All counselors, counselors are present this evening with counselors Vassan, Pena on Zoom, and Councillor Lewis will be here soon.

We will start with a moment of silence, followed by the Pledge of Allegiance.

Hi, Pledge Alleghenies.

And to the Republic, which expands one nation under God, indivisible with liberty and justice for all.

Thank you.

I don't know Council Brooklyn.

So I'm going to believe it.

I don't know it in Spanish.

Thank you.

There she is.

Today is the first of three public hearings the council is required to hold on the city's operating budget.

Today's meeting will focus on the social goals, social goal department budgets, which include Albuquerque Police, Albuquerque Fire Rescue, Civilian Police Oversight Agency, Community Safety, Health, Housing and Homelessness, Parks and Recreation, City Clerk, Economic Development, Arts and Culture, and Senior Affairs.

Because of the schedule and conflicts, aviation will be heard tonight, and youth and families will be heard next Thursday.

On Thursday, May 7th, the council will hold a second hearing to discuss the city's physical goal department budgets, which include municipal development, planning, general services, environmental health, transit, um animal welfare, legal, solid waste, internal audit, inspector general, human resources, technology and innovation, finance and administration, and city support.

The council will hold a third committee of the whole meeting on Thursday, May 14th, to consider amendments or substitutes.

No live public comment will be taken on at the May 14th meeting, although written comments will be accepted.

At the end of the May 14th meeting, the budget, as amended or substituted, will be sent to the Monday, May 18th City Council meeting for adoption.

Live public comment and written comments will be accepted at the May 18th meeting.

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

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

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

The video recording of this meeting will also 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 50578-3100 for assistance during business hours, which are Monday through Friday, 8 a.m.

to 5 p.m.

Members of the public have the opportunity to address the committee if they have signed up for public comment per the rules published on the agenda and on our website on Friday.

We now have um will now move to public comment.

Here are the public comment ground rules.

Each participant has two minutes to present.

Comments are to be addressed to the counselors only, and disruption any disruption, uh disruptive conduct will result in removal from the meeting.

Mr.

Cornelius, please call the name of the first speaker.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Our first speaker is Lam Ho, followed by Janet Sayers.

Hello, I'm sorry, I'm a first timer.

Is this where I stand?

Okay.

Good evening, everyone.

I'm Lam Ho and I've been a resident of Albuquerque since October 2024.

I'm a newly appointed at large library advisory board member.

I'm so excited to be working with y'all.

I'm a resident of East Downtown.

I'm also a writer and consultant, about to start my MFA in poetry at UNM, a community I'm really excited to be a part of.

I'm here to advocate for libraries to receive at least $500,000 of funding for IT on an annual basis and to fill any open staffing positions.

And I want to share why this would be so important to the work that I do.

I write stories about the Vietnam War and my parents' journey here as immigrants to America.

And I can honestly say that if it weren't for the library, my work just wouldn't be possible.

Working with staff to make sure I can find what I need through the archives and also being able to print, quite simply, has allowed me to put together my first poetry collection.

So I hope you'll consider prioritizing the library in this budget.

Thank you so much for your time.

Thank you.

Janet Sayers, followed by Kit Kopek.

All right.

Good evening, Madam Chair, members of the council.

I'm Janet Sayers, chair of the Library Advisory Board, and this was my we just met in person.

We've uh emailed, but we hadn't met in person, so that's very exciting.

So I'm chair of the library advisory board, and that our charge, our duty in the ordinance, is to uh communicate, be the liaison between our government and the community, and to recommend policies for development and encourage the greatest use of library facilities and programs.

So having said that, we first of all are very thankful that we have two wonderful partners helping our libraries, and that would be the Friends, which provide over $100,000 every summer to support the weekly performers and uh prizes that are part of the summer reading program that starts June 2nd.

We're also thankful for the library foundation that pays for the twice yearly event guide.

I have my uh what do you call those?

Anyway.

So this is what the event guide looks like.

And excuse me, and this is our oh, and our summer program this year is Unearth, Unearth a Story, and we're going to have dinosaurs, archaeologists, aliontologists.

So it's gonna be a oh my gosh, 31 seconds.

Okay, it's gonna be very exciting.

Um I mean, you all, I'm preaching to the choir.

You you all are library supporters, but let me just say this.

We we urge, I mean, we're supposed to uh recommend things to the mayor.

We urge the mayor to change designating technology at the library as non-recurring.

Come on.

This is how the library runs.

It's not non-recurring, it's been recurring forever.

And lastly, staffing levels of the library, so that we don't have to close during lunches and um close early.

So thank you very much.

Appreciate your uh thank you.

What you do.

Thank you.

Kit Kopec, followed by Julia Clark.

All right.

Uh Chairwoman Grout and Council members, thank you for the opportunity to speak.

My name is Kit Kopeck, and I'm speaking to you as president of the Friends of the Albuquerque Public Library.

We are a nonprofit supporting the Albuquerque and Bernalillo County Library system.

Our purpose is to fund library programming, such as the Summer Reading Program, as Janet mentioned, and professional development for library staff.

Uh to be clear, the Friends and Foundation have a well-defined scope of work, and that cannot include staffing, technology, or other major activities of the library.

The public library should be funded with public money.

Our contributions, our contributions are a supplement.

Uh currently it's set for 400,000 as non-recurring, and this is used to cover hardware and software that runs the entire library system as well as public and staff computers.

Clearly not a one-time need.

Um, Albuquerque residents use libraries heavily, and we deserve reliable quality 21st century services that meet the demand.

Our library system sees over 1.5 million in-person visitors annually, and often nearly and offers nearly 10,000 programs every year.

Keep in mind that libraries are not just book warehouses.

They uh, in addition to books, movies, and music.

Libraries provide free programming for youth and adults, free computers, printers, biFi, and other tech, a free and safe place to spend time indoors, and so much more.

Libraries protect our civil rights, libraries build business, and libraries build strong communities.

Thank you.

Julia Clarks, followed by Grace Dukes.

Good evening.

I'm Julia Clark.

I'm on the library advisory board as well as the board of the Albuquerque Public Library Foundation.

Public libraries are about people.

They're not just a place to store books.

There are books, computers, programs, films, music, and many things that enhance the daily life of our community.

Needs vary.

Is it an after school program?

Is there a school assignment or a science fair project?

Is it using the public access computers?

Or did are you a member of a group that reserved a community room?

Our libraries serve all residents, all ages.

Their schedules vary.

One thing is constant.

Information is posted on social media, or you read the close sign on the door as you arrive at the library.

There is no advertising budget, and this is not what our community wants or deserves.

There are no tricks or schemes that will result in our libraries being open on a reliable schedule unless enough positions are funded in the budget and the vacant positions are filled in an expedient manner.

I will close by also asking you to fund the IT budget as a recurring item at the $500,000 level.

Thank you.

Grace Dukes, followed by William Pentler.

Recurring revenue and spending are up, and the city is sitting on over 70 million dollars in reserve.

This is not an austerity budget, this is a priority budget.

He chose who gets cut, and he chose to eliminate 247 vital roles.

APD gets 19% of the city's budget, more than housing, child care seniors, transit, and community safety combined.

APD is the only Department of Game personnel from this budget, including the entire Office of Emergency Management.

In a year of Ice RAIDs and climate risk, disaster response now answers to the police.

That is structural pre-compliance to Donald Trump's agenda.

Keller is eliminating 42 teaching positions at child development centers.

These are not pimple simple cuts, these eliminate specialized human-intensive support.

He has omitted the city will serve fewer children.

He calls it strategic realignment.

It is a calculated choice to abandon early childhood education.

Keller disingenuously brags about a 10% increase to housing when the entire increase is non-recurring funds.

There is no long-term commitment.

And behind the headline, Keller slashes substance use programming by 76%, mental health by 17%, health and human services by 22%.

The city is giving 400,000 for a diversion program to process people arrested for sleeping outside while cutting the worker who would have helped them get into a shelter.

That worker, the emergency shelter community outreach coordinator, is a person who goes out to where people are living and connects them to services before they ever get cited or arrested.

That position is gone.

Keller defunded a person who prevents a citation and funded the system that processes it.

He is not solving homelessness.

He is managing it through the criminal system and calling it a diversion program.

That is the pipeline of criminalization.

The 73 million dollar reserve exists for a moment exactly like this.

Use it to protect the most vulnerable residents, not to grow the mayor's surplus.

These cuts are all reversible.

Do not roll over to him.

This is a classic shell game.

Thank you.

William Pentler, followed by Ann Curl.

Good evening.

My name is William Pentler.

Throughout my whole working career, I was a zookeeper and a park ranger.

Sadly, what I've done as a career has always been considered secondary.

Anytime there's a budget cut, it seems that the things at the biopark or in open space seem to be the top line of being cut, and it's happening again.

When I first started in open space in the early 2000s, there were four full-time park attendants.

At this point, with this cut, there will be one.

One full-time park attendant.

Two parks to handle on opposite ends of town, Petrocliffe National Monument, Boca Negra Canyon, and the Elena Gallegos.

This is a time when reservations increase, other things increase.

You know, it's hell as to pay if we don't open parks on time.

The biopark and open space are two of the shining stars of Albuquerque.

These are two entities that have the highest visitation of any attraction, as you want to call them, within the city.

And yet we always take the biggest cuts.

This doesn't make any sense.

This is problematic as a whole.

Truthfully, if you want to save money, lean towards fleet management's principle currently.

What they do right now is they demand that a set amount of miles be put on each and every vehicle within the city fleet.

This includes big equipment and trailers, which sadly causes a lot of employees to drive around aimlessly just to put on miles.

If they don't put on these miles, their vehicles are threatened to be taken away because they feel they're not being used enough.

This is a waste of personnel, this is a waste of gas, this is a waste, period.

Please look to cut that principle and save our employees a lot of things.

And also please don't cut open space or the biopark.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Ann Curl, followed by Nikhil Pylor.

Good evening.

Counselor Pena, you may not recognize my name because you never respond to any of my emails, and neither does the staff.

Please make your comments, Germaine, to the budget.

I'm getting there.

Okay, and direct them to me, please.

Oh, sure.

Then I'm sure you care as much about district three as Councillor Penya does.

I was at the grand reopening of the Alamosa Library branch along with Councillor Pena.

I know all of us in District 3 were grateful for her for leading the charge on the renovations.

However, the branch continues to be plagued with staffing issues, forcing frequent closures.

Please do what I know to be in your power to address this, and it makes sense why your last election was so close, and I would be worried about the next one.

Thank you.

Nikhil Pylor, followed by Dr.

Lisa Christofferson.

Hello.

My name's Nikhil.

I'm a district four voter.

I'm here to speak about some of the priorities reflected in the mayor's proposed budget.

I think specifically there are several items that others have spoken about earlier, but uh I'd like to highlight in particular the urgency of making sure our transit system here in Albuquerque is fully funded.

Uh I think as we've seen in the last month, uh the uh the state of oil prices is not something we can easily budget for and predict, and having alternative metrics of methods of transportation available to our residents uh is of increasing critical importance.

Uh you know, Albuquerque in some ways is quite a bit ahead of uh the rest of the country in that we have made transportation in some ways a right.

Uh anybody can hop on a bus without having to wait in line to pay the fare.

Uh it makes things like art uh a lot better designed in terms of the infrastructure in terms of reliability.

Uh this is a chance, I think, for Albuquerque to invest more in our transit system to invest in terms of expanding these kind of alternatives, uh, in terms of investing in greater reliability, safety, uh more regular routes, uh, more service towards uh different neighborhoods of the city rather than cutting back on our resources.

Uh I would also like to highlight that uh the city has seen significant progress in the last few years in terms of a reduction in violent crime.

I think that's a good thing that we should all be celebrating.

Uh, it doesn't make sense then that by far the largest share of increases in the budget is uh towards the police department when at this point violent crime uh is at this is near a five-year low.

Uh so I think with those things considered, uh I would certainly hope that the council weighs significant changes to the mayor's budget.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Dr.

Lisa Christofferson, followed by Tom Guralnik.

Tom Garalnick, followed by Julie Rugg.

Thank you, Madam Chair and City Councilors.

Uh I'm Tom Gorellick, as you heard.

Um, and I'm the founder and director of the Outpost Performance Space for 38 years now, and I thank you for letting me address you.

First of all, I want to express my gratitude for all you do to make Albuquerque the unique and wonderful place it is.

Something that uh some of you might be aware of is that today, April 30th, is International Jazz Day.

So I thought it would be appropriate for me to come here before you to thank you for your past support for the Outpost Performance Space, one of the premier presenters in the country of jazz and much more for the last 38 years.

I also want to thank uh I also want to ask that you continue to support us in our efforts to serve the community.

Indeed, we are in the budget draft for a generous appropriation once again this year, and this year these dollars will be stretched as the 50-year-old New Mexico Jazz Workshop merged with Outpost in January.

So our combined programs comprising extensive educational programs, year-round concerts, the Summer Under the Stars concerts at the Albuquerque Museum and the 20th anniversary of the New Mexico Jazz Festival will happen because of your support.

So thank you.

I know how precious these dollars are as belts have tightened, and uh so many arts organizations more than it is possible to support, deserve the support of the city.

I want to assure you that the dollars spent on outpost and the jazz workshop programs will serve the city and its residents well.

We do not by any means take your help for granted and appreciate it deeply.

The arts are essential, and we have a terrific arts culture here in Albuquerque.

It makes our city a better place to be.

Thank you once again for all you do.

Thank you.

Julie Rugg, followed by Bruce Heinrich.

Madam Chair, Counselors, good evening.

My name is Julie Miller, and I am the executive director of the New Mexico Biopark Society, the nonprofit support organization for the biopark, and I'm here tonight speaking on behalf of our 89,000 members and volunteers.

As you consider tonight's budget, I ask you to consider two items affecting the biopark.

First, eliminating the event supervisor does not make fiscal sense.

This role generates significant revenue.

In 2025, one supervisor brought in over $600,000.

The biopark has had to reduce its event schedule over the past several years as its events team has been cut from three full-time events people to zero.

This has led to the loss of the destination dinners in 2019, weddings at the Botanic Garden in 2022, and so many other community events and fundraising opportunities.

Due to eliminating this position, event bookings have already dropped 40%, resulting in an estimated $250,000 loss.

That's more than three times the savings from cutting the position.

Second, funding for animal diets and medications of $250,000 is currently labeled as non-reoccurring.

This is an essential ongoing cost tied directly to animal well-being and maintaining national accreditation standards.

It must be included in the biopark's annual operating budget.

If additional funding is needed, a minimum $1 admission increase could generate over $1 million annually.

The biopark and the community have benefited from over 150 million dollars in improvements, yet admission prices have not changed since 2017, remaining $10 for an adult resident, even El Paso, once charging less than us, now charges $1395 for adult residents.

Truly, it's time for an increase.

These are practical steps to protect both the biopark's financial health and its it in its mission.

Thanks for your time and consideration.

Thank you, Julie.

Bruce Heinrichs, followed by Neil Copperman.

Madam Chair, I'm Dr.

Bruce Henriks, member of the board of directors of the Biopark Society and a proud zoo docent.

I can't really believe that I'm here again beating the same old drum.

Year after year, food for the animals at the zoo and medications administered to them have been classified as non-recurring expenses.

Does that mean that the city actually believes that there are some years that the animals don't need to eat nor have medications available to them?

When will these items finally be classified as essential ongoing operational needs that weren't a dedicated line item in the budget?

In the past, there have been as many as three event planners employed by the biopark.

They serve an invaluable function planning public events that bring in revenue far in excess of their salaries.

And now the city wants to eliminate the single remaining event planner on the staff.

Pennywise and pound foolish, if you ask me.

The biopark is a world-class venue that has received national acclaim.

It has undergone extensive, expensive renovation and expansion in the last 10 years, thanks to the revenue generated by the GRT.

It would be a shame if its reputation were tarnished should Word get out that the animal collection could not be fed, and that the biopark would no longer host its very popular income-generating public events for lack of an events planner.

There is a very simple way to remedy this budget embrolio.

A modest increase in the gate fee, which has been stagnant since 2017, could generate enough income to feed the animals and employ one or more events planners.

Thank you.

Neil Copperman, followed by Carl Kaiser.

Greetings, Chairman, Chairman Grout, and the members of the City Council.

Thank you for the opportunity to address you today.

My name is Neil Copperman, and I'm the executive director and founder of AMP Concerts.

I think you're mostly familiar with us because I've been coming in for several years now.

But AMP is a nonprofit that has served Albuquerque for 19 years.

Our work is rich, diverse, and creative with an emphasis on connecting New Mexico to a global network of musicians that enriches our local community.

We produced over a hundred events around the city each year, many of which are free programs, artist residencies, workshops, school outreach, and opportunities for local artists to work with international touring artists.

Our programs in the libraries, open spaces, and parks allow us to bring free music to people across the city.

We provide two free events a month at the city and county libraries.

And since that program has started, we've brought over 23,000 people to the libraries to see music.

The funds we receive from the city help us with downtown activations like the 90 plus programs we have done at the Vibrant Fusion Art Space at First and Lomus and the many events we produce at the Chemo and South Parabé Cultural Center.

We'll be heading back to the chemo in just a little bit for our concert over there tonight.

And the money also helped us start a free concert series at the new park at Winrock Town Center, which we will be kicking off again at the end of May this year.

This year we've been able to bring in artists for school programs from Ukraine and Jordan, as well as an Ukraine choral composer.

So it's already getting off to a good start on that front.

We are requesting funding support from the city council in this year's budget to continue to be able to offer and expand these programs to city residents.

Thank you for your consideration and your service to the community.

Thank you.

Carl Kaiser, followed by Kristen Lee.

Madam Chair, members of the committee.

I am Carl Kaiser, a member of the Open Space Advisory Board, approved by this council last December.

Albuquerque Open Space successfully manages more than 30,000 acres of land.

Whether you picnic at Atlane Gallegos, stroll in the busque, bicycle in the foothills, or jog in four hills.

People visit and move to Albuquerque because it's accessibility to beautiful natural areas.

The mayor's proposed budget mandates four fewer positions within open space, four of four of twelve within parks and rec and the largest dollar reduction within the department.

Unfortunately, two less educator positions and two less park attendant positions impact the core functions of open space.

When staff is small, one or two less persons mean frankly that things aren't done.

For example, park attendants monitor open space lands, open and closed locks gates, perform minor ongoing maintenance tasks.

Without these people, it becomes a free-for-all on our public lands.

The current budget allows for one person, one parking attendant for the entire city.

I expect most entities within the city will need to spend less this fiscal year given revenue shortfall.

But such cuts need to be equitable and not unduly impact a small staff.

Please reduce such a large cut to our open space programs.

Thank you for your time this evening.

Thank you.

Kristen Lee, followed by Sheldon Hamilton.

Hello, hello.

Good evening, Madam Chair, members of the council.

My name is Kristen Lee.

I'm the co-executive director at Explora.

I'm here to thank you for the opportunity to speak.

Thank you for listening to all of these voices, and to respectfully ask that you restore the $250,000 cut from Explora's operating funding in the draft to FY27 budget, and to add that funding to our recurring, uh not non-recurring budget line.

Explora is a powerful public-private partnership with the city.

Together, we provide a science center, children's museum, teen, workforce center, and early childhood programs for Albuquerque families.

Over time, Explora has leveraged the city's investment to significantly expand our impact.

While the city's contribution once represented nearly half of Explora's operating budget, today, excuse me, today it accounts for just 28%, reflecting substantial growth in our own earned revenue and philanthropic support.

Each year, Explorer brings more than 600,000 in federal funding and over 1 million in state funding into Albuquerque to support programs that serve local children, families, and educators.

Notably, the city's contribution has remained remains relatively flat for more than a decade, and we're not asking for an increase, only that this essential support, which makes us such a strong example of a public-private partnership be maintained.

Explora serves over 300,000,000 people each year, and students in our program show measurable gains in educational outcomes and workforce development skills.

The loss of 250,000, which equals a loss of five FTE staff members, will result in fewer STEM programs, fewer free memberships for Albuquerque families, and fewer out-of-school time opportunities for pre-K through high school learners.

Thank you for your support of a proven high impact partnership.

Thank you, Kristen.

Sheldon Hamilton, followed by Julie Radoslovich.

Good evening, Madam Chair and members of the council.

My name is Sheldon Hamilton, and I am on the leadership team at Explora.

I run the Teen Workforce Development Center, but tonight I'm here to talk about Explorer specifically as it's somewhere near and near to my heart, place I grew up.

And I would also like to respectfully ask that you restore the 250,000 cut from the operating funding and FY Draft Budget 27 and add that funding to our recurring budget line.

As Kristen mentioned, Explorer serves over 350,000 people each year, and students in our program show measurable gains in educational outcomes and workforce development skills.

And today I brought with me a letter that we just received from one of those students, and I would like to meet you with Roth Commission.

Hello, I'm I hope you're doing well at Explora.

I'm graduating this year with my bachelor's in chemical engineering, and I will be going to graduate school in New York City this fall.

The directed energy internship I had at Explorer a few summers ago was the best experience I could ever have as it helped me get an internship at Sandia National Labs.

Working at the labs allowed me to get into my PhD program, and I'm extremely grateful to have learned from you, Tim Presnell, and Dr.

Gunny about the STEM and life-related activities within a classroom and makerspace.

I was wondering if you had any opportunities for volunteering or helping out with the summer camps, and as I'm looking to get more experience with them and STEM education.

I really love Explora.

It gave me so much, and now it's my turn to give back.

Best Sophia Castillo.

That 250,000 loss will result in fewer STEM programs for students like Sophia.

Restoring this 250,000 investment will protect a proven high-impact partnership that leverages significant outside funding, serves hundreds of students, hundreds of thousands of residents and visitors, and delivers measurable outcomes to outdoors children's families and economy when it needs it the most.

Thank you so much.

Thank you.

Julie Radaslovich, followed by Jesus Munoz.

Chair Grout and members of the Committee of the Whole.

My name is Julie Radoslovich, Chair of the Metropolitan Parks and Recreation Advisory Board.

I plan to speak about park activation and programming this evening.

That remains important, but given this budget, I want to speak about the board's top priorities.

We understand this is a difficult year, and we recognize the mayor's focus on public safety, housing, and homelessness.

But the cuts to parks recreation will have immediate visible impacts across the entire city.

I ask that the committee of the whole consider restoring some funding to our city's parks and recreation department.

Priority one, please consider restoring contractual services.

The proposed $2.1 million cut is an urgent concern.

With only 50 full-time staff to look over to look after nearly 300 parks across the city, park management depends on seasonal workers to maintain our parks.

This funding also supports basic operations, trust collection, restroom cleaning, security, essential services.

