So, and sounds very basic, but we look for a north arrow.

We make sure that there is a north arrow and a scale on the site plan itself.

So that criteria has been satisfied.

We look at the lot boundaries and easements.

So I'm pointing out that, and these are a lot easier to see on your agenda briefing memorandums when you're able to actually like zoom in and see the boundaries.

But they did provide where the lot boundaries are, they did provide where the existing easements are.

They also are showing proposed easements.

But D, they also are showing the existing and proposed right-of-ways.

So with this one, what they're showing is uh what they have talked with DOT about the need to put in a D cell turn lane off of I28, um, the pavement that would happen along Monterey along with those turn lanes, and then any additional uh infrastructure needed along Opergon for 154.433C.

Uh so this is showing the existing and proposed utilities.

So in and the it looks very tiny here, but again, uh agenda briefing memorandum is a lot easier to read.

Um the blue lines are the water lines, the green lines are your sewer lines, so they will be extending utilities to the property and then along the section of Monterey that they will be paving.

Looking at 154.433E.

Uh, so they need to list out the proposed structures with uses, dimensions, and setbacks.

Um so I've got a lot of little red circles on here, um, but what I am trying to highlight is that on the far right hand side, what they're showing is the setback a setback line.

So what that does is it's actually telling us that the setbacks required in C1, that's as far as they could actually go.

Um they're not going that far, they're actually meeting or exceeding what those setback requirements would be in C1.

Um they are showing the access points along with setbacks, dimensions uh for the buildings itself.

So uh the convenience store would be approximately 4,499 square feet.

They're also showing where the field canopy would be located.

Um just to go into a little bit of detail on that setback line that I referenced on the right hand side.

Um, so they would need to be 10 feet from the front, uh, 10 feet from the corner side, and then zero on their side and rear lot lines, um, they are again exceeding those distances.

Um and then the other circles are highlighting the proposed ingress and egress, parking, and then circulation through the site.

Um so that um bottom right hand circle is highlighting where they would have a cross lot um access or circulation with the feature development.

Then we have 154.433G, uh which is their landscaping and landscape buffer plan.

So uh what you can see is that they are um putting a lot of landscaping on the site.

Um again, they're showing um a lot of those buffers between actually where the building is and the roadway.

Um, and then there is a requirement uh for a buffer wall.

One of the things that um I'm trying to display on that right hand side, and sorry that the picture is so tiny, uh, but it did come to our attention that the NMDOT has a right-of-way map uh from 1992 actually, um, and it's not something that that we knew about until we had reached out to the county about this.

Um, but those red boxes um in that image on the right hand side are um NM DOT right-of-way.

And so the distance between that southern property line for the subject property and the property to the south is over a hundred feet, and so technically they they are not required to do a buffer wall uh for that uh section of the southern uh boundary for the property.

Uh that was something that came to our attention just recently.

Um so we did have a catch-all in our uh conditions of approval uh requesting that if they weren't going to put in that buffer wall that they would need to come in for advance, um, but it is now our understanding that there is about 120 feet of right-of-way located on that section of road, and so therefore they would not be required to put up that buffer wall on that section.

Uh then for 1543 3G, um, nope, sorry, next one, uh 3H.

Um, so elevations, um, and I actually have three pages on this one.

Um, so a couple of things that I wanted to uh point back to.

So the second picture for the site plan had a south view that showed that the road would be up here with the houses, um, and then any of the commercial would be located um further down, right?

Um, or uh stepped down.

So on this uh specific portion of the site plan, it's it's the drainage plan, and so I'll come back to this later too.

Um, but that elevation at the road ranges from 1,000, I'm sorry, 5,150 feet up to 5,170 feet.

Uh, and the finished floor for this building is actually going to be 5,150.

So depending on the location, there is about a 20-foot uh deviation or set down from where the road itself is located.

Uh when we're talking about building height, um we're looking that this seemed like kind of the easier uh image to point out.

Um and so what I have circled in red, and so it'll talk about 100 feet at that bottom uh circle, uh, and then that top circle is is uh 119.

Um when we're looking at site plans, architectural site plans, um they actually have their baseline starting at 100 feet uh because they don't like to go into the negative for things, so they actually always start at 100 and go up.

So this building is not going to be 119 feet.

Um the bulk of the building is 19 feet, um, and then that little awning on the top uh goes up to 29 feet.

Um but when as the city we measure um the building heights, uh since that is technically considered a uh gable roof, uh we do the average between the EVE, which would be the bottom little part of it, and the ridge, which is like the tip top.

Um, and so the average height of the building would actually be uh approximately uh 24 feet, um, but again, the majority of the building is going to be around 19 feet.

So this uh just is some more illustrations of what the building would look like from some different angles along with the fuel canopy.

The fuel canopy is just a little bit over 19 feet in height.

Then for 154 43 3J, uh this is the uh preliminary drainage, and then uh for 1543 3.

Actually, I'm sorry, the last one was yeah, no, this one's I uh the adjacent characteristics for the property.

Um, so what they did was they did provide um a location map to show what other properties were around them and what those other properties look like, along with a flood map to show the arroyo um to the south.

And so uh I didn't say it verbally every time we were going through, but it is written in the ABM.

I did put it on the slides that all of the criteria that we have to uh that we need to review for for a site plan, all of those criteria have been met and is within the standards that was submitted by the applicant.

One of the other things I wanted to show today, so this is the proposed site plan from 2007, and then I'm laying on top, um, and I don't have like the greatest technical skills, so I just did this in you know, PowerPoint, so I did what I did.

Um, but what you can see is how it overlays on top.

Um, and so um looking at it, uh the access point is very similar in location for this proposed site plan as it was in the 2007.

The um site the access point off of Opergon is also again very similar in location to where it was in the 2007 site plan.

Uh the cross access uh same thing again, very similar to where it was.

Um we are looking at just a portion of the entire site, right?

So uh when this 2007 site plan came in, it was looking at that bigger picture, um, and we are looking at a smaller portion of that.

Um currently the traffic um study has uh been submitted to the city of Rio Rancho and has been approved.

Um, but there is always the options if there was additional um information or feedback from DOT that we can uh go back through that review process if we want to uh talk more about the larger um site as a whole.

Um and so the next one for the conditions of findings.

Um so this was reviewed and again generally not reviewed by the planning and zoning board, uh, but the ordinance required it.

The planning and zoning board reviewed and approved at their meeting on June 9th.

Um, and then I have the findings of fact, and then I have the conditions of approval on the next three slides, uh, trying to make it big so that we can read it.

Uh and with that, I will stand for any questions.

Thank you, Director Rincone.

Can I before I ask ask for a motion?

I want to let everyone know in the audience what the way we work this is we always ask for a motion in the affirmative.

That's not in an indication that that's the way the vote's gonna go.

It allows the project to or the request and move forward, so we can then move on to public comment.

So, can you get a motion?

Motion to approve D23.

Second.

We have a motion and a second.

Uh before we move on to I'm sorry, was there a comment from no right there?

There's comment spots.

Good job.

You ran.

You beat me.

You're all good.

Thank you.

Before we move on to public comment, I want to make make a couple of announcements.

First of all, I want everyone to be respectful in here of each other.

I don't want to hear any applause, any whistling, any clapping, yelling.

We need to be respectful of one another.

If another individual has already presented something that you want to speak on, we don't need to duplicate comments.

So just keep those items in mind.

We do have uh law enforcement in the room.

If things go awry, I doubt that will happen, however, just uh a forewarning.

All right, so we'll move on to public comment, starting with the I believe it's the agent, Mr.

Piggott.

Okay.

Engineer Wagner, counselors, appreciate the sacrificing your time and efforts to help with the City of Rio Rancho and go through this public process, which I really appreciate because it's how we were able to get things done and to do it the right the correct way and how your code is set up.

And um I know it's a great sacrifice, but we really appreciate the staff's times and efforts, and especially Director Rincon's uh comments with respect to the project.

Um she answered a lot of my comments, so I'll go briefly as best I can so we can get back to the public comment.

Let's see if we work this.

So uh as I think everybody knows a little bit about what Maverick represents.

Um we have several stores here in the Albuquerque area.

This would be our first one in Rio Rancho.

Um what our motto is is ventures for stop.

Um we're trying to build the coolest experience of the convenience store in the market.

Um we feel like we are unique to the market because one of the things is we're uh locating states in the United States.

All our stores are privately owned by our owner.

Um we have eight hundred stores with over 14,000 employees with respect to those that have any kind of benefit and opportunity to be successful within our company.

Um the store itself would probably employ about 15 to 20 employees.

Um with that, we have trained our what we call our adventure guides into 40 different aspects of sales, point of sales, liquor control, um, how to keep treating customer right.

Uh, one of the rules that um Maverick has is what we call the titanium rule, which is treat others better than they expect to be treated.

And we kind of do that with everything we do from what I do as a site development manager, and we try to be as best as we can to accommodate what the neighbors want and be successful within our communities.

Um one of the nice things is about BNS you know owned by all our stores, our stores are owned by one owner is we have control over our stores.

Um we're not up to franchisees.

So we're able to keep our stores cleaner, well more well organized.

And one of the things we've been really respected in the industry is how clean our bathrooms are.

One of the things that people look for us on road trips is they know our employ uh our restrooms are safe and able to be accessed and know that they're going to be clean.

With our adventure stop theming, um, you can see that we use uh metal accents, uh steel beams, exposed uh party board and rock cultures on the the corners of our stores.

This helps continue that adventure theme where we're trying to promote uh just getting out into your community.

One of the things that if you've gone to any of our stores, we put uh murals within our stores of the local uh typically the states.

