>>COUN. PEÑA: GOOD EVENING, EVERYONE. I'D LIKE TO CALL THIS -- ONE SECOND. I'D LIKE TO CALL THIS 5th MEETING OF THE 27th COUNCILAL TO ORDER. ALL COUNCILORS ARE PRESENT. COUNCILOR LEWIS SHOULD BE HERE SHORTLY. NEXT WE HAVE A MOMENT OF SILENCE FOLLOWED BY THE PLEDGE. IF YOU CAN JOIN US. IN ENGLISH AND SPANISH. [ INAUDIBLE ]. >>COUN. PEÑA: THANK YOU. VICE PRESIDENT. >>COUN. CHAMPINE: THANK YOU, MADAM PRESIDENT. CIVIC PLAZA PARKING PASSES ARE PROVIDED FOR MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC. YOU CAN OBTAIN FROM THE COUNCIL STAFF NEAR THE CHAMBER ENTRANCE. MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC HAVE THE ABILITY VIEW THIS THROUGH FOUR PLATFORMS, GOVTV, CHANNEL 16. GOVTV WEBSITE, YOUTUBE AND ZOOM. THE LEAVE STREAMS CAN BE ACCESSED FROM MOST SMART PHONES, TABLETS AND COMPUTERS. THIS MEETING IS CLOSED CAPTIONED AND YOU MAY ENABLE THE SERVICES AT THIS TIME. THE VIDEO RECORDING OF THIS AND ALL PAST COUNCIL MEETINGS WILL REMAIN AVAILABLE ON THE CITY COUNCIL WEBSITE. COUNCIL STAFF IS AVAILABLE VIA TELEPHONE IF YOU NEED HELP FINDING THE VIDEOS ONLINE. CALL 505-768-3100 FOR ASSISTANCE DURING BUSINESS HOURS MONDAY THROUGH FRIDAY 8 A.M. TO 5 P.M. THE COUNCIL WILL TAKE A BREAK AT 7:00 P.M. IF NEEDED. WE WANT TONIGHT'S MEETING TO BE AS CIVIL AND RESPECTFUL AS POSSIBLE. NO PERSONAL ATTACKS, AND PLEASE DO NOT APPLAUD OR SNAP OR ANY OTHER OUTBURSTS DURING THE MEETING. THE PRESIDENT WILL PROVIDE ONE WARNING TO ANYONE CAUSING A DISRUPTION. UPON THE SECOND OR CONTINUOUS DISRUPTION THAT INDIVIDUAL WILL BE ASKED TO LEAVE THE CHAMBERS AND IF NECESSARY SECURITY WILL BE ASKED TO ESCOURT THAT PERSON OUT OF THE CHAMBERS. SUCH REMOVAL FROM THE CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS WILL BE EFFECTIVE FOR THE REMAINDER OF THE MEETING. IF CONTINUED DISRUPTIONS OCCUR THE PRESIDENT MAY RECESS THE MEETING UNTIL ORDER IS RESTORED AND IF NECESSARY MAY CLEAR THE CHAMBERS OF PERSONS PARTICIPATING IN THAT DISTURBANCE. THE MEETING WITH WILL GO SMOOTHER IF WE'RE RESPECTFUL OF ONE ANOTHER. MADAM PRESIDENT. >>COUN. PEÑA: THANK YOU, MR. VICE PRESIDENT. DUE TO THE NUMBER OF INDIVIDUALS WHO HAVE SIGNED UP TO PROVIDE PUBLIC COMMENT, THE ALLOTTED SPEAKING TIME PER INDIVIDUAL WILL BE REDUCED TO ONE MINUTE. THIS ADJUSTMENT IS NECESSARY TO ENSURE THAT ALL REGISTERED SPEAKERS ARE PROVIDED AN OPPORTUNITY TO ADDRESS THIS BODY WITHIN THE SCHEDULED MEETING TIME. A TIMER WILL BE UTILIZED TO MAINTAIN FIRENESS AND CONSISTENCY. SPEAKERS WILL BE ASKED TO CONCLUDE REMARKS PROMPTLY ONCE THE ONE-MINUTE LIMIT HAS BEEN REACHED. THE LAST COUPLE MEETINGS HAVE BEEN NOTICED ON THE COUNCIL AGENDA. IT IS AT THE DISCRETION OF THE COUNCIL PRESIDENT TO DETERMINE THE TIME LIMIT FOR PUBLIC COMMENT. WITH THE MAXIMUM OF TWO MINUTES. DEPENDENT UPON THE NUMBER OF PUBLIC COMMENTS SIGN UP, IF MORE THAN 50 INDIVIDUALS SIGN UP TO SPEAK THE TIME LIMIT WILL LIKELY BE LESS THE TWO MINUTES. ALL TIME LIMITS WILL BE STRICTLY ENFORCED. WE APPRECIATE YOUR UNDERSTANDING COOPERATION. >>COUN. FIEBELKORN: I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO OVERRULE THE DECISION OF THE PRESIDENT AND ALLOW PEOPLE TWO MINUTES TO SPEAK. >>COUN. PEÑA: THERE'S A MOTION, AND A SECOND TO ALLOW FOR THE TWO MINUTES MAXIMUM TIME. IF THERE'S A MOTION, AND A SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY YES AND RAISE YOUR HAND. OPPOSED NO. THAT'S 4-4. THAT MOTION FAILS. THANK YOU. WE'RE BACK ON ITEM NUMBER FOUR. THIS IS VICE PRESIDENT CHAMPINE. >>COUN. CHAMPINE: THANK YOU, MADAM PRESIDENT. ADMINISTRATION QUESTION AND ANSWER PERIOD. COUNCILORS WISHING TO ASK QUESTIONS HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO DO SO. TO ENSURE ALL COUNCILORS HAVE THE ABILITY TO PARTICIPATE WE ASK THAT YOU HAVE QUESTIONS TO ONE DIRECTOR UNTIL THE COUNCILORS HAVE THE CHANCE TO ASK THE QUESTION. AFTER 5:00 P.M. THE QUESTION MAY BE DIRECTED TO THE ADMINISTRATION AT THAT TIME. ANY QUESTION FOR THE ADMINISTRATION? COUNCILOR GROUT. >>COUN. GROUT: THANK YOU, MR. VICE PRESIDENT. I HAVE A QUESTION FOR DIRECTOR TURNER. WITH DMD. HI DIRECTOR. THANKS FOR BEING HERE TODAY. YOU LOOK NICE. I WANTED TO FIND OUT, WHAT'S THE SCHEDULE FOR STREET MAINTENANCE FOR THE STREET SWEEPERS? FOR THE MAIN STREET. WHAT IS THE SCHEDULE? >> MADAM PRESIDENT, COUNCILOR GROUT, WE TRY TO SWEEP EVERY STREET IN THE CITY APPROXIMATELY TWO TIMES A YEAR. BUT SOME STREETS ARE SWEPT THAT HAVE A HIGHER NEED. THEY'RE SWEPT MORE FREQUENTLY. AND ALSO SWEEP FOR SPECIAL EVENTS SUCH AS THE TWINKLE LIGHT PARADE. WE DON'T HAVE EVERY MONDAY WE SWEEP SAN MATEO FIVE TIMES. WE DON'T HAVE IT LIKE THAT. WE TRY TO COVER THE CITY. WE SWEEP IN ZONES ON THE EAST AND WEST SIDE. AGAIN, WE DON'T HAVE -- YOU CAN EXPECT THE STREETS IN YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD TO BE SWEPT NOVEMBER 1st, WE DON'T HAVE TAT. SDMRG -- >>COUN. GROUT: I UNDERSTAND. YOU MENTIONED SOMETHING ABOUT ZONES, ARE THEY OUT -- WERE THEY OUT TODAY? IT WAS WINDY. THAT MIGHT HAVE NOT BEEN A GOOD DAY. ARE THEY OUT WEEKLY? DO WE SEE THEM WEEKLY? >> MADAM PRESIDENT, COUNCILOR GROUT, OUR SWEEPERS ARE OUT DAILY. THEY'RE OUT EVERY WORKING DAY. >>COUN. GROUT: OKAY. ALL RIGHT. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >>COUN. CHAMPINE: COUNCILOR GROUT. COUNCILOR BACA HAS A FOLLOW UP QUESTION. DO YOU MIND IF HE STEPS IN? >>COUN. GROUT: GO AHEAD. >>COUN. BACA: THANK YOU, MADAM PRESIDENT. DIRECTOR TURNER, JUST TO FOLLOW UP ON THAT. WE'RE HAVING THE 100-YEAR ANNIVERSARY WE'RE STARTING TO GET A LOT OF TOURISTS. I'M WONDERING IF IN OUR AREAS WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A WHOLE LOT MORE PEOPLE VISITING, IF WE COULDN'T SET UP A CONSISTENT SCHEDULE OF STREET CLEANING AND SIDEWALK CLEANING. WE ARE DOING A LOT TO PROMOTE ROUTE 66. I CAN SAY FOR CERTAIN DOWNTOWN IS -- LUCKILY IT RAINED THE OTHER DAY. IT GOT A LITTLE BIT CLEANED UP. THAT SHOULDN'T BE WHY IT'S CLEANED UP. >> MADAM PRESIDENT, COUNCILOR BACA, I WOULD DEFINE THE ROUTE 66 CENTENNIAL AS A SPECIAL EVENT. I SHOULD HAVE HIGHLIGHTED THAT WE HAVE INCREASED SWEEPING ON ALL 18 MILES OF ROUTE 66, GIVEN THAT WE ARE IN THE CENTENNIAL YEAR. AND ON DOWNTOWN, WE HAVE IN THE PAST PARTICULARLY WHEN THERE'S EVENTS GOING ON, WE DO SWEEP ON FRIDAYS BEFORE AND WE'LL GIVE SPECIAL ATTENTION THE FOLLOWING WEEK IF WE KNOW THERE WERE TENS OF