And then priority two.

Please protect core staff.

Eliminating 10 full-time positions will further weaken operations.

The budget projects the budget projects cut in forestry, park management, golf, and open space.

Open space will be reduced, as you've already heard earlier today, will be reduced to one educator, effectively ending more most of our programming.

These are essential roles, not optional.

With regard to programming, we continue to support park programming, but not at the expense of cooperations and staffing.

So the bottom line parks are essential infrastructure.

When maintenance dollars decline, people see the impact immediately.

Trash is not collected, closed restrooms, safety concerns.

We urge you to restore contractual services first and protect critical staffing.

These are the minimum investments needed to keep our parks functional.

Thank you.

Thank you, Julie.

As is Munoz, followed by Megan Yosis on Zoom.

Megan Yosis, followed by Nicole Finch.

Good evening, uh Chairwoman, Council members.

So I uh I just um want to speak against the budget as it has currently been written and ask you to provide some amendments to make the budget more centered on um on people's needs.

So there's no there's really no like law of the universe that says that the police have to get an ever increasing share of the budget when crime is at a historic low over the past like several several decades.

It's at a historic low.

Um it's just it's really unfortunate to see a budget that prescribes staffing cuts and uh funding cuts for pretty much every department except for the police department and you know, just sitting here.

I've been hearing um different cuts that I was not previously aware of.

Um so the ones that I'm specifically focused on.

Um I do not think it's a good idea to cut public transit while we're in a gas crisis and the price of gases um reach four dollars.

Um, a lot of people rely on public transit right now, and this is just gonna make things even harder for them if um y'all are cutting um bus routes and uh bus driver positions and stuff.

Um, and then also for the library, um, our libraries are understaffed.

Um, Baltimore, which is a city of similar size, has like hundreds and hundreds more library staff than Albuquerque does.

So I would love if my library was open, um, was open later, was open on Sunday.

Um, and also the library does deserve um recurring funding for computers and IT because the library can't really function without computers.

Um people go there to use the computer because they don't have a computer at home.

And just overall, um, I think city workers uh deserve a raise.

Um, I know that there are some recommendations that maybe haven't been implemented about um giving city workers a raise, so I do think that um community safety, sanitation workers, all of our city workers who are currently dedicating their lives to public service when they could be making more in the private sector.

Um, all of them deserve a raise.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Nicole Finch, followed by Yasmin Najmi.

Madam Chair, Counselors, my name is Nicole Finch, and I'm a member of the library advisory board for district nine.

I had really hoped to be there in person with my colleagues tonight, but my knee just gave out and I couldn't get there.

And so I appreciate the council's commitment to accessibility via Zoom.

And I want to express my thanks to Mr.

Cornelius for always doing such a great job managing the technical aspect.

Uh, I'm also grateful to the library for its accessibility because I'll be able to check out an e-book to read tonight without leaving my home.

Uh, the library is committed to serving all members of the community regardless of disability status, age, residential status, or income.

A budget is a moral document, and it's very important that our city budget shows our commitment to the library and therefore the community by fully funding and staffing the library system, including recurring IT funding.

The library budget this year is heartening if it actually results in the much deserved pay raises for library staff.

But we have to fully staff the library all the way up to that funding level and fill all vacancies without leaving positions open.

Our hardworking library staff deserves that, and our community deserves that.

Thank you so much for all you do.

Thank you, Nicole.

I hope you feel better.

Yasmin Najmi, followed by Steve Glass.

Good evening, Counselor Grout and other counselors.

My name is Yasmin Najmi, and I am also on the Open Space Advisory Board.

And I know that environmental and outdoor education and public engagement are very important to the Keller administration and very important to the counselor.

So much so that the council directed the open space division to produce a public engagement plan.

And all of these activities really to implement them obviously take staff.

And as Mr.

Pettler and Mr.

Kaiser eloquently talked about, you know, reducing the education staff to one and park attendance to one means that you're not going to have the wonderful and critical programming that open space provides, and you're not going to have management of these critical open spaces.

And it's my understanding right now that the park attendant staff duties are largely being done by temporary staff who are being funded through contractual services.

So any reduction in contractual services could jeopardize again the ability to manage some of these open spaces and be responsive to the public and protect these open spaces, but also other critical management activities such as restoration of these critical ecosystems that open space embodies and the many other activities that open space does as well.

So I really was strongly encourage you to maintain as much of the permanent staff as you can, in particular in education and the park attendance and to restore the contractual services budget.

And I thank you for your time.

Thank you, Yasmin.

Steve Glass, followed by Althea Atherton.

Good evening, Madam Chair, members of the council.

I'm here as well representing the Open Space Alliance, which is the friends of Albuquerque Open Space, so to speak, to speak in support of the funding for the Open Space Division and for the public, the parks and recreation division or department in general.

But I will point out that Ralker has a reputation as being one of the most having the highest ratio of uh park space parkland spaces to population.

And I would say that that that's an uh tourist attraction.

It's a reason for people to visit Albuquerque generates revenue.

Uh so the open space division uh is a is a critical element of um of the Albuquerque environment, and I really strongly encourage you to do what you can to maintain the positions that the Albuquerque uh open space division needs that have been uh eloquently described by the previous speakers.

Uh thank you for your time and for anything you can do to assist uh the open space division.

Thank you, Mr.

Glass.

Althea Atherton, followed by Rudolph Serrano.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Madam Chair, I'd like to open with a quote from the 14th librarian of Congress, Carla Hayden.

Librarians have been called the cornerstone of democracy.

They're free.

Anyone can walk through the doors and with the insurance that what they're asking for and what they're asking would not be shared with anyone else is a pillar of democracy.

And librarians and their profession have held that that is one of their cornerstones of service.

It's public service.

I use our library several times a week as an avid reader, rating raising avid readers, and a geographic information technology student and a conveyor, uh convener of public meetings and public spaces.

Libraries should be fully funded with all the technology expenses that they need recurring annually.

And if libraries are the cornerstone, then transit is the connective cement that touches every social issue that you can imagine.

I start most of my bus rides at the Ernie Kyle Library, and I take it to all the other libraries.

I take it to Explora.

I took it this morning to the city hall to meet with my own city counselor.

I've taken to the doctors, and I'm far from alone.

Transit is the underappreciated, underspoken cardiovascular system of our entire economy.

And while I know that we'll talk more about transit next week when we talk about physical goals, I can't help but think about how transit is crucial for the efficacy of all these social programs as well.

And the heart of that system is our bus drivers.

And not just cost of living adjustment.

They need to be paid like our peer cities.

And you shouldn't have to take a pay cut to drive a bus for the city over the CDL jobs in the credit sector.

And while it's been clear that these transit positions that are currently vacant don't impact service today, that doesn't mean that these transit positions are unnecessary, as they are to restore us to 95% of our 2019 operation levels.

Right now we're kind of at 65, 70%.

And transportation, public transportation is 10 times safer per mile than traveling by the automobile.

And if we want to really be concerned about human safety, we need to fully pup fund public transit and have real customer service of like ambassadors.

Thank you very much, and I appreciate your time.

Thank you, Althea.

Rudolph Serrano.

Madam Chair and uh everybody, uh, if I go over to me off, because uh I don't know the queue here, but here I'm on the open space, and if you can see, they put a rope and we cannot enjoy the open space.

They just made a line and we cannot open uh you know uh enjoy it anymore.

So don't give him more money so they can cut our access to the open space until they take these things from it's not conservation, they're just segregating us from enjoying what is ours.

Um from Explora, thank you for trying to help me all last year to get my puppets to be 3D.

Sadly her proposal Alexis deny me the use of Explorer, which is our money, and I I was not able to do anything in her words.

You just don't quit, right?

And that's just wrong.

So we need to work with the Hispanics in Explora.

I want to see how many boys are Hispanics before we give them one more penny.

The other thing is THC may have uh the road from uh THC to schizophrenia.

We cannot give them 3.5 million so they can keep uh continuing the developing this uh terrible uh illness in our streets, and uh we need to put that money to make sure we fight it.

And um with homelessness, which is my specialty, uh the PTSD cruiser.

I have a new proposal, but uh I think my timing is gonna be wrong.

But uh, we definitely need to talk more about uh the use of uh or money to to THC.

You know, they there's uh correlation that they don't want to put in T B.

And that's the the uh and and the companies they say that is not related to crime, but it's great.

Schizophrenia is behind 80, 40 percent of increased crime.

So they're just trying to wash their faces, but uh pretty much the last time.

Thank you, Mr.

Serrano.

Thank you.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

That concludes public comment.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Okay, uh, before we begin department presentations, I have just a couple of questions for the CFO and the um DFA um Department of Finance.

Um regarding the one-time compensation compensation adjustment as well as the proposed um budget uh or the the this budget now.

Um so to Miss Sandoval.

Hi, Miss Sandoval.

Hi.

Um, what was the total cost of the one-time supplemental payment that employees got in R25219?

Um Chairman Grout and counselors, I believe it was just under two million.

Can you please um get me the exact amount?

Sure.

I can okay.

And if you could get that to us tomorrow, that would be great.

Um, how much of that was uh what how much was appropriated for it?

Uh Chairman Grout, that's the amount that was appropriated.

Okay.

Um what was the total cost?

There is two different numbers.

So there, so I guess I'll talk with you afterwards.

Let's get the exact numbers that we need.

Okay, and it will help us moving forward.

Thank you.

All right, thank you.

Um and Miss Um CFO Martinez, thank you.

At the F finance and Government Operations Committee meeting on April 13th, Madam CFO, you did state that the general fund will come in at budget for fiscal year 26.

Is that still the plan?

Madam Chair, yes, that's still the plan.

Okay.

Um is the assumption that you're coming in at um budget for fiscal year 25 included in the estimation for the fiscal year 27 proposed budget.

I'm sorry, I I heard fiscal year 25.

Do you mind restating that?

Okay, is the is the assumption of you coming in at budget for fiscal year 26 included in the estimation for the fiscal year 27 proposed budget?

I'm not sure I understand your question, Councillor Grout.

Um budget staff, can you explain further to RCFO?

Uh Chair, Madam Chair.

Um we're asking if you're assuming that you come in budget in FY26.

Have you included that estimation in the proposed 27 budget?

Madam Chair, uh, I think Kevin, do you want to Mr.

Noel?

Yes, madam chair.

Um, yeah, we are including that in the proposed budget as we showed on the fund table.

Okay, can you show us where in the in the uh fund table?

Um not sure if everyone has a copy of the fund table.

I'm sorry.

No, it's not included in the slide.

So madam chair, um if I mean the FY27 proposed budget shows that you know we're not anticipated to carry over a deficit into FY26 into FY27.

Um the fund table for F, I'm sorry, the FY26 estimated actuals shows that uh the available fund balance will net to zero with this cost savings measures and the well not cost savings, however, but you know, just getting the spending back under budget.

And therefore we wouldn't be carrying that deficit into FY27.

Okay, and where is that on this table?

Well, I mean you can see that in the fund table for I'm sorry, in the column for FY26 estimated actuals, we're showing that 13,000 $13 million uh estimated projection adjustment reflects the guidance by which we're using to um help departments manage their spending so that they'd come in at budget, which is reflected by the zero at the bottom for the available fund balance.

And therefore, if we were anticipating coming in um you know over budget, then we would have you know we would have reduced our spending in FY27, but we're just showing that you know we will um you know have an eight million dollar fund balance at the at the end here.

So I mean okay, thank you.

We'll have further questions later.

Okay.

Thank you, sir.

Okay.

Um you want to follow up on that, sure, Mr.

Thank you, madam.

Mr.

Lewis.

Council Lewis.

Uh well, really, just because it's more of a general question of Ms.

Martinez or Ms.

Single.

Um this total budget.

I mean, there are there are some fee increases to city residents.

Um, two dollars on weekends for city residents at the biopark.

Um I mean, look you built your budget around a pretty massive increase to a water bill.

I mean, it could be a uh, I mean, you're assuming it, you're assuming this council would pass this, but you built your budget around it, a pretty big increase to the water bill for every resident in our city.

Um you propose an increase for you know three dollars, an increase of three dollars in senior meals, so um, and also a trash pickup bill, it's uh pretty significant amount of money that would apply to small businesses.

Um, I look at this and it's uh you you've built your proposed budget around um some significant fee increases to city residents.

Yeah, even though we have um you know more taxpayer dollars in revenue than we have before.

So really the question is this you know, back at the mayor's city city, you know, state of the union, state of the city address, he said that uh he announced a freeze on um on city fees.

Now that was clarified, there was some confusion about it.

Um so then Ms.

Single, you clarified that uh by stating uh that you know those obviously were not a fee, you know, freeze to all fees, and or it even said it's not a tax reduction.

Uh and the mayor said his his purpose for that is because he wanted to make you know City Hall affordable, you know, he recognized that you know people were having a hard time making ends meet, and uh um you know the city you know taxes a lot, you know, we have a lot of fees.

Um so really the clarification that you gave you know to this council and you know, addressing the mayor's statements and his desire, uh not just desire, his commitment to do it.

It was a I I would call it a campaign promise.

I mean, he announced uh while he was running for mayor again that there would be no fee increases uh to city residents.

Um again you you clarified that over and over, and you and you mentioned as well uh that the purpose was the concern for affordability.

Uh so really I guess my question, and it's kind of a gotcha question.

I'm sorry, it it is, I'll admit it.

Um, but um our I I guess several things.

Um do we do we not care about affordable affordability anymore?

I mean, is that not a concern?

Because it was a concern during the state of the city address when the mayor was running for re-election.

It was a concern of you all, you know, that you all conveyed as well.

Um, and yet we see these fee increases throughout this budget on city residents.

I mean, City Hall is more expensive now than it was last year if we um if we uh um you know accept your budget.

Um was it a what was it a was it a uh a reneg on a campaign promise, just uh uh or is it just not not a concern anymore about affordability in the city who is that for question CFO CFO um Madam Chair, Counselor Lewis, um you know you mentioned a few different revenues in there, so I'm gonna address them.

So as it relates to the storm stormwater fees, there was a state law that passed that said that municipalities can recoup those costs.

So what we have proposed to you all relates to the recoupment of infrastructure that has been built by the city related to stormwater fees.

Again, I mean you can take it or leave it, right?

But if we don't raise these as potential revenue opportunities, then the conversation never happens.

As it relates to solid waste, I know that there was a proposal to increase on out of city residents for those that are utilizing our services at convenience centers that are not residents of the city of Albuquerque and are not paying into the tax base.

As it relates to senior affairs, there is a complete revampment of their menu, and I'm sure that director Sanchez is happy to you know talk in more detail about that.

Related to cultural affairs, again, I think Director Sanchez can speak to this.

Um, but I think you know, this decision about whether or not to increase charges on residents there.

I think the intention for her when this proposal was raised by her was really to modify behavior so that there we actually don't want to raise fees on residents.

The hope is that these individuals start to utilize our facilities on different days and really try to increase the experience for everybody.

But again, I will let uh director Sanchez speak to that because that really is the heart of her reason for wanting to propose this.

All right, madam chair, I mean maybe it's more of a uh policy decision because I mean you you I mean you explain some of the fee increases, although the commercial increase in solid waste is to all that's a that I mean you have in here a two about two million dollars and an increase in fees uh related to trash pickup for commercial.

That's small businesses, and that's a pretty big increase to services that the city provides.

And so it's again, it's a new increase, you know, to families, the small businesses directly related to people uh you know that live and do work in our city.

Um the uh the stormwater, I mean, whether you I mean again, however, we justify it or not.

I mean, yeah, I mean, I I I know you know how it works, you know, we have the ability to raise these fees, um, but you propose to do it and you built your budget around it.

Um then, you know, regardless of what the the fee increase at the zoo is meant to do, uh it's uh it's a big increase to city residents and families uh to go to the zoo.

Um the senior meals, you know, I guess we'll talk about that, but um uh it's a it's a tax, it's an increase in services that we provide, an increase in money directly out of the pockets of senior citizens in our city was something that we provide for them.

So it's an increase.

Uh so I guess I would ask it to the CAO, and again, it's it's a gotcha question because I think it deserves it.

I mean, you know, not made made it look bad, but to go, I mean, I I sincerely want to know the answer to the question, and that is is the mayor by policy not concerned about affordability of families in the city like he was in you know a few months ago when he did the state of the city address, um, or was that just a campaign promise that he had no intention of ever you know keeping whatsoever?

Uh Madam Chair and Councillor Lewis, um I actually appreciate that you asked the question again because it gives me the opportunity to point out that um you know, in one of the questions that was posed with uh from city council was uh if we were charging market rates or even keeping up with the market increases that would be uh appropriate in the many places within our city that um we charge fees, what would the new revenue be for all of those fees?

And I believe we've provided that answer.

But I think it's important to note, you know, there is not a fee increase for going to the pool.

There is not a fee increase for playing golf, which I know was important to you, counselor.

You mentioned it to me several times.

It was important to you that we uh and the mayor that we maintain fees.

That what you're speaking to are items that are critical infrastructure issues like stormwater, in which the state passed a law to ensure that we have the opportunity to continue to invest in stormwater to support individual neighborhoods to not be flooded.

What you're referencing is the commercial um solid waste fees that um long ago have been uh approved in that through discussions with city council around the fact that we need to uh ensure that we're keeping up with the cost of delivery and that enterprise fund for picking up waste uh with commercial businesses different than what it how it impacts uh a resident in their household at their at their curbside or where that might be.

And those surcharges related to the biopark is a remains that individuals have choice.

Um our residents do not have to attend, go to the zoo at the time when those surcharges are there.

They make it they have the opportunity to make that choice.

So we have not raised all of the fees that would be necessary to uh for us to keep up with what is probably notably um reasonable if you look across our region in terms of um other uh areas and including in the state of New Mexico.

We have made that commitment to keep things as affordable, especially when it relates to children and our our um uh senior community and others that are rely on our services.

Um this is in balance with the fact that we have made significant uh cuts in the through this budget and try to maintain services for those individuals that rely on these services for their quality of life and the opportunities that the city brings for them.

It is an impossible task to imply that we should not raise fees and not generate revenue and keep all services at the same level to support our community and uh cut the budget at the same time.

We are experiencing the same price increases in in every single purchase, every single payment we make as a city.

And that includes, by the way, a budget that's presented to provide wage increases to our employees because they uh the 6,000 employees also need the opportunity to have the uh ability to um afford what they need to at home as well.

Madam Chair, Ms.

Single, you said it's impossible.

It's impossible.

So were you guys just naive a few months ago?

I mean, what was going on?

Because you know, you said in the statement, you you said it means that the city will not propose any fee increases.

That's what you said, that rather than eliminating fees entirely, because you wanted to clarify it's not limited, we're just not doing any fee increases.

You know, you said it also covers programs that are already offer free access to city facilities or services.

You said the this is your quote.

The intent of freezing means that we would not be increasing any fees or proposing any fee increases.

That's what you said.

I mean, were you guys?

I don't know.

I mean, are we just complete idiots?

I mean, you were just saying you're just again, is it are these just are these just campaign, you know, re-election type statements with with no intent whatsoever.

Did you know when you said this that it was impossible to do that?

Um again, I I guess probably not gonna answer that.

And I I think we know though.

I thought I think the answer is obvious.

I mean that there was never any intention whatsoever to actually do, you know, what the mayor ran on and wanted to do and told the people of the city that he wanted to do.

Um, and what I mentioned are some pretty real fee increases, you know.

I mean, again, it's gonna cost more for seniors according to your proposal.

At the same time, we're cutting, yeah, you said, well, we cut, we we uh we really cut some, yeah, you cut some departments, you cut the libraries, you cut some other significant services, um, but it wasn't because we didn't have enough revenue.

You cut it because of your other priorities, uh whether it be uh um you know in housing or other priorities that you said this is what we're going to uh prioritize and do.

So um, you know, we we weren't in need of a cut in those departments.

Uh but you wanted a cut.

You wanted to cut some things so that you can fund other stuff.

And so you really be clear that it's not this is not like some citywide cut because we you know we don't have enough revenue.

And at the same time, increase fees on seniors on every resident, on small businesses.

Um, just a lot of things about that that don't make sense, even about the specific things you guys said just a few months ago, which to me I took that as okay.

Um, you know, maybe there's some some true changes from this administration when it comes to understanding affordability in our city, understanding you know, uh just the nonstop fee increases that we just accept, you know, year over year.

And so I mean, I think the only reason why the mayor would have said that, and you said that is because you had a pretty real understanding of the fact that there is a direct correlation between affordability in our city and the cost of city hall.

That's it.

Thanks, madam chair.

Thank you, Ms.

Councillor Lewis.

Okay, Madam Chair, I'm sorry, if I could make one point of clarification.

Uh senior citizens will and still continue to get free lunch.

So I just wanted to make that clear.

So there's there's an increase in three dollars to senior meals.

So what are you trying to say?

What is the difference?

Madam Chair.

I mean, Madam Chair, we're happy to discuss that more when uh Director Sanchez comes, but there are others besides seniors that come and partake in mills, very inexpensive mills.

So I continue to state that seniors continue to get free lunch.

Okay.

Okay.

Uh Counselor Teas.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I have a question about the stormwater fees and what is included in the budget.

So you have four million dollars in the budget on stormwater fees.

Is that right?

Madam Chair, Councilor Teas, yes, the budget was sent down with uh an assumption of four million in revenue.

So we did have a conversation about this earlier, or I guess it was last week now.

Um, I guess so, but the stormwater fees are not actual revenue that we get.

I know you mentioned that the state passed a bill, so that's why you included it, but the bill actually with the state requires that the city pass an ordinance to collect those fees, and we don't actually have an ordinance, so we're not actually collecting those fees.

And while there is now an ordinance, because I did see one has been introduced.

Um, do you have a plan, contingency plan?

We've had this discussion.

I'm just wondering if you were able to put together a contingency plan for those fees, that four million dollars, should this ordinance not get passed.

Madam Chair, Councilor Tayus, you are correct.

When we had the meeting, we flagged the fact that we had sent down a balanced budget with available fund balance that included this four million dollar revenue.

We have also provided parallel to that, um, a draft ordinance in lieu of this, because the state law does say does give municipalities the opportunity to uh to increase for stormwater fees through and via through an ordinance.

So that is what we have done.

And so I apologize, I can't remember uh I did I I don't know if I answered all your questions.

Yeah, I'm just wondering if there's a contingency plan.

So if we don't pass that ordinance, what are where are you gonna get the four million from?

Well, um, as I madam chair and counselor Tayas, as I stated in our meetings, you know, we did send down a balanced budget with an eight million dollar available fund balance.

Uh okay, thank you.

Um, and madam chair, one more question.