You'll see most of the time.

I think it's white sands that I think is around a lot of the parts of the store, but some of the other nature stops where it because New Mexico is really a beautiful state, and we're able to reflect that into our stores here locally.

Um really concerned, of course, is and I think the residents were concerned about the environmental construction or environmental controls, is we kind of exceed what the industry standard is.

We use double wall fiberglass construction on our tanks.

That are not only monitored here locally, but also at our headquarters in Salt Lake City, Utah, on a 24-hour basis.

Landscaping, of course, will be respectful to the community and meet local codes.

And of course, safety is one of our major concerns.

With that, that's with not only our adventure guides but our customers.

We want to keep it as safe, clean, opable, and make sure that people are safe when they're using our facilities.

Um a lot of large glass are our canopies.

Uh, this way we can keep security well enforced and make sure that there's not people that are uh uh loitering or things of that.

We're we want to make sure that our uh customers have a big welcome uh invited to our stores.

Um we are a 24-7 operation.

Uh one of the benefits of that is there's always going to be somebody there monitoring our stores.

Um, also it's sometimes somewhat of a safety net for the the area because there's always going to be somebody to be available if anybody ever needs a system.

Um a little bit to the liquor issue.

Um Maverick's a little different.

If you've ever been to a Maverick store, we're not really had a lot of rack with a lot of products for sale.

One of the things we have in our stores is what we call a bonfire grill, which sells um pre-packaged uh meals and fresh food that you can make in your local comedians.

Um those include destroyed style pizzas, burritos, uh, made to order case of these, things like that that just are ready to eat.

Um it's one of those things I actually like about the job.

Um, one of the things I should say is um not only do I really appreciate Maverick for who they are, it's one of the reasons why I work for the company.

I think we're a great brand.

I think we're really respectful of our neighbors, and I do like the taping rule that we uh all honor as part of our uh our task as being members of this uh maverick organization.

Um with the alcohol sales, um, I know it's a concern with their neighbors.

We are not personally in alcohol license this time.

Uh New Mexico is kind of unique for us.

Um, liquor licenses are quite expensive and they're not hard, they're hard to come by.

I would say off uh I didn't look at the actual numbers before I came.

I'd say about 50% of our stores don't sell packaged liquor because it's not part of our purpose of what uh our profit margins are at these locations.

It's not something that this store has been uh the success of this store is based on liquor sales.

So I know there's uh concerns about liquor licenses coming back later.

Um there is things within the code that limit the possibilities of liquor stores at this location.

There's also time that people can make adjustments to those things if the concerned citizens want to make efforts to that.

Um over this location.

Um I think Director Rincon did a fabulous job of kind of explaining all the different aspects of this particular site plan, so I'll be brief.

What's kind of interesting is that curved road that's there on the right side of that site plan as because of grading.

Um really stringent on what we like to see it on slopes because we're concerned about safety, making sure our customers have the ability to get through uh the site.

So those the the grades on that road are it's a winding uh road so that we can make sure we can keep to our own grading plan for slopes going up to the Monterey Road.

Um, what's unique about this site is the south west corner is so much lower than the north east corner.

So there's a lot of fall across the site.

Um one of the things you can look at here is you can kind of see what this looks like in cross section with a neighbor's residence house with respect to where our building sits, the can be sits, and also U.S.

highway Mexico 528 as well.

Um we are significantly lower than Monterey, as you can tell by that uh uh cross section through there.

Biting is also another concern by the residents.

Um this is our current photometric plan we have for the site.

And you can see we have lighting at the entrances, both on that right-in access there on overgom.

It's 2.6 foot candles, 1.8 up on Monterey.

As you can see up by the residence, is a zero or 0.3.

If that was a concern, uh lighting that uh Monterey Road, we can of course make adjustments with that.

The benefit of the 25-foot poles and LED lights is you have levers now that can direct the light.

So the old days of shielding are gone where we can just direct light with the movers themselves.

One thing this photometric plan doesn't take into account is any lighting or street lighting that uh Rio Rancho will require of us.

So um we haven't got that far in the design yet to know what uh street lights will be required of us to put in that road, but that would also provide lighting there on Monterey.

Uh one thing I should also note we are a 24 hour 24 hour operation.

We do have dimmers uh for the late night hours on our canopy lights.

We dim to 20, they dim 25%, so 75% of what they is whether you'd be showing until some car comes up underneath the canopy.

I do want to say that if you've ever played with the dimmers in your house, 25% sounds like a lot, but it I mean it's the best we can do with the industry, and uh but it it it is uh a reduction, but it is uh what we can actually accommodate.

Um let's see.

Is uh our traffic study getting the approval through both NMDOT and also with the city or uh Rio Rancho.

One of the things that was really back and forth for several months was the discussion of accesses onto the site.

Um we were not able to have uh the best operation and safety for this development and for the development for the future.

The state required us to not have a ride-in, right-out access on New Mexico 528, and that we weren't able to get even a full movement on Obergon coming into our site.

So we're only limited to a right-in access, which of course allows us to only have the majority of the accesses coming out onto Monterey.

As you can see, we're improving Monterey Road, of course, with three lanes at the intersection of Obergun and Monterey for a right, left, and a uh entrance onto the street, and then that narrows down to about 26 feet up towards where that access is.

Of course, uh widening Obergon itself, allowing for a right turn pocket that goes on to not only our right-in access, but also onto uh Monterey, and then on New Mexico 528, we are extending that.

Let me just make sure I get the numbers right.

So we're providing a 350-foot right turn pocket with a hundred and seventy-five foot paper.

Uh and in addition to that, we're also putting in a bike lane.

They're on that uh westbound lane coming into Obergon.

And uh that is something that Maverick is willing to put in, and of course, with that adjustments will be made to made to the signal there with signal timing, adjustment of light placements, things of that nature.

This is uh the the letter we received from Rio Rancho dated May 19th, where we had the traffic study accepted by the city uh based on a review by Mexico Department of Transportation.

Um, this is kind of a little bit more of a blow-up version of what uh our premiums were proposing for Monterey, which is that the lane widenings there on Monterey paving the road and allow and installing those right and left turn pockets in addition to the widening we're doing on overgone what uh overgrown road to accommodate what the traffic study is requiring us to do, in addition to the uh eastbound uh lane on Mexico 520 to 8.

We're extending that right turn pocket or left turn pocket so that we can meet the requirements for the intersection that is controlled.

One of the things I do want to point out with traffic study with regards to convenience stores.

We're not a destination.

Uh, if you can think about it when you're going to a gas station, you're not actually, oh, I just need to go to a gas station.

Uh, we'd like to think our customers really like us, but most of the time, only about 30% are it's a destination.

Most of our traffic is generated just by what we call bypass traffic.

So about 70% of the the cars that are coming to our site are already on the roadway.

So we're not really amplifying the traffic because most of our customers are already on the road and just oh, I need to get gas today.

I'm gonna pull in and fill up my tank, or any tasty beverage, we're gonna go in and get me a quick diet, Dr.

Pepper, which I always do, and then uh go on my way back to my home.

So that's one of the kind of things that we understand of what uh convenience stores are a little different than a destination like a CVS or a coffee shop or something of that nature.

Um Director Ringcon did a good job of going through the elevations, so I won't belabor that.

So um typical branding that Maverick has.

You see any of our stores in the local areas.

This is the same thing you're gonna get.

A good example would be Ibsen and Yale in Albuquerque, I think is our latest and greatest.

It's a little bigger than this store.

That would be a good example.

That is my presentation.

If you have any questions or concerns, I'm here to answer anything I can do.

So appreciate counselors and mayor.

Uh let me know if you have any other comments.

Thank you, Mr.

Piggy.

We will call you back up if we have additional comments or questions.

We move into public comment at this time.

I want to remind the public the time limit for speaking is two minutes.

I also want to remind the audiences or the the folks in the room as well.

Director Rencone made a very detailed explanation of the site plan.

The reason for that is because this is a site plan request only.

This is not a use change.

This use, this gas station is a permissive use on this site.

There's no zone change being requested.

So the comments that were that you should bring forward at this time are specific to the site plan itself, the layout of the site plan, as opposed to the fact that it's a gas station.

Gas stations are allowed on this site.

With that said, we will go through the public comment, starting with Teresa Paul Wentz.

That's not Teresa.

Did I get your name wrong?

It says No, I'm taking the place of my wife.

Okay.

And you are?

I'm Sean Wards.

Do you have do you have have you filled out one of these Sean?

Yes, sir.

You're Sean.

Okay, so your wife's not speaking.

He's not gonna speak at all time.

All right.

All right, so this is Sean.

Thank you, Sean.

Thank you for the opportunity for me to speak.

And I like the presentation before.

I was gonna dispute um about due process, but let me just give you a little example of what Monterey Road is and what this gas station is going to do to that.

Where I drove down and people waved to me.

That doesn't happen that often.

And making it a paved road, it's a large uphill road itself, Monterey going on the other side.

And on the other side is where I meet my neighbors where they are walking the dogs, walking the children to school, and there's really no need for speed limits signs or anything like that.

There's not actually anything there because we're a community.

We know what's there.

The problem is is that when you put increased traffic, that's where it's gonna endanger our families on that.

Just me driving out.

There was a car coming out out of uh come down Monterey that wasn't part of our community, and thank God I have safety devices on my vehicle where I backed up where that detected before I even saw it.

And now it's gonna be a paved road with no safety devices on there.

I mean, being a veteran, I don't want to go back to being a military service depending on my property and my neighbors.

Um, this gas station, there's really an idea for it because we got one across the street.

What's it gonna do for the community of Rio Rancho and immediate community, a real rancho and extending community real rental?

Does it really make a difference?

Uh it's gonna be there.

Um I also travel in in the early mornings and where I go to speedway where there is a gas station.

I already see the homelessness, are you see drug peripheral, and we're just increasing that.

If you go behind Speedway where the homeless thing is not at, you're just gonna add them to come across the street to our area.

And that and that's just the nature of it.

It's not the Maverick station.

That's the problem.

It's a problem where people are coming through the Maverick station itself.

I just want to be able to point that out, and I just appreciate your time.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr.

Wentz.

Moving on to let's see, we got Nick Shall Lee.

Did I say that right?

Good evening, Mayor Weyer, and members of the governing uh body.

Um, I respectfully ask that you deny the site plan or remand it to planning and zoning for further review.

The appo this is not about opposing maverick or opposing development.

We welcome response responsible growth in a rancho.

My concern is that the site plan is simply wrong for the location for the volume of for 24 hour fueling station.

Um this property sits immediately adjacent to established neighborhoods, and the enchanted hills elementary school.

Families choose this area because it is residential and family oriented.

Placing it in intensive commercial use at this location, it changes the character of the neighborhood and creates an incompatible transition between residential living and commercial activity.

My question is does the traffic study adequately evaluate school traffic during peak drop-off and pickup times?

Before approving a site like this, the city should have a complete understanding of how this location will impact children, families, and surrounding neighborhoods.

Ultimately, this decision is about land use compatibility.

A gas station may be appropriate in another commercial area, but this location besides homes and nearest school is not the right place.

I respectfully ask that you deny the site plan and remember or remand it for additional review until these compatibility traffic concerns can be fully addressed.

Thank you for your time and your service to the residents of Real Rancho.

Thank you, Miss Lee.

Next up is Thomas.

Let's see if I got this right.

Krupiac.

Yes, sir.

Members of the government body.

Thank you for the opportunity to speak.

My name is Thomas William Krupiac, and I am a retired lieutenant from the Albuquerque Fire Department and a resident of 1253 Monterey Road.

I respectfully ask you to continue this application until you are satisfied with the public record that the public record actually demonstrates this project and it's the for health, safety, and welfare of our community.

Although zoning allows a gas station in today's decision, it's about whether this site plan is appropriate for this location and its compatibility with the 2007 ordinance.

The city's own review identified the need for a traffic impact study, Mexico DOT approval, the grading and drainage analysis, roadway improvements, utility review, and stormwater requirements.

Yet as a resident who has carefully reviewed the public record, I have been unable to determine whether all those issues has really fully been addressed.

This Maverick proposal represents only a two-acre portion of what was originally envisioned as a part of an approximately eight and three-quarter acre commercial development.

According to the city's own staff report, the original concept could have accommodated a partial access from New Mexico 528 that compiled that complied with the New Mexico DOT spacing requirements.

The current standalone proposal cannot, and instead relies on ingress and egress from Monterey Road, a residential street.

Before approving this revised plan, I respectfully ask you to consider whether the evidence demonstrates that directing commercial traffic onto a residential street is the safest and most compatible design for this neighborhood.

As a retired fire lieutenant, I understand the importance of identifying public safety risks before problems occur, not after.

Before casting your vote, I ask each one of you to question can you honestly say that the record before you demonstrated that every reasonable concern regarding traffic safety, neighborhood compatibility, necessity, environmental protection, impact, keeping in mind grading, drainage, and all the surrounding domestic wells, that public welfare has fully been answered.

If the answer is yes, please identify that evidence for the public.

If there is any uncertainty, I respectfully ask that you continue this application until those questions can be answered.

Thank you for your time.

Thank you, Mr.

Krupiak.

Next up is Juan Lopez Corona.

Good evening, uh Mr.

Mayor and members of the governing body.

Uh my name is uh Juan Lopez Corona and I live at uh 1249 Monterey Road Northeast.

Um I moved here in 2021 and I quickly realized that this is a quiet, safe and family oriented neighborhood.

Uh I am here tonight to ask you to protect that.

Um, because this site plan contains zero enforceable noise conditions and routes traffic directly onto our residential street.

There are no restrictions on delivery hours, no restrictions on truck idling, and no quiet hour requirements.

Uh, if approved, families on Monterey Road will have their sleep interrupted when heavy fuel tankers start arriving at 3 a.m.

And this is not just a noise issue.

Um, it is a matter of basic safety.

Heavy commercial trucks navigating residential streets create an immediate hazard.

There um, as mentioned before, there are parents dropping kids off at enchanted Hills Elementary, less than half a mile away, and the track traffic study um does not uh completely ignores uh school drop-off and pickup impacts.

Um yet, you know, as you all know now that none of this is new since uh it was uh I mentioned in the two in 2007.

Um, and back then the community accepted a special use designation uh specifically so this governing body could impose protections during the site plan process.

Uh tonight is that process.

Um, with speedway already operating safely across the the street, uh second gas station is entirely redundant.

I am standing here tonight with many neighbors who uh who have signed petition against this project.

And uh to conclude, um, a business can be legally allowed and still be poorly placed.

Uh, because this site plan fails to protect our neighborhood.

I respectfully ask you to deny it.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr.

Lopez Corona.

Next up, Jorge Colon Rossa.

Mr.

Mayor and members of the governing body.

My concern tonight is the potential impact this proposed maverick gas station will have on residential property values and the financial well-being of families in this area.

For many, a home is their largest investment.

Resident paid property taxes and make long-term life decisions based on the safety and character of the neighborhood they choose.

When a high traffic commercial use is placed directly adjacent to homes, it fundamentally alters how future buyers will move to our neighborhood.

Even if technical requirements are met, homeowners face real consequences, increased traffic, fumes, and constant noise.

A house that once looked towards a quiet street may instead face fuel facing fuel pumps and late-night activity.

This shift in quality of life carries a financial cost to cause that is being on friendly based on homeowners who have already invested in this community.

When the development create burdens for residents while the businesses gain the benefit.

Approval is premature.

I asked this site plan be denied as proposed, or delay until stronger protections are required to preserve the safety, peace, and value of our homes.

Voters and taxpayers should not have to lose their primary investment because the commercial use was placed in their front doors.

Thank you, Mr.

Mayor.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr.

Colon Rosa.

Next up, Stephen Ryan.

My name is Stephen Ryan.

I live at 1452 Monterey.

Thank you for the opportunity to speak.

You deny, or at the very least, postpone approval of the proposed Maverick gas station.

My primary concern is safety.

The site is situated in an already congested intersection.

Residential near residential homes, churches, and an elementary school.

Adding a troll pump facility, which effectively doubles the current fueling capacity at this intersection, will inevitably increase traffic congestion and create dangerous conflicts for residents, pedestrians, and school traffic.

We have historical data showing that this intersection is difficult to manage.

Beyond traffic, we must consider the health and community impact.

This development is incompatible with a quiet residential neighborhood.

We are talking about a 24-hour operation.

Increased lighting noise and potential environmental hazards like benzene, all within 300 feet of families' homes.

The city's own comprehensive plan identifies this area as an activity center.

Meant to support a mix of issues for residents, not highway travelers.

This proposal contradicts that vision.

Furthermore, we deserve development that protects our families in alliance with the long-term growth of Rio Rancho.

I ask that you deny the site plan or any minimum delay approval until thorough independent review of the traffic, environmental, and public safety impacts and be completed.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

She's online.

Those impacts extend well beyond the property line affecting families who live here every day.

The burden is on the applicant to demonstrate that these impacts have been adequately addressed.

Based on the information presented, I do not believe that the burden has been met.

For these reasons, I will respectfully ask that you deny the site plan.

However, if the governing body decides to move forward with approval, I urge you to impose meaningful conditions to protect this community.

Number one.

Number three, traffic and infrastructure.

Restrict access from Monterey or Obregon.

Require a new traffic study during school hours, and mandate an independent review of crash data at 528 in Obregon.

Number four, site design.

Require larger landscape buffers, reduce sign brightness, comprehensive security plans, and enhance groundwater protection.

I'm almost done.

This decision will save our community for decades.

I respectfully ask for you to place the safety of our children above and our quality of life and our residence above the convenience of this development.

Thank you for your time and your thoughtful consideration.

Thank you, Miss Backer.

The last person I have signed up is Victoria Santos, who I understand is online.

Is that okay?

So Santos.

Can we read the I'm here?

Can you read the oath?

Um my name is Victoria.

I, Victoria Santo, residing at 3749 Desert Pignon.

Um, I'm actually talking on the behalf of not behalf of my parents, but my parents do live at 1239 Monterey.

I do solemnly declare and affirm that the testimony I give in reference to tell me the truth, and I do understand I do this under the penalty of prejudice.

Go ahead.

Okay.

Um good afternoon.

Um one of my biggest concerns is emergency access.

If there's an a med medical emergency fire or other urgent situations at one of the homes, how will ambulances fire tracks and other urgent situations at one of the homes?

Well how will they be able to get in and out when there's increased traffic, field trucks, delivery vehicles, and cars blocking the area.

Any delay in an emergency response could put someone's life at risk.

There's also concerns about fire risk, yams, noise, bright lights, late night activity, and overall loss of peace and safety in the neighborhood.

A gas station directly across from homes changed the character of the area and creates risk that families should not have to live with.

We're not against development, but we do believe that this is the wrong location.

A gas station should not be placed across from residential homes, especially where families rely on private live rely on private wells and where emergency access can be affected.

For those reasons, I respectfully ask that you propose this proposal to be denied or move to a more appropriate commercial location away from private homes and wells.

Um I definitely think that we ought to think about areas that are near Cleveland High School where we could really need some development in these areas.

Thank you.

Thank you, Miss Santos.

That I am missing for public.

No, Mr.

Mayor, there is not.

You have them up.

Okay.

All right, we'll close the floor in public hearing and move on to counselor discussion.

Any counselor discussion on this item?

Mr.

Mayor.

Council Town.

Okay.

Um I just have a couple really quick things.

Um this is a really difficult decision, uh, and I don't know what where it's gonna go.

There's a couple of concerns that I have, but the biggest part I think when residents or when folks buy in real rancho, especially along a state highway, which is New Mexico 528, there's inevitably going to be something built there.

That that's there's just no doubt about it.

And so the protections and and the and that that site is and it's specifically zoned for this per this type of use.

So that in itself speaks volumes for where this could potentially go later.

But that being said, um I do think that the residents have some concerns that we we really should take a look at.

I I do think that there is a concern with the lack of the utilization of 528, but I don't really know that it even if we utilize 528, if that would negate using uh the access on the other road.

So I don't I just don't want on Monterey, I don't think it would.

My only question is for the applicant, if you could just come up real quick.

Actually, not only I have like two, maybe three.

You don't answer them right, I have more.

Uh real quick on the height of the light poles that are in the lot, are they going to be is there a way to reduce the height of those to help comply with the the um light ordinance that we have in place because you're gonna have to comply with the light ordinance, right?

And then the dimmers that you talked about, so this is a two-part the dimmers that you talked about, are those on auto or manual?

So can some attendant inside go, ah, we're not gonna dim the lights today, or are they automatically dimmed at like Miss Backer said, nine o'clock or whatever time?

They're automatically dimmed.

Okay.

Um if director in climate, is there a height requirement on the polls?

Right now, the the model that you saw was based on 25 foot poles on a two and a half foot base.

I just didn't know if there was well the only thing I'm saying is if they were reduced down in height, it might reduce some of the light projection to the rear of the residents, right?

So that's the only reason why I say there, I don't know if there's a height limit for the trucks to go in and out.

I mean, uh that that part I don't know, but it's something to consider.

I'm not I'm not asking for you to make any changes.

I'm just saying you might want to consider No, we can consider it.

I mean we make limit uh limitations on light pole heights all the time.

Okay.

All right.

And then the other part that I have is part of the ECFR part 397, that's the federal transportation, when it comes to driving hazardous materials on a roadway that's not specific, so on that um residential street.

Um we need to make sure that we comply with that, and it has to be five feet off, 300 feet from the residence, and there is some issues there, and I'm sure that if NMDOT looked at it, that you are in complete compliance with that, but we need to make sure of that piece of it as well.

So I would ask staff to make sure that that happens.

I do like and I and I'll I'll just guide you in one other piece.

If this moves forward, I would like to urge you to work with the community because I actually like the list that Miss Backer rattled off.

I mean, maybe some of them are not doable, but I think the more the community if this project moves forward, what the community needs to understand is how do we move it forward and gain something that makes it more acceptable to the community, right?

Nothing's ever going to be perfect.

And if the site were to move forward, how do we compromise?

Be it you and the and the community in making something that everyone can buy off on, right?

Correct.

Now everyone's not going to be absolutely happy with anything.

But I think it goes a long way if you when you're developing it, work with the community, listen to their concerns, and you're not gonna be able to do everything.

But she has a really good list, and I do like her list.

I do too.

And I think that um get with her, maybe listen to that list and go through it.

But um, I that's the biggest thing I want to urge you to do as a developer as developing the site and work with the community if it moves forward, make sure that we try to do as best we can to accommodate, but you still have to run a business.

So I understand that too.

Okay.

Um, one thing I do want to make a comment, though I don't really need to, but um, we own our own logistics, so we have we control our fuel trucks, so late night delivery hours, those are not a concern.

Um there's a lot of her lists that we can easily accommodate.

Okay, and then the the delivery that adds to one more question and I'm done.

I'm sorry.

Going in and out, is that truck gonna be going in and out off Albergon, or is it gonna have to use that?

But it will exit on Monterey.

The whole the site.

Okay, because if if we were able to use 528, would that change that pattern?

I mean, yeah, that was the so to kind of go with since I've full disclosure.

I've been in land development 30 years, yes, licensed civil engineering in a couple states, just not New Mexico.

The DOT can always take away access from you.

And you know, this was approved back in 2007.

We fought for the access, whether we got uh for the site.

They really don't want to uh encumber 528.

We were only able to get a write-in access on Obergon.

Um, I mean we would have loved to have a full movement so that we could come circulated back out or eliminated limited just to that ride in.

So we did what we could.

I think I believe um my traffic engineer was not able to come tonight, but I believe this the city was involved during those negotiations we had with the DOT.

Um, but again, um we're open for whatever suggestions you have.

Okay, well, thank you.

I'm gonna yield them.

Thank you, Mr.

Murray.

Thank you, Counselor Tyler.

Mr.

Mayor, Councillor Crobworth.

Thank you.

Um actually um Mr.

Piggott, you could stay maybe there.

Don't run away too fast.

Um so just um a couple questions right there on that same line.

Um, since we're um here on this the 528 question, that's that's really my primary question, but it may not necessarily um be for you in particular.

Um really it's a question around the entire property as its own.

So I mean, I I believe you only are talking about the the single portion, and so I don't know if the property owner um and like the whole project development team is here or online or available to answer questions.

My development team is not online, they are all on family vacations.

So you get me.

Sorry.

Um, I don't know if the landowner is here.

Um we are under contract of land, we don't own it.

Okay.

Um if you um one of the things that was in my PowerPoint presentation was the exhibit C from the approved traffic study from both the DOT and from the city.

Um go to that.

Could you share that with screen?

Yeah.

Yeah, can you see it?

Yeah.

So if you read there, um you can see where in the bottom right hand corner, it has the no write-in write-out access on the mix 2528.

That was from the DOT.

You can see the highlighted portion on the the neighboring uh lot to the east of us, there's all accesses are gonna be off on Monterey for the future development on the adjoining lot.

We did, however, what's not reflected in this site plan because this is back in the early discussions.

We did provide that lot to access to our site, so they'll be the same lower part coming out and exiting onto that with single access.

Um we've done what we can.

Um those were the the items, and you can also see up there.

I think in our access there, it has a comment monterey improvements.

Um I said it's not like it's uh basically we're responsible for the improvements on the Monterey.

So those were the negotiations we had with the DOT and what we were limited to.

Okay.

Thank you.

So but you can still stay there.

So can you tell me more about the um conversations that were had with uh NMDOT?

I mean, the as with you know, in in some cases, their first response may be no, uh, but that doesn't always mean that's where the conversations should uh necessarily end.

Can you tell me more about the discussions that were had?

I wish I could.

I wasn't at the president at the meetings.

Okay.

Um between my engineers, um, the state officials in the city.

Um and I wish I could uh answer that question.

Yeah.

All I know is that we our site plan evolved through the six months.

Um, and this was the the results of that process.

Yeah.

I think based on my understanding of um being able to have access to a write-in right out.

Um even if there were only one or two of the adjacent lots that I believe are all under the same ownership included in the site plan, it would be within the uh zoning or the like the appropriate distances to be able to have that write in right out for NMDOT.

It's because this property is just short of the required uh distance that's needed for a ride-in right out on 528.

And that write in right out on 528, I think would begin to alleviate some of the concerns that are presented uh by the neighbors and would honestly quite honestly I think provide better access for the property.

Um so I would be really interested in understanding what those conversations were, who was engaged.

Um a traffic study is one thing, and that's that's just a one-way request, but then pushing back and asking uh and for what is needed to get that write-in write out, that would give us I think more information uh as we help start to make that decision.

Um so do you have any thoughts on on escalating those requests and pursuing additional requests for that right-in-write out from 528?

Um from my understanding, we did make every effort uh on trying to get the best access we could for mostly our site.

I will be specific that it was for our site, um, and this was a result of that.

I think um Dr.

Rincon, could you read that comment that it says on that highlighted portion on that lot?

So exactly what was written on that exhibit Cep, that one right there.

Um so that one in the bubble it says no additional development proposed at this time on the C1 lots to the north.

Any access to the lots in the future will come from Monterey.

Well, I mean, I don't have the answer to this question, but is the C1 lot considered the office lots too where that write-in right out access would be the uh the 2007 plan.

So um, Mr.

Mayor Counselor Culprett.

So um so no, so the SU that we're talking about, and I can pull up uh that site plan again.

Uh this area that for that rezoning in 2007 had a portion of lots that were zoned um SU for C1, and then there was another section of lots that was zoned um 01.

So there is two different zoning districts uh that went in um and that were included in this uh entire site plan.

Yeah, thank you.

So I I think there's opportunity to have some more conversation uh with the the landowner.

It's not often on 528 that we have eight and a half, nine acres of contiguous uh land with one property owner to be able to have the opportunity to get the access from 528, and that's probably the best served access uh for this road and to try to avoid uh access on uh Monterey as much as possible, um, in particular because those um those homes are the front yard is facing Monterey and some of the other uh areas it you know, it's the backyard, other parts of Rio Rancho, the backyard is what's facing that commercial uh area, and so it's not people's driveways uh that are being impacted, right?

Um so I I think there would be an opportunity to pursue um more discussion with uh uh NMDOT on 528 access.

Um, and I think for the property owner, though they're not here, um I think that's incumbent on them, not on you, uh, to be able to understand what we need to do, what they need to do to be able to get that 528 access.

Um and it's so I want to be be very clear.

Um, I am I'm not opposed to the the gas station.

I'm not opposed to any other aspect of the site other than the access off of 528, and I think that is something that is easily that is at least we can attempt to mitigate it if we work a bit harder um to have additional conversations with NMDOT, and I think there are ways to do that.

And I think that is something that is easily that is at least we can attempt to mitigate it if we work a bit harder um to have additional conversations with NMDOT and I think there are ways to do that.

But again it I I think I think we have some time I I think we we should pursue this and see what we can do with an MDOT.

It would take a little bit of time to get there but I think there's a space uh if we look at a postponement and I don't know what my colleagues would think about but I think it's something to consider.

I appreciate your comments Counselor Coldworth.

Yeah thank you that's all I have.

Thank you Councillor Colbreath Mr.

Mayor Councilor Nest I want to thank everybody for taking the time to come out and to share your thoughts and concerns we have received dozens of emails I have read through every single one there it are many things that are consistent through all of them that are the concerns of the residents I appreciate you being here on behalf of Maverick I I totally support your product we are the people that when we're on a road trip we look for the Mavericks like your product is great.

I do feel like I heard from the residents the product is not the problem it's the whole concept and all the parts that go with it.

So I think um my colleagues have pointed out some of the things but I want to be clear that I heard at this time we're not pursuing alcohol it seems like alcohol may not really be beneficial at this particular location so while it may not be forever it doesn't really sound like it's anywhere on the radar right now to be pursuing alcohol at this location.

Did I hear that correctly?

You heard that correctly okay um also we talked about school traffic so the traffic studies um are they coming as a next phase um folks are very very concerned about that added traffic during those couple of windows of time pre and post pickup um and and what does that look like so I qu uh quickly looked at the traffic study before I came up here because of that comment uh the traffic counts were done on February 11th uh which was a Wednesday from 7 a.m.

to 10 a.m for the aM peak traffic and then for the PM peak traffic was from 3 to p 3 p.m to 6 p.m on that day and then through that you have your traffic engineer does the calculations for the M peak daily traffic counts and nature.

All right so your traffic study did include the school year.

Correct.

February 11th which was a Wednesday 7 a.m to 10 p.m.

Okay.

Obviously the folks that specifically live on Monterey this is very specific to them.

As Counselor Calberth pointed out this is a unique situation in that you're talking about people's driveways front doors are going to be facing the gas station so um not so much about the aesthetics but about the fact that every single vehicle will have to pass their front door that is very very significant.

Have any conversations been had like a community outreach and allowed the neighbors to come and meet with you and have conversations about all of their concerns and an opportunity to try and minimize mitigate what are the things that you can absolutely make shifts because you control and what are the things you can't because they're out of your control have you had that kind of a public opportunity for them.

No we haven't one of the requirements or one of the during the process we're not required to have a neighborhood meeting but again if uh council sees that uh postpone we would have those conversations.

So you'd be open to doing it thank you.

All right another thing that hasn't been addressed although uh counselor Tyler kind of spoke a little bit about it but many of the folks maybe all of the folks are on wells and so there is a different kind of concern when you're on a well should there be a a gas spill or an oil leak what does that look like for them um so this site's kind of unique and I'd have to look at the geotech report with the way this site's constructed um we are downhill the residents as you can see our our fuel tanks were up against highway 528 again we go over and above what is required for leak detection things of that nature um spills are managed on site that's why we have 24 hour uh people there 24 hours a day to help mitigate those kind of concerns um there's things we can do with our drainage patterns so that they're not dumped in if there is somebody that uh if somebody has a drives off with a hose attached to the car.

Yes I've done that once you mitigate those risks and okay all of that is very much appreciated.

I thank you for taking the time to answer those questions.

The fact that within there it talks about should something drastically be different, you have to come before us.

And it is our role and our job to say this is drastically different, and um primarily because of that 528 access.

And so I think that then we have to revisit would this have been approved in 2007 this way.

And um I I would feel that it would not.

So I just wanted to encourage my colleagues to think about some options I heard about a postponement.

If we're willing to go back to DOT, we're willing to have some conversations with community members.

Um that could be an option.

Uh but otherwise, as is uh with 528 being an option, and again, I know your hands are slightly tied because you're talking about a specific piece, there is a larger piece that could have a different outcome.

Um I I think that that consideration needs to be very seriously taken care of um for this to be considered to move forward.

Thank you, Councilor List.

Mr.

Mayor, Councilman Time.

Uh couple cool questions.

Do you guys uh does this site have uh EV chargers?

Uh we don't show them on the site plan, however, the state of New Mexico has a requirement for EV chargers.

Uh, we're required to by the state electrical code that happened last year.

So don't count me on this.

I think we're required to put in two to four with options for eight in the future.

Okay.

Uh I believe that we're accommodating those on the parking lot that was to the west of the okay, very good.

And then uh I'm assuming the site has diesel.

Yes.

On all 12 pumps.

Um clarify that one uh memory, but I would say the majority of them will have diesel.

Okay.

All right.

Uh I do I do think and agree with sort of my colleagues that um I mean the the standards you have in Mavericks, it annoys me so much when you go to print a receipt at the at the pump and there's no paper in there, you guys you you always stock it, you take out the trash, all that other stuff.

Uh what will another gas station do on another corner?

It'll raise the competition level, and I think that that's probably something that's needed.

Um so you guys run clean establishments.

I'm gonna I'm in a Maverick four times a week, and um all of them are they're just they're cleaning the macula, which is great.

Um if this slides through postponement, and I really hope it doesn't, but if it does, uh two years ago, probably, and I'm sure Peter Wells remember the date exactly.

We pushed back on a gas station on the UNSER corridor, and when we push back on that, uh the whole thing fell apart and it didn't come forward again.

And so uh if that happens, um I just I I think that we need this.

I think you guys have a great product.

So I want to just say, you know, please don't uh give up on the rancho if that happens.

Um I would like to just encourage my colleagues up here.

If they were if you work on this and DOT tells you that we can do nothing with the 520 access, which is what I think will definitely happen based on historical, you know, evidence.

Um would you still vote, you know, would you still vote no in the future on this?

And so you do have to think about that because I think that's what's gonna happen.

We'll postpone, you'll try to work with DOT, and then we're gonna be right back here again.

Um but if that's the case, please come back with this project again.

I think it's gonna be good for the area.

I think that even the residents here tonight, you know, can't reasonably think that a long 528 that is not going to develop commercially, we've got to have 528 developed commercially.

Um so I think it is a good product, and uh that's all the questions that I had.

Thank you, Mr.

Mayor.

Thank you, Councillor Antine.

Counselor Dobson, any comments from District One?

Mr.

Mayor, no, thank you.

Um I do think we got it.

We really should maybe consider postponing all right.

So we've got a we've got a motion on the table in a second.

I'm gonna go back to our procedural question that we asked a ways back.

Oh, I'm sorry, Counselor.

Okay.

I mean I commented earlier, but I just wanted to follow.

Yeah.

So I think um, you know, given the given the comments and really what's before us, um, while it is always the possibility that uh we may get a no.

I think you never know until you ask, until you push a little bit harder than normal.

Um, and I think uh given Councillor Liszt's comments about uh the actions uh that's the 2007 actions really were contingent on a complete site plan.

Um and so I I think it's important for the whole development team, which includes uh the the uh site owner, the property seller, and the applicant to really revisit the uh 528 access.

Um and so I would propose that we postpone this uh probably until the first meeting in September.

Um that will give enough time for the discussions, uh give enough time to get some answers.

Uh my colleagues may have some different ideas on the timing, uh, but I really urge the entire development team.

You're only a piece of it, which I completely understand to really uh look at what we have in 528.

Um and um and and I I encourage us to to think about that.

I also would would ask for you to just hang with us while we go through that process.

I do think it's possible, especially if they look at uh the the properties that may need to be included to get that access on to 528.

I feel I'd like to make a motion that we postpone until the first meeting of September, which is September 10th.

Thank you.

Okay, before we entertain that motion, is there further council comment?

Mr.

Mayor, Councilor Antony.

Uh if I could divert to city manager uh Geisel, how responsive is NMDOT?

So if we weren't in September, like if we were in August, do they come are they pretty responsive or are they typically bureaucratic?

Mr.

Mayor, members of the governing body.

Um I think uh given that we're in summertime, uh, and you know, recognizing that we're summertime when we're about to go into a holiday period and then July's vacation, August is back to school.

Um people's you know, people's availability uh you know fluctuates, and I think uh perhaps the thought process from councillor uh colworth with September is you know you know under normal conditions it was February March, maybe not as long, but recognizing that we do have some other variables there.

Was it for September 10th?

Is that what you said?

Uh okay.

All right, thank you, City Manager.

Mr.

Mayor.

Councilor Turner.

I also like Councilor Lenantine.

I do not want you to run away from this project, because I do think it's a needed project.

And um we'll I'll be interested to see what NMDOT says.

I I would be happy if they would change that access point.

But um I don't think that even if they change that access point, correct me if I'm wrong, we're still gonna have the other access point off of the residential road.

Mr.

Mayor, the only thing we were doing is we're reducing the amount of traffic that could potentially use that side street.

That's that's what really what we're doing, correct?

Yeah, Mr.

Mayor, members of the governing body.

Um the site would need multiple access points for different reasons, such as you know, public safety response, etc.

There you know, conceptually there's customers from the neighborhood.

Um but being that you know I think I'm gonna reference what the um the applicant reference said 70 percent of the traffic is driving by.

Yeah, they're driving by on 528.

Um, most likely heading, you know, southbound.

There's a right in, you make a right into the property, um, you make and then you can make a right out and you continue on 528.

So there's a good you know you know conceptually, presumably uh you know a redistribution of the trips.

Okay.

Um I think going back to the the time frame.

Um if uh the the applicant and the overall project development team, you know, including different folks, property owner, etc.

are able to get some traction with the DOT, there may be a need for them to do uh for the applicant to do revise civil engineering work or revise TIE type work.

Um, you know, so that may as part of also I think part of part of the timeline.

Okay.

And if we come back in in September and they're making headway, but it's not finalized, um, the governing body's rules of procedure allow for two to postponements.

Okay.

I mean, I just I too like I remember the other gas station run answer, and I think that was a huge miss on our part.

And uh I don't want to see the same thing happen here.

So thank you, Mr.

Mayor.

Thank you, Casey Taylor.

Any further council discussion?

All right, so now we're back to the procedural question.

So the current motion is to postpone to September 10th.

However, we have not received a second.

So is or are we though don't don't we have a motion already for approval of the site plan and a session?

We do, but because there is overall consent by the governing body, this would this super seats perfect.

Okay, that's what I need to help with.

Thank you.

Appreciate it.

Second.

Okay, so we have a motion and a second for postponement.

Any discussion by council on the postponement.

None.

Ms.

Davis.

Thank you.

Councillor List.

No.

Councillor Tyler.

Yes.

Councilor Jabson?

Yes.

Counselor Lennantine?

No.

Councilor Weimer?

Yes.

And Deputy Mayor Colbreth.

Yes.

And I apologize, Mayor Weimer.

I called you Councillor Weimer.

It's okay.

It's always getting used to it.

It's all good.

Sorry.

You messed up and called him Mayor Hall earlier.

D43 has been postponed to September 10th.

All right.

Well, I too hope to see you back here in uh in a few months because I agree.

I think it's a good project, and we just need to work through some of these details.

All right.

Moving on then to second reading of ordinances.

We have none.

First reading of ordinance, also none.

That takes us to city manager.

Mr.

City Manager.

Mr.

Mayor, members of the governing body, good evening.

Just a quick update.

As we mentioned, they're coming up on the holidays.

The city's festivities will be here in the city center from 5 30 to 9.30.

The last day to sign up to participate in the parade is tomorrow.

Information on the city's website, R RnM.gov or just Google Rio Rancho 4th of July 2026.

That's how I got there.

Again, last day to sign up for the parade is uh tomorrow.

I would also like to take a uh a second to acknowledge the folks uh from the Special Olympics for their thank you that they shared uh a recognition they had for Connie and the entire Parks and Rec staff.

I think the round of applause that she received was uh well deserved.

Um Connie is a trooper, Connie is a warrior for the city and is out front and center and takes a lot more uh takes a lot more uh negativity than the the positivity that she deserves.

So I thought that those comments were um I appreciated them taking the moment to recognize Connie because I appreciate Connie and value her significantly.

I would also like to take a second.

Um there was comments made, and we are in the time of year uh where fireworks start to get launched.

Uh Rio Rancho's um firework prohibition rules uh on our ordinary what we have uh is the strongest that the state allows us to have on the books, so we can't go any air quotes any further.

Um there is a um uh a large supply or easy access to um fireworks that uh go far above higher in the air and louder, etc.

than uh what should be permissible.

Um don't need to elaborate on how and why, but we know there's ample uh ample supply, just minutes outside of city limits.

Um so it is a uh a little bit of a uh a challenge when the supply is so daunting.

Um however, I do want to uh acknowledge that you know the the work of the rear rancho fire and rescue as well as um our rear rancho police department and their efforts uh to address the illegal firework activity.

Um I remember former uh Chief De Filippo telling the story of confiscating fireworks from a nine-year-old.

Um he says it's one of the uh toughest days yet to go about it.

Maybe 12-year-old, I forget exactly.

Um, but we have uh both police and fire have patrols um out during during and around 4th of July.

It is a uh a little bit of a you know the Dutch boy putting the holes uh in the in you know in the side of the you know the the uh the dike um given that there's a lot of calls for service.

Um but we do we do confiscate fireworks, do issue warnings, um both police and and fire.

Um respect the police officers' discretion to whether it's a citation or a warning.

Um I also want to highlight that it's not the only thing that's going on on 4th of July.

We have a lot of uh we have a special event taking place here at City Hall.

Uh police is obviously gonna look at um they have to for the purposes of public safety, higher priority calls um because those do take literally higher priority because they represent a greater risk to the public safety.

But uh for instance, last year um in 2020 2025, police issued nine verbal warnings, uh fire had 75 uh uh verbal verbal warnings uh and confiscations 2024, uh fire uh had 98 verbal warnings, uh confiscated fireworks from 77 from 77 uh uh groups, eight verbal warnings from from PD.

So you see that work that's happening out there.

It is a difficult task, um, but we aren't turning a blind eye to it.

But I also think it's uh important to look at it in the context of the surrounding area, the supply of the illegal fireworks, and everything else that we have going on on 4th of July.

Thank you very much.

Thank you, Mr.

City Manager.

So contrary to what we heard earlier, the ordinance is not being ignored.

That's what I heard.

With that, we are conclude the meeting.

I'm Greg Hull, and I'm out here at the Rio Rancho.

Sunday is Funday, right here at Haynes Park, and we're doing the kickball tournament right now.

It's amazing that this event has been going on since 2005, where we bring the community, get together.

Uh we've got all kinds of vendors here.

We've got all kinds of music and entertainment.

Got the mechanical bull and yes.

We've got the mayor's posse out here doing the kickball tournament, trying to win back the Tony Popper Memorial Trophy.

One hand here.

I have one dog is a German Shepherd.

Yeah, you're gonna be a policeman.

Do it.

Oh, the four kids.

Oh, why don't we take it up?

Okay, good evening, good afternoon, and welcome to the Plan Zoning Board meeting for June the 23rd, 2026.

Uh please sounds all electronic devices while attending the planning zoning board meetings, and we'll please stand up and do a pledges of allegiance.

Okay, a couple.

Um for the record, I would take a roll by calling each plan zoning board member name, please announce your presence by Sam Present, Kevin Kaufcher, present, Robadon, present online, Andrea Hankins.

Present.

Lisa Hardesy.

Present.

Okay.

That's gonna be tough for her.

Okay, a couple of housekeeping items before we get started.

Any personal attendees, please fill out the form.

Um and give it to the speaker to my left.

All individuals who have signed up will be permitted to speak.

If you have yet to fill out the form, now's the time to do so and provide it to the recorder again to my left.

Virtual attendees.

Please turn on chat message to the host or use a raise hand feature if you want to provide public comment.

Well, I recognize you to speak.

You have the ability to enable audio and video.

Okay.

For the consent calendar.

Uh nothing there.

So we'll take motion to approve the consent calendar.

Motion to approve the consent calendar.

Second.

Second.

Call the rule.

Chairman Richardson.

Yes.

Commissioner Caufier.

Yes.

Vice Chair Gabbledon.

Yes.

Commissioner Hankins.

Yes.

Commissioner Hardesty.

Yes.

Motion pass.

Okay.

Move over to uh present.

Um, I guess let's go to public hearings.

Item number two is a zone map amendment.

Staff contact is Michelle Costello and staff recommends the plan zone board recommending approval to the governing body.

Good evening, Mr.

Chairman, members of the board.

Michelle Castilla, planner with the City of Rio Rancho.

This item is a request for a zone map amendment from NC neighborhood commercial to SU special use for NC neighborhood commercial uses and an indoor soccer facility for the property look legally described as unit 16 block BB, lot 17A, 18A, and 20A through 24A.

The subject properties approximately 1.91 acres combined, located on South 29th Street Southeast, a residential road off of Southern Boulevard, Southeast, a principal arterial.

It is currently zoned NC neighborhood commercial per ordinance number 25, enactment number 8-27, and ordinance number 33, enactment number 99-31.

The existing ordinance zoned the property as CMU commercial mixed use.

However, in 2013, under ordinance number four enactment number 13-3, properties zoned to CMU were amended to NC neighborhood commercial.

It is within the golf course quarter plan as well, which is which purpose is to help guide and manage future development along the golf course uh business arterial.

The application presented as an attachment meets the minimum submittable requirements for the proposed zoning request and the justification adequately addresses the policies and criterion for zone map change per the Rio Rancho Municipal Code Chapter 150.07.

Specifically, staff recommends that the board finds that the proposed amendment will maintain all existing permissive and conditional uses on subject property while adding the indoor soccer facility use.

The maintenance of these existing uses along with the additional use will be consistent with the existing conditions of the welfare of the area while adding a use that it may satisfy a recreational need for the community.

Furthermore, the goals and policies of the comprehensive plan, particularly the parks and recreation elements.

Is the site plan for the indoor soccer facility?

The site plan has been attached as a exhibit A to the ordinance and is reviewed uh pursuant to Chapter 154.43 and conforms.

The building is 30 feet two inches in height, which is in compliance with the maximum allowable height of 32 feet listed in the golf course quarter plan.

Um and the site plan shows that 13,353 square feet of landscaping will be provided, which is more than the required minimum.

Therefore, staff require uh recommends that the planning and zoning board recommend approval to the governing body uh with findings and conditions, and with that I'll stand for any questions.

Thank you.

Is the applicant present?

Come for state your name, the address, please.

Okay, you may proceed.

Any comments that fine.

Yes.

Okay, gotcha.

Okay.

Okay, is anyone present who wishes to speak for or against item number two?

Zen virtual will wish to speak for or against item number two.

Okay, item number two is now closed for public comments.

Motion to approve item number two.

Motion to approve item number two.

Second.

Second.

And discussion from the board.

And in discussion from the board.

Commissioner Hankins.

Yes.

Commissioner Kaufcher.

Yes.

Vice Chair Gabblan.

Yes.

Commissioner Hardesy.

Yes.

Chairman Richardson.

Yes.

Motion pass.

Okay.

All right.

Um, any discussion deliberations?

Any comments by the members from the board?

Okay.

And public form comments.

Okay.

Motion to adjourn.

Okay.

Thank you.

Have a good evening.

Good evening, welcome to the regular investment advisory board of the City of Rear Rancho.

Um calling the meeting to order first.

Let's stand for the Pledge of Allegiance.

Liberty and Justice Law.

Thank you.

Next on the agenda, it looks like it's roll call.

Thank you, Chair Wainwright.

Member Bills?

Present.

Member Baker.

I didn't hear what you said.

Member Baker.

Member McCray.

Member Jablonsky.

And Chair Wainwright.

Present.

Thank you.

Sir, we have a quorum.

Okay.

Next.

Let's see.

Discussion and deliberation.

See Clerk Davis to present.

Consent calendar.

Yes.

Consent calendar.

All right.

If I can please get a motion to approve the consent calendar, which is the approval of the November 19th, 2025 regular meeting minutes.

I'll make a motion to approve.

Thank you.

If I can please take the roll.

Here.

Member Baker.

Yes.

And Chair Wainwright.

Yes.

The consent calendar is approved.

And next.

Is that where I'm at?

Uh yes, sir.

Item number two is the selection of a chair and vice chair.

Yes.

Annually, we are required through the city charter to go ahead and select the chair and the vice chair.

And so I would like nominations for chair.

I second that.

Chair Wainwright, do you accept your nomination?

Sure.

Accept it.

Okay.

Status quo.

Um for the record.

Member Jablonski has arrived.

He arrived at six oh two PM.

Um I will go ahead then and conduct a roll call for Chair Wainwright to remain as chair.

Um so Member Jablonski.

Yes.

Member Bills?

Yes.

Chair Wainwright?

Yes.

And Member Baker.

Yes.

Thank you.

Chair Wainright remains chair.

And if I can get a nomination for vice chair.

Uh member Baker.

Well call.

Yes.

Member Jablonski.

Yes.

Member Bills?

Yes.

And Member Wainwright.

Yes.

Congratulations.

Chair and Vice Chair remain the same.

Thank you.

Looks like we're going to review an input on the permanent fund performance.

Do we have Deanne Woodring?

I am here, Chair.

Can you hear me okay?

We can.

Okay, well, good evening, everyone.

It's nice to see you.

I'm going to pull up my slide deck and uh we'll review the performance of the permanent fund.

Uh, and then I'll also be reviewing the performance of the operating portfolio and the uh proceeds that you have.

Pull the slides up.

You should all have my slides with you.

Technical difficulties.

Okay on sharing.

Okay.

So as many of you recall, I know several of you the members here are newer.

I just became the uh oversight uh advisor for your permanent fund.

Mr.

Chair, I don't see those slides on our screen.

Is it possible to get that on our screen?

Yep, we can now.

Thank you so much.

Okay, perfect.

Uh so I thought I would kind of step back and look at some of the components of the permanent fund.

We will be looking at the investment policy for the permanent fund later in this agenda.

Uh so I'm going to hit on a couple of key points uh for you as board members to kind of consider or think about as we're going through this.

I do, so all the monies up at the uh in the permanent fund are managed by the state investment council up in Santa Fe.

All of them are managed by various investment portfolio managers that are selected by SIC.

And I take the data and the equity reports that they're providing from their um RV Coons, who is their oversight consultant, and then I add my own uh commentary regarding the markets, et cetera.

So I just wanted to go through so and touch on a couple areas to key in on.

So the permanent fund is invested in U.S.

equity securities that's up here on the top.

You're also invested in international securities, which is represented by the MSCI uh international fund.

So these are the return components for the year of each of these sectors.

Um the jet Japan, United Kingdom, and Canada are just the countries that we're representing, but it's mainly these two asset classes and then also the government bond market.

So when we're reflecting on this page, we're kind of looking at what's happened to the overall sectors.

I was uh I'm primarily work in the bond market.

I also do asset allocation for the SIC funds for several New Mexico accounts.

But it was amazing when I looked at these returns from the international sector.

So the international sector over the last or so far year to date up and for the calendar year is performed at 31%.

So the key when we're looking at these different asset groups is the diversification that you have in this permanent fund.

This permanent fund is a longer term uh initiative, so you have you have a lot of ability to take on a lot of price change.

And since you've started, the price has only been up.

But it's important to have different asset exposures so that when one sector does well, usually another sector doesn't do as well, and that's that diversification component.

So when we look at how you're invested, they're gonna be tied back to these indices that uh SIC manages each of your components for.

And the equity market, as we all know, has been really strong into last year.

It did slow down a little bit this last quarter, and we are hitting some bumps in the tech sector.

Um, and the international market, as I just mentioned, is really on fire and it continues to uh be accelerating.

You're also exposed in some real estate uh exposure.

Uh and these asset classes I'm gonna talk about because we're gonna be looking at that within your policy as well.

And then as far as the bond market, bond market also year to date has had very strong returns.

Uh, we've we've coming off a very high level of interest rates from 5%, which we hit back in 2024, and interest rates have declined dramatically since that period.

The investment component of the permanent fund is has a much longer duration than your operating funds.

So that means that when interest rates drop, you get a much quicker or larger appreciation in those bonds.

So the things that are impacting our interest rates, I'll go into detail uh in my session on the operating account, but we're mainly focused on inflation and what the Federal Reserve is doing and what employment is doing.

Right now, the uh employment numbers are providing an opportunity for the Fed to drop interest rates again lower in the very short-term rates.

Um that is impacted by uh the Fed what the Federal Reserve does.

They dropped the Fed funds rate three times last year in 2024, and we're anticipating another two times or a 50 basis point drop this year.

So all those trend lines means that there'll be appreciation in the bond portfolio, although you are exposed it a little bit longer, and there may be some inflation impact that will get stirred by that.

But again, real positive returns here for the year so far.

And then this detail of this report is looking at the actual funds that you own in the uh in the uh permit fund.

So you own the large cap fund, you own the small cap fund, and this is all their indices that they direct their portfolio managers to manage to.

And so when we look at these comparisons, my eye always kind of draws to well, how's the active portfolio doing relative to the benchmark?

So passive portfolio doing relative to the benchmark.

Active means you've got the active portfolio managers that are really stock pickers and really selecting passive means they're pretty much matched to the index, and they just stay consistent.

Many of you have probably read over the years can you really outperform the indices?

Can you outperform the market?

And there's a lot of uh questions out there on whether you can or can't, uh, but that's what I kind of look for when I'm looking at these numbers.

Um, and there are there are small fees on all these funds.

I just went back and tracked every single transaction that occurred from the start of this fund in 2023.

Um, and the the fees are pretty limited for you uh when we look at that.

Then you have the real estate pools down here that these look like really complicated uh indices, but they're basically inflation types of numbers that we can compare the real estate market, and the real estate market has struggled.

Uh it only performed at 2.3% over this last year.

Again, that's a diversification tool.

So the international funds are doing really well.

The real estate hasn't done as well.

And that real estate and that real return pool portfolio uh was brought in just at the beginning of last year by the prior manager, and I'm familiar with them, and we're looking at those as I go through and look at kind of our next step that which I want to cover with you next quarter is the asset allocation balances.

And then in the fixed income portfolio that performed at 730, um, and you have a credit uh portfolio in the in the um permit fund.

So I did step back so uh for a little bit of history.

So this portfolio started in Jan 1, 2023 with a seed money of 10 million dollars.

Uh in 2023, there was also a small contribution of $2 million.

And then in 2024, there was another contribution of a million.

Uh no funds have been taken out of the portfolio uh to date, and the earnings in uh 2023 was about a million five eighty three.

In 2024, a million two fifty-three, and in 2025, 2 million 57.

And so these numbers um uh Stephanie will be reviewing with you when you're making a determination of of what you're doing with those allocations and how much uh you as a board can look at uh allocating out after year end.

The returns I'm standing, I'm sorry, this is Stephanie.

I just wanted to the uh the the small donation in 2023 was only $2,000, not $2 million.

So just wanted to.

Oh, I'm sorry, did I say $2 million?

I meant $2,000, sorry, but thank you.

Um this, so it's really quite phenomenal how well this portfolio has worked.

It basically contributed at 10 million in 2023, and you ended the market value at 15 million, eight ninety-six.

So that's kind of the big picture for the portfolio.

And then this is all the detail of the funds that you currently hold.

So as we get into the policy later in this discussion, I am going to be doing a full asset allocation modeling to evaluate the variances of the active and passive and and look at this mix.

You're very diversified.

Uh as I mentioned, you just added the real estate and real return pools at the beginning of last year.

And um, so this is your quarter to date uh earnings were um increased up to 15 million, so you earned about 375,000, and then since fiscal year 1,137.

And then these are all primarily the fees that are in the funds.

And then when we look at asset allocation, uh the current policy uh is looking at a 37% allocation to domestic equities, a 20% to international, a 5% uh the current allocation 5% to real uh assets, and then 38% to fixed income.

Your target allocation from policy is written so you have 39% domestic equity, 21% international equity.

There isn't anything stated in policy on the real estate uh real asset allocation, so I wanted to address that in policy update and the fixed income portfolio at 40%.

So what we're looking for is a board and oversight of these funds is making sure that you're aligned to your targets.

