendation and findings There's a motion and second by counselor um Basan to accept the Luho's recommendations and findings.

Is there any discussion?

Seeing none, Madam Clerk, can you please call the roll?

Councilor Bacca Councillor Passan, yes.

Vice President Champagne, yes, Councillor People Corn?

Yes.

Councillor Grout.

Yes.

Counselor Lewis?

Yes.

Councilor Rogers.

Yes.

Counselor Teyas?

Yes.

President Pena.

Yes.

Passes unanimously.

Thank you.

So next item on the agenda is general public comment, but we're gonna move to approvals just to get to these two items of business out of the way.

So that we have EC58, Department of Youth and Family Services progress report on implementation of resolution R25186.

We have Ms.

Stiles here, but um I'm gonna move a receipt be noted.

Second, there's a motion in the second by Councillor February for a receipt note it.

Is there anyone signed up to speak?

Yes, sirs, madam president.

We have Lisa Christofferson, followed by Giorgio Delgroso.

And before I start my one minute, can I just say that a miracle happened?

Um and you guys, did you see our miracle?

We worked it out.

Good.

I didn't notice that.

Yes, that's excellent.

We worked it out, and we still have they they they still have some issues, but we worked it out our part, okay?

Just so that you know.

Thank you.

Sorry, I need to flip this.

Come on.

Anybody know how to work this?

Okay.

May I have the camera, please, sir?

James Matthew Aba Boyd.

He was born April 8th, 1975.

Today is the anniversary of his murder, March 16th, 2014.

And he was murdered by Dominique Perez and Keith Sandy.

And it is because of ABBA that we were able to get the US DOJ investigating into our community months and months and months and months of public comment, public forum.

And here we are, 12 years later.

Are our unhoused neighbors any safer?

Are our immigrant communities any safer?

Are immigrants who are unhoused?

Are they safer?

There were eight things on that uh CASA agreement.

Six of them were met.

The two main ones, excessive force and transparency, have never ever ever been met.

And in fact, one of these guys was hired back after murdering this man.

So I would ask that we please consider a moratorium on sweeps.

Madam President, looks like uh Giorgio is not here, so that concludes comment.

Thank you.

Okay, so that concludes public comment.

I think I have Councillor Grout has her hand raised.

Thank you.

I'm a little confused.

Are we talking about EC58?

Yes, correct, correct.

Um, Councillor Grout, I'm I was going to stop okay.

Ms.

Christopherson, but it's kind of related, but then it didn't.

That's okay.

All right, thank you.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I have some questions about his uh progress report.

Can somebody from YFS Madam President, Director?

Um excuse me.

Um Martinez is here to speak.

Okay, thank you.

Oh, very good.

Um, okay.

So I was just reading through, I was reading through the report and and also the staff write-up, and it I'm not quite sure that it's been followed properly.

Like have you didn't um increase the um staff the open hours or um staff, and I'm not I I'm a little bit taken back by it.

Um I know that it's you know it's important to um it's important to get our our children, our teenagers, our our children.

It's important that we get them involved in good things and and keep them busy and so forth.

And so I saw this EC or this um uh resolution 180, I think it's 186, um, as a really wonderful uh gap in some of the um things that we do for our children.

And um, so and and the reason one of the reasons one of the things that I noticed I'm in DC right now and it's at a conference, and today we had a workshop um about um opioid settlement funding and things that you should do with it, and one of those key things is prevention, and to me, prevention is also um part of is is educating children and teenagers and keeping them busy, and so I I need to understand how it seems like there's an excuse in this in this report, as we can't do it, and so I need to understand why that's what it says.

Madam Chair, Councillor Grout.

Um, when we initially met with uh counselor Rogers and her policy analysts along with my team, um, it was under the understanding that we would shoot for FY27.

Um funding, we do not have current funding for this uh expanded project, and so the whole goal from my understanding was that we were shooting for FY27 to implement.

Um we did submit a spreadsheet to counselor Rogers in terms of what we were going to attempt to do uh for the summer program, and um at this time, you know.

I mean, I apologize if we were supposed to implement right away, but it was my understanding that this was going to be in effect for FY27 when possible budget was allocated.

Oh okay.

I'm I'm gonna um ask Counselor Rogers if she could clarify or confirm that for me.

Um how like that's gonna work out.

Summer.

Is summer part of um is summer fiscal year 26, or is that fiscal year 27 summer thank you thank you, Counselor Um Grout and thank you, Madam President.

So the resolution didn't speak to a specific implementation time at all.

It just said I knew from not just knowing YFS's budget, but the whole city's budget that it would be hard for us to operationalize this.

So that's why I've been working on getting other funding to support what I really needed from the department and director.

We talked about this, that's why we withdrew it the last time because I didn't feel like it was adequate.

Um, and I was hoping this time around um it would include the spreadsheet that you sent me.

I mean, we we've met monthly um since we um you know, since we passed this, making my vision clear, making my expectations clear several times, and I was hoping by having you withdraw, go back and include.

I asked specifically, can you include the implementation spreadsheet?

Um, all of the things that you did, really good work, it just wasn't reflected in this EC.

And then now to see that it was the exact same thing, just added a budget to it.

Um, it just I agree with Councillor Grau, it's underwhelming and not what I asked for.

Um, and so I appreciate my colleague asking because those are some of the questions that I that I had as well.

Um, Madam Chair, uh Councilor Rogers.

Um, from a department standpoint, when we start a new initiative, uh, and the conversations between um uh your office as well as my team have been very fruitful.

Um it is extremely difficult when we want public input.

Um it is very important that we work with those NPOs that you have uh so graciously um chose to partner with.

Um we want this to be a meaningful partnership, a meaningful relationship with those teenagers, and it I would be remiss um with the experiences that um we have within our team to operationalize something that they don't want to do.

Um the summer program spreadsheet was just thrown out there um as a starting point.

Um right now, it is my understanding that uh the group that has been contracted with has received proposals, those proposals have been vetted, and now we're going through a process of um putting together that team that is going to operationalize uh this EC moving forward.

So understanding your frustration, um I would ask that we the create the community recreation team um be given a little bit of leeway um to work with your policy analyst, as you know, she worked for us, uh, and she was the director of the teen center at up in Santa Fe that uh we would be able to come up with an exceptional plan uh to move forward.

Thank you, madam president.

May I say one final thing?

Yes, um yes, thank you, madam president.

Um YFS does get um a third of the public safety tax monies, and it's important that they're spending it wisely and well, and um if if we need to maybe we should move it to a different department if they're not gonna use it.

It I feel strongly that we need to.

We all know juvenile crime in this city and this state is overwhelming, and um prevention, prevention prevention is key to uh stopping is one of the big things that we need to really advocate for and look at.

So um I I just think we need to do a better job.

Thank you.

Madam Chair, Councilor Grout, if I may.

Um I'm disappointed that you will you believe that.

Um, I will say that my department has increased youth opportunities by more than 35% during this administration's term.

Um we operated during COVID when everybody else shut down.

Uh we were the safety net for the city of Albuquerque and the working families.

Um, we do a heck of a job, and we pinch pennies to the best of our abilities uh to offer the programming that we do.

We try hard to be as efficient as possible with the monies that were given, and across the board, I will say that we do a heck of a job for the city of Albuquerque.

Thank you.

Is that it?

Okay, thank you so much.

Vice President Champagne.

Thank you, Madam President.

Director, um, going in through here and reading kind of the evaluation, it says the YFS has formed an implementation and evaluation team to guide the effort and monitor progress and currently seeking participation from district six community school coordinator as per required by R2586.

Of which 260,650 is attributed to part-time positions, including 10 teen leaders to assistant supervisors on-site supervisor working approximately 25 hours per week.

What's the progress of that?

Do you have 10 positions?

Are they hired?

Are they working 25 hours?

It doesn't say any of that.

So where's the money?

Where's it at?

Madam Chair, Councilor Champaign, um, that's the budget that we put together that we feel we could implement the program itself.

Those positions are not created.

Um we have a very restrictive part-time wage uh pay scale.

Um we start our our staff at 1250 an hour.

Um, so it's a challenge to hire staff, uh, part-time staff in general.

Um, our FTE structure is not as robust as others, um, and we make do with what we have.

Okay, so none of the two six two hundred and sixty thousand has been spent.

Yeah.

Uh we have we do not have two hundred and sixty thousand dollars.

The the goal was to um present a budget that we feel we could implement the program.

We do not have the money in hand to do that.

So we haven't implemented that is correct.

Okay.

So our 25186 has not been implemented, so no equipment has been bought, no 44,000 worth of equipment has been bought, no 85,000 for transportation and food has been bought, none of that.

Madam Chair, Counselor Champagne, that is correct.

And when did our 25186 pass?

Do we know that answer?

Yes, ma'am.

Uh Council President, Councilor Champagne, uh final action was on November 17th of 2025.

Okay, so four months ago.

Okay.

So we're not quite there yet.

Understandable.

Okay.

Enough time hasn't passed for us for you to be able to do that, correct?

Uh, Madam Chair, Councilor Champagne.

Um, the we did not get a we did not receive a drop dead start date.

Um, the goal is to start it in FY27.

Okay.

Was that Madam President?

Was that communicated with that what your idea was?

I mean, here we are four months in it on, and I'm not saying we've talked about timelines.

We've talked about you know not having enough time and allowing things to progress uh, you know, when things are passed.

So in four months, was that communicated that you were gonna go to FY27?

Uh I mean the reason why I ask is because you're very adamant about how much you've reached and the 30% you've grown and the teams that you've outreached.

I would think that you know one of the counselors advocating and pushing and giving you close to 400,000 to do a program you would be chomping at the bit to get started.

Uh Madam Chair, Councilor Champaign, fund we did not receive an appropriation for this uh project.

Okay so at this time um with our conversations with Councilor Rogers.

Uh we our goal was to start this program in FY27.

Okay.

Perfect.

Thank you, Madam President.

Yes.

Thank you, Vice President Champagne.

Counselor Teas.

Uh thank you, Madam President.

Um Director, um who's responsible for um making the appropriation in the budget Madam Chair, Councilor Teas, um it could either be this body um or the administration.

The administration, right?

Because they make the budget and then send it to us for approval.

Does your department have any sort of independent authority to increase staffing levels or operating hours without approval from the administration?

Uh Madam Chair, um, Councilor Teas.

My department, my community centers are structured a bit different.

We we have 22 facilities.

In that frame, 10 of those facilities have two FTEs.

Probably more so than any department possibly solid waste.

We have the ability to adjust our hours, hire our part-time staff without getting prior approval from the administration as long as we stay within our allocated budget.

Okay.

Thank you, Director.

So was a request made by your department to the administration to put to allocate funds for this particular matter on the budget line item.

Madam Chair, Councilor Teyas, we did not put forth that request.

Okay.

And so did the maybe this is for Dr.

Single.

Did the admin fail to prioritize the funding for this, or where did that gap come?

Madam President, Counselor Teyas, this was a resolution passed in November after the budget was passed.

We operate the facilities based upon the budget that was passed for the fiscal year.

When this resolution came through, we began working with Councillor Rogers to determine both expectations and practicality of shifting operations and the current programming.

And I think Director Martinez has done a great job of explaining in the sense that when you just shift, we have to plan for that shifting, including the cost appropriate for the type of programming change.

So this report was required to come forward as a progress report.

This is typical for us that we would bring a progress report, we would present a potential budget, it gives the information to the public and to you as a council to be able to consider, and then the council or the counselor as the sponsor would you know is typically make a work with us to make a recommendation whether there is an appropriation mid-year or if it is in the next fiscal year.

So my understanding, and I don't want to speak for the counselor by any means, is that the work has been collaborative work to determine the path that Councilor Rogers was interested in this center uh embracing in terms of the types of programming and the partners that she would like embraced in this site in her district.

Okay, thank you, Doctor.

Um I madam president, you cover one more question.

Did the administration explore options with the department to reallocate or reprogram funds during the fiscal year 26 to fulfill this council adopted policy?

Madam Chair, Councilor Teus, we reallocate in general.

Um we operationalize as the need progresses.

Um currently we are short-staffed.

We have a staff person, an FTE that is currently running that facility that should be on a different facility.

Um at the end of the day, what we try to do is if we have it within our means, we will 100% try to make it happen.

That's the way we've operated in my lifetime here at the city of Albuquerque.

Um, and uh we understand that the impact that we do have, just generally speaking, uh so any time a request comes from administration, the general public, you as a council body, um we try to make it happen as best we can.

Yeah, I madam president, um director, I understand the report says there was an estimated cost of 389,700 for four full implementation.

Um did the administration take any um action after receiving that estimate.

Um Madam Chair, Counselor Teas, um what do you mean by action?

Well, did you what did the administration say when you told them that's the estimated cost for implementation?

Uh Madam Chair, Councilor Teyas, um I mean it's within my realm.

Uh just I don't have to, as the previous question, I don't have to go to administration for permission uh to do things.

Um we have not had that conversation uh specifically uh with this amount of monies.

Um and you know, um counselor Rogers has given us grace um to properly plan this project uh with her um hand in hand and um we're shooting for FY27.

Okay.

So I guess I mean, I'm not saying that the work you do is not important and critical and has made a lot of really good, you know, made a big difference in our in our city because I think that it has, but I'm just trying to understand where the limitations lie.

Is it it's not necessarily by feasibility, like you can do it, you can implement this.

The issue is getting the money to implement it.

Um is that right?

Or um, Madam Chair, Counselor Teas, um, of course it's money, of course it's staffing.

Um, so if you don't have staff to implement, you could have all the money in the world, but at the end of the day, you just can't implement because of staffing.

So, I mean, there's a myriad of possibilities that could be happening just in general.

And at any point, did you identify um or speak with or escalate what um to the administration of the mayor's office or whomever your your um bosses that the resolution could not be implemented as intended without additional resources?

Um Madam Chair, Counselor Teas, um, I do believe from my perspective, the administration knows and understands that.

Um we are working towards FY27.

As you know, we are in the budget cycle.

Um, I am quite confident that counselor Rogers will bring it up.

There will be conversations with administration, there's gonna be a back and forth, and um decisions will be made.

Okay.

And do you think, last question?

Do you think it would be easier for you as a director um when developing a budget and what this kind of looks like to include sort of an evidence-based performance evaluation um process that ties um outcomes of implementation and programs to the budget, so we can actually see here's our goal, here's our objectives, and this is what our objectives did.

Um, Madam Chair, Counselor Teas, um, that's a hard question for me to answer.

Um being with FCS family and community services, and now with youth and family services, uh, we're a direct service provider to families.

Um, whether we service five children, 150 children, it's some sort of impact.

Um, if we introduce some sort of evidentiary-based system specific to my realm, I would say that there will be more there would be um harsher impacts to those that are in the minority because of lack of attendance versus not.

So it's a hard question for me to answer.

Um, I would be opposed to it to some degree, um, but would be open to conversation as to how it could work for me because uh again, we were open during COVID.

Um we offered school during those times.

We were open for 10 kids, we were open for 25 kids, we were open for two kids.

And if we had an evidentiary-based system, those two kids would not have been serviced, thus, those parents could not go to work.

So it's it's a hard answer for me.

Okay, well, thank you.

Thank you, Madam President.

Thank you.