So I see that there's about so the inner fund transfers, those are not also that's also revenue risk.

Um 8 million.

Let's just say so that's 4 million.

I also know that there's about 4.7 million in the recurring funds.

Let me find that.

I think it's on page 20 or 30.

Okay.

So we have 22 million in non-recurring appropriations for items that are arguably very much operational costs, so should not be one-time non-recurring appropriations.

Um, of that, we only have a revenue stream for non-recurring revenue in the amount of 4.4 million dollars.

So we are about 18 million over in non-recurring items.

So, where are you gonna get the additional money to pay for that those 18 million that 18 million?

Because the 4 million and the 4 million, that puts us at 8 million.

So that's your wiggle room.

But we still have 18 million, and that's only in the recurring items.

That is totally unaccounted for that arguably are really actually operational needs and not one-time things.

But you look at technology and innovation, for example, just that one list in the recurring items has us at find it.

22, I think it's about 22.

And 22 million or 20, sorry, um, you know what I'm saying.

Um, but those are not they're listed as non-reocurring, but uh call center script for 311, Cisco docusign subscription, ESRI for APD, licenses, credits, people soft licensing, those are not one-time needs, those are things that we need to operate every year.

What would APD do without the ESRI support?

Uh Madam Chair, Counselor Teos, I think um there, and you know, even hearing some of the presentations, I think there's confusion.

Because an item is a non-recurring, it is not a reflection of whether the expense is recurring or not.

It's a matter of the funding source that is being utilized.

So I just want to make that clear.

It's not a referendum on whether or not we think those items are are recurring items or not.

As to the other question, I mean, I will have uh Mr.

Noel, if you can answer the question, Madam Chair, Counselor Tees, which question is that the question on Yes.

Oh, as far as the non-recurring versus the non-recurring, I'm sorry, non-recurring expenses versus the non-recurring revenue.

I mean, the all of the revenue is put into the general fund, and then as uh CFO Martinez stated, um, we determine okay, which type of appropriation is going to be non-recurring, i.e., you know, intended to last just for the year instead of recurring repeating every year.

Um, getting to the point about say something like IT costs, you know it initially when these items were set up, you know, they were set up as non-recurring to get an understanding of how they might, you know, if it's something that actually would be the same amount each year, and so you know, we're willing to work with the departments to see how we can, you know, if these are gonna going to continue to be repeated costs, then we can work with them to see how we can make them recurring going forward.

Um, but yeah, just to I guess get back to the understanding of how the general fund works is that you know, revenues be they recurring, non-recurring, they come into the fund, and then we determine how to allocate them to the different you know items or you know, appropriate them correctly, and then you know this non-recurring list is just a reflection of items that we anticipate would only be appropriated for a single year.

And if a department comes back and says, well, we need it again, then we would look at do we want to appropriate it as a recurring or you know, in discussions with them, how long do they anticipate that it's going to be recurring, and therefore it might go on to the non-recurring list?

Thank you in that sense.

Okay, thank you.

Um and Madam Chair, just to be clear, sure uh we're using it for not necessarily um non for non-recurrent expenses, right?

But it's very explicit in state guidance, budgeting guidance from DFA in our local government division, that we are never to budget recurring costs from non-recurring one-time revenues.

Um, because you're gonna have over budgeted budgeted obligations.

There's pop there's a lot of risks in doing that, like a lot of risks in doing that.

And yeah, it's not technically you know the thing, right?

There it's not a law, you're not doing anything illegal, but you're certainly risking misstatements and mismanagement of government public funds.

So that's a and 22 million in non-recurring items is quite a lot for a potential misstatement or mismanagement of funds.

Thank you, madam chair.

Thank you, Councillor Chair.

Yes, Mr.

Noel.

Madam Chair, Councillor Tayas.

On page 27, uh in the blue column, the proposed budget, we show that recurring revenues, recurring revenues are 889 million, and recurring expenses are 852 million.

So we're not budgeting uh recurring items with non-recurring revenues.

Well, that's home park distributions.

So those aren't going to be there forever.

Those are phasing out a big chunk of that.

But that's the non-recurring revenue.

But I'm just saying that the 889 million on the recurring line is higher than the 852 million recurring appropriations.

So we're not budgeting recurring revenues from non-recurring.

I'm sorry, we're not budgeting recurring expenses from non-recurring revenues.

No, right, but you're only supposed to use non-recurring revenue to fund non-recurring appropriations.

That's the that's the general practice under GASBY under yellow book, under whatever you want to look at it.

If you are having non-recurring appropriations, they should be funded with non-recurring revenue.

Madam Chair, Councillor Tis, we'll take a look at it.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Counselor TS.

Counselor February.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I just wanted to clarify um because I've got a lot of um emails and calls about the stormwater um utility fee and the stormwater utility ordinance, and I was telling everybody that it has not been introduced, it has not been introduced.

I saw um just a couple of minutes ago that it is now available on Legistar, but it's got a note that it is to be introduced.

So I just I just wanted to clarify that because everybody's very concerned, and none of us have actually seen it, and now I see that it is on Legistar, which I will be looking at it tonight, but just wanted to clarify that.

Thank you.

Okay, any other questions?

All right, let's move on.

Thank you for that.

Robust discussion.

Okay, we will now go to Mr.

Kevin Noel.

He is the budget officer.

Mr.

Noel will lead today's presentation overview of the social goal department budgets.

Counselors will have an opportunity to ask questions of each department after they are presented.

Mr.

Noel.

Madam Chair, counselors, thank you very much.

Um we're presenting to you the FY27 proposed budget with revenue and information on the social departments this week.

Go to the next slide, please.

Next slide, please.

Okay, thank you.

Madam Chair, Counselors.

I would like to first thank our Office of Management and Budget Staff.

We have City Economist Christine Berner.

I'm the acting budget officer Kevin Noel.

Our senior budget analyst, Linda Cutler Cutler Padilla, who oversees Chief the CAO's office, economic development, fire, the mayor's office and parks and recreation.

Our other senior budget analyst, Hiane Zhao.

She oversees DFAS, General Services, Human Resources and Transit.

Executive budget analyst Emma Romero, who oversees CPOA, the civilian police oversight agency, legal police, and senior affairs.

Our other executive budget analyst, Mavan Biazar.

She oversees animal welfare, aviation, community safety, solid waste, executive budget analyst Suzanne Oliver, who oversees city support, municipal development, Office of the City Clerk, Office of Internal Audit, the Office of Inspector General, Technology and Innovation, and YFS, and Executive Budget Analyst Diane Shaver, who oversees Arts and Culture, Environmental Health, Health Housing and Homelessness and Planning.

And I'd like to take a moment just to really thank them because you know we, as you all know, we went through a lot of transition in the middle of budget prep.

And our two new analysts, uh Suzanne Oliver and Diane Shaver, they really stepped up, as well as Linda and Hyan as our senior budget analysts, they did a great job in leading the whole budget team and getting you know the budget submitted on time and accurately.

And then Emma Romero and Mavon, they worked really hard as well in you know helping Linda and Hyan uh bring along the two new analysts.

So I'd just like to you know acknowledge their efforts.

Um the FY27 budget calendar started on December 19th with the budget call and the message and instructions sent to the departments.

Um on January 9th, departments submitted the budget forms to OMB from February 9th and 10th, as well as February, February 12th and 13th.

We conducted the CAO budget hearings on April 1st.

We submitted the budget resolution to council on April 22nd.

Um the social departments sent their responses to uh the council's questions on April 29th.

Yesterday, the physical departments sent their responses to council.

Today we are having the uh committee of the whole number one social goal presentation.

On May 7th, we will have the committee of the whole number two physical goal presentation on May 14th.

We will conduct the committee of the whole meeting for the budget markup, and on May 18th, um, we will conduct the regular council meeting for budget and final adoption.

I'll turn this over to CFO Martinez now.

Thank you, Mr.

Noel.

Thank you, Madam Chair and members of the committee, and first of all, um Madam Madam Grout.

I appreciate your flexibility in allowing us to flip-flop a couple of the departments due to scheduling conflicts.

So thank you for that.

I would like to start with sort of an understanding of the budget methodology that we applied this year.

I will say that you know, this body confirmed me, I believe, on February 18th, which I appreciate, and um in less than I think six weeks, uh, I had to gain a fairly good understanding of the budget and be able to submit with the team, they're an amazing group, a uh budget uh balanced budget by April 1st.

And I think not only was the time compressed, but it was a different approach this year to the budget, as I have mentioned to many of you.

And so it was a lot of long hours, it was a lot of having conversations, some very difficult sometimes conversations with departments about the work that needed to be done, but at the end of the day, they all stepped up and did the hard work.

And so this is just a highlight of some of the things that were done.

First of all, I know that this city council had requested um, I believe the mayor and the CAO that we discontinue the use of prudent program savings.

It was something that was on the budget in previous years, I believe is a negative number and a way to balance the budget.

And so one of the first things that departments were required to do was to go find those positions that would be discontinued as part of that process.

And through doing that work, we identified $18 million of positions that were identified to discontinue the prudent program savings.

In addition to that, the departments were asked to find potentially 7% of cost cuts in their departments.

And that led to an additional $37 million.

Some of that, and we'll get to a later slide, was additional positions that were cut to get us to a total of $23.5 million of positions that were position savings through this budget.

And as the departments did those cuts, we had conversations about ways in which we would reallocate the budget according to priorities, as well as to reflect appropriate spending.

And in previous years, departments used vacancy savings in many respects to cover their operating budget.

And this year, to the extent, you know, it's going to be a several year attempt, but to the extent that we could, we moved and shifted those costs into the right places, which was into operations.

So that was the overall sort of budget methodology.

As a result of it, as you see on this table, there was an overall amongst all of the funds within the city's budget, an overall $35 million cut to the budget.

I think there's been some conversation about was it really a cut?

Yes, it was absolutely a cut.

However, we acknowledge that there was an increase in the general fund.

And to that point, we will talk through what some of those increases were a result of.

But we can we move to the next slide.

Before we get into that, I also I wanted to start with sort of the overarching, which I think some of the counselors have touched upon.

Number one, our budget revenue assumptions or budget assumptions, excuse me, were that we would send down a budget based on a 5% IDOH rate.

I appreciate the conversation that has happened with city council around this, and I know we've sent down additional information based on your requests.

We also sent down a balanced budget with $4 million related to stormwater fees based on again the state law that allows municipalities to collect that.

And then $5.5 million in surcharges, those are costs that we would apply to out of city or out of county residents who are using our services as a city but are not paying into the tax base.

And this year the commitment from the mayor and the administration was something more than that.

And so what we sent down was an $8.1 million fund balance.

Some of the items that sorry, next slide, sorry.

Okay.

As CAO Sangle said, we wanted to invest in our staff, the 6,000 plus employees in the city of Albuquerque.

The budget assumes a average of a 2% pay increase across the city.

And again, I want to highlight that that is also subject to negotiations with our many unions.

And within that $13 million, there was $4 million set aside for AFR that was part of the negotiations that happened last fiscal year.

And then we also have done in addition to the $13 million wage adjustments for YFS of $800,000 for part-time employees.

So a huge chunk of YFS's employment is around hiring part-time employees, especially during the summer.

And so this $800,000 infusion is to help them try to at least get competitive.

As it stands right now, the part-time employees make about $12 an hour.

I have a 17-year-old, she makes more working for a fast food joint, right?

So the hope is that we're able to attract talent and retain talent by being a little bit more competitive.

This infusion would I believe get them up to about $15 an hour.

And then we are asking to infuse about 300 about 300,000 into Metro Security to help again the wages of our security officers be more competitive and also be more competitive even with other city departments.

I should say call it subject.

Oh, and yes, uh both Metro Security and YFS are both subject to the union negotiations as well.

Couple other highlights.

We have some capital that is coming online.

We have station 12 that's coming online.

We have the Northwest multi-gen that is coming online, and so there's about 1.2 million dollars there to get operations going for those both facilities.

We have also added $500,000 to YFS for team programming.

A lot of this was initiated, I know, by counselor Rogers, so we appreciate that.

And then almost $2 million in expansion for ACS.

We have also asked for $400,000 for a legal diversion program.

Um I think there was some previous comments about this criminalizing our homeless.

I want to make it clear this is a program that would be run by the city that is before any individual actually gets into the criminal justice system.

That's the whole point of this diversion program.

And then of course, we have some you know, standard recurring increases in costs.

We have medical that has gone up, we've had dental that has gone up slightly, and then of course, just regular ongoing costs for communication and other things that we do in the city.

Some places where we reduced within the budget.

I mentioned the two 23.5 million dollars.

Again, 18 million of that was prudent program savings that had been reflected in previous budgets.

We completely eliminated those positions.

One thing I wanted to flag is there are places where we still have to maintain vacancy savings in departments for flexibility.

We have, for instance, I'll use parks as an example.

They have promotional tracks depending on certifications.

So we have to make sure we're leaving positions available when individuals receive certain certifications and they need their promoting within the system.

Um we added 12.2 million of new positions, so 129 new FTEs because we had expansions in certain areas, but the overall reduction to personnel costs was 11.3 million dollars.

So Madam Chair, Councillor Teyas, you know, we did reduce that number from 30 to about 22 million dollars.

And then we did across you know, multiple, and these are just highlights of places where we reallocated funds amongst the budget to be more efficient and find ways in which we could have better cost savings.

Um we had, for instance, in DMD, uh, we reallocated this is one of those examples where DMD was using vacancy savings to pay for ongoing operational costs, and we made the decision to move that money into operations so that it was a better reflection of what they were actually doing with the funding.

We moved additionally some money into subsidy for gas tax because in years past that was not something that was recognized as a budget need, but it was an ongoing need, and so that happened this year.

And um, Chief Padamiya will get into a little bit more about her overtime savings, but this is an example of where we shifted positions within AFR to help lower overtime costs that were happening, and then another example is triple H you know identified an opportunity to shift some money to ACS.

We've heard city counselors, we've heard you know, a request or a want to to arm ACS with vouchers and other things to help our homeless population, and so this was an attempt to start that kind of pilot towards that, and uh I will turn it over to Christine and Kevin to follow up with the remaining slides.

Okay, Madam CFO, yes, Counselor Champagne has a question for you.

Okay, just a quick um Madam CFO.

The overall non-reoccurring reduction was 7.3 and then you saying that the budget reallocations were to all these departments, correct?

Correct.

Madam Chair and Councillor Champagne, they're two different points that are just included on the same slide.

This adds up to 8 million.

That's 7.3.

Yes, my apologies for the confusion.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Mr.

Noel.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

So the next slide shows the FY27 resources for all funds.

So the largest share is of gross receipts tax revenue of $616 million at 42%.

The next come next comes property tax at 200, roughly about 201 million at 13.7%, then other taxes at 3.9%.

Intergovernmental represents like grants, you know, federal and state grants, that's roughly about 74 million.

Next is the enterprise funds, that would be aviation, the you know, parking fund, as well as you know, solid waste and other you know similar departments.

And those that that revenue is at 188 million.

Then interfund and fund balance, those would be transfers between between funds as well as a fund balance appropriations that is at 16.3%, uh which equates to about 239 million dollars.

Then at 75 million, we have charges, fines, and permits, and then miscellaneous comes in at 16.3 million.

So those would be any other you know, small revenue items.

And to give a more detailed breakdown of the gross receipts tax revenue, um, Christine Berner will be giving that presentation, Madam Chair, members of committee.

Good evening.

So yes, I'll be giving you a quick update on GRT, the general fund and employment, as soon as I can actually see.

So this first table, it's just GRT revenue.

Um and you've you've seen similar things like this in uh in the recent past.

Um this table shows the evolution of the GRT revenues.

Uh to the far left, you have FY25 audited actual, and then the FY26 approved budget, where we thought we'd be uh at the five-year forecast, and then the second quarter, which is the most recent report that you've uh that you've received.

Um, and then to the to the the last column on the right is the FY27 proposed budget for GRT.

Um, and then the percent growth, the 3.8 percent, that is the growth of FY uh 26.

Uh not 27, just just to avoid any confusion.

Um at quarter two, FY26 is is expected to grow 3.8 percent.

Um, and I do have an update for February revenue.

We did get that.

Uh and growth was actually four and a half percent for February, uh, and that allowed the cumulative growth for the year to remain at 4.6 um percent.

And that's not up there for you.

I just I've got this here.

Um, and then for February, just briefly cannabis grew 40 almost 43 percent for February.

Uh however, I looked back at the last couple of Februaries and they just seem abnormally small.

So I think there's some sort of anomaly there that I'll look into, but at any rate, this February um did quite well over last year, or this time last year.

And um, and that brings the cumulative growth for cannabis uh nearly 2% positive for the first time this year.

So good news there.

Uh and then the FY27 GRT estimate in the proposed budget is uh projected at 1.9 percent, um, and that's about 11 and a half million over the previous year.

So if I could have the next slide.

Am I doing the slides or you can find oh sorry, yeah, yeah.

Oh, next week before you do that.

We typically point out the hold harmless um increment that was implemented effective July 2018, and so for 27 FY27, that's projected at almost 91 million, and then when you account for uh the required reserve, that leaves about 83.7 million available for appropriation.

So next slide, please.

So this is all of general fund.

Um, briefly, and I I think you've seen most of this as well.

The FY25 audited actual, where we were with the approved budget, and then the second quarter, and then I wanted to just provide some of the um some of the changes that we see in FY26.

So uh recall that FY26, the GRT, uh a little bit growth, a little bit higher there than we had at the approved budget that reflects year-to-date growth.

That reflects year-to-date growth.

There is the lump sum food hold harmless that we got at the beginning of the year, which is in there as well.

So that's that bit of increase there.

Property tax, it's holding steady.

Expect to see significant impacts from the new exemptions for veterans.

So that stays at 4%.

Franchise revenues are still doing well year to date.

Intergovernmental, that small decrease there, that's largely the state shared gas tax.

It was elevated last time last year, and I didn't expect to see it again in FY26.

So that's what that reflects.

That's what that reflects.

And then permit revenue.

At the second quarter, we did adjust that down slightly.

I mean, there were some delayed um changes that were going to happen at the planning department.

Um and so we did I did put that a little bit lower in the second quarter.

However, I am just recently looking at year-to-date um permit revenues, both regular permit and and other building permit and other permits, they're actually tracking fairly well right now.

Um, and so for Q3, which you should be getting before too long, I might be able to adjust that estimate up a little bit.

And then miscellaneous, that's a nearly 46% decrease there, that 6.7 million, but the vast majority of that is because we had um audit adjustments at the end of FY25, and you can't budget for that, and so that's why that's um so much lower.

There was, I mean, there were some other decreases.

There is some earnings on investment that had to be pulled back a little bit, but that's it's largely because of those audit adjustments, and then interfund transfers, you know, funds coming from other funds into the general fund.

Um, some of that's the um IDOH.

There was a one-time uh transfer from um the hospitality fund into general fund for some um athletic events, I believe, and so um it reflects that that increase reflects some of those.

So we can go to the next slide.

Can I sure pause for just a minute?

I have a few questions and a couple counselors too as well.

So I have just a couple questions.

Um fiscal year 26 had a 3.8% projection.

Isn't that correct?

Correct.

So far in fiscal year 26, it looks like we're about 4.6 or a little less than 1% over the projection.

Where does that um X increased amount over the 3.8% go?

Uh Madam Chair, that goes into general fund, and um I think I mentioned previously while the general fund, while the GRT is a little bit higher, we do have some reductions in the rest of general fund, and so um part of it's offset by other reductions in other places.

I sorry, it's the GRT that you're seeing that increase in, and it does offset some of the decreases in other revenues in the general fund, correct?

But yes, it goes right into general fund.

Okay, and then my final question is how many how much money is equal to about one percent over projection?

Yeah, the estimate would be around five million dollars.

Thank you, madam chair.

Um, counselor Rogers.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Um, question and just to go back to the um GRT slide.

Is the CMP is that the cannabis listed on here?

Uh Madam Chair, no, back one uh here for me.

Madam Chair, no, there's no cannabis in the general fund at this point.

It's all going into that special dedicated fund.

Right, but we still want to see what it is on the slide.

Oh so I I think I've said that several times, even though I know it doesn't go into the general fund, it goes into our own fund.

We still want to see it called out on any of our reports.

Madam Chair, Councillor Rogers, you did say that, and I didn't include it, and I do apologize.

Thank you.

Can we just get an updated sure?

Thank you so much.

Uh counselor Champagne.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Um, I'm just going over your chart, and I'm just trying to follow it all, but these numbers did you say an FY25 audited actual numbers?

All that column adds up to 83957, correct?

Correct, madam chair.

And 873043, and so on and so forth.

Correct, madam.

Okay.

Then help me with my math on the percentage growth because I'm coming up with a negative 11, not a positive 3.9.

Are you madam chair?

This this should be FY26 growing over the FY25 audited actual.

Is that what you're doing?

Yeah, the the FY26 percentage growth.

I'm adding up that column, and I'm not coming up with 3.9.

I'm coming up with 11, negative 11.

Unless that negative 45.8 is a typo.

Oh, madam chair, um, if you were to take the 872055, that growth over the FY25 audited actual of 83957.

I believe that's the three point the 3.9%.

That's where you're getting that from.

Correct.

I apologize if that's confusing.

Thank you for the clarification, Madam Chair.

Okay, thank you.

All right, continue, please.

Okay.

All right, the next slide is GRT by sector.

So this is just sort of for your information.

Um, it does show the relative um percentage by uh business sector for total GRT.

And so um for the far left column, you've got the five-month cumulative um average.

So you can see, for example, that professional and scientific services has grown about 10.8 percent so far this year.

So that's what that column is about.

And then I've included February.

Um, and you'll note that while like retail trade had experienced a bump of 16.2 construction, for example, this time last year, uh it declined 18.2.

So there were there were some declines in there.

And then I'll point out the far right two columns, FY19 share and FY25 share.

This actually speaks to a question that counselor Tayas had.

Um I don't know, maybe it was last time I was before you all.

Uh, but she asked, well, which which sectors are the most important, which ones have, I believe that was your question.

Um, and this answers the question more thoroughly.

So I think I mentioned professional and retail, but then you can actually get the percentage share for each sector, and you can see the change from 2019 to 2025.

So thank you for that.

Next slide, please.

All right, well, I wish I could say I saved the best to last, but I did not.

Um this is employment, and I think that oops.

I think that this might be the first time since COVID that I've had to tell you there's a decline in in um employment for the city.

Um for January 2026, which is the last that I had, um uh total non-farm employment declined by 1.1 percent.

Uh we did see increases in retail trade, information, health, leisure, state government.

However, um federal government declined, you know, nearly 12 percent, which we understand.