THOUSANDS PEOPLE ATTENDING A CONFERENCE. WE DO RESPOND WHEN WE GET REQUESTS. >>COUN. BACA: THANK YOU. WE HAVE A SNOW EVENT, WE HAVE ICE ON THE ROAD. PROBABLY WENT THREE WEEKS WITH THE RAIN. I ACTUALLY GOT LOT OF CALLS ON THAT. NOT TO SAY OUR GUYS AREN'T DOING A GOOD JOB, I KNOW THEY'RE OUT THERE DOING THE WORK. ESPECIALLY IN AN AREA WHERE WE KNOW THERE'S GOING TO BE MORE PEOPLE AND MORE TRAFFIC. A LITTLE MORE CONSISTENCY BECAUSE YOU CAN DEFINITELY SEE IT'S NOT BEING CLEANED. THEY MAY ALSO BE OVERWOMANED. I RECOGNIZE THAT AS WELL. THANK YOU. >>COUN. CHAMPINE: COUNCILOR ROGERS. >>COUN. ROGERS: THANK YOU, MR. VICE PRESIDENT. MY QUESTION FOR PARKING. I DON'T KNOW IF ANYONE FROM PARKING IS HERE. I'VE BEEN RECEIVING AN IMMENSE AMOUNT OF EMAILS ABOUT OUR NEW PARKING STICK. SPECIFICALLY AROUND MONTE VISTA ELEMENTARY SCHOOL. I HAVE QUESTIONS ABOUT HOW DID WE WORK WITH APS TO DECIDE WHERE TO PUT THEM AROUND SCHOOLS? THE FEEDBACK I'M GETTING IS IT'S IMPEDING WHERE PARENTS ARE PICKING UP IN THE PICK-UP LINE. I JUST WANTED TO ASK THAT. I SENT IT TO YOUR DEPARTMENT EARLIER TODAY. >> COUNCIL PRESIDENT, COUNCILOR ROGERS, I WILL FIND OUT WHAT CONVERSATIONS WERE HAD WITH APS IN DETERMINING WHAT'S PLACED NEAR THE SCHOOL. WE'LL GET THAT BACK TO YOUR OFFICE. >>COUN. ROGERS: JUST A COUPLE FOLLOW UP QUESTIONS. ARE THOSE AROUND THE SCHOOLS ALREADY TURNED ON? LIKE THEY'RE ACTIVELY GIVING TICKETS RIGHT NOW? >> COUNCIL PRESIDENT, COUNCILOR ROGERS, THERE IS A 30-DAY GRACE PERIOD FOR CITATION. WE'RE IN THE GRACE PERIOD. I'LL GIVE YOU THE DATE WHEN WE GO INTO ENFORCEMENT AND CITATIONS WILL BE ISSUED. WE'LL GET THAT INFORMATION TO YOUR OFFICE. >>COUN. ROGERS: THE BIG QUESTION IS HOW MUCH TIME DO THEY HAVE? WHAT ARE THEY GOING TO BE SET TO? >> COUNCIL PRESIDENT, COUNCILOR ROGERS, AS I UNDERSTAND IT, ABOUT 90 SECONDS. >>COUN. ROGERS: # 90 SECONDS. I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO LOOK AT THE SCHOOLS. I HAVE AN 8-YEAR-OLD -- I HOPE THEY'RE NOT WATCHING RIGHT NOW. I HAVE A WONDERFUL 8-YEAR-OLD WHO UNFORTUNATELY I HAVE TO SIT IN THE PARENT PICKUP LINES FOR QUITE SOME TIME. 30 MINUTES OR MORE. I WOULD BE GETTING TICKETS LEFT AND RIGHT. I WANT TO BE THOUGHTFUL ABOUT APS WHERE WE'RE PUTTING THOSE AND WHERE THE PARENTS HAVE TO LINE UP TO PICK UP THEIR KIDS. >> COUNCIL PRESIDENT, COUNCILOR ROGERS, WE'LL GET THAT INFORMATION TO YOUR OFFICE QUICKLY. >>COUN. ROGERS: THANK YOU. I SENT YOU ALL THE EMAILS. >>COUN. CHAMPINE: COUNCILOR BACA. >>COUN. BACA: THANK YOU, COUNCILOR CHAMPINE. DR. SENGEL, LAST COUNCIL I ASKED ABOUT AN UPDATE ON THE NOISE CAMERAS. DIRECTOR LEECH DID REACH OUT TO SET UP A MEETING. UNFORTUNATELY I WASN'T ABLE TO FIND A TIME. LEGISLATIVE SESSION AND ALL. I WOULD LIKE TO SET A TIME. AT LEAST SEND ME AN EMAIL UPDATE. >> COUNCILOR BACA, I SAW A MEMO THIS MORNING. I DIDN'T GET AN OPPORTUNITY TO READ IT ALL TODAY. MULTIPLE DEPARTMENTS PARTICIPATED IN ENSURING THEY PROVIDED THAT. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE I READ THROUGH IT AND WE'LL BE ABLE TO PROVIDE THAT TO YOU IN WRITING AS WELL AS PROBABLY HAVE A FOLLOW-UP MEETING. I THINK THERE'S VALUE IN THAT MEETING. RECOGNIZING THAT MAYBE THURSDAY WILL OPEN UP AGAIN. >>COUN. CHAMPINE: COUNCILOR TELLES. >>COUN. TELLES: I'M SORRY. THANK YOU. MADAM PRESIDENT, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR PLANNING DIRECTOR BARELA. >> GOOD EVENING, COUNCIL PRESIDENT, COUNCILOR TELLES, FIRST TIME I'VE SPOKEN WITH YOU. IT'S NICE TO MEET YOU. >>COUN. TELLES: NICE TO MEET YOU TOO. I APPRECIATE IT. I HAVE A QUESTION REGARDING THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT'S -- HOW DO YOU MONITOR AND ENFORCE VIOLATIONS ON ANY LOCAL STATE OR FEDERAL REGULATION OR LAW FROM THE BUSINESS LICENSE REQUIREMENT? >> COUNCIL PRESIDENT, COUNCILOR TELLES, WE HAD A GRACE PERIOD, WHICH JUST EXPIRED IN JANUARY ON THE BUSINESS LICENSES. WE SHIFTED FROM BUSINESS REGISTRATION TO LICENSES JULY 1st OF LAST YEAR. WE HAVE NOT HAD ANY SCENARIOS COME UP AS OF YET WHERE SOMEBODY HAS BEEN DEEMED TO HAVE BEEN FOUND IN VIOLATION OF A LOCAL, STATE OR FEDERAL ORDINANCE THAT WOULD IMPLICATE ACTION AGAINST BUSINESS LICENSE. WE DON'T HAVE ANYTHING COME UP AS OF YET. WHEN SOMETHING WERE TO UP, WE WOULD FOLLOW OUR NORMAL CIVIL PROCESS WHICH WE WOULD PROVIDE NOTICE TO THEM. WE WOULD GIVE THEM OPPORTUNITY TO BE HEARD AND TO EXPLAIN THEIR SIDE AND THEN PROCEED MOST LIKELY TO A HEARING IN FRONT OF AN INDEPENDENT HEARING OFFICER THROUGH ADMINISTRATIVE PROCESS LIKE WE DO WITH OTHER CIVIL ENFORCEMENT MATTERS. >>COUN. TELLES: MADAM PRESIDENT, LAST QUESTION. DO YOU HAVE ANY DOCUMENTED SOPs ON THAT PROCESS? >> I AM SURE THAT WE DO HAVE A DOCUMENTED SOP ON THAT. WE ENFORCE THE BUSINESSING LICENSING PROCESS. >>COUN. TELLES: CAN YOU SEND ME A COPY? >> MADAM PRESIDENT, COUNCILOR, YES. I'LL MAKE SURE THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR KAISER SENDS YOU THE SOP. >>COUN. TELLES: THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MADAM PRESIDENT. >>COUN. CHAMPINE: COUNCILOR GROUT. >>COUN. GROUT: THANK YOU, MR. VICE PRESIDENT. I HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT -- WHO ENFORCES HANDICAPPED PARKING SIGNAGE IN BUSINESS PARKING LOTS? >> COUNCILOR GROUT, THAT WOULD MOST LIKELY GO THE PARKING DIVISION. IT WOULD NOT BE CODE ENFORCEMENT. >>COUN. GROUT: I NEED TO SPEAK TO SOMEBODY IN THE PARKING DIVISION. THANK YOU. >> YOU'RE WELCOME. >>COUN. GROUT: HI, THERE. WHO ENFORCES HANDICAPPED PARKING SIGNAGE IN BUSINESS PARKING LOTS? >> COUNCILOR GROUT, PARKING ENFORCEMENT ENFORCES. >>COUN. GROUT: OKAY. ARE BUSINESSES REQUIRED TO HAVE VERTICAL SIGNS ON A POST? >> COUNCILOR GROUT, I WOULD HAVE TO CHECK THE ADO COMPLIANCE REQUIREMENT. EACH, AS FAR AS I KNOW, EACH PARKING REQUIREMENT IS DIFFERENT DEPENDING ON THE SPACES AS TO WHAT IT'S GOING TO BE EXPECTED FOR THAT. WHAT WE CAN DO IS FIND OUT WHAT THOSE EXPECTATIONS CONTINGENT ON THE SPECIFIC APPLICATION. IF WE CAN EXCHANGE MORE INFORMATION ON THAT I CAN GET YOU THE ANSWER TO WHETHER A VERTICAL SIGNED IS REQUIRED OR REQUIRED PAINTED IN THE ACTUAL SPACE BECAUSE IT'S CONTINGENT ON THE APPLICATION. >>COUN. GROUT: OKAY. SOME CAN HAVE JUST THE PAINTED SPACES, SOME CAN HAVE A VERTICAL SIGN ALSO? >> I DON'T KNOW. >>COUN. GROUT: OKAY. WHO WOULD A CITIZEN CALL TO REPORT IMPROPER SIGNAGE? >> WE WOULD ENCOURAGE ALL CITIZENS TO CALL 311 AND WE'RE HAPPY TO WALK THEM THROUGH AND GET THE ANSWERS THEY NEED. >>COUN. GROUT: THANK YOU. >>COUN. CHAMPINE: COUNCILORS, WE HAVE 14 MINUTES. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE ADMINISTRATION? MADAM PRESIDENT, THERE ARE NONE. >>COUN. PEÑA: THANK YOU, MR. VICE PRESIDENT. WE'RE ON TO PROCLAMATIONS AND PRESENTATIONS. COUNCILOR FIEBELKORN. >>COUN. FIEBELKORN: THANK YOU, MADAM PRESIDENT. WE JUST RECENTLY UNANIMOUSLY UPDATED OUR TRAFFIC CODE TO BETTER PROTECT VULNERABLE ROAD USERS. PART OF THAT PACKAGE OF BILLS WAS A REQUIREMENT FOR THE ADMINISTRATION TO WORK ON A COMPREHENSIVE EDUCATION AND OUTREACH CAMPAIGN. AND THEY ARE DOING IT REALLY WELL. SO, DIRECTOR TURNER IS HERE TODAY TO GIVE US A PRESENTATION ON HOW THAT PROGRAM -- OUTREACH PROGRAM IS DEVELOPING AND I THINK THEY ACTUALLY HAD SOME FILMING THAT HAPPENED LAST WEEK. SHE'LL TELL ABOUT THAT AS WELL. >> MADAM PRESIDENT, COUNCILORS, COUNCILOR FIEBELKORN, THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO PROVIDE MY SECOND TRAFFIC SAFETY EDUCATIONAL CAMPAIGN UPDATE. JUST TO BRIEFLY HIGHLIGHT SOME KEY POINTS. EVERYONE IS REMINDED OF WHAT THE TRAFFIC CODE CHANGES DID. DRIVERS SHALL STOP FOR EVERYONE USING MARKED OR UNMARKED CROSSWALKS. VULNERABLE ROAD USERS HAVE THE RESPONSIBILITIES TO CROSS SAFELY. AND THE RULES PROVIDED CLEAR RULE FOR HAWK SIGNALS. I AM ASKED WHAT IS A HAWK SIGNAL AND WHAT DO I DO? PART OF MY CAMPAIGN WILL INCLUDE THE DOCUMENT YOU SEE BEFORE YOU. THE PURPOSE IS ALLOW VULNERABLE ROAD USERS TO CROSS HIGH TRAFFIC ROAD SAFELY. IT HAS RULES WHICH IS STOP, PUSH THE BUTTON, WAIT AND CROSS WHEN GIVEN THE OPPORTUNITY. FOR DRIVERS YOU SHOULD ALWAYS LOOK FOR VULNERABLE ROAD USERS IN CROSSWALKS. IF YOU SEE A YELLOW FLASHING LIGHT, SO DOWN. A SOLID YELLOW LIGHT, PREPARE TO STOP. A SOLID RED, STOP. AND FLASHING RED IS STOP AND PROCEED WHEN THE CROSSWALK IS CLEAR. TURNING TO EDUCATIONAL CAMPAIGN, WE FINALIZED BRANDING. AS COUNCILOR FIEBELKORN MENTIONED, WE'VE WORKED WITH OUR CONSULTANTS ON FILMING TWO CAMPAIGN VIDEOS WHICH WERE FILMED IN THE LAST COUPLE WEEKS. WE WORKED ON DRAFTS OF BILLBOARDS. WE WORKED WITH THREE MESSAGING OPPORTUNITIES PARTICIPATED AND SCHEDULED MORE COMMUNITY OUTREACH. AND WE ALSO COMMENTED ON BEFORE THE STATE LEGISLATURE ON STATE LAW CHANGES TO REQUIRE VULNERABLE ROAD USER DRIVERER EDUCATION, PASSED THE SENATE, PASSED THE HOUSE COMMITTEE. RIGHT NOW, I'M VERY EXCITED THAT IT'S PENDING THIRD READING BEFORE THE HOUSE. THAT'S BEEN VERY SUCCESSFUL. TURNING TO THE CAMPAIGN. HERE IT IS AGAIN. STOP FOR EVERYONE. IT'S THE LAW. AND I JUST WANTED TO SHOW SOME STILLS. THIS IS A SNEAK PEEK OF SOME OF THE THINGS WE'VE FILMED. HIGHLIGHTING VULNERABLE ROAD USERS CROSSING SAFELY AND DRIVER STOPPING AND MAKING EYE CONTACT WITH THEM. HERE'S THE END OF ONE OF OUR VIDEOS. SNEAK PEEK. AND NEXT STEPS WILL BE LAUNCHING OUR VIDEOS AT A RED CARPET EVENT. WE'LL INVITE ALL OF YOU TO ATTEND. WE'LL ROLL OUT A WEBSITE TO THE CAMPAIGN. FINALIZING BILLBOARDS AND THE ONE-PAGER AND WE'LL ATTACH IT WITH THE SPEED SAMARA CITATIONS. AND DEVELOPING A WEBINAR. WITH THAT, I STAND FOR QUESTIONS. >>COUN. PEÑA: ANY QUESTIONS? THANK YOU SO MUCH. APPRECIATE THE PRESENTATION. THANK YOU. NOW WE'RE ON TO COUNCILOR ROGERS, PRESENTATION FROM JODY ESQUIBEL, DIRECTOR OF ALBUQUERQUE COMMUNITY SAFETY. >>COUN. ROGERS: I'D LIKE TO CALL OUR DIRECTOR OF ACS. MEGAN ASOON, ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR. AND JACKLEN BECK. SENIOR PROGRAM ASSOCIATE. REDEFINING PUBLIC SAFETY INITIATIVES. WHO WILL PROVIDE AN UPDATE ON THEIR WORK WITH ACS. I'M HONORED TO HAVE THEM. THEY'RE DOING A SITE VISIT WITH ACS. THEY HELP WITH RESEARCH ON CHANGING THE LANDSCAPE OF PUBLIC SAFETY. I'M REALLY HONORED TO HAVE THEM HERE WITH US TODAY. JODY WILL START OFF. >> COUNCIL PRESIDENT, COUNCILORS, AS ALWAYS IT'S AN HONOR TO COME SPEAK WITH YOU AND THE COMMUNITY ABOUT THE ALBUQUERQUE COMMUNITY SAFETY DEPARTMENT. AND AN AMAZING TO BE ABLE TO HIGHLIGHT OUR PARTNERSHIP WITH THE VEER INSTITUTE. I WON'T TAKE MUCH TIME. THEY'RE THE EXPERTS TO SHARE. THEY'RE DOING A SITE VISIT. THEY'LL BE HERE FOR THE WEEK. THANKFUL FOR THEM TO SPEAK WITH YOU ALL. AND HOPEFULLY GIVE A LITTLE INSIGHT ON A NATIONAL LEVEL FOR THE DEPARTMENT. >> THANK YOU, JODY. THANK YOU, MADAM PRESIDENT, COUNCIL MEMBERS. THANKS, JODY AND THE ACS TEAM, FOR HOSTING US THIS WEEK. WE'RE THANKFUL FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK IN FRONT OF YOU ALL ABOUT THE GROWING NATIONWIDE INVESTMENT IN COMMUNITY-BASED SAFETY STRATEGIES. IN PARTICULAR, OUR PARTNERSHIP WITH ACS AS THEY WORK TO DELIVER PUBLIC SAFETY SERVICES THAT MEET THE NEEDS OF THE PEOPLE OF ALBUQUERQUE. BEFORE WE GET STARTED, I WANT TO TAKE A MOMENT TO PRODUCE OURSELVES. THE VART INSTITUTE OF JUSTICE IS A 65-YEAR-OLD NATIONAL POLICY AND RESEARCH ORGANIZATION. OUR TEAM IS REDEFINING PUBLIC SAFETY INITIATIVES FOCUSES ON BUILDING AND SUSTAINING COMMUNITY CENTER SOLUTIONS TO PUBLIC SAFETY. WE ACT AS A PRO BONO RESOURCE TO GOVERNMENT AND COMMUNITY LEADERS. WE COLLABORATE WITH JURISDICTIONS ACROSS THE COUNTRY TO DEVELOP AND EXPAND PUBLIC SAFETY INSTITUTIONS, LIKE ALBUQUERQUE'S COMMUNITY SAFETY DEPARTMENT. I'M JOINED BY COLLEAGUE JACKSSON BECK AND FRANK WATCHAL. THIS IS AN EXCITING AND INSPIRING MOMENT FOR THIS WORK. HISTORIC INVESTMENTS IN COMMUNITY-BASED SAFETY STRATEGIES HAVE A CONTRIBUTED TO AN UNPRECEDENTED DECLINE IN CRIME. IN NEW YORK, THE WINNER PROMISED TO SET UP A COMMUNITY SAFETY DEPARTMENT LIKE YOURS IN ALBUQUERQUE. ALBUQUERQUE IS SETTING THE STANDARD ON STRUCTURAL CHANGE REQUIRED FOR EFFECTIVE PUBLIC SAFETY. WE CELEBRATE THIS PROGRESS AND WE ALSO KNOW THERE'S MORE WORK TO BE DONE. TWO KEY COMMUNITY-BASED PUBLIC SAFETY STRATEGIES THAT ARE DRIVING NATIONAL PROGRESS ARE ALTERNATIVE RESPONSE AND VIOLENCE PREVENTION AND INTERVENTION. WHAT MAKES ALBUQUERQUE UNIQUE AND A MODFRL THE -- MODELAL FOR THE NATION IS THESE ARE HOUSED IN A SINGLE CABINET LEVEL DEPARTMENT. CITIES ACROSS THE COUNTRY ARE LOOKING TO YOU AS AN EXAMPLE OF HOW TO MANAGE ALTERNATIVE RESPONSE AND VIOLENCE INTERVENTION UNDER ONE ROOF. DEMONSTRATING A COMPREHENSIVE APPROACH TO PUBLIC SAFETY THAT REDUCES OVERRELIANCE ON LAW ENFORCEMENT. ALTERNATIVE RESPONSE IS A PRACTICAL WAY TO -- SHOULD I PAUSE FOR THIS? >>COUN. ROGERS: IS IT OKAY IF SHE FINISHED? >> WE HAVE A FEW MORE SLIDES. >>COUN. PEÑA: OKAY. >>COUN. ROGERS: THANK YOU, MADAM PRESIDENT. >> ACROSS THE COUNTRY CITIES ARE DEPLOYED TRAINED TEAMS TO RESPOND TO NON-VIOLENCE SITUATIONS INVOLVING HEALTH OR SOCIAL NEEDS. ACS'S SUCCESS INSPIRED MANY OTHER CITIES TO FOLLOW SUIT INCLUDING RICHMOND, CALIFORNIA. THEY'RE LAUNCHING AN ALTERNATIVE RESPONSE PROGRAM AND HAVE LOOKED TO ACS AS A MODEL FOR HOW TO IMPLEMENT IT EFFECTIVELY. THE SECOND APPROACH IS VIOLENCE PREVENTION AND INTERVENTION. WHEN CITIES INVEST IN TARGETED VIOLENCE INTERVENTION SERVICES, THE RETURNS ARE NOT ONLY SUBSTANTIAL ECONOMIC SAVINGS BUT MORE IMPORTANTLY HUMAN LIVES SAVED. IN ALBUQUERQUE, ACS IS VIOLENCE INTERVENTION PROGRAM HAS A 92.3% SUCCESS RATE OF PARTICIPANTS AVOIDING FURTHER INVOLVEMENT IN VIOLENT CRIME. OUR PARTNERSHIP WITH ACS BEGAN IN 2023 WITH A CLEAR GOAL, ACS EXPANDS SERVICES, WE'RE HELPING DEPARTMENTS STRENGTHEN INTERNAL SYSTEMS TO GROW TO REACH COMMUNITY, OPERATE EFFICIENTLY AND SUSTAIN SERVICES. OUR WORK WITH ACS FOCUSES ON UNDERSTANDING HOW THEIR PROGRAMS OPERATE, HOW SERVICES ARE DELIVERED, AND HOW THEY'RE APPROACHED TO SIMILAR INITIATIVES ACROSS THE COUNTRY. WE HAVE BEEN REVIEWING INFORMATION ACS COLLECTS AND LEARNING FROM STAFF ABOUT HOW THEY DOCUMENT AND COMMUNICATE ABOUT THEIR WORK. THIS HELPS US UNDERSTAND THEIR CURRENT PROCESSES AND IDENTIFY OPPORTUNITIES TO FURTHER HIGHLIGHT THEIR IMPACT. INVESTMENT IN DEPARTMENTS LIKE ACS ARE NOT ABSTRACT. THEY TRANSLATE INTO MEASURABLE OUTCOMES WITH CALLS ANSWERED, PEOPLE HOUSED, YOUTH ENGAGED, CRISIS PREVENTED, AND LIVES SAVED. ALBUQUERQUE IS NOT ONLY PART OF THE TREND, IT'S HELPING SET IT. THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO PRESENT. >>COUN. PEÑA: THANK YOU. ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS? THANK YOU. WE ARE NOW ON TO THE JOURNAL. I MOVE APPROVAL OF THE FEBRUARY 2nd JOURNAL. THERE'S A MOTION, AND SECOND BY COUNCILOR GROUT. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY YES AND RAISE YOUR HAND. AND IF YOU CAN KEEP YOUR HAND UP UNTIL WE'RE ABLE TO -- THAT PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. THANK YOU. WE ARE NOW ON TO -- I MOVE APPROVAL OF THE FEBRUARY 9th JOURNAL. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY YES AND RAISE YOUR HAND. OPPOSED, SAME MOTION. MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. WE ARE NOW ON TO COMMUNICATIONS AND INTRODUCTIONS. IS THERE -- ANY CHANGES TO THE LETTER OF INTRODUCTION? I MOVE THE RULES BE SUSPENDED FOR THE PURPOSE OF PULLING EC-26-17 OUT OF FINANCE AND GOVERNMENT COMMITTEE AND PLACING IT ON THE MARCH 2nd, 2026 COUNCIL AGENDA FOR ACTION. EC-17 IS MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION OF AN ON CALL ARCHITECT SERVICE FOR AVIATION DEPARTMENT. THERE'S A MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY YES AND RAISE YOUR HAND. OPPOSED, SAME MOTION. THAT MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. I MOVE THE LETTER OF -- I MOVE APPROVAL OF THE LETTER OF INTRODUCTION. THERE'S A MOTION, AND SECOND BY COUNCILOR GROUT. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY YES AND RAISE YOUR HAND. THAT MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. WE'RE NOW ON TO REPORTS OF COMMITTEES. COUNCILOR BASSAN. >>COUN. BASSAN: MADAM PRESIDENT, THE LAND USE COMMITTEE MET AND REPORTS THE FOLLOWING ITEM. IN EC-26, AND EC-35 BE CONFIRMED. I MAKE MOTION TO ACCEPT THE COMMITTEE REPORT. >>COUN. PEÑA: THERE'S MOTION BY COUNCILOR BASSAN, SECOND BY COUNCILOR GROUT. ANY QUESTIONS? SEEING NONE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND AND SAY YES. OPPOSED, SAME MOTION. MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. WE ARE NOW ON TO DEFERRALS AND WITHDRAWALS. COUNCILORS, ANY DEFERRALS OR WITHDRAWALS AT THIS TIME? SEEING NONE. WE'LL MOVE TO THE CONSENT AGENDA. ARE THERE ANY CHANGES TO THE CONSENT AGENDA? SEEING NONE. FOR THE INDIVIDUALS ON TONIGHT'S CONSENT AGENDA WHO ARE BEING APPOINTED TO SERVE ON A BOARD OR COMMISSION, THANK YOU FOR YOUR WILLINGNESS TO SERVE. I MOVE APPROVAL OF THE CONSENT AGENDA. THERE'S A MOTION AND A SECOND BY VICE PRESIDENT CHAMPINE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND AND SAY YES. MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. WE ARE NOW ON TO ANNOUNCEMENTS. COUNCILOR BASSAN. >>COUN. BASSAN: MADAM PRESIDENT, THERE WILL BE AN INTERGOVERNMENTAL LEGISLATIVE RELATIONS COMMITTEE MEETING ON THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 19th AT 3:00 P.M. IT WILL BE HELD VIA ZOOM VIDEO CONFERENCE. >>COUN. PEÑA: COUNCILOR ROGERS. >>COUN. ROGERS: THANK YOU, MADAM PRESIDENT. THERE WILL BE A LOCAL GOVERNMENT COORDINATING COMMISSION MEETING ON THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 19th AT -- TOMORROW, AT 5:00 P.M. IN THE BERNALILLO COUNTY BUILDING, KEN SANCHEZ COMMISSION CHAMBERS. THIS IS A HYBRID MEETING. >>COUN. PEÑA: THANK YOU. WE'RE ON TO FINANCIAL INSTRUMENTS. THERE ARE NONE. AND WE'RE GOING TO MOVE THE AGENDA AROUND UNDER FINAL ACTIONS, LETTER C. COUNCILOR ROGERS, O-11. >>COUN. ROGERS: THANK YOU, MADAM PRESIDENT. I APPRECIATE YOU MOVING IT UP ON THE AGENDA FOR US. I REALLY DO. AS WE GATHER DURING BLACK HISTORY MONTH WE'RE REMINDED THAT HISTORY IS NOT JUST SOMETHING WE STUDY. IT IS SOMETHING WE LIVE, SHAPE, AND PASS FORWARD. THIS WEEK, WE MOURN THE PASSING OF REVEREND JESSIE JACKSON, THE CIVIL RIGHTS LEADER WHOSE VOICE ECHOES WITH AFFIRMATION, I AM SOMEBODY. THOSE WORDS WERE NOT JUST A CHANT. THEY WERE A DECLARATION OF DIGNITY, DEMAND OF RECOGNITION, AND REFUSAL TO BE INVISIBLE. I AM SOMEBODY. IN THIS CHAMBER TONIGHT, I STAND AS THE FIRST AFRICAN AMERICAN WOMAN ELECTED TO CITY COUNCIL. I CARRY THOSE WORDS WITH ME. NOT JUST FOR MYSELF BUT FOR EVERY CHILD WATCHING, EVERY ELDER WHO FOUGHT TO BE HEARD AND EVERY COMMUNITY WHO HAS EVER WONDERED IF THEIR VOICE MATTERED HERE. I BELONG. WE BELONG. REPRESENTATION IS NOT SYMBOLIC. IT'S STRUCTURAL. IT SHAPES WHO IS SEEN, WHO IS HEARD, AND WHO POLICIES ARE DESIGNED TO PROTECT. THAT IS WHY THIS BILL MATTERS. THIS LEGISLATION IS MORE THAN POLICY LANGUAGE, IT IS ABOUT AFFIRMING WHAT EVERY RESIDENT OF ALBUQUERQUE IS SOMEBODY. THAT EVERY NEIGHBORHOOD COUNTS. EQUITY IS NOT AN ABSTRUCT IDEA. IT IS A COMMIT WE MAKE IN THE DECISIONS WE TAKE. BLACK HISTORY MONTH REMINDS US THAT PROGRESS HAS NEVER BEEN ACCIDENTAL. IT HAS ALWAYS REQUIRED COURAGE, THE COURAGE TO SPEAK, STAND, AND TO BUILD SYSTEMS THAT REFLECT OUR SHARED HUMANITY. TONIGHT, WE HONOR THAT LEGACY NOT WITH WORDS ALONE, BUT WITH ACTION. BECAUSE I AM SOMEBODY. YOU ARE SOMEBODY. AND TOGETHER WE WILL ENSURE THIS CITY EVERYBODY BELONGS. I MOVE O-26-11. I URGE YOUR SUPPORT. >>COUN. PEÑA: THERE'S A MOTION AND A SECOND BY COUNCILOR CHAMPINE. WE'RE GOING TO MOVE TO FLOOR AMENDMENT A. >>COUN. ROGERS: THANK YOU, MADAM PRESIDENT. I HAVE ONE AMENDMENT. COMMUNITY MEMBERS BROUGHT TO OUR ATTENTION THAT TWO PARTNER ORGANIZATIONS WERE NOT NAMED IN THE INTRODUCED VERSION. I WANT TO CORRECT THAT. ON PAGE THREE, LINE 17, WE WANT TO INSERT THE FOLLOWING. 13, NAACP ALBUQUERQUE BRANCH. AND NUMBER 14. ALBUQUERQUE PUBLIC SCHOOLS, AFRICAN-AMERICAN EQUITY AND ENGAGEMENT COORDINATOR. THIS IS TO CORRECT THAT THIS BODY WILL BE DIFFERENT THAN MOST OF OUR BOARDS AND COMMISSION WHERE WE HAVE PERMANENT POSITIONS OF ALL THE POWERFUL ORGS THAT HAVE CARRIED THIS WORK FORWARD. I URGE YOUR SUPPORT ON THIS AMENDMENT. >>COUN. PEÑA: THERE'S A MOTION AND A SECOND ON FLOOR AMENDMENT A THAT WAS BY COUNCILOR FIEBELKORN. AND ANY DISCUSSIONS? SEEING NONE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF FLOOR AMENDMENT NUMBER ONE? PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND AND SAY YES. THAT MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. BACK ON THE BILL, COUNCILOR ROGERS. >>COUN. ROGERS: THANK YOU, MADAM PRESIDENT. I KNOW WE HAVE SOME PUBLIC SPEAKERS. WE DO HAVE TO DO A MOTION TO DEFER. I WOULD HAVE TO CHANGE MY MOTION BECAUSE OF THE TIMING FOR THE FILING. I KNOW WE DO HAVE SOME PUBLIC COMMENTERS. >>COUN. PEÑA: THANK YOU. WE'LL MOVE TO PUBLIC COMMENT. IF ANYONE SIGNED UP FOR GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT TO SPEAK ON THIS, AND YOU DIDN'T SIGN FROM THE BILL SPECIFIC, WE'LL BE HAPPY TO ACCOMMODATE YOU. CALL THE FIRST SPEAKER. >> THANK YOU, MADAM PRESIDENT. FIRST SPEAKER IS DANIELLE FOLLOWED BY LISA. LISA FOLLOWED BY TAD. >> COUNCILORS, MY NAME IS LISA. I'M THE GREAT GREAT GRANDDAUGHTER OF A GUHANIAN THAT WAS STOLEN AND SOLD INTO SLAVERY. THANK YOU. WE ARE SOMEBODY. WE NEED TO BE SEEN. PART OF THAT IS OUR PUBLIC COMMENTS. THANK YOU FOR KEEPING Q&A WITH CITY ADMINISTRATORS. I LEARNED MUCH ABOUT HOW OUR CITY WORKS. IT MAKES US PARTNERS. RIGHT NOW, TO BE HONEST, I FEEL LIKE IT'S YOU AND US. MAYBE WE CAN GAIN BACK SOME TRUST, BUT IT'S GOING TO BE THE VOTES. WE HAD A GOOD LAST YEAR. WE DISAGREED. BUT WE GOT THINGS DONE AND WE WORK THINGS OUT. RIGHT NOW IT LOOKS LIKE FIVE OF YOU ARE IN SOME KIND OF COLLISION AGAINST THE PEOPLE. SO, COULD YOU PLEASE EITHER DEMONSTRATE THAT YOU FAKE CARE OR AT LEAST START TO CARE BECAUSE TRULY I'M HONESTLY TELLING YOU I DO NOT BELIEVE YOU ALL DO ANYTHING BUT SCREW US. >> TAD FOLLOWED BY JADEN ON ZOOM. >>COUN. PEÑA: BEFORE YOU GO ON TO SPEAK, IF YOUR COMMENTS CAN BE GERMANE TO THE BILL. I THINK THAT'S IMPORTANT. >> OKAY. THANK YOU. EVERYBODY ARE SOMEBODY. AND ONE OUT OF ANOTHER OUT OF RACE, THAT IS RACIST. I HAVE ACCENT. YES. I WENT RIGHT HERE IN THESE CHAMBERS. SANCHEZ, JONES, ET CETERA, ET CETERA. ANYWAY, EVERYBODY OR SOMEBODY, YES. IT TAKES ONE TO KNOW WHO CAN HEAR AND LIVE FOR ALMOST 70 YEARS ALREADY IN THIS COUNTRY. THANK YOU. >> JADEN ON ZOOM. IF YOU CAN PLEASE ACCEPT PROMOTION TO PANELIST. GO AHEAD, JADEN. THANK YOU. PLEASE PROCEED, JADEN. WE CANNOT HEAR YOU IF YOU'RE SPEAKING JADEN. MAYBE SOME TECHNICAL DIFFICULTIES? APPEARS THERE'S TECHNICAL DIFFICULTIES, MADAM PRESIDENT. >>COUN. PEÑA: IF HE GETS ON, WE'LL LET HIM SPEAK LATER. BACK TO YOU FOR YOUR MOTION, COUNCILOR ROGERS. >>COUN. ROGERS: THANK YOU WERE -- MADAM PRESIDENT, I MOVE THIS BILL BE DEFERRED TO THE MARCH 2nd MEETING. >>COUN. PEÑA: THERE'S A MOTION AND SECOND BY VICE PRESIDENT FOR DEFERRAL TO MARCH 2nd. ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? SEEING NONE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR PLEASE SAY YES AND RAISE YOUR HAND. OPPOSED, SAME MOTION. THAT PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, COUNCILOR ROGERS. WE ARE BACK UNDER ITEM 11, APPEALS. THIS IS AC-05. MARIA GONZALES APPEALS THE ZONING HEARING EXAMINERS DECISION TO DENY VARIANCE OF 30 INCHES TO ALLOW A 56-INCH PROJECTING WALL SIGN AT THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 3715 SILVER AVENUE SOUTHEAST, ZONED MX-M, 202500170. MR. HALL WILL EXPLAIN THE APPEAL. >> THANK YOU, COUNCIL PRESIDENT. COUNCILORS, THE ISSUE IN THIS MATTER IS WHETHER A VARIANCE SHOULD BE GIVEN TO PERMIT A PROJECTION SIGN THAT WILL PROJECT 57.5 INCHES OUT OF THE FACADE. THE CURRENT IDO TEMPLATES LIM PROJECTION SIGNS TO ONLY 30 INCHES. IN REVIEW OF THE MATTER THE ZONING HEARING EXAMINER DENIED BECAUSE THE APPLICANTS FAILED TO MEET BURDEN OF PROOF OF THE VARIANCE. THE APPLICANTS APPEALED TO THE LAND USE HEARING OFFICER WHO RECOMMENDED IN HIS PROPOSED FINDINGS THAT THE CITY COUNCIL DENY THE APPEAL AND UPHOLD THE DENIAL OF VARIANCE. CITING THE IDO, 6-4-E3 THE APPLICANT PROVIDES BURDEN TO PROVIDE SOUND JUSTIFICATION BASED ON SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE TO HAVE APPROVAL OF A VARIANCE YOU MUST MEET FIVE FACTORS. NOTABLY, SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES THAT ARE NOT SELF-IMPOSED AND DO NOT AFLY OTHER PROPERTY IN THE SAME ZONE DISTRICT. IN THAT INSTANCE SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCE WOULD HAVE TO CREATE AN EXTRAORDINARY HARDSHIP IN SUBSTANTIAL AND UNJUSTIFIED LIMITATION ON THE REASONABLE USE OR ECONOMIC RETURN ON THE PROPERTY OR PRACTICAL DIFFICULTIES THAT WOULD RESTRICT FROM COMPLIANCE AND MINIMUM STANDARDS BUT FOUR OTHER AMENDMENTS MUST BE MET. INCLUDING THE VARIANCE WOULD NOT BE CONT VERY TO PUBLIC SAFETY HEALTH OR WELFARE, AND IF THE STRUCTURE IS APPROVED IT WOULD NOT UNDERMINE THE IT TENDED PURPOSE OF THE IDO AND AVOID EXTRAORDINARY HARDSHIP. THE ZONING HEARING EXAMINER AND THE LAND USE HEARING OFFICER FOUND NONE OF THESE ELEMENTS WERE MET BY THE APPLICANTS. THEY FOCUSED APPLICATION ON HOW THE VARIANCE WOULD BENEFIT THE CHURCH AND THE COMMUNITY. THEY ALSO ARGUED THAT THE SIGN WAS FROM THE PREEFBTS PREVIOUS LOCATION AND IT WILL BE COST EFFECTIVE TO FIX IT SO IT'S MAXIMALLY VISIBLE. THE ZONING HEARING EXAMINER FOUND THIS WAS INSUFFICIENT UNDER THE IDO STANDARD FOR GRANTING VARIANCE. COST EFFECTIVENESS NOR THE BENEFIT TO CHURCH OR COMMUNITY MEET THE FIVE FACTORS REQUIRED FOR GRANTING THE VARIANCE. THE LAND USE HEARING OFFICER AGREED. THE LUHO CONCLUDED THE APPEAL SHOULD BE DENIED AND THE ZONING HEARING EXAMINER DECISION SHOULD BE UPHELD. THIS IS ACCEPT OR REJECT, YOU WON'T HEAR FROM THE PARTIES TONIGHT. I STAND FOR ANY QUESTIONS. >>COUN. PEÑA: THANK YOU. ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE COUNCILORS? COUNCILORS, YOU HAVE A MOTION -- ANY COUNCILOR HAVE A MOTION ON AC-25-05? COUNCILOR FIEBELKORN. >>COUN. FIEBELKORN: MADAM PRESIDENT, I MOVE TO ACCEPT THE LUHO RECOMMENDATION AND FINDING. >>COUN. PEÑA: THERE'S A MOTION AND A SECOND ON AC-25-05. ANY QUESTIONS? COUNCILOR LEWIS. >>COUN. LEWIS: MADAM PRESIDENT, I BELIEVE WE HAVE TO EXHAUST THAT MOTION. I WOULD -- I THINK IN THIS CASE -- JUST REVIEWING THE RECORD HERE, I THINK THIS WOULD BE ONE -- I WANT TO HEAR THE ARGUMENTS. I THINK I RECOMMEND THAT WE REJECT THE LUHO RECOMMENDATION. MEANING IT'S JUST GOING TO COME BACK TO US FOR A FULL HEARING. I THINK I'D LIKE TO HEAR THE ARGUMENTS. I THINK FOR US TO COME BACK TO US IN A FULL HEARING WOULD BEST HONOR, I THINK, THIS APPEAL. >>COUN. PEÑA: WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND ON THE FLOOR TO ACCEPT THE LUHO RECOMMENDATION. COUNCILOR BASSAN. >>COUN. BASSAN: MADAM PRESIDENT, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR MR. HALL. IF THIS WERE -- IF WE WERE TO ACCEPT THE LUHO RECOMMENDATION AND FINDINGS AND SEEING THAT THROUGH THE DOCUMENT THAT WE READ AND WERE PROVIDED TO US, IS IT POSSIBLE FOR THE APPLICANT TO THEN GO BACK AND FILE A DIFFERENT APPEAL AND BE ABLE TO PROVIDE MORE INFORMATION THAN THEY DID? OR IS THE ONLY OPPORTUNITY FOR FURTHERING THE APPEAL WHETHER IT COMES BACK TO THE FULL COUNCIL? >> COUNCILOR, THE APPLICANT WOULD ABSOLUTELY BE ABLE TO RESUBMIT AN APPLICATION AND PROVIDE INFORMATION THAT WOULD FIT AMONG THOSE FACTORS THAT WOULD APPLY FOR VARIANCE. IT WOULD NOT BE FORECLOSED BY ACCEPTING THE LUHO'S FINDINGS TODAY. >>COUN. PEÑA: THANK YOU, COUNCILOR BASSAN. COUNCILOR ROGERS. >>COUN. ROGERS: THANK YOU, MADAM PRESIDENT. I JUST HAVE A QUESTION. THIS IS IN MY DISTRICT. I JUST WANTED TO TALK ABOUT THE APPEAL WAS BROUGHT ON BY -- WHO -- IS IT THE NEIGHBORHOODS THAT SAID THEY DON'T WANT SPECIFIC SIGNS? OR IS IT JUST OUR INTERNAL PROCESSES THAT DIDN'T MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE IDO? >> COUNCIL PRESIDENT, COUNCILORS, FOR VARIANCE THIS HAS TO BE HEARD BY ZONING HEARING EXAMINER. THE COMMENTS THAT WERE BROUGHT BY THE PUBLIC SURROUNDING THE VARIANCE, BUT THE DENIAL WAS ON THE APPLICANTS TO PROVIDE THE INFORMATION THEY NEED TO MEET THOSE FIVE ELEMENTS FOR A VARIANCE. >>COUN. ROGERS: THANK YOU, MADAM PRESIDENT. IN MY BRIEFING, IT WAS JUST THAT THE APPLICANT DID NOT ADEQUATELY COMMUNICATE HOW THEY MET THE FIVE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE IDO PER THE ZONING HEARING EXAMINER. >> COUNCILOR ROGERS, THAT'S CORRECT. >>COUN. ROGERS: THANK YOU, MADAM PRESIDENT. DO WE KNOW HOW MANY PEOPLE SPOKE IN OPPOSITION FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD? >> COUNCIL PRESIDENT, COUNCILOR ROGERS, I BELIEVE THAT INFORMATION IS IN THE RECORD PROPER. I'M NOT SURE OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD HOW MANY SPOKE OR HOW MANY LODGED A COMMENT ABOUT THIS PARTICULAR VARIANCE. I THINK THAT INFORMATION IS CONSIDERED IN THE RECORD PROPER. >>COUN. ROGERS: THANK YOU, MADAM PRESIDENT. I THINK THE LAST QUESTION IS -- I KNOW LOOKING AT THE MAP THIS IS ONE BLOCK OFF OF CENTRAL. IF THEY WERE ON CENTRAL WOULD THEY NEED THE SAME VARIANCE? >> COUNCILOR ROGERS, THE REQUIREMENT FOR A PROJECTION SIGN IS IN ALL AREAS. THAT'S A REQUIREMENT FOR THE SIZE THAT LIMIT 30 INCHES OFF THE FACADE IS APPLICABLE EVERYWHERE. >>COUN. ROGERS: THANK YOU. >>COUN. PEÑA: THANK YOU. IT SEEMS AS THOUGH IT DOESN'T MATTER WHERE WE GO, BUT THE QUICKEST WAY IS TO REJECT IT AND WE MAKE A DECISION -- HOW LONG IT TAKE THEM TO GO THROUGH THE ENTIRE PROCESS AGAIN? >> COUNCIL PRESIDENT, JUST FOR CLARIFICATION. FIRST IS ACCEPT THE LUHO CONCLUSION TO BRING THIS MATTER TO THE CLOSE, AND THE APPLICANTS WOULD HAVE TO RESUBMIT. I'M NOT SURE HOW LONG THE TIME FRAME WOULD TAKE. THAT WOULD DEPEND ON THAT KIND OF PROCESS FOR REACHING OUT TO THE SURROUNDING AREA AGAIN, IF THEY'RE STILL REQUESTING THE TYPE OF VARIANCE. >>COUN. PEÑA: IF WE ACCEPT IT -- IF WE REJECT IT, IT MAY BE A SHORTER TIME FRAME BECAUSE IT WOULD BE THE NEXT MEETING, CORRECT? AND THEY CAN ANSWER EITHER WAY. >> COUNCIL PRESIDENT, COUNCILORS, IT DEPENDS ON THE OUTCOME OF THE FULL HEARING BEFORE THE COUNCIL. AND WHETHER THE APPLICANT WANTED TO PURSUE A DIFFERENT TYPE OF APPLICATION, FOR EXAMPLE. ONE THAT MAY NOT REQUIRE A VARIANCE. THAT COULD BE A PROCESS IF THEY GO DOWN A DIFFERENT TYPE OF SIGN VERSUS PROJECTING SIGN OFF A BUILDING. IT MIGHT HAVE A CLEARER PATH FORWARD FOR THEM. THAT MIGHT BE FASTER. >>COUN. PEÑA: THE MOTION ON THE FLOOR IS A MOTION TO ACCEPT THE LUHO RECOMMENDATIONS AND FINDINGS. CORRECT? I'M SORRY. COUNCILOR LEWIS. >>COUN. LEWIS: THANK YOU, MADAM PRESIDENT. THESE HEARINGS, ESPECIALLY BEFORE THE LUHO, ARE PRETTY MECHANICAL. WE SET IT UP LIKE THAT. I THINK IN SOME CASES, AND I THINK IN THIS ONE, THE APPLICANTS DESERVE JUST TO PRESENT THEIR CASE WITH A FULL HEARING BEFORE THE COUNCIL. THAT'S WHAT I RECOMMEND. I DON'T KNOW IF I CAN MAKE -- CAN I MAKE A MOTION AT THE SAME TIME? >>COUN. PEÑA: NO. >>COUN. LEWIS: I'LL MAKE THE MOTION IF THIS FAILS. >>COUN. PEÑA: THERE'S A MOTION AND SECOND TO ACCEPT THE LUHO RECOMMENDATION. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND AND SAY YES. OPPOSED, SAME SIGN. WE'LL HAVE A FULL HEARING, THE NEXT GO ROUND. >>COUN. LEWIS: I MOVE TO REJECT THE LUHO RECOMMENDATION. >>COUN. PEÑA: THERE'S A MOTION AND A SECOND TO REJECT THE LUHO RECOMMENDATION. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY YES AND RAISE YOUR HAND. OPPOSED, SAME MOTION. THAT IS 5-4. MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC CAN PROVIDE LIVE PUBLIC COMMENT TO THE COUNCIL IN PERSON OR VIRTUALLY IF THEY HAVE SIGNED UP FOR PUBLIC COMMENT PER THE INSTRUCTIONS PUBLISHED ON THE AGENDA AND OUR WEBSITE FRIDAY. HERE ARE THE PUBLIC COMMENT RULESES. EACH PARTICIPANT HAS ONE MINUTE TO PRESENT, COMMENTS ARE TO BE ADDRESSED TO THE COUNCILORS ONLY THROUGH THE COUNCIL PREDZ PRESIDENT. ANY DISRUPTIVE CONDUCT WILL RESULT IN REMOVAL. THERE WILL BE A ONE-MINUTE TIME LIMIT AND THE BELL WILL RING TO INDICATE WHEN YOUR TIME IS UP. WE HAVE SOME ADDED INFORMATION. I'M GOING TO READ THIS OUT TO THE COMMUNITY. COUNCIL SERVICES HAVE RECEIVED SEVERAL WRITTEN COMMENTS RELATED TO A QUASI-JUDICIAL MATTER, NAEVA AND WSCONA VERSUS THE CITY OF ALBUQUERQUE AND MESA FILM STUDIO. D-202-CV-202504659. PURSUANT TO THE RULES, ARTICLE ONE, SECTION 8C, GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT SHALL NOT BE PERMITTED ON QUASI-JUDICIAL MATTERS. PLEASE DO NOT INCLUDE IN YOUR COMMENTS ANYTHING RELATED TO THE MESA FILM STUDIO CASE OR ANY OTHER QUASI-JUDICIAL MATTER INCLUDING AC-25-05. THE LUHO CASE APPEAL ON TONIGHT'S AGENDA. FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH THIS RULE MAY RESULT IN YOUR COMMENT BEING CUTOFF. PLEASE TAKE THIS TIME TO EDIT YOUR COMMENT. NOW, WE'RE ACTUALLY -- BEFORE WE GO TO THE FIRST PUBLIC SPEAKER, COUNCILOR BACA IS GOING TO TAKE A PERSONAL PRIVILEGE. >>COUN. BACA: THANK YOU, MADAM PRESIDENT. I'LL BE VERY QUICK. I HAVE TWO TEENAGE BOYS AT ALBUQUERQUE HIGH SCHOOL. THEY BOTH SAID IF SKYLINE COMES TO CITY COUNCIL TO GIVE HIM A SHOUT OUT. THANK YOU. >>COUN. PEÑA: I'M SORRY. SOME OF THE COUNCILORS DIDN'T HEAR WHAT YOU SAID. >>COUN. BACA: SECOND TIME. THANK YOU, MADAM PRESIDENT. OUR LOCAL HERO IS IN THE AUDIENCE TONIGHT. BOTH OF MY SONS SAW HIM THE LAST TIME HE CAME. THEY ASKED ME TO GIVE HIM A SHOUT OUT THE NEXT TIME HE CAME TO COUNCIL. >>COUN. PEÑA: OKAY. THANK YOU. NOW, PLEASE CALL THE NAME OF THE FIRST SPEAKER. >> THANK YOU, MADAM PRESIDENT. FIRST SPEAKER IS BIANCA FOLLOWED BY SARAH FOLLOWED BY MOLLY. >> GOOD EVENING, MY NAME IS BIANCA. TONIGHT TAKES ME BACK TO 2017 WHEN SOME OF US HERE WERE HERE FOR THE PASSING OF THE IDO, INTERGRATED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE. WE WERE HERE REPRESENTING THE HISTORIC NEIGHBORHOOD ALLIANCE. SANTA BARBARA MARTINEZ TOWN, SAN JOSE AND MANY COMMUNITY. WE HER HERE TO SHOW HOW THE CITY COMMITTED ACTED RACISM IN COMMUNITIES OF COLOR AND INDIGENOUS COMMUNITIES THROUGH DEVELOPMENT OF IDO. WE FILED A TITLE NINE COMPLAINT WITH HUD AND FILED A LAWSUIT AGAINST THE CITY OF ALBUQUERQUE. SINCE 2018, BASED ON RACISM, THE IDO HAS BEEN AMENDED 650 TIMES. THE CONSTITUTION HAS BEEN AMENDED 33 TIMES. THE IDO IS A MESS AND CREATED A MESS. OUR CONCERNS IS THE CHANGE WILL CHANGE THE USED ALLOWED WILL TRIGGER THE REMOVAL OF 3% CAP WHICH THE BERNALILLO COUNTY ASSESSOR'S WEBSITE REMOVES THE 3% CAP AS IT REOPENS HOMES NEGATIVELY IMPACTING COMMUNITIES OF COLOR AND INDIGENOUS COMMUNITIES. THANK YOU SO MUCH. >> SARAH FOLLOWED BY MOLLY FOLLOWED BY JACKIE. >> ON THE 30th OF DECEMBER AT TRANSPORTATION CENTER I LOST WATCHED A YOUNG MAN BOARD THE RAPID RIDE AND BE SLOWLY PURSUED BY TWO SECURITY OFFICERS. THEY DROVE HIM OFF THE BUS AND THREW HIM ON THE CONCRETE AND WHEN THE YOUNG MAN STOOD AND DID NOTHING, HE WAS MACED IN THE FACE. ONE OF THE SECURITY OFFICERS CLAIMED THIS YOUNG MAN SPIT IN HIS FACE. I DID NOT SEE THAT INCIDENT. IT WAS FURTHER BACK IN THE TRANSIT CENTER. WHETHER OR NOT THAT IS TRUE IT DOES NOT JUSTIFY ASSAULT. OFFICERS OF THE LAW NEED TO BE REASONABLENESS, IN ORDER TO CONDUCT USES OF FORCE. SECURITY, WE HAVE NO IDEA WHAT SECURITY NEEDS TO DO. WE HAVE NO IDEA HOW THEY'RE VETTED. WE NEED SECURITY OVERSIGHT. PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP IS DANGEROUS. >> MOLLY FOLLOWED BY JACKIE FOLLOWED BY JORDAN. >> GOOD EVENING, COUNCIL PRESIDENT, COUNCILORS, AND COUNCIL STAFF. THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO ADDRESS YOU. I AM HERE TO OPPOSE PLAN FOR THE MAVERICK GAS STATION LOCATED -- >> MADAM PRESIDENT, I APOLOGIZE FOR THE INTERRUPTION. THIS IS CONVERSATION ON A QUASI-JUDICIAL MATTER. >> I APOLOGIZE. THANK YOU. >> JACKIE FOLLOWED BY JORDAN FOLLOWED BY BRIAN. >> GOOD EVENING, MADAM PRESIDENT COUNCILORS. I NEED TO START BY SAYING THAT I'M IN STRONG SUPPORT OF THE AMENDMENTS YOU'LL LATER HEAR TO THE IDO. I WANT TO EXPRESS MY APPRECIATION FOR THOSE WORKING TIRELESSLY TO MAKE OUR ROAD WAYS SAFE FOR VULNERABLE ROAD USERS. I WANT TO SAY THANK YOU TO YOU FOR UNANIMOUSLY VOTE TO BRING OUR TRAFFIC CODE INTO THE 21st CENTURY. THANK YOU TO THE FOLKS AT DMD TO MODERNIZE INFRASTRUCTURE AND IMPLEMENT THE CROSSWALK EDUCATION PROGRAM. I ALSO WANTED TO SPECIFICALLY THANK COUNCILOR ROGERS, AND COUNCILOR FIEBELKORN, FOR THEIR TIRELESS ADVOCACY AND SUPPORT FOR SAFER STREETS. WE HAVE SOON SIGNIFICANT PROGRESS THAT RESULTED FEWER DEATHS. I ENCOURAGE YOU, MADAM PRESIDENT, AND COUNCILORS, TO KEEP THIS PROGRESS GOING. ZERO FATALITIES ON ROAD WAYS BY 2040 IS ONLY POSSIBLE WITH EVERYONE'S CONTINUED COMMITMENT TO MAKING OUR STREETS SAFER AM THANK YOU. >> JORDAN FOLLOWED BY BRIAN FOLLOWED BY SHANNON. >> GOOD EVENING. LATER TONIGHT YOU'LL CONSIDER SOME MODEST AMENDMENT TO THE IDO THAT ALLOW HOMES LIKE TOWN HOMES AND DUPLEX AND LEGALIZE BODEGAS. THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT GATHERED USER OF PUBLIC INPUT AND TESTIMONY TO SHAPE THE RECOMMENDATIONS. THAT WORK DESERVES REAL CONSIDERATION. AT LUPZ I HEARD CONCERNS FROM COUNCILORS THEY GOT EMAILS FROM PEOPLE THAT SAID THEY DIDN'T KNOW THIS IS HAPPENING. FIRST OF ALL THEY DID. DURING BUDGET SEASON YOU RELY ON STAFF AND LONG-TERM INPUT, WHY IS THAT STANDARD DIFFERENT HERE? I DON'T SEE ANGRY PEOPLE AT BUDGET HEARINGS, WHY IS THERE SUCH A DOUBLE STANDARD? IGNORING THE PROCESS YOU CREATED AND THE THOUSANDS OF VOICES BEHIND IT RICKS BREAKING CIVIC AND PUBLIC TRUST. MANY PEOPLE ARE ALREADY FEELING UNHEARD, TONIGHT'S YOUR CHANCE TO SHOW THEIR PARTICIPATION MATTERED. I'M LUCKY TO SPEAK. MOST PEOPLE CAN'T. BE BRAVE, MAKE BETTER CHOICES AND GO THROUGH THE IDO AMENDMENTS PASSED BY EPC. >> MADAM PRESIDENT I'M SEEING SHANNON ON ZOOM. WE'LL COME TO YOU WHEN WE GET TO THE ZOOM PORTION. UP NEXT IS BRIAN FOLLOWED BY ADRIAN FOLLOWED BY LISA. >> PRESIDENT, COUNCIL MEMBERS, I'M URGING YOU TO RESTORE THE PROAFFORDABILITY AMENDMENTS TO THE IDO AS RECOMMENDED BY THE E HAD C. THE CODES WE DEALT WITH 50 YEARS AGO WORKED FOR THE PEOPLE NOW, BUT THE SYSTEM IS RIGID AND INFLEXIBLE IS NOT ABLE TO MEET THE DEMANDS AND NEEDS OF THE PEOPLE TODAY. ALBUQUERQUE IS A WORKING CLASS CITY. BUT THE ZONING CODE IS NOT ALLOWING WORKFORCE HOUSING. HOMELESSNESS IS INCREASING, WE'RE DISPLACING SENIORS, PUSHING YOUNG ADULTS ELSEWHERE TO START FAMILIES AND DELLING BUSINESSES THERE'S NO HOUSING FOR WORKFORCES. ZONING HAS NOT STOPPED IT. BLOCKING EVERYTHING BEHIND GLASS HAS NOT STOPPED ENTROPY. LET HOUSES TOUCH. A TOWNHOUSE IS A SINGLE FAMILY HOME. IT TOUCHES THE ONES NEXT TO IT. THE DUPLEX IS A SINGLE FAMILY HOME THAT TOUCHES ALONG ONE WALL. THESE TYPES OF HOUSING HAVE A FRONT YARD TO PLAY IN, AND BARKYARD TO GROW GARDEN. THEY ARE NOT RADICAL. >> ADRIAN FOLLOWED BY LISA FOLLOWED BY TYLER. LISA FOLLOWED BY TYLER, FOLLOWED BY JANE. >> MY APOLOGIES, CHAIR. I DIDN'T UNDERSTAND THAT LAST TIME I WAS MAKING PUBLIC COMMENT ON JUST THAT ONE ORDINANCE. I THOUGHT IT WAS GENERAL. THE SIGNIFICANT POWER IMBALANCE WE HAVE THAT WE'RE FEELING, I'LL SPEAK FOR MYSELF, WITH LANDLORDS CAUSING FOR THE PEOPLE I WORK WITH -- I WORK WITH A LOT OF YOUNG PEOPLE WHO ARE IN COLLEGE AND TRYING TO GET THEIR OWN HOMES AND FAMILY STARTED. THERE'S HOUSING INSTABILITY. WE'RE NOT DOING HISTORY HONEST. YOU'RE A REALTOR WHERE CAN YOUNG PEOPLE AFFORD TO LIVE IN THIS CITY? HONESTLY, WE'RE JUST ASKING FOR AFFORDABLE RENT. YOU ALL CAN HELP US WITH THAT. YOU HAD AN OPPORTUNITY AND WE SOMEHOW DIDN'T GET THERE. WE'RE ASKING NOW PLEASE RECONSIDER ALL OF THESE BILLS THAT GIVE US PROTECTIONS RENTERS, AND LANDLORDS. AS PEOPLE THAT OWN PROPERTY, WE'RE ASKING FOR PROTECTION. YOU ALL CAN DO THAT FOR US. HELP US. >> TYLER FOLLOWED BY JANE FOLLOWED BY LEWIS. >> GOOD EVENING, TODAY'S FEBRUARY 18, 2026. AND BEGINS THE CENTENNIAL YEAR OF THE ROUTE 66 MOTHER ROAD. ON SEPTEMBER 30th, 2022 COUNCILOR PEÑA LED A RIBBON CUTTING CEREMONY. PHOTOS WERE TAKEN, SPEED SPEECHES WERE MADE, YET THREE AND A HALF YEARS LATER WE ENTER THE YEAR WITHOUT AN OPERATIONAL FACILITY. ONE YEAR AGO TODAY, COUNCIL PRESIDENT ANNOUNCED AGAIN IN HER DISTRICT THAT THE ROUTE 66 VISITOR CENTER WAS OPENING FOR BUSINESS. ACROSS THE NATION FROM CHICAGO TO TELLSA, CITIES ARE CAPITALIZING ON THIS ONCE IN A CENTURY MILESTONE. IN ALBUQUERQUE, THE LONGEST CONTINUOUS STRETCH OF URBAN ROUTE OF 66, OUR $14 MILLION ROUTE 66 VISITOR CENTER SITS DARK. THE GATES ARE LOCKED. WEEDS GROW. AND THE PARKING LOT, I DROVE BY JUST LAST WEEK, THIS IS NOT A SURPRISE. THIS IS AN EXECUTION FAILURE. THIS IS BIGGER THAN ONE BUILDING. THE CITY CANNOT OPEN AND OPERATE A SINGLE COMPLETED FACILITY. HOW CAN RESIDENTS TRUST HOUSING PRODUCTION? >> JANE FOLLOWED BY LEWIS FOLLOWED BY IAN. >> MADAM PRESIDENT, I THOUGHT I SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON THE NEXT ITEM WHICH IS THE WEST MESA CPC. AND ON O-26-2. I DON'T HAVE PUBLIC COMMENT NOW. I CAN SPEAK ON SOMETHING IN THIS TIME. OR IF YOU ARE WILLING, I'LL WAIT UNTIL THOSE ARE CALL. >>COUN. PEÑA: IT'S UP TO YOU. IT SHE SIGNED UP? WE CAN AT YOU TO THE OTHER ITEMS AS WELL. YOU CAN GO AHEAD NOW. THAT WAY YOU DON'T HAVE TO WAIT. >> ALL RIGHT. I OPPOSE EC-549, WEST MESA CPA REPORT AS WRITTEN. THE BASIS FOR MY OPPOSITION IS UNCHANGED. IT INCLUDES ACTION ITEMS MOST IMPORTANTLY ITEMS 14 WHICH WOULD NEVER PART OF PUBLIC COMMENT OR DISCUSSION. THIS IS BASED ON MY PERSONAL PARTICIPATION IN PUBLIC EVENTS, REVIEW OF POSTED COMMENTS, FOCUSED GROUPS, OPEN HOUSES AND REPEATED COMMUNICATION WITH LONG-RANGE PLANNING STAFF. THE REPORT NOW INCLUDES MATERIALS NEVER REFERENCED TO ANY MEETING WHICH HAVE BEEN ATTACHED TO THE ORIGINAL REPORT. ALEX NEVER PARTICIPATED IN THE CPA PROCESS. YOUR VOTE ON THIS IS A MESSAGE TO YOUR CONSTITUENTS. EITHER THE CPA PROCESS REPRESENTS THE COMMITMENT TO PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT AND ITS REPORT WILL SAFELY REPRESENT THE TIME, IDEAS AND WORK OF RESIDENTS, OR PARTICIPATION IS A WASTE OF THEIR TIME BECAUSE THE REPORT WILL BE WRITTEN TO REFLECT POLITICAL AND SPECIAL INTERESTS RATHER THAN THEIRS. THANK YOU. >>COUN. PEÑA: DID YOU WANT TO REMOVE YOUR NAME FROM THE OTHER ITEM? OR YOU WANT YOUR NAME TO BE ON THERE? I THINK WE MISSPOKE. HE MENTIONED THAT IT WASN'T BUT IT IS. YOU ARE SIGNED UP ON THAT ITEM. >> I DID WANT TO COMMENT ON O-26-2. >>COUN. PEÑA: OKAY. >> SHOULD I DO THAT NOW ALSO? >>COUN. PEÑA: YOU'RE FINE. YOU'RE SIGNED UP ON THERE. >> OKAY. >>COUN. PEÑA: THANK YOU SO MUCH. >> THANK YOU, MADAM PRESIDENT. LEWIS FOLLOWED BY IAN FOLLOWED BY THOMAS. >> MADAM PRESIDENT, COUNCIL MEMBERS, I'M A HOMEOWNER IN DISTRICT SEVEN. WHEN I PURCHASED MY HOME IN 2008 I HAD NO EXPECTATION MY NEIGHBORHOOD WOULD STAY THE SAME. IT WAS CLEAR THEY HAD ALREADY CHANGED FROM THE TIME IT WAS BUILT IN THE MID50s. HOMEOWNERS ALREADY MODIFIED THEIR HOMES TO EVOLVE WITH THE WANT AND NEEDS. ON MY STREET ALONE, THERE ARE FOUR GARAGE CONVERSIONS, ROOFS CHANGED FROM FLAT TO PITCHED, AND ADDITIONS BUILT. ZONING REFORMS AS PROPOSED BY THE EPC MAINTAIN THE 26-FOOT HEIGHT LIMIT FOR TOWN HOMES, DUPLEXES AND ATTACHED USE IN THE VAST MAJORITY OF RESIDENTIAL ZONING. THEREFORE, THESE ARE NOT DRAMATIC CHANGES OVER WHAT PEOPLE ARE ALREADY DOING. PLEASE SUPPORT THE REFORMS AS RECOMMENDED BY THE EPC, TO ALBUQUERQUE ADAPT TO ITS WANTS AND NEEDS. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. >> IAN FOLLOWED BY THOMAS, FOLLOWED BY ALTHEA. THOMAS FOLLOWED BY ALTHEA FOLLOWED BY DENNIS. >> LAST MEETING, PENA, YOU THREATENED TO SUE ME FOR LIBEL AFTER I CALLED YOU ALBUQUERQUE'S MOST BRIBED POLITICIAN. CAN I GET THE OVERHEAD? OVERHEAD? THERE WE GO. THANK YOU. HERE'S WHAT YOUR MATERIAL LOOKS LIKE HERE. THIS IS SOME BAD MATERIAL PLANTED AGAINST YOUR OPPONENT, THERESA GARCIA. IN THE VERY BACK IT SAYS THAT YOU DID NOT ENDORSE THIS OR APPROVE THIS. THAT'S VERY CONVENIENT BECAUSE ABQ FOR ALL SPENT THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS TO PRINT THIS KIND OF BAD MATERIAL AGAINST YOUR OPPONENT. WHAT I THINK IS INSIDIOUS WHERE THE CITIZENS UNITED GOES TOO FAR IS THIS IS A PICTURE OF MY FRIEND THE NIGHT SHE SURVIVED DOMESTIC VIOLENCE. ABQ FOR ALL SPENT THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS ON THAT. YOU COULD NOT BE BOTHERED TO CONDEMN IT BECAUSE YOU WANTED TO WIN ELECTION. THIS IS NOT FREEDOM OF SPEECH, THIS IS THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS FOR FREE CAMPAIGN MATERIAL. WE'RE GOING TO LOOK AT MORