>> Comm. Benson: THIS IS A TEST FOR THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING. STAY TUNED. >> Comm. Benson: GOOD EVENING. THE 20TH MEALING OF THE 25TH COUNCIL WILL COME TO ORDER. COUNCILOR SANCHEZ HAS NOTIFIED ME HEED IS GOING TO BE LATE. WE HAVEN'T HEARD FROM COUNCILOR PENA YET. BUT WE DO HAVE A QUORUM AND SO WE WILL GET STARTED. AND, WE WILL START WITH THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE IN ENGLISH BY COUNCILOR GROUT AND IN SPANISH BY COUNCILOR BASSAN. (PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. ), (PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE IN SPANISH) >> Comm. Benson: THANK YOU COUNCILORS. MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC, CITY STAFF AND MEDIA HAVE ABILITY TO VIEW THIS MEETING IN PERSON AND ON LIVE STREAMS THROUGH FOUR DIFFERENT PLATFORMS. GOVTV, COMCAST CHANNEL 16, THE WEBSITE, YOUTUBE AND ZOOM. CORRECT MYSELF, THIS MEETING IS ONLY ON ZOOM AND SUBSEQUENT TWO MEETINGS OF 2022 WILL BE ONLYE ON ZOOM. THE LIVE STREAMS ACCESSED FROM YOUR SMARTPHONES, TABLETS AND COMPUTERS AND ALSO MEETING IS CLOSED CAPTION. IF YOU NEED CLOSE CAPTIONING YOU CAN ENABLING YOUR DEVICE AT THIS TIME. THE VIDEO RECORDING OF THIS AND ALL PAST COUNCIL MEETINGS WILL REMAIN VIEWING AT ANY TIME ON THE CITY COUNCIL'S WEBSITE. COUNCIL STAFF IS AVAILABLE VIA TELEPHONE IF MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC NEED ASSISTANCE. SO, JUST CALL 768-3100 FOR ASSISTANCE DURING BUSINESS HOURS MONDAY THROUGH FRIDAY. IF NECESSARY, THE COUNCIL WILL TAKE A BREAK AT APPROXIMATELY 7:00 P.M. WE WANT TONIGHT'S PROCEEDING TOCE BE AS CIVIL AND RESPECTFUL AS POSSIBLE SO WHEN YOUR SPEAKING, PLEASE DID NOT MAKE PERSONAL ATTACKS. WE'LL START WITH A PROCLAMATION AND PRESENTATION, HOWEVER, THIS IS BY THE LOW RIDER BIKE CLUB PROGRAM. COUNCILOR PENA, BUT IF JEFF IS AVAILABLE, WE'LL ASK JEFF TO GET STARTED WITH THIS PRESENTATION. >> JEFF: THANK YOU. MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL. I KNOW YOU GUYS HAVE A BUSY MEETING TONIGHT AND SO I'LL BE BRIEF WITH THE PRESENTATION. SO, THISAT IS UPDATE ON COUNCILOR PENA'S INITIATIVE RELATED TO DEVELOPING A LOW RIDER BIKE CLUB HERE IN ALBUQUERQUE AND I AM JUST GOING TO GIVE YOU A QUICK OVERVIEW OF WHAT WE HAVE DONE SO FAR AND WHERE WE STAND. IF I CAN GET THE NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE? SO, JUST TO GIVE A BIT OF BACKGROUND ON THE PROGRAM. THIS ALL STEMS BACK TO COUNCILOR PENA AND HER INITIATIVE WITH THE CRUISING TASKFORCE WHEN SHE MET WITH COUNCILOR BENTON AND CONVENED THE CRUISING TASKFORCE BACK IN DECEMBER OF 2017. AFTER THAT, AFTER WORKING WITH THE TASKFORCE THERE WAS REPEALING OF THE NO CRUISING ORDINANCE AND FROM THAT WE GENERATE ADD LOT OF ENGAGEMENT FROM THE LOW RIDER COMMUNITY, RIGHT. IT WAS THAT PROCESS THAT REALLY BEGAN THE REAL WORK FROM DECEMBER 2018 TO MAY 2021 WHERE WE DEVELOPED IN COLLABORATION WITH APD A LOW RIDER POLICE VEHICLE. AND THIS VEHICLE WAS LITERALLY A VEHICLE FOR CHANGE IN TERMS OF DEVELOPING STRONGER RELATIONSHIPS WITH THE LOW RIDER COMMUNITY, BUSINESS COMMUNITY AND LAW ENFORCEMENT. SO, IN MAY, 2021, WE UNVEILED THE POLICE VEHICLE AND STARTED GETTING A LOT OF NATIONAL ATTENTION FROM OTHER CITIES AROUND THE COUNTRY WANTING TO DO SOMETHING SIMILAR. THAT IS WHERE WE ALSO CAME INTO CONTACT WITH OLATHE KANSAS WHERE WEE LEARNED ABOUT THE LOW RIDER BACK CLUB. SO, IT WASLU AUGUST OF THIS YEAR THAT WE VISITED OLATHE, KANSAS TO LEARN MORE ABOUT THE BIKE CLUB, STILL FOCUSED ON LOW RIDER CULTURE AND USING BIKES AS STEAD FOR A B VEHICLE FOR CHANGE. WHAT DID YOU WE LEARN FROM THE BIKE CLUB PROGRAM? THEIR ACCOMPLISHING A LOT OF THINGS AT THE SAME TIME, BUT AT THE HEART IS REALLY THE BIKE AND THE PROCESS OF GIVING STUDENTS THE OPPORTUNITY TO CUSTOMIZE THESE BIKES AS REALLY A TOOL FOR BRIDGING THE GAP BETWEEN LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT AND THE LOW RIDER COMMUNITY AND THE STUDENTS. SO THERE IS A LOT OF THINGS HAPPENING IN KIND OF CREATING MENTORSHIP OPPORTUNITIES FOR THE STUDENTS, BRINGINGIN IN POLICE OFFICERS, FIREFIGHTERS AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMUNITY TO PROVIDE MENTORSHIP FOR THE KIDS AFTER SCHOOL. SO, WECH LEARNED A LOT FROM OLATHE. JUST A QUICK SNAPSHOT OF YOUR TRIP IN AUGUST. THEY DID A REALLY GOOD JOB OF TAKING US AROUND THE CITY AND MAKING US REALIZE THAT THIS IS A PROGRAM THAT IS REALLY DEEPLY IMBEDDED WITHIN THE SCHOOL SYSTEM AS WELL AS LOCAL GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS. SO, WE LEARNED A LOT FROM THAT VISIT AND NOW WE TOOK ALL THAT KNOWLEDGE AND WE ARE TRYING TO DEVELOP THE PROGRAM HERE IN ALBUQUERQUE. SO, LOOKING AT SOME OF THE ISSUES THAT OLATHE'S BIKE CLUB WAS REALLY GETTING AT AND KIND OF WHAT THAT MEANS FOR HOW WE DEFINE OUR PROGRAM HERE AND WHICH STUDENTS WE ARE TRYING TO SERVE, A COUPLE OF THE THINGS THAT THEIR LOW RIDER BIKE CLUB WAS TRYING TO ADDRESS WERE THINGS LIKE RECIDIVISM, BEGUN VIOLENCE, DRUG USE, GANG ACTIVITY, MORE THAN ANYTHING IT WAS VERY MUCH A PROACTIVE APPROACH TO TRY TO SUPPORT STUDENTS WHO MIGHT BE AT RISK. THERE WAS AN INTERVENTION PIECE BUT A LOT OF THIS WAS PREVENTIVE ENSURING THAT KIDS WEREN'T GETTING OUT INTO THE STREETS AND GETTING INTO TROUBLE BUT HAVING OTHER ALTERNATIVES TO DOING SOMETHING AFTER SCHOOL. SO, ON THE RIGHT SIDE OF THE SLIDE, THESE ARE JUST SOME OF THE THOUGHTS THAT WE HAVE IN TERMS OF WHO WE WANT TO DESIGN THE PROGRAM AROUND HERE IN ALBUQUERQUE, AND WE ARE WORKING WITH LEADERSHIP TEAM, A WORKING GROUP TO KIND OF STILL DID HE FEIGN THAT SCOPE. SO, REALLY TO KIND OF JUST GIVE A BRIEF OUTLINE OF HOW THE PROGRAM OPERATES LIKE I SAY IT ALL STEMS AROUND BIKE CUSTOMIZATION AND SO EACH STUDENT GETS A NEW BIKE KIT. THEY WORK WITH THE PROGRAM COORDINATOR AS WAMELL AS LOCAL MENTORS. IN OLATHE, THEY MET ONE TIME A WEEK AFTER SCHOOL. THE STUDENTS GET TO WORK ON THEIR BIKE. THIS IS USUALLY IN THEIR JUNIOR ANDIR SENIOR YEAR OF HIGH SCHOOL. AND UPON COMPLETION OF HIGH SCHOOL THEY GET TO KEEP THE BIKE AND THEY ALSO -- THEY ARE ALSO ENCOURAGED TO TRY TO SUBMIT THEIR BIKE TO LOCAL COMPETITIONS OR EXHIBITIONS AND KANSAS HAD A LOT OF THEIR STUDENTS DO THIS AND REALLY MOVE ONTO OTHER TYPES OF CAREER PATH WAYS THAT WERE SUITABLE FOR WHAT THEY LIKE. THIS IS A FLOW CHART. I KNOW THERE IS A LOT GOING ON HERE AND I AM HAPPY TO SHARE YOU WITH THIS AFTER THE PRESENTATION. OF COURSE,EN JUST WANTED TO GIVE OVERVIEW OF WHERE THE FUNDING FOR THIS PROJECT IS COMING FROM, WHO IS INVOLVED IN KIND OF SHAPING THE SCOPE AND WHO ISSUES SERVING. A BIG PARTIES COMING FROM FUNDING THAT WE RECEIVE FROM THE DRUG ENFORCEMENT ADMINISTRATION. OPERATION ENGAGE PROGRAM AND THEN ALSO SOME FUNDING FROM COUNCILOR PENA. SO, THIS IS ALL BEING FACILITATED THROUGH APD TO KIND OF COUPLE WHAT THEY ARE DOING WITH THE LOW RIDER POLICE VEHICLE BUT IN TERMS OF THE WORKING GROUP AND IMPLEMENTATION OF THIS PROJECT, WE ARE WORKING WITH THE COUNTY AS WELL AS THE LOCAL NONPROFITS AND COMMUNITY PARTNERS. SO, THIS SLIDE, IT WILL KIND OF BE A WORK IN PROGRESS AS WE CONTINUE TO DEVELOP THE PROGRAM. THIS IS JUST A LONG, THIS, LIST WILL KEEP EVOLVING BUT I WANTED TO LIST SOME OF THE DIFFERENT STAKEHOLDERS WE WANT ONER THE IMPLEMENTATION TEAM AND AS OLATHE EMPHASIZED WHEN TALKING ABOUT THE WORKING GROUP THEY SAY THE MORE HANDS IN THE DOUGL, THE LONGER IT WILL LAST. I THINK A BIG PART OF THEIR SUCCESS STEMS FROM THE FACT THEY HAVE A WHO HAD OF KEY PLAYERS AT THE TABLE WHEN DEVELOPING THE PROGRAM. WE INTEND TO DO THE SAME. THIS IS THE LAST SLIDE. I JUST WANTED TO OUTLINE SOME OFSO THE GOALS OF THE PROGRAM MOVING FORWARD. SOME OF YOUR BENCHMARKS AND SOME OF THE GOALS THAT WE ACTUALLY INCORPORATED INTO OUR PROPOSAL FOR THE OPERATION ENGAGE DA FUNDING PROGRAM. SO, JUST AT THE TOP THERE, IN TERMS OF THE LOW RIDER POLICE VEHICLE, JUST TO UPDATE EVERYBODY ON AND'S APD'S WORK, OVER THE PAST COUPLE OF YEARS THEY ENGAGED WITH OVER 200 YOUTH DURING AFTER SCHOOL COMMUNITY CENTER VISITS AND 100 OF THEM ON SCHOOL CAMPUSES AND SO, THESE ARE ONE TIME ENGAGEMENTS WHERE APD COMES WITH A CAR, HAS AN OPPORTUNITY TO ENGAGE WITH THE STUDENTS, BUT THE GOAL OF THE LOW RIDER BIKE CLUB PROGRAM IS MORE TO DEVELOP THESE ONGOING RELATIONSHIPS AND HAVE THAT KIND OF RAPPORT BUILDING WITH POLICE OFFICERS AND FIREFIGHTERS OVER A LONGER PERIOD OF TIME. SO, WE HAVE A FEW GOALS THERE ABOUT HOW MANY STUDENTS TO ENGAGE WITHIN THE FIRST FEW MONTHS OF STARTING THE PROGRAM. MANY WE HOPE TO GET ON BOARD OVER THE FIRST YEAR, HOW MANY MENTORS WE REALLY WANT TO BRING INTO THE MIX AND THEN ALSO A GOAL FOR NEW BUSINESSES TO GET INVOLVED AS WELL. AGAIN, AT THE BOTTOM THERE WE HAVE A NOTE ABOUT HOW THE TRUE VALUE WE THINK OF THE LOWRIDER BIKE CLUB IT IS DEVELOPING LONGER TERM RELATIONSHIPS AND HELPING THESE STUDENTS ONCE THEY FINISH UP WITH HIGH SCHOOL MOVE OUT INTO THE WORKPLACE. I THINK THAT IS IT. I STAND FOR ANY QUESTIONS AND WE'LL BE SURE TO KEEP YOU GUYS UPDATED ON THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROGRAM AS WE MOVE FORWARD. >> Comm. Benson: ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? COUNCILOR PENA HAS JOINED US. >> Coun. Pena: I JUST WANT TO THANK JEFF FOR THE PRESENTATION. I JUST WANTED HIM TO KIND OF UPDATE COUNCIL BECAUSE I THINK THIS IS SOMETHING THAT COULD BENEFIT US CITY WIDE IN DIFFERENT AREAS OF THE CITY AND, YOU KNOW, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT OLATHE HAS DONE THEY IMPLEMENTED WITHIN THE SCHOOL SYSTEM WHICH IS COOL AND ITO IS PROBABLY A MODEL THAT WE WOULD LIKE TO REPLICATE BUT REALLY SOME OF THE CONVERSATIONS WE HAVE BEEN HAVING WITH THE DA AND FOLKS FROM BERNALILLO COUNTY IS HOW DID WE GET TO THE STUDENTS THAT ARE ON THE PERIPHERY OF THAT, MAYBE THROUGH ALTERNATIVES THROUGH INCARCERATION AND OTHER METHODS. SO, YOU KNOW, IT IS STILL IN ITS DEVELOPMENT STAGES. WE ARE LOOKING FORWARD TO CEMENTING IT. THIS IS SOMETHING THAT ACTUALLY NOW SENATOR MOE MAESTAS HAS TALKED ABOUT US DOING FOR MANY YEARS AND WE LEARNED ABOUT OLATHE LATER AND SEEING HOW THEIR PROGRAM OPERATES AND WHETHER IT IS SOMETHING THATND WE REALLY SHOULD CONSIDER. THE WORK C THAT THEY HAVE BEEN DOING, THEY PARTNER WITH EVERYBODY TO GET THIS DONE AND THE DA HAS BEEN HAVING THESE CONVERSATIONS. HE HAS TALKED TO THE BERNALILLO COUNTY FOLKS, THEY ARE INTERESTED. YOU KNOW, APD. IS INTERESTED. WE HAVE TALKED TO OTHER NONPROFITS WHO ARE INTERESTED SO AS A IT PROGRESSES WE'LL KEEP YOU POSTED BUT I THINK IT IS SOMETHING THAT THE INITIAL FUNDING THAT WE HAVE IS VERY LIMITED SO WE ARE KIND OF GOING TO DO A CALL TESTER BUT HOPEFULLY IT WILL GROW BECAUSE WHEN WE TALK ABOUT -- I AM ALWAYS TALKING ABOUT THE UNDERLYING ISSUES WE NEED TO ADDRESS OTHER THAN INCARCERATION FOR ALL THESE OTHER THINGS THAT ARE HAPPENING IN THE CITY WE NEED TO LOOK FOR PREVENTION AND INTERVENTION. THANK YOU JEFF AINND THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING TIME FOR THE PRESENTATION, MR. PRESIDENT. >> Comm. Benson: THANK YOU COUNCILOR. ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM THE COUNCIL? JUST QUICKLY, I JUST WANT TO EXPRESS MY APPRECIATION FOR THE MENTORSHIP ANGLE HERE AS A FORMER BIG BROTHER MYSELF AND WHICH IS SOMETHING THAT HAS BEEN AND REMAINS VERY REWARDING IN MY LIFE. MENTORSHIP IS A BIG DEAL AND EVERY OPPORTUNITY WE GET TO CONNECT WITH A YOUNG PERSON, YOU KNOW, EVEN IF IT IS ON A FAIRLY MINE OR SCALE, YOU KNOW, EVERY CHANCE TO CONNECT WITH A YOUNGER PERSON ESPECIALLY THOSE WHOER HAVE A DIFFICULT PERHAPS A DIFFICULT HOME SITUATION, IT IS SO IMPORTANT. SO THANKS COUNCILOR. I DON'T SEE ANY OTHER QUESTION THE. WE'LL MOVE ON. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT. WE HAVE NO ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENTOM PRESENTATION TONIGHTRE AND THAT TAKES US STRAIGHT TO GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENTS. PEOPLE ARE SIGNED UP HERE TO SPEAK. MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC CAN PROVIDE LIVE PUBLIC COMMENT TO THE COUNCIL VIRTUALLY IF THEY HAVE SIGNED UP PER INSTRUCTIONS PUBLISHED. WHICH IS TYPICALLY PUBLISHED ON THE FRIDAY BEFORE THE MEETING. PUBLIC GROUNDRULES, EACH PARTICIPANT HAS TWO MINUTES TO PRESENT. COMMENTS ARE TO BE ADDRESSED TO THE COUNCILORS ONLY THROUGH THE PRESIDENT. ANY DISRUPTIVE CONDUCT WILL RESULT INIL REMOVAL FROM THE MEETING. SO, AGAIN, TWO MINUTE TIME LIMIT. A BELL WILL RING TO INDICATE YOUR TIME IS UP. >> JUST SO YOU ARE AWARE, WE CAME A LITTLE EARLY AND -- (NO AUDIO) (NO AUDIO). >> I THINK IT GOT MUTED ON YOUR ENDS. >> GRANT: YOU CALLED MY NAME I AM ASSUMING. I AM SORRY ABOUT THAT. GOOD EVENING CITY COUNCILORS, GLAD TO ONCE AGAIN BE A VOICE FOR BOTH LARGE AND SMALL PROPERTY OWNERS HERE IN ALBUQUERQUE AND BEYOND. I AM A SMALL PROPERTY OWNER HERE IN ALBUQUERQUE AND CURRENT PRESIDENT OF THE DEPARTMENT ASSOCIATION REPRESENTING THOUSANDS OF OWNERS THROUGHOUT NEW MEXICO. AND I APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK BEFORE YOU ONE MORE TIME. IT HAS COME TO MY ATTENTION, OUR ATTENTION, THAT TWO NEWLY PROPOSED ORDINANCES 2259 RESIDENTIAL RENTAL PERMIT ORDINANCE AND 22-60 RESIDENTIAL TENENT PROTECTION ARE INTRODUCED THIS EVENING. I STOOD IN FRONT OF YOU ALL EXPRESSING OUR VITAL CONCERNS REGARDING RENT CONTROL WHICH WE APPRECIATE YOUR SUPPORT IN THAT AREA. MEMBERS WILL BE SERIOUSLY CONCERNED ABOUT THE SEVERAL ITEMS WITHIN THESE DOCUMENTS AND THEREFORE WE ARE ADAMANTLY AGAINST THE PROPOSED CONCEPTS AND FULLY OPPOSE THE NEW INTRODUCED ORDINANCES. A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS TO THINK ABOUT. AS WE TALKED ABOUT BEFORE, ARE WE GOING TO BE THE CITY THAT WANTS TO CONTINUE GROWING IN A POSITIVE DIRECTION WITH NEW JOB GROWTH, NEW COMPANY EXPANSIONS AND YES FUTURE HOUSING OR ARE WE GOING TO BE A CITY SO HARD TO DEAL WITH THAT BUSINESSES AND FUTURE INVESTORS DECIDE NOT TO DEAL WITH ALBUQUERQUE AND RUNAWAY FROM US. IFR DON'T THINK WE WANT THAT, DO WE? LASTLY WE ALL KNOW WE ARE IN THE MIDDLE OF HOUSING SHORTAGE AND THEREFORE I AM EAGER AS WELL AS MANY PROPERTY OWNERS AND DEVELOPERS TO WORK WITH THE CITY TO FIND SOLUTIONS FOR OUR HOUSING CONCERNS. WE APPRECIATE YOUR ATTENTION. THANK YOU. >> WE HAVE SEVERAL OTHER PEOPLE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK. BUT THEY ARE NOT PRESENT IN THE ATTENDEES WAITING ROOM SO THAT DOES CONCLUDE GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT. >> Comm. Benson: APPRECIATE YOUR ADVOCACY AND APPRECIATE OUR MANY YEARS TOGETHER AS MY CONSTITUENT AND ALL YOU HAVE DONE FOR REDEVELOPMENT IN THE ETO AREA AND CERTAINLY ONE OF THE OTHER DETAILS I PERSONALLY SPEAKING FOR MYSELF WANT TO HEAR THE DETAILS OF WHAT THE ASSOCIATION HAS TO SAY AND ALSO ASK THE ASSOCIATION TO SUPPORT IN ANY WAY YOU CAN, THE HOUSING INITIATIVE THAT THE MAYOR ANNOUNCED. IT HAS GOT A LOT OF GOOD STUFF IN THERE. IT IS GOING TO BE SOMETIMES CONTROVERSIAL BECAUSE PEOPLE ARE AFRAID OF NEW DEVELOPMENT IN THE NEIGHBORHOODS AND IT IS UNDERSTANDABLE SOMETIMES BUT WE HAVE GOT TO DO THINGS DIFFERENTLY IF WE ARE GOING TO INCREASE THE HOUSING, BIG PART OF THE CHALLENGE. THANKS FOR BEING HERE. >> I AGREE THANK YOU. I KNOW THERE IS SOME THINGS TO BE HAPPENING WITH THE IDO AND CHANGES THAT SEEM TO BE A POSITIVE DIRECTION AND SO I THINK MANY OF THOSE ARE GOOD BUT I AM NOT SAYING EVERYTHING IN THE ORDINANCE IS BAD BUT I JUST THINK THAT WE NEED TO REALLY CAREFULLY CONSIDER WHAT WE ARE LOOKING AT DOING. >> Comm. Benson: I AM SURE YOU AND THE SOCIAL WILL BE REACHING OUT. >> WE DID HAVE ONE MORE LATE, KAREN NAVARRO. >> NAVARRO: GOOD EVENING COUNCILORS.VE I AM SO SORRY, I AM SO LATE. I JUST JUMPED ON THE CALL. I WANTED TO TALK ABOUT THE NEED FOR WITHINER TO MORATORIUM ON BREAKING UP AND MOVING ENCAMPMENTS. LAST WEEK WE DONATED LOTS OF BLANKETS COATS AND HATS TO GIVE TO PEOPLE WHO ARE FREEZING OUT ON THE STREET. THE IRONY IS THE SAME ITEMS THAT KEEP PEOPLE WARM ARE LIKELY TO BE SWEPT UP BY SOLID WASTE IN THE RELENTLESS ORGANIZEDDEN CAMP MEANT SWEEP. I AM CALLING ONNI THE ADMINISTRATION TO DECLARE THIS WINTER MORATORIUM ON MAKING UNHOUSED PEOPLE MOVE UNLESS THEIR CAMP POSES IMMEDIATE HAS AND. THAT IS NARROWLY DEFINED BY CITY POLICY AS CREATING AN IMMEDIATE RISK OF SERIOUS INJURY OR DEATH TO ENCAMPMENTS RESIDENTS OR OTHERS OR WITHIN TEN FEET OF A PUBLIC FACILITY WHERE CHILDREN ARE PRESENT OR LOCATED WHERE FIRE RESTRICTIONS HAVE BEEN IMPOSED. PLEASE MAYOR KELLER DECLARE A WINTER MORATORIUM ON ALL REMOVALS OF ENCAMPMENTS THAT ARE NOT IMMEDIATE HAZARDS. EVEN WHEN NOTICE IS GIVEN, HAVING ONE WAS HOME IS TRAUMA. IN WINTERTIME SWEEPS CAN CREATE SERIOUS CRISIS LEAVING UNHOUSED PERSONS TO FEEL TOTALLY DEVASTATED AND DEFEATED. SWEEPS HARMFUL TO PEOPLES' WELL-BEING AND THEY HAPPEN ONLE A REGULAR BASIS AND ARE CONSIDERED ROUTINE BY THE CITY. I DON'T UNDERSTAND THIS. ALSO ADMINISTRATION STILL HAS NEVER ESTABLISHED A WORKING POLICY FOR STORING UNHOUSED PERSONS PERSONAL PROPERTY AFTER A SWEEP AND PROCESS FOR NOTIFYING THEM WHERE THEY CAN WE CLAIM PROPERTY. BIRTH CERTIFICATES, PHOTOS, ADD DRESS BOOKS, IMMIGRATION DOCUMENTS, EYE GLASSES, PRESCRIPTION MEDS AND ALL PERSONAL PROPERTY ARE SWEPT UP AND THROWN INTO THE BACK OF TRUCKS. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I APOLOGIZE FOR BEING SO LATE. >> Comm. Benson: THAT DOES WRAP UP GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. WE'LL GO NOW TO ADMINISTRATION QUESTION AND ANSWER PERIOD. COUNCILORS, ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE ADMINISTRATION? I SEE COUNCILOR DAVIS FOLLOWED BY COUNCILOR GROUT. >> Coun. Davis: THIST. IS REALLY BRIEF BUT I KNOW WE HAVE HAD SOME CONVERSATIONS UNTIL PREVIOUS MEETING ABOUT THE CITY'S POLICY TOWARDS QUALIFYING OR DETERMINING WHO ISNG A VALID MEDIA OUTLET. WE HAVE HEARD FROM ABQ RAW ALSO GOTTEN SOME COMMENTS BACK ABOUT SOME OF THE CITIES PIO'S, SOME OF THEIR MESSAGES THEY PUT OUT ON TWITTER IN PARTICULAR. I WONDER MR. RAEL IF YOU HAVE SOMEBODY THAT COULD GIVE US UPDATE ON THE CITY'S POLICY. I UNDERSTAND YOU'RE MAKING CHANGES AND IMPROVING PROCESSES THERE, PERHAPS WE COULD SCHEDULE THAT FOR THE NEXT MEETING SO WE HAVE TIME TO PREPARE. >> MR. RAEL: WE HAVE MADE CHANGES IN PROCEDURES THAT WILL ACCOMMODATE ABQ RIDE IN PARTICULAR AS YOU HAVE HAD THOSE CONVERSATIONS. WE WOULD BSEE HAPPY TO DO A FULL PRESENTATION TO YOU ABOUT HOW THAT POLICY WORKS AND MOVING FORWARD HOW WE ARE GOING TO MANAGE THOSE T SITUATIONS IN THE FUTURE. >> Coun. Davis: THANK YOU. WE DON'T HAVE TO MAKE IT LONG BUT I KNOW YOU MADE UPDATES AND I WANT TO BE SURE OTHER MEMBERS OF THE PRESS KNOW YOU ALL ARE WORKING ON THAT AS WELL. FOR US TO KNOW THAT HOW TO MANAGE AND HOW TO INTERACT AND RESPOND TO CONCERNS. WE LOOK FORWARD TO THAT. MR. PRESIDENT IF WE HAVE TIME IN THE NEXT AGENDA, WOULD BE GREAT TO ADD THAT PRESENTATION FOR JUST A MINUTE OR TWO. THANK YOU. >> Comm. Benson: I AM SURE WE'LL HAVE TIME TO ADD THAT. IT IS IMPORTANT. >> Coun. Grout: THANK YOU. I HAVE AMP COUPLE OF QUESTIONS FOR DIRECTOR PIERCE. THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE. WHAT IS THE TIME LINE FOR GETTING UNHOUSED PEOPLE INTO THE GATEWAY CENTER. >> PIERCE. COUNCIL COUNCIL PRESIDENT BENTON AND COUNCILOR. >> Coun. Grout: , THANK YOU FOR THISro QUESTION. OUR TIME LINE FOR GETTING UNHOUSED PEOPLE INTO THE GATEWAY CENTER IS WITHIN TERESA/SPRING OF 2023 AND THAT WILL BE FOR A WOMEN INITIALLY, 50 W WOMEN AND THEN THAT WILL EXPAND TO MEN IN THE FUTURE. >> Coun. Grout: THANK YOU. IS THERE ANY POSSIBILITY WE COULD GET THEM W IN BEFORE THE END OF THIS YEAR? BECAUSE WE HAVE HAD SOME COLD EVENINGS LATELY. >> PIERCE: COUNCIL PRESIDENT BENTON AND COUNCILOR. >> Coun. Grout: , WE CAN CERTAINLY LOOK AT THAT. WE HAVE HAD DISCUSSIONS ABOUT WHAT WE COULD DO WITH THE CONSTRUCTION THAT IS UNDER WAY ABOUT WHAT WE COULD DO BUT WE ARE PEDAL TO THE METAL TO GET THAT FACILITY READY. >> Coun. Grout: IS THERE A POSSIBILITY THAT WE COULD USE THE PARKING LOT ON THE SOUTH IDEA OF THE GATEWAY FOR ANY KIND OF OUTDOOR, SAFE OUTDOOR SPACE FOR PARKING? IS THATKI A POSSIBILITY? PIERCE: COUNCILTY PRESIDENT BENTON AND COUNCILOR, THE ANSWER IS NO IN THAT THE CITY ITSELF, WE AREN'T OPERATING THOSE SAFE OUTDOOR SPACES, THOSE ARE PRIVATE ORGANIZATIONS ARE TAKING THE LEAD ON THAT. >> Coun. Grout: I JUST HAVE A COUPLE OF OTHER QUESTIONS FOR APD MR. PRESIDENT. I JUST RECENTLY HEARD THAT APD IS DISMANTLING THE OPEN SPACE POLICE DIVISION AND I WAS WONDERING WHY AND THEN MY FOLLOW-UP QUESTION WOULD BE WHAT ARE THEY DOING WITH THE 1.4 MILLION THAT WAS APPROPRIATED TO THAT DEPARTMENT? >> THISPA IS DEPUTY CHIEF, RIGHT NOW, THE OPEN SPACE IS SET TO BE DISSOLVED AND INCORPORATED INTO THE BUREAU IN JANUARY. ONE OF THE THINGS TO LOOK AT WE WERE PAYING SWORN PERSONNEL TO OPEN AND CLOSE GATES SO WE ARE GOING TO REALLOCATE PSA'S TO THAT JOB. PART OF THAT FUNDING STREAM, I'LL HAVE MORE FOR YOU LATER BUT THE WAY THAT WE LOOK AT IS THIS IS SOMETHING THAT IS CURRENTLY FUNDED, ALSO IT IS STILL GOING TO TAKE PLACE, THE MAINTENANCE COSTS OF A LOT OF THE EQUIPMENT AND UPKEEP AS WELL AS WE ARE STILL GOING TO HAVE COLLATERALS THAT ARE COMING IN AND THEY WILL BE UP AND GOING BY THE TIME THAT TRANSITION TAKES PLACE TO GO BACK. I THIN K IT IS ALSO IMPORTANT TO REMEMBER AS WELL THAT THE NEW MEXICO STATE IS THE ONE WHO IS PRIMARY ON SEARCH AND RESCUE FOR THE STATE. WE HAVE ALWAYS BEEN A BACK UP ROLE IN THAT. BUT AGAIN IT IS GOING TO TAKE SOMETIME TO GATHER UP WHAT THE FULL FINANCIAL FUNDING IS GOING TO BE FOR THAT. I CAN GET MORE BACK TO YOU ON THAT ONE. >> Coun. Grout: THANK YOU. >> Comm. Benson: COUNCILOR PENA. >> Coun. Pena: THANK YOU. I WOULD BE INTERESTED IN THAT AS WELL BECAUSE WE HAVE A LOT OF PEOPLE -- WE HAVE SOME OF THOSE FOUR WHEEL DRIVE CARS OUTA THERE AND THERE IS GUNSHOTS THAT I GET REPORTS FROM MY CONSTITUENTS. I DIDN'T REALIZE THEY WERE OPENING -- I WOULD BE INTERESTED TO KNOW WHAT IS GOING TO HAPPEN THERE AND IF THAT IS WHAT THEY WERE DOING, YOU KNOW, I WOULD LIKE TO LOOK MORE INTO WHO WE HAVE OUT THERE KIND OF, I KNOW BERNALILLO COUNTY, SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT HASFF SOME FOLKS OUT THERE. ANYWAY INTERESTED. BUT MY QUESTION IS, I THINK WE HAVE DIRECTOR WHALEN HERE. AT THE LAST MEETING I WAS TALKING ABOUT THEN COME MEANT POLICY. EN CAMP MEANT POLICY. HE WAS BLANKET. I AM MORE OF A VISUAL PERSON. I WOULD ASK THAT HE PREPARE A FLOW CHART FOR US AND I THINK HE HAS IDENTIFY READY AND AVAILABLE. IF HE COULD TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT OUREN CAMPMENT POLICY. >> YES WE SHOULD HAVE A COPY UP LOADED THAT WE CAN SHARE. I DID PROVIDE THAT. WE PROVIDED IT TO GARRITY, SO, IF HE WANTS TO PULL IT UP, I CAN WALK YOU THROUGH IT. I SENT I THAT AS WELL AS A WORD DOCUMENT SO THE SLIDE SHOW WE DOWNLOADED ALL THE INFORMATION TO WORD AND THIS FLOW CHART IS KIND OF THE OVERVIEW OF HOW THINGS WORK BASED ON EACH EN CAMPMENT. I DON'T KNOW IF WE HAVE IT TO SHARE. >> EN CAMPMENT. >> COUNCIL PRESIDENT, SO IF YOU LOOK THE VERY TOP LAYER IS WHAT HAPPENS WHEN THEY ARE REPORTED. SO YOU CAN SEE IN THAT SLIDE, IF YOU LOOK AT THE WORD DOCUMENT, IF YOU USE THAT HAND IN HAND WITH THE FLOW CHART IT WILL TELL YOU WHAT HAPPENS. EITHER RESIDENTS REPORT IT THROUGH 311. 311APP OR THROUGH THE CITY WEBSITE. THOSE ARE THEN RECORDED BY US OR CITY DEPARTMENTS, COUNCIL SERVICES, CONSTITUENT SERVICES OR GOVERNMENT AGENCIES WHICH INCLUDE APD, AFR, PARKS, NMDOT OR APS. IT ALLS. COMES THROUGH THAT FIRST LEVEL. WHICH GUESSE TO OUR INITIAL CONTACT SERVICES WHICH IS OFFERED AND ASSESSED BY FAMILY COMMUNITY SERVICES OR SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT. NOW, IT IS CLEAR TO SEE THERE, IF IT IS OFFERED BY SOLID WASTE IT IS BECAUSE MAYBE APD OR APS HAS SEEN ANEN CAMPMENT AND THEY SAY THERE IS NO INDIVIDUALS THERE. IF THERE ARE NO INDIVIDUALS LOCATED THERE IT IS TREATED AS ILLEGAL DUMPING OPENED OUR SOL IDO WEIGHS CAN A ZEST AND REMOVE ITEMS AND LOOK AT WHAT IS LEFT BEHIND. IF THERE ARE INDIVIDUALS LOCATED THERE, THEN FAMILY COMMUNITY SERVICES OUTREACH GOES AND MAKES INITIAL CONTACT, THEY EITHER PRIORITY 1, PRIORITY 2, WHICH IS 24 TOUGHIE HOURS OR A PRIORITY 3 WHICH IS 72 OUR NOTICE AND THEY ENGAGE THOSE INDIVIDUALS AND THEY LET THEM KNOW THEY CANNOT BE THERE. YOU CAN SEE THROUGH THE FLOW CHART IF IT IS A PRIORITY 1, SERVICES ARE ALWAYS OFFERED AS WE GIVE THE NOTICE. AND THEN IF IT IS PRIORITY 1 IT IS CLEANED. PRIORITY 2, BECAUSE YOU HAVE TO PIGGY BACK OFF OF PRIORITY 1 IF WE HAVE RESOURCED WE CLEAN WITHIN 24 TO 72 HOURS WHICH USUALLY HAPPENS IN A PARK, COMMUNITY CENTER OR AREAS WHERE THERE IS CHILDREN'S PROGRAMMING OR ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS OR HIGH SCHOOLS LOCATED NEAR THAT PARKS AND RECOLLECT HELPS WITH, NOT ONLY WE CLEAN IT BUT PARKS AND REC HELPS US AS WELL. PRIORITY 3 IS 72 OUR NOTICE IS GIVEN AND THEN WE WILL GO AFTER 72 HOURS AND ADDRESS SITUATION. NOW, THERE IS THAT ONE LINE THAT SAYS IF IT IS PRIVATE PROPERTY THEN WE NEED TO ENGAGE PLANNING SO THEY CAN GO ASSESS THE PROPERTY. IF IT IS IMMEDIATE HAZARD WE WORK RIGHT AWAY WITH PLANNING TO ADDRESS IT. BUT WE CONTACT THE PROPERTY OWNER TO LET THEM KNOW IT IS PRIVATE PROPERTY AND THEY NEED TO ADDRESS IT BY SIGNS, FENCING OR WHATEVER THEY NEED TO DO. IF WE GET NO RESPONSE WE ISSUE A CLEAN AND LIEN WHICH MEANS THE CITY WILL CLEAN IT BUT THERE IS A COST ASSOCIATED. THOSE ARE YOUR THREE BRANCHES ON THIS CHART. IT IS HIGH LEVEL. BUT AT THE VERY BOTTOM IT SAYS THESE SERVICES ENGAGED AS NEEDED. NO MATTER WHAT PRIORITY IT IS, 1, 2, OR 3 IF WE NEED APD WE ENGAGE THEM IMMEDIATELY AND THEY ASSIST. IF WE NEED AFR, THEY ASSIST US AND IF INDIVIDUALS REQUIRE MORE SERVICES THAT IS WHEN WE ENGAGE ACS. ACS HAS NO ENFORCEMENT CAPABILITIES. THEY JUST GO TO OFFER MORE RESOURCES OR IF AT THE TIME WE ADDRESS THE CAMMENT RESOURCES OR NEEDED OR TRANCE MORE TAGS IS NEEDED, ACS COMES AND ASSISTS US. THAT IS WHY YOU HAVE THE BOX AT H THE BOTTOM. IT IS A DOTTED LINE INSTEAD OF STRAIGHT LINE, BECAUSE THOSE RESOURCES ARE ONLY ENGAGED IF NEEDED. >> Coun. Pena: I JUST WANT TO GOT BACK TO KIND OF THE PRIVATE PROPERTY ONE BECAUSE I THINK THAT IS ONE THAT WE HEAR A LOT ABOUT. SO, WHAT IS THE TIME FRAME ON THAT BECAUSE WE HAVE, YOU KNOW, PRIVATE PROPERTY OWNERS WHO SAY THEY ARE ON THEIR PROPERTY AND THEY DON'T GET REMOVED. ENCAMPMENTS DON'T GET REMOVED AND THEN ARE PROPERTY OWNERS RESPONSIBLE FOR WHAT IS LEFT BEHIND? >> YES, SO, LET ME WALK YOU 32 YOU THAT PROCESS. USUALLY WHEN IT IS PRIVATE PROPERTY THEY ARE USUALLY NOT IMMEDIATE HAZARDS BECAUSE THEY ARE A VACANT LOT OR ABANDONED HOUSE THAT NO LONGER IS RENTED AND PEOPLE BEGIN TO SQUAT IN. WHAT WE DO IS WE GO AND ASSESS AND LET THE PEOPLE KNOW THEY CAN'T BE THERE. THEN PLANNING AND CODE LET APD NOTIFIES ANDET THEY LET THEM KNOW THEYET ARE TRESPASSING AND WE KIND OF WORK WITH THE OWNER TO TRY AND GET THEM OFF. IF THE OWNER IS COOPERATIVE WE REALLY WORK W WITH THEM TO TRY AND ADDRESS THAT SITUATION. WHERE THE CLEANING LIENS COME INTO PLACE IS WHERE WE HAVE NO RESPONSE. WE TRY TO GET AHOLD OF THEM AND THEY DON'T RESPOND OR THEY ARE LIKE WHATEVER. WE DON'T HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH IT AND SO THAT IS WHERE CLEAN AND LIEN COMES IN. WE DO TO WORK WITH THEM AND IN YOUR DISTRICT THERE ARE SEVERAL AREAS AROUND TOWER PARK WE ADDRESSED IN THE PAST BUT ALWAYS ENGAGED PLANNING AND OWNER BEFORE WE DO ANYTHING AND BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT IN IMMEDIATE HAZARD WE GIVE THAT 72 HOURS BUT THEN WE ALSO WANT TO GIVE THE OWNER TIME TO PUT UP A FENCE, PUT UP A SIGN AND ENGAGE APD. BUT IF IT IS AN IMMEDIATE HAZARD WE REALLY DO LOOK AT EACH SITUATION AND WE WILL ADDRESS IT IF IT IS PUTTING THEN GENERAL PUBLIC OR THE RESIDENTS IN HAZARD. >> Coun. Pena: THANK YOU. THOSE ARE ALL THE QUESTIONS C I HAVE. I APPRECIATE ALL THE WORK THAT YOU PUT THIS DIRECTOR. >> Comm. Benson: QUESTION FROM COUNCILOR SANCHEZ. >> Coun. Sanchez: IT IS FOR THE POLICE ADMINISTRATION. >> Comm. Benson: ANY OTHERDM QUESTIONS FOR DIRECTOR. I HAVE A QUICK QUESTION FOR HIM BEFORE I MOVE ON. DIRECTOR, THE PRIORITY 1 INCLUDES A WORD OBSTRUCTION. IST THAT OBSTRUCTION OF RIGHT-OF-WAY OR PUBLIC SIDEWALK? >> IT IS ANY OBSTRUCTION THAT PUTS EITHER THE RESIDENT OF THE ENCAMPMENT OR THE GENERAL PUBLIC IN IMMEDIATE HAZARD AND THE EXAMPLE THAT I COULD GIVE IS IF YOU WERE WALKING DOWN A SIDEWALK AND IT CAUSED YOU TO GO INTO A STREET THAT IMPEDES YOUR ABILITY TO WALK DOWN A SIDEWALK THAT IS AN IMMEDIATE HAZARD BUT IT ALSO IS IMMEDIATE HAZARD BECAUSE AS IT IS ON THE A SIDEWALK IF A CAR WERE TO VEER OFF THE ROAD IT PUTS THOSE RESIDENTS IN HARMS WAY AND INCLUDES OUR BUS STOPS. WHAT THAT DOES IT IMPEDES IMPACT FEE PEOPLE FROM GOING WAIT FORS STOPS AND A BUS TO COME PICK THEM UP. ANYTHING THAT IS ATTACHED TO CITY PROPERTY WE DEEM AN IMMEDIATE HAZARD BUT WE ALWAYS OFFER RESOURCES BEFORE WE REMOVE ANY ENCAMPMENT AND DIRECTOR PIERCE CAN TELL YOU WE HAVE PLENTY OF BEDS DURING THE WINTER. ACS OFFERS TRANSPORTATION. THERE IS A COOPERATIVE EFFORT TO GET PEOPLE TO OUR RESOURCES. THE PROBLEM SOMETIMES LIES WHERE PEOPLE DON'T WANT RESOURCES. >> Comm. Benson: JUST TO FOLLOW-UP, SO I UNDERSTAND EXACTLY WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. WHAT I AM WONDERING ABOUT IS THE PUBLIC'S RIGHT OF PASSAGE, FOR INSTANCE, I UNDERSTAND IF YOU'RE FORCED OUT INTO A STREET, THAT IS AN IMMEDIATE HAZARD IF YOU ARE A PEDESTRIAN OR A BICYCLIST. WHAT ABOUTIC OUR TRAIL SYSTEM, ARROYO TRAIL, NORESTE, THAT PASSES THROUGH THE ARROYOS, A BICYCLIST MAY HAVE NO OPTION OR SOMEONE WALKING MAY HAVE NO OPTION OTHER THAN TO LEAVE THE TRAIL OR TO HAVE THEIR PATHS OBSTRUCTED. >> COUNCILOR BENTON, YES, WE ADDRESS THOSE. WE WORKS WITH PARKS AND REC WEEKLY, SOMETIMES SEMI WEEKLY BASIS SO THEY ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR OPEN SPACE AREAS. HOWEVER WE DO ASSIST IF THEY NEED ADDITION@AL RESOURCES BUT WE DO ALL THE TRAILS AND ALL THE WATER AREAS THAT GO ALONG THE DITCH BANK ON I 40 AND I-25 BECAUSE THOSE ARE IMMEDIATE HAZARDS. WHEN YOU HAVE PEOPLE SETTING UP CAMPS, IF THERE IS A RAIN OUT THEY CAN GET WASHED OUT SO WE TRY AND ADDRESS THOSE AS SOON AS POSSIBLE. WE DO DEEM TRAILS IMMEDIATE HAZARD AND WE TRY TO ADDRESS THOSE WITHIN 24 HOURS. >> Comm. Benson: THANK YOU. SEEING NO OTHER QUESTIONS. >> Coun. Sanchez: I HAVE A QUESTION FOR THE POLICE ADMINISTRATION ALSO IN REFERENCE TO OPEN SPACE. ME BEING A FOREMAN POLICE OFFICER I KNOW THERE IS A LOT OF EQUIPMENT MILLIONS WORTH, THAT SINCE THE OPEN SPACE IS GOING AWAY, IS GOING TO BE LEFT IDLE. I KNOW THEY HAVE AIR BOATS, OTHER EQUIPMENT THAT NEEDS TO BE UTILIZED. USING PSA IS GOING TO BE A DANGEROUS SITUATION BECAUSE THEY ARE USING PSA'S IN REMOTE AREAS OF THE CITIES THAT NORMAL REGULAR OFFICER DOES NOT GO INTO. I AM JUST REALLY WORRIED ABOUT USING PSA'S WHETHER OFFICERS SHOULD BE USED. THIS IS A SITUATION WHERE WE HAVE MANY INDIVIDUALS OUT THERE RECREATION IN THESE REMOTE AREAS AND NEED TO MAKE SURE THESE INDIVIDUALS ARE PROTECTED. ALSO WE HAVE SOME VERY IMPORTANT NATURAL RESOURCES WHICH IS THE BOSQUE UP ON THE WESTSIDE, OPEN SPACE AREAS THAT ARE IN AND ALL AROUND AND ON THE EAST SIDE, TO PREVENT FIRES,T TO PREVENT OTHER DAMAGE THAT IS GOING ON JUST BY THE MERE PRESENCE OF A POLICE OFFICER VERSUS A PSA. I AM ALSO CONCERNED THAT WE ARE SLOWLY DWINDLING AWAY AT EVERY ALL OF THESE SPECIALIZED UNITS. IT CONCERNS ME BECAUSE IT IS OBVIOUS THAT THE FIELD SERVICES WHO NEED THE HELP AND I GET THAT THEY NEED THE HELP BUT IT ALSO CONCERNS ME WE ARE STILL NOT FILLING THE RANKS AGAIN. WHEN DC FRANKLIN WAS HERE, HE WAS PROVIDING A MONTHLY REPORT FOR ME IN REFERENCE TO WHAT THE STANDARD WERE AND STATUS ON WHAT WAS GOING ON WITH FIELD SERVICES AND BOOTS ON THE GROUNDON HANDLING CALLS FOR SERVICE. I KNOW THE CHIEF HIMSELF HAD ADMITTED THAT WE ARE GOING BACKWARD INSTEAD OF FORWARDS IN TERMS OF FILLING THE RANKS FOR FIELD SERVICES. BUT, IF THAT IS WHERE WE NEED TO GO, THEN I THINK WE NEED TO HAVE MORE PEOPLE IN FIELD SERVICESL THAN ANYWHERE ELSE BUT WHAT ABOUT THE EQUIPMENT? RIGHT NOW WE HAVE NO SWAT TEAM, NO GANG UNIT. STARS AS FAR AS I KNOW ONE OR TWO DETECTIVES IN NARCOTICS AND NO OPEN SPACE AND MILLIONS OF DOLLARS EQUIPMENT SITTING IDLE. I THINK IT ALL GOES BACK TO MAKING SURE THAT WE BUILD THE RANKS AT THE RANK AND FILE LEVEL AND IT ALMOST SEEMS LIKE THAT IS NOT HAPPENING. SO, I WOULD LIKE TO GET THAT MONTHLY REPORT BACK ON LINE. IT STOPPED COMING TO ME THE MINUTE DC FRANKLIN WENT AWAY AND THAT REPORT WAS EXTREMELY HELPFUL TO SEE APD STANDS IN REFERENCE TO MAN POWER. >> THAT IS A LOT TO UNPACK. THE POC ORDINANCELY REPORT THAT FRANKLIN GAVE YOU, WE CAN GET YOU THAT BACK. THAT IS EASY ASK. AS FAR AS THE EQUIPMENT GOES, LIKE I SAID, WE ARE GOING TO HAVE CO-LATERAL OFFICER WILL USE SOME OF THAT RESCUE EQUIPMENT. IT IS STILL IN THE PROCESS OF BEING WORKED OUT ON HOW THAT IS GOING TO LOOK. I CAN GET YOU MORE ON THAT LATER TOO. AS FAR AS PSA'S, I AM CONCERNED I WOULDN'T HAVE PSA'S ON AIR BOAT. THAT IS SOMETHING THEY HAVE TO BE TRAINED ON AND CERTIFIED TO USE. ALL THE CERTIFIED EQUIPMENT WE HAVE IS GOING TO BE PROPERLY STILL MAINTAINED AND IT WILL BE USED JUST BY OFFICERS. THE PSA'S ARE GOING TO SEGMENT INTO THOSE OFFICERS BACK IN THE FIELD AND HAVING THOSE BOOTS ON THE GROUND TAKING CALLS FOR SERVICE. >> Coun. Sanchez: THANK YOU DEPUTY CHIEF BROWN. >> Comm. Benson: ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR COUNCILORS. WE WILL NOW MOVE ONTO THE JOURNAL. VICE PRESIDENT LEWIS. >> Coun. Lewis: MOVE APPROVAL OF NOVEMBER 7 JOURNAL. >> Comm. Benson: SECOND FROM COUNCILOR BASSAN WE'LL GO TO THE ROLL CALL. >> Councilor Bassan: YES. >> Coun. Davis: YES. >> Coun. Fiebelkorn: YES. >> Coun. Grout: YES. >> Coun. Jones: YES. >> Coun. Lewis: YES. >> Coun. Pena: YES. >> Coun. Sanchez: YES. >> Comm. Benson: YES. PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. >> Comm. Benson: THANKNA YOU. WE'LL GO TO COMMUNICATIONS AND INTRODUCTIONS. ANY CHANGES TO THE LETTER OF INTRODUCTION? I HAVE ONE. I MOVE THAT THE RULES BE SUSPENDED FOR THE PURPOSE OF PLACING EC191 ON TONIGHT'S AGENDA FOR ACTION. IT IS APPROVAL OF THE FISCAL YEAR '23 CONTRACTS TO PROVIDE SUPPORTIVE HOUSING VOUCHERS FOR FAMILIES AND INDIVIDUALS EXPERIENCING HOMELESSNESS. THIS IS A SUSPENSION REQUIRING 2/3 VOTE. THERE IS A MOTION. THERE IS A MOTION BY COUNCILOR. TO THE VOTE. >> Councilor Bassan: YES. >> Coun. Davis: YES. >> Coun. Fiebelkorn: YES. >> Coun. Grout: YES. >> Coun. Jones: YES. >> Coun. Lewis: YES. >> Coun. Pena: YES. >> Coun. Sanchez: YES. >> Comm. Benson: YES. >> PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. >> Coun. Fiebelkorn: THANK YOU MR. PRESIDENT. WE HAVE BEEN TRYING FOR SOME TIME NOW TO GET THE MONEY OUT TO THE ANY THEY ARE WOODS PROGRAM THAT COUNCIL APPROVED EARLIER IN THE YEAR AND WE HAVE ANSWER TO THAT PUBLIC I MOVE RULES BE SUSPENDED FOR PURPOSE PLACES RA2 ON TONIGHT'S ACTION FOR ACTION FORMAL ICING CITY'S URBAN GRANT PROGRAM. >> Comm. Benson: I SECOND THAT MOTION. COUNCILOR DAVIS ACTUALLY SECONDED. THIS IS A RULE SUSPENDED REQUIRING 2/VOTE. IF THERE ARE NO YESES WE'LL GO TO THE ROLL CALL. >> Councilor Bassan: YES. >> Coun. Davis: YES. >> Coun. Fiebelkorn: YES. >> Coun. Grout: YES. >> Coun. Jones: YES. >> Coun. Lewis: YES. >> Coun. Pena: YES YES. >> Coun. Sanchez: YES. >> Comm. Benson: YES. >> ITch IS UNANIMOUS. >> Coun. Lewis: MR. PRESIDENTPR IES MOVE APPROVAL OF THE LETTER. >> Comm. Benson: THERE IS AET SECOND A FROM COUNCILOR BASSAN. TOOR THE VOTE. >> Councilor Bassan: YES. >> Coun. Davis: YES. >> Coun. Fiebelkorn: YES. >> Coun. Grout: YES. >> Coun. Jones: YES. I WOULD LIKE SOMETIME I THINK THE WHOLE COUNCIL SHOULD HEAR IT. I UNDERSTAND PERHAPS MR. MELENDRES WANTS TO MAKE A MOTION TO CHANGE OR MODIFY, REPORT IT OUT SEPARATELY SO THAT WE CAN HAVE A SEPARATE VOTE. >> MELENDRES: THE. RULES DO HAVE A PROVISION THAT COULD BE DESCRIBED AS PORT BEING THE MINORITY IN THE -- SUPPORTING THE MINORITY IN EVENT MINORITY OFOR A COMMITTEE WANTED THE BILL TO PASS BUT THE COMMITTEE RECOMMENDED A DO NOT PASS. THE WAY THAT IS HAND IN THE PAST IHS FOR WHEN THE COMMITTEE REPORT IS READ OUT TO VOTE FIRST ON THE BILL THAT A MOTION MAKER WANTS TO ACCEPT FROM THE COMMITTEE AND THEN MAKE A SEPARATE MOTION AS TO THE BILL THAT SOMEONE WOULD LIKE TO REJECT THE COMMITTEE REPORT ON. SO NTHIS INSTANCE, IF THAT IS THE PREFERRED TASK FOR O-42, THEN THE MOTION WOULD BE TO ACCEPT THE COMMITTEE REPORT AS TO ALL MATTERS EXCEPT FOR O-42 AND SUBSEQUENTLY A SEPARATE MOTION TO REJECT ANY REPORT AS TO O-42. THE RULES HAVE A SPECIAL VOTING STANDARD FOR THAT TIME OF APPROACH. ESSENTIALLY IT REQUIRES ONLY FOUR VOTES TO REJECT A COMMITTEE REPORT ON SOMETHING THAT RECEIVEDET A DO NOT PASS. IF THAT VOTE IS SUCCESSFUL BY A VOTE OF FOUR THEN PLACED ON THE AGENDA AT THE NEXT MEETING. >> Coun. Davis: I KNEW WOULD YOU KNOW THE ANSWER. I THINK I HAVE DONE THIS ONCE IN SEVEN YEARS. I WOULD LIKE TO REQUEST THE PRESIDENT MADE THE MOTION ON MY BEHALF. IF YOU WOULD BE WILLING TO MAKE THE MOTION TO ACCEPT THE COMMITTEE REPORTS EXCEPT FOR RELATING TO O-42 SO THE WHOLE CAN CAN HEAR THIS QUESTION AND MAKE THAT DECISION AT THE NEXT MEETING, IF WE CAN GET THAT MOTION DONE AS WELL. I DON'T THINK THERE IS GOING ANYWHERE BUT I'LL WITHDRAW MY MOTION AND YOU CAN MAKE A MOTION. I APPRECIATE IT, I KNOW IT IS TECHNICAL AND APPRECIATE THE PATIENCE. I MAKE THE MOTION THAT WE ACCEPT THE COMMITTEE REPORTS FOR ALL MATTERS EXCEPT O-42. >> Comm. Benson: I THINK MR. MELENDRES CLARIFIED THIS SITUATION SO THEREF IS A MOTION TO ACCEPT THE REPORT WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE BILL REFERENCE. >> JUST WANTED TO BRING UP TO MY MEMORY WHAT O-42 WAS. >> Comm. Benson: ANY OTHER QUESTIONS. WE'LL GO TO A VOTE. >> Councilor Bassan: NO. >> Coun. Davis: YES. >> Coun. Fiebelkorn: YES. >> Coun. Grout: NO. >> MR. PRESIDENT, I WANT TO. MAKE SURE REALLY QUICK AND APOLOGIZE TO JUMP IN BUT THIS MOTION IS TO EXCEPT THE REPORT AS TO ALL OF THE BILLS THAT WERE RECOMMENDED TO BE APPROVED. A REJECTION OF THIS MOTION WILL RESULT IN ALL OF THOSE BILLS FAILING IF THE MOTION PRECEDES -- >> Councilor Bassan: IF I MAY MR. MELENDRES, THEN, DO WE NEED TO ASK FOR A RECOUNT, THEN? OR SINCE WE DIDN'T FINISH -- IT IS MY UNDERSTANDING THAT I WAS VOTING BACKWARDS, THEN. >> MELENDRES: IT MAY BE EASIEST TO START THE ROLL CALL VOTE FROM THE BEGINNING. >> Councilor Bassan: YES. >> Coun. Davis: YES. >> Coun. Fiebelkorn: YES. >> Coun. Grout: YES. >> Coun. Jones: -- >> Coun. Lewis: YES. >> Coun. Pena: YES. >> Coun. Sanchez: YES. >> Comm. Benson: YES. >> Coun. Jones: (NO RESPONSE). >> THAT PASSESJo ON 8-0 VOTE. >> Coun. Pena: I AM SORRY, I AM BACK ON. MAY I VOTE, MR. PRESIDENT. >> Comm. Benson: YES. >> Coun. Jones: I VOTE YES. >> Coun. Davis: I REALIZE THIS IS ODD AND TAKES UP A BUNCH OF TIME, MAKE A MOTION IN THIS MATTER O-42 THAT WE REJECT -- >> Comm. Benson: COULDN'T HEAR YOU. >> Coun. Davis: THE SECOND HALF OF THE ONE WE JUST STARTED MAKE A MOTION IN THE MATTER OF O-42 THAT WE REJECT THE COMMITTEE REPORT SO THAT IT CHAN COME TO OUR NEXT COUNCIL MEETING ON FULL AGENDA FOR THE FULL COUNCIL TO HEAR. >> Comm. Benson: IS THERE A SECOND? >> Coun. Fiebelkorn: SECOND. >> Comm. Benson: ANY OTHER DISCUSSION, THIS WILL BE NOW, TO REJECTS COMMITTEE REPORT. AND, FOR THE PURPOSE OF ALLOWING JUST THIS ONE ITEM; IS THAT THE MOTION. >> FIRST MOTION INCLUDED ALL THE OTHER ITEMS RECOMMENDED TO BE APPROVED. THIS SECOND MOTION IS ONLY TO REJECT COMMITTEE REPORT AS TO O-42. >> Comm. Benson: ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU FOR THAT CLARIFICATION. >> Councilor Bassan: NO. >> Coun. Davis: YES. >> Coun. Fiebelkorn: YES. >> Coun. Grout: NO. >> Coun. Jones: YES. >> Coun. Lewis: NO. >> Coun. Pena: NO. >> Coun. Pena: NO. I DON'T KNOW IF THIS IS DELAYED BUT -- >> Coun. Sanchez: NO. >> Comm. Benson: YES. THAT PASSES ON 4-5 VOTE. >> Coun. Jones: MR. PRESIDENT VOTE. IONSIDER MY AM SORRY I WAS LISTENING TO A PHONE CALL AND WASN'T PAYING ATTENTION. >> Comm. Benson: YOU MAY. >> Coun. Jones: MY VOTE IS YES. I AM SORRY, MY VOTE IS NO. >> THAT FAILS ON 3-6 VOTE. >> Comm. Benson: THANK YOU. WE'LL MOVE ON THEN TO THE REPORT OF THE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE. COUNCILOR SANCHEZ. >> Coun. Sanchez: THE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE MET ON TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 15 AND REPORTS OUT THE FOLLOWING ITEMS. IN THE MATTER OF EC-161, THAT IT BE APPROVED. I MAKE A MOTION TO ACCEPT THE COMMITTEE REPORTS. >> Comm. Benson: SECOND FROM COUNCILOR GROUT. TO A VOTE. >> Councilor Bassan: YES. >> Coun. Davis: YES. >> Coun. Fiebelkorn: YES. >> Coun. Grout: YES. >> Coun. Jones: YES. >> Coun. Lewis: YES. >> Coun. Pena: YES. >> Coun. Sanchez: YES. YES, I AM SORRY. >> Comm. Benson: YES. >> PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. >> Comm. Benson: THANK YOU TO COUNCIL OR JONES FOR THE LUPZ COMMITTEE REPORT. >> Coun. Jones: THANK YOU. THE LAND USE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMITTEE MET ON WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 16 AND REPORTS OUT FOLLOWING ITEMS. IN THE MATTER OF R74 THAT IT DO PASS AS AMENDED. I MAKE A MOTION TO ACCEPT THE COMMITTEE REPORT AS TO R-74. >> Comm. Benson: I AM LOOKING AT THE SCRIPT AND I THINK IT MAY BE OUT OF ORDER. THERE WAS A SECOND MATTER. >> Coun. Jones: MR. PRESIDENT, I WILL ADDRESS THAT NEXT. >> Comm. Benson: THERE IS A MOTION IT DO PASS AS AMENDED. AND THERE WAS A SECOND FROM COUNCILOR CORRECT? WE'LL GO TO THE VOTE. >> Councilor Bassan: YES. >> Coun. Davis: YES. >> Coun. Fiebelkorn: YES. >> Coun. Grout: YES. >> Coun. Jones: YES. >> Coun. Lewis: YES. >> Coun. Pena: YES. >> Coun. Sanchez: YES. >> Comm. Benson: YES. >> THAT IS UNANIMOUS. MY UNDERSTANDING THERE WAS SECOND MOTION TO BE MADE. >> Coun. Jones: IN THE MATTER OF O-33 THAT IT DO NOT PASS. >> Councilor Bassan: I MAKE A MOTION TO REJECT THE COMMIT REPORT ON O2233 AND PLACE IT ON THE DECEMBER FIFTH AGENDA FOR FURTHER ACTION. >> Comm. Benson: THERE IS A SECOND ON THAT FROM COUNCILOR GROUT. THE MOTION AS STATED BY COUNCILOR BASSAN. ANY DISCUSSION? BUT TO BE CLEAR, A YES VOTE ON THIS WILL REJECT THE COMMITTEE REPORT AND FOR THIS ONE ITEM AND IT WILL BE PUT ON THE SUBSEQUENT MEETING FOR DISCUSSION. YOU CAN GO AHEAD AND CALL THE VOTE. >> Councilor Bassan: YES. >> Coun. Davis: NO. >> Coun. Fiebelkorn: NO. >> Coun. Grout: YES. >> Coun. Jones: YES. >> Coun. Lewis: YES. >> Coun. Pena: YES. >> Coun. Sanchez: YES. >> COUNCIL OR BENTON: NO. >> THAT PASSES ON A 5-4. THAT CLEARS OUR REPORTS. WE'LL GOEP TO DEFERRALS AND WITHDRAWALS. ANY DEFERRALS OR WITHDRAWALS AT THIS TIME? WEIM DO HAVE ONE FROM COUNCILOR. >> AMENDING INTERGOVERNMENTAL RELATIONSNT ORDINANCE TO UNDATE COMMUNITY MEMBERSHIP ABILITY OF COMMIT TOY CONVENE, INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE COMMITTEE, DEVELOPMENT OF THE FEDERAL AND STATE PRIORITIES RESOLUTION, REVIEW OF OBLIGATIONS. WE WILL DEFER TO DECEMBER 5. >> Councilor Bassan: SECOND. >> Comm. Benson: NO DISCUSSION, TO THEn: VOTE. >> Councilor Bassan: YES. >> Coun. Davis: YES. >> Coun. Fiebelkorn: YES. >> Coun. Grout: YES. >> Coun. Jones: YES. >> Coun. Lewis: YES. >> Coun. Pena: YES. >> Coun. Sanchez: YES. >> Comm. Benson: YES. >> PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. >> Comm. Benson: NEXT IS MYSELFMO BY REQUEST O-50 APPROVING PROJECT INCLUDING TO SUPPORT ACQUISITION AND RENOVATION AND IMPROVEMENT OF A BEVERAGE MANUFACTURING DISTRIBUTION FACILITY IN ALBUQUERQUE. I MOVE A DEFERRAL TO DECEMBER 5. SECOND FROM COUNCILOR. >> Councilor Bassan: YES. >> Coun. Davis: YES. >> Coun. Fiebelkorn: YES. >> Coun. Grout: YES. >> Coun. Lewis: YES. >> Coun. Pena: YES. >> Coun. Sanchez: YES. >> Comm. Benson: YES. >> PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. >> Comm. Benson: ALL RIGHT, R-70. >> Coun. Pena: THANKR- YOU. R-70 IS REQUIRING TRANSIT SYSTEM SECURITY INCIDENT RESPONSE QUARTERLY REPORTLE OF SECURITY CALLS FOR SERVICE IN THE TRANSIT SYSTEM AND DEVELOPMENT OF A LONG-TERM SECURITY PLAN FORRM THE OPERATIONS AND FACILITIES OF THE ALBUQUERQUE TRANSIT DEPARTMENT. I MOVE DEFERRAL TO DECEMBER 5. >> Comm. Benson: SECOND FROM COUNCILOR. ANY DISCUSSION? MOVE TO A VOTE. >> Councilor Bassan: YES. >> Coun. Davis: YES. >> Coun. Fiebelkorn: YES. >> Coun. Grout: YES. >> Coun. Jones: YES. >> I WOULD LIKE TO PULL O, EC-174 OFF THE CONSENT AGENDA. EC-174 IS REQUEST FOR A RIGHT OF WAY VACATION PROJECT, VACATION OF PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY FOR ALL OR A PORTION OF LOT 6, FOUR HILLS VILLAGE ZONED R-1D. LOCATED ON 1200 HIGHWAY MAIN BETWEEN STAGECOACH ROAD SOUTHEAST AND I 40 CONTAINING APPROXIMATELY 3.0791 ACRES. >> Comm. Benson: SECOND FROM COUNCILOR SANCHEZ. IS THAT CORRECT. WE DON'T NEED TO VOTE. I'LL SECOND THAT. THAT IS A SECOND, THANK YOU. SO, THREATENING BEHAVIOR THAT IS A MOTION TO PULL ITEM O, EC174. THAT IS JUST A COUNCILORS ON PREROGATIVE. I WANT TO PULL ONE ITEM. APPROVAL OF THE HOUSING AND ECONOMY I GO DEVELOPMENT FUND 202210 YEAR PLAN. THIS IS A AN EC, AS DESCRIBED APPROVING THIS PLAN.BE THIS IS A FUND OF 6 OR SEVEN MILLION THAT HAS BEEN IN PLACE GOING BACK TO THE 1980'S, THINK, IF I AM CORRECT. ANDRE THERE WAS ADVISORY COMMIT THAT I WAS REFORMULATE ADD FEW YEARS BACK, I THINK IN THE LAST YEAR OF THE BERRY ADMINISTRATION, WHICH HAS BEEN TAKING A LOOK ACHT THIS FUND AND THIS PLAN, THIS 10 YEAR PLAN THAT IS REQUIRED. I WAS IN FULL DISCLOSURE IN A PHONE CALL WITH SOME OF THE MEN'S. IT WAS NOT A MAJORITY OF THAT