Um, but then construction employment declined 8.6 percent from this time last year, um, and professional and business services.

So, and I'll just tell you that construction employment is one of the main drivers of GRT for the city.

So that's that's a little bit worrying at this point.

But can we really be you know entirely surprised at this point?

Um so and then the unemployment rate for Albuquerque increased to 4.8 percent for January, and that was up from 3.9 in December of 2025, and that was a bit higher than the uh unemployment rate for the federal and state.

Uh the state was four and a half, and the federal was 4.3.

And so that was the last data that I had available to me when I made this slide, but very recently um February actually became available, and I'm uh it's actually not very much changed from January.

Total non-in-farm employment, it was down 1.2 percent from the previous year, with construction and federal government suffering the the worst.

Um, and then the unemployment rate for Albuquerque remained unchanged for February, uh, with New Mexico at 4.7 and the U.S.

I believe at 4.4 for February.

And so that those are that's the end of my slides.

I'd like to just sort of remind you.

I I believe you all received the the UNM Bureau of Business and Economic Research.

Um they just released their uh April report.

So this the current proposed budget was built on the January report.

That was the latest information that we had available, and that was before the the war in Iran.

Um, and this April report is the first actual data that I'm seeing that I'm getting to look at that takes some of that into account, both federal and with Bieber.

And you know, many in many years it seems like I've been able to come around this time and be able to maybe suggest the addition of additional money, but I I don't see that happening this year.

Um I actually have early in the morning I mean a meeting with Bieber.

Um this is their forecast meeting, um, and they didn't send their narrative to me until late this afternoon.

I haven't even had a chance to look at it.

So you know, I'll I'll come back to the to the council and let you know details.

I mean, you've got the the high level, you've got the numbers that you've seen it.

I've sent it to you.

Um, but it's it's I need to I need to talk with with Iber and kind of get the nuts and bolts of what's behind their data.

Thank you.

Yes, um, thank you for that.

Um we'll look forward to your next presentation.

Stay in touch.

Mr.

Lewis, thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you.

Thank you for the data.

Um I mean, I'm assuming that the you know I read the report, but I guess it it would refer to high gas higher gas prices.

Um probably the same higher gas prices that we had a couple of years ago, uh, to the and had you know two years before that and previously.

So um I think there's a lot of conclusions that we could probably draw uh you know, based on some of our history and how do we deal with budgets as a city and future revenues when we see high gas prices.

Um, when it comes to the city, we're budgeting wise.

I mean uh we hedge we normally hedge our fuel.

Um not sure if we've done that this last year.

We hedged the fuel this year.

Do we have a hedge on a fuel?

Um Madam Chair, Counselor Lewis, not as of yet, because we are trying to watch the numbers.

Um generally somewhere between February and June, we hedge uh, you know, we we lock in on the hedge for one year.

Usually one year, okay.

Um I mean that that would be some advice, I guess you we could gain from that regarding our own fuel usages.

But as far as the overall economy, and look, we have these reports.

Actually, we didn't have these reports for a long time until I you know made sure that we have these reports, because these reports I think should shape our policy.

Um for a good you know, couple years now, we have these reports, and they show that our economy in Albuquerque sucks.

I mean, that's that's the that's the result.

That's the conclusion of these reports that we're getting.

Um if anything, maintaining or pretty good.

Uh but but you know what these reports should cause us to actually shape policy, they should shape policy, they should shape a budget.

Um now we get a report when it comes to our biggest driver in our economy, employment, uh, when it comes to construction, when it comes to the greatest contributors to GRT.

Um, and we're talking about, you know, I mean, we've had discussions about raising GRT taxes and things like that.

I mean, can't you see how how significant that this report, this data is to shaping policy?

Sure, certainly so I mean my qu as we're going through this budget, and really as we're moving forward, um I mean I'd I'd love to be able to see um in our in our budget reasoning and forecasts and projections and goals for our city, you know, from the administration, um the kinds of things that are gonna change getting reports like this, that's the whole point.

The things are gonna be the drivers in this.

Um, but what we do is we again, you know, more fees, more taxes, more programs, none of them are related to this kind of data, and they should be.

Um and if you know, if you could help us with that at times, you know, I mean, because you know, it's just like accountants, you know.

We we you know, we love accountants, gotta have accountants.

The great accountants um uh that are that that help.

I mean, you have to, as a decision maker, you have to be able to go.

What does this accounting mean for the way I'm gonna run my business for the decisions I'm gonna make tomorrow?

And I think that's report is is is the same way.

So thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you.

Thank you, Ms.

Counselor Lewis.

Okay, continue.

Madam Chair, that concludes my presentation.

Okay.

Um, Madam Chair.

Yes, um, I see if I may recommend um since her meeting is with UNM tomorrow, that we'd ask that she'd be able to come back next week at the Thursday Cow hearing and give an update to the council.

I think that's a great idea.

Thank you for that.

Okay.

Madam Chair.

Yes.

I did have a quick, you know, quick follow-up.

Ums Martinez, um when you went through the the slides there again.

I noticed uh uh good I was referring to the commercial uh trash rate increase uh of 1.8 million dollars that's in your budget, page 171.

Uh and yet um so it's the commercial rate increase is expected to generate about 1.8 million dollars of additional revenue.

So you're you're counting it in your revenue, but yet you all didn't show it on your your uh your your rating, your rate sheet.

What why was why was that not on the rate sheet?

Um Madam Chair, Counselor Lewis, the reason being is that we're presenting the general fund versus solid waste has an enterprise.

There are uh solid waste is an enterprise fund, and so what we're presenting is the highlights of the general fund.

Okay.

So it's not Madam Chair, it's not a comprehensive what you gave us, wasn't a comprehensive list of of fees for the budget, it was just the ones related to tonight.

Madam Chair and Councilor Lewis, it's my understanding that's what is always presented to you as the general fund because that is the piece that you all make decisions about.

I mean, don't get me wrong, we will be presenting solid waste and transit and other enterprises as part of the presentations, but the highlights that I gave to you and the budget that was submitted to you does include the enterprise funds, but I was highlighting the work that was done related to the general fund.

Okay.

Is that does that help?

I mean, just some clarification from our staff, is that usually the case?

Is it well?

I mean, because we were talking generally about revenues, and and that's a pretty significant increase in revenues to the whole budget.

So would you say it's it's just another conversation for another day?

Madam Chair, Counselor Lewis, I I would say that in the proposed uh FY27 surcharge list, there is a a surcharge for a convenience center receipts uh for outside of city uh users.

So there that number isn't in the proposed surcharge, but the 1.8 is not.

Yeah, so so you gave us you gave us a schedule and it had uh you know solid waste fee increase, you know, two different ones, but one of them one of them was there and one of them is not there.

Um Mr.

Whalen, you know yeah, madam chair, counselor Lewis.

The reason why it's part of the discussion about the surcharge is because we have general fund related funds that there are funds, expenses related to the general fund that relate to that.

And so that was essentially um wanted to flag that for you.

But again, solid waste will be presenting to you, but my highlighted the ones that I was trying to highlight were kind of the high level, mostly focused on the general fund.

Gotcha.

So one of them is actually a lesser of a fee increase that was on that schedule.

The other so I'm so I guess in that reasoning, it would be one uh one goes to the general fund, one doesn't.

Do you want to clarify that, Mr.

Whalen?

Uh council chair and counselor Lewis.

Uh there's several differences here.

The five the increase to the commercial rate was approved back in 2021 or 2022 by the council, which was the last time we had a um residential rate increase.

So this was part of that increase back then, which allowed the department to try and keep up with its commercial costs uh up to a certain percentage, and that's what you're seeing, which is the 1.8.

So it has been for a long time.

Madam Chair, but this is a I guess Ms.

Mosco, could I correct me if I'm wrong then?

You're saying the dollar increase that that I didn't approve.

I guess this council approved it in the budget a few years ago.

Uh a dollar increase.

You're saying that that's the same thing as this new increase, this 1.8 million because of the expenses to it, or I mean this is an additional increase to trash pickup.

Uh council chair and counselor Lewis, back when we did the rate increase, residential increase in that legislation, it was stated that based that's the department could raise commercial rates up to five percent annually every 12 months or annually, which they have done since 2022, I believe.

I don't know the exact year, but it has been done and it's in that legislation.

Without our approval, it's approved in that legislation as the rate increase because any rate increase has to be approved by this council, which it was, which was a two-dollar rate increase, I believe, um, which brought us from 16 to 18, and then within that legislation, there would it said that they could raise commercial rates up to 12 up to 5% in a 12-month period.

So every 12 months, they can raise that commercial rate up to 5%, and it's not it varies based on the commercial um uh person business that has it.

So for instance, if you have a small business and you have a four-yard can and you pay $30 a month for one pickup each week, which would be four pickups, and you paid $30, it would be four or five percent of that thirty dollars.

If you're one of our high-level commercial clients, like our fast food chains, such as McDonald's or those who need to be picked up daily, their rates are a lot higher, so their five percent is a lot higher because it's based on the actual usage, whereas our residential rates are a set rate set by the council.

Madam Chair, so you understand this.

Um you got it, you got you got the ability without and we gave you the freedom to do that for how long a period of time.

You can continue to raise those rates by 5% every 12 months.

Mr.

Motsko.

Oh, okay.

Madam Chair Council Lewis.

Uh unfortunately, if it was passed in 2022, that was that was before my time.

Uh in the budget book itself on 171, where it does mention the rate increase of 1.8 million dollars, that ordinance is not referenced.

Uh in the next paragraph, they talk about the the the fuel hunt hedge, and that ordinance is referenced.

So if Mr.

Whalen and I could discuss afterwards that the ordinance reference, we'd be happy to look that in uh up for that for you.

Okay, thank you.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you.

Okay.

Um I also want to uh surcharge is another word for fee increase, correct?

Uh Madam Madam President, um, in our mind, it is not a fee increase, it is an additional charge, a surcharge for those individuals that are outside the city limits.

Okay, thank you.

Okay.

Um thank you for that clarification.

So at this time it is seven o'clock.

Before we get started on our um departments, we're gonna take a quick lunch dinner break for about 30 minutes.

We'll be right back at 7:30, and we're gonna knock this out.

Okay.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Okay, we're back from our dinner break.

Uh Mr.

Noel, would you like to go ahead and start your presentation?

Madam Chair, can I continue with it?

Yes, madam chair.

Uh we have one more slide in the overall presentation before we go to the departments.

Okay, this last slide shows the FY27 appropriations for all funds.

Um, the net overall operating budget is one million one, four hundred and sixty-six million and one hundred and ninety-five thousand after the elimination of interfund transfers, and this actually correlates to the uh slide that showed the resources earlier.

Um the slide on the or the pie chart on the left shows the FY27 proposed budget, and that is by category by spending category.

So personnel is at 52.4%.

Uh grants, I apologize is floating out there, but there is a line that should be going to the uh wedge to the left, the blue wedge to the left of the green section for personnel.

That's at 4.3%.

Uh transfers is at 5.9%, and those are the in-fund transfers.

Uh, capital spending is at 0.2%, and operating costs are at 37.2%.

Um the slide to the right, or I'm sorry, the pie chart to the right, is the net appropriations by fund type, and this is in millions.

Um, internal service funds are at 186 million, 35,000.

Enterprise funds are at 230 million, non-enterprise debt services would be like your geobond debt service GRT debt service.

That's at 126 million.

Special revenue is at 106 million.

This includes both uh like your project funds, which would be your grants, um, you know, fund 250, which is the senior services provider fund, and other special revenue funds, that's at 107 million.

And then the general fund is at 817 million.

So this is an overall presentation of both the resources and the appropriations.

Um, you will be able to in your budget book, you'll be able to see more detail on pages 41 and 45 in the financial consolidations section.

Um, and this basically just shows you know, after we've eliminated the interfine transfers, which are um the transfers between you know funds and departments where you know revenue comes in, for example, into the general fund, and then we decide okay, we're gonna transfer some of that money out to the the grants fund.

Um, and so it's an expense in the general fund, but it's also uh revenue transfer revenue in the grants fund, and then the grants fund will then expend it.

So that transfer uh expense from the general fund and that you know transfer revenue in the grants fund, we just basically cancel those out so that we show the true um revenue and expenses, and it just shows that we balance the budget.

Um next we have um I'm sorry, the next slide.

Um the next slide shows just the order in which the departments will go.

Um this will be we'll start with the city clerk, then we'll go to APD, then AFR, then we'll go to the Civilian Police Oversight Agency, uh, Albuquerque community safety, health housing, and homelessness, aviation, parks and recreation, economic development, arts and culture, and then senior fairs.

We'll wrap it up.

So on the next slide.

We have the city clerk's office or the office of the city clerk.

Ethan Watson is the city clerk.

Their FY27 proposed general fund budget is 5 million 45,000.

And they have 35 35 general fund positions.

131,000.

They have 131,000 in personnel savings from cutting two positions.

And there is a 400,000 reduction by real reallocating temporary employee expenses to the risk fund.

And this next slide will be presented by Chris, who is standing in for Ethan Watson.

Good evening.

Good evening.

All right.

So unfortunately, Ethan had to step away to attend a meeting to discuss IPRA on a statewide level.

So I'm filling in this uh this evening.

Uh the uh office of the city clerk uh has uh as uh Kevin mentioned eliminated two positions uh from our record center, but we believe that we are able we will be able to continue to keep up with uh our work at the warehouse.

Uh we've sought uh uh funds from elsewhere, uh federal uh grant funds, state funds.

So we're we're looking to do that.

Uh we've seen a substantial increase in our IPRA requests, particularly from out-of-state and out-of-country res uh uh people or persons.

Uh I ran a uh report a couple of weeks ago just for this calendar year, and we're seeing about uh 45% of our requests coming from out of New Mexico, and we believe that that's due to content creation uh seeking on-body camera lapel footage for content creation on YouTube.

Uh we uh we are digitizing as many records as we can, and we're also expanding our hearing office uh to keep up with the increase in ACE uh citations that have been issued, and so we're we're looking at uh bringing on additional hearing officers to keep up with that demand as it as it continues to increase.

Counselors, any questions?

Okay, counselor champagne.

Thank you.

What were the two positions that were cut?

It was two document imaging texts at our warehouse.

How long were they open for?

I I couldn't give you an exact uh time frame, but they were I believe they were vacant for about eight months.

Any other questions?

Yes, madam chair, hold on one second.

Uh and you just mentioned that you're gonna be adding two new a couple new positions to address the ongoing uh requests.

Yes, madam chair, counselor champagne, yes.

We are we're not adding uh FTE positions, these are gonna be contract hearing officers.

And how much are you allocating for their salaries?

Uh they're not gonna be salaries, they will uh madam, excuse me, uh Madam Chair, Councillor Champagne, they're not gonna be salaries, it's gonna be contracts.

Um I believe we're we're still in discussions with TMD about what's available for those uh contract hearing officers.

How many positions?

We're looking to we have uh one presently on contract, and then I believe we're looking to bring two additional.

Perfect, thank you, madam chair.

Counselor Feeplecorn.

Thank you, madam chair.

Um, my question might just be for the CFO.

Um it's around the use of risk fund to cover the temporary um staffing.

Now I'm I'm against temporary staffing.

I don't think this is a temporary thing.

We're gonna be doing Ipras um forever.

Um can you just talk about the justification for using the risk fund for that expense?

Um, Madam Chair, Councillor Feeblecorn, yes, and I I believe Mr.

Peck too could speak to why we use temp services.

I think for them it's an a better strategy for them rather than having full FTEs.

However, as it relates to transitioning these funds into the risk fund, I you know, I think this is a reflection of our city clerk and Mr.

Peck being very creative and proactive as it relates to their budget, and the work that they do is frankly risk mitigation work.

And so we felt comfortable and we felt it appropriate to shift what had been one-time funding for these for these temp positions to shift that funding into the risk fund because the work they do has shown a decrease in in IPRA lawsuits as it relates to the work, the processing of IPRAS.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I I I hear you.

I just I have concerns.

I mean, all of our work could be considered a risk um mitigation in one way or another.

And I think that responding to IPRAs is not just about reducing risk, it's about providing transparency for the public.

But I I appreciate the rationale there.

And then just one more question.

I just noticed that there's a trend also of transferring you know attorneys to legal this year.

And can you just talk through kind of the thought behind trying to get most of the attorneys into the central legal department rather than having them in the various departments?

Um, Madam Chair, Councillor Februar, it actually is not a reflection of where these attorneys will be physically working.

It's a matter of the fact that they are supervised by the city attorney, and therefore we felt it appropriate for the funding related to those positions to be reflected in the city attorney's budget.

Thank you.

Counselor Rogers.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I just had a question about the reduction for the Cazan contract.

I know that that was the um contractor that we were using in city clerks to do process improvement so we can get better at Ipras.

And so reducing that contract by 100,000, how is that going to affect that work?

So I believe that we are looking to fix that in a technical adjustment.

Um I I feel we had talked to uh budget, and I I think we're going to adjust that in a technical adjustment.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I think you shouldn't answer the question.

Okay.

So are we going to add it back?

Is that what you're we're wanting to put it back in?

We've talked, Madam U Chair, Councillor Rogers, we've talked about it, so I'll let Kevin explain.

Madam Chair, Councillor Rogers, as Chris explained.

Uh that was sort of an administrative oversight, and so we're looking to submit an amendment to or submit a technical adjustment request to get that corrected.

Thank you.

I'm glad to hear that.

Because if we want to get better at Ipras and we're doing process improvement, we won't want to cut the contract that's going to help us get better at doing the IPRAS.

And I think you know, to counsel people horn's point, I think I raised some eyebrows about the risk fund, but then when I looked at how much we're paying out in lawsuits for IPRAs not being done on time, I say this is a risk mitigation uh opportunity, so that we're not paying out uh so much in claims 131 claims since 2022 with over 2.7 million dollars paid out.

So I would say that it is a risk mitigation thing, so we don't uh continue to have to pay that out.

So thank you.

Counselors, any other questions?

Counselor Tayas, that's right.

I'm sorry.

Counselor Tates.

Thank you, madam chair.

Hi, how are you?

Doing good.

I'm doing well.

Yeah, that's too, you know.

Um, okay, with regard to your performance measures, I know there's the four core services here.

Um, and it looks like all the data that we're capturing, I see is more action-based data.

So we're capturing public records requests, that volume trainings, that volume, so the measurements are all volume-based.

Um how are you measuring your outcomes?

Uh Madam Chair, uh Counselor Teas, that's a good question.

Uh, a lot of the work that we do at the city clerk's office is driven by factors outside of our office.

So we uh, you know, we we're subject to the volume that we or the demand that we encounter from the public.

So whether that's administrative hearings or if that's uh uh public records requests, those are always going to be our high drivers, right?

That that forms the data that we present to.

Um and so outcomes are a little bit tricky to for us to kind of formulate because we never know in a given year what's going to drive our increase or our demand for either public records or administrative hearings.

And so I understand your question as to how would we better capture our outcomes, and I think uh that that's something that we can look at.

I think we're looking at ways where we can uh use data after the fact versus just getting it on the front end and then having to address the that demand and then reporting out.

So uh those are certainly conversations that uh we're having ongoing uh between the clerk and myself and our team to see what we can actually present to you in a in a way that's not just high charts and uh numbers in that way, but actual outcomes for our office.

Yeah, yeah, thank you.

Um, and madam chair, thank you for that.

And I I'll just throw this out there because this is a question that I'm gonna ask of all of you, all of our department um leaders really, is how are you determining your outcomes?

Because what I am seeing here is a list of intents, um intention, what your goals are, what your objectives are.

I see that you're capturing data, but then it stops there.

And so we're not, I don't know how you're able to inform your decisions and how you're making decisions, because I certainly cannot be informed by that.

I need to know from this data, how are we doing better?

How are we doing worse, right?

What should we be scaling?

What should we be pulling back?

And without outcomes, we can't be properly informed to make those decisions.

Um, and you just you know got lucky number one because you're the first up, right?

So that's you know, but really this is necessary information for every department because we are significantly lacking in outcome-based data.

And so I think that's yeah, so for the rest of you, be prepared to answer that question.

So thank you, appreciate it.

Thank you.

Madam Chair, yes.

Um, if I might just uh address a little bit.

I mean, I I appreciate Councillor Tayus's reflection on this.

I do think that these performance measures are done in collaboration with city council staff and city counselors, and so if there's opportunities that we can look at for gaining some better uh data, we're all for it.

I do I do want to say that there are a few places as we look at city clerk where there is performance being tracked, like the number of hearings being held within the time frame as well as uh average working days from the request to delivery.

So there are there are options for that.

Are there opportunities for improvement?

Absolutely, but but they are in there.

Councilor Rogers.

Thank you, Madam Chair, and I'm just so happy to hear Counselor Tayas say this because I've been saying it, but this is year three now.

There's not a metric tied to the objectives.

I think you're right, we have objective and goals, um, but again, there's no metric that tells me if we're meeting the objective.

And so, you know, saying that it's on city council to we don't we set the we help set the objectives and pass the objectives, but we don't assign the metric to that objective.

We need the department to tell us what that is.

So I don't know what we have to do as a team, administration, council, get together and fix this once and for all.

I know I asked about this at our last meeting, and our director said we're working on that on that.

Um, but I I just don't want to have to keep saying the same thing for three years, and that we need a metric tied to every outcome for every department so that we can see if we're meeting our goals.

So I just wanted to again thank you, Counselor Tes, because we've been asking for three years.

Thank you, Councilor Rogers, Counselor Champagne.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Uh I just read on their little sheet that you had right up here.

It said you're expanding the independent hearing office capacity to improve timeliness.

How are you expanding it?

Uh Madam Chair, uh, Councillor Champagne, uh, we are doing that through the addition of uh hopeful addition of the contract hearing officers.

So in addition to the one or two that you had mentioned, so we have the we have the uh Madam Chair, uh, Councillor Champagne.

We have currently we have our chief administrative hearing officer, and we have one for for uh the ACE specific hearings, we have one contract hearing officer, uh, and we're looking to add two more to that number.

So there would be three total contract hearing officers and the chief administrative hearing officer.

And is that in addition to the one to two, three positions you would mention earlier, or is that the same?

It's the same.

Okay.

Perfect, thank you.

Thank you.

Okay, thank you, Chris.

Thank you.

Thank you, Director.

Madam Chair.

Next we have Albuquerque Police Department with Cecily Barker as a police chief.

Their proposed general fund budget for FY27 is 278 million, 238,000.

Um and on the positions, I want to give a little bit of clarification.

So in the budget, there's 1100 sworn positions.

The 917 reflects the current sworn positions that are that are currently staffed.

Is that correct?

And so with uh some last minute math, the uh 909 was just deducted from the overall number, also counting the 69.

So if you add all those up, the 917, 909, and 69, it is correct in total.

It's just that there are 1,100 sworn positions in the budget, and there are 726 civilian general fund positions, as well as 69 grant positions.

So just a little clarification on that.

So it's just really driven by the fact that uh this 917 was initially to reflect what was currently staffed.

Mr.

Noel, will you repeat those numbers again?

The the true numbers 1100 for the sworn general fund positions, 726 for the civilian general fund positions, and then 69 for the grant positions.

Thank you.

Um their budget includes 7.2 million, a 7.2 million dollar cut and 63 civilian and sworn brass positions.

Um that are this offset by the addition of 3.2 million dollars for 50 police service aid positions.

Uh this increases the total PSA count to 100 and 100 funded positions.

It also includes a 1.1 million dollar increase for the transfer of the Office of Emergency Management Personnel and operating budget to the police department to strengthen citywide coordination and enhance operational readiness and ensure a unified approach to emergency management and major event planning.

And then there's 400,000, a 400,000 increase in funding for for crime technology analyst positions.

And I'll turn it over to Chief Barker for questions for the next slide.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Can I go over the second slide?

Yep.

Madam Chair and members of the committee, some of the reallocating of resources to strengthen our frontline response for filled uh starts with drones as a first responder program.

Um as it notes here, we currently have 10 dock drone networks, um, which has enabled us to have a quicker response time to specific calls.

Um, eventually, we're looking at going to 14 dock drone networks, which would allow us to have coverage over the entire city.

In March alone, APD conducted over 500 deployments with 65 percent of those deployments.

Uh, calls were able to be cleared remotely, and allowing for a quicker response time for patrol officers.

Something that we have seen with the drones as well as an ability for the officers to be safer when they're responding to calls.

A recent example is a call at Interstate 40 and U Bank, not the officer involved shooting, but a different one where an individual had a handgun.

Uh the drone was able to respond and you know, show the officers um what the threat was and the people watching the drone were able to tell the officers a safe way to approach that.

Um, we are also been able to use the drones to locate um missing children as well, and so that's that's some success that we're seeing there.

In reference to the digital intelligence team, we've expanded from three to ten examiners and two supervisors, and they're now supporting in all cases.

So when we initially started the DIT team, they were only able to review homicide cases and assist those detectives.

However, they are now able to assist across the entire investigation bureau.

Um they have completed 1,260 cases in 2025, and year to date, they have completed 600 cases.

That team is instrumental to helping us solve our homicide cases and other cases throughout the city.

Um they do anything from look at cell phone data, um, social media, um, anything related to technology to help us uh solve crimes.

Our civilian support increases uh capacity.

Um to support operations, PSAs and transit and safety officers are leveraged to handle non-emergency calls, transit-related incidents, and this helps to free up sworn officers.

And so um we've talked about what that looks like, whether it's um at bus stops on central um or our police service aides responding to traffic accidents and helping officers take reports um and write citations, and I will be uh stand for any questions that you might have.

Counselors, any questions?

Counselor Lewis, Madam Chair, thank you.

Thank you, Chief.

So Chief, we we always uh fund additional sworn positions in every budget.

Uh, but you know, there are always vacancies.

Um what's the actual number of deployable officers currently working field assignments compared to last year?

I don't have the number in comparison to last year.

I can tell you that we um bid 43 more officers at the field officers bid than we did last year.

We currently have 363 police officers in uniform that are responding to calls that does not include supervisors, and it does not include our crisis negotiation or uh crisis negotiation team, which is also under field services and assists, you know, walking uh downtown as well.

I I appreciate that.

That's that's good.

That's all I was asking.

Um and how does it compare to the positions that we're budgeting for?

Those that from that 363.

Madam Um Chair and Counselor Lewis, we currently have 917 sworn police officers.

We are budgeted for 1,100.

Uh, we did have 100 officers join the police department last year, and we are on course to have that many more uh complete training this year as well.

So, and just so I know the 1100 is um the the budget specifically for um the deployable officers working currently in field assignments correctly the the 363 number and then that eleven hundred is where we want to be.

Is that correct?

Madam Chair, Counselor Lewis, that is correct.

Okay, and so um you know we're we're not reaching full staffing and we haven't for some time.

Um but so how much can you quantify like how much of your operations are being sustained through overtime uh rather than permanent staffing?

Madam Chair, Counselor Lewis, we are currently putting caps on our overtime.

Um previous years we did have more money in the budget to allow for overtime.

We also had state funded Monday money which allowed our officers to work a warrant TAC plan.

Uh we have a 25-hour cap on overtime right now, and we also allocated our field service officers to work for 10-hour shifts to make sure that we had bigger squads able to respond to calls for service.

And um Mrs.

Long is here, and I don't know if she has an exact um fiscal number for you as far as that goes.

So the total amount of overtime that we are current.

Sorry, my apologies, Madam Chair, Councilman Lewis.

Um currently, right now we are for FY26, we will spend 24 million dollars in overtime in total.

Out of the amount of that is due to the recent schedules that we have was the four what is it?

312s one week and basically 44 36 in each week, which caused a lot of openings for overtime.

The amount of overtime that we were having was due to the amount of officers and FMLA injury duty.

So when we did the comparison of the hours of work versus the hours of overtime, it was a difference of 50, roughly about 50 hours.

So it was almost equal.

We have a lot of folks on military leave, we have a lot of folks on FMLA, and you have to cover those ships, plus their training hours.

So our overtime was being caused by this.

In the recent two payrolls that we have run with the different ships, our overtime is looking a lot better.

We have already brought it down close to about 300,000 dollars per payroll, which is a big difference because we have less people calling in for um, excuse me, due to the larger schedules.

You have 10 hours, 10 officers, you have a minimum of what they can work.

And Aaron, I might be stepping in your area, but so it's less officers that you can take a vacancy without needing to mandate overtime at that point.

So therefore, our overtime costs are starting to come down.

But we are also answering the calls more for service, is what I understand.

Correct.

Madam Chair and Counselor Lewis, um, just to add to what Ms.

Long said, um, our squads are bigger now as well.

Um last year we had squads that had anywhere from three to five officers on them.

We currently staff five to ten um officers, so we have increased the size of our squads, allowing for you know, if someone takes off, whether that be calling in sick um or vacation, we do not have to backfill that with an officer coming in to work overtime.

Okay.

And madam chair, and this is a budget hearing, so that's why I'm addressing this.

Um at what point does overtime stop being a short-term tool and become the staffing model.

Madam Chair, Counselor Lewis, um, that's a hard question to answer.

Something that we talk about, you know, all the time.

We need to continue to staff our police department, which we have tried to utilize technology and our professional staff to include our police service aids and TSOs to assist us with the lower priority calls so that we have enough officers responding to calls for service.

I would also add that ACS has helped us to clear up to 3,000 calls a month, and that's calls that are taken away from police so that we can respond to the priority calls.

Thank you.

Okay.

Let's see who's next.

Counselor Champaign Thank you, Madam Chair.

Just a kind of a couple of point of clarification.

Um it says in here that you would cut 36.

I'm sorry, 63 civilian and sworn brass positions.

What were the breakdown of those positions?

How many civilian and how many brass of the 63?

Madam Chair, Counselor Champagne.

Um, I believe we had 63 total professional staff or civilian.

Um I'll defer to Kevin for this.

Madam Chair, Councillor Champagne, it was 55 civilian and eight brass.

Perfect.

And just out of curiosity, Madam Chair, what was the is an increase of 1.1 million to the offices of emergency management?

What was the uh justification behind that Madam Chair, Counselor Champaign?

We actually moved the budget that was assigned to Office of Emergency Management and the positions and shifted them under APD.

Previously, they were under DFAS, Department of Finance, and it made more sense for them to be aligned with APD.

Perfect, thank you.

Uh Madam Chair, it says in here the 400,000 increase for funding for four crime technology analysts to support the growing demand.

Can you expound on the growing demand?

Madam Chair, Councilor Champaign, those analysts are going to be for the real-time crime center, and so that goes back to the technology that we've talked about, whether that's the drone program overseeing that, and then just the response for officers who are out in the field and asking questions of those working at the real-time crime center to get um timely and accurate information to them as well as providing data for meetings that we have like Duke City Stat where we're analyzing data and crime trends throughout the city.

And madam chair, what what would the total what would that if you added these four?

What would the grand total be then at the crime center, the real-time crime center?

Madam Chair, Councilor Champagne.

Um if Ms.

Long doesn't have that number, I will make sure to get that back to you.

Thank you.

Okay.

Madam Chair, only a couple more questions.

Um can you expound on how the drone program reduced 65% or cleared 65% calls remotely?

Um, Madam Chair, Councilor Champagne, that would be 65% of the 500 calls that the drones responded to.

So for an example, um, if we have a report, sometimes it's called a down and out, which you might know is just an individual who is reported to be sleeping somewhere.

If the drone is able to go there and notice that there's no one at that intersection in the area, then a supervisor can state there is nobody in that area, and they can clear that call for service, and that allows a police officer not to respond and to then respond to priority one calls.

Okay.

So basically it saves the time the officers aren't dispatched.

They can check the area.

Madam Chair, Counselor Champagne, yes.

May I have a just out of curiosity in your spare time?

Just a list of those type of calls that they uh that they're able to clear.

I mean, we're checking the area for a down and out as one shots fired, stuff like that, stolen car, illegal parking.

What are these doing specifically?

Just out of curiosity.

Madam Chair, Councilor Champagne, I'm sorry, we will get you a full list of what the RTCC is currently doing.

Perfect.

Um Madam Chair, the digital intelligence team, is that all civilians?

Madam Chair, Counselor Champagne, yes.

Okay.

And my last question, uh, Madam Chair.

Uh it says that the the PSAs will be answering non-emergency calls.

What non-emergency calls are they now?

Madam Chair, Counselor Champagne, those non-emergency calls are going to be traffic accidents that they might respond to.

Um, they do assist the field if they are at an encampment, they can call for a PSA to come and assist them in writing citations or helping to secure the scene, but they are never dispatched to those type of calls if there's not an officer who has already made the scene secure for them.

Okay.

Have they expanded to Madam Chair?

Have they expanded to accidents with injuries?

Madam Chair, Counselor Champagne, we still uh try to have officers respond to accidents with injuries.

Same with major time delay on calls, say residential burglaries that are 24 hours or older.

Madam Chair, Councillor Champagne, they are able to respond to burglaries and calls that require a report again when there is no offender on scene and when that has been verified by dispatch.

Okay.

And I was curious, you said there was a 25-hour cap on overtime.

Does that include court overtime or is that strict calls for service?

Madam Chair, Counselor Champagne, that does not include court.

That's just uh calls for service, um chiefs overtime, that that type of um that type of overtime.

Okay.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Counselor Rogers.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Hi, Chief.

First budget hearing.

So a couple questions.

So in on page 162 of the budget has department by the numbers for your department, but FY27 targets are missing completely.

So I only found that you were budgeting to 1,100 officers because it was in the narrative on page 160, um, where it says sworn officer count will be 1100.

Um so I'd like to get that updated because this is the data, right?

That I've been asking for number net gain of officers versus cadets, number of sworn officers, number of cadets, number of 911 calls received.

I know it's so it would be good to see what that looks like for FY27, what your targets are for those, um, because it's completely not in the booklet.

Um, and then kind of in the same line of questioning that Council Lewis says about 24 million in overtime is a lot.

So at like, and I'm gonna try to rephrase it and not duplicate it, but I still feel like what would it take to right size APD's budget, right?

And and so that we can actually get to because your department, even though we know there's a certain amount we've not haven't been able to uh hire year over year, those weren't cut like other departments in APD, right?

Because I understand how cutting officers is very politically touchy thing, but every other department we cut positions that were not filled, but we did not do that here.

So I think it would just be good to see like what so I'll ask you that.

What what point um does oh you know overtime phrase this at what point does overtime spending become more expensive than hiring and retaining our officers?

I think I feel like we're there.

Madam Chair, Counselor Rogers, um we are always gonna be trying to hire more personnel, and again, we are going to continue to try and utilize technology and professional staff to take um the work away from our sworn police officers so they can really focus um and strategize on on crime fighting.

Yeah, thank you, madam chair.

And I get that, but in my district, you have uh air force base and the aviation in the airport where you're not gonna be able to fly drones in a lot of places in my district, which are high crime areas.

So, what's your plan for my district where you can't have drones in several places in my district because of the flight restrictions for Air Force and the and the airport?

Madam Chair, Councilor Rogers, that's a good question.

Um, and that goes back to what we looked at uh when we prepared for the the bid for field officers, and so we used a data analyst to pool calls for service and where they were happening and made sure that we provided the correct amount of officers per area command based on those calls for service, and that goes for shifts as well.

And so you might see, and we have heard there are less officers uh, for example, in an early morning graveyard shift, but that is strictly based on calls for service that have been documented.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I'm glad to hear that because the last bid I saw a couple bids ago.

We had way more officers in the South Valley, for instance, 60 in that bid, and like 20 in my Southeast Command.

And we have county to to help with South Valley.

So I felt at the time leadership was kind of wanting to compete with the sheriff or something.

So we're adding way more officers in an area where we don't necessarily need them based on the call volume.

And so I feel like you know, we were talking about my ride-along where we had three officers on shift on swing shift during my ride along, one acting sergeant that meant two officers to take all the 911 calls, and it was eye-opening at how heart-wrenching it was for the officers who wanted to go to calls but couldn't.

Um, and it changed my perspective wholeheartedly on what they're dealing with.

Um so for me, I just want us to get to a point where we're right sizing the department and um making sure, and then we come back at mid year and add more positions if you get there, right?

We're doing that with every other department, but we didn't do that in APD.

Um so I just uh talked about that.

So can you talk a little bit?

Are there what based on your experience, Chief?

What are the top financial risks for APD's budget?

What'd you say?

Madam Chair, Counselor Rogers, I'm gonna defer to um this as well.

The things I'm thinking of over time overtime overruns, legal settlements, like all excess long list.

Madam Chair, Councilwoman Rogers.

The biggest risk that APD has is really software escalators, contracts, cost of ammunition, cost of basically our day-to-day supplies have escalated and the amount that we are now putting in vests, folks that are invests by increasing PSAs by increasing transit officers, they have to wear vests to be out there.

They can't be without the vests, so those are costs that we didn't have before.

So that all of that brings up issues of where we find the money.

You have to dress them, you have to outfit them, you have to train them.

All of those costs are drawing against our operating budget, and we balance that very delicately.

Um we leverage our LEPF funds to help us a lot.

This year was the most money we have ever used of the LEPF funds to cover our vests and cover our instead of using it for day-to-day equipment for the officers.

We are we we're weighing what's more important to us.

It's more important that they're safe with what they need to do their jobs.

So those are really our escalators of what I don't know.

With the work going on, the ammo is going to be harder for us to get.

We're gonna have to make more orders so we can keep it in time to have it available for the officers.

Thank you, madam chair.

That's sounds a deep put you.

Yeah, it was actually off of what you said because looking at the numbers, Councilor Rogers, it says it's you're actually budgeted for 1,100 officers and 726 civilian positions and 69 grant positions, which totals 1895.

But our sworn is 917, the civilian is 909 and 69 grant positions, which is 1895.

So if you say that you're using sworn position money to fill in civilian positions, which would be the PSAs, if you already have sworn money that you're using for civilian spots, the accruchum of a swarm position would be included in that money, vests, radio, belt, uniform.

Councilwoman Grout and Councilwoman Champaign, yes, you are correct in the sense of supplies being that's part of the budget, but our budget has remained flat over the last two years, and we have not had an increase in supplies to cover those expenses.

So I am relying on vacancy savings to cover those costs.

So our operating budget has stayed the same.

I believe it was increased by two percent last year, but I'll have to look.

Thank you.

You're welcome.

Thank you for the introductive.

Okay.

Oh, no, a couple more questions.

Okay.

Um, okay.

So the other, I think the last question are there any one-time funds being used to support ongoing operations for APD?

Um we're talking a lot about reoccurring, non-reoccurring.

We have very limited um councilwoman and councilwoman Rogers.

We have very limited um non-reoccurring funds as of last year, our non-reoccurring funds.

We had five transactions.

One was the I APD technical support of 130, which is the computers, which is used for sworn.

Then we had the criminal justice coordinator for 20,000, and then we had the drag racing, which helps the officers with the drag racing program and keeping up with the kids, and then we have the youth risk programs, which helps us with our summer camps and our um programs, and then we have the student loan forgiveness.

If we don't have those, the officers kind of lose out on that a little bit with the student loans.

If we don't have the risk, we'll have a harder time putting on those youth camps.

If we don't have the racing, we can't keep up with the kids and catch them, and then the criminal justice coordinator council.

I don't know enough about that program, so I'll have to refer to COS Jones on that one, and then the technical support, we need our computers, so we would have to figure out where I'm gonna pull that funding.

Thank you.

That helps me a lot, especially as we're digging into the public safety tax.

There's a six percent call out for corrections.

The city of Albuquerque no longer runs any jails.

So what is APD using the six percent corrections from the public safety tax for?

All of councilwoman ground chairman, Councilwoman Rogers.

The six percent all goes to salaries for us.

Oh PTU and PTU.

So it's PTU and so on that the money is used for thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you.

Okay, Counselor Februar.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Um, so just a couple of questions.

One, um, you know, the transit security officers are now at APD.

It's my understanding that those are being paid for out of your budget.

Um, but what how are we paying for the contract services for the um additional transit security that is not actual employees at this time, Madam Chair and Counselor Feeblecorn, that is coming from transit.

So transit security is now housed at APD, but transit is paying for transit security.

That seems counter to the whole point of moving them over.

Uh Madam Chair, uh, Councilor Feblecorn, the decision for the move was related to the supervision and the alignment with APD, the systems and the opportunity for APD and uh TSOs to be aligned in terms of call and that might be uh transit is funding the transit security officers both within APD and transit security.

So as we are able to increase the staffing within APD and hiring up transit security officers, those dollars are coming from transit into APD.

They're maintaining the balance to maintain security uh contracts and as we grow, and that comes from that transit um safety report that we had done by the consultants to think about how to do this most effectively and ensure that we're having a unified and appropriate response related to transit oriented um issues.

Thank you.

I I um I just have a concern about that, right?

We we're taking money from one of the departments that got the most reduction and transferring it to the department that has by far the largest buddy budget in the city, and um these these transit security officers are now based out of APD, and so I feel that APD should be paying for them.

Um, and I think that's just shocking to learn.

Um next question.

Um, and this one is just about a reduction in the civilian um spaces.

Most of the civilian piece um personnel that were cut, you know, there was a good reason for it, it was already empty, it's not gonna impact um, it's not gonna impact any um service.

But one stuck out stuck out, and there were a lot of folks that commented on it tonight.

It's the victim's advocate that was cut, and and on your own table it says this change will adversely impact service delivery.

Can you just talk through why we would cut a victim advocate and knowing that it's gonna impact service delivery when we're adding you know 50 new police service aids and drone flyers and all those things that I'm sure are important, but so are victims, madam chair and uh counselor feeblecorn.

So again, we have um had to make some really hard cuts and and taking a look at um all of our staffing and where we can make those cuts.

You know, it is detrimental.

I worked at the family advocacy center um for several years throughout my career, and that is a very important position.

Um, we do have advocates there, um, and so we do know that we will still be able to continue our services, um, and that is something you know that we will have to continue to monitor to make sure that those services are not um being disrupted.

Thank you, madam chair.

It does say with fewer victim advocates available, response times will increase as the remaining advocates assume higher case volumes.

So I think we know that it's gonna negatively impact, and again, we're adding a lot of new staff.

I just feels like that one is one that I have concerns about dropping when we're adding you know 50 new police service aids.

Surely we could add 49 and have victims cared for as well.

Thank you.

Okay, counselor Tayas.

Hello, Chief.

Hello, Commander.

How are you doing good?

Hanging in there, all right.

I have a question going back to over time.

Is time still reported in telestaff?

Is that what you're using?

Madam Chair, Counselor Teez, yes.

Okay.

And are you verifying that overtime?

Is it reflected in CADS?

Madam Chair and Counselor Teas, it is.

So if an officer works overtime, they would have had to been logged on a CAD or a location to show that they were working, and then the supervisor is required to approve that overtime and ensure that it was actually worked.

Okay.

Do we have do you have any of that data you can send to us?

Madam.

Even spot checked.

Yeah, Madam Chair and Counselor Teez, I will work on providing a document that can provide that information.

Okay.

Madam Chair Chief.

So I'm a little um concerned about the overtime.

And I have a little bit of sensitivity to APD overtime because five years ago I worked on the APD overtime special audit.

And so I want to make sure that you know we're keeping up with the SOP update on that one.

So I also understand there's supposed to be a 65-hour weekly cap.

Is that being yes, Madam Chair, Counselor Teas, we currently have a 25-hour overtime cap.

Um that is in place, and then just in reference to your noting of the SOP update, we do review our policies on a consistent basis.

Um that's something that was placed when the DOJ was here that we are continuing.

And then I've also put accountability measures in place at our weekly Duke City stat meeting, meaning that the area commanders um are having audits on their overtime, and if there's an area command that um is far above another, uh, they are to report as to why.

Um there could be valid reasons for that, but it's a trust but verify.

Gotcha.

I love trust but verify.

That's I'm more of a verify and then trust kind of gal, but you know.

Um so can we I know the for the chief's overtime because that was a biggest bit.

Um the SOP or the recommendation was to require a 30% audit of the COT entries per pay period to ensure that CAD support.

Do we know that that 30% is being adhered to councilwoman grout?

Councilwoman TELUS.

Sure, yes.

Um the Chiefs overtime has changed since that SOP.

We are now running it through a third party called off-duty management.

So when an officer signs up for overtime, they go in through their system, they clock in on their system, punch in and punch out through their system, and they are paid via through us.

The entry is made by the fiscal staff.

We audit to make sure that we can confirm with the ODM report that the officer actually showed up, work, did the job, and then it's entered into telestaff and approved at that point.

Okay, all right.

And my last question, Madam Chair, um, Chief, do we know if we um APD, and maybe this is for Dr.

Um Single or Yeah, so I don't know.

Do we know if we have ever actually recovered any of our overpayments?

Um Madam Chair, Counselor Teas, um, can you specify overpayments on what specifically?

Yeah, so in the um special audit that we we did, there was a lot of that we were seeking repayment from officers that didn't have verifiable um overtime reflected in their CADs, and there was quite a bit in there.

Um, and so I want to know if we had ever even attempted to collect those overpayments.

Madam Chair, Counselor Teas, um that would have happened um before Miss Long was here, but we can work on a response for you.

Um can you reference what year that was?

Yeah, so this would have been um end of 2020, so a good time, right?

That was a fun year.

Um let's see, and and you know, we can do samples, so we don't have we can spot check, and I'm happy to um chat with you more offline about what that could look like, so we don't have to go super deep in it.

Um yeah, so we can totally work together on that.

Madam Chair, Counselor Teas, I would appreciate that.

And Madam Chair, Councilor Teas, we do recoup overpayment with employees.

It's one of the painful things that I often have to have those conversations when there's an error or um an individual is separated from the city and there's been a payroll error where we continue to pay.

We we do go back and recoup.

I can't speak obviously to the chiefs over time uh prior to my time here at the city, but it is a practice that we have in place.

Thank you.

Thank you.

I have a few questions for you.

Um thank you for being here this evening.

Um, currently APD has a goal to answer 78% of 911 calls in 15 seconds.

The national standard is 90 percent.

In 2025, we were answering 76% of the calls within 15 seconds.

I understand setting realistic goals for improving performance.

What's keeping us from the 90% target and what would it take to get there?

Madam Chair, uh, what is preventing us from getting to that target right now has a lot to do with our staffing.

Um, and when uh the dispatcher answers the call, if it's a priority one, for example, they do have to stay on the line until an officer arrives.

Um, Deputy Chief Hernandez, I have spoke with him at length about this over the last several weeks, and he's working on several different avenues to try and ensure uh that we are getting the proper staffing.

He currently has six uh people who are in the pipeline um to be hired.

We are hopeful uh that they will be on board, and he believes that if he can get um eight more personnel added to his team that we will be able to meet that goal.

Do you thank you for that?

Do you have um is are you are you budgeted for those eight positions?

Uh Madam Chair, yes, we are.

Okay, thank you.

Very good.

Good luck.

Thank you.

Okay, so I have a couple more questions.

You had mentioned that um over time, is it this year or fiscal year 25 that you were 24 million over time?

Madam Chair?

It was in both years 24, I'm sorry, in 25, we spent 24, and I'm slated to hit the 24 million dollar market again.

So this um in fiscal year um 27, you have um you have it budgeted at 11.7 million.

Is that realistic?

I'm hoping so.

I will be honest.

Um we are managing overtime way differently than it was with the previous chief.

Okay.

Um we are watching our caps.

We are going to be lowering the cap again down to 20 hours to help us maintain it, and we will be open to discussion as if we need to keep lowering it or need to find a different method, we will work on it.

I hope not.

Okay, but hopefully we can achieve it.

Very good.

Thank you.

Um, and then um question about vehicle management.

Uh, where in the budget is vehicle replacement reflected uh madam chair, vehicle replacement for APD is with the Office of Operations.

I will need to get an answer from Commander Howe of what our replenishment plan is through DMD.

I don't have that on hand.

I'm sorry.

Okay, will you get that for us?

Sure.

Madam Chair, we will provide that to you.

Okay, thank you.

Okay, um, Counselor Shampain.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Just the point of clarification for the record, it wasn't 1.8% increase you guys got last year.

So there was an increase.

Roughly about five million.

Thank you, Counselor Teez.

Follow it.

Sorry, I have one more question.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

For um crime lab work, the is 49 additional personnel to conduct crime lab needs included in your in the request.

Madam Chair, Counselor Teez, I don't know that exact number.

Um we can check that now.

Okay.

Um and Madam Chair Chief, are we how are we dealing with any sort of bottlenecks or anything that it you're dealing with concerning the crime labs?

Um, because I understand that there is a need for modifications, um, and some additional equipment.

Um are you able to, with your staffing the way it is?

Are you are you meeting your needs to process evidence?

Madam Chair, Counselor Teez, um, we do have proper staffing.

I do know that they are currently um trying to ensure that they have the personnel they need historically.

We have seen um backlogs in different areas, um, but we have worked hard to come out of those in the last few years.

Um, Commander Ratliff oversees the crime lab, and he is continually doing audits to ensure uh that we are meeting the needs, whether it's um processing evidence, um DNA uh fingerprints and and those types of requests.

Madam Chair, Chief, are we having any scenarios or situations where evidence is not being processed timely while individuals are being held?

And you know, is there any are you seeing any issues of cases being dismissed for time because evidence is unable to be processed properly?

Madam Chair, Councilor Cheez, we always prioritize cases.

We work very closely with the district attorney's office to ensure that the cases they are either going to trial on or that they need information back promptly.

We prioritize those and we will continue to do that, and I will ensure and work with Commander Ratliff to make sure that we're addressing that.

Okay, thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Oh thank you.

Okay, Mr.

Noel.

We have Albuquerque Fire Rescue is next.

Thank you.

Thank you, President Grout.

Um Albuquerque Fire and Rescue with Chief Emily Harameyo.

Their FY27 proposed general fund budget is 138 million, 268,000.

They have 789 sworn general fund positions and 39 civilian general fund positions.

And the budget includes a $1 million reduction in overtime and the reallocation of positions into the field.

There's 4.8 million for IAFF negotiated FY27 wage increases to include additional funding for overtime.

And the $325,000 personnel savings includes 157,000 for cutting two civilian positions.

And the balance was used for wage adjustments for other positions.

And Chief Automio will present the next slide and stand for questions.

Good evening, Chief.

Good evening, Chairwoman Grout and members of the committee.

So I just like to thank them.

So with our slide, I think the first block might be a little confusing if you compare it to the slide before because the number is different.

So on this slide, the 4.4 million is just specific to the contractual rate wage increases for our contract with the 244.

So we have a 5% across the board raise for all of our sworn firefighters that goes into effect in FY27.

So on this slide, that's the 4.4 million.

If you look at the previous slide, it says 4.8 million.

The 4.8 million includes increases in overtime and overtime adjustment based on the wage increases.

And then also it includes the 2% for our civilian staff.

So that's why you see that difference there.

So I wanted to point that out.

So we opened station 12 at the end of last year.

Station 12 is one of our busiest stations in the in the Southeast Corridor.

It's the only station in the Southeast Corridor that doesn't have a medic unit yet.

So station 11 has a medic unit, station 5 has a medic unit.

This is it looks just like the rescue, but it's another unit that we can put there as part of our ALS expansion program to help address the needs of that district, and then also reduce the call volume for engine 12 and rescue 12.

So they'll be able to share the share the load of calls there.

So good for the firefighters and then also good for the people living in District 12.

And then the third portion of this slide is significant right sizing.

So this is where we had to do the hard work with this budget for FY27 because so many of our positions, as you can see on the previous slide, are sworn.

So I know based on the questions that I've received from the council, a lot of them were related to overtime and staffing.

So field staffing is always our priority, and it's our biggest challenge.

That's why we see the overtime rates that we have.

And so what we did is we I had all of my support divisions, and we did this during COVID also, report back to me minimum staffing levels that they could continue to operate by reducing the numbers of firefighters that work in desk jobs.

And so we kind of started that first wave of right sizing there where we took sworn positions that have a desk job and reassigned them to a field the field.

Some of them were vacant, and I've been holding them vacant during FY26 because we had vacancies in the field at those ranks, and I didn't want to pull people from the field and increase the vacancies in the field and then put them in desk jobs.

So I've held some of these vacancies since October of 24 so that I could prioritize guild staffing.

So some of the three of these positions that were transferred were already vacant, but I did reduce some of the staffing in our two newest divisions that we've added over the past eight years, which was our heart program and adapt.

And we know that those are both very important programs to the city, but we're really trying to prioritize field staffing.

And so we did lose some positions in there that are now being transferred to the field for FY27.

The last part of the right sizing that I have is we've had this practice for several years.

We call it support fill, and our support divisions are our desk firefighters.

Um every two weeks they have a day that's assigned to them, and if we have a vacancy, we attempt to fill it with the support division personnel for that day shift.

So rather than them say going into the work in the fire marshal's office, they would do a 10-hour day in the field.

It helps reduce overtime costs, but it also helps reduce the impact on having our firefighters in the field work forced overtime and things like that.

So right now we've been doing it on the back end where we fill all the overtime slots and then we use support fill.

So we're flipping that, and we're going to assign those support division positions first before we start calling overtime.

We were really just trying to prevent it from there being forced hires, but now we're going to fill it on the front end, which will also save us some of the money in our overtime budget.

Um so that's where we anticipate with these changes that we should see about a million dollars of uh change in our in our overtime overage.

And with that, uh any other questions that you may have.

Um I know I gave you a lot, so thank you, Chief.

I have I have one real quick question.

Is uh support division are those like floaters?

Is that what you would call floaters?

Um Madam Chair, no.

So floaters are actually assigned to the field.

So we have a float pool that's operations, firefighters through the ranks, um, and and I'm glad you asked that question because actually they generally fill the vacancies first, and then we would move into the support divisions.

But based on our vacancies per day, the floaters get used every day into a position.

Okay, thank you.

Councilor Dulis.

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

Um you've addressed some of this, I think, or but wanted to ask you you know, AFR continues to respond to a high number of EMS calls.

Um what percentage um again is a budget discussion, so it's related to that, but what what percentage of your total call volume is low acuity or non-emergency?

And has that changed over time?

Um, Madam Chair, Counselor Lewis, um I feel like I should rattle this one off the top of my head because of all of the time that I spent as the deputy chief over EMS.

Um I don't have the percentages for you, but I can get you those.

I'd like those to be accurate.

So I'd like um 80% of our about 80% of our call volume is emergency medical services, and the majority is generally more on the non-emergent than the emergent side.

Um but I'd like to break those down for you and get you the actual percentages so I can send those over.

Okay.

And you mentioned overtime, and you know, we're we're we're seeing a yeah, that's a significant amount of reliance on overtime to meet minimum, you know, to meet our minimum staffing.

Um, and again, this is a budget discussion, so uh do you know what it would cost uh to staff those positions on a permanent basis instead of relying on overtime?

And uh and and I would say, you know, what why is that not reflected as a policy option in the budget?

Um Madam Chair and Counselor Lewis, uh to answer the first part of your question, it it really depends on the the position.

So a firefighter position would have a certain cost versus a driver versus a paramedic driver.

Um and so we it would depend how many we calculated that we needed in each of those.

Um one thing that we do when we would and we've had this practice over the past eight years is every time we add an additional resource, we use um what we call the 1.33 multiplier to ask uh for funding for additional floaters.

This is something that was not done before, and so we're playing catch up on that float pool.

Um but basically what that multiplier means is for every firefighter that you hire, you need to hire 0.33 of a firefighter.

And so when we put a truck in service, like when we put engine 23 in service, we did hire those floaters as part of our ask.

But with you know, 23 stations and all of the apparatus that we have, it is it's a tremendous amount of catch up to build our float pool, but it is something that we've been working on, and with the support of the administration and the support of the council, every time we've asked for those positions, we've been able to get them into the budget.

Um, and so I I think that uh with with your question about how much it would cost, there's two pieces.

There's the total cost, which if you take just the overtime for backfill for FY26, looks like we're expecting about six and a half million for backfill, um, and that's the backfill of those positions.

Um we can always break that down by position, but then the next part of that is how many firefighters can we train a year?

And so um it's something that we're gradually trying to build to and and we have been, um, but it's not something that we can just fix overnight, unfortunately.

So I I believe to your policy question, um, we have been following that that best practice of trying to increase our float pool with that multiplier, it's just taking some time.

Okay, and then uh Madam Chair and Chief.

So and you know, same question with uh you know, you know, similarities with APD, but um, you know, at what point does overtime become you know, um, or stop being a structural part of your staffing model rather than it's a temporary solution, you know, it's always been a temporary solution, but over time becomes a structural part of your staffing model.

And so um do you do you uh are are you all focused on that time and at what point is that?

Um Madam Chair, Counselor Lewis, uh I 100% agree with you that it is a structural piece of our budget.

Um the the downside of relying on overtime is also the work that it places on our firefighters.

The majority of our overtime is voluntary overtime, um, people that want to work, but they work a lot, and it's it's it's hard work.

And so um, you know, to answer your question, I think that again it's kind of following that that that strategy of adding to our float pool.

Um, and as we continue to add to our float pool, then in theory that should reduce our overtime because we have people that are hired, which I believe counselor Rogers was the one that pointed out earlier in the meeting that it's got to be cheaper to hire somebody than to rely on overtime.

Um if we continue to follow that practice of hiring the floaters, uh then in theory we should see that overtime reduction in our budget.

Um, another challenge that we did have this year with overtime is is the wage increases and how that affected.

So we're in the third year of a very good contract, which is great for our boots on the ground.

Um, but then then that means that our overtime costs also went up, and there is always an adjustment there, but there was some pretty significant raises in certain areas that um I think might be affecting us this year as well.

So I think you know, uh paying attention to wage increases, how that affects how much we're paying out on overtime, but also just really focusing on that float pool and continuing to grow that every year so that we can start seeing that reduction.

Thank you.

Counselor Champagne.

Thank you, Madam Chair, just a couple quick questions.

It says that there's a million dollars in reducing of overtime, but then in the next deal over chief, it says they're negotiated including additional funding for overtime.

Can you clarify between the two?

Madam Chair, Counselor Champagne, yes.

So the additional money that was added for overtime is to hopefully offset what I was just talking about with the 5% raise starting July 1 when that firefighter works overtime.

And then separately from that, by me moving people over, we're projecting that we should be able to save about a million dollars.

Okay.

And the other uh two positions that were reduced were 325,000 and two positions, or what was the numbers on those?

Uh Madam Chair and uh uh Counselor Champagne, that is also um unfortunately a uh typo.

Uh so the two positions was a hundred and fifty-one thousand reduction.

Um we had a total, we had some other positions, civilian positions that were vacant that we've used to kind of move to uh make some adjustments in other areas of our civilian positions, and so that was reflected in the 325 with a total of four positions.

Um, but to reflect the cuts, uh it was two positions that were cut from our department, and that's 151,000.

Perfect, thank you, madam chair.

Uh, and final question that you had mentioned two departments were reduced.

Um were those departments designed to help reduce calls for service in the initial part.

Um, Madam Chair and uh uh Councilor Champagne, uh yes, so our heart, our heart division specifically holds our repeat patient program where um and our fall prevention program um and some other some other programs in there, but those are two are really big programs that we have.

Um so yes, they were designed to help uh reduce call volume eight years ago, and um so as we're as we're shifting these positions out right now.

Our team is kind of re-evaluating how they can prioritize uh the most important work that they can do in the office, and um another strategy that I'm using to help support them is uh we on average have anywhere from about 16 to 20 firefighters that are on light and modified duty based off of injuries on and off the job, and so I am going to be making that division a priority for getting some of that light duty support because any trained firefighter can kind of jump in and help in that division.

Um, so we're gonna that's one of the ways that we want to try to make sure that we don't lose lose the services that are very essential to the community and to our department with these with the shuffling of the personnel.

Perfect.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Chief.

Thank you.

Real quick before I get to Councillor Rogers, um, the people that um the overtime that you um have for your firefighters, what is the the number one position that is usually um needing firefighters overtime for overtime, uh Madam Chair that's a it's a complicated question because on duty, like today we have five battalion chiefs.

So if you broke it down by percentage, if I have one battalion chief off, that's I see, you know, it's it's so and I have you know hundred firefighters, so it's it's um a little bit of a challenge.

One of the areas that um I would say were the most challenged in staffing with overtime are our paramedic positions, um, which are at the driver, lieutenant, and captain rank, although we can put a paramedic kind of into any slot when we need to, um, and at our officer rank, uh it tends to be where we find the most challenges, and so that's where we get into these overtime issues because a person that's a firefighter rank cannot work as an officer, they cannot work as a paramedic.

And if I so I can only staff that position with someone with those credentials, and um to layer that even more, um, it's a little bit different for maybe like police where maybe they're just short one on their squad that day.

I don't want to be short one on my squad because then we get into a safe staffing discussion, or on a rescue, I have to have two people, so then I would have to shut that truck down, and so that's where we're a little bit different than say police, where um I don't want to have an unsafely staffed truck, um, and that's where we start to talk about atypicals and all of those things.

Um we're trying to balance our duty to the public to respond to the calls, safe staffing, and then having enough firefighters to backfill those positions.

It's a puzzle or like a che exhaustle, I think.

Counselor Rogers.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Hi, Chief.

So a couple questions, of course, around staffing, because I am very concerned about staffing levels in AFR.

Um I think even in your write-up about needing to pull firefighters out of adapt and heart, um, which adapt for my district is critical to be able to document and work with code enforcement and that commercial residential structures that pose a risk to your firefighters, right?

And so to me, um the fact that you're having to do that says that we have a bigger staffing issue, then I think we're wanting to just be admitted um and so I think I had the pleasure, and thank you for helping me set it up, meeting with um a lot of your captains.

And so I just had a question on in the FY27 proposed budget, it says total full-time positions is 828.

How many of those 828 are the boots on the ground uh deployable firefighters?

Um so um, Madam Chair, Counselor Rogers, out of the 828 positions in FY27 with with these changes here, 789 are boots on the ground positions.

And then is there any practice in your department for the prudent savings?

I know we're getting away from that, which I'm grateful for, but are there any um well actually let's answer the same question for FY26?

Uh, in the budget it said 826.

How many of those are boots on the ground?

Uh Madam Chair, Counselor Rogers.

Um, so I am currently funded for 785 sworn.

So um I don't know if I can do that math right here, but it uh 785 of those positions, the 826 that you said are currently sworn boots on the ground positions.

Okay, and then the other are the support.

Um Madam Chair, Counselor Rogers, those are sworn total sworn.

Um currently 183 of my positions are in support divisions in FY26.

So you would need to sorry, so 785 minus 183 would tell you what we have boots on the ground in the field.

602.

Thank you.

Okay, and I think that's that's the disconnect.

I think I noticed when I met with the captains that when um so I taught them how to look at the proposed budget.

I taught them how to look at the past budget to see what they were budgeted for.

Um, and seeing a difference in those, I think, and I was trying to explain to them about prudent savings and you know, but of course the boots on the ground don't want to hear that.

They don't want to hear that we are saving for a rainy day when they're working so hard, especially in in the um stations and in across the whole city, but especially in the busy ones in district six.

So I think um I'm glad we're getting away from that because I think we need to hire to the full amount that we need, and I know you want that too.

Um, so I think that was interesting, just to kind of that they really were like, what is that?

Um I hope that didn't cause too much uh chaos for you, but I think it was good to to at least teach them where to see it for themselves.

Madam Chair, Councilor Rogers, if I may, um, AFR actually doesn't follow prudence savings.

We're one of the departments that has not um been instructed to follow that um really as long as I've been up here.

Uh now previously, prior to this um administration, we did we I believe we had to have a 2% was that is that right, Amanda?

About 2% uh salary savings that we had to follow.

And when we started in 2019, um we had massive amount of catch up for staffing because we had to follow that, but we don't follow uh the prudent salary savings.

Um thank you, madam chair.

So then how do we how do we account for the hundred and plus difference then?

Because you just said I'm just going off of FY26.

So we budgeted for 826.

You said 785 of those were boots on the ground minus the 183 sworn.

That's 602 minus 826 that's your budgeted for, that's negative 142.

Um, Madam Chair, Counselor Rogers, uh all of those sworn positions are are together, so we're not short 100 firefighters in the field.

Um that 785 number includes fire inspectors, heart paramedics, all of that.

Right, which you gave me the number to subtract of those support staff, which was 183.

So I subtracted that and got to the 602.

If you subtract the 602 minus what you're budgeted, that's 142 positions difference.

And so what I'm hoping is that we're I'm just doing the math based on the numbers that you just gave me.

And so I don't want to uh but so what I'm hoping is we're not purposefully understaffing the department is what I'm wanting to make clear.

Um so it's just yeah, so I think so.

Biggest question I've continued to ask is atypical, atypical staffing.

Um what would you say are how I still can't, I cannot get you to give us that in your reports.

A typical staffing.

So, Madam Chair, Counselor Rogers, we're actually um something that uh came of our discussion is we're working on a we want to put together a quarterly staffing memo that we can send out to our our firefighters and then also share with the council that will include atypical staffing, the numbers of forest hires.

Uh we're we're doing some graphs right now showing trends of um when leave is like our highest days for leave usage and if those are correlating with atypicals and things like that.

So we're in the process of finalizing a memo that will have that uh, which I believe we we got most of it done yesterday, so I'm thinking we'll be able to send that over to you all next week, which will have a lot of that information.

Um I have some of the notes here, um, and uh we in January we had um 39 uh 38 incidences of atypical trucks out of 17,112 staffed shifts.

We had 32 uh 38 times that they were atypical out of that many staff trucks.

Because if you take 23 uh engines times them by a 24 hour shift times 31 days, that's how many shifts we have to staff.

Um, and then in February we had nine, and then in March we had 19.

And so it fluctuates based off of uh in January is when our cadet class graduated, and so that gave us an improvement.

Uh February we had a driver's test, and so now we are able to promote people into those positions.

So we see these trends, but what we're trying to do in this memo that will share will show some correlation of cadet classes and just different things we have, and um and the atypicals and the forced hires.

Thank you, Madam Chair, and I appreciate that because I think that gives us a good snapshot of what's actually happening because bottom line is the men and women in my district, um the forced overtime on their first day off is becoming a norm.

It's becoming the staffing model, like Counselor Lewis said.

Um so I think that that is something I want to see get decreased, and so being able to track that in your reports will be super helpful.

So thank you for uh for doing that.

I think the the other question, because you know, I think putting cadets in there, they aren't taking calls.

So cadets doesn't help me be able to see what's happening for boots on the ground, they're not taking calls.

So to subtract them or keep them in your totals, um, doesn't give me a good picture of what's actually happening because I had to help with nursing staffing at UNM hospital.

I'm very acutely aware of what you're dealing with and how hard it is a jigsaw puzzle of fitting all of the things in the right places.

Um, but atypical is not acceptable.

That I mean we always know we want to not have any atypical.

Um, and so to see 30 some um is is still to me alarming knowing staffing.

Um, so I just I really just have to continue to echo this is something I'm gonna be watching because this is for me about the working environment of the folks that are doing the work, and it is not sustainable for for the men and women in my district.

Madam Chair, Counselor Rogers, I just want to address a couple of things that um you brought up, and the first is the um saying that uh we're forced hiring in the international district every first day off is actually not accurate.

Um I didn't say the international district you said in your district, so I um so we we in March we had uh one 10-hour forced hire on a Friday, we had five on a Saturday, this is the entire month and 13 on a Sunday.

It's still a lot, and I but it's not every firefighter every first day off.

I just want to make sure to contextualize that we we have forced hire and we would like it that number to be zero, and that's why you see our overtime number high because then putting people that should be working working overtime into those positions, and when we run out, that's when we run into forced hiring, so we have states say staffing, so we don't have atypicals, but these numbers don't compute to every first day off every firefighter getting forced.

And then the second part with the cadets, that's always the challenge because then in human resources, you you're funded for a position, and so I'm funded for the 785 positions, and these cadets are with us for several months, and then they go and fill that position.

And so I think that maybe is a bigger conversation on because you can't put someone into a position that doesn't exist, and so they kind of hold that position, and so we hire into those vacancies.

So right now, as of today, I have 30 vacancies boots on the ground.

That's it, that's where I'm at.

Next week we do chief selection.

Generally, the budget office does let me overhire because we know we'll lose some people in that process.

We have retirements, so we generally start day one of the cadet class with that many vacancies in the field, but I'm able to back them up with that many cadets, and then after 45 months, then those cadets go into those positions.

And I don't know HR-wise how you solve that because um they're they're filling a funded position and that funded salary.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

We had the same problem with nursing at the hospital, we put them in the floating pool.

That's what our our fix was that putting putting the training.

We had residencies, so nurse new nurses that came to the hospital had to go through a residency program for a year, and so they aren't necessarily on the floor the whole time.

So there's there's ways around that, but it's not for me, it's it doesn't amount to boots on the ground if they're cadets.

I know that they're filling a position, and that's a hard part, but they're not taking calls, so we can't subtract, use that as a way to say we're staffed.

That's all I'm saying.

And I think you can agree that any amount of atypical, I mean, a top or any amount of forced overtime is hard for a firefighter, period.

And it is becoming the norm, and I think that's what I'm hearing from my boots on the ground.

It is becoming the norm.

And so I'm glad to hear all of the things that you're working on to make sure it doesn't become more widespread than it already is.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you, Chief.

Okay, let's go on to the civilian police oversight agency, Mr.

Noel.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

So the civilian police oversight agency is overseen by executive director Diane McDermott.

Their FY27 proposed general fund budget is 3,124,000.

They have 21 general fund positions.

It includes 45,000 in one-time funding carried forward to cover costs associated with branding materials for the CPC mediation and translation translation services.

So Director McDermott McDermott is here to uh present the second slide and stand for questions.

Thank you.

Hello.

Hello.

Uh thank you for the opportunity.

Um just to go over some of the highlights that we did mention our thing, uh our slides.

Uh, the mediation program is a new program that uh is new this fiscal year, and it's been very successful in a short period of time.

Since the mid-2025, which is when it was initiated, we've had 36 cases that were already handled by formal mediation.

The benefits basically to formal mediation are that it promotes constructive dialogue and enhances community policing relations.

We also additionally have many cases that we resolve through an informal mediation process with supervisors, APD supervisors.

These are when the uh either the citizen asks for that kind of a resolution, or it's that they're needing information, the various driving complaints is how those issues are resolved.

So we have many cases that go that direction as well.

Um our other accomplishment that I could highlight is our staffing has been filled for the first time.

Um almost they're in the process of HR for a long time, and we've had staffing increases due to our department need.

Um I've taken a lot of effort with uh partnering with HR and budget to actually realign some of our positions so that they're more efficient and uh a better match for what we actually need in our department.

So that's a big accomplishment that we've had those things filled now.

Um to counselor Teos's kind of like question about metrics.

I wanted to give a couple of things here.

Um in 2025 is an example, we've had 899 intakes and 277 of those were formal investigations.

And also some of the other just answering questions, I guess you'd say.

Usually anyone in the city that hears police a problem, go to the CPOA.

So we get a lot of different things that we may or may not be able to resolve, but we do our best to help help them and resolve them.

It also speaks to a much better intake process that we have.

It used to be because we had so short staff and we didn't have enough people that we had to just kind of assign everything for investigation to figure it out.

Now we have a much more robust intake process.

We can review it, we can look at it.

Are there really issues here?

Are there not?

So that's why you're kind of gonna start seeing that difference between a high number of intakes but a lower number of assigned cases.

Sustained cases are being completed in time to ensure that officers are appropriately trained and held accountable.

So that is another measure of success when we don't have missed sustained cases, especially.

That's a big uh measure of our accomplishments.

Uh we've made policy recommendations from the beginning of 2025 to March of 2026.

We made 264 different policy recommendations, of which 165 were accepted.

So we have a 62.5% acceptance rate in what we're recommending the department that they're now incorporating into their policy.

We also support the CPOA board, of course, the data assistance, admin support, and funding for their work.

Um the board is filled for the first time in a long time again, also.

And we have very dedicated members.

The board is current on its force reviews, which definitely could not be said for boards of the previous years.

So again, another big accomplishment.

Um the community policing councils, again, we support them with funding, and they're our partners, but they still have their independence, of course.

So just to kind of wrap it quickly is these are all community value type of items.

Um, as was mentioned, we do have three non-recurring items that are should be recurring and are recurring items.

So at some point we would like to see those be recurring um line items for us that totals about 45,000 uh dollars.

And um again, we just provide the community a resource to address their concerns about their interaction with the police department, and we conduct fair and impartial investigations.

We improve the department through our recommendations and identify problems with the incidents that are brought to our attention.

Thank you, Ms.

McDermott.

Uh, counselor Tayas.

Thank you, uh Director McDermott.

I appreciate you coming up and um starting with the the performance measures because we all know that CPOA is a public accountability function.

That's your whole purpose, right?

And so I was a little um kind of taken aback when I noticed that we actually don't have a separate performance measurement for CPOA that are required here, and so it sounds like you are tracking some information.

Um, as a public accountability function for your organization, I would expect actual performance measures that we can review because that is also a public accountability function.

So do you have any sort of measures that you have started tracking and developing?

You mentioned that you are with um complaint intake, um, but are you tracking case closure time, any sort of backlog, um sustained findings, any type of policy recommendations, just any sort of um you know, decision making sufficiencies in in terms of performance measures such as intent um you know objectives and outcomes that you can provide to us.

Uh yes, Chairwoman and um Councillor Teas.

So, unlike a lot of the departments, we actually have an ordinance, of course, a separate ordinance that guides a lot of things.

So the ordinance actually lays out many of these different metrics and measures, and our semi-annual report has a wealth of information about many of the things you just asked about.

So those are all available to the to the council to the public in our in our semi-annual reports that we publish online.

Thank you, um, Madam Chair uh executive director McDermott.

I appreciate that.

I will um review that, but you know, I always say the law is the lowest bar for ethical behavior.

So um hopefully we're capturing more data than that than that's required in the the ordinance.

So thank you.

Absolutely, we do.

And um, just for the council's information, it's it's not yet ready for rollout, but we are actually working on a public facing dashboard that we'll be having on our website.

But again, we're working on it, it's not quite ready yet.

Thank you.

Councillor Champagne.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Uh just a quick question from my notes from last year.

It looks like your budget has been increased by 160,000.

Is there is that with the new positions?

Do you have an idea of I think predominantly part of it is from the move to the new facility at uh 501 Terrace because we do have to pay rent and janitorial services for those things.

It's not a city owned building, so that's part of it.

I think the other part is mostly the you know, just the regular cola and those types of things.

Um we haven't really operationally received anything in an increase.

What's your uh madam chair?

What's the rent and janitorial costs annually?

I'm not sure if I have it right handy.

I'll have to get it to you just to be able to lots of line items that are hard to read on the on the fly.

I can get it to you if if we can't find it here.

Oh, we don't know what so we're not budgeting for it this year.

Yes, it is it's as part of the I just don't know what the separate line item is for that because it's not run by us, it's run by GSD, and it's just put in our bucket, but I don't like see it exactly the same way as every other expense.

Understand direct uh Madam Chair, CFO.

Uh Madam Chair, uh Councillor Champagne.

Um we uh it's an allocated amount based upon a total rent, so we can get that for the department.

We just don't have it um off the top of our in the document set separate okay but we will obviously provide that.

Thank you.

Is that it?

Okay, Council Rogers.

Thank you, Madam President.

I think it's just a follow-up to Councilor Tea's just about the objectives in the budget.

Every department has objectives listed, and I would like to see CPOA have them reflected in the budget.

So because this is the document people are going to be looking at, they're not gonna go to your reports.

So I think putting the main objectives into the budget with would be helpful so that we can see it in line with every other department.

And Councilor Rage, we do have we have been assigned two objectives, which we fulfill those objectives.

We report on those objectives.

Um that's what is signed to us.

Thank you, manager.

No, I believe you have them.

I just want to see them reflected in the budget book.

Every department in here has their objectives and then what those um goals are for the objectives, but for CPOA, there's nothing there.

And I know CPOA is also under city council purview, so we need to do that work to to make sure um we um have those listed for you here.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Okay, thank you.

Thank you.

Okay, we are going to move on to community safety.

Mr.

Noel.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Albuquerque community safety is overseen by Director Jody Escabel.

Their proposed general fund budget for FY27 is $19,819,000 with 146 general fund positions, 10 grant positions.

Uh it includes 1.9 million dollars, a 1.9 million million dollar increase supporting the addition of 15 positions and additional contractors helping ACS expand its mission.

330,000 in funding for programmatic costs and community safety resources for a school-based violence intervention program and 500,000 to fund emergency placements with dedicated oversight and coordination.

Um Director Escabel is here to present the second slide and stand for questions.

Good evening.

Good evening.

Um Madam Chair, Counselors, thank you for this time to go over the second slide.

I will try to be quick.

These are it's kind of a bunch of oh, my slides a little different.

Um the first slide or the first um little bullet that I have is the funding.

Um diversifying funding that's coming into the department.

We currently are um have five grants that we have applied for, and two more that will open next next month or tomorrow, maybe.

Um understanding that uh we want to help diversify funding coming into the department.

So we are seeking out additional funds consistently to support across the board to touch base on the grant funding that's coming in now.

To touch base on the grant funding that's coming in now, a lot of our violence intervention side of the house to include include our school-based program is currently grant funded.

Thank you.

Something that was important to the community as well as the city council, as well as the administration, was making sure that ACS had the capability to do proactive outreaches.

And that means that is somebody either stopping, stopping when they can, not a call for service, so some space that we can create outreach without receiving a call for service.

And I know that's been important for us to be able to get back to that in a proactive nature.

In FY26, we saw a major increase in demand, including 25% overall calls for service, and I'll break that down for you in 911 calls and 311 calls, and what that looks like.

We've also seen an increase of transport.

So year to date, we've had an increase of 69% transports.

So what that says to me is even though our calls are increasing, we're continuing to get more folks into connections.

So those numbers briefly just for transports.

Last year we transported 3,000 or 2024, excuse me, we transported 3,325 people.

And the last year we transported 4,311 people, and so that's another thousand people that excludes our overnight winter transport, which also was massive numbers this year.

So 6,000 over 6,000 people were transported via winter transport.

I mentioned the violence intervention division that's housed in the trauma recovery center.

We've also seen there's their number increase overall about a 300% increase for their caseloads, and that includes our youth team, our school based team, as well as our opiate education and prevention team, and as well as our violence intervention team, which we're closely working with APD and those referrals for.

I think those are the big points.

I want to take a note just as far as operationally for this last year.

We did some huge, very big departmental changes that is helped us mitigate the call volume with having the same amount of staffing.

And so what that looks like is we split the city in half bilaterally.

And so before a responder would be on tramway, and then their next call could be on cours, and instead, we as everyone else in the city in public safety has sectors that they're staged at so that they can increase response times.

So the best that we could do with the amount of staff that we had was split the split the city in half.

So that's helped us tremendously.

One other thing, uh one other operational thing that we did was we went to a priority-based system.

So we are dispatched under the police department.

A call comes into 911, you're gonna get one of three responses.

The fire department, the police department, or Albuquerque community safety.

Before last year, um we were kind of just trying to figure out how to get to the calls efficiently efficiently with the bilateral split as well as the priority dispatch system, it has helped us tremendously being more effective.

So priority one for us is somebody that is actively suicidal, somebody that is saying that they want to take their life.

Um there's no criminal element and there's no medical element to those calls because that's a different call for service.

That's a fire department or a police response.

But for us, that's an extreme priority for us to be there immediately.

The next priority one call that we have is a call that an APD officer is on scene, and so that is also a priority to us to ensure that we can relieve our officers so that they can get back into the field and respond to their priority one calls for the city.

So seeing the the collaborations with APD as well as AFR to alleviate and reimagine what public safety looks like in the response of a 911 system in the city.

Um we've really been able to solidify that with those changes.

One other big change that we made and had a budget impact was that our responders before were salary, and that's really hard on shift work and um trying to flex hours and oh, you got held over on a call, and we wanted to make sure that everybody was being compensated correctly, and so we went to an hourly rate, they're eligible for overtime now.

And so we went to an hourly rate.

They're eligible for overtime now.

We budgeted that in even though we we knew we needed to find it within our own budget to make that transition happen.

And that's to take care of the responders.

They're doing hard work for a long amount of time, and if they're being held over, they should be compensated accordingly.

And and thankful to our responders for continuing to answer the calls for service here in the city that we we desperately need that compassionate outreach to folks to get them connected.

So with that, I will stand for questions.

Counselors, any questions?

Counselor Lewis.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Uh Director, thank you.

Uh you're you're a great leader for what that's worth.

I mean, uh a director who leads a very large department and great example of uh of giving just great leadership, you know, to a department like this and vision for it.

Um I I like the I like the programs, I like the um you know the various things that ACS does and the improvements and all those things.

Um I'm interested mostly in the the calls that are diverted, you know, the diverted calls.

And I think um uh would would you classify that?

I think just in your as you're talking about it, you would you would call that a priority one call?

Because you get called for a lot of different things, and I mean now you have so many things going on that you get called directly.

Um but uh is that what you'd call a uh a diverted call that went to the police department and they gave it to you, or is that is that what you're calling priority one, or is that another category that you're um madam chair, counselor um Lewis, thank you, thank you for the compliment.

I'm I'm honored to be able to leave lead this work and and honored that this city and and you all give me this opportunity to um answer the call for service in a city that I grew up in and a public service system that I've been in for you know 20 plus years.

So thank you for that.

The the call diversion is an interesting word, and what I've been trying to maybe um make the narrative a little bit more clean is that yes, that call would have gone to the police department when we were not in existence, and the way the reason why it's being diverted from APD is because we're dispatched by the police department.

So they they receive the calls, you know, they're the call takers, and then we've give them guidelines on what calls for us that we can we can take.

We also have a triage specialist that is embedded in the emergency communication department, so they are also helping APD triage calls to say, hey, this one looks like we can take it, let's take this one, let's take that one, or hey, we can't take that one.

We got to shoot it back to the police department, and that position is is really vital as well as the triage.

So to answer your question, um, that is a priority one for us, and that would have been a call diverted from the police department.

Yeah, um so and Madam Chair, um director.

I mean, the reason why that's important, I think, is because that that's the reason why ACS was created.

You know, it was you know, whether whether it goes through, you know, so it goes through the um, you know, APD dispatch, uh it goes to you all, you tell them that whether you can, you know, your criteria, whether you can respond to that to not, you respond to it, and um you you um responded to something in a way where one of our officers didn't have to respond to, right?

So we saw the value in that.

There was there was value in that when your department was created, uh, and that was the reason uh for the part that the department exists and the reason why it was created.

Um so that that's why I want to zero in on that.

Um and that's again we're we're in a budget discussion.

Uh so how many calls are currently um diverted to community safety?

And how many additional calls uh are you expecting to divert with that kind of increase?

And so I'm assuming that you you know how many uh calls that were, and again, lack of a better term, maybe there's a better way to say that or but a term that, but it's the you know the reason why you see is this you know calls that are taken and responded to by ACS that would have gone to a um to the police department.

Um how many of those have you have you have the calculation of those calls responded to and then what's the uh um expected growth of that kind of capacity Madam Chair, Counselor Lewis for the amount of calls that come into the 911 Center, we're looking at an 84% diversion of those calls, the percentage of calls that are coming to us, 84 of those would have gone to the police department.

Some of them wouldn't have.

Some of them maybe would have gone to lesser the fire department because if it's medical, they need medical attention.

Um so 84% of those calls that we're receiving are potentially APD calls.

And that um totals here to take.

Okay, just clarify.

So you're whether that be from dispatch, that that comes from dispatch, everything you don't so um you're gonna refer it back to them, you know, and then about so it would be about um you know 16%.

You would go, yeah, this meets our criteria, um, and we'll respond to it.

So about 16%, would that be of calls that come to you or 16 out of 100 you take?

So total calls diverted from APD year to date is 126,000 calls.

Okay.

Um and so on average we're receiving three uh 4,000 calls very conservatively a month.

Okay.

And what that looks like right now for January, February, and March of this month, our 911 calls have increased every single month.

On January, they increased 29%.

That's 3,000 calls, 399.

That's 3,399 calls via 911.

And you would think 85% of those would have gone to the police department.

The other percent that we are we're still responding to, it would have just gone somewhere else.

Sorry, yes.

Okay.

So those calls would have um the truth is we've asked our officers to do everything under the sun for a really long time.

Um so if it wasn't medical, it was gonna go to the police department.

And now we've created this redefining public safety in Albuquerque saying those don't have to go to the police department, they should go to ACS, and those are those calls that we're responding to.

And you and again, and and what's what would be that number again per month?

You said about 4,000 a month.

Correct.

Um quick numbers, which I can add in January we responded to 3,399 calls for 911.

311, it was 1,201 calls.

So that's 4,000 500, 4,600 calls.

So conservatively, very low, not exaggerating numbers would be 4,000 a month, but we're we're nearing 5,000 calls a month.

Okay.

Yeah, I mean, I'm assuming that we would track those pretty pretty closely, you know, because again, they say, hey, this is uh the the uh this is our capacity, and this is the difference that it's making and with uh with APD.

So um and that would be my next question is um you know how how would those numbers translate into measurable reductions in APD and A AFR workload, uh you know, particularly in terms of overtime and staffing demand.

Um, maybe not don't know that I mean, but do you have do you have a way to kind of measure that the impact of uh of what that's doing for APD and AFR?

And again, that's the reason why ACS exists, the reason why it was created.

So how do you measure that?

I mean to me that would be the the measure of success for the department, the difference that it's making in APD and in AFR as well.

Madam Chair, Counselor Lewis, we've we've been um trying to figure out what metric that looks like as well.

And one thing that we came up with was let's track our man hours on how many calls and how much time we spent on scene with a community and what that looks like because if we weren't there, maybe it was gonna be somebody else uh over time, et cetera, et cetera.

Um so man hours in 2025 was 25,640 man hours of community time spent with ACS responders being dispatched into the field.

So I can we can do the calculation of of like how much that costed the city as far as of salary per man hour, um, and then we we can talk about that.

I know that I got the question about um how much it costs for each department to respond.

And I think I I will just say that that's a really hard comparison, seeing that everybody has a very different scope of work along with um they measure success different in different ways, right?

Our our op our um are now really solid data that we're really trying to track now, which also happened in the last year is I want to see outcomes.

I want us to say we've transported X, Y, and Z many more people.

We are the connector of services, and as long as my percentage of transports are going up, even matching the calls with the same amount of people, I know that we're on the right track.

If our transports are going down, then we need to evaluate.

Great.

You know, I do think that's important, you know.

I mean, that and I and I think that's up to also to to AFR and APD to be able to be able to show some um some measurable you know, reduction.

Um show some measurable, you know, uh you know, stats when it comes to their staffing, their overtime, their call volume.

Um, those are critical for us.

And again, we're in a budget discussion.

This is a budget hearing, and so when it comes to a council continuing to fund, not just a fund, but to increase the funding in a department, um it has to be those measures of success that started the department in the first place.

Um and that's gonna be different, I imagine.

I mean, that's the reality of that is is to to you all it's that it's that data, it's those measurable differences.

To the mayor, it's it's something different, you know.

It's his idea, and um it's uh it's enough that Mayor Mondami brags about or thinks it's a wonderful thing to do and is jealous of it, you know.

Uh to the mayor, that's enough.

You know, to me, that's not enough.

You know, I want it, I want it to be, you know, have some some measurable results in that kind of regard.

Um thanks so much.

Appreciate it.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Madam Chair, um, Counselor Lewis, one more point um as far as measurable difference in um and and I agree with you.

Um I want it to work for the city, and I want it to work for our community, and and and reimagining public safety and what that looks like to make sure our our public safety partners are at the calls that they should be.

Um what we've seen in um year over year is our response to behavioral health emergencies increase and APD's use of force decrease.

And and we talk about measuring, I think I um sent a slide in the in the packet so that you guys can see those numbers as well.

Um so I hope that helps.

Yeah, and Madam Chair, it it does.

And I I think that in so many in so many ways, I think you you've shown that and um uh and uh you revealed that in your reports.

Um but I have I think having that messaging pretty tight.

I mean it it helps me to be able to say um you know this department is making an impact, making a difference.

Uh it's helping our you know uh APD and helping overall safety of it.

So um, you know, so that's uh just some some thoughts regarding but thank you, appreciate it.

Thank you.

Let's see, counselor Sham Pine.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Uh thank you, Director.

Uh compliments to the assistant director's attire tonight.

It's good.

Uh I just have one question, and again, I'm we're reminded over and over again how this is budgetary hearings and and in from one counselor or other counselors that want to say that they need um results, you know, um result-based uh account.

So my question is, and you were talking about 4,000 calls for service a month.

You were you increased last year's budget was increased by a million dollars.

This year is projected at 1.9 million dollars for all the services and all the costs of service.

Um, you seeing a drop in homeless population.

Madam Chair, Councilor Champagne, uh it valid question.

Um, what I can show share with you is um thank you to this body that has helped us receive opiate money um and and really concentrate on Sri outreach at a at another level, which is also mentioned in in the 500,000 that we would be trying to um add into this program is that we've housed um successfully from just this year, January 1st to April 28th, 71 individuals, and those are housed long-term housing, not uh quick stay at a hotel.

This is um the navigators that are paid by the opium money to say, Walter, um let's make sure that you're settled in, let's do check-ins, let's walk them through this process.

And so in a very small amount of time, we've seen people long term housed through this through this initiative.

And so I can tell you the numbers of of the folks that we're seeing um no longer be on the streets.

And so to answer your overall um question, I think is really hard, but I do know that people are getting housed through our Sri Outreach Navigation team.

Okay.

The reason why I ask is because the point in time and such every year we talk about how there's 4500 homeless, there's 5,000 homeless.

And I'm not taking away from the work you do.

I mean, counselor was hit the nail on the head when he said that the type of work that you guys do does take away from APD's calls for service.

Uh it frees up APD, it frees up AFD to take other types.

When there is a crime, that's what APD does.

When there is a uh an emergency, and this is a tough one for me to say, but when there's an emergency, AFD goes out, you know.

It's not the same as APD, but I'm biased.

Um the amount of calls you're taking, and in it being 4,500 to 5,000 homeless people that you guys have direct account with, whether it's mental uh drug abuse, alcohol, housing issue, all the stuff that you guys deal with, you would think that you would see a significant decrease based on you're asking for almost 20 million dollars this year.

Your calls for service are up there.

We we brag and boast about how they're over 100,000 or 130,000 uh since the insemination of this uh department, but yet these numbers aren't decreasing that well.

Madam Chair, Counselor Champagne, completely understand um the the question.

Um I do know that we've had a 20% increase of connection to services, and I think that goes to the broader um system that we actually have those services to connect people.

Um women's um women's gateway, men's gateway, first responder drop-off.

I think we're probably the highest utilizers and and understanding that really some of our calls aren't the unsheltered, those that we're transporting are in mental crisis.

Um a lot of our highest transports, I'll share with you our top four transports locations are caseman hospital, UNM psych, West Side Shelter, and Madam Chair, and directory.

I'm not taking away from the work that you're doing, the costs for service.

It really just goes back to the question.

And in because this is budget, because there's an increase, I mean through three million, four million over the last two years.

Is it effective?

Are you seeing an a number of a reduction number in the streets with the clientele that you see day to day?

Madam Chair, Counselor Um Champagne, I do think that it's effective and it's working.

People are getting connected into services, we have more services.

Um homelessness is a is a really global issue, right?

Affordable housing, all of the other things that kind of tack onto the side.

I can transport thousands and thousands of people, people also have free will to leave the shelters, are they not ready?

These these things that we have to take into account.

I think that there's been a reduction.

I think that ACS is uh by the numbers um being more effective than they've ever been in the past and more efficient, and I think that's important for the greater good of the city of Albuquerque.

Um we talk about bringing small businesses here and and all the things that we want to support our city.

I think that this is vital.

Um we do uh proactives now that we're able to in the old uh old town area, downtown area, all these areas that we we everywhere across the city, connected care events go citywide.

Um there's not one specific area that we're we're focusing on, but we understand we understand the the bigger picture of the city of Albuquerque.

Okay, Madam Chair, and and again, thank you for the service that you do and stuff like that.

But uh, when we're where we're talking about sheer numbers, and we're transporting 4,000 people, but yet there's 5,000 uh people living on the street, that means that we're transporting them over and over and over and over and over again.

Um so it might not fall on your shoulders of uh your job of you're doing it, you're transporting.

You even said if my transport numbers are going up, I'm doing something and I am showing progress.

Uh it might be further on past your department of where they go that the reason why you keep transporting the same person over and over again.

So thank you.

Thank you, counselor.

That was gonna be one of my questions.

How many people do you see over and over and over again that you transport?

So how many repeats are in those numbers?

Madam Chair, I think that's something that we could dive into for you to see um see what we come up with as far as evaluating our our reports.

I do want to say that one thing that is um that should be understood about ACS's data is that we don't have the authority to make people tell us who they are.

So Walter could be Mr.

Walter Adams today and tomorrow he could be Bob Adams, right?

And so when I pull the report for Walter, maybe it only shows a few times.

And so we can look into that.

I can't promise you that it'll be the best data because of that.

Okay, thank you.

I'm gonna just ask a couple of my questions and then I'll go on to other counselors.

Um the 500,000 that um motel vouchers that you have in the budget proposed budget, will that be for non-recurring or recurring?

Madam Chair, that is recurring.

Recurring?

Okay.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Um, and then Mr.

Adams, I have a question for you.

Um earlier this week, um, we our office had asked about um motel vouchers, and um my question was um wanting to know um about a list of the motels that accepted motel vouchers, and your response was that you do not maintain centralized list of motels that accept city funded vouchers, we primarily connect individuals to service providers who provide motel vouchers, so we're not keeping track of anything.

I mean, where is the how do we know something's missing?

So, madam chair, um typically for motel vouchers that are city funded, we refer to agencies that provide the motel vouchers, um, and then they have the relationships with those motels.

So are you telling me that this 500K that you guys would like are you going to be giving 100K to to Motel 1 and Motel 2 and Motel 3 Madam Chair, we feel like the scope of the opiate money that we received would be vital for this 500,000.

So, what that what that money encounter um um encompasses is also um eviction prevention application fees, um, these types of services to help mitigate unsheltered the unsheltered population.

The voucher of saying, like, hey, Walter's gonna go to hotel is is for a subset group of people that are half that are stable and that we don't want to lose through the system and somebody that our navigators can continue to check in so that we we know that um the hotel voucher is a transition for them to get into something more stable, right?

We can't we can't pay for them to stay in a hotel for a long time, and so we want to make sure so some of that money would absolutely go to emergency voucher uh hotel vouchers.

Okay, um thank you for that explanation.

Um again, we need to have tracking of what we're doing with taxpayer monies, and so to have have an answer that um we just hand them off and we don't have that information that doesn't sit well with me.

I think um I need to know what um what what hotels that that our taxpayer dollars are being used at because there are some hotels that they should not be used at.

Madam Chair, all of the hotel vouchers are in communication with the um owner of the hotel, and all of the as we refer them out now, all of the service providers would have the list of hotels, like everything is tracked in that way.

It's just that we don't own the contract or the voucher.

So when I refer Walter to a community partner, and then they put them into a hotel, all of that is absolutely tracked through our community partners.

So what my ask is I would like a list of the hotels that are receiving taxpayer dollars to house people.

It's important that we have them in proper hotels and not in some not good hotels, Madam Chair.

Absolutely, we can talk to our our community partners where those are housed at this time and and understand that it is also hard to depending on the clientele.

Um it's also hard to, and we have money built out for incentive incentives for renters and hotel folks, right?

Because some hotel owners are familiar with the unsheltered population and are welcoming to those those folks to stabilize um, and it it does need to be a conversation with the hotel owners, absolutely.

Correct.

It also we also um there is also a an ordinance that we are not any hotel that is in the adapt program is not to be receiving hotel vouchers from the city of Albuquerque.

And it's important that we have that list so that we can make sure that both taxpayer dollars are being spent wisely, and that the people that are using the hotel vouchers are in a good safe place.

So if you wouldn't mind, I this is very important to me.

I would like a list of where any taxpayer dollar motel vouchers are being spent.

And if that means you have to call the providers that are getting them, so be it.

Thank you.

All right.

Um with that, um, counselor Rogers.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

A couple things I will continue to scream off the raptors every budget cycle for the people in the back.

ACS is not the homelessness department.

So again, ACS is not the homelessness department.

That is health, housing, and homelessness.

So if you want to see the we should have the same questions that you have for ACS for HHH coming up next, because that is who is in charge of homelessness at the city of Albuquerque.

Now, their work intersects a lot with homelessness because we're talking about behavioral health, right?

And so again, when we're talking about the partners that they're referring to, those are the people that HH contracts with for vouchers.

Now, for the opioid settlement dollars, you do have contracts directly with hotels.

Is that correct?

First for the opioid settlement dollars.

Madam Chair, Counselor Rogers, right now we have a PT contract for 100,000 dollars with heading home, and so we track um that extensively on where they are going and what's going on with that money.

And I have a full layout of what we've done thus far with the opiate money.

Thank you, madam.

So that is the tracking I think Councillor Grout's looking for specifically for for housing dollars that are in HHH.

It's only the opioid settlement dollars, which are tracked through a contract that they manage.

When they talk about referring to partners, those are the partners that HHH funds, right?

And that keep that data that is not controlled by ACS.

So I think it's important for everybody listening as well to understand that.

Uh so a couple questions for you.

What I'm concerned, you know, concerned about our clinicians, our behavioral health, because to your point, a fellow counselors.

Your mission is when someone calls and says I am going to harm myself, we are sending the right response at the right time, which is not APD.

Every boots on the ground officer that I've talked to absolutely love ACS.

They do not want to go to those calls.

They are happy uh to have ACS go to those calls, but my questions are around the clinicians.

So those are the ones who are answering those priority one calls, right?

You're our behavioral health uh responders, right?

How many behavioral health responders are we budgeting for an FY27 versus FY26?

So as we look for those numbers exactly, and just for a point of Madam Chair, excuse me, um counselors, counselor Rogers, thank you for the question.

To be clear, um the we do have we actually do have licensed clinicians that are um with our MCT team, which is a co-response model with APD.

Um, and those are independently licensed clinicians that go to very high acute calls that APD can potentially clear, and also um our clinicians can um evaluate for a certificate of evaluation.

Our behavior health responders, which I think that you're referring to, can and um are the are the only um responders that are um triaged to go to our priority one calls.

So with our behavior health responders that we have right now.

Um I'm sorry.

We currently have 19 BHR teams.

We have two community responder teams, and just because I have the the floor, a point of of education on the growth of ACS, is that we do have levels to where you can um promote, right?

And so we have a community responder, which is our entry level position, which would be equivalent to like an EMT basic.

There's three levels, um, a CR, a BHR1, and a BHR2, and then you can go on to the supervisor level.

The BHRs, 19 BHR teams, two um community responder teams, four street outreach teams, and five triage specialists for the asks.

Um we've asked um to increase we've asked to increase our street outreach response as well as our BHR teams.

So we've asked for four BHR responders as well as an increase of um the street outreach um coordinators.

So it was nine um street outreach coordinators for total, so we would add two more BHR teams to um the fleet essentially.

Okay.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

So what does unmet demand look like?

How many calls should like if we're looking at the data and trending?

Because I know you guys look at trending.

Is there ever a time where there's a call but not a responder to go to that call and it defaults back to AFR or APD?

Madam Chair, Councilor Rogers, thank you for the question.

Uh the way that we're triage now and the priority-based system really helps us be able to answer to those um answer those priority one calls.

I'm I will be honest, um, the lowest priority calls have um a long response time, but it is because we are prioritizing our mission.

And so does a call go unanswered.

No, we will respond um to every single call that is sent to us.

If it is a priority one call and we don't have a team available, that would be likely a team that gets sent back to dispatch to say, is there anybody available?

So Madam Chair, so it would default back to AFR or APD.

Madam Chair.

If it's a priority one, it would.

Yeah.

Madam Chair, Counselor Rogers, yes, it would.

Thank you.

That's what I was trying to get to.

Because what I'm saying is understaffing clinicians doesn't just limit ACS, it shifts the cost burden back onto police, our ERs and jails, right?

So I think I want to see.

I know that we are trying to respond to counselors in the community wanting more outreach to try to help homelessness, right?

But that is not the mission of ACS.

Is that that's not.

I have always said this.

If we want it to be, let's give HHH some of HHH's money to ACS and watch them work.

I've said that over and over and over again.

And so I think, but what I don't want us to get away from, and that's why I'm directing this definitely to the administration, is trying to answer the response of counselors and other folks in the community wanting ACS to get in the homelessness business full time.

That's not what ACS was built for.

And if we want them to do that, we need to fund them at the level that we do, the homelessness department, so that they can actually do what we want them to do, which is get people off the streets into permanent care.

And to hear that you've already placed 81, was it 71 people into housing?

Permanent housing, right?

Is that what is that what I'm hearing?

With with the amount that we've allotted for you for that.

And when I'm looking at HHH for men's navigation, they've sent like 20 people to housing with millions of dollars to run that operation.

So I'm saying our costs, like our return on our investment.

Um, I agree we need a better return on investment when it comes to homelessness, but that's not the charge of ACS.

So if ACS is the alternate, um, we have to fund it like a core public safety function, not as a pilot.

And I think that that's the direction we need to go if we want to see homelessness reduced.

You do have metrics just to answer some of my counselor questions around frequent flyers.

It's in the uh community safety metrics on page 93.

It talks about number of frequent 911 callers that they contact.

Um for mid-year FY26, it's 1,152.

Um, last year actual for FY25 was 2,373.

So they are keeping metrics on um frequent what we call in healthcare frequent flyers, um, which are a drain on our resources for fire for ACS, for police, for ERs, for mental health um places.

To hear that your top response like transport areas are are places like casemen and um the UNM Mental Health Hospital, are we billing for transport for those in ACS?

Are we billing for transport for those in ACS?

Madam Chair, Counselor Rogers, that's an extremely uh great question, and we are exploring what that would look like.

We we did bring on a contractor to do an evaluation, and so we are are continuing to travel down that path during the the federal change and landscaping.

There was a pause, but it does seem promising, and so we'll continue to pursue that.

Yeah.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I think that is the way we need to go.

We need to be compensated for the work that we're doing, and that's not even.

I mean, we talk about that for fire, we talk about that for um uh transports even in APD sometimes.

Like it would be really awesome to see us get nimble like that where we are billing Medicaid if folks have Medicaid or insurances for transports to casemen or to UNM mental health.

Madam Chair and Councilor Rogers, if I could just add an extra sentence to what Director Escabel said, it was paused by the state.

Um we had two departments working very diligently on Medicaid eligibility for the appropriate um services offered through the city through ACS and HHH that should qualify.

Um and I can't speak technically to the Medicaid terminology, but I felt we were on prior on going to make that progress, and um it was paused by the state um offices indicating they did not have the capacity to continue based upon the changes in Medicaid that they had to figure out how to incorporate.

So it is high on our priority.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Well, I'm glad to know that, and we can do some advocating on the state level.

We all have great relationships.

Um we should be advocating and screaming that off the raptors that we cannot we cannot that's not acceptable.

Like we can't take on new and Medicaid reimbursements right now because we are like not acceptable.

So I'm happy to advocate state on the state level for that because that will give us revenue for then to do more of the homelessness work that we clearly want ACS to do, and trust me, I do too.

I do too, but not without the resources to do that.

Um last question, one of the things that came up last time, and I know this is capital, but we have enough vehicles to go to the 911 calls now.

Madam Chair, Councilor Rogers, yes, we do.

Thank you.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Counselor Penya.

Counselor Pena.

I'm good.

Thank you.

I'm just gonna make a comment.

I just really appreciate ACS and the work they're doing and being proactive.

I know that when we first brought them on, that was one of the major goals, and you know, I know that once they um embarked down the road, um, noticed that really they were actually um having to respond to lots of things going on in the community rather than being able to you know take that extra um time to just be proactive.

So um I met with Dodie um the other day just to let her know, but I just wanted it on the record to say I really appreciate that work.

Um that's really meaningful to me.

Thank you so much.

Thank you, counselor.

Um, I have Counselor Feeblecorn.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Um, I just wanted to jump in.

I think um I think we've heard a lot of metric metrics up here today about the work you're doing, and um, I think it's quite impressive.

Um, but I I do want to just say I think the idea that we would judge any city department on how many unhoused people are in our community is faulty.

Um we are having new unhoused people every single day.

Um, and I just wanted to raise the issue that you know just yesterday uh ACS helped someone who was becoming unhoused because of a bad landlord, um longer a habitable place to be.

Landing had to close that down, and who was there to help this person get to somewhere that he could live safely while this was all being worked out?

It was ACS.

And so I would just challenge us all to think about the real causes for unhoused people in our community, and they are not that is not ACS.

That is more the decisions that this body makes, the decisions that the mayor makes, the economy, all of those things impact the number of how of unhoused people that are streaming onto our streets.

Um, but I do think that the way you report your work each month to us really shows the value of the work that you are doing.

Um two things that we just haven't talked about, and I I know they're in the budget, but I just want to clarify welfare checks.

You guys have helped me on so many welfare checks in my district and suicide calls, and those are giant responsibilities of ACS that I think are really worth mentioning, and I know you pull them out in all of the work that all the reports you do.

And I know you pull them out in all of the work that all the reports you do.

So I just wanted to raise that.

And also thank you for helping that gentleman yesterday who is newly unhoused because of a bad landlord, not anything to do with anything else.

Thank you.

Thank you, Counselor.

I have a follow-up to the 500,000.

Um what is the $500,000 that you want for homelessness in ACS for Madam Chair?

Um as mentioned, I think that we're we're finding great success in the eviction prevention.

Um, the kind of the pivotal point of pre-homelessness, I think is really important.

Um, and what that that scope of that money looks like is very similar to the money that you you all um passed for opiate funds.

Um and so what that looks like is the immediate emergency um hotel placements for a short short-term time.

Um it looks like engaged street outreach, housing stabilitations and the system coordinating um entry-level system that also looks like support through our street medicine team as as well as um the um application fees, etc.

etc.

to get somebody into a new space.

So that 500,000 is really close to the same scope of work that we're seeing be extremely successful for the opiate money.

Thank you.

Okay, thank you.

Any other questions, counselors?

Counselor Tayas.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Hello director.

I actually would love to ask our new executive director of public safety some questions.

Um, because we have um gone through all of our public safety departments that you are now gonna be working with.

What is my little guy in here?

Um, how are you, director?

Good.

Um, let me see.

Community safety route.

Okay, so I think we're all on the same page up here on the on the council.

You have heard us repeat the same thing, I think, um, in different ways about the necessary requirement of having outcomes reported so that we can make the right type of decisions.

And we are tracking a lot of data, right?

We're getting outputs, we're getting the what did we do, but we're not getting the what changed.

And I think it's because we're missing a lot of the baseline information, because we're saying, hey, we're gonna you know increase by 27%, or we're gonna cut by 105 or whatever that is, but of what we don't know what that initial number is, so we have no baselines to go off of these suggested numbers, right?

Um, so we have I think we have the targets, and I think we have the data sources.

Um we need the baselines and the outcomes so that we can get that cost connection, and I think in your role now, and I don't actually 100% know what that includes, but I'm hoping that it includes identifying where these overlaps are with these public safety um departments.

And one of the things that I outlined was some estimated overlap costs between APD, ACS, and AFR.

Um, I have talked to our awesome budget teams to help me verify this information, but when it comes to certain functions like behavioral health response, crisis calls, outreach, transport, and encampment response, there's a lot of overlap between the three public safety departments, and I don't know who the primary responders are for that, who is the lowest cost responder, right?

Um, what type of work is being duplicated, and who owns these processes of these functions from end to end.

And so one of the things I'm hoping that you can do and help us with is figure that out as the executive director of the public safety because you have that umbrella, you know, uh oversight.

So what that's what I would ask of you is to help us gather this information.

I mean, we have good data, but we're not using it to inform what we're doing, what changed, right?

Um and so I want to know you know you come from a very you know great background um in in managing big departments and seeing how this this looks.

How would you how would you go about building something like that?

So, madam chair and counselor uh Day is uh thank you for the question and yes, we're looking at cost and efficiency, and we have overlap between three departments that are all under the public safety umbrella.

We need to make sure that we're looking at those efficiencies and we're not overtasking and spending resources where we don't need to spend resources at the end of the day.

It is my responsibility to go ahead and find how we can make that process better, and we're not only just better distant because we're saying that we're gonna go ahead and reduce times or we're gonna, but what are the outcomes that are gonna positively impact our city?

And we want to provide the right resources at the right time with the right personnel.

And yes, we're gonna go ahead and look at technology to make sure that that gives us some of the answers that we're looking at, so we're not duplicating just dispatching uh additional resources that are not needed, and at the same time, look at a cost effectiveness because these resources are not weighted the same.

We talked about overtime throughout the the session.

We've talked about overall vacancies and those types of resources, but in the end of the day, it's about staffing in such a way that we can provide the resources that we need.

So we are looking towards the outcomes that are gonna drive down cost in some effect, but also at the same time provide the adequate resources that our community needs at the time that they need those resources.

So, yes, that's gonna be on me to go ahead and figure out how we're gonna go not only just looking for a cost savings that's not that may or may not be needed, but make sure that we're also providing those resources and that it makes sense for everyone.

Thank you, Director Madam Chair.

So I would ask it for you to do that right now.

Well, not right now, you know what I mean.

But um because like I said, I've identified five functions that appear to be have some cost overlap right now, and again, it's behavioral health response, crisis calls, outreach transport, and encampment response.

And I appreciate you know uh Chief Jomeo and um Chief Barker and and Director Escoval being here to answer these questions, but I want them to focus on their public safety jobs, their core job, right?

And and I would love for you as the executive director now of the public safety, you know, umbrella to help us figure out these metrics for our next gathering of you know the brain trust up here.

So and and happy to, you know, we have our great team also working, happy to help with that, but because I see a lot of risk and overlap, and I don't know again who are who's primary, who owns these functions from end to end that are overlapping, right?

Who is the responsible um administrator for that?

Because that's gonna help us then to inform our our decision, and it does have to be a governance shift, right?

It has to be uh we have to move away from just intent and activity and get to the real question like what changed, what is the measurable change here because we spent this money?

What improved?

We want the what improved information because we can't make informed decisions without that.

I can't say we should scale or we should claw back without that.

Um you know I think all of us are more than willing to help and work with you and everyone, all of you to do that.

So that's what I'm hoping that I'm gonna ask of you to help us with.

Um and then I know hey man, I'm new too, so we'll just get through it together.

Yes, madam chair, counselor Thais, yes, that is something that I'll go ahead and work in with your respective teams as well, because I want to make sure that we're meeting the marks and getting you the information and the data that is needed to make these decisions.

Thank you.

Thank you, Counselor Chen Lines.

I'll go ahead and get it all out of it, get it out of the way now, Madam Chair.

Yes, sir.

Make a motion to suspend the rules.

Oh, you all were nervous.

You all were very nervous.

Make a motion to suspend the rules uh and extend this meeting till midnight tonight.

Okay, Madam Clerk, will you call a roll councilor Bassan?

Yes.

Councilor Shamheim?

Yes.

Counselor People Corn.

Yes.

Counselor Lewis.

Yes.

Counselor Benya.

Yes.

Counselor Rogers.

No.

Counselor Teyas.

Yes.

Counselor Grove.

Yes.

That passes on a 7-1.

Thank you.

Okay.

Let's thank you, guys, for being here, Director.

Thank you.

Mr.

Noel, let's move on to health, housing, and homelessness.

Mr.

Director Gilbert Ramirez.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Health Housing and Homelessness is overseen by Director Ramirez.

Their FY27 proposed general fund budget is 48,847,000.

They have 78 general fund positions, 20 grant positions.

Their highlights include a continued investment into the gateway system of care.

$780,000 increase from HB2 Grow for House Bill 2, GROW for Gateway Young Adult Housing International District and Affordable Housing.

They are expanding capacity by higher hiring an individual with expertise in a large shelter environment.

And Director Ramirez is here for the second slide and to stand for questions.

Good evening, Director.

Good evening, Madam Chairwoman, Counselors.

All right.

Sorry.

Folks are getting set up here.

So this slide is really going to reflect something from our department in regards to what we've been working toward.