So you're pretty close, uh, with the exception of not having anything in there for real estate, and that's something that we'll address both bringing that into policy, and then next quarter, I'll be bringing some asset allocation information for you.

And then this is a summary for policy, which I'll wait for Stephanie to present on this, but I did uh notice a couple components, and I just wanted to give you that background while I was presenting this section that it's really the real return assets that I'm recommending to add into the portfolio asset allocations.

They're listed in there, but they're not part of your strategy.

And then I look at the allocations, I'm recommending to have your your target right where you are about 5%.

And every whenever we're building asset allocations and targets, we look at the target and then we look at a range because what we want to be able to do is rebalance when equities do very, very well.

That portfolio that we have positioned at 55% might go up to 60%, and that's a trigger for us to go back and rebalance to our target.

So when we're looking at all these different assets each quarter, I'll be evaluating how far off you are, and then we'll recommend a rebalancing from maybe uh and you've done this quite a few times over the years, but you've reduced your equity position and moved it back to fixed income to keep that 6040 allocation.

So with that, is there any questions questions?

Doesn't look like it.

Thank you.

Okay.

Um so now I'm gonna go into the operating funds.

The operating and bond proceed fund is what GPA manages on individual security selection.

And we're very closely with Stephanie on all decisions there at the city.

Uh I wanted to talk a little bit about the changes in short-term interest rates because these really impact the selection of the securities that we're working on.

We look year over year in 2024, the short-term at the Fed funds affected area was at 432 yield.

And uh in 2025, it dropped all the way down to 363.

The two-year note is the area that we invest in dropped also from four and a quarter down to about 348.

So the key elements that GPA is focused on for the city is to balance how much money you leave on hand and how much money you need to leave on hand and liquidity versus how much you're investing.

And uh since we started on board with the city, we really built up that core fund side.

We have an opportunity at higher rates, and you're gonna see the results from doing that.

Uh, then we'll consistently that higher earnings yield that was purchased back in these 4% environments will hold up that yield for the county.

I mean, excuse me, for the city as uh interest rates change.

The key things that are driving this change in rates is we'll hear more about the Federal Reserve.

We just had a new chairman uh put in place uh and was announced in January.

He is supposed to be taking over in May.

I have been extremely amazed at how quiet uh overall the fixed income market rates have been with so much turmoil going on in the world and in the markets.

We've really ranged between 340 and 370, uh, which is a pretty tight range.

Um, and the anticipation is down there in that bottom graph where the market, we can look at bonds and read what it's anticipating in future rates, and it is anti is uh anticipating declining rates, but not too bad, down to 3%.

To give you some historical perspective, in 2021, that first graph I pulled up, we we were in a 1% to a 0% interest rate environment.

So the amount of earnings that we're able to earn on the portfolio in this three to four percent environment is substantially increased.

However, we do expect those earnings to drift a little bit lower as these rates trend down.

So this is all about kind of managing those expectations of what's going to happen within the portfolio.

Uh we also look at duration changes and the exposure of your portfolio.

So normal markets investing longer in the uh investment cycle should achieve higher returns.

I'm happy to say this last year we did get those positive returns, and this price is in and compares really like your SIC money where we're looking at price change plus interest income.

Uh last year for the calendar year, the sector we're investing in uh earned about 544.

You're right here in this zero to five year sector, whereas short money or holding it in cash only earned 432.

So we're back to normal performance.

Uh the last three to five years has been really rough, mainly because of the big jump in interest rates.

Uh, but I think going forward, coming off these higher levels, we should continue to see that trend.

Then we are not looking at this the city's investment policy, but that will be, I think, next quarter, Stephanie, right?

So your policy dictates how the securities are invested.

The guidelines are both your policy as well as state statute.

So we're actively involved in looking at any changes that are occurring in statute or how your portfolio is positioned relative to that.

So at the end of the calendar year, the total portfolio bond proceeds plus your investment portfolio was bullying about 64% in treasuries.

And that's because there wasn't a lot of opportunity within our other sector that we're able to wait into agencies.

There just wasn't a lot of added yield.

So we've mainly been riding with higher components to U.S.

Treasuries.

We will look to add to the other sectors when we see spread relationships, and then the balance of the portfolio is invested in money mark of our bank deposits at Wells Fargo.

So that's your liquidity component, and then your investment component is in treasuries and agencies.

We also have a maturity limit by policy, you're allowed to go to seven years.

By practice, we really stay in that five-year maximum maturity area.

The supranationals, we don't have any in the portfolio right now, but uh your maximum level um your maximum maturity on those is five.

So all these rules keep the portfolio safe, keep it in with guidelines that's appropriate for operating type of uh investments.

And when we look at the portfolio, there's a couple components.

You have bond proceeds that were issued for dedicated purposes.

These portfolios are laddered to expected cash flows, and we're constantly looking at spend downs on those, and if you need those funds.

We have the 2024 that is spending down.

Uh we also have what's called a cash match portfolio, and that portfolio is invested to meet your debt service payments.

Uh and then we have a core investment portfolio, and that's money that's dedicated for longer-term budgeted items, but money that you don't need to leave on hand.

And that's our real anchor that's invested at 4%.

Um, and that will drift a little lower, but we'll we will see these liquidity numbers come down faster.

So when we started working on this, the yield on the liquidity was actually higher than our investments.

Um, and now we're seeing that reversal.

So as those short-term rates come down, this 4% will hold the portfolio up quite nicely.

And then four-year quarter report, we look at changes.

So we did uh overall on your earnings yield went from a 407 to a 397.

That's mainly because of these drops in the liquidity rates.

Um, and we did have a little bit of drop in your cash match portfolio because we were reinvesting at four rates.

Again, all expected as an oversight board, you want to make sure that the portfolio is doing what it should be doing in interest rate market changes, and and it is it's it's coming down a little bit, but not rapidly because of that diversification of maturity.

The unrealized gains at the end of the year were uh up two million dollars, so just rates came down, so the price and the value of the portfolio went up.

We look at a couple other tools with this portfolio.

We make sure we are diversified.

We do have one super, I think I mentioned uh we were low on that, but we have one supranational, a few agencies, and then we're using the you do have a uh high grade corporate fund in there, and then the remaining is all in U.S.

Treasury.

So this is just another way of looking at those various uh asset allocations.

And then we also diversify by maturity.

So those are the main tools that we have to maintain stability within the portfolio.

This is just focusing on just the operating components.

You ended the year at a market value of 282 million, and the earnings to date fiscal year so far is 5.7.

So we're halfway through, so you should be earning right about 10 million uh on earnings income coming into the fiscal year end.

And then this is the last slide in here to look at overall balances.

So this is where we look at the health of the city and the growth.

You guys are a growing community, so we'd expect to see these types of stability uh in your numbers.

Uh you are up a little bit, about 14 million this year from last year.

And when I look down here at the earnings, we have stable earnings, we have relatively stable book yields with that trend line down, and then stable durations.

So everything's sitting really well positioned for a declining rate environment, and I'm really excited about the increase in in dollars that we did get invested in that higher um income period.

Pictured asset allocation and then total return.

So we do track total return and performance of the portfolio, like your SIC funds.

The the yield earnings are not quite as fun as that international uh portfolio, but the total return for the um investment portfolio is about 561.

I mentioned that benchmark of 544, so we're outperforming due to um tactical allocations that we're working on in the portfolio.

And that is it for my report and stand for any questions.

All right, thank you, Dean.

Uh-huh.

I'll call on Director Yara with the permanent fund investment policy statement revision.

Yes, Chair Wainwright and members.

Um according to your charge, the first meeting is both to look at our permanent fund investment earnings and and um weigh in on their use and also to look at the permanent fund investment policy statement.

Um Deanne has actually went ahead and provided some recommendations that she saw based on our our asset class classes and the allocations.

Um I did not prepare any uh different recommendation for you to review.

Um and if any of the members have their own recommendations, we can certainly discuss that and um send that up to the governing body.

So I'm not sure if Deanne can pull up her um, yeah.

Yeah, I can pull that up.

Thank you.

So it was really um some small uh changes on the policy.

Uh so I I wanted to correct some terminology that was in there.

One is you were uh giving the authority to an investment manager of external funds, and really the SIC is your is an investment advisor.

Um the investment guidelines.

I wanted to their description of real returns, as I mentioned, were in there, but there wasn't anything addressing how much you should buy.

So that again, that was purchase.

I'm fine having those in the portfolio.

I think they're a good diversifier.

Uh I wanted to set a target of just five percent.

Uh so it made that recommendation in the asset allocations.

Um, and then change the selection of investment managers to investment of external investment pools, and that's more of a language of how SIC is structured in that they call it pools.

There's they you know they have a lot of different buckets of money up there at SIC, and these in internal external pools are available for local governments like yourselves, and they are limited.

So it was important just to distinguish that those are the pools that local governments are allowed to purchase, and that's what you're investing in.

And then recommended to add the uh real return constraint and clarify how the performance uh is being tracked and run.

So I'm not running the full performance numbers, I don't have all those details to the those specific indices that SIC does, very few managers do.

So I am utilizing the consultants data, RV Coons that provides that to SIC to share and pass on to you.

So those were the main changes within the policy, and I can pull the policy up if that would be helpful.

Okay, Chair Wainwright and members, if you have any other input, um we can um I think you can entertain a motion to um recommend Ms.

Woodring's um changes or other changes or no changes.

Um we can certainly talk about that more if you need more time to review the policy.

Comments?

No, I make a motion to accept the the changes as proposed.

Second second seconded discussion.

Thank you.

Member Jablonski?

Yes, Chair Winright?

Yes, Vice Chair Baker?

Yes.