COMMITTEE BUT SOME OF THE MEMBERS WERE PRESENT OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE. WHO HAD A CONCERN ABOUT THIS PLAN IN THAT IT IS VERY SIMILAR TO PREVIOUS PLANS THAT WERE INITIALLY PROPOSED BACK IN THE 80'SAL AND 90'S AND 2 ,000'S. AND THE CONCERN IS THESE ARE A LOT OF THE SAME ASPIRATIONS. BUT, FOR ONLYIO SIX MILLIONARE AS THIS IS A LONG LIST OF EXPECTATIONS. AND THE DISCUSSION IN THIS ZOOM MEETING THAT I ATTENDED WAS THAT THERE NEEDS TO BE MORE PRIORITIZATION. THEY NEED TO HONE IN ON THE VERY TOP ISSUES. BAY THE WAY ONE OF WHICH THAT COMES OUT ON TOP IS HOUSING. AND LET THE OTHERS FALL BACK OR AT LEAST MAKE CLEAR WHAT THE TOP ISSUE IS. I DON'T SEE IS MS. PIERCE, DIRECTOR PIERCE, STILL HERE? THIS FUND IS ADMINISTERED UNDER FAMILY AND COMMUNITY SERVICES SO INI DON'T MEAN TO CATCH YOU BY SURPRISE DIRECTOR PIERCE BUT, DO YOU GET WHAT WE ARE DRIVING AT HERE? I THINK THERE IS A CONCERN THAT THERE MIGHT JUST BE A SMALL CHANGE TO THIS PLAN THAT JUST MAKES VERY CLEAR LIMITATIONS OF WHAT SIX MILLION DOLLARS WILL DO AND WHAT THE VERY TOP PRIORITY 1 OR TWO, PERHAPS, SHOULD BE. >> PEERS COUNCILOR BENTON I DO UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SUGGESTING WITH THAT MONEY TO PRIORITIZE. THE PLAN WAS APPROVED BY THE COMMITTEE MEMBERS AND THAT IS WHY IT IS BEFORE YOU. ARE YOU SUGGESTING THAT THAT THE PLAN INCLUDES -- THAT IT GOES BACK TO THE COMMIT TOY LOOK ASCO WHAT WE WOULD RANK OVERRED AS THE TOP PRIORITIES WITH THAT MONEY. BENT THAT >> Comm. Benson: THAT WAS KIND OF THE QUESTION AND I HAVEN'T PULLED THIS YET AND HAVEN'T VOTED ON THE CONSENT AGENDA YET. I AM WILLING TO LET THIS GO BUT I THINK I UNDERSTAND ALSO THAT IT WAS VOTED UPON BY A MAJORITY OF THAT COMMITTEE. NOT TO OVER RIDE WHAT THOSE MEMBERS DID BUTHO THIS IS A CONCERN AND MAYBE THERE IS JUST -- I'LL JUST ASK THIS, MAYBE WE LEAVE THIS ON CONSENT AND GET THE REPORT PASSED BUT WOULD YOU OBJECT TO HAVING A FOLLOW-UP MEETING OF THE COMMITTEE WHERE THEY MIGHT DISCUSS THIS POSSIBLE PRIORITIZATION? >> PIERCE: ALWAYS OPEN TO HAVE A FOLLOW-UP MEETING WITH THE COMMITTEE. I APPRECIATE YOU LEAVING IT ON CONSENT AND WE CAN GET BACK TWITH THE COMMITTEE TO DISCUSS. I APPRECIATE YOU RECOGNIZING THAT COMMITTEE HAD APOLUNE AND THERE MAY BE OTHER DISCUSSION AT A COMMITTEE MEETING THAT WOULD BE USEFUL. >> Comm. Benson: I WILL LEAVE THAT ITEM FOR THE RECORD ON THE CONSENT AGENDA AND HOPEFULLY WE CAN -- DIRECTOR, IF YOU COULD TOUCH BASE WITH THE COMMITTEE AND JUST YOU CAN BLAME IT ON ME AND SAY THAT COUNCILOR BENTON ASKED THAT THEY LOOK AT IT AGAIN BUT PERHAPS THERE COULD BE SOME FORM OF ADDENDUM THAT MIGHT ALSO COME DOWN AS AN EC. SO THAT IS MY REQUEST. WE'LL HAVE THE ONE ITEM UNLESS THERE IS ANYTHING ELSE TO BE PULLED. >> Coun. Sanchez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oun. Sanchez: 1993. >> COUNCILOR BENTON: 1993 WAS THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THAT FUND. SO, IT IS A RELIC, COUNCILOR. I DON'T DISAGREE AT ALL WITH WHAT YOU'RE SAYING BUT I THINK I'LL ASK DIRECTOR PIERCE TO CLARIFY BUT I DON'T THINK UNDER LAW AND UNDER THE CREATION OF THAT ORIGINAL THING, ORIGINAL PROGRAM, THAT WE COULD ADJUST THE MAP AT THIS POINT. IN FACT, WITHIN THE ORIGINAL POCKET OF POVERTY, THEREN ARE A COUPLE OF NEIGHBORHOODS WHO HAVE PULLED THEMSELVES OUT OF POVERTY, I.E. DOWNTOWN NEIGHBORHOOD NORTHN AND WEST OF DUNN TOWN ABSOLUTELY WOULD NOT QUALIFY IN TODAY'S DAY AND AGE BUT THIS IS A RELIC AND MOST OF THE MONEY HAS BEEN SPENT OVER THE YEARS. I'LL ASK MS. PIERCE TO WE LAB RAT. >> SINCE I AM PROBABLY THE RELIC THAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT, I WAS THE CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER WHEN THIS FUND AND THIS PROGRAM WAS ESTABLISHED. QUICK HISTORY. THIS IS THE BETA WEST BUILDING WHICH IS THE BIG BUILDING ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE CIVIC PLAZA WAS FELT WITH URBAN DEVELOPMENT GRANT THAT WAS GIVEN TO THE CITY IN THE 80'S UNDER MAYOR SCHULTZ' ADMINISTRATION TO BUILD THE HYATT AND ABOUT IT A WEST. ONE OF THE REQUIREMENTSES WITH THAT NEIGHBORHOODS AROUND THE SITE WHERE THIS WAS CONSTRUCTED TO BE HIRED AS PART OF THE DEVELOPMENT AND PART OF THE INVESTMENT IN HELPING THE POCKET OF POVERTY NEIGHBORHOODS FIND EMPLOYMENT FOR INDIVIDUALS THAT LIVED IN THOSE AREAS. UNFORTUNATELY AS THINGS MIGHT START OUT WITH GREAT INTENTIONS THAT DID NOT WORK OUT. IN 1993 THE DEVELOPERS OF THE PROJECT BASICALLY TURNED AND GAVE THE CITY BACK A PORTION OF THAT FUND THAT WAS NOT UTILIZED AND THE FEDERAL REQUIREMENT WERE THAT WE WORK TO IDENTIFY THE SAME POCKET OF POVERTY THAT WAS USED TO GET THE GRANT TO PUT THESE FUNDS INTO A RESOLVING LOAN FUND OR A FUND TO BE USED FOR THE POCKET OF POVERTY THAT WAS IDENTIFIED AND SHOWN IF THIS MAP THAT YOU SEE BEFORE YOU. COUNCILOR SANCHEZ, SO, UNFORTUNATELY WE CAN'T AMEND THE MAP BECAUSE THIS IS REQUIRED BY THE GRANT AND FEDERAL LAW THAT WAS, THAT GOVERNED THE PROGRAM BACK IN THE 80'S AND TO THE POINT THAT COUNCILOR BENTON MADE IS NOW THE FUND IS STILL IN EXISTENCE, IT HAS BEEN USED FOR VARIOUS PURPOSES THROUGHOUT THE YEARS, BUT THE ACTUAL COMMUNITIES IDENTIFIED IN THE MAP ARE THE ONLY COMMUNITIES THAT CAN UTILIZE THE FUNDS AS THE REQUIREMENT UNDER FEDERAL LAW WAS TO REINVEST IN THOSE COMMUNITIES. I UNDERSTAND YOUR INTEREST PERHAPS IN WANTING TO MODIFY AND USE OTHER AREAS IN YOUR SIDE OF THE CITY BUT UNFORTUNATELY THIS IS REALLY RESTRICTED TO THOSE AREAS IDENTIFIED UNDER THE MAP. I HOPE THAT GIVES YOU MORE FLAVOR. THIS IS A LONG STANDING FUND THAT REALLY DOES NEED TO HAVE SOME REVIEW OF IT AND I THINK WE ARE SUPPORTIVE OF COUNCILOR BENTON'S THOUGHTSR ABOUT GOING BACK AND HAVING A CONVERSATION WITH THE COMMUNITY ABOUT POTENTIALLYBO MAYBE RESTRUCTURING A LITTLE BIT THE USE OF THAT. THAT IS THE HISTORY AND STRUCTURE OF THE PROCESS UNFORTUNATELY. >> Coun. Sanchez: THANK YOUUN MR. PRESIDENT. I AM GOOD SO I AM OKAY WITH IT NOW THAT I GOT THE EXPLANATION. >> COUNCILOR BENTON: WE'LL GO AHEAD WITH CONSENT AS INTENDED OR AS AMENDED OR REMOVED BY COUNCILOR AND WE'LL GO TO A VOTE ON CONSENT. YEAH, THERE IS REALLY NOT NORMALLY AND ACTUALLY I WILL STATE THERE IS NO DEBATE ON CONSENT AGENDA. YOU YOU WANT TO REMOVE ANYTHING ELSE FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA? LET'S GO TO A VOTE THEN. >> Coun. Sanchez: WERE YOU TALKING TO ME. >> Coun. Pena: THANK YOU. THERE IS NO DEBATE. THERE IS A LOT OF DEBATE GOING ON I WANT CLARIFICATION. WE ARE TALKING ABOUT -- >> Comm. Benson: I MADE THE MISTAKE OF STARTING A DISCUSSION ON THIS BUT WE ARE NOT GOING TO CONTINUE TO DEBATE IT. IT IS AGAINST THE COUNCIL RULES. >> Comm. Benson: I HAVE A CLARIFYING QUESTION. >> Comm. Benson: MY MISTAKE. >> Coun. Pena: I HAVE A CLARIFYING QUESTION. SO, EC-22-140, IS THAT BEING PULLED FROM THE, CONSENT AGENDA CURRENTLY. >> Comm. Benson: IT IS NOT. >> Coun. Pena: OKAY. THANK YOU. >> Comm. Benson: WE'LL GO TO A VOTE. I'LL MOVE APPROVAL OF THE CONSENT AGENDA. SECOND FROM COUNCILOR BASSAN. >> Councilor Bassan: YES. >> Coun. Davis: YES. >> Coun. Fiebelkorn: YES. >> Coun. Grout: YES. >> Coun. Jones: YES. >> Coun. Lewis: YES. >> Coun. Pena: YES. >> Coun. Sanchez: YES. >> Comm. Benson: YES. >> PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. >> GOING TO EC--174. >> Coun. Grout: I WANTED TO ASK THATTE COUNCIL SERVICES AND DIRECTOR IN PLANNING, COULD YOU GIVE US BACKGROUND ON THIS RIGHT-OF-WAY VACATION? >> COUNCILOR, I WILL GIVE MY UNDERSTANDING. WE DO HAVE REPRESENTATIVES FROM THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT HERE AND WE HAVE REPRESENTATIVES OF THE APPLICANT. I BELIEVE, ON LINE AS WELL. THE BACKGROUND TO MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THIS SUBDIVISION HIDE AWAY LANE WHICH IS FAR SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE CITY WAS PLATTED PRIOR TO THE ADOPTION OF THE IDO IN 2017. SO, WHEN THIS SUBDIVISION WAS FULLY CONSTRUCTED, THE STORM WATER INLET THAT SERVES THE LOT THAT THE APPLICANT IS BUILDING A SINGLE FAMILY HOME ON WAS NOT CONSTRUCTED UP TO CITY STANDARD. AND SO, THE APPLICANT WHEN SUBMITTING HIS BUILDING PERMIT WHICH WAS APPROVED IS NOT ACTUALLY ABLE TO OBTAIN A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY UNTIL THAT STORM WATER INLET WAS BROUGHT UP TO CITY STANDARD OR THE OTHER SOLUTION BEING A VACATION OF THE LAND AND THAT STORM WATER INLET SO THAT ALL RESPONSIBILITY FOR MAINTENANCE OF THIS SYSTEM FALLS ONTO THE PROPERTY OWNER AND NOT THE CITY. ESSENTIALLY REMOVING SOME HEAVY COST BURDEN OF BRINGING THAT UP TO CITY STANDARDS. BUT AS WELL JUST, YEAH, FINDING HOPEFULLY A COMPARABLE SOLUTION AND ALSO BEING ABLE TO GIVE A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY TO THE APPLICANT. >> Coun. Grout: MR. PRESIDENT A COUPLE OF MORE QUESTIONS. THIS RIGHT-OF-WAY IS VACATED, WILL HIDE AWAY LANE END IN A CUL-DE-SAC OR DRIVEWAY? >> MR. PRESIDENT, COUNCILOR, MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT IT WILL END INTO THE APPLICANT'S DRIVEWAY AT THE END OF HIDE AWAY LANE. I AM GETTING A NOD FROM PLANNING AS WELL. >> Coun. Grout: IS THERE ADEQUATE SPACE FOR EMERGENCY VEHICLES TO TURN AROUND, IF NECESSARY? >> THAT IS SOMETHING I WOULD LIKE TOG TURN OVER TO JAY FROM THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT. >> GOOD EVENING. I AM A PLANNING MANAGER WITH SERVICES AND CONSULTING WITH PRINCIPAL ENGINEER, ARMIJO WITH TRANSPORTATION SECTION AND CITY ENGINEER. MR. ARMIJO MENTIONED PRESENCE OF A BOWL TO THE SOUTH THIS SITE WHERE VEHICLES CAN TURN AROUND. >> Coun. Grout: ALL RIGHT. THAT WOULD BE ADEQUATE? IT WOULD BE OKAY. >> JAY: I JUST NOTE THAT WILL HAVE TO GO, IF APPROVED, THIS RIGHT-OF-WAY VACATION WILL HAVE TO COME BACK TO FOR A PLATTING ACTION. AND AT THAT TIME CITY STAFF WILL LOOK AT THE IDO REQUIREMENTS AT THAT TIME. >> Coun. Grout: OKAY. >> JAY: INCLUDING PERTAINING TO ACCESS AND TURN AROUND REQUIREMENT. >> Coun. Grout: OKAY. ALL RIGHT. THAT ISn. ALL MR. PRESIDENT. I MOVE TO APPROVE EC-174. >> Comm. Benson: MOTION AND SECOND FROM COUNCILOR BASSAN. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION. WE'LL GO THE TO A VOTE. S ABOUT BASS YES.,. >> Councilor Bassan: YES. >> Coun. Davis: YES. >> Coun. Fiebelkorn: YES. >> Coun. Grout: YES. >> Coun. Jones: YES. >> Coun. Lewis: YES. >> Coun. Pena: YES. >> Coun. Sanchez: YES. BENTON TON: YES. WE'LL MOVE TO ANNOUNCEMENTS. >> Coun. Pena: MY INTERNET IS UNSTABLE SO I WAS TRYING TO PLAY AROUND WITH IT SO I APOLOGIZE FOR THAT. THERE WILL BE INTERGOVERNMENTAL LEGISLATIVE RELATIONS COMMITTEE MEETING ON FRIDAY, DECEMBER 2 AT 3:00 P.M. VIA ZOOM VIDEO CONFERENCE. >> COUNCILOR BENTON: AC22-19, SKINNER APPEALS ZONING HEARING EXAMINER'S DECISION TO DENY A VARIANCE OF 3 TO THE REQUIRED EIGHT RESIDENTS IN A COMMUNITY RESIDENTIAL FACILITY FOR LOT 1, BLOCK B, MONTEREY MAN OR LOCATED AT 12105, SIERRA GRANDE. >> THANKAN YOU. THE ISSUE IN THIS APPEAL IS WHETHER A VARIANCE SHOULD BE APPROVED TO ALLOW THREE ADDITIONAL RESIDENTS TO THE LIMIT OF EIGHT RESIDENTS ALLOWED IN PROPOSED COMMUNITY RESIDENTIAL FACILITY WHICH IS IN THIS CASE A PROPOSED ASSISTED LIVING FACILITY. THE VHE DENIED THE VARIANCE BECAUSE THE APPLICANT FAILED TO SATISFY THE VARIANCE CRITERIA. LUHO RECOMMENDS THAT THE CITY COUNCIL DENY THE APPEAL AND UPHOLD THE ZHE'S DECISION TO DENY THE VARIANCE. FIVE CRITERIA MUST BE IMMEDIATE TO OBJECT CONTINUE TO A VARIANCE. VHE FOUNDNC APPLICANT FAILED TO SATISFY THE FIRST PRONG WHICH IS THAT THERE ARE SPECIFIC CIRCUMSTANCES THAT MAKE THAT PROPERTY SPECIAL OR DIFFERENT SO THINGS LIKE THE PROPERTI' SIZE SHAPE TOPOGRAPHY LOCATION, SURROUNDINGS OR PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS CREATED BY NATURAL FORCES. APPLICANT'S ARGUMENT WAS ESSENTIALLY THAT THIS VARIANCE SHOULD BE APPROVED BECAUSE OF BUILDING PERMIT WAS ISSUED THAT INCLUDED CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS THAT SHOWED THAT HE PLANS TO HAVE 11 BEDS IN THE HOME THAT HE IS REMODELING FOR THE ASSISTED LIVING FACILITY. HOWEVER, THIS IS NOT TERRAIN SPECIFIC SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCE AS REQUIRED BY THE IDO SO THE APPLICATION WAS DENIED. THE LUHO FUND THAT THE ZHE DID NOT ERR IN APPLYING THE VARIANCE TEST AND AGREED WITH THE DETERMINATION THAT THERE IS INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE TO DEMONSTRATE SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES APPLICABLE TO THE PROPERTY. LUHO ALSO FOUND THAT THE APPROVAL OF THIS REQUEST WOULD BE AN I'M PER MISS BELIEVE USE VARIANCE OR BACK DOOR ZONE CHANGE BECAUSE INCREASING THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE ALLOWED IN THE FACILITY WOULD CONSTITUTE A DIFFERENT LAND USE THAT IS NOT ALLOWED IN THAT PARTICULAR ZONE. SO, THE LUHO FUND THAT IS FURTHER GROUNDS TO DENY THE APPLICATION FOR A VARIANCE AND FOR THESE REASONS, THE LUHO RECOMMENDS THAT THE COUNCIL DENY THE APPEAL AND UPHOLD ZHE'S DENIAL OF VARIANCE REQUEST. IF THERE IS ANY ACCEPT OR REJECT PROCEEDING SO COUNCIL HAS OPTION TO ACCEPT THE LUHO RECOMMENDATION AND FINDINGS OR ACCEPT THE RECOMMENDATION AND ADOPT DIFFERENT FINDINGS OR REJECT THE LUHO RECOMMENDATION IN WHICH CASE THIS MATTER WOULD COME BEFORE THE COUNCIL FOR AL FULL HEARING AT ITS NEXT MEETING. >> Comm. Benson: I M E E T I N G . >> COUNCIL OR BENTON. I MOVE WE ACCEPT THE LUHO AND FINDINGS. >> Coun. Fiebelkorn: SECONDS. >> COUNCILORor BENTON: ANY DISCUSSION? COUNCILOR DAVIS. >> Coun. Davis: THANKS. I USUALLY TRY TO EDITORRIZE IN THESE BECAUSE I THINK THAT WE ARE PRETTY STRICT AND HAVE TO BE CAREFUL IN THESE HEARINGS. I HAVE TO ADMIT IT CONCERNS ME AMOUNTING BIT THAT THE PROCESS FOR LACK OF A BETTER TERM, SORT OF LAY PERSON LIKE MYSELF OR ANYBODY ELSE, I THINK MOST OF US EXCEPT THE PRESIDENT WHO IS EXPERIENCED IN DOING THIS BUILDINGHI AND DESIGN, WOULD USE KIND OF, I THINK, FAIL THE APPLICANT IN THIS CASE BECAUSE MOST OF US WOULD GO TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT, SUBMIT A PLAN, AND ASSUME THAT THEY CHECKED ALL THE RIGHT BOXES AND DID ALL THE RIGHT REVIEWS. THE FACT IS IN THIS CASE SOMEBODY APPROVED THE BUILDING PLAN AND DIDN'T CHECK THE ZONING AND SORT OF LEFT THE APPLICANT OUT THERE ON THEIR OWN ASSUMING THEY HAD DONE EVERYTHING RIGHT ONLY TO FIND OUT LATER -- IT JUST CONCERNS ME THAT THIS PROCESS HAPPENS. I KNOW THIS COUNCIL IS INVESTED IN THE NEW REPLACING THE PROXY SYSTEM AND PERMITTING PROCESS BUT THIS IS A REAL ISSUE WE ADDRESS TIME AND TIME AGAIN. SOMEBODY STARTING IN ONE SIDE OF THE PROCESS S IN THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT NOT KNOWING THE LEFT-HAND FROM THE RIGHT-HAND WHAT EACH IS DOING. UNFORTUNATELY I THINK THERE IS NOT MUCH WE CAN DO HERE. I HAVE TO AGREE WE CAN'T JUST PERMIT THIS BECAUSE THE LAW DOESN'T ALLOW IT. WE ARE SORT OF STUCK BUT I AM DISAPPOINTED THAT THE DEPARTMENT THAT WAS RESPONSIBLE FOR ENFORCING BOTH ZONING AND BUMMING CODES DOESN'T HAVE A BETTER PROCESS FORS THIS. I THINK SAYING WE WILL HAVE ONE LATER WITH NEW TECHNOLOGY PLATFORM IS NOT GOOD ENOUGH FOR ME. IT IS WITH REGRET THAT I THINK WE HAVE TO UPHOLD THIS. BUT I DO THINK THIS IS REGRETTABLE AND SOMETHING -- WE NEED TO ENSURE THIS DOESN'T HAPPEN AGAIN WHEN SOMEONE IS INVESTING TO DO A GOOD COMMUNITY SERVICE THAT WE NEED. >> I DISCUSSED THIS THIS AFTERNOON, THIS PREVIOUS BUILDING PERMIT THAT WATS ISSUED. COUNCILOR LEWIS WOULD YOU LIKE TO HEAR THAT OR WOULD YOU LIKE TO GO FIRST. >> Coun. Lewis: THAT IS FINE. JUST A COMMENT. I ABSOLUTELY AGREE WITH THE CONCERNS AND ISSUES THAT COUNCILOR DAVIS BROUGHT UP. AND, FOR THAT REASON, I MEAN, THOSE WERE SOME OF THE SAME CONCERNS THAT I HAVE AS WELL. JUST OBSERVATIONS ABOUT THIS, JUST FOLLOWING THIS CASE AND FOR THAT REASON, I DO THINK THAT THE COUNCIL SHOULD CONSIDER REJECTING THE LUHO AND JUST SENDING THIS TO FULL HEARING. I THINK THIS -- BOTH SIDES HERE, I THINK, NEED TO HAVE A FULL HEARING BEFORE US AND I AM WILLING TO DO THAT. >> COUNCILOR BENTON: WELL -- >> Coun. Lewis: WE HAVE ANOTHER MOTION ON THE TABLE RIGHT NOW BUT THAT IS MY RECOMMENDATION. >> COUNCILOR BENTON: SO, WE'LL DISPENSE WITH THIS FIRST MOTION, BUT I ASKED ABOUT THIS VERY THING ABOUT THIS PREVIOUS BUILDING PERMIT ISSUED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT AND I THINK NEITHER YOU NOR I NOR ANYTHING IN THE REPORT UNDERSTOOD HOW THAT OCCURRED AND THE DISADVERTISING THERE BETWEEN A BUILDING PERMIT AND WHAT IS ALLOWED USE THAT IS ALLOWED UNDER THE ZONING ORDINANCE, AS IDO OR EVEN THE PREVIOUS ZONING ORDINANCES BUT -- >> MR. PRESIDENT, YES, THAT IS CORRECT, SO, BUILDING PERMITS ALLOW FOR THINGS LIKE NEW CONSTRUCTION, ADDITIONS AND REMODELING WORK. MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT IS A SEPARATE PROCESS WITHIN PLANNING FROM THE LAND USE AND ZONING PROVISIONS OF THE IDO. SO, APPROVAL OF A BUILDING PERMIT DOES NOT CONSTITUTE APPROVAL OF A PARTICULAR LAND USE. I WILL ADD AT THE LIEU WHO HEARING THE APPLICANT TESTIFIED THAT HE WAS INFORMED BY PLANNING THAT HE NEEDED TO OBTAIN SATISFY VARIANCE TO PROCEED WITH THE USE THAT HE IS PURSUING WITH THIS PARTICULAR SITE. I DON'T HAVE A COMPLETE UNDERSTANDING OF HOW THAT CAME UP T IN THE PROCESS AND WHY THAT WAS NOT FLAGGED DURING THE BUILDING PERMIT PROCESS BUT IT DID COME UP FROM PLANNING AND THEY DID ADVISE THIS PERSON TO PURSUE THIS PROCESS BEFORE YOU TODAY. >> COUNCILOR BENTON: JUST AS A FOLLOW-UP, THIS HARD NUMBER OF EIGHT FOR A FACILITY IN AN R-1 ZONE, TO MY RECOLLECTION, AGAIN, AS I SAID BEFORE, IT WAS IN THE PREVIOUS ZONING CODE AND CARRIED INTO IDO. IT HAS BEEN A PRETTY HARD LINE DURING MY TIME. IT HAS COME UP A COUPLE OF TIMES AND THERE WAS NO VARIANCES WERE GRANTED TO THAT, THAT I KNOW OF AT LEAST DURING MY TIME. BUT, I THINK THE EXAMPLE -- WELL, THERE IS AN EXAMPLE -- TELL ME THE EXAMPLE THAT YOU HAVE WITH ANOTHER STAFF MEMBER THAT BROUGHT UP THE IDEA. ABOUT A COMMERCIAL CAN I HAVE EVEN IN A RESIDENTIAL HOME. >> YES, MR. PRESIDENT, EXAMPLE THAT I SHARED WITH YOU EARLIER TODAY WAS SOMEONE COULD OBTAIN A BUILDING PERMIT TO INSTALL A COMMERCIAL GRADE KITCHEN IN THEIR HOUSE, SEPARATE FROM THAT, THOUGH, THAT WOULDN'T ENTITLE THEM TO OPERATING A RESTAURANT OUT OF THEIR HOUSE IN A RESIDENTIAL ZONE. THOSE ARE TWO DISTINCT APPROVALS. >> COUNCILOR BENTON: WE DO HAVE THE CONFERENCE ROOM WITH THEIR HAND UP. >> MR. PRESIDENT IF YOU HEAR FROM PEOPLE, YOU NEED TO HAVE A FULL HEARING. >> COUNCILOR BENTON. TO. HAVE ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION, MR. MELENDRES SAYS WE HAVE TO GO TO A FULL HEARING. >> MELENDRES: THIS IS YOUR OPPORTUNITY TO HEAR FROM YOUR STAFF AND ITS ANALYSIS ON THE LUHO RECOMMENDATION TO THE EXTENT YOU HEAR FROM PARTIES BEYOND YOUR STAFF, THAT CAN GO BEYOND THE RECORD THAT IS BEFORE YOU IN WHICH CASE YOU WANT A FULL HEARING AND HAVE THE PARTIES HERE AND GIVE THEM THE OPPORTUNITY TO PARTICIPATE. >> COUNCILOR: THIS IS OUR REPORT FROM OUR STAFF AND THERE IS A MOTION AND SECOND ON THE FLOOR. ANY DISCUSSION? >> Coun. Lewis: YOU ORIGINALLY MADE THE MOTION TO ACCEPT. IS THAT MOTION ON THE FLOOR. >> COUNCILOR BENTON: MOVED AND SECONDED TO ACCEPT THE LUHO RECOMMENDATION AND FINDINGS. >> Coun. Lewis: OKAY. I AM NOT GOING TO SUPPORT THAT. IF IT DOESN'T PASS, I'LL MOVE TO REJECT. >> COUNCILOR BENTON: OKAY. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? WE'LL GO THE A VOTE. >> Councilor Bassan: YES. >> Coun. Davis: YES. >> Coun. Fiebelkorn: YES. >> Coun. Grout: YES. >> Coun. Jones: YES. >> Coun. Lewis: NO. >> Coun. Pena: YES. >> Coun. Sanchez: YES. >> Comm. Benson: YES. >> MOVE TO APPROVALS. AND ITEM A. IS AN APPROVAL FOR THE -- THIS IS IMMEDIATE ACTION THAT WE JUST APPROVED EARLIER. THE APPROVAL OF FY23 CONTRACTS TOON PROVIDE SUPPORTIVE HOUSING VOUCHERS FOR FAMILIES AND INDIVIDUALS EXPERIENCING HOMELESSNESS. I'LL MOVE APPROVAL. >> Coun. Fiebelkorn: SECOND. >> COUNCILOR BENTON: WE CAN HEAR FROM THE MAYOR'S CONFERENCE ROOM IF YOU LIKE NOW OR WE CAN MOVE TO A VOTE. THESE AS WERE DESCRIBED HOUSING VOUCHERS CONTRACTS. SEEING NONE, WE'LL GO TO A VOTE. >> Councilor Bassan: YES. >> Coun. Davis: YES. >> Coun. Fiebelkorn: YES. >> Coun. Grout: YES. >> Coun. Jones: YES. >> Coun. Lewis: YES. >> Coun. Pena: YES. >> Coun. Sanchez: (NO RESPONSE). >> COUNCILOR BENTON: YES. WE'LL GO TO FINAL ACTIONS NOW. ITEM A. >> FAB FEEBLE THANK YOU, THIS IS O-37 ADDING A NEW PART TO CHAPTER 9 ARTICLE VI ROA1994 FOOD AND BEVERAGES TO BE KNOWN AS ALBUQUERQUE MARKET FOOD CONVENIENT FOR ORDINANCE AND ESTABLISHING A PERMITTING FEE. MOVE DO PASS. >> COUNCIL OR BENTON: SECOND WITH CANNELLOR BASSAN. LOOKING LIKE YOU HAVE AMENDMENT ALSO, COUNCILOR. >> Coun. Grout: MOVE FLOOR AMENDMENT NO. 1 WHICH YOU CAN SEE ON THE SCREEN. THIS IS JUST SOME CLEAN-UP LANGUAGE STANDARDIZING THE VARIOUS PROCEDURES WITHIN THE ORDINANCE. I BELIEVE WE HAVE ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH WITH US IF THERELT ARE QUESTIONS BUT MOVE DO PASS. >> COUNCILOR BENTON: MOTION AND SECONDIO FOR THE AMENDMENT FROM COUNCILOR BASSAN? WE'LL HEAR FROM THE MAYOR'S CONFERENCE ROOM LOOKS LIKE. >> COUNCILOR PRESIDENT, NOTHING ON THE AMENDMENT. >> COUNCILOR BENTON: WE ARE JUST ON C THE AMENDMENT. SECOND ON THE AMENDMENT, ANY DISCUSSION? GO TO A VOTE. >> Councilor Bassan: YES. >> Coun. Davis: YES. >> Coun. Fiebelkorn: YES. >> Coun. Grout: YES. >> Coun. Jones: YES. >> Coun. Lewis: YES. >> Coun. Pena: YES. >> Coun. Sanchez: YES. >> COUNCIL OR BENTON: YES. PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. >> COUNCILOR BENTON: WE WILL ASK W THE ADMINISTRATION IF THEY WOULD LIKE TO COMMENT ON THE BILL. APPRECIATE YOU WORKING WITH THE COUNCILOR ON THIS. I HEARD A LOT ABOUT THE CHALLENGES OF VENDORS IN THESE MARKETS AND BUT I DIDN'T TAKE OUT THE TORCH TO FIX IT BUT IT IS LIKE THE COUNCILOR DID. >> THANK YOUD. PRESIDENT BENTON AND THANK YOU COUNCILOR FOR WORKING WITH US ON THIS. WE ARE ALWAYS HAPPY WHEN WE CAN REMOVE ANYTHING THAT IS ADMINISTRATIVE HEADACHE OUT OF THE WAY. WE WANT TO HELP THE MARKET BE SUCCESSFUL AND THIS MOVE WILL HELP THE MARKET PERMIT WHICH IS REALISTICALLY A WAY A LOT OF MARKET VENDORS MOVE. THEY SHOW UP AT VARIOUS MARKETS THROUGH THE YEARI AND THIS IS AN EASIER LIFT FOR US WORKING WITH A PERMIT THIS WAY, EASIER ON THE STAFF AND INSPECTORS. WE THINK IT IS A GOOD SOLUTION FOR THEUT MARKET VENDORS AS WELL. WE HAVE MET WITH THEM ALONG THE WAY OF DEVELOPING THIS AND I THINKND WE CAME TO A PLACE WHERE EVERYONE IS HAPPY. MOVE IT FORWARD. >> Coun. Fiebelkorn: MR. PRESI DENT, ARE THERE PUBLIC SPEAKERS. >> COUNCILOR BENTON: WE DON'T HAVE ANYONE SIGNED. YOU. >> FEEBLE TO BE A I WANT TO THANK YOU FOR ALL THE WORK ON THIS. THIS IS ONE OF THE PHYSICIAN THINGS THAT CAME TO ME AS A NEW CITY COUNCILOR BACK IN JANUARY. REALLY WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT YOUR FARMERS MARKETS AND NEIGHBORHOOD MARKETS ARE ABLE TO THRIVE THAT THOSE SMALL BUSINESSES ARE NOT UNDUELY BURDENED WITH EXCESS REGULATION AND FEES. AS A REMINDER PREVIOUSLY FOLKS HAD TO GET A PERMIT FOR EVERY SINGLE FARMERS MARKET THEY WANTED TO SELL AT. THAT WAS ONEROUS FOR THEM. THIS GIVES THEM A PERMIT FOR THE ENTIRE SEASON AT A LOW COST SO THAT L WE CAN REALLY SEE OUR LOCAL MARKETS GROW SO WITH THAT, I URGE YOUR SUPPORT. >> COUNCILOR BENTON: MOVED AND SECONDED. WE'LL GOEC THE A VOTE. >> Councilor Bassan: YES. >> Coun. Davis: YES. >> Coun. Fiebelkorn: YES. >> Coun. Grout: YES. >> Coun. Jones: YES. >> Coun. Lewis: (NO RESPONSE). >> Coun. Lewis: YES. >> Coun. Pena: YES. >> Coun. Sanchez: YES. >> COUNCILOR BENTON: YES. >> PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. >> COUNCILOR BENTON: CONGRATULATIONS COUNCILOR AND GOOD WORK. I KNOW THAT WE JUST MADE QUICK WORK OF OUR PASSING THIS BUT I KNOW IT WAS A LOT OF WORK ON YOUR PART AND GREAT SOLUTION. THE GOVERNMENT DOING -- WORKING THE WAY IT IS SUPPOSED TOD WHERE WE CLEAR UP LOG JAMS AND HELP THE LOCAL ECONOMY. ALL RIGHT. WE'LL NOW MOVE TO ITEM C. >> Coun. Sanchez: O-43 IS ME ANDE COUNCILOR JONES WORKING TOGETHER TO WITH REFERENCE TO SAFE OUTDOOR SPACES. SO, O-43 IS ADOPTING A NEW ARTICLE AND CHAPTER 9 OF THE REVISED ORDINANCET OF ALBUQUERQUE, 1994 HEALTH, SAFETY AND SANITATION, TO BE KNOWN AS SAFE OUTDOOR SPACE OPERATOR'S PERMIT ESTABLISHING A PERMIT AND PERMITTING FEE. MOVE DO PASS. >> COUNCILOR BENTON: SECOND FROM COUNCILOR BASSAN. THERE ARE SOME AMENDMENTS THAT NEED TO BE MOVED. WE DO HAVE FOCUSED SIGNED UP TOP SPEAK. WHY DON'T WE TOUCH BASE WITH THESE AMENDMENTS. AT LEAST HEAR ABOUT THEM. MAYBE WE'LL GO TO PUBLIC COMMENT IF THAT IS OKAY WITH YOU COUNCILOR SANCHEZ AND WE I'LL GET BACK TO VOTING ON THESEN INDIVIDUAL AMENDMENT? >> Coun. Sanchez: THANK YOU. >> COUNCILOR BENTON STARTING STARTING WITH COUNCILOR BASSAN.NC >> Councilor Bassan: SO JUST TO MAKE SURE I FOLLOW THIS CORRECTLY. I AM GOING TO DISCUSS THIS BUT WE'LL VOTE AFTER PUBLIC COMMENT. >> COUNCILOR BENTON MEANT. I'LL LEAVE ITEA TO YOU, WE CAN GO EITHER WAY. WE CAN LISTEN TO PUBLIC COMMENT. JUST TWO PEOPLE SIGNED UP AND THEN IN THE EVENT THEY ARE SPEAKING TO THE AMENDMENTS, IT MIGHT BE A GOOD IDEA. >> Coun. Jones: IF I MAY, I WOULD ASK THAT WE LET THE TWO SPEAKERS COMMENT FIRST. >> COUNCILOR BENTON: THAT WAY IN CASE THEY HAVE SOMETHING TO SAY ABOUT AMENDMENTS WE CAN DO THAT AND THEN MOVE TO AMENDMENTS. CALL THE SPEAKERS. >> WE HAVEPE TWO SIGNED UP BUT ONLY ONE JOINED US AND THAT IS KAREN NAVARRO. >> KAREN NAVARRO: I JUST WANTED TO SUGGEST A FEW SLIGHT CHANGES IN WORDING THAT I WOULD THINK BE IMPORTANT. SECTION 9245 NO. 5, I THINK NEEDS TO BE AMENDED TO ELIMINATE THE WORD ON SITE BEFORE RESOURCES AND SERVICES. ON SITE I'M MRIS ON SITE PAID STAFF AND THAT IS UNNECESSARY BECAUSE SERVICES CAN BE BROUGHT TO THE SAFE OUTDOOR SPACE BYOO A HEALTH CLINIC AND STREET OUTREACH TEAM FROM A HOMELESS SERVICES PROVIDER ON A REGULAR BASIS AND CONNECT RESIDENTS TO RESOURCES. SO, OPERATOR DOES NOT NEED TO GO OFFER ONSITE SOCIAL SERVICES OR HEALTHCARE SERVICE. >> NOMINATORS 4 SAYS PERSONS WITH CRIMINAL BACKGROUND WILL BE DENIED SAFE OUTDOOR SPACE OPERATOR'S PERMIT. I THINK THIS SHOULD BE CHANGED TO MAY BE DENIED FROM WILL BE, SINCE EACH PERSON'S SITUATION IS UNIQUE SO THAT SOMEONES WHO CRIMINAL BACKGROUND INCLUDED LIKE SHOPLIFTING OR DRUG POSSESSION CONVICTION OR WHO EXPERIENCED HUMAN TRAFFICKING AS A YOUNGER PERSON THAT RESULTED IN T A CRIMINAL BACKGROUND COULD BE DISQUALIFIED WITH THESE WORDS AND THAT SHOULD NOT BE. THOSE WERE MY TWO RECOMMENDATIONS. THANK YOU. >> COUNCILOR BENTON. THAT CONCLUDES OUR PUBLIC COMMENT. WE'LL GO BACK TO THE BILL. AND THE AMENDMENTS STARTING WITH COUNCILOR BASSAN. S ABOUT BASS MR. PRESIDENT,. >> Councilor Bassan: I WAS READING THROUGH THE OncTHER ONES. I WOULD LIKE TO MOVE FLOOR AMENDMENT 1 TO O-22-43. ON PAGE 3, LINE 1 STRIKE THROUGH COMMUNITY COMMITMENT OUTLINING HOW THE OPERATIONAL POLICIES WILL MITIGATION POTENTIAL OFF SITE IMPACTS. PAGE 3, LINE 20 BE INSERT EACH OPERATE ASHALL ENGAGE IN A GOOD NEIGHBOR PROGRAM WITH NEIGHBOR WITHIN 100 FEET OF THE PROPERTY. >> COORDINATE WITH CONTRACT. ON PAGE 4, LINE 11, CHANGE THE PERIOD BETWEEN WARNINGS, TO A COME A. EXPLANATION A COMMUNITY COMMITMENT WOULD REQUIRE AN SOS SITE TO CREATE A STATEMENT OF HOW THE OPERATOR WOULD MITIGATE POTENTIAL OFF SITE IMPACTS OFF AN SOS BUT GOOD NEIGHBOR PROGRAM WOULD REQUIRE INCREASED NEIGHBORHOOD ENGAGE MEANT. I ALSO WANTED TO ADD TO THAT EXPLANATION THAT THIS IS SIMILAR TO WHAT WE ENDED UP DOING FOR THE GATEWAY CENTER WITH THE NEIGHBORHOODS OVER THERE. THIS AMENDMENT CHANGE ALSO REQUIRES SAFE OUTDOOR SPACE OPERATE TO TO CONTRACT WITH NONPROFIT ORGANIZATION TO PROVIDEO STREET OUTREACH IN AREAS ADJACENT TO SOS IN CONTRAST WITH JUST COORDINATING WITH THEM. THE THIRD IS A TECHNICAL CHANGE. I DO KNOW THAT DIRECTOR PIERCE IS HERE TO SPEAK AND THAT WE HAVE SOME FURTHER INFORMATION THAT WE CAN PROVIDE REGARDING THIS. I KNOW STAFF WAS WORKING ON IT. MS. STYLES MIGHT WANT TO SAY A FEW THINGS TO ELABORATE DETAILS. >> COUNCILOR BENTON: IS THERE A MOTION AND SECOND ON THIS? NO, SO, THERE WAS NO SECOND ON THIS. IS THERE A SECOND? DROUGHT. >> Coun. Grout: SECOND. >> COUNCILOR BENTON: WE'LL GO TO THE ADMINISTRATION. DIRECTOR PIERCE. >> PIERCE: THANK YOU. YES, IN TERMS OF THE GOOD NEIGHBOR PROGRAM I THINK WE DO HAVE SOME EXPERIENCE ON WHAT THOSE ELEMENTS WOULD INCLUDE AND SOME OF THEM BASED ON OUR EXPERIENCE WOULD INCLUDE NO. 1 JUST GETTING INPUT FROM THE NEIGHBORS CLOSE TO ABOUT WHAT ARE THE IMPORTANT ELEMENTS. IT TYPICALLY IS ABOUT SECURITY PROTOCOL, FIGHT SECURITY, HAVING UPDATES ON THE SITE LIKE HOW MANY PEOPLE ARE YOU SERVING, HOW MANY PEOPLE ARE CONNECTED TO SERVICES. SO, GETTING AN UPDATE ON ACTUALLY WHAT IS HAPPENING WITH THE PROGRAM. IT ALSO WOULD BE MAKING SURE A CODE OF CONDUCT IS IN PLACE AND HAVING THE NEIGHBORS FAMILIAR WITH THAT CODE OF CONDUCT. WE ALSO WANT TO PROVIDE IN ADDITION TO THOSE REGULAR UPDATES TO NEIGHBORS IS TO HAVE AN EXISTING CONTACT SO THEY KNOW WHO TO CONTACTS WITHIN THE PROGRAM IF THEY HAVE CONCERNS. SO THOSE ARE SOME OF THOSE IMPORTANT ELEMENTS AS WE SEE IT WITH A SAFE NEIGHBOR PROGRAM. >> COUNCILOR BENTON: SO, YOU SUPPORT -- YOU DON'T SEE ANY ISSUE WITH THE REQUIRING THIS GOOD NEIGHBOR PROGRAM, I MEAN, WOULD THAT BE A CONDITION SOMEHOW -- WELL, THESE WOULD BE APPROVED OR NOT APPROVED, I GUESS, AS AN APPLICATION BUT THESE ARE -- BY DEFINITION, THESE CAN ONLY GO INTO PLACES WHERE THEY ARE ZONED FOR IT. >> PIERCE: THAT IS CORRECT BY THE IDO. IT TELLS US WHERE YOU CAN ACTUALLY HAVE A SAFE OUTDOOR SPACE TO BEGIN WITH. BUT, YES, I AM IN SUPPORT OF WHAT THIS REQUIRES AND THIS IS WHAT WE WANT TO DO BY BEING IN TOUCH WITH NEIGHBORS AND BEING A GOOD NEIGHBOR IF THAT PROCESS. WE THINK THIS CAN BE IMPLEMENTED INTO THE PROGRAM. >> NEXT IS COUNCILOR DAVIS AND. >> Coun. Davis: I WANTED TO ASK THE SPONSOR BRIEFLY, IF YOU COULD THROW THAT BACK UP. I MISSED TOP PART. I SEE THAT ONE OF THESE THINGS COUNCILOR REQUIRES THAT ON ITEM 3, WHERE IT PLACES ORDER NIGHT WITH CONTRACT LIST. I JUST WONDER AND THIS IS GETTING HYPER TECHNICAL BUT FOR AN EXISTING NONPROFIT THAT ALREADY DOES OUTREACH AND HAS THEIR OWN PROGRAM, IT SEEMS TO ME THIS MIGHT REQUIRE THEM NO CONTRACT WITH ANOTHER NONPROFIT. WHICH I DON'T THINK IS REQUIRED BUT I THINK LANGUAGE MATTERS AND PARTICULARLY FOR OUR SPONSOR, LANGUAGE ALWAYS MATTERS. I WANT TO MAKE SURE WE ARE GETTING THE RIGHT INTENT HERE. >> Councilor Bassan: YOU KNOW, IT CERTAINLY IS NOT MY INTENTION TO HAVE A NONPROFIT CONTRACT AGAIN WITH SOMEBODY ELSE. IT IS THAT WHEN I READ THE LANGUAGE TO SAY THAT THEY ARE TO COORDINATE, TO ME IT WAS IMPLYING THAT SURE WE WILL HAVE DISCUSSIONS ON WHAT TO DO AND HOW TO DO IT BUT THEY WON'T ACTUALLY BE IN AGREEMENT ON WHAT IS GOING TO HAPPEN WITH THIS NONPROFIT AND WHAT THEIR INTENTIONS ARE MOVING FORWARD WHICH IS WHY IT WAS TO BE WORDED AS CONTRACT VERSUS JUST COORDINATE. >> Coun. Davis: I APPRECIATE THAT. I KNOW WE HAVE: A NUMBER OF AMENDMENTS. I THINK ADMINISTRATION CAN CLEAN THIS UP IN RULE MAKING IF THERE IS A EXCEPT DISCREPANCY. IT WANT TO BE SURE WE CAPTURE THE RIGHT INTENT. I AM OKAY WITH THIS. >> Coun. Fiebelkorn: COUNCILOR DAVE IS ASKED MY QUESTION. >> ANY OTHER DISCUSSION, COUNCILORS ON AMENDMENT NO. 1? WE DO HAVE MS. STYLES HERE AND SHE WAS MENTIONED AND SO WE MIGHT WANT HER TO -- DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING TO ADD AT THIS POINT OR LATER? >> STILES: I AM HAPPY TO ANSWER QUESTIONS. >> SO THERE HAS BEEN A MOTION AND SECOND FOR AMENDMENT NO. 1. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? IF NOT WE'LL GO THE A VOTE. >> Councilor Bassan: YES. >> Coun. Davis: YES. >> Coun. Fiebelkorn: YES. >> Coun. Grout: YES. >> Coun. Jones: YES. >> Coun. Lewis: YES. >> Coun. Pena: YES. >> Coun. Sanchez: YES. >> COUNCILOR BENTON: YES. >> PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. NEXT AMENDMENT. THIS IS COUNCILOR DAVIS. AMENDMENT NO. 2. >> Coun. Davis: AMENDMENT NO. 2 MAKES A CLARIFICATION REGARDING BACKGROUND CHECKS. CURRENT BILL REQUIRES THAT ANY PERSON THAT OPERATOR SHALL NOT LOU ANY PERSON -- IT DOESN'T CLARIFY WHO IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE F CHECK. WE KNOW THIS HAS BEEN A BARRIER FOR ENTRY INTO SHELTERS AND SERVICES IN THE PAST FOROPERATORS WHO DON'T HAVE A SOLID POLICY FOR ADDRESSING THIS. WE KNOW BACKGROUND CHECKS TAKE THREE TO FOUR DAYS OR TWO WEEKS DEPENDING ON THE CHECK CONDUCTED. THEY CAN RUN ANYWHERE FROM $30 TO $130-DOLLARS. SO, WHILE I DON'T PERSONALLY BELIEVE THAT THIS BACKGROUND CHECK PIECE IS REQUIRED, I UNDERSTAND THAT A MAJORITY OF COUNCILORS DO. SO, I WANT TO MITIGATE THE UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES OF APPLICANTS TO PAY THE FEES UP FRONT OR TAKEN BY A RIDE BY SOMEBODY TRYING TO TAKE ADVANTAGE SO THIS AMENDMENT WOULD REQUIRE THAT THE OPERATOR HAVE A POLICY THAT WOULD -- I THINK THAT IS A REASONABLE EXPECTATION SO AS NOT TO CREATE ARTIFICIAL BARRIER. ALL THOSE WORDS MEAN I MAKE MOTION TO APPROVE AMENDMENT NO. 2. >> COUNCILOR BENTON: MOTION AND SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION ON AMENDMENT NO. 2? SEEING NONE, WE'LL GO THE A VOTE. >> Councilor Bassan: YES. >> Coun. Davis: YES. >> Coun. Fiebelkorn: YES. >> Coun. Grout: YES. >> Coun. Jones: YES. >> Coun. Lewis: YES. >> Coun. Pena: YES. >> Coun. Sanchez: YES. COUNCILOR BENTON: YES. >> PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. >> THIS WOULD BE AMENDMENT NO. 3 SPONSORED BY -- YOU WANT TO TAKE THIS ON? >> Coun. Jones: MR. PRESIDENT, APPARENTLY COUNCILOR C SANCHEZ DOESN'T WANT TO SPEAK TO THIS. I THINK THAT THIS IS A GOOD WAY TO HANDLE THIS AND I WOULD ASK FOR YOUR SUPPORT. ON AMENDMENT C. THIS HAS TO DO WITH THE FEES. >> Coun. Jones: YES. >> COUNCILOR BENTON: COUNCILOR SANCHEZ. >> Coun. Sanchez: THIS IS BASICTH NEED PART OF THE CITY PROCESS. AND WHAT IIT HAVE BEEN TOLD IS MOST OF THE FEES AROUND THE AMOUNT THAT ARE LISTED AND THIS WOULD ACTUALLY MAKE THOSE FEES ACTUALLY EQUAL TO JUST ABOUT EVERY OTHER FEE THAT THE CITY CHARGES. SO, I URGE YOUR SUPPORT. >> COUNCILOR BENTON: WAS IT MOVED B AND SECONDED? SO, IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR SANCHEZ AND SECONDED BY COUNCILOR. IF THERE IS NO OTHER DISCUSSION WE'LL GO THE A VOTE. >> Coun. Fiebelkorn: I HAD A QUESTION. >> THANK YOU. I AM STILL A LITTLE BIT CONFUSED ON THIS ONE. IF SOMEONE IS APPLYING FOR A SAFE OUTDOOR SPACE PERMIT THROUGH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT RIGHT NOW, ARE THEY PAYING AN ADDITIONAL FEE ON TOP OF THIS AND IF SO HOW MUCH IS THAT FEE? >> I DON'T KNOW WHO CAN ANSWER THAT. >> Coun. Sanchez: I THINK PLANNING DEPARTMENT WOULD BE ABLE TO ANSWER THAT. THAT CAME AS ONE OF THEIR SUGGESTIONS, I BELIEVE. >> COUNCIL OR BENTON: IS THE DIRECTOR AVAILABLE. >> MR. PRESIDENT, COUNCIL MEMBERS, THIS IS ALLEN BARELA, THERE IS A STANDARD FEE THAT IS CHARGED, I BELIEVE IN AMOUNT OF $75. AND THIS WOULD BE NOT AN ADDITIONAL FEE BUT IT WOULD BE A RAISED FEE IN THIS PARTICULAR SITUATION, THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT WAS ASKED WHETHER THE EXISTING FEE IS ENOUGH TO COVER ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS AND STAFF STATED ALTHOUGH THESE MATTER ARE VERY FEW, THEY ARE TIME CONSUMING. HOWEVER, THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT IS NEUTRAL IN THIS MATTER AND WOULD APPRECIATE CONSIDERATION BUT CERTAINLY IS NOT GOING TO ADVOCATE FOR THE RAISED FEE. >> Coun. Fiebelkorn: THANK YOU. SO, THE SAFE OUTDOOR SPACE OPERATORS PERMIT FEE IS GOING TO BE PAID AT THE SAME TIME YOU APPLY FOR YOUR PLANNING PERMIT FOR YOUR SAFE OUTDOOR SPACE SO THERE IS JUST ONE FEE OVERALL. >> AND MR. PRESIDENT AND COUNCILOR, THAT IS MY UNDERSTANDING YES. THERE ARE NOT TWO SEPARATE FEES. >> FAB FEEBLE THANK YOU. >> RAEL: WE THINK THAT THE FEE CURRENT LIP IN PLACE IS ADEQUATE. WE ARE NOT GETTING A WHOLE VIEW OF REQUESTS FOR SAFE OUTDOOR SPACES. IT SEEMS TO ME THIS WOULD BE ANOTHER REASON WHY WE SHOULD TRY AND MAKE THIS AS PAINLESS AS POSSIBLE, KEEP IN MIND, PER THE LAST AMENDMENT, IN MANY WAYS THE FEES ARE GOING TO BE EITHER PAID THROUGH PRIVATE CONTRACTOR TO THE CITY OR SOMEONE THAT IS RUNNING THE PROGRAM AND THEN WE ARE GOING TO PAY FOR OTHER THINGS AS PER AMENDMENT. SO THIS SEEMS TO BE LIKE I UNDERSTAND THE NEED TO HAVE IT PAY FOR ITSELF BUT THIS IS REALLY A PUBLIC SERVICE FOR THE CITY SO JUST FOR INFORMATION WE THINK THE CURRENT FEE IS APPROPRIATE. >> COUNCILOR BENTON: WE HAVE COUNCILOR LEWIS AND BASSAN IN THE CUE. >> Coun. Lewis: JUST A QUESTION FOR OUR STAFF. MAYBE MR. MELENDRES. I AM JUST -- I UNDERSTAND WHAT THE SPONSORS ARE DOING. I GENERALLY SUPPORT THE IDEA. BUT I JUST FLAT OUT DON'T SUPPORT SAFE OUTDOOR SPACES AND ESPECIALLY WITH YOU KNOW AN AMENDMENT LIKE THIS WHERE WE ARE CREATING MORE AND MORE REVENUE FOR THE CITY AND APPARENTLY ITND IS NOT EVEN NEEDED. SO, I GUESS, MY QUESTION TO YOU MR. MELENDRES IS IF WE APPROVE THIS ORDINANCE, ARE WE HINDERING -- ARE WE KEEPING OUR SELFS FROM BEING ABLE TO, YOU KNOW, IF WE WERE TO COME BACK TO THE FUTURE AND AMEND THE IDO TO PROHIBIT OUTDOOR SPACES ARE WE CREATING SOME MORE ROADBLOCKS AND BARRIERS, I GUESS WOULD IT HINDER US FROM BEING ABLE TO DO THAT BY APPROVING THIS TONIGHT. >> MELENDRES: APOLOGIZE FOR THAT. THIS BILL THAT ITS BEFORE YOU CAN EXIST REALLY ONLY BECAUSE SAFE OUTDOOR SPACES PERMITTED WITHINER THE IDO. SO, IF AT SOME POINT IN THE FUTURE SAFE OUTDOOR SPACES WAS REMOVED FROM THE IDO AS A POSSIBLE USE WITHIN THE CITY, THEN IT WOULD ULTIMATELY RENDER THIS PERMIT PROCESS IRRELEVANT. THIS PERMIT PROCESS WOULD NOT PRECLUDE YOUR DISCRETION FROM DOING THAT IN THE FUTURE. ESSENTIALLY, ANY SAFE OUTDOOR SPACE THAT IS IN ALWAYS TODAY WOULD BE PERMITTED TO CONTINUE TO EXIST PURSUANT TO THE TERMS OF THE ZONING CODE AS IT EXISTED WHEN APPROVED AND SO IF YOU WERE TO REPEAL SAFER OUTDOOR SPACES AT SOME POINT IN THE FUTURE, THAT WOULD STOP NEW ONES FROM COMING IN BUT THOSE THAT ARE I ARE CURRENTLY PERMITTED OR STILL TREO BE PROPOSED WOULD BE SUBJECT TO THE PERMITTING REQUIREMENTS OF THIS BILL. >> COUNCIL OR BENTON: DID THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION. >> Coun. Lewis: YES, SIR. >> Councilor Bassan: MR. PRESI DENT, THANK YOU. SO, BASED OFF OF WHAT I WAS JUST, MR. RAEL WHAT YOU WERE SAYING ABOUT HOW THIS IS A PUBLIC SERVICE IN MANY WAYS AND WE ARE REALLY BY HAVING THIS FEEG IT WAS GOING TO BE JUST PAYING US BACK. I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE CLARIFICATION AND MS. STILES MAYBE CAN YOU HELP. I WAS UNDER IMPRESSION DEFINITION OF OPERATOR IS NOT THE CITY OF ALBUQUERQUE WHEN IT COMES TO SAFE OUTDOOR SPACE. AM I CORRECT OR INCORRECT? >> STILES: MR. PRESIDENT, COUNCILOR, THE DEFINITION FOR -- I JUST HAD IT. I AM SORRY. THE DEFINITION FOR SAFE OUTDOOR SPACE OPERATOR IS THE OWNER OR PARTY OTHERWISE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE SAFE OUTDOOR SPACE OPERATION. SO, THAT WOULD BE THE APPLICANT WOULD BE THE OPERATOR. >> Councilor Bassan: THANK YOU. IT IS MY IMPRESSION THAT THE PERSON OR PARTY THAT IS RESPONSIBLE FOR PAYING ON THE PREVIOUS AMENDMENT THAT WE JUST DISCUSSED WAS THE BACKGROUND CHECK FEES IS NOT THE N CITY OF ALBUQUERQUE. I DON'T KNOW IF MAYBE I WAS MISUNDERSTANDING MR. RAEL WHEN YOU WERE SAYING WE WERE GOING TO BE CHARGING A HIGHER FEE AND CHARGING MORE SO IT IS KIND OF A WASH OR PAYING OURSELVES FOR THE PUBLIC SERVICE BUT I BELIEVE THAT THE OPERATOR WILL BE PAIN FOR THE BACKGROUND CHECK T OF ANY INDIVIDUALS THAT REQUIRE IT AND THEN THE OTHER THING THAT I AM CONFUSED ON IN REGARDS TO THIS AMENDMENT IS ALSO IT SAYS IN THE EXPLANATION THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT REQUESTED THIS. >> RAEL: LET ME CLARIFY MY COMMENT THERE FOR THE COUNCIL. REMEMBER THAT THESE SOCIAL SERVICES CONTRACTS WITH CONTRACTORS SO MY REFERENCE WAS THATCE AS THEY APPLY FOR THESE SOCIAL SERVICES, THAT WE ARE GOING TO BE SUPPORTING THEIR OPERATIONS WITH PUBLIC DOLLARS, IF YOU WILL. SO, IN ESSENCE WHEN I SAY THAT WE ARE PAYING OURSELVES IT US THAT WE ARE GOING TO JUST BASICALLY GIVE THEM A CONTRACT TO PROVIDETR THE SERVICES AND THEY'LL PROBABLY BILL US IN THAT CONTRACT FOR THE COSTS OF THE PERMITS. SO, JUST SEEMS THAT IT IS IMPOSING ADDITIONAL COST THAT WE ARE GOING TO PAY FOR OUR SEVERALS. >> Comm. Barela: THAT DOES CLARIFY A LOT AND MAKING SIGNIFICANT SENSE TO ME. I AM CONFUSED BECAUSE IT DOES SAY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT REQUESTEDEP AN INCREASE. SO, I GUESS I AM WONDERING AND KIND OF TO WHAT COUNCILOR WAS SAYING, HOW MUCH DOES IT COST TO OR HOW MUCH SHOULD IT COST TOOS COVER THE CITY'S LABOR ON PROCESSING THE PERMIT FOR A SAFE OUTDOOR SPACE SO THAT IF NOT TO MAKE A PROFIT BUT YET AT THE SAME TIME IS IT GOING TO BE THE CURRENT $75, SHOULD IT JUST BE $75 RATHER THAN $100 OR $250. I WOULD LOOK TO KNOW WHAT WOULD BE THE ACCURATE AMOUNT FOR THE PERMIT FEE IN ORDER FOR US TO ACCOMPLISH OUR TASKS IN THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT BUT YET ALSO NOT JUST RAISE IT EXORBITANTLY TO YOUR POINT THAT WE END UP PAYING FOR IT ANYWAY. >> MR. PRESIDENT AND COUNCILOR, THAT A IS A VERY GOOD QUESTION. SO, IT DEPEND HOW MANY HORSE GOR INTO PROCESSING AND IN THESE CASES REPROCESSING AND NUMEROUS APPEALS THAT GO THROUGH THE LOOP. A PARTICULAR APPLICATION. HOWEVER, IN LIGHT OF THE MORE DETAILED EXPLANATION THAT WE RECEIVED SO FAR, WHICH IS POINTED OUT THAT MANY OF THESE APPLICANTS END UP BEING GRANT RECIPIENTS OR VENDORS IN ORDER TO PROVIDEDE SOCIAL SERVICES FOR THE CITY, WE DO AGREE PERHAPS IT IS COUNTER PRODUCTIVE, AS MUCH AS WE WOULD LIKE TO GET MONEY TO COVER ALL THE COSTS, IF THAT MONEY IS JUST COMING FROM ASSIST A SISTER DEPARTMENN WE NO LONGER WILL ADVOCATE FOR THIS. >> Councilor Bassan: IT SOUNDS TO ME AND WE HAVE HAVE ANOTHER DISCUSSION LATER BUT SOUND LIKE INDIRECT OVERHEAD COSTS. I WOULD BE HAPPY TO DISCUSS THAT ANOTHER DAY. >> Coun. Sanchez: THANK YOU. WHEN WE LOOKED AT THIS, I HAD THE SAME QUESTIONAD AS COUNCILOR BASSAN IN REFERENCE TO WE GOT ASKED BY PLANNING TO RAISE THE RATE. THAT IS THE REASON WHY WE DID IT. I HAVE NO PROBLEM STAYING WITH THE ORIGINAL BILL AND THE ORIGINAL PRICE OR THE PERMITTING FEE, NO PROBLEM. WE CAN ACTUALLY PULL THIS AMENDMENT AND JUST GO WITH THE ORIGINAL AND I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH THAT. >> COUNCILOR BENTON: IF THAT IS AMENABLE TO COUNCILOR JONES I THINK WE CAN SAY THIS AMENDMENT HAS BEEN WITHDRAWN. >> Coun. Jones: I THINK IT IS A GREAT IDEA. DO I APPROVE. >> COUNCILOR BENTON: WE'LL PUT THAT AMENDMENT NO. 3 AS WITHDRAWN AND GO TO THE NEXT AMENDMENT IF THERE IS ONE. >> BEFORE I MOVE MINE AMENDMENTS, I WANTED TO DOUBLE CHECK. SPOKEN TO COUNCILOR SANCHEZ ABOUT MY TWO AMENDMENTS. LEFT THEM IN HEREBY ACCIDENT. I THOUGHT YOU WE ARE GOING TO BRING ANOTHER ONE FORWARD BUT SHOULD I MOVE THESE. >> Coun. Sanchez: YEAH, I THINK THEY ARE -- >> Coun. Fiebelkorn: MOVE FLOOR AMENDMENT NO. 3 WHICH IS ON PAGE 2, LINE -- NO. 2 WAS MOVED AND WITHDRAWN SO THIS WILL BE NO. 4. >> Coun. Fiebelkorn: OKAY. SO, ON PAGE 2, LINE 10 INSERT-OR AFTER THE WORD AND. AND THIS IS JUST TO MAKE IT CLEAR THAT WE ARE NOT ASKING FOR YOU TO HAVE BOTH OF THOSE REQUIREMENTS JUST ONE OF THEM. I'LL MOVE DO PASS. >> COUNCILOR BENTON: A MOTION AND SECOND FOR AMENDMENT NO. 4. ANY DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE, WE GO TO A VOTE. >> Councilor Bassan: YES. >> Coun. Davis: YES. >> Coun. Fiebelkorn: YES. >> Coun. Grout: YES. >> Coun. Jones: YES. >> Coun. Lewis: YES. >> Coun. Pena: YES. >> Coun. Sanchez: YES. COUNCIL OR BENTON: YES. >> PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. >> Coun. Fiebelkorn: THANK YOU SO I WILL MOVE FLOOR AMENDMENT NO. 5 AND THERE SHOULD BE A CORRECTION TO THIS AFTER SPEAKING WITH COUNCILOR SANCHEZ. WE DECIDED TO CHANGE IT TO ON PAGE 3, LINE 29 AMEND SUBSECTION D AS FOLLOWS. DURING THES. FIRST AND IT SHOULD SAY SIX MONTHS OF OPERATION EACH OPERATOR SHALL OFFER TO MEET WITH THE PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 660 FEET OF THE OUTDOOR SPACE AT LEAST ONCE PER MONTH AND ADDRESS QUESTIONS AND CONCERNS. FOLLOWINGNS THE FIRST 6 MONTHS OF OPERATION EACH OPERATOR SHALL OFFER THESE MEETINGS ON AT LEAST A QUARTERLY BASES. JUST A CONVERSATION WE HAD. I THOUGHT EVERY SINGLE MONTH FOR ENTIRE YEAR WAS A LOT. I ORIGINALLY SAID THREE MONTHS AND COUNCILOR SANCHEZ SUGGESTED 6 AND SO THAT IS WHAT WE AGREED ON. I MOVE A DO PASS. >> COUNCILOR BENTON: SECOND FROM COUNCILOR. THANK YOU. ANY DISCUSSION? SEEMS LIKE AN GOOD MIDDLE GROUND THERE. WE'LL GO TO A VOTE. >> Councilor Bassan: YES. >> Coun. Davis: YES. >> Coun. Fiebelkorn: YES. >> Coun. Grout: YES. >> Coun. Jones: YES. >> Coun. Lewis: YES. >> Coun. Pena: YES. >> Coun. Sanchez: YES. >> COUNCILOR BENTON: I'LL TAKE THAT AS A YES FROM COUNCILOR PENA. YES. >> PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. >> FLOOR AMENDMENT NO. 6. >> Coun. Sanchez: THANK YOU. JUST A CLEAN-UP MEASURE. WRITTEN CONSENT TO COMPLETE THE BACKGROUND CHECK ON THE PRIMARY OPERATOR. PERSONS WITH CRIPPLE CORRAL RECORD WILL BE DENIED A SAFE OUTDOOR SPACE OPERATOR'S PERMIT ONLY TO THE EXTENT AUTHORIZED BY THE NEW MEXICO CRIMINAL OFFENDER EMPLOYEES EMPLOYMENT ACTS. >> EXPLANATION IS THIS AMENDMENT CHANGES CRIMINAL BACKGROUNDS TO CRIMINAL RECORDS TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THE WORDING USED IN THE NEW MEXICO CRIMINAL OFFENDER EMPLOYMENT ACT. MOVE DO PASS. >> Coun. Fiebelkorn: SECOND. >> COUNCILOR BENTON: THIS WAS WHAT WAS REFERRED TO IN M S. NAVARRO'S STATEMENT OR WAS THAT ANOTHER PART OF THE BILL OF. CAN ANYBODY HELP ME WITH THAT? SHE WAS SAYING SOMETHING LIKE YOU MAY BE. I DON'T KNOW WHETHER THAT WAS TO INDIVIDUALS OR WAS THAT FOR THE OPERATOR. >> Coun. Fiebelkorn: MR. PRESI DENT, MS. NAVARRO SUGGESTED IT IS PERSONS WITH CRIMINAL RECORDS MAY BE DENIED SO THAT IS NOT DEALT WITH IN THIS AMENDMENT. >> COUNCILOR BENTON: BUT SHE WAS TALKING ABOUT THE SAME LANGUAGE. >> Coun. Fiebelkorn: YES, SHE WAS REFERRING TO THE WORD AFTER THE CHANGE IN THIS AMENDMENT. >> COUNCILOR BENTON: BUT THIS HAS TO DO WITH THE REQUIREMENTS FOR AN OPERATOR NOT AN INDIVIDUAL THAT WOULD BE HOUSED, CORRECT? >> Coun. Fiebelkorn: CORRECT. >> COUNCILOR BENTON: ALL RIGHT. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION OR QUESTIONS? >> AMENDMENT NO. 6 HAS BEEN MOVED AND SECOND. TO A VOTE. >> Councilor Bassan: YES. >> Coun. Davis: YES. >> Coun. Fiebelkorn: YES. >> Coun. Grout: YES. >> Coun. Jones: YES. >> Coun. Lewis: YES. >> Coun. Pena: YES. >> Coun. Sanchez: YES. >> COUNCILOR BENTON: YES. >> THIS WOULD BE NO. 7. COUNCIL OR JONES. >> Coun. Jones: THANK YOU. I MOVE AMENDMENT G WHICH READS ON PAGE 2 LINE 23 AFTER SPACE ADD INCLUDING FOOD SERVICES AND OR RESOURCES AS WELL AS MENTAL AND PHYSICAL HEALTH SERVICES. THE TYPE AND FREQUENCY OF ON SITE RESOURCES AND SERVICES TO SUPPORT THE OCCUPANTS OF THE SAFE OUTDOOR SPACE AND ADD INCLUDING FOOD SERVICES AND OR RESOURCES AS O WELL AS MENTAL AND PHYSICAL HEALTH SERVICES. THIS AMENDMENT ADDS LANGUAGE REQUIRING THAT ON SITE SERVICES TO TAKE PLACE IN SAFE OUT DER SPACES INCLUDE A PLAN FOR RESIDENTS OF THE SOS TO RECEIVE FOOD AS WELL AS MENTAL AND PHYSICAL HEALTH SERVICES. MOVE DO PASS. >> COUNCILOR BENTON: THERE IS A SECOND. I'LL SECOND FOR PURPOSES OF DISCUSSION. TO CLARIFY, I GUESS, I'LL ASK THE SPONSOR, WHEN WE SAY ON SITE SERVICES, YOU KNOW, A LOT OF TIMES PEOPLE THINK THAT MEANS THAT THEY ARE JUST ALWAYS THERE. BUT THIS DOES NOT DO THAT, DOES IT? OR SOMEBODY HELP ME OUT WITH THAT. >> Coun. Jones: IF I MAY ASK MS. STILES TO ANSWER THESE QUESTIONS. >> STILES: WHAT THIS DOES IS ADDS LANGUAGE SPECIFYING THAT IN THE PLAN THAT THE OPERATOR DOES HAVE TO INCLUDE A FOOD SERVICES RESOURCES PLAN AS WELL AS PLAN TO ADDRESS MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES. THIS DOES NOT REQUIRE THE PROVIDER PROVIDES IT. IT REQUIRES THEY SUBMIT A PLAN AND THEN THE DEPARTMENT OF FAMILY AND COMMUNITY SERVICES WOULD DETERMINE WHETHER THAT PLAN WAS SUFFICIENT. >> COUNCILOR BENTON: WHAT I KNOW IS WHAT I HAVE SEEN WHICH IS IN DENVER, A LOT OF THOSE FOOD SERVICES WERE BEING PROVIDED BY NONPROFIT GROUPS SORT OF A ROTATION OF FOLKS WHO WOULD COME IN AND PROVIDE FOOD BUT THERE WASN'T NECESSARILY A GUARANTEE OF A MEAL; IS THAT CORRECT. >> STILES:ED MODEL VARIED QUITE A BIT TO LOCATIONS WHERE THEY PROVIDE ONE HOT MEAL BUT HAVE 24/7 FOOD AVAILABLE SUCH AS SERIAL, BUTTER AND YELLY SANDWICHES AND THAT TYPE OF THING. I ALSO HAVE SEEN MODELS SUCH AS DENVER WHERE THEY BRING IN FOOD. >> COUNCILOR BENTON N: THANK YOU. >> Coun. Fiebelkorn: THE WAY I READ ORIGINAL LANGUAGE SAYS THAT WE HAVE TO PUT OPERATIONS PLAN IN THAT ADDRESSES THESE THINGS. IT DOESN'T SAY REQUIRES BUT ON THE EXPLANATION OF THIS AMENDMENT IT SAYS IT REQUIRES. SO, I JUST WANTED TO GET CLARITY ON ARE WE REQUIRING FOOD SERVICES, MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES AND PHYSICAL HEALTH SERVICES OR JUST SAYING IF YOU PUT IT IN YOUR PLAN, YOU HAVE TO SAY WHETHER OR NOT YOUR PROVIDING THOSE? >> COUNCILOR BENTON: IF I CAN FOLLOW-UP WITH THAT QUESTION TO ON THE SAME TERMS. WOULD THIS BE -- I GUESS, COUNCILOR, PHRASED IT CORRECTLY. NEVER MIND. CAN SOMEONE ANSWER THAT QUESTION, EITHER SPONSORS ON MS. STILES. >> Coun. Jones: I ILL ASK MS. STILES TO ANSWER THESE QUESTIONS BECAUSE SHE HAS DONE THE RESEARCH AND KNOWS EVERYTHING VERY WELL. >> STILES: MR. PRESIDENT, COUNCILOR, THE AMENDMENT IS IT REQUIRES THAT THERE IS A PLAN IN THE EXPLANATION WHERE IT SAYS THAT IT REQUIRES ON SITE SERVICES TO TAKE PLACE IN SAFE OUTDOOR SPACES, INCLUDE A PLAN FOR RESIDENTS OF THE SAFE OUTDOOR SPACE TO RECEIVE FOOD SPARSE MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES IT REQUIRES A PLAN HOW THEY ARE GOING TO RECEIVE THE SERVICES. THEY CAN'T JUST -- IT IS REQUIRED THAT THEY WOULD HAVE SOME SORT OF A PLAN FOR THIS BUT THEY CANNOT BE ADMITTED FROM THE APPLICATION BUT THAT PLAN COULD VARY ON THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE SAFE OUTDOOR SPACE ACCORDING TO WHAT THEIR COMMUNITY SERVICES WOULD APPROVE. >> FEEBLE FEBRUARY >> FAB FEEBLE >> WE'LL GO TO VOTE ON AMENDMENT NO. 7. >> Councilor Bassan: YES. >> Coun. Davis: YES. >> Coun. Fiebelkorn: YES. >> Coun. Grout: YES. >> Coun. Jones: YES. >> Coun. Lewis: YES. >> Coun. Pena: (NO RESPONSE). >> Coun. Sanchez: YES. >> COUNCILOR BENTON: I THINK THIS WAS A YES FROM COUNCILOR PENA AND I'LL VOTE YES. THIS WOULD BE FLOOR AMENDMENT NO. 8. COUNCILOR JONES. >> Coun. Jones: I MOVE AMENDMENT 8 WHICH READS PAGE 2 LINE 32, ADD A YOU IN SUBSECTION TO 8 A PROPERTY MAINTENANCE PLAN CRIBBING HOW THE SITE WRIILL BE MAINTAINED INCLUDING A PLAN TO KEEP THE SITE CLEAN AND FREE OF WEEDS, DEBRIS AND OTHER WASTE. I MOVE A DO PASS. >> COUNCILOR BENTON: MOTION AND SECOND, FROM BASSAN. ANY DISCUSSION? PRETTY STRAIGHTFORWARD. WE'LL GO THE A VOTE. >> Councilor Bassan: YES. >> Coun. Davis: YES. >> Coun. Fiebelkorn: YES. >> Coun. Grout: YES. >> Coun. Jones: YES. >> Coun. Lewis: YES. >> Coun. Pena: YES. >> Coun. Sanchez: YES. >> Coun. Lewis: YES. >> PASSES. >> COUNCILOR BENTON. THIS WILL BE COUNCILOR THIS WILL BE NO. 9. COUNCILOR JONES. >> Coun. Jones: THANK YOU. I MOVE FLOOR AMENDMENT NO. 9, OR I, WHICH READS ON PAGE 3 LINE 7 AFTER SITE ADD AND DESCRIBING HOW THE SITE WILL BE RETURNED TO THE PREVIOUS CONDITION OR BETTER. MOVE A DO PASS. >> COUNCILOR BENTON: SOME LANGUAGE THERE ABOUT DECOMMISSIONING WHICH IS WHAT THIS IS ABOUT. THERE IS A SECOND FROM COUNCILOR DAVIS. ANY DISCUSSION? WE'LL VOTE ON FLOOR AMENDMENT NO. 9. >> Councilor Bassan: YES. >> Coun. Davis: YES. >> Coun. Fiebelkorn: YES. >> Coun. Grout: YES. >> Coun. Jones: YES. >> Coun. Lewis: YES. >> Coun. Pena: YES. >> Coun. Sanchez: YES. >> COUNCILOR BENTON: YES. THIS WILL BE FLOOR AMENDMENT NO. 10, COUNCILOR JONES. >> Coun. Jones: MOVE AMENDMENT 10 WHICH READS ON PAGE 3 LINE 8 ADD A NEW SUBSECTION TO READ EVIDENCE OF OWNERSHIP OR EVIDENCE OF CONSENT BY THE OWNER FOR THE PROPOSED USE OF THE PROPERTY. MOVE DO PASS. >> COUNCILOR BENTON: SECOND FROM COUNCILOR. ANY DISCUSSION? GO. TO A VOTE. >> Councilor Bassan: YES. >> Coun. Davis: YES. >> Coun. Fiebelkorn: YES. >> Coun. Grout: YES. >> Coun. Jones: YES. >> Coun. Lewis: YES. >> Coun. Pena: YES. >> Coun. Sanchez: YES. >> COUNCILOR BENTON: YES. THERE WAS A LATE SUBMISSION BY COUNCILOR LEWIS. >> I HAD IN THE PREVIOUS MEETING, MR. PRESIDENT, BUT I AM NOT -- I DID NOT INCLUDE THAT IN THE PACKET. >> COUNCILOR BENTON: OKAY, THANK YOU. LET'S GO TO THE NEXT ONE. BEAR WITH ME. WE HAVE TWO OTHER AMENDMENT? >> Coun. Jones: THANK YOU I WOULD LIKE TO MOVE AMENDMENT 11. READS ON PAGE 3 LINE 8 A LIST OF DID THE A THAT WILL BE COLLECTED AND IMPORTED ON THE SITE BUT NOT LIMITED TO. >> THE NUMBER OF TENANTS WHO ARE EXITED FROM THE SITE INCLUDING THE REASONS FOR THE DEPARTURE AND NO. 4, NUMBER OF TENANTS WHO ARE EMPLOYED AND WHETHER EMPLOYMENT IS FULL-TIME OR PART-TIME. I MOVE APPROVAL. >> SECOND FROM COUNCILOR BASAAN. ANY DISCUSSION? >> Coun. Fiebelkorn: THANK YOU. I JUST HAD A QUESTION ON THE NUMBER OF TENANTS WHO ARE EMPLOYED OR WHETHER EMPLOYMENT IS FULL-TIME OR PART-TIME. IS THAT DATA POINT WHEN THEY MOVE IN OR WHEN THEY MOVE OUT, ONE IS ASSUMING THAT PEOPLE MIGHT MOVE INTO THESE WOULD BE UNEMPLOYED AND THEN GAIN EMPLOYMENT WHILE THEY ARE THERE. I WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT. >> Coun. Jones: I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE DIRECTOR PIERCE ANSWER THAT QUESTION. SHE HAS DONE ALL THE RESEARCH. >> PIERCE: THANK YOU. IN TERMS OF EMPLOYMENT I THINK WEOY ARE LOOKING AT THAT UPON EXIT. THERE WILL BE SOME PEOPLE THAT ARE EMPLOYED, WE WILL KNOW THAT, WHEN THEY ENTER THE PROGRAM AND SIGN THE AGREEMENT BUT WEAR ALSO LOOKING FOR THE EMPLOYMENT AND THERE IS ANOTHER PIECE ON THAT AMENDMENT IF WE MIGHT PULL IT UP. THAT I WANTED TO CLARIFY. ITEMS EXITING AND WHY. I MEAN I THINK THAT IS ALSO WE INTERPRET THAT TO MEAN IT IS WHEN SOMEBODY IS LEAVING THE PROGRAM. WHY MIGHT THAT BE. I THINK IT IS NO. 3 THERE. YES. NUMBER OF TENANTS EXITING FROM THE SITE, NOT ON A DAILY BASES BUT IF THEY LEAVE THE PROGRAM AND I THINK THAT IS WHAT WE MEAN BY THAT AS WELL. >> THANK YOU. >> COUNCILOR BENTON. THAT LANGUAGE WILL BE CHANGED CH THE PROGRAM; IS THAT RIGHT. >> PIERCE: THAT WOULD BE MORE PRECISE, EXITED FROM THE PROGRAM YES. >> COUNCILOR BENTON: IF THAT IS ALL RIGHT WITH COUNCILOR JONES AND COUNCILOR BASSAN WE'LL MAKE THAT CHANGE. >> Coun. Jones: YES. >> Councilor Bassan: YES, THAT IS OKAY. >> COUNCILOR BENTON: ANY DISCUSSION? LET'S GO TO A VOTE ON AMENDMENT NO. 11. >> Councilor Bassan: YES. >> Coun. Davis: YES. >> Coun. Fiebelkorn: YES. >> Coun. Grout: YES. >> Coun. Jones: YES. >> Coun. Lewis: YES. >> Coun. Pena: YES. >> Coun. Sanchez: YES. >> COUNCILOR BENTON: YES. AMENDMENT NO. 12, COUNCILOR JONES. >> Coun. Jones: THANK YOU. I MOVE AMENDMENT 12 ON PAGE 3, LINE 29 AFTER OFFER CHANGE TO MEET TO A PUBLIC MEETING. ON PAGE 2, LINE 32, AFTER PUBLIC, INSERT NOTICE OF THE PUBLIC MEETING SHALL BE POSTED OUTSIDE OF THE SOS FOR ONE WEEK PRIOR TO THE MEETING TIME. I MOVE APPROVAL. >> COUNCILOR BENTON: IF THERE IS A LANGUAGE THAT CHANGES AS WELL. IS THIS JUST HOW IT WOULD READ? >> Coun. Jones: DO YOU WANT THE EXPLANATION ON IT. >> I WANTED TO BE CLEAR WHAT THAT LANGUAGE WAS IN QUOTES THERE. THE SHALL OFFER A PUBLIC MEETING, ET CETERA. >> Coun. Jones: I BELIEVE SO. COULD WE ASK MS. STILES TO CLARIFY FOR US. >> STILES: THIS IS EXACTLY HOW IT WOULD READ WITH INSERTIONS. >> EVEN IF THIS IS PASSED AFTER THAT AMENDMENT WAS. >> STILES: MR. PRESIDENT, COUNCILOR,RE I THINK MR. MELENDRES WOULD BE BETTER TO ANSWER THIS QUESTION. I UNDERSTOOD THAT THIS WOULD STILL REMAIN CONSISTENT. >> MELENDRES. MR. PRESIDENT, YES, IT WILL. SOES THE WAY THAT WE DRAFT AMENDMENTS IS THE WAY THE BILL IS WRITTEN AT THE TIME THE AMENDMENT IS DRAFTED, SO, WITH THAT PRIOR BILL AMENDMENT HAVING PASSED THIS AMENDMENT WOULDNT NOT REPEAL THAT AND, IN FACT, YOU'RE POINTING IT OUT IS SUPER HELPFUL IN GIVING CLERK'S OFFICE DIRECTION IN WHAT IS INTENDED HERE. >> Coun. Pena: THANK YOU. SO, IS THIS BACK ON THE AMENDMENT. IS IT SAYING IT IS JUST A REQUIREMENT TO HAVE A PUBLIC HEATING BUT NO REQUIREMENT TO NOTIFY THE PUBLIC OTHER THAN POSTING THE SIGN IN THE FRONT? >> STILES: MR. PRESIDENT, THAT IS CORRECT. WHAT IS THIS SAYING IS THAT IT IS REQUIRED FOR THERE TO BE A PUBLIC MEETING BUT THAT THE ONLY REQUIRED ADVERTISEMENT IS TO HAVE A SIGN IN THE FRONT FOR A WEEK PRIOR TO THE MEETING STATING THAT THERE IS GOING TO BE A PUBLIC MEETING. >> Coun. Pena: THAT DOESN'T SEEM LIKE. I APPRECIATE THE SPONSORS INTENT HERE BUT THAT DOESN'T REALLY SEEM LIKE IT IS REALLY TO ADVISE THE COMMUNITY. >> Councilor Bassan: MR. PRESI DENT, I AM SEEING THE POINTS THAT COUNCILORS ARE MAKING RIGHTIN NOW. I MEAN IS THERE A WAY THAT WE CAN SOMEHOW FIGURE OUT A WAY TO MERGE NOT LITERALLY MERGE THE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED AMENDMENT BUT YET AT THE SAME TIME TO, YOU KNOW, CHANGE THIS ONE TO SAY DURING THE FIRST SIX MONTHS OF OPERATION, EACH OPERATOR SHALL OFFER A PUBLIC MEETING WITH THE PROPERTY OWNERS AND THEN MAYBE SAY THAT IT SHALL BE POSTED OUT OF THE SOS ONE WEEK PRIOR TO THE MEETING TIME AND WITH AT LEAST TWO OTHER FORMS OF COMMUNICATION. I DON'T KNOW IF THE SPONSOR WOULD BE AMENABLE TO CHANGING IT SO THAT IT REMAINS CONSISTENT WITH THE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED AMENDMENT BUT ALSO I AGREE THAT SOME OF THE APPLICATIONS THAT HAVE COME IN ARE A LITTLE REMOTE TO WHERE PEOPLE AREN'T REALLY GOING TO KNOW ABOUT A MEETING POTENTIALLY. >> Coun. Jones: MAY I ASKPO DIRECTOR PIERCE TO RESPOND TO THAT ALSO SINCE SHE IS THE DETAIL PERSON FOR US. >> PIERCE: YES. THANK YOU. SO, WE CAN -- I THINK THERE AREHE SOME -- I THINK COUNCILOR JONES, IF WE WERE TO POST THE NOTICE OUTSIDE THE SOS, MOST OF THESE LOCATIONS ARE WHERE PEOPLE WOULD SEE THEM. WITH THE 6 ASKING FEET, I MEAN, WE ARE -- 660 FEET, WE ARE TALKING HUNDREDS OF PEOPLE THAT WE WILL HAVE TO IDENTIFY AND I BASE THAT ON THE PERMITTING PROCESS THAT WE DID ON A RECENT ONE FOR 100 FEET. THERE WERE ABOUT 20 PEOPLE. SO, 20 PEOPLE AND BUSINESSES SO WE WOULD HAVE TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO IDENTIFY THOSE PEOPLE AND HOW TO NOTIFY THEM BUT A NOTIFYING OUTSIDE THE SAFE OUTDOOR SPACE WE THINK COULD WORK FOR MOST PEOPLE IN THE VICINITY TO SHEEE AND BE PREPARED FOR A PUBLIC MEETING. >> Councilor Bassan: DIRECTOR, I GUESS I AM NOT ASKING FOR A MAILER OR DOOR TO DOOR CONTACT BUT I AM EVEN THINKING LIKE AN ADA IN THE PAPER OR SOMETHING ELSE TO NOTIFY PEOPLE OF THE MEETING. AS IT STANDS NOW, WILL YOU PLEASE REMIND MS., MS. STILES, IS THERE A REQUIREMENT FOR NOTIFICATION AT THIS TIME? >> STILES: THERE IS NOT ANY REQUIREMENT OTHER THAN WHAT IS OUTLINED IN THE IDO BECAUSE THAT IS FOR THE INITIAL SITE TOAL BE CREATED SO, NO, THERE IS NOT A REQUIREMENT RIGHT NOW FOR A PUBLIC MEETING, HOWEVER, WITH THE PASSAGE OF THE FIRST AMENDMENT FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD -- THE GOOD NEIGHBOR PLAN THATO MAYBE ADDRESSED AT THAT TIME FURTHER. >> COUNCILOR BENTON: ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? >> Councilor Bassan: MR. PRESI DENT, I GUESS I AM STILL AT A LOSS WITH THIS ONE. SITTING HERE PONDERING. I THINK THAT IT DOESN'T SEEM TO MAKE SENSE TO ME TO HAVE THE FIRST 12 MONTHS WHEN WE JUST CHANGED IT TO SIX MONTHS PREVIOUSLY ESPECIALLY IF, PERHAPS NTHOSE SAME SIX MONTHS THAT CONTACTS WILL BE MADE. AND KIND OF HELP OUT WITH SOME OF THAT PROCESS. NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS, WHY CAN'T WE USE THEM TO REACH OUT TO DIFFERENT PEOPLE AND HAVE A NOTIFICATION THAT IS NOT JUST A SIGN ON A FENCE OF A PROPERTY. I FEEL LIKE THERE IS SOME ALTERNATIVES NOT COSTLY WHERE PEOPLE CAN BE CONTACTED AND NOTIFIED BUT MAYBE -- I DON'T KNOW. 12 MONTHS TO SIX MONTHS, I THINK WOULD BE A GREAT START BUT TO SAY SOMETHING OTHER THAN JUSTHE ONE METHOD OF COMMUNICATION BUT I AM TORN ON THIS ONE. >> MELENDRES: IF I MAY JUST REITERATE THAT THIS AMENDMENT DEALS WITH THE SAME SECTION THAT AMENDMENT 5 DEALT WITH. AMENDMENT 5 CHANGED 12 TO 6. BYPASSING THIS AMENDMENT YOU'RE NOT CHANGING THE 6 BACK TO 12. WE COULD ADD FURTHER CLARIFICATION TO THIS AMENDMENT FOR PEOPLES COMFORT LEVEL HOWEVER REGARDLESS BYPASSING THIS, YOU'RE NOT CHANGING THE 6 BACK TO 12. >> Councilor Bassan: MR. PRESI DENT IF I MAY ASK A QUESTION. MR. ME DRIVEN DRESS SO ON THE PASSAGE OF THE PREVIOUS AMENDMENT, THOUGH, IT WAS REQUIRING SOME COMMUNICATION AND FOLLOW-UP WITHIN 660 FEET SO, TO ME IT SEEMS REDUNDANT AND OVER KILL TO DID BOTH. I GUESS. I AM WONDERING IF IT SEEMS LIKE WE SHOULD EITHER CHOOSE TO VOTE FOR ONE OR THE OTHER AT THIS POINT BECAUSE OTHERWISE ISN'T IT DUPLICATING EFFORTS AND EXTENDING THEM FOR ANOTHER 6 MONTHS. >> MELENDRES: THE PRIOR AMENDMENT DEALT WITH THE SAME SECTION WITH THEHE PRIOR AMENDMENT THISR SECTION WOULD HAVE READ DURING THE FIRST SIX MONTHS OF OPERATION EACH OPERATOR SHALL OFFER TO MEET WITH PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 660 FEET. SO, WHAT IS CHANGING HERE IS INSTEAD OF SAYING TO MEET WITH PROPERTY OWNERS, IT IS SAYING SHALL OFF OFFER A PUBLIC MEETING STILL WITHIN THAT SIX MONTH TIME FRAME. >> Councilor Bassan: THAT HELPS TREMENDOUSLY. THANKME YOU EVERYONE. >> COUNCILOR BENTON: OTHER COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS. DID I HEAR A YES? >> Coun. Pena: I HAVE A QUESTION. I AM JUST NOT SEEING YOU ON THE SCREEN HERE. BUT, COUNCILOR PENA. >> Coun. Pena: THANK YOU MR. PRESIDENT. I GUESS I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO AMEND THIS AMENDMENT TO SAY. NOTICE OF PUBLIC MEETING SHALL BE POSTED OUTSIDE OF THE SOS, I AM GETTING A WEAK NOTICE ON MY SIDE. I WOULD JUST LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION IN CASE IT PASSES, THAT NOTICE OF THE PUBLIC MEETING SHALL POSTED OUTSIDE OF THE SOME OF THE OS FORTE ONE WEEK PRIOR TO THE MEETING AND MAYBE MR. MELENDRES CAN HELP WE WITH THIS, AND SOME OTHER TYPE OF NOTIFICATION LIKE, PERHAPS, AN ADA AS COUNCILOR WAS SUGGESTS. >> I WOULDTS SECOND THAT. >> IS THAT A MOTION FOR AMENDMENT TO THE AMENDMENT IN. >> Coun. Pena: YES. IT WOULD NEED SOME CLARIFYING LANGUAGE. >> COUNCILOR BENTON: CAN YOU PARAPHRASE THAT AMENDMENT TO THE AMENDMENT? >> MELENDRES: SO, IS THE INTENT OF THE AMENDMENT TO REQUIRE A NOTICE BY PUBLICATION? >> YES THAT WOULD BE GOOD. THAT COULD BE A JOURNAL ADA. I DON'T KNOW. >> MELENDRES: THE WAY THAT NOTICE IS REQUIRED BY PUBLICATION WE ON COULD REQUIRE PUBLICATION IN A SOMETHING OF REGULAR CIRCULATION WHICH WOULD BE THE JOURNAL. OR IT COULD BE POSTED ON A FAITHS BOOK PAGE. THERE IS A NUMBER OF WAYS CAN YOU PUBLISH NOTICE. DEPENDS WHAT YOU'RE INTENT IS. >> Coun. Pena: LIKE THE JOURNAL. I DID NOT SAY THE JOURNAL BUT TO SAY SOMETHING THAT IS WIDELY A RED. >> Coun. Jones: IF I MAY, I BELIEVE THAT THIS IS A GREAT PROJECT, I BELIEVE. I DON'T THINK IT IS SOMETHING WE NEEDG TO PUT IN A UP IN BUT I DO BELIEVE IT WOULD BE HELPFUL IF WE AGREED TO AT LEAST FOR THE FIRST SIX MONTHS, MAYBE A YEAR, WHEN WE HAVE A MEETING, THAT WE NOT JUST POST IT ON THE FENCE BUT ALSO NOTIFY THE NEIGHBORHOODS THROUGH THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS OR IF WE GET REQUESTS FROM OTHER AREAS THAT AREN'T IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, I DON'T THINK THIS NEEDS CITY-WIDE PUBLICATION. >> COUNCILOR BENTON: I WOULD AGREE WITH THAT. IF I MAY JUST SPEAK HERE COUNCILORS, THAT, I THINK WE ARE CONFLATING THIS WITH WHAT WE DO WITH LAND USE MATTERS AND SOME WIDESPREAD PUBLICATION AND A MEETING WHERE RANDOM PEOPLE WILL SHOW UP BECAUSE THEY SAW IT IN THE NEWSPAPER DOESN'T SEEM HELPFUL TO WHAT IS TRYING TO BE ACCOMPLISHED HERE. ONE OF THESE SOS'S IS UNDER WAY AND THE PREVIOUS AMENDMENT IS IN EFFECT WITH THE 6 MONTHS YOU WOULD THINK THAT INTERESTED PROPERTY OWNERS WOULD BE KEEPING AN EYE ON THIS PROPERTY. AND WOULDIS BE KEEPING AN EYE ON THE FRONT OF THE PROPERTY FOR A NOTICE OF A POSTING ON THE PROPERTY. AND THINK THIS IS NOT SAYING THAT AS A LAND USE MATTER OUTSIDE OF A SITE THAT ATHLETES UNDER CURRENT SITUATION IS ZONED FOR. AN SOS. SO, I AM CONCERNED ABOUT THIS AMENDMENT AS A WHOLE AND WHETHER IT IS EVEN NEEDED AND I DON'T -- YOU KNOW -- WHEN THE PREVIOUS LANGUAGE WOULD HAVE SAID TO MEET WITH PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 660 FEET, AS OPPOSED TO A PUBLIC MEETING WHICH MEANS REALLY ANYBODY AND EVERYBODY. >> Coun. Jones: IF I MAY. I BELIEVE THAT THIS IS SOMETHING THAT THE MAJOR INTENT OF THIS IS TO NOTIFY AND KEEP INFORMED THE NEIGHBORS -- NEAREST NEIGHBORS CLOSEST. RESIDENTIALLO AND COMMERCIAL. I THINK THIS IS A PRACTICE THAT WE THINK THE CITY WOULD BE INTERESTED IN DOING MORE OF BUT I THINK IT ISN'T SOMETHING THAT -- WE JUST NEED TO KEEP THE RESIDENTS AND THE BUSINESS OWNERS IN THE IMMEDIATE AREA AND A LITTLE BIT FURTHER, TO KEEP THEM APPRISED AND GIVE THEM OPPORTUNITY TO GIVE FEEDBACK TO THE MANAGEMENT OF THE SOS. I DON'T THINK PUBLICATION PT AS EFFECTIVE AS NOTICE ON THE GATES BUT ALSO PERSONAL NOTICE TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS AND THE BUSINESSES. >> COUNCIL OR BENTON: MOTION IS TO AMEND THE AMENDMENT. MOVED AND SECONDED TO AMEND THE AMENDMENT TO REQUIRE SOME SORT OF PUBLIC -- IT WAS SECONDED BY COUNCIL GROUT. >> MELENDRES: THE AMENDMENT AT BEFORE YOU STATES NOTICE OF THE PUBLIC MEETING SHALL BE POSTED OUTSIDE OF THE SOS FOR ONE WEEK PRIOR TO THE MEETING TIME. AMENDMENT TO THE AMENDMENT WOULD ADD -- AND ONCE AT LEAST A WEEK IN ADVANCE IN A PUBLICATION OF GENERAL CIRCULATION. >> THAT IS THE AMENDMENT TO THE AMEND. ADDING REQUIREMENT OF PUBLICATION INUI A PUBLICATION OF GENERAL CIRCULATION. ANYC FURTHER DISCUSSIONS? >> Coun. Pena: I'LL ADD TO THAT JUST BECAUSE THERE WAS COMMENTS MADE ABOUT, SO I SAID GENERAL PUBLICATION BECAUSE THERE WAS CONCERN FROM THE DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR PIERCE SAYING IT WOULDR BE DIFFICULT TOC FIND ALL THE RESIDENT AND REACH OUT TO ALL OF THEM SO I COULD CHANGE THE AMENDMENT TO REFLECT THAT YOU HAVE TO REACH OUT TO ALL THOSE RESIDENTS WITHIN 660 FEET BUT I THINK THIS WOULD SERVE AS A SUFFICIENT NOTICE TO TRY TO GET THE WORD OUT RATHER THAN TO GO THE OTHER DIRECTION. THANK YOU. >> COUNCILOR BENTON: ALL RIGHT. WE'LL GO TO THE VOTE ON THE AMENDMENT TO THE AMENDMENT. >> Coun. Jones: MAY WE HAVE A REREADING OF THAT AMENDMENT TO THE AMENDMENT IN. >> MELENDRES: IT WOULD BE AFTER THE WORD TIME ADD COME A AND THEN AT LEAST ONE WEEK IN ADVANCE IN A PUBLICATION OF GENERAL CIRCULATION. >> Coun. Jones: IF I MAY STATE THIS MR. PRESIDENT, IT DEPENDS ON YOUR DEFINITION OF GENERAL CIRCULATION. AGAIN THIS IS PEOPLES HOMES AND LIVING AND I THINK IT MOSTLY AFFECTS THE PEOPLE WHO LIVE IN THAT COMMUNITY. SO, A GENERAL PUBLICATION, WHAT EXACTLY WOULD THAT BE? >> COUNCILOR BENTON: SOMETHING LIKE THE JOURNAL. >> Coun. Jones: I DON'T BELIEVE THAT IS APPROPRIATE. I COULDN'T SUPPORT THIS. I CERTAINLY THINK THAT WE NEED TO GIVE NOTICE OF PUBLIC MEETING AND IF NECESSITY SHOULD BE CHANGED TO THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD. >> COUNCILOR BENTON: THE MOTION ON THE FLOOR IS AS STATED. >> Coun. Fiebelkorn: I AGREE WITH COUNCILOR JONES. I JUST WORRY THAT THIS TYPE OF REQUIREMENT ADDS A PRETTY HEFTY PRICE TAG TO FOLKS OPERATING SAFE OUTDOOR SPACES AS MR. RAEL REMINDED US TODAY, THAT WILL MOST LIKELY BE PAID FOR WITH TAX DOLLARS. I WOULD PREFER TO SEE SOMETHING THAT SAYS THAT YOU ARE GOING TO GET THE WORD OUT THROUGH THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION BUT CERTAINLY NOT REQUIRING AN EXTENSIVE ADA. A D . >> RAEL: I WANTED TO REITERATE COUNCILOR MADE OUR POINT. I THINK IT MIGHT BE MORE IMPORTANT TO NOTIFY THE NEIGHBORHOODS AROUND THE SPACE, THE EXISTING SOS, RATHER >> S DID MS. KEEFE HAVE SOMETHING TO ADD. >> KEEFE. THERE HAD BEEN A QUESTION A FEW MINUTES AGOE IN REGARD TO WHAT A GENERAL CIRCULATION MEANS AND MR. MELENDRES' REFERENCE IS VERY COMMONLY USED WHEN REQUIRING NOTICE, BUT, COUNCIL PRESIDENT BENTON IS CORRECT, IT WOULD REQUIRE A NEWSPAPER LIKE THE JOURNAL OR OTHERS CITY WIDE IS HOW I WOULD INTERPRET THAT LANGUAGE. >> Coun. Pena: THANK YOU. WELL, I WOULD WITHDRAW THE MOTION AND CHANGE IT TO SAY NOTICE OF PUBLIC MEETING BEING POSTED OUTSIDE OF THE SOS FOR ONE WEEK PRIOR TO THE MEETING TIME, AND TO THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORS WITHIN 660 FEET. I DON'T THINK NOTIFYING NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, BECAUSE THEY DON'T HAVEHO THE RESOURCES TO BE ABLE TO NOTIFY THE NEIGHBORS IN THE SURROUNDING COMMUNITY. PUBLIC NOTICE TO THE PEOPLE THAT ARE MOST IMPACTED IS WHAT IS IMPORTANT. I JUST DON'T THINK THAT A SIGN POSED OUTSIDE OF THE SOS IS SUFFER. COUNCILOR BENTON: DO YOU AGREE. >> Coun. Grout: I THINK IT IS IMPORTANT PEOPLE RIGHT AROUND IMMEDIATE AREA ARE NOTIFIED. >> COUNCILOR BENTON: EVERY PROPERTY OWNER WITHIN 660 FEET WOULD HAVE TO HAVE, WHAT, A REGISTERED MAILING? WHAT IS THE MEANS OF NOTIFICATION? I THINK WE ARE REALLY CONFUSING THIS WITH LAND USE NOTIFICATION.E I MEAN -- >> CAN YOU SENDN THEM EMAILS OR PUT A FLIER ON THEIR DOORSTEP. >> COUNCIL OR BENTON: WHAT IF I DON'T GET ONE, WHAT HAPPENS THEN. >> YOU HAVE TO MAKE A BEST EFFORT. >> HOPEFULLY YOUR NEIGHBORS ARE GOING TO REACH OUT TO EACH OTHER TOO. >> COUNCILOR BENTON: I THINK -- I BELIEVE WE HAVE BEAT THIS TO DEATH BUT I UNDERSTAND THAT THE CHANGES. YOU UNDERSTAND THE CHANGE IS THAT THERE WOULD BE -- HOW WOULD THAT READ, M R. MELENDRES, YOU WANT TO HELP US OUT. >> MELENDRES: SO, WAY PUT DOWN HEARING THE MOTION AS STATED WAS TO AMEND THE AMENDMENT SO THAT AFTER THE WORD TIME, WE WOULD ADD A COMMA AND TO SURROUNDING NEIGHBORS WITHIN 660 FEET. >> COUNCILOR BENTON: THAT IS A SHALL AND 660 FEET IS SIMILAR TO PLANNING DEPARTMENT NOTIFICATION OF SOMETHING. COUNCILORS, I THINK WE OUGHT TO VOTE ON THIS. I WANT TO SAY THAT I OPPOSE THIS ENTIRE AMENDMENT MUCH LESS THIS AMENDMENT TO THE AMENDMENT. I THINK WE ARE GOING OFF OUT INTO LEFT FIELD HERE AND WE HAVE ALREADY H WAD THE PREVIOUS LANGUAGE WAS AMENDED TO SAY THAT THEY WILL MEET WITH PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 660 FEET. IN OTHER WORDS THAT SOUNDS LIKE A MEETING WOULD BE OFFERED WITH ANY INDIVIDUAL PERSON DURING THAT TIME WITHIN 660 FEET THAT IS A PROPERTY OWNER. I THINK TO ME THIS ENTIRE AMENDMENT INCLUDING THE AMENDMENT TO THE AMENDMENT IS REDUNDANT. I HAVREE WAITED TO SAY THAT BECAUSE I WANTED THE DEBATE TO GO FORWARD BUT IT CONCERNS ME GREATLY. IF THERE IS NO OTHER DISCUSSION, I WOULD MOVE WE VOTE ON THE AMENDMENT TO THE AMENDMENT. LET'S GO WITH THAT VOTE. >> Councilor Bassan: YES. >> Coun. Davis: NO. >> Coun. Fiebelkorn: NO. >> Coun. Grout: YES. >> Coun. Jones: NO. >> Coun. Lewis: YES. >> Coun. Pena: YES. >> Coun. Sanchez: YES. >> COUNCILOR OR BENTON: NO. >> WE ARE BACK ON THE AMENDMENT AS AMENDED. >> Coun. Jones: I WOULD LIKE TO WITHDRAW A AMENDMENT AS AMENDED. >> COUNCILOR BENTON: SECONDED BY WHOM? COUNCILOR BASSAN ARE YOU IN AGREEMENT WITH WITHDRAWAL. SO, AMENDMENT NO. 12 IS WITHDRAWN. ALL RIGHT. DO WE HAVE ANY OTHERS? WE ARE BACK ON THE BILL AS AMENDED. AND ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? >> Coun. Fiebelkorn: THANK YOU. I JUST WANTED TO VERIFY TWO THINGS WITH THE ATTORNEYS OR WITH MS. STILES. MS. NAVARRO ASKED ABOUT THE CHANGE TO THE LAG THAT SAYS ON SITE AND ASKED ABOUT THE CRIMINAL BACKGROUND BEING A DEFINITE NO, IF YOU WANT TO BE A SAFE OUTDOOR SPACE OPERATOR. IT IS MY UNDERSTANDING BOTH OF THOSE THINGS ARE IN THE IDO NOW, SO, CHANGING THEM HERE WOULD NOT BE RELEVANT BECAUSE THE IDEA IS ALREADY INCLUDING THAT INFORMATION. I JUST WANTED TO VERIFY THAT. >> COUNCILOR, I BELIEVE MS. SCHULTZ IS ON THE CALL AND SHE CAN BETTER ANSWER THAT. >> SHE IS NOT ON THE CALL. MS. KE. FE DID YOU HAVE ANYTHING ON THIS? >> MS. MORRIS ARE YOU AVAILABLE TO ANSWER THE QUESTION ABOUT HOW THE IDO HAS BEEN AMENDED TO DEAL WITH THIS? >> MORRIS: MR. PRESIDENT, COUNCILORS, YES, I AM GOING TO BRING UP THE IDO AND DOUBLE CHECK THAT. >> COUNCIL OR BENTON: COUNCILOR DAVIS WOULD YOU LIKE TO SPEAK. >> Coun. Davis: YOU KNOW I UNDERSTAND WHAT WE ARE DOING HERE AND APPRECIATE THE SPONSOR' INTENT AND HARD WORK BUT I AGREE IN PRINCIPLE WITH ADMINISTRATION WE DON'T HAVE A REAL RUSH OF THESE, WE NEED TO PROVIDE SOME FLEXIBILITY. THERE IS A STRONG APPLICATION PROCESS IN PLACEPP AND WE DO NEED SOME FLEXIBILITY BECAUSE ALLLI THESE SPACES ARE NOT GOING TO BE OPERATED THE SAME. SOME. HAVE CARS, SOME RUN BY CHURCHES, SOME BY NONPROFITS. THERE IS A RANGE OF SERVICES THAT ARE NEEDED DEPENDING ON THE TYPES OF PEOPLE SERVED. AND I REALLY DO THINK I AGREE WITH SOMETHING I THINK I HEARD COUNCILOR LEWIS SAY EARLIER. WE HAVE TO BE GUARDED AGAINST &ING TOMORROW REGULAR LACES AND RACKING UP FEES WHEN WE DON'T NEEDE THEM. SO, I APPRECIATE IT. I OFFERED MY OWN AMENDMENTS IN CASEN THIS PASSES BECAUSE I WANT ITSE TO BE THE BEST IT CAN BE. I DON'T THINK THIS IS NECESSARY AT THIS TIME AND WE ARE GOING TO GET -- CALL IT A SECOND BITE AT THE APPLE. I THINK IT IS SIXTH OR SEVENTH BITE BECAUSE OF THE NEW BILL THAT HAS BEEN BROUGHT UP. WE ARE GOING TO HAVE THESE DEBATES EVERY MONTH FOR A WHILE AND I DON'T THINK IT IS NECESSARY TO ADD MORE RULES TO THE APPLICATION PROCESSES PEGSLY WITH THE EXISTING OR PENDING SPACES ALREADY UNDER DEVELOPMENT AND READY TO GO. I'LL BE OPPOSING THE LEGISLATION BILL AS IT STAND AS AMENDED. >> NORRIS: I BELIEVE TWO SECTIONS ONE WAS ABOUT ON SITE SERVICES, THAT IS A REQUIREMENT OF THE IDO, SECTION 4-3G8I WHICH REQUIRES THATUI EACH SAFE OUTDOOR SPACE SHALL OFFER SUPPORT FACILITIES TO ITS OCCUPANTS. THE REQUIREMENTS ABOUT THE BACKGROUND CRIMINAL BACKGROUND, THAT IS NOT A PART OF THE IDO. THERE IS A SECTION THAT NO REGISTERED -- NO PERSON WHO IS A REGISTERED SEX OFFENDER SHALL BE ALLOWED TO STAY IN SAFE OUTDOOR SPACE BUT ANYTHING IN THE IDO BUT ABOUT CRIMINAL BACKGROUNDS. >> COUNCILOR BENTON: ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? WE WILL BE TAKING A SHORT BREAK. IT IS 8:00 AND WE HAVE NOT HAD A BREAK. SO EVERYBODY CAN NURSE THEMSELVES FOR 15 OR 20 MINUTES, NO MORE. WE ARE BACK ON THE BILL AS AMENDED. MULTIPLE TIMES HERE. I DON'T SEE FURTHER DISCUSSION AND GO TO THE SPONSORS TO CLOSE. JONES JOBS THANK YOU. URGE YOUR SUPPORT. >> Coun. Jones: THANK YOU MR. PRESIDENT. URGE YOUR SUPPORT. >> Coun. Sanchez: THANK YOU. BASED ON WHAT WE ARE DOING HERE IS, YOU KNOW, I WAS NEVER FOR THE CAMPMENTS BUT WE HAVE THEM AND SAFETY IS OF THE UTMOST TO THE RESIDENTS AND BUSINESS OWNERS AND OCCUPANTS OF THE SOS AND ALSO THE PERSONS OPERATING THE SOS. INTENT OF THIS BILL IS TO MAKE SURE THAT THESE INDIVIDUALS ARE SAFE AND MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE DOING WHAT IS RIGHT BY THEM. IF WE DON'T HAVE ANYTHING TO GO ON, WE ARE GOING TO HAVE A ROUGH TIME TRYING TO CATCH UP ON THIS. THE REASON WE WANT A PERMITTING PROCESS IS TO ALSO MAKE SURE THAT EACH INDIVIDUAL KNOWS AND EACH INDIVIDUAL WHO IS GETTING OR DOING THIS, KNOWS WHATHI THE APPLICATIONS ARE. THROUGHOUT MY CAREER AS A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER, YOU HAVE TO SET THE EXPECTATIONS IN REFERENCE TO PEOPLE KEEP THE FAITH AND PEOPLE ARE HOUSED PROPERLY WITH DIGNITY AND RESPECTS. THAT IS THE GOAL. THE GOAL IS THE SAFETY OF THE COMMUNITY. THE GOAL IS THE SAFETY OF THE INDIVIDUALS THEREIN AND SAFETIVITY PERSONS WHO ARE OPERATING. THAT IS THE INTENT. SO I URGE EVERYONE'S SUPPORT TO MAKE SURE WE HAVE SOMETHING TO WORK WITH HERE, A WAY TO MAKE SURE THAT EVERYONE IS SAFE. >> COUNCIL OR BENTON: WE GO TO A VOTE ON THE BILL AS AMENDED. >> Councilor Bassan: YES. >> Coun. Davis: NO. >> Coun. Fiebelkorn: YES. >> Coun. Grout: YES. >> Coun. Jones: YES. >> Coun. Lewis: NO. >> Coun. Pena: YES. >> Coun. Sanchez: YES. COUNCILOR BENTON: NO. THAT PASSES ON 6-3 VOTE. >> COUNCIL OR BENTON: V ALL RIGHT. DOES 20 MINUTES SOUND OKAY TO JUMP AWAY. WE'LL BE BACK IN 20 MINUTES. (COUNCIL IN RECESS) 9:40:00 P.M.)URNED ATTING ISAD