We're now gonna go to Councilor Rogers and then uh CFO Martinez.

Thank you, Madam President.

So a couple of questions.

So first I want to just to dispel a couple of things that I don't think we got quite right.

So the purpose of this resolution was to direct the administration, and I'm reading directly from our 25186, direct the city administration to explore opportunities for partnerships and funding to support the teen center's operations, staffing, and programming, including mentorship programs, college readiness, mental health services, or referrals, arts and culture activities, and workforce development.

The city administration shall seek input for programming from the mayor's youth advisory council and youth from the district six mentorship program.

Uh next, it talked about the requirement was for EYFS to convene an ongoing program implementation and evaluation team, and that you were supposed to meet within 30 days of enactment of this resolution, and then quarterly thereafter, and we wanted a rep we were very specific about who should be on that implementation team.

And so my first question is where is the implementation team and why has it not convened?

Um, and again, this was separate from the mentorship program.

So I know you mentioned our North Star mentorship program where we're we're that's just us giving funding to folks to do member mentorship.

That uh didn't necessarily mean they though you needed to wait for that process to convene the program and implementation and evaluation team.

So why did we not implement an evaluation and an implementation team that should meet 30 days after enacting counselor Rogers?

Um I do believe, if my memory serves um me correctly, prior to the resolution being passed, we had met I would say five or six times.

Um I don't recall if we met 30 days after the resolution was um passed, uh, but I do know that we do have a meeting or my team has a meeting uh that is scheduled on the books for the end of the month um to meet with that team.

So I am not I'm not quite sure um about the 30 days after I could 100% get that information to you, but I know that there is a meeting that is scheduled at the end of the month with that implement implementation team.

Okay, and who's included on the implementation team?

Um it is the um community recreation uh staff.

Um we have sent invitations to the community school coordinators in that district from Wilson and Van Buren.

Um I do believe your policy analysts did receive that invitation as well.

Um yes, and um I do not know if there's anybody else.

Okay, and thank you, Madam President.

So this the the I I really again, and I've said this to your team, and look, director, this is not at all to overshadow the work that you did six years ago during COVID.

Okay, um, what we're talking about is today and now, and the situation for our youth has gotten worse since COVID when it comes to social isolation and all of the things that your team knows better than me.

Um, and so I would ask that again for that you go back and read the resolution because it's very specific, it should have a representative from youth and families, which you said it is on there.

I asked for a representative from Senior Affairs Multi-Generational Center, specifically some of their youth staff.

We asked for a representative from city council, which will be my policy analyst, who is, and then thank you for acknowledging her expertise.

Um, you know, that that's you're exactly right.

She is our city's expert.

Um, we also asked for nonprofit groups that provide youth programming, so a lot of which your department already funds and should be able to easily add to the to the team, and then the community school coordinator from any school in district six.

Um, and so I think for me, the let's just go back to my questions before we and do my commentary.

Um, but what so I so the timeline, there was no timeline other than when you were supposed to give me information.

We know that you don't have the budget to operationalize this, which is why this is an information gathering, a planning uh how do we implement something like this?

And I have to point out, Counselor Penny already asked your department for something like that across the whole city for more hours for teams and for our community centers.

I'd like to know where that's at, but really what this was just focusing on one center, Heights Community Center.

Um so thank you for the budget because I think that's what was really missing from the first time around was the budget, so that I know as a counselor, it's our job, right, to help the administration come up with funding opportunities.

And I'm so pleased to say that our our state legislators really uh rallied around this project and we were able to get the funding we needed to do this, which is why I didn't uh have a date on when implementation needed to happen because I know we needed to figure out, and it says it right in there.

The implementation plan, and I quote, should include a proposed budget for both operations and initial setup.

And so the next question I have is just how has the team been meeting regularly without council representation or representation for community partners?

Have you all met outside of this implementation team in the council?

Uh Madam Chair, Councilor Penya, or excuse me, madam chair, uh counselor Rogers.

Uh I I do not have that answer.

I can get that to you.

Um, I would say that the answer is no at this time.

But I will confirm tomorrow with uh the division manager.

And thank you, and Madam uh present.

My last question, Director, do you do in your like we've had these conversations?

I think I know, but I want to ask on the record are you in favor of YFS doing more for our teams in our current community centers that we have in every neighborhood?

Do you believe your staff can support teams better and add more programming specifically for teams?

Is this something you even want to do?

Uh Madam Chair, Councilor Rogers.

Um I'm a little surprised by the question.

Um we have actually um reduced the age of our team passes, which has had an increase in our team population.

Um, but to answer your question on the record, um, absolutely, um, we do.

Thank you, Madam President, and I'm glad to hear you say that, because I'll be honest, it feels like you don't.

It feels like we don't want to do this, and so I appreciate hearing that on the record, and I want to continue to work together because for this is a non-negotiable for me.

We have to work together to better support our teens.

And I want to point out the team pass that you're talking about came out of one of the meetings with my policy analysts who suggested that to your team.

So, again, that was collaboration working together to say, hey guys, why don't we try this thing?

And because for the public watching, teams were not allowed after 14, right?

Without a parent to utilize our centers, and so um because of our collaboration, you all then took again our policy analysts' work and elevated it, and now we have a team pass where parents can go and get a team pass for their teens to be able to utilize the center.

We have a problem with idle youth, youth and family services is supposed to help us with that, and so I'm going to continue to be in the spirit of collaboration, work with you to get this done.

So I want to um remove not vote for receipt be noted, send this back so we can continue to work on it.

Thank you, Madam President.

Did you have anything to add?

No, thank you.

Um CFO Martinez.

Thank you.

Madam President, I just wanted to correct the record that YFS does not receive public safety tax dollars.

I think where the confusion may be is that triple it's actually triple H that receives that at one point.

YFS and Triple H were part of one department called FCS.

So I just wanted to correct the record.

Well, actually, Madam President, we just add a list of that.

Madam President.

Councilor Rogers.

Thank you, Madam President.

I'm digging into the public safety tax as you know, uh, Director Martinez.

Um, and so some of those contracts that were in FCS did go to youth and families, so we do need to take a look at that.

And I'm diving in that with your team right now and looking at that data, and there's absolutely spending out of YFS out of the public safety tax.

Thank you.

So, seeing no um additional, thank you, Director.

No additional discussion.

Um, we are in um there was a motion and second for receipt be noted of EC58.

Um, Madam Clerk, Madam President, I have a not receipt no is that the motion on the floor?

Yeah, I made the motion for uh move a receipt be noted.

Correct, and then counselor Rogers came back and she made a motion.

Yes, I'm sorry, I apologize.

I didn't hear that.

Madam President, um, Councilor Rogers, I believe that the process though it is that your motion is on the floor, but if you want, you can vote it down, and then that would mean they'd have to come back with another EC.

Okay.

So before we re vote and and say that we're not gonna accept this report, it is a report.

So um not accepting the report, I don't think changes the reports are usually what the progress is made up until now, but then there will be another um report.

And when is that due?

I mean, I have the bill in front of me, but I don't have when the next report is due.

Madam President, yes, Councilor Rogers.

Thank you.

I just happened to have it up.

Um, it actually just asked for within 60 days um to have an implementation plan with a proposed budget for both operations and initial setup, and because we don't have an implementation plan plan that came with the record, even though I know the department and their credit was thinking about that and sent us some really great work.

They just didn't include it in this EC.

And so that's why I'm saying this is not an implementation plan, um, and we should send it back so that they do have that, but there was no regular follow-ups.

My intent was that we could get a great implementation plan.

I'd know how much I needed to work with our budget chair or apply for grants, whatever, so that we can operationalize this.

Um, and so that was the original intent, if that helps.

Thank you, thank you, Councilor Rogers.

So then I would ask because we had passed a bill that I'd sponsored prior to this that really covered all the community centers for for the city.

Is there any way when we're looking at the budget this go round that we just work on having that implementation plan for all the centers, or would you all feel more comfortable just working on this one initially?

No, madam president, that's why I mentioned it in my uh speech just now because you have you asked for this a long time ago for all of our centers.

Yes, this would include the Heights Community Center.

So I would love to know where the department is on that, and I think to your point, it would fix all of that.

Um especially on the hours of operation.

The the programming this would still go to um, but definitely for those hours of operation, you're exactly right.

Thank you, Councilor Rogers.

Uh Madam President, um, I would like I'll respond.

I don't know where I think he's back there, but I can't see him in the crowd.

Um, so I wanted to offer up a couple things, which is that I think we have been focused on team programming across citywide, so not just one department, but looking at uh ways in which we can increase team programming.

I think we would be all um benefit from a presentation about the places in which we have are uh done that work already to increase teen uh programming, but also uh the other good ideas um that departments have come up with and are either going to implement, hope to implement, or have thought about the operational plans to do so.

Um so we can offer that.

Um I'm gonna put it under the label of team connect um presentation so that we can talk about that citywide and all of the different departments.

Um, second, I think um the preliminary planning that they've done related to meeting um councillor Rogers goals for Heights Community Center, um, is has been it's been incredibly fruitful, I think, for all of us to look at the possibilities at that location.

Um I do think that there is some custom um ideas in this location, and I I think that comes from Councilor Rogers' thinking, and um I think it's been really valuable to have that um investment from the from the counselor.

So I would ask that we um uh present both to you the team connect um model across all of the departments, and and you can see that, but also for us to pilot with Heights Community Center.

If you saw you know the th the 350-ish thousand dollars per um teen center, or I'm sorry, per community center would be um a significant change for us related to the YFS budget, and I think we all need to think about the financial impact as we come into the budget proposal uh that we're drafting right now.

So it is not a no, we don't want to do team programming.

I think we need to think thoughtfully about how we don't lose the other programming that is also currently serving the community in those community centers and balance that so it's a long answer to I think it it's a complex um uh proposal for us to think about for coming into the budget based upon the budget that we're preparing um uh with council's request for um prioritization and um uh what we're doing.

As you all know, we are preparing a draft budget right now that is very tight, um, that we'll be sending down so we can um uh draw from that budget the areas in which we know team programming is is highlighted as well, so we'll make sure we do that as well.

Thank you, CAO single single.

Um, yeah, so I agree.

I just think that you know, as we're looking at, and obviously we have something on the table later, and we're we're looking at a tight budget and really trying to accommodate all the all the um community centers throughout and creating new programs, it becomes very um challenging.

So I'm okay with whatever um this body decides, but I do think that we need to kind of sit at the table and figure out what we're gonna do because um, as you all know, um, in order to get all these things accomplished, it takes lots of lots of money and lots of staff.

So um there is a motion on the floor for receipt being noted, Madam Clerk.

Councilor Backa Councilor Basson, yes, vice president champagne.

No counselor people, no councilor grab no councilor Lewis, no, councilor Rogers.

No counselor Teas.

No President Penya, yes.

It fails on a 1-8 vote.

Thank you, Councilor Rogers.

Two seconds.

Thank you, Madam President.

Oh, I'm sorry.

I was just correcting the record, I'm sorry.

Councilor Rogers.

Thank you, Madam President.

I uh look forward to working with the department so we can come back with uh with uh a better implementation plan.

And thank you, Jess to end the team.

You did great work.

I just wanted to see it in this EC.

And and uh I think we can get there.

Thank you.

Councilor Rogers, I was looking for a motion.

I'll make a motion.

I'm sorry, I thought we we already voted, and so that means that it gets sent back to the department.

Yeah, okay.

Yes, here correct.

Yes, I'm so sorry, I apologize.

Thank you so much.

So um now we are on EC 45 Mayor's recommendation of citywide on call for traffic engineering services.

Councilor People Corn.

Move due pass.

Discussion there there's a motion and second for approval.

Is there any discussion?

Seeing none, uh, Madam Clerk.

Councilor Bacca.

Councilor Basaki.

Yes.

Vice President Champagne?

Yes.

Counselor People Corn.

Yes.

Councilor Grout.

Yes.

Counselor Lewis.

Yes.

Councilor Rogers.

Yes.

Counselor Teas.

Yes.

President Pena.

Yes.

Passes unanimously.

Thank you so much.

So I had moved to approvals because I thought it was going to be a couple of really simple votes, so I apologize to everyone for that.

So it just really threw us off.

So we are now on public comment.

So if I can find my place here, we'll move on to that.

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

Here are the public comment ground rules.

Each participant has one minute.

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

Any disruptive conduct will result in removal from the meeting.

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

As a reminder, pursuant to our rules of procedure, Article 1.

I don't know that this matters anymore.

It still does.

Okay.

Article 1, Section 8 C general public comment shall not be permitted on quasi-judicial matters.

Please do not include your comment.

Anything related to quasi-judicial judicial matters, including the Luho appeals we just heard, AC 2505 and AC 2601.

Failure to comply with this rule may result in your comment being cut off.

Please take this time now to edit your comments.

Mr.

Cornelius, please call the name of the first speaker.

Thank you, Madam President.

First up is Let's Avo, followed by Brick Jonasi, followed by Sophia Vega.

President Pena, Council.

This body took the opportunity on March 2nd to try to publicly shame an individual for using the word colored.

A word which is found in the NAACP's name.

When a citizen uses an historical term, you break the meeting protocol to shame that man's mail character in an attempt to quell his speech.

He felt so unsafe that he left the meeting.

You had officers follow him out, even though he left voluntarily.

Shadowing a citizen with police who's already leaving is a clear attempt to punish dissent and to silence a critic.

You use the police in your power your positions of power to create a spectacle.

We are all free to believe what we want to believe.

But our government cannot practice selective outrage to target its critics.

Your time is up.

That's your first warning.

So I do believe that there's probably a little mis uh misconception on Miss Rogers' part.

I believe that she was kind of led by Pena, but I am here to serve a follow-up cease and desist letter to you.

Who do I give this to?

Which one?

Right?

All right.

Last meeting you halted the official business to label me racist because I used the term colored and African American to show appreciation for people.

You know, the African American Advisory Board uh just gave a permanent seat to the NAACP uh representative uh Pamela Herndon.

She's the she's respected CEO and attorney.

I would assume that she uses that term pretty regularly.

Um, you know, this is a procedural abuse of power.

I will I'm on a retraction.

That's what this is about.

You need to apologize to me and issue that retraction because that's slander.

You tried to slander me.

And yeah, the people work it out.

Thank you, Miss Christopherson.

Thank you, Lisa.

Yeah, the people work it out.

You have power.

You're the racist.

Sofia Vega, followed by Rosalio Hernandez, followed by Francesco Artist.

Good afternoon, President and members of the City Council.

My name is Sofia Vega.

I am a member of El Centro, and I'm very proud to be studying psychology, so that in the future I can contribute my knowledge to the community.

At the same time, I I work as an educator and at ACR Center.

Today I am here to support the Safer Community Places ordinance.

Because in my work as a teacher, I see how the fear of deportation and family separation is directly affecting our children and also my fellow teachers.

It is essential that parents feel safe leaving their children at Acre, knowing they will be protected and cared for while they fulfilled their responsibilities.

But with the current attacks from this administration at my workplace, we have had to conduct additional drills in case a federal authority shops up demanding that we hand over a child or asking about one of my fellow teachers with a detention order.

This is traumatizing.

No child should grow up in fear or live with the constant worry of being separated from their parents.

Thank you.

Rosalio Hernandez, followed by Francesco Artist, followed by Sachi Watase.

Good evening, Chair and members of the city council.

My name is Roxana, and I am a member of El Centro, and in Solidarity, I will read the testimony of my uncle.

My name is Rosalia Hernandez.

I am a member of El Centro and the owner of Takeria Mexico, which I have operated for 30 years.

Today I am here to support the safer community places because since the administration began, our community has been constantly targeted by the presence of eyes.

And my restaurant individuals in white vehicles wearing green uniforms have shown up spreading fear among my customers, who then decide to leave my business out of fear.

Some of my workers have missed work multiple times because they are afraid of being detained and are returning to their families, which has reduced both of my workforce and my customer base, significantly impacting my income.

That is why today I ask you to approve this ordinance for the good of the entire working community so that everyone feels safer visiting places like Taceria, Mexico.

Business owners also need to be able to protect our workers and inform them if an I9 audit has been requested.

We want to continue providing our services, contributing to the local economy and supporting our families.

Thank you.

Francesco Arnest, followed by Sachi Watase, followed by Sarah Ivan Escobar.

APD refusing the application to enforce my protection order against those who tried to kill me is massive salt in the wound.

That same badge with a gun allegedly got bored one day, put a woman spread eagle on his car without cause, exposed her breast and fingered her inside her underwear in front of a church.

Telling her if she's nice to him, he won't arrest her.

Including, but not limited to the women who shape our city, gave him a three-day time out.

Put him back on the streets, resulting in his felony cases getting thrown out by the DA because you all can't be trusted to grade your own homework.

While breaking every rule in the book for the bad cops, never step foot in front of a judge in the matter of Mayor Keller's illegal law.

While you sit telling us we can't clap our hands, we can't snap our fingers.

How about no to fingering?

Why did you say yes to harboring bad caps from justice?

Why?

Why?

Sashi Watase, followed by Sarah Ivan Escobar, followed by Janet Sayers.

Sarah Ivan Escobar, followed by Janet Sayers, followed by Lisa Christofferson.

Good afternoon, Chairman and Counselors.

My name is Sara Ivon Escobar.

Everybody calls me Bonnie.

I'm the executive director for Enlace Comunitario, and I'm here to speak in favor of ordinance 2615, the safer places ordinance.

And I specifically want to speak to the piece that makes domestic violence shelters as well as sexual assault service coordinators, safe places in our community.

Clients have not been coming to our space because of their fear of ICE showing up.

And also because ICE can also set up outside our agency as a setup ordinance.

So this changes to the ordinance will make it safer for clients and safer for our communities.

Please vote yes.

Janet Sayers, followed by Lisa Christofferson, followed by Mariah Breeding.

Madam President, members of the council.

I'm here tonight just as Janet Sayers, not a member of anything, just a longtime resident of Albuquerque.

I am supporting the public safety tax, but my comments I wanted to say that I think this is an opportunity for the city to get its house in order as the city is the landlord for dozens and dozens of buildings.

I'm hoping that the bill, as it evolves, could point out have an inventory of all the buildings prior to 1980, built before 1980, and identify those big ticket items of renovation, roofs, HVAC, electrical, etc.

That's number one.

Number two, I would hope that it could prioritize repairing some of those buildings that are now 60, 70 years old.

And lastly, I just wanted to comment that hopefully the monies could also help open some of the underused buildings that are only open five days a week.

That does happen to include some libraries that are only open five days a week.

Thank you.

Lisa Christofferson, followed by Mariah Breeding, followed by Cesar Marquez.

Hello, my name is Dr.

Lisa Christophersson.

I reside in District 3, City Councilors.

I'm here because in Albuquerque, we believe in community and fairness and responsibility, and we take care of our neighbors.

And we expect our businesses and communities to do.

So I am asking last uh yesterday, a group of us went out in front of Frontier, and we had previously asked uh Frontier if they would consider not allowing uh individuals to linger in there for three, four hours, because they have a sign on the door that says no study groups, no groups can meet in there.

However, we have learned that ICE agents hang out in frontier for hours and hours, and not only are they hanging out drinking unlimited coffee with a military discount because they're not military, because our military who sign up to be military who serve, they serve respectively, and so I do not believe that I should be getting a military discount.

My father was uh uh in the Marines, also in the Air Force, all of my uncles were in the Army and the Air Force.

I have cousins who are in the Army and the Air Force, and I don't believe that I should be getting military discounts.

So we're boycotting Frontier till they change that.

Mariah Breeding, followed by Cesar Marquez, followed by Sean Chauncey.

Chancy, excuse me.

Good evening, Madam President, City Council members, hardworking city staff, and everyone in this extraordinary audience tonight.

I would like to address the principle behind the uh city council protocol that was employed in the AC 2505.

I do not wish to discuss the case, but I wish to make it perfectly clear that the way your protocol has either been written or interpreted, allows for no feedback at a city council member from actual affected members of the community.

We heard at length from the city council members, we heard at length from the appellant.

You can hear at length in any hearing that is conducted this way from city staff, from all of the various zoning hearings, but you cannot hear.

We are not allowed to speak.

The people who actually are affected 24-7 by this, you don't even know who of us are here.

And we never were communicated with, not the neighborhood council.

You can't be a safer city, which I so much support, and not practice this in your own individual business game.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Cesar Marquez, followed by Sean Chansey, followed by Thomas Stewart.

Hi.

Good evening, Madam Chair and members of the council.

My name is Cesar Marquez.

I live in district two, and I am the senior organizer with Common Cause New Mexico.

Thank you for the opportunity to speak.

Last week on March 9th, the FGO committee shut down the rank choice voting ordinance with a four to one vote with no real discussion and no valid reasons given.

And I have to say it plainly, this vote is an intentional choice to keep wasting taxpayer money.

We just spent 1.8 million dollars on a single runoff election.

You know, conservatives claim that they care about fiscal responsibility.

Well, spending 1.8 million dollars and avoidable runoffs is not it.

What makes this even uh more frustrating is that the hearing, a representative from the county clerk's office, uh the people who actually administer our elections came out in support and said that this would make their jobs easier.

As leaders, you owe it to the subject matter experts to at least have a real discussion, ask questions, and put reasons on the record.

So, well, given that we don't have any more time, uh Sean Chancey, followed by Thomas Stewart, followed by Joe Cardillo.

Good afternoon, madam president and family uh and council.

I just want to show support in our gross receipt tax bill that's up for tonight.

I please urge you guys to vote in consideration of that for the city workers.

Thank you.

Thomas Stewart, followed by Joe Cardillo, followed by Anami Dash.

Mr.

Cornelius, if we might want to ask for those names out there just in case, because I was just told by another counselor that some of the children.

No, okay, go ahead, proceed.

Thank you, Madam President.

Joe Cardillo, followed by Anami Das, followed by Justin Rogers, uh good evening, Madam President, counselors.

Uh pleasure to see you.

I'm here to speak in support of the Safer Spaces Ordinance.

Um, you know, I believe strongly that if if my neighbor's not safe, I'm not safe.

I'll say that again.

I believe strongly that if my neighbor is not safe, I'm not safe.

And that's one of the reasons that I actually have been to all of your districts in the last year and pick up trash.

Um, not it's not something I really talk about.

I just kind of like to check in and see how folks are doing, see what the state is of my neighbors.

And of course, I do that a little bit more regularly in my own neighborhood, as I think most people tend to do.

We look after our neighbors, but I think it's really important to look after and protect the people in our city and make sure that they're safe and that they're okay.

And if they're going to work, that they can go to work.

If they've got to take their kid to the daycare, they can do that.

If they've got at the grocery store to get food, they can do that.

And right now we're seeing a reckless and out of control federal government that simply doesn't respect the constitution or the human rights of our residents.

And so I think it's upon us to you know go further and do more for our residents to protect our neighbors and encourage this council to pass the safer spaces ordinance.

Thank you.

Anami Das, followed by Justin Rogers, followed by Joseph Fuhr.

Justin Rogers, followed by Joseph Fuhr, followed by Denise Fuhrer.

Okay, thank you, Madam President and members of the council.

My name is Justin Rogers.

I'm here for myself, but also as the board president of the Asian American Association of New Mexico.

Um, our board stands in support of O 2615, Safer Community Places Ordinance and all forms of abolition, dismantling, and shutting down operations of ice.

As people continue to be kidnapped out of their communities and sent to horrible detention camps for the crime of being considered not American enough.

I wanted to share a story about a previous time that happened here.

She was the last surviving Nisei, children of the Japanese immigrants from my grandfather's generation.

In 1942, when she was eight years old, my grandfather was 14.

The president issued orders that led to over 120,000 Japanese Americans being forcibly removed from their homes and locked up in internment camps.

However, my family was not part of this.

One reason is that Colorado governor Ralph Carr, a Republican, took a bold unpopular stand in favor of Japanese Americans' constitutional rights.

There's a book about him out there reading.

So I hope that you can show the same kind of uh minimal amount of courage as 1940s white Republican and protect our community's wise.

Thank you.

Joseph Ford.

Okay, there is not this is not gonna happen.

So we need to keep decorum.

Joseph Fore, followed by Denise Ford, followed by Simon Polakowski.

Good evening, Madam President and members of the Albuquerque City Council.

My name is Joseph Ford.

I'm a retiree on a fixed budget living near the Manzano Mesa Multi-Generational Center.

I'm speaking tonight because I am vehemently opposed to the GRT gross receipts increase being considered by city council.

The GRT is a regressive punishing tax that punishes senior citizens, fixed income citizens such as myself, and small businesses.

Affordability seems to be a hot topic you know today, and increasing our taxes will not make us more affordable.

I cannot envision any situation where the increase to the GRT is justifiable.

Um in 2019, I helped raise money to support your campaign for your first election.

Sir, please direct your comments to me to the Western.

Thank you so much.

I helped, I helped to elect people on this council, and now I stand here embarrassed thinking that they're going to betray citizens by raising taxes.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Denise Foor, followed by Simon Polakowski, followed by Angela Salas.

Good evening, Madam President and City Council.

My name is Denise Ford.

I am here to speak on the increase in the gross receipts tax.

I am opposed to the increase.

Since I retired and moved to Albuquerque 11 years ago, I have seen nothing but tax increases.

I have seen the city budget increase by more than 50% over the last eight years.

I have not seen any benefits from the increase.

Homelessness is rampant, businesses have closed their doors.

It would be difficult on all of those who have been retired.

And I believe this administration should consider cutting spending and stop wasting our taxpayer dollars on frivolous, unnecessary projects, and eliminate some administrative overhead.

Thank you for your time.

Simon Polakowski, followed by Angela Solas, followed by Debbie Reynolds.

Can you hear me?

You put me at the bottom.

Angela Salas, followed by Debbie Reynolds, followed by Grace Dukes.

Debbie Reynolds, followed by Grace Dukes, followed by Beth Roy.

Hello.

Madam President and Counselors, thank you for the good work you do for our city.

My name is Debbie Reynolds.

I'm a voter and a resident of Albuquerque for more than half my life.

I've never attended a city council meeting before.

What compels me this evening is my opposition to an increase in our tax rate.

It doesn't seem a good way to advance a project, a city amenity.

I think that traditionally we've gone through bond issues to fund those kinds of projects, and that's what I would recommend in this case.

The other point I would make is think of the single mothers.

Think of the retirees.

Think of the disadvantaged and the poor people.

They're the ones who bear the burden of a regressive GRT.

A mother who's trying to buy yet another pair of shoes for her children, or an elderly person who has to rent medical equipment or buy supplies.

Those are the people who will be impacted.

And often those people are not living in the district that will benefit greatly from this GRT.

Thank you.

Grace Dukes, followed by Beth Roy, followed by Lucy Arnett.

Good evening.

Tonight I'm here to express concerns for the way my unhoused neighbors are being treated by this administration and ask for action.

A recent ProPublica article found that under Mayor Keller's leadership, Albuquerque has increasingly criminalized conduct associated with homelessness.

It really seems like he's taking a page out of Darren White's playbook on this one.

The inhumane treatment of our neighbors has to end.

They are our neighbors.

None of them chose to be forced on the streets.

And this mayor seems to be more interested in the appearance of a well-run city than actually running the city well.

And so with that being said, I asked that the city council take immediate action and put in place a moratorium on the sweeps of encampments and unjust dealing of our unhoused neighbors.

They are our neighbors too.

Treat them like it.

Thank you.

Beth Roy, followed by Lucy Arnett, followed by Robert Gilbert.

Madam President, uh, first of all, I want to say I'm a retired professor, so I've never managed to speak in only one minute.

I'll do my best.

Um I wanted to speak to uh the transactions that happened.

Uh kind of a little bit of an uproar that happened in the March 2nd uh meeting.

Several other people have spoken to the today.

Uh and register my distress about one aspect of that uh interaction.

Um first of all, I'm very uh much want to congratulate you on having a regulation about respectful speech.

I uh was very much uh concerned when uh councilwoman Rogers invoked that uh at the time that she did.

I thought that was completely appropriate, and I was very glad it was in place for her to call on.

But I was distressed that so I'm a mediator as well, and I uh specialize in mediating organizations and communities around issues of race.

And the one thing I know above all is that white voices matter when there's been an incident of distressing disrespectful racist speech.

So I want to call on those of you council members who are white to stand with your council time of color.

Thank you so much these kinds of incidents here again.

Thank you.

Lucy Arnett, followed by Robert Gilbert, followed by Sarah Azebo.

Yes, good evening, um president and counselors.

I just very quickly, this is also my very first meeting, but I I have to say that I think the timing and maybe even the means of the funding for this um tax increase is not in the best interests of the city at this time.

While I support what was intended for the city, their budget has also increased over the last several years, but you're forcing every Albuquerque city taxpayer to adjust their budget to accommodate what the city was not able to adjust in their budget.

And at this particular time when we already know inflation is going to affect everybody for a variety of different reasons, none of which I'm blaming on you or anyone in the city.

I will say that I've seen a lot of people here who are gonna have a hard time.

And so I don't recommend that we pass approval of that bill.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Robert Gilbert, followed by Sarah Azebo, followed by David Sore Hadriger.

Hi, Madam President.

Um full disclosure, I am a solid waste employee.

Um I'm also a taxpayer.

And so I'm in favor of the uh GRT ordinance.

I think that the very small half a percentage point increase is something that I, as a consumer, am not gonna uh have an effect on me as a consumer, sorry.

Um but as a blue-collar worker, I think it's gonna help me, it's gonna benefit the departments I work with, especially because we have been in a wage um insecurity for quite some time.

So thank you for bringing this matter to your attention.

Thank you.

Uh Madam President, I see Sarah Azebo in Zoom, so Sarah, I'll get to you.

Um David Sor Hadledger, followed by Tad Nyaminski.

Madam President, members of the council.

First, thank you for your services, always.

Uh I am here in favor of ranked choice voting.

Uh, and as a former city council staffer from 25 years ago.

Back in my day, uh, we worked really hard to stretch every dollar and do everything we could to provide city services.

I'm always a little surprised when people vote in favor of spending an extra million six, and we don't have to do it.

Um, as a budget analyst, I would have come to you and said we can buy 21 police cars for that.

We can put 16,000 hours of police enforcement doing DWI sweeps or warrant enforcement.

We could buy 15 police officers.

We could buy 10.5 acres of open space near the bus gate.

We could fund more events for the Route 66.

So that's a budget analyst in there, but thanks so very much for your time.

Tad Niuminsky, followed by Jason Sanchez.

Thank you.

My name is Ted Nemeiski.

Well, this morning, at City Council office, I shall down with director got the involved of City Council office.

Because uh I said it a few things.

I won't be able to speak up last Robert's meeting last week.

So anyway, let me ask you.

The respect and racism.

What is races?

What is national origination?

I uh I am Hawaii race.

Isn't this clear enough?

What is my uh national origins?

Polish and I can go on and on about our constitutional rights.

Thank you, Mr.

Naminsky.

Um, I am hoping that um some of the comments that you made to a person of color this morning or this afternoon at City Council that you would really reconsider those comments as we're talking about race.

You can call the next speaker.

Jason Sanchez, followed by Todd Reed, followed by Eleanor Walther on Zoom.

That's that's your second warning.

Nope, I gave you a warning when you were speaking.

Go ahead and proceed.

My name is Jason Sanchez.

I work at Solid Waste as a commercial collections driver, and I am supportive of the Bill 2616, and I encourage all of you to vote yay on it.

I want to talk about something most people don't most people don't think about until it's too late.

Solid waste workers, the people who pick up the trash every week perform one of the most essential services in our city, yet they are often overlooked when it comes to fair pay, safe working conditions, and respect for the risk, they all take every single day.

Employee retention and refuse services is growing a challenge.

When workers when workers leave when workers leave because of low pay burnout, unsafe conditions, it creates a cycle where fewer employees must handle heavier workloads.

Many solid waste workers are being forced into overtime just to keep routes covered.

When overtime might sound like extra income in reality, it you guys.

Thank you.

Appreciate you being here.

Gentlemen, I'm gonna have to give everybody a first warning on that.

We cannot have any outbursts.

Thank you so much.

Todd Reed, followed by Eleanor Walter, followed by Nicole Finch.

Hi.

Good evening, counselors.

I'm here tonight to speak for the people of Albuquerque, especially those struggling to survive.

Let me be clear.

Taxes cannot be increased if they create a burden.

That is a constitutional limit.

Our citizens have natural rights, the rights to earn and keep the fruits of their labor.

Excessive excessive taxation violates those rights.

It turns government from a servant into an oppressor.

And here in New Mexico, the quant consequences are real.

Our state has one of the highest poverty rates in the nation.

Nearly one in five residents lives below the poverty line.

Raising taxes now will push struggling families deeper into hardship.

It will hit seniors, workers, and small businesses hardest.

This is not leadership, it's punishment.

There is a better way.

Cut waste, spend efficiently, encourage investments, grow jobs, strengthen families.

That is real fiscal responsibility.

That is common sense.

Albuquerque deserves leaders who respect the law and respect the constitution and the people.

Thank you.

Good evening, Council President and Councillors.

I'm here to speak about Amendment P, the wall and fence amendment introduced at the February 18th meeting.

This amendment was introduced more than six hours into the meeting, discussed for less than eight minutes, and there was no opportunity for public comment.

Major changes to the ideas should not be rushed through when residents are unable to review or respond.

The reasoning behind this amendment was that it was unfair for one homeowner to be cited when neighbors have not been cited.

But the answer to inconsistent enforcement is consistent enforcement, not weakening the rules for everyone.

Allowing violations to justify more violations undermines the entire ordinance.

Amendment P also removes basic public notice requirements.

It eliminates mailed notice to neighbors within 100 feet and removes the requirement to post a sign.

That means people may never know a variance of being requested next door.

It also lowers the standard for great granting of variants from 20% to 10% and doesn't even require that the nearby non-conforming walls were properly permitted.

Um in other words, existing violations could be used to justify new ones.

Please reconsider amendment P.

Thank you.

Nicole Finch, followed by Ian Colburn, followed by Sonia Romero Achi.

Madam President, Counselors, my name is Nicole Finch, and I'm a resident of District 9.

I'm strongly in favor of the safer community places ordinance.

The city of Albuquerque shouldn't provide any of our scarce resources to federal immigration enforcement.

Good evening.

Um Madam President, Councilman.

Um raised the vote that is early out of the beginning of this meeting tonight on rain choice voting, also known as instance runoff.

Um, my understanding is that we're gonna see it again at the next council meeting.

Um, this comment is primarily for the other five uh council people who voted against that, and everyone in the audience um who is uh against uh city spending waste and also sick of seeing their council people uh not um listen to their voices.

Rank choice voting instant runoff improves our democracy as well as saves our city money.

Um it improves our democratic processes by weakening the two-party system and removing the the spoiler vote option.

Um this will be uh an improvement for our city politics.

Um it is not too complicated, it is not uh cost more money, it saves money.

Um this is council people.

I implore you to get educated and uh uh people in the audience to call your council people and and and push them to learn about the benefits that RCB and Runoff will bring Albuquerque.

Um thank you so much, and I'll see you guys at that meeting uh next time when it comes to a vote.

Thank you again.

Support off the right choice story.

Sonia Romero Altre, followed by Sarah Azebo.

Hello, can you hear me okay?

We can hear you, please proceed.

Great.

Um, good evening, members of City Council.

My name is Dr.

Sonia Romero Autry, and I am a longtime educator in Albuquerque Public Schools and the elementary vice president of the Albuquerque Teachers Federation.

I'm speaking tonight on behalf of our President Ellen Bernstein and the thousands of educators we represent.

I am here again to express our strong support for the safer community places ordinance.

For nearly three decades, I have worked with children in our schools.

And when a child walks into a classroom, they carry their whole world with them.

Their curiosity, their dreams, their worries, and yes, their fears.

As educators, our very first responsibility is to ensure that our students feel safe.

To create spaces where children feel secure enough to learn to grow and imagine their futures.

But when families are afraid, when the possibility of immigration enforcement near schools or community spaces becomes part of a child's reality, that fear does not stay outside of school doors.

We need your help.

As educators, we knew that when we chose this profession, there would be challenges.

Challenges create fear for children, and families do not that families do not need.

Protect our most valuable children, and it will take all of us.

Too often broken system create harms that we as educators cannot fix alone.

I have seen too many moments where young children are suddenly gone without explanation.

Or families spend their send their students to school, unsure if they will see them again at the end of the day.

In those moments, families are placing enormous.

Thank you.

Sarah Azebo.

In 2024, 127 such individuals were memorialized.

In 2025, 144.

One minute nor two minutes is enough to say all their names, but I speak today to remind you that each of these individuals and each person who is still left to live outside in this moment is our collective responsibility.

It is your responsibility as elected city leaders to make a plan, invest in housing and work to prevent harm.

Hammer the homeless, hate the homeless with 311 calls for solid waste, hide the homeless in a jail that serves as a shelter or a former jail reshell reshaped as a shelter.

These are not solutions.

These are not attitudes, policies, or actions to uphold or promote as city leaders.

Yet ordinance 02614 was introduced this month under the guise of safety zones that essentially authorize more displacements, clearing people from sidewalks.

According to the ProPublica report in 2025, people were charged 1,256 times for obstructing sidewalks, nearly six times the number of cases in the previous eight years combined.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Madam President, that concludes general public comments.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you all for being here.

We are going to take a break and we'll return at 8.05.

Okay, everyone, we are back.

We are now well, actually, we're on final actions item 14, but before we do that, I am uh CFO Martinez has uh a comment she wants to make.

Thank you, Madam President.

Since I made a point to correct the record earlier about the public safety tax, I feel the need to correct the record again, which is that I misspoke Triple H receives about 14 million dollars of the growth of the public safety tax and of that amount.

Um YFS received receives about 700,000.

So I believe less than half a percent of the funds.

So I just wanted to correct that on that.

To correct the record.

Thank you.

Thank you, Ms.

Martinez.

I appreciate that.

So Councilor Baca Ambassan O 16.

Madam President, 016 imposing a municipal gross receipts tax and providing for the use of revenues for municipal capital projects, including land including related debt service and municipal operations.

I move a due pass.

There's a motion by Councillor Bassan.

Is there a second?

I'll make a second.

Madam President, I normally don't read, I normally just speak, but I want to make sure to fill people in.

I've had a couple conversations, and I think that it's important to give a little bit of the outline of the timeline and what's happened and how things have gone over the last two weeks, and maybe some reasoning as to why.

And what I'm hoping uh the council will be able to entertain discussing beyond this.

So uh I want to start by saying I've been working on following through on a commitment I've made for to the district for for six years.

It is a project desired for over 20 years and part of a master plan for Albuquerque.

What began as something for a smaller area has turned into a vision that will benefit families around all of Albuquerque and now even the state of New Mexico.

It has the promise to be an economic driver in place for all to utilize and enjoy.

Through dedication of voters, this council and administration, APS, the state legislature, and governor, it has come to life.

But due to many reasons, this project still needs more funding to ensure it is not simply half completed.

One of those was to consider raising the GRT and bonding the revenues in order to obtain the capital funds.

However, if I were to ever stick my neck out and go against something I typically would not support, it was going to have to be the grand slam and get more than just one project done.

This effort was going to have to be big enough that it would benefit and solve some of the problems we're facing citywide and close massive gaps.

This council has been discussing often.4875% with no other information or explanation.

This equates to one half penny, less than one half penny for every dollar spent in Albuquerque.

If we defer or delay this bill passed tonight, we will have to wait at least another year to see the rewards for our our efforts.

This vision is what can be found in O2621 and R2613 for all to see.

These bills have been introduced for holdover so the council can amend and agree on any changes necessary and if we pass, so we can maximally achieve each of our district for each of our districts.

Although these bonds will be enough to deliver on my commitment, it is not enough for me to ask for this level of support or worth raising taxes only for one thing.

R2613 is the heart of what made me willing to take this leap at all.

This resolution has been created with deep consideration of what we've been struggling to achieve for many years.

Topics like wage increases, fee reductions, maintenance of our existing facilities, and how are we going to operate any new ones.

Even with what many say is a bloated budget, I was unable to find a way to significantly decrease it when I was committee of the whole chair for two years.

It wasn't for lack of effort, but also it isn't simple, as simple as an across the board percentage decrease or what I may be willing to cut out, might not be supported by one of the counselors, and they may refuse to cut it.

We have information from the completed class and comp study and have yet to fully implement it or make significant progress on ensuring our lowest paid city workers are raised up to receive comparable and even competitive salaries so they will stay working for our city because they are supported as they deserve to be supported.

And this includes our public safety and labor employees.

We've also debated about the importance of improving our parks while also defending the need to increase these same promise salaries.

We've heard that we should stop increasing fees at city facilities, which the public is already paying for with these taxes.

We want to support our growing economy and have talked a lot about permits, how they take too long to obtain, they're too pricey, and something should be done about it.

We have compromised and made only some small progress with these deliberations, but I think they're only sprinkles of what we need and what we can produce.

Speaking of sprinkling support, I understand the state has high gas and oil revenues impacting all of us.

And as grateful as I am to the state for what they do for our city, it's not delivering on closing the gaps and completing projects.

Another large fact is that our entire city pays property taxes and behavioral health taxes to Bernalillo County.

Since Albuquerque is in Bernalillo County, the question to think about is how much of Albuquerque's tax payments are coming back directly to us in the form of financial support from the county.

I have yet to have substantial, if any funds come from the county to help improve roadways, build projects, and help with some other pressing needs in my district.

I believe county funds are mostly spent on the unincorporated areas.

Although these areas need support too, why doesn't our city see more benefit from the dollars being spent back on us?

We're paying into something we hardly get returned.

The proposal before us tonight will make sure all the revenues received with this increase in Albuquerque are reinvested in Albuquerque.

This GRT increase will take half of the revenues and dedicate it to creating, approving, and appropriating separate plans to raise up our valued workers, determine operating cost plans, and reduce city facility and permit fees.

The resolution directs the administration to create separate plans for each and bring them to the council for approval.

All the revenues will be reserved until these plans are reviewed and approved by council.

The administration will not be permitted to spend them until there is a majority agreement and transparency.

I'm not proud to sponsor a tax increase.

In fact, it's the last thing I ever thought I would do.

But after careful thought, I truly believe this will allow us to close some of the massive gaps our city is facing.

It will allow us to move forward and become a better version of what we have.

The.4875 proposal was specifically selected because it would get all of the above done in a big way.

Some have suggested even collecting a higher percentage, but my goal was to find an amount that would complete my promised project while improving many of the other issues we continuously face.

If we reduce the GRT percentage collected, it won't be something I can support because if we're not, if we're going to initiate any increase, I hope this democracy will ensure no one side gets everything, but everyone gets something.

We could send this to the voters, but I believe in this effort and think we will see the benefit of this dedication almost immediately.

I'm willing to risk a lot and I'm committed to this decision.

I see no benefit in any delays and hope you all will support this visionary effort like the quality of life tax and what it did to transform Albuquerque.

I do sincerely hope that you will pass this bill tonight.

If we don't do it now, we could do it later.

But if we're willing to do it later, it only means we miss the opportunity that is directly before us today, and we delay these possibilities for at least another 18 months.

I hope this brings a lot of clarification for you because it's been very difficult not to meet with everyone due to the quorum regulations.

I truly have been dedicated to thinking about all the angles and what would benefit everybody's goals that I've heard about over the past several years.

And I really tried hard to build a package that would be largely impactful based on the information from each of you and what you speak about prioritizing.

Thank you for letting me do that.

And I would like to please ask if Counselor Baca has anything to add for the opening.

Yes, he has his hand up, Counselor Backa.

Thank you, Madam President.

Thank you, Counselor Basan, for your opening words.

Last year I offered a similar proposition because we raised taxes for Capitol.

I call it the quality enhancement fund at that time.

And because I firmly believe like all cities and Albuquerque itself, you know, when we invested ourselves, that's when we actually make things happen.

You know, it was I don't know, 25 years back, whatever it was when the final park was built, when the Explorer museum, the loon museum, the all our open space, the things that we look at today and take for granted like this is what makes Albuquerque great.

That was done in this same ad 25 years ago.

Because we invested in ourselves.

Consistently, we think about raising our economy, attracting businesses.

It's not just a matter of creating a fiscal requirement for businesses, it's also bringing those families.

You know, if someone's gonna bring their business here, if someone's gonna open it up, they're asking their employees to take a chance on Albuquerque.

They're asking their families to bring their kids to take a chance on Albuquerque.

You know, if we we need health care.

We know our legislature did a fantastic job this last year to help our uh bring increase our our our level of doctors and other healthcare professionals.

This is part of us.

Every time, you know, when they come out here to look, it's not just about is the fiscal environment okay.

Can I raise my family here?

We will have the same opportunities here for my family as I will have in other cities.

And right now that's not the case.

And so we need to invest in ourselves to really make this happen.

On top of that, we're in a situation where the federal government, the current federal government, has started to take away funding.

We all know that we're at a loss of funds because of that, and likely we'll have the loss of funds for the next few years.

For no other reason, other than we take care of our community.

We care about everyone who's a part of our community because of that.

We've lost money.

And so this is a part of that as well.

We're having to make that balance, which we should not have to make, not by any means.

Under no circumstances should the situation occur.

And yet here we are.

And so I believe in investing in ourselves, doing what we need to do to put ourselves forward to attracting to creating the world that the Albuquerque needs to bring businesses, healthcare professionals, take care of the families that are already here.

Um, it's not an easy choice by any means.

I I agree with that.

I'm part of that as well.

I have kids here.

But I think this is this is the right thing.

It's happened before, and it's it is what made Albuquerque great right now.

And so I I want to thank Council Bassad for standing aside with me.

Um, Mayor Keller has said that he's he's in support of this.

Um, and and everybody else.

So uh I urge everyone's support.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Um, Councilor Bacca, I think we will go ahead before we go to public comment, we'll go ahead and move the floor amendment.

So um you have your packet in front of you, and it's uh floor amendments A through E, what we have currently.

So we will start with um floor amendment labeled A in your packet, which will become one.

Counselor People Corn.

Madam President, I'll move floor amendment number one.

It's on page three line two, amend section four dedication as follows.

Dedication revenues from community enhancement municipal gross receipts tax shall be used for municipal capital projects and related bond debt service as applicable, including but not limited to design construction, acquisition improvement, renovation, rehabilitation, and equipping or furnishing thereof, and for general municipal operational purposes and group, and I am proposing to add in exclusively in the form of employee compensation.

Move that.

There's a motion in two seconds.

Um we'll go with um counselor Tayus.

So is there any discussion on the amendment?

Councilor Bassan.

I am in full support of this amendment.

Uh I really mean it when I say that I'm trying to find a gap to close when it comes to increase increasing city wages, especially for the lowest paid earners in the city.

Two years ago and three years ago, I was I think it was those two and three years ago, I was committee of the whole chair, and I did the tiered approach where we gave the lowest paid earners a higher percentage, and then another tier above that, a lower percentage, but still more.

And eventually, when you got to some of the top dollar earners in the city, they didn't get that same increase.

We need to make sure to close the gap on the class and comp study.

We need to make sure to truly put our money where our mouth is.

I am in support of this.

Um, and as proposed, I will say I can't support the other two amendments that you have, counselor, because as proposed, if this passes, we will be able to give 56 million dollars in compensation to our employees based off of if it sticks at the point 4875 and is 5050.

Any other discussion?

Anyone online now?

So, with that, um, to close, council people corn.

Thank you, madam president.

So um, I I do want to thank Councilor Basson for her openness to this.

Um, we talked a lot about or what we heard about was what's in this other bill that council will be hearing, and I'm very excited to see that.

But what's before us tonight is literally what I just read to you, which is that it's gonna be spent on capital or bonding or uh operations, and that's the only detail that's before us tonight, and I think it's really important that we say specifically in this enabling legislation that all of those operating funds are gonna go to pay the people who actually keep our city running.

I've had a lot of conversations um on this bill in the last two weeks.

I'm sure everybody has and two OT, every single person I've spoken with when I said I understand that you don't want a tax increase, but what if it paid our staff?

What if it got them to the right place from that class and comp study that was quite frankly finished when I took office and we haven't implemented it?

And I have not had one single person say to me that they don't want that and that they wouldn't be willing to pay a small tax increase to cover that.

And so um I just urge us to in this enabling legislation not rely on what's in future bills and future things that we might consider as a body, but in this document that we are considering tonight, say that all operational funds will be given to our employees for employee compensation.

I did the math um with some help.

Um that our employees out of our 1.5 billion dollar budget, our employees make up a large percentage of that.

It's 764 million dollars and change just to pay our employees for the amazing work they do, and they are not getting paid enough.

And so with that, I urge your support.

Thank you, madam clerk.

Councilor Bacca.

Yes.

Councilor Bassan, yes, Vice President Champlain, yes, Councilor People Corn, yes.

Counselor Grapp.

Yes, Councilor Lewis, yes, Councilor Rogers.

Yes.

Councilor Teis, yes, President Penya, yes, passes unanimously.

Thank you.

So then now we have floor amendment labeled B in your packet will now become floor amendment number two, Councilor People Korn.

Thank you, Madam President.

Floor amendment number two is on page three, line two, and then section four dedication.

Um we have it on the screen.

So we are currently we do not have any allocation of how the funds would be split up between capital and operating.

And so I am proposing in this document tonight that we are going to vote on tonight that we make a 30-70 split, 30 for capital projects that can be bonded to provide funding for some of those large-scale projects that councillor Bassan talked about, but 70% of it should be reserved for general municipal operations, which as we just passed, includes only our staff and making sure that every single person who works for the city is paid in the range that they should be paid in, so that we can retain staff and show that we value them.

I do think that I've seen since I put this in the um one drive last week.

I have seen that there is further legislation that's been approved um proposed by a councilor Bassan that has a 50-50 split, and I just have to say that I think that that is entirely too much for capital.

Um I have very big concerns that um many of the things that I heard counselor um Baca talking about could really come true.

What if we lose more of our federal funding?

What if we are not able to continue the services that we have in our city?

And what if we spend all of that money on capital projects?

I have a very big concern about that.

In this time of uncertainty, we do not know what's coming.

We do not know if we're going to be able to continue to pay our staff anything moving forward if we don't find a way to button up our operating expenses.

And so this 70-30 split to me makes a lot of sense.

And I'm sorry, I forgot to move it.

Move the floor amendment to there's a motion in a second by counselor Tayas.

I was asking.

So thank you, Counselor People Corn.

I think I see Councillor Baca's hand up.

Yes, thank you, Madam President.

Uh quick question for our staff.

Uh, since this is specifically for operational purposes of the previous amendments, it wouldn't be operating stripped for salaries.

A verbage standpoint, does this actually work or does council itself out?

Okay.

Madam President, Councilor Bacca, this amendment would build upon the amendment that was just passed to add language to the end of this section to say that the general municipal operational purposes will be exclusively in the form of employee compensation.

So 30% would go to that purpose.

Sorry, 70%, 70.

Okay, okay, thank you.

Thank you.

So while I I appreciate Counselor Corn's our people are support acid to accomplish your mission without your people, um this quote is quite a bit too much.

Um because you know, for my own opinion, obviously.

Um our city is one just it's it's everything, it's our community, it's our people, it's everything that's there in the capital portion.

Um if you take that out, you take away kind of the essence of the bill that uh councillor Bassan and I have put together.

So I I personally cannot support this amendment, but thank you.

Thank you, Councilor Backa.

Counselor Bassan, Madam President, I uh I said I said it before uh that I'm not gonna be able to support a 70-30, but the proposal for a 50-50 right now at this rate will garner 56 million dollars in operating, which would be for employee compensation.

And I guess I I've heard plenty of stuff about you know the pool and how that's not the one thing that should matter, but I've also heard on this council, and I agree with a lot of it, that our roads need improvement, and that's considered capital.

So if we want to be able to invest in things like that too, not just buildings, not just you know, not just my project, that's where to me we've talked about road, we get a regular update now about it.

And so, how are we going to close that gap when we're behind?

And so I am hoping that uh that we can keep the 50-50 because I do think that there are some significant needs on both sides, and I'm hoping that we can see that difference.

Thank you, Councilor Bassan.

Counselor Rogers.

Thank you, Madam President.

I just have some questions um around the numbers for the percentages.

So, my first question is for the administration.

Um, I know we've been going back and forth on numbers of what the actual cost will be to bring employees up to the correct percentile, and I just wanted to talk through some of those numbers to put it into perspective to help me see if this 30-70 split will actually get what we need for our employees.

So, first question is how many employees do we have to do the work to move them to the 25th percentile?

Madam President, Councilor Rogers, um, if we look at our study from Evergreen and the proposal that they laid out for us, in which they provided um evaluation um for, and just to note that the implementation was um projected to start in FY25.

Um, when we look at those um projections it to move folks to the 25th percentile within our market, we have 1,153 employees currently projected for the implementation of that um uh compensation move.

Okay, thank you, Madam President.

And then how much how about to how many employees would we need to bring up to the 50 percentile?

Uh Madam President and um counselor Rogers, um it looks uh okay.

Sorry, looking at the wrong table.

Um the projections at the time of the completion of their evaluation was that we had 2,830 employees that we would need to move to move them, get them to the 50th percentile of the market pay for like positions within um Albuquerque and other like employers.

Okay, and the total cost to bring everybody up, all of those employees, what would that be?

Um, Madam President and Counselor Rogers, the um the high-end projection to move everyone to the 50th percentile, including a market adjustment, so that uh you know, with this to study, it's important to note that if as you move individuals or employee groups to the 50th percentile, we also have to adjust for the fact that the market is going to adjust at the same time.

So accounting for a 2% market adjustment at the same time allows us to and moving folks to the 50th percentile, which is 2,830 employees with benefits calculated into that because pay and benefits are tied to each other, it's 25,400.

I'm sorry, 25,442,535 dollars is the approximation.

Okay, and so what I did on that form that you sent me.

Thank you for doing the work because for me, I can't first of all making decisions this huge for my district because this is a regressive tax, which means it's gonna hit folks who are in who are the lowest earners, including our employees.

Um, and so when I added all of those meetings up, I've got almost 43 million dollars.

And so my question is what is the 30, 70 split of the revenue based on this?

Um, and I don't know who can answer this for me, but um, because we've gotten several different numbers on what would this would generate as far as dollars, and then what would be the 30 percent and the 70 percent split?

So, in other words, at 70 percent, could we make sure everybody gets up to the 50th percentile with the 2% cola um 43 million dollars?

Would that do it with the 70-30 split?

Madam President, if I can answer that one for her, um, so I I you know part of the problem with this proposal is that none of this has been really um clearly calculated, and so um I had a um briefing with council services staff last week because again, no through no fault of her own, but the sponsor is not able to talk to me about this bill because of the open meetings act.

So I don't want it to sound like she was not willing to talk to me, she's literally not able to.

Um, and so we had a meeting and it had a lot of questions, and there were very few answers because we don't have a lot of the data on this.

So over the weekend I worked with um a local economist, Kelly O'Donnell.

I think most folks know her.

Um, she helped me determine kind of what numbers I think are coming out of this tax.

Um, and so I'm gonna tell you the numbers that I think, and then folks can you know give their numbers.

Uh, but from our best guess, and I will point out that she is a PhD in economics and I am a master's in economics.

Um, we think the tax would at this level would generate about 119 million a year.

I hear a little bit different numbers everywhere, so totally fine.

But if you believe my 119 number, um, and then 70 percent of that would be 83.3 million.

And so I want to point out that that is not just to get staff up to the class and comp implementation now, it is to pay for staff moving forward.

Um, I've very grave concerns that we do not have a dedicated funding source to pay for staff, and in the world that we are living in where federal funding could be taken at any moment, um, where the state revenue could be down dramatically because we rely 100% almost exclusively on oil and gas.

So there are a lot of unknowns in our in our world right now, and this would be a known that that money, whatever that amount is, that amount right now, if with the amount that's on the bill right now, would be 83.3 million that would be dedicated to paying staff exclusively every year that would allow us to get everybody up to where they need to go.

It would allow us to give them those colas that they deserve every single year, and quite frankly, it might allow us to actually hire some people to do things like staff our libraries and clean up our parks, which are things that we've heard a lot about on this dais.

We're not doing a great job at some of those things.

We don't have enough permanent employees.

We're relying on temp employees, and so with that amount of money, we would have a dedicated funding source.

In my mind, it would be 83.3 million per year for 20 years to actually provide that known quantity of funding for staff.

So thank you, Madam President.

Thank you for that, Counselor Feeblecorn.

So but here so we said exclusively for staff, and but here it says the general municipal operation purposes.

So can any of this 70% be spent on, let's say, gateway operations?

Because council or administration have not planned for how do we onboard a lot of money to our budget for the gateway network.

So can any of this 70% 83.3 million be spent on that?

Madam President, no, we just passed an amendment that says that operational funds are exclusively for employee compensation, and so this would build up on that prior amendment.

And so all operation funds would be spent on employee compensation if this if this proposal before us passes.

Okay.

So then I think the biggest question then is how are we going to pay for the gateway network if we're not able to use some of this for operations, which probably should have asked that on the last amendment.

But I think that's my concern.

I think our job is to make sure we can cover paying our people well, but also making sure the vital services that we brought online are taken care of.

So that still leaves a major question about our operating budget, especially when I know how much we need to onboard to that operation budget.

But thank you.

That answers my question about that.

And then I just have a question for the administration.

Based on the numbers that we just went over, that thank you for working to get us those because it helped me put things in perspective.

Maybe it's not a question.

I think it's just the maybe more of a statement that you know we should have already been planning for our employee comp compensation once we had that plan and making sure we have a five-year plan on how to operationalize all of that.

And it's just really hard for me to make decisions with such little time and not all of the information to make good sound decisions, especially when we're frankly asking the employees of the city to pay for this race for themselves, right?

Like that's how I see it is um and you know, for some other projects.

Um, and we have over 6,000 employees of the city that will be fronting the bill for their rates.

Um, and so I think it's just I'm the only counselor probably right now that's living in poverty.

I can imagine spending another dime for what I need, much less paying for my own raise if I was still a city employee.

So this one's really hard because we just don't have enough time to be thoughtful, get all of the information so we can make really good decisions.

But thank you all for trying to get us what you could.

Dr.

Single.

Madam President, thank you, Councilor Rogers.

I just wanted to correct one thing in when you mentioned that you added the numbers together.

The number that final number that I gave you, which was 25 uh million four hundred and forty-two thousand five hundred and thirty-five.

That is um, if we were just to make one move to everyone, everyone inclusive to the 50th percentile.

So that already includes everyone getting to the 25th percentile, that number number is inclusive, it is not in addition to the previous number.

So I just wanted to make sure that was clear.

Thank you, Madam President.

I think it wasn't clear because the number of positions are different.

So what I was told when I went through this with your staff was that we've already done some work to bring folks up to the percentile, which is why the 25th percentile is 1,153, and the 50th percentile is more employees than 2,830.

So that's why I added those two numbers together for each of those boxes, because I was told we were already did work to bring some people up to the 25th percentile, which is why those position numbers didn't were different, right?

So, but again, I think that's the point is we haven't had enough time to flush this information out and make sure it's accurate because I you know, with all due respect, we received two rounds of numbers from your team just in the last couple of days, and so again, I'm making very hard decisions for my district and the people who are already struggling, um, including city employees that we know can't afford homes, uh bus driver who was getting food boxes.

So I understand critically the need to make sure our employees pay more.

It's just really hard for us to ask them to do that by paying more in GRT.

So thank you for that clarification.

Thank you, Dr.

Single.

Thank you, madam president.

Um, then just for I want to make sure we're giving all the information as clear as possible.

So if we're moving everyone to the to the 50th percentile, the 1153 employees that we need to move uh to the 25th percentile would be also going to the 50th percentile.

So that's why the numbers are shifting.

We have employees that are between between the 20 fifth percentile and the 50th percentile, so they wouldn't be included in that 25th percentile.

So I I just want to make sure that the reason the numbers are different is based upon the 6,000 different employees, which is not 6,000 different pay um uh bans, but that is why we end up with different numbers.

But they 1,100 employees that we would bring to the 25th percentile.

If we skip that step and just go to the 50th, they're included in the 2800 employees.

And then second, I just wanted to mention that we did implement right away when the Evergreen study was complete to do uh what we could to bring everyone to the minimum in their pay scales at the time that employees that existed at the time, and or we worked with our collective bargaining um uh units so that they understood exactly what employees needed to uh were within that and for their negotiations and their pay um uh plans when they negotiated.

So that was our first step that we did accomplish in that first year, um, and we did not accomplish our next step.

Thank you.

Thank you, Dr.

Singles.

So I don't see any more hands up or any counselors, so counselor people corn to close.

Thank you, Madam President.

Um, so I I just want to clarify because we heard you know, let's leave it the way it is.

Well, the way it is before us tonight is that there is absolutely no breakdown.

It is 119 or 130 or whatever number you choose to believe, um that is the amount, and it can be broken up in any way, shape, or form between capital projects bonding and operations.

We now have at least said that anything that goes to operations has to go to staff, which is great.

I think that's really important.

But before us tonight is something that has absolutely no part of it that says anything about what percentage will be used for what.

And so I personally think if we're thinking about a um tax that's going to raise 119-ish million dollars for um couple of decades, we should have something in this enabling language that tells the city of Albuquerque and the residents of Albuquerque what those funds will be used for.

And I do think that a 30, 70 percent split is a fair one.

70 percent going to operate our city is a very, very important thing.

Um we have a lot of uncertainty, and we have a lot of staff that relies on us.

Um 30 percent for capital projects is still quite a lot of money.

Um, and I think one of the problems that we've had in the past years with our our bonding process that several people from the front from the community mentioned, is that we all have to grab some something for ourselves, and so our capital bonding process is a little bitty bit here and a little bitty bit there.

Um, that is because we haven't prioritized.

That is not something that the citizens should um pay for.

So I'm not taking it to zero.

I'm not proposing that we spend no money on capital projects, but I think a 70-30 split is the appropriate split given all of the unknowns that are in this bill and that are happening in our world right now.

Urger support.

Thank you, madam clerk councilor Backa.

Councilor Passad, no Vice President Champagne Yes Councillor People Corn, yes, Councillor Grout Councillor Lewis, yes Councillor Rogers, yes, Councillor Tayas.

Yes, President Penyon.

No passes on a six-three but so we are now on to floor amendment labeled C in your packet, which will now become floor amendment number C, Councilor People Corn.

Thank you, Madam President.

I'm gonna move floor amendment number three on page two line 11.

Umend section one that has the point four eight seven five percent, amend that to point one two seven five percent, and I'll move that amendment.

Second thank you, madam president.

So this is you know, this is the kind of the meat of the of the discussion tonight.

Uh 0.4875 by my best guess is gonna generate about 119 million dollars a year.

Um, with the two amendments that came before this, that does give you some um clarification of how it's gonna be spent, and we know it will be spent um in a in a majority way on our staff, which is very very important.

Um, but I argue that we do not need that much.

Um, what we really need is to pay our staff up to the level that is in the class and comp study, including COLAS, and that can be done for a much smaller amount.

Uh I I've heard from so many constituents that are very concerned, a half a percent is a lot of money for many people, and I'm gonna be real honest, it's not a lot of money for me.

I probably won't notice it, but so many people in our community will notice it, and it will hurt them dramatically.

I have folks who live in my district who are literally unable to make rent this month, and if we take any more money out of their pockets, it is just a travesty.

Um, and so I want to get our employees paid, I want to get some money for capital projects that are important that have been happening.

You know, I I there is one project that you all heard about that has been fully funded, I know at least three, four times.

We do need to get those completed, but I don't think we need to do it on the back of the poorest people in our community, and so I am just asking for us to consider a lower amount so that we can do all the things that we all want to do, but at a level that will not so negatively impact so many members of our community.

Thank you, Councilor Basan, followed by by Vice President Champagne, Madam President.

Uh well, I guess for some it's a move well played.

And I said at the beginning that I won't support this if I can't get my project done.

I am sorry to all of the employees, but if we don't keep the 50-50 split, and if this package can't be a little something for everyone and not one thing for everyone, I'm not going to be able to support it.

I will vote for this decrease, making it a minimal tax increase, and then I plan on voting against this bill because I don't think that that is what this democracy was designed to do.

I understand a lot of the concerns, but at the same time, if you're going to take away some of the meat for a little bit of everyone, and I understand I've heard the arguments and I get it, but I will say that while we're talking about it and while everyone's attention's on it, whether you're Republican or whether you're Democrat, I'm really glad that we're talking about it.

I'm really glad that this is a concern because this clearly indicates a larger problem in our city, and I sure hope that you all find a better way to do this during the budget pilot process because I've definitely heard some solutions that I wasn't able to do when I was there.

So I really wish that there was a better way to do this.

I wish that you all could have seen a little bit of that, but if you reduced it to the 70-30 and now you want to reduce it to a one-eighth, that won't get it to where the fundamental if I'm going to stick my neck out and raise taxes, it's not gonna do it for me at this amount with that dollar amount.

Thank you, Madam President.

I just need some clarification.

The the previous one was we we said it was a percentage, 70%, based off of the 84.8475, and we put out numbers about how much that'll generate, and we advocated and we passed that based on that percentage will generate X amount of dollars, and now we're gonna cut that percentage in half, so it's not gonna generate the same amount of dollars that we just advocated for.

How does that math work?

Madam President, so um, this reduction would be about one quarter of what was proposed, and so it would take it to around 30 million dollars a year for the two decades.

Um that 70 percent of that is 21 million dollars a year, um, which gets us all we needed to bring all of the employees up to the compensation level in the comp class and comp study, and has a little left over for capital.

So, what you just advocated for saying that 30 percent because we're moving forward is now being reduced some more.

Yes, Madam President, the percentages are the percentages of whatever the total um tax raised is, and so I'm just asking now that we you know be somewhat reasonable and lower the tax so we don't harm people quite as much.

Thank you.

Councilor Rogers.

Thank you, Madam President.

Counselor February answered my question, and I was just writing down the revenue that would take what we would get with this this current amount.

She answered that.

Thank you.

Thank you, Councilor Basan.

Madam President, I just want to say one more time for those of you that are here that I have been talking to about the lowest earners in the city.

I had a proposal that's written for everyone to see that would have gotten you 56 million dollars a year in compensation.

Are there any additional questions?

Councilor Bacca.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you for my purpose.

Um I think this this amendment would uh essentially strip away the spirit of this bill, a bill that works to approve all aspects of our city.

So it's good.

Um I don't support this amendment, honestly.

I'd even suggest we withdraw the bill after this.

Thank you.

Thank you, Councilor Bacca.

I will say that I will not support this amendment either.

This was kind of an exercise, and you're gonna get a lot of money into the reduction of you're gonna get a lot less money.

So, you know, I can't support anything like this.

So um, with that, um, Councilor People Corn, too close.

Thank you, Madam President.

Um I don't think we should be voting on any bills up here because we're gonna get a lot of money.

So let me just be really clear that we should be working to improve services by the city, and that means supporting our staff.

Um, the proposal before you would still get all the money that we need to pay our staff what they are worth.

Um, what it doesn't have is a ginormous amount of money for individual counselors' projects, and I feel that loss as well.

I have projects that I definitely want to have happen, um, big projects that would transform my district, but I am not willing to transform my district on the back of poor people who live in our community.

So I think that I will just go through some numbers here because I want to be really clear.

Without this amendment, um, based on my calculations this weekend, um, we are gonna be individuals, individual households in the city of Albuquerque would be spending about 214.83 cents more a year per household.

That is a lot of money for most households in our community with the proposed reduction that's before us right now, that gets us to a little over 50 dollars, which is still a lot of money for many households, but I believe that that is something that most households can um can overcome, and I've had many conversations with people who are low-income people who have said I would find a way to make that $50 payment because I want to make sure that the staff of the city of Albuquerque are paid.

So that is the impact that we are trying to reduce.

Also, the number of businesses, and this is per area's website and and assumptions that we were making this weekend, the average business is going to be direct charge one thousand six hundred and fourteen dollars and eighty-five cents with the with the un amended amount.

If you take that down by a quarter, um, you're talking about four hundred dollars.

That is much easier for a small business.

I will point out that 68% of the businesses in Albuquerque are small businesses, one to four people, and so having that go from 1,615 to around 400 seems more reasonable.

Again, something that I think people can bear if they know that the money is going to pay workers a living wage, they do have a problem bearing it to pay for our favorite projects, and so um, you know, I the again there are projects that I want so desperately want, um, and I have raised so much funds for them, and I will continue to do that.

Um, and there is some money with this point 1275.

There is some money, and we can prioritize amongst ourselves, um, like the adults that we are to say which is more important to move in year one and then go to something else in year two.

Um, but we don't all have to get everything year one, and I will, as my final point, say we heard from someone who I very much respect tonight who said, you know, some of this money would go to maybe updating some buildings that we already have, but no, it won't.

There's nothing in this bill, and there's nothing in the bill that that is now gonna be heard later at a later date that says that it will be going towards updating buildings that we already own.

It's just building new stuff, and who's gonna staff that new stuff?

Do we have employees for them?

No, we don't.

We don't have employees to do the things that we need to do right now, and we're gonna build more stuff and more stuff and more stuff, and there'll be nine vanity projects with no one to do the work and nowhere to go to get that operating dollars because we have maxed out our tax potential for the city of Albuquerque.

So with that, I urge your support for reducing a pretty large amount of tax to something that is a reasonable thing that can be absorbed by most households in our community.

Thank you, Councilor People Corn.

Um so Madam Clerk, floor amendment number three.

Councilor Botet.

No.

Councilor Bassan.

Yes.

Vice uh President Champagne.

No Councillor People Corn, yes.

Councilor Grab.

No.

Councilor Lewis.

Yes.

Councilor Rogers.

Yes.

Councilor Teas.

Yes.

President Penyan?

No.

Pass this on a five-board vote.

So we are now on to um floor amendment labeled D in your packet will now become floor amendment number four.

Councillor Graut.

Thank you, Madam President.

Um, floor amendment number four um on page three line 10, insert new section to read.

Uh voter approval required.

Uh the commit community enhancement municipal gross receipts tax imposed by this ordinance shall not take effect unless approved by the a majority of the registered voters.

Voting on the question at an election held pursuant to the provisions of the local election act.

Um I just feel that um when we're going to consider a tax, I think that we need to get voter buy-in.

They need to be educated on why we're proposing this a lot more, not just in the a few short weeks.

I do understand both sides.

I um man, we've got to get those, we've got to get our employees paid.

We need to get them up to that um class and comp study what's recommended.

Um, we're having a hard time finding employees to we're losing them to um, I don't have my camera on, sorry.

Um we are losing them to uh the county and the state, and we it's important that we do get them up.

But I also think that and I and like um someone had mentioned, it's hard to find um the this administration has um we've we've time and time again we've said you've got to cut things, you've got to cut things to stay within the budget, and trying to find 21 million dollars it has been difficult for them to do so.

So um while I understand a proposed possible change um increase in tax, I think it's important um that we do get voter buy-in.

And so if this um were to pass, um then I think that as counselors and as the administration, including the mayor, need to um go out into the community and tell them why it's in um why we're asking for this improvement or this tax added added tax, and then letting the voters decide in November.

Um, I think that's one of our jobs.

I know it's a hard decision to make, but I think uh again, when people understand a lot more why it's being proposed and have more time to ask questions, they can absorb it and then and then perhaps vote yes.

I think so.

Um I would uh ask floor amendment four to be um moved.

There's a motion or second on floor amendment number four.

Second, there's a second by vice president um champagne.

So is there any discussion on the amendment?

Councilor Rogers.

Thank you, Madam President.

I just have a question about just process.

So if this amendment passed and the bill passed, then we would begin to collect the increased security of uh July 1, and then if the voters say no in November, would we have to return that money to them?

Or how how would that work?

So can someone from our uh madam president can someone from council services answer that question, please?

Absolutely, Mr.

Motsko, Madam President, Council Rogers.

Mosco uh madam just to follow up so I understood from counselor Basson's opening that there's a March 31st deadline so that we can begin to charge it in July well so can you help me explain there was a March 31st deadline for the state in order for us to do this if we did it then if we didn't pass this then it had we had to wait a year so I just want to understand that better Madam President Councilor Rogers that is correct uh this would delay the collection for uh 20 uh 15 months thank you counselor backer go ahead thank you mr vice president uh one while I appreciate this uh send it to the voters last year when I ran something similar I requested it to go to voters from the very beginning people should have to say I think in this case it's actually uh it's a thing right we have to sound clear board probably likely won't build anything in capital voters to raise the tax to pay for other people's salary and they're not gonna get anything in return so obviously it's arguable like you know if you're gonna get a pool that matters or you're gonna get other quality of life um you know people love the biopark fact right people love our open space fact um people receive something for that increase way back um in this case we've now taken that away from people we're gonna ask people to pay for other people's salary to bear that word and we're gonna ask the people who are getting that salary increase to pay for their own salary increase and vote for it I think this is a very very very bad precedence in that sense uh just I I don't have support for this one thank you any other discussion no um counselor grout to close thank you all I urge your support madam clerk councilor bacca no councilor no vice president champagne no counselor people corn no counselor grout yes counselor lewis no counselor rogers yes counselor teas no president pinyon no so that motion fails so now two seven sorry about that yes thank you um we're now on floor amendment number e which will now become floor amendment number five councilor ground I'm not going to move this one okay so I think that concludes our amendments councilor lewis thank you madam president I I did have um you know there's like seven or eight different amendments that are in your that are in your uh packet I'm I'm not gonna um introduce any of them partly because I think it just it would be disingenuous I'm um I'm not gonna vote in favor of this bill either way um but um you know uh there there is the I I just want to I mean without being critical I think a lot a lot's been said tonight regarding just the implications of uh of increasing the GRT and what it would do you know to our economy to families to um uh to small businesses um I think there's a lot of we discussed that a lot but what I would like to do is just is is just reiterate a an alternative to this uh because I do believe that you know the the the sponsor and you know the intentions are are are good you know we want to see good things happen in our city um we want to build things we want to make sure we're um you know paying our employees well and uh meeting our obligations um but there's another way to do this um and it's not far fetched because we've done it before many times uh and by the way I'm I'm I'm the guy who four years ago proposed a one eighth of a percent uh decrease in the GRT tax it failed on an eight to one uh and so I think it's pretty clear you know where where I'm at on this bill uh but um but there there's a solution to it and the solution

Um but there's another way to do this.

Um it's not far-fetched because we've done it before many times.

Uh and by the way, I'm I'm I'm the guy who four years ago proposed a one-eighth of a percent uh decrease in the GRT tax, it failed on an eight to one.

Uh and so I think it's pretty clear, you know, where where I'm at on this bill.

Um but um but there's a solution to it.

And the solution is that uh that we budget each year with some fiscal discipline.

Um the solution is that we put money in the fund reserve, um, and if we want to bond against some of it, we can do that.

If we want to um you know use it for our our raises for employees, we can do that.

But I want to be very clear to all the to all that you know the the great workers who are here tonight and all across our city, because I think we need to be truthful with you all as well, uh, and that is that uh your your money has been here.

Um your money each year has been here all along, and uh and and we could have paid for all of the raises that we're talking about and uh and paid for our our workers really well.

Um but it starts with the administration uh proposing a budget, a 1.5 billion dollar budget every year that doesn't just spend every penny of it.

In fact, this year we have a uh we're projecting a 3.8 percent increase to our budget of 1.5 billion dollars.

So a 3.8 percent increase is $57 million.

So this administration has $57 million projected in 2027 over this current year.

Um what what they're gonna do, and and again, I think they're making some strides, and this is not to harass the administration, um, but uh so I hope they're hopefully they're making some strides in this direction.

Um but if they put 20 million dollars in the fund balance and we put 10 million dollars or you know, or 20 million dollars toward our toward our wages toward our employees, um, or you know, and we bonded some of it, you do that every single year, and we have all the capital projects that we need uh to pay for roadways and and and you know everything else.

But the fact is, and you I think you all need to hear this, is that this administration has already spent your raises.

This administration already spends your your wages, your increases every single year.

And this year, hopefully they won't, um, but they propose budgets that with this new 57 million dollars in our 3.8 percent increase, they're probably gonna give us a budget that spends every single bit of it.

And then it's up to this council to be able to play with a little bit of that we have in reserves uh to be able to um you know to be able to uh uh you know reprioritize things.

But they've already prioritized it.

Um we've done this in the past where we we put 50 million dollars aside in the fund balance, bonded against part of it, and it's how we paid for about four or hundred four hundred to five hundred million dollars in capital improvements.

Um so there's there's a way to do it.

It takes fiscal discipline, it just simply takes changing some priorities.

I think we have to ask uh um does Albuquerque city government is it affordable?

Um and does it give a good return on our tax dollars?

And I I would answer no to both.

And um so I'm not gonna introduce these amendments, but I I'm I mean I oppose the bill.

But again, uh you know, this isn't about winning or losing or um uh you know trying to win an argument.

This is about offering other solutions, it's about hopefully making the conversation better, um, and uh ultimately coming up with something that's better for Albuquerque.

I think I've articulated that whether that happens or not, I hope it does.

You know, four years ago it was absolutely crazy to lower the grocery seeds tax by one-eighth percent.

Somehow, somehow it's uh the end thing nationally to um you know that we need to be more affordable, you know, nationally, but in the city of Albuquerque, you know, maybe it doesn't matter as much.

And I'm not saying that because of this bill, I'm saying that because again, I've I've I've I'm the one you know trying to lower the cost of government, you know, over periods of time and make sure we're prioritizing the right things, and that includes our city workers.

Thank you, Madam President.

Thank you, Counselor Teis.

Thank you, Madam President.

I just want to say with the amendments, even with the amendments.

I don't think we we're missing the point here.

Um this isn't a question about whether the city has needs, because we do.

This isn't a question about um, you know, if it if it's a if passing a tax is the answer, because it might be, but the question, and this is weird because I think I'm agreeing with counselor lewis for once, um, that um we need to get a hold of our budget, and as fiduciaries on this council, every single one of us has a fiduciary duty, and it's not to just accept that we need more money.

Our duty is to ask whether the existing resources that we have are being managed well, and whether alternatives have been considered, whether reallocations are possible, whether the normal budget process has been completed, and I think when we look at this at a minimum, a new tax should not be considered before we complete a fiscal year 27 budget process, and we have performance information necessary to make informed decisions.

We need better evidence-based budgeting process.

We do not have that right now, and I'm just looking at our um audit for FY25.

We have a gross dollar value of quantifiable deficiencies of 87.2 million dollars.

And I don't want to be misleading, that's not saying we've lost 87.2 million dollars, but we have there is reclassifications, there's overstatements, there's understatements, there's presentation errors.

We had a 65 million dollar restatement, and so it's not just an issue of where do we have money, do we not, where is it, what are we doing with it?

It's what have we spent and what's been committed and how well are we using it?

And if we don't know that, then every budget we make is based on assumptions and uncertainties, and we have to talk about what is happening in our budget process, and I have some major issues with our budget process right now.

We have several recurring operational costs that are appropriated using non-recurring funds in our budget right now.

That is insane that we are not utilizing public finance rules and state budgeting guide guidance.

Even even the local local government division at DFA provides guidance not to budget recurring costs from non-recurring revenues.

That's the guidance from our state.

We don't have an evidence-based process process where we are tying actual objectives to outcomes to the budget that is being monies that are being appropriated and then expended.

So I can't say for sure that we don't have money or we do have money, and our financial statements say that we could use some more, but I don't know if that's true or not because I can't see how we've been using it.

There are no outcomes tied to our budget.

We collect some good data, we tie it to our objectives and our mission and our vision, but we don't answer the next question.

And that question is is it tied to outcomes?

Is it making our city better or not?

And that's the question we just do not have answers to.

And as a as a fiduciary, I can't vote for any sort of tax increase until we've looked at alternatives.

And from what I understand, no additional alternatives were reviewed.

We didn't look to see if we have opportunities for clawbacks on tax abatements.

We didn't look to see what what how many dollars are being forgone because we're not collecting um any sort of franchise fees.

I so I don't know what we have and what we don't, because we are not collecting that information, and we're not answering the questions that we have actual, we're not answering those questions.

So hopefully we can do that during this budget process, and I just cannot vote for this, especially.

I mean, read the room, man.

People are struggling.

We are struggling, and we just cannot, in all good faith, raise this, even with the amendments, because we're missing the bigger picture.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Counselor Peoplecoin.

Thank you, Madam President.

Just a few thoughts.

I I first of all I want to say that I put up my amendments on the one drives for the counselors to see last week as soon as I had them prepared.

So this was not a surprise or a gotcha or anything like that.

I've also shared these amendments and my intent with every constituent who reached out to me.

So this has been out there.

And I will say while I wasn't going for a surprise, you know, gotcha.

Um, you know, there are some surprises here, right?

We got a bill that had no details, and then we got a bill on Friday afternoon that had lots of details that will not be heard tonight.

That's pretty big surprise.

I'm also told that there is a um spreadsheet that lists all the projects that are gonna be funded with this.

Um I haven't seen that.

Uh I don't know if other counselors have, but that's a pretty big surprise as well.

Um I will say that I agree with counselor Thaez that that we do have a fiduciary um duty to make sure that we do the best job we can with budgeting.

And I've been on council now for a little over four years, and we have not done that.

Um I I use this example not as the be all end all, but I remember once trying to just take $800,000 for a um re resurfacing of a parking lot from APD.

Nope, nope, sacrosanct.

That is not something that we can touch.

And until we start taking a bigger look at how funds are needed and how they're used, we can't just say let's find the waste.

We all know where the waste is.

We're just not willing.

This body nor the mayor is willing to do anything about that waste.

And so, given that that's the situation we're in, and I'm convinced after four years of the budget process where I have seen cow chairs diligently try um to find a way to get the needed five votes to make those changes, that that is not an option for the city of Albuquerque right now.

Um I will also say that in the proposal that was released on Friday that we'll hear at some later point.

Um, you know, it says we're gonna get rid of fees, and I'm very, very confused by that.

Why would we reduce revenue because we don't have enough revenue and then raise revenue on the backs of low-income people?

That makes zero sense to me.

Um, and so that alone uh would make the other bills, not the one tonight, because it doesn't say that in the one tonight, doesn't say anything in the one tonight, except for the amendments that we just passed.

Um so I I guess with that, I just I will say um, you know, the votes tonight will tell you a lot, and I think there are some folks that are just voting no or yes based on principle, and you can tell who those are.

Um, but I will say that uh I don't want to pay staff more to get something.

I'm just gonna vote to pay staff more.

Thanks.

Thank you.

So we will now go to public comment.

Thank you, Madam President.

First up is Janet Sayers, followed by Mariah Breeding, followed by Sean Chansey.

Um, Madam President, members of the council.

The latest I ever stayed here as a city employee was uh midnight.

That was back in the 1980s when I was significantly younger.

But going down memory lane, I am I was prepared.

I mean to support the tax.

Um the last swimming pool was when I was a city employee, 1995, the West Mesa Aquatic Center.

Um people in the 1970s, early 80s who thought we were nuts to be buying open space.

Why are you buying the West Mesa?

Why are you buying volcanoes?

Why are you buying sandy foothills?

And but there was a group of community people that just pressed and pressed, and now we have this fabulous open space system.

Um I I appreciate the debate.

I appreciate all of you, nine people, nine very different parts of our community, but um thank you for the time and energy that you spend.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mariah Breeding, followed by Sean Chacy, followed by Ray Barnes Sean Chancy, followed by Ray Barnes, followed by Dante Jacques.

Go ahead, sir.

Ray Barnes, followed by Dante Jax, followed by Jacob Gutierrez.

Madam President and esteemed counselors, thank you for your time.

Ask you to vote against 02616 to uh to raise property, the uh GRT rate.

Um let's be clear, totally in favor of paying our hardworking uh city workers more.

I'm also totally in favor of growing our city with capital, but we need to do it in a real way.

You're asking them to take a pay raise and then give most of it back to you.

That's like offering someone a Tamali, but then eating half of it before you uh before you give it to them.

Um when it comes to raising gross receipts taxes, most uh municipalities have found that what it does is increase in growth gross receipts taxes, stifle spending rather than rather than increasing it.

So it reduces revenues, and rather than increasing them unless you have more people in the in the place.

It's like when I was a kid and my sister was born and we needed more milk.

Well, we couldn't get the cow to give it more milk, so we had to get another cow.

So we've got to get more people here to pay those taxes if we're ever going to raise those revenues.

Thank you.

Dante Jax, followed by Jacob Gutierrez, followed by Dr.

Geraldo Sionero.

Jacob Guterres, followed by Dr.

Geraldo Sionello, followed by Paul Cedillo.

Thank you, City Council members.

Um, I've been a city employee for 13 years, and I can honestly say that you're correct.

Um we got employees leaving by droves.

Um, we got a revolving door over there.

Before when I first started, it used to be three years experience just to just so you can get a job there.

Now we're hiring people that have two months experience.

It's not going to stop, it's gonna be unsustainable.

We're doing 60, 70 hours a week in overtime guys working five, six, seven days a week.

Um I hope that you this bill does pass.

I am for it.

Um, I hope that you invest in the city employees.

Uh because if you don't, I think you're gonna be investing in claim and damage.

Um, I think you're gonna be investing in lawsuits because um it does take someone of skill to do this job, and right now we're just we're hurting, we're we're hurting battle there.

So I am I do support this bill and I do thank you for your time.

Dr.

Geraldo Siamello, followed by Paul Sidio, followed by Roberta Curtis.

All right.

Good evening, Madam President and members of the city council, and I'm Dr.

Heraldo Chanelo.

I'm an alternative health doctor minister.

Last month we've just finished a legislative session in Santa Fe where we had issues with the HP99 medical malpractice in reforming medical malpractice or bad bad practice laws to reduce insurance costs for providers.

As a business owner, by passing this massive 21% GRT or gross receipts tax site in Albuquerque affects our constituents and taxpayers' wallets.

If we eat or shop in town, using an Albuquerque-based service local businesses or stock for gas on our way home.

This would permanently raise the permanently raise the cost of doing business and living in Albuquerque.

Numero families and businesses already struggling with rising costs and cannot afford another tax increase.

Don't we really have enough resource waste?

That said, I urge you to vote no on the proposed gross receipt tax increase.

And may God give you wisdom to do the right thing by voting no on the proposed gross receipt tax increase.

Thank you.

Paul Sidio, followed by Roberta Curtis, followed by Dennis Curtis.

Roberta Curtis, followed by Dennis Curtis, followed by Louis Monttoya.

Madam President, President, City Council members, hello.

My name is Bobby Curtis.

I'm a long-time Albuquerque resident, and I work for Americans for prosperity at grassroots organization that advocates for lower taxes and less government for all new Mexicans.

We are we at AFP urge you to vote no on the proposed gross receipts tax increase.

The GRG track tax is a regressive tax that disapportionately hurts low-income families the most at a time when many New Mexicans are already facing an affordability crisis, increasing taxes on everyday goods and services is simply the wrong approach.

This proposal also comes at a difficult time.

We've just come out of a legislative session where vehicle registration fees increase by 25%, and residents are already dealing with rising gas prices and higher costs across the board.

Albuquerque families are already being asked to do more with less.

Madam President, City Council members, Albuquerque families don't need another tax increase.

They need tax relief.

Thank you.

Dennis Curtis, followed by Louis Manzoya, followed by Augustine Romero.

Madam President, City Councillors do not raise the taxes on Albuquerque businesses and people.

This proposed tax is on the poorest of the poor in Albuquerque, and we got plenty of them.

I believe with Councillor Lewis that this is just mismanaged money.

I encourage you to manage our money properly.

I've got about 50 years of managed managing my budget.

It's always been in the black.

We can do it here.

Luis Mantoya or Louis, excuse me.

Augustine Romero, followed by Joel Villa Rialy.

Good evening, Madam Counselor.

Chair, uh Council.

My name is Luis Montoyo.

I'm the president for Local 624.

I have came in today with my sisters and brothers from many city departments that include street maintenance, senior affairs, parks and rec, solid waste, and transit and building maintenance, and many others.

We respectfully ask that you pass this bill 2616.

It will help with the cost of living increases over the years and help with the employees' retention, bring in much needed uh staffing and support the employees who are already working hard every day to make a living wage.

Thank you.

Augustine Romero, followed by Joel Villa Real, followed by Larry Passetti.

Good evening, Madam President, City Council members.

My name is Augustine Romedo.

I'm a 20-year employee president of the M series Union 3022.

Um as a city employee, um, class and comp is has put me and others like me at a disadvantage.

I was at a step two for most of that time.

I really appreciate you guys uh trying to do something in helping us out.

I'm in support of this bill because uh we do need pay equity.

We we work, we show up every day, we work for you guys.

You guys go to the art museums, you go to the parks, your trash gets picked up.

We're the guys that make this happen.

And when you invest in us, you invest in yourselves.

I appreciate your time.

Thank you.

Joel Via Rial, followed by Larry Passetti, followed by Philip Mayhew.

Good evening, madam chair and members of the city council.

My name is Joel Villarreal.

I am uh rep with our unions here within the city of Albuquerque.

Um first want to say I'm kind of blown away that we had a bipartisan bill here that has little by little been taken apart tonight.

Um the increase that would have happened in its original form, would have cost a little more less than a nickel for every $10 that a person spent, which has now been brought down by 80% now, right?

So we're talking about a couple of cents there for every $10.

Yet we still have counselors right now that are sitting on the sidelines on this.

This money would have provided a lifeline for the services that we provide here.

It would have helped fund the class and cop study that this council has supposedly supported for the last three years.

I know it's not an easy decision, but this is the reality.

The city has been operating by paying our workers less than their market value for the last who knows how long.

That's wage theft.

That's where we're at right now.

Even at its full implementation, we would have still had employees at 25% of the market.

That's 75% of the workers out there would have been making more than these people.

All we were asking you all to do was fix a pro the broken pay structure, and it's very sad now that I'm seeing the progressive wing of our city council take the same position as the real brand foundation as Americans for prosperity and doge.

Elon Musk stuff that he was sitting there as he was sitting there criticizing our government.

That is what they're asking us to do here before they're willing to pass anything.

I would ask people to please reconsider because our employees need help.

Thank you.

Madam President, Joel.

Um Council Passan has a question for you.

So Mr.

Villaria, I have one question for you, sir.

Uh, I have been speaking with you about this increase, about the intent.

What have I told you about my being able to support a tax increase?

That it would have required the the big the big picture that you were asking for, ma'am.

Thank you, sir.

Because to me, I really was so excited to be able to do 56 million dollars in employee compensation.

But it can't just be employee compensation.

It also has to be roads.

It does have to be a capital project that I'm waiting to deliver.

It does have to be that package.

We were going to be able to get there.

And I apologize to you that I wasn't able to deliver that to you and your people.

Thank you, ma'am.

And it's unfortunate because the people that are paying the price is literally the employees here that everybody is professing to care about.

You would think that something would be done here to help fix what we're going through.

Thank you.

Larry Passetti, followed by Philip Mayhew, followed by Bernadette Overbeck.

Madam President, City Council, my name is Larry Passetti.

I work for Solid Waste Department.

I'm here today expressing my support for the bill.

Over the past seven several years, the cost of living has continued to rise for everyone in our community.

Unfortunately, the compensation for solid waste collection drivers and employees have not kept pace with this increase.

The work that we do is physical demanding and require us to work in all types of weather and ensuring our city continues to run smoothly.

Solid waste services are a critical part of keeping our clean city safe and healthy.

Every day our drivers are out there in the community collecting waste and keeping the neighborhoods and businesses and public spaces clean.

It is an essential service that many people depend on, even if sometimes it goes unnoticed.

Supporting Bill 02616 would recognize the importance of work that we do and help ensure that the employees responsible for keeping the cities clean are fairly compensated.

Thank you.

Philip Mayhew, followed by Bernadette Overbeck, followed by Chris Allen.

Good evening, ma'am.

Madam President and City Council members.

My name is Phil Mayhew.

I am one of the senior herpetology keepers at the Albuquerque Biopark.

I've been working at the biopark for nearly a decade now, and in 80% of that time, we have been critically understaffed.

Um, often having to do the jobs of two to three people.

Um issues that we have with uh staffing is due to pay.

We lose people to either other zoos or they have left the field completely.

I've wanted to be a zookeeper since I was a little kid myself, going to the Albuquerque Zoo, and I was able to reach that dream.

I can tell you right now that if uh Governor Grishan's child care assistance was not in place, I'd I don't know what my wife and I would do.

Um so I'm asking for your support in this bill.

Um it does not matter who you are or what part of the city you live in.

Um all of our trash needs to be taken out.

Um our children need places to go and have fun and learn things, and uh none of that would happen if we don't have people to staff those facilities.

So thank you.

Bernadette Overbeck, followed by Chris Allen, followed by Christy Martinez.

Good evening, Madam President and Councillors.

My name is Bernadette Overbeck, and I serve the city of Albuquerque as a zookeeper at our biopark.

I'm here in support of the bill 2616 for a GRT increase.

I'm speaking on behalf of the dedicated and understaffed biopark animal care staff.

We love what we do, but we know that there is an underappreciation for our current workloads that is represented in our wages as reflected in the recent comprehensive classification and compensation study recently undertaken by the city.

In addition to being animal care professionals, we are safety officers, we are trained first uh first responders for active shooters, bomb threats, medical emergency response, and CPRs for guests, lost children and seniors, crowd control, and are directly trained by the fire department to address fires both within the biopark and in the nearby Bosque.

Our pay rates should reflect the high stakes responsibility that and diverse skill set uh that the city demands of us.

We support this request for increased funding that prioritizes additional staffing and pay raise that aligns with the professional requirements that the city requires from us.

Thank you.

Chris Allen, followed by Christy Martinez, followed by Tad Numinsky.

Christy Martinez, followed by Tad Numinsky, followed by Debbie Blea, good evening, Madam President and Counselors.

I oppose the proposed the proposed gross receipts tax increase in Albuquerque.

Raising the GRT now would unduly burden small businesses and low income residents already struggling with the cost of living.

A higher tax rate risk stifling economic growth and discouraging new investment in our city.

We should prioritize efficient management of the existing resources that we already have over the increased tax on our citizens.

I urge you to vote no on the GRT tax.

Thank you.

My name is Christy, and I am with a Libre Initiative.

Tad Numitsky, followed by Debbie Plea, followed by John Welsh.

Mr.

Garrett, I think he's passing.

Tad, do you wish to speak?

Thank you, Mr.

Vice President.

Debbie Bleia, followed by John Welsh, followed by John Morton.

John Welsh, followed by John Morton, followed by Miss Ward.

And Council members.

My name is John Welch.

I'm a 76-year-old, almost 80-year-old.

And my purpose is to vote no on this GRT.

I agree with the myth that management needs to be stepped up with what we have and learn to just make it make things work with what we already have, not force people to pay for things they can't.

I live in a trailer park, and we're stretched out to the limit already.

Vote no on GRT.

Thank you very much.

Didn't like it.

John Morton, followed by Miss Ward, followed by Ben Michael Barreras.

Good evening, Madam President, members of the City Council, distinguished guest.

I'm John Morton, and I'm speaking to you today about not voting for the GRT.

It's inflationary, it affects every aspect rather than a sales tax, it affects every aspect of everyday life.

We have money in this state.

We're one of the richest states in the country, with the second largest permanent fund with 14.5 billion dollars in revenue from oil and gas.

We had a surplus of 3.5 billion.

Talking about solutions, you asked the governor for about 40 million dollars, and it can be done.

Thank you very much.

Madam President, Counselors, I'm speaking as an individual tonight.

Please vote no on the proposed increase in gross receipts tax.

This is a tax on businesses.

It is common for businesses to pass this tax on to customers, and that since it is a regressive tax.

Those least able to afford an additional tax will be the most effective relative to income.

What are the real motives for this?

I think there are two.

One is paying for a swing pull in the zip code of the highest median income in the city.

And uh the I I just want to add the ID international district waited decades for a library to complain about six years is an example of privileged entitlement, in my opinion.

The second reason I think is an attempt at an end around on a downtown performance center that should be decided by the voters of Albuquerque.

Ah, didn't finish.

May I continue?

Thank you, sir.

The fact that city employees have become a leverage.

I wasn't a good idea.

I'm sorry, I said you were that close.

Sorry.

But yes, thank you for understanding.

Ben Michael Barreras, followed by John Vaughn, followed by Levi Griego.

John Vaughn, followed by Levi Griego, followed by Zach Biamante.

Levi Griego, followed by Zach Biamante, followed by Catherine Simnack.

Pardon my pronunciation on that one.

Zach Miamante, followed by Catherine Sim Nacker, followed by Gerald Simack.

Catherine Sim Knocker, followed by Gerald Simnacker, followed by Kieran Hill.

Madam President, counselors.

The GRT is a regressive tax, meaning that the poor are taxed more than the wealthier.

We should all be concerned about affordability and bringing down the cost of living for all Americans and all Albuquerque residents.

This absolutely not the time to enact tax increases on those the least able to afford it.

Gas pricing is very unstable at this time, making it harder to budget for the commute to work.

PNM is already telling us electric rights will soar in the near future.

Not to mention the cost of groceries will continue to go higher as fuel prices increase.

And I urge you to vote no on this measure.

Thank you very much.

Gerald Simknacker, followed by Kieran Hill, followed by Mara Jans.

Madam President, City Councilors, uh I'm Gerald Simnacker.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this.

And I urge you to vote vote no for the uh gross receipts tax.

It's nearly doubled in adding over 500 million dollars over over eight years.

This is unsustainable, and I appreciate your listening.

Thank you.

Kieran Hill, followed by Mara Jans, followed by Todd Reed.

Mara Jans, followed by Todd Reed, followed by Jasmine Arias.

Good evening, Madam President and City Councillors.

My name is Mora Jans.

I had three reasons for you to vote no against the gross receipts tax increase.

My first was that it's bad for business.

My second is that you should have found funds in the regular budget, and now I am shocked and appalled by hearing your city workers ask for decent pay.

How is this not put in the regular budget?

Oh good lord.

Okay.

I'm sorry for the city workers.

This has got to be addressed.

My third uh reason to vote no is that there should have been an alternative funding source, bonds.

I like asking Santa Fe too.

Vote no, but pay our workers.

Todd Reed, followed by Jasmine Arius.

Followed by followed by Sally Radke on Zoom.

Jasmine Arius, followed by Sally Radke, followed by Marcelin Costiner.

Hello, Madame President Pena, and hello, everybody on the council tonight.

First of all, I just want to say thank you, all you guys, for doing what you can for us.

In the meantime, I do understand the discouraging of our workers.

They all took the time to come out here tonight to hear you hear their voices and to see their faces because at the end of the day we are struggling.

Um I think Augustine put it the best way the other day in our meeting that it's putting us on a diet that we're already on a very big diet right now, and we're skinny.

Um, work is at my worker working 16-hour days and not seeing their family just to make ends meet.

Uh, we have people working for only $17 an hour, and it's just frustrating that the minimum is just not enough of them.

For them to advocate for a tax increase on them just so they can get more money.

I mean, you guys are constantly approving these budgets, but yet nothing's being done to improve workers' quality and wages and work conditions.

So, as a president, when I took this job, I will continue to advocate on their behalf.

I hope it doesn't stop from us dispatches with becoming first responders in the future.

But I just hope you guys understand that if we're here and we're struggling and we're asking and we're pleading, we're just wanting your guys' support in that.

So thank you.

Sally Radke, followed by Marcelin Costner.

Hi, I'm Sally Duranke.

Um I just left a book club meeting where a bunch of women were all sitting around chatting about how we really oppose raising the gross receipts tax.

Um it is disproportionately going to affect low-income people in our city.

Um and I hate that we're being pitted against city workers because we also really want our city workers to get a raise.

All of the hardworking people that we've heard from tonight, they deserve a raise.

Um I couldn't have I I agree with what counselor Thay has said that there's the budget needs a closer look.

There's another way to pay for raises for these hardworking people, other than raising a tax that's going to really affect people who are barely making it paycheck to paycheck.

Um please do not raise the cursor's heats tax.

Thanks.

Marcelin Costner, followed by Carla Sontag.

Followed by Paul Gessing.

Hi, hope you can hear me.

Um, I'm not against paying taxes to ensure our schools are well funded.

I'm not against paying more to have safer streets.

I'm not paying.

I'm not against paying more to house my neighbors.

I just don't understand the base idea that many of the programs we have to pay our do.

So I question this iterate nothing.

I question increasing everyday costs, especially during hard economics.

For all of us, I question increasing costs for seniors on fixed income.

I call it costs for family.

I question this while we fund daily to keep the homeless community.

I question this while we spend on a home complete.

Already for our crucial on the ground.

But that shouldn't be commented.

We should increase the bits for working people and build community projects, but not at the expense of other working people and their ability to afford life.

Holding a wage increase cost it.

Because I'm the hardest working city employees, so you can have a personal pet project funded is disgusting.

I want to say from the counselor that said it earlier, read the room.

Carla Sontag, followed by Paul Gessing.

Good evening, Madam President and Council members.

It's actually Larry Sontag here.

Carla had to step away.

I'm speaking on behalf of the New Mexico Business Coalition, representing hundreds of small businesses and thousands of Albuquerqueans.

And we know that thousands have contacted you by email because we've received a copy of that as well.

I'm encouraged by the candor of some of the council members.

One admitting that they can't imagine this gross receipts tax because they're barely getting by.

Another admitting that it really won't make any difference to them.

What has been discussed is that it makes no sense at all for a regressive tax on those who make the least amount of money, saying that we'll give you turnaround and give you a tax or uh increase in wages.

This is about management.

And while projects like swimming pools and other capital amino amenities may be nice, they are not what most residents say is affecting their daily quality of life.

When Albuquerque citizens are asked about their top concerns, the issue that consistently rise to the top are crime and homelessness.

Before taxpayers asked or should are asked to pay more, the should be the city should demonstrate progress on issues residents care most about.

We urge you to vote against this GRT increase.

Paul guessing, followed by Matthew Gonzalez.

Hello, city councilors.

My name is Paul Gessing.

I run the Rio Grande Foundation, a policy research think tank and advocacy organization based here in New Mexico, right here in Albuquerque.

I specifically oppose this tax increase because the city budget has gone up so dramatically from approximately 750 million to 1.5 billion, near doubling under the current mayor.

If employee pay raises are an issue, something that needs to be addressed, I encourage the council and the mayor's office to work together to achieve that goal.

In the meantime, the city and its tax money has been used to build a very overpriced bike trail, the likes of which typically cost $500,000 a mile.

Instead, it's costing several times more than that approximately $10 million a mile.

This and other wasteful spending needs to be balanced when we're making budgets.

Thank you for your time.

Matthew Gonzalez.

I'm um city employee with the Solid Waste Department and the collections and the residential uh collections.

I uh urge you to approve this um uh this bill.

It's um I was a city employee 15 years ago, and I left for this specific reason is that there was not enough pay.

I mean, way below what I was able to get in even a private sector where it wasn't even that, you know, it just made that much more difference.

Um we're constantly picking up trash, we're we're we're helping our citizens out, you know, we're doing the best we can because we love our city.

Well, we need to get pay raises for all of our city employees.

We need to bring them up to average at least, if not more.

Thank you for your time.

Thank you, Madam President.

Um, I was able unable to find George Welsh.

I just wanted to call his name to see if maybe he's in the house.

Does it look like it?

So that does conclude comment.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr.

Cornelius.

So that concludes public comment.

Um, anybody want to speak before I send it over to Council Bassan and Councilor Um Bacca?

Vice President Shamfine.

Thank you, Madam President.

Um it's very difficult position to put us in, and I guess this is why we're elected, but I expressed this a couple of times to constituents that reached out is that it's a delicate balance of what we're trying to accomplish up here.

Um you listen to your constituents and they say we need improvement in roads, we need uh um some say a pool, some say a library, a community center.

And in the two years that I've been here, I've learned that you come up with this idea, you listen to it, you advocate for it, and you say, okay, how does it go?

Um I thought I was gonna get gabbled.

Um they tell you, say, well, you you have to go get uh uh plans made, and that costs X amount of dollars, sometimes uh usually about a tenth of what the project ended up costing.

So 150,000 to develop this program, and they come back and say it's gonna cost 1.5 million.

And you say, okay, I'll go get the money.

And you go get them 1.5 million, and it takes you 10 months because you got to go to Santa Fe and you gotta talk during budget, and you gotta uh all these little intricate movements, and then that you go back and say, I've got my money, and then they go, okay, it's 1.7 now, because it took you 10 months.

Okay, let me go find 200,000.

And then you keep going and you keep going.

You're chasing this carrot the whole time.

So it's very difficult to say, how do we stop that?

How do we generate money so that we start a plan and say we have the money now, start it now?

Um, do you save?

Do you raise taxes?

Um, but on the flip side of that, we talk about, and this was the difficult part when I read this was here we are months and months and meetings and meetings, talk about how uh our our folks here are struggling to make it by.

We need uh assistance for living, we need assistance for food, we need guaranteed income because they can't afford a good car.

So we develop these programs because of all the need of the public, and then now we're gonna say raise the taxes in order to do little things like a like a library or roads and stuff like that to get ahead of the game, but we didn't look internally first.

That wasn't even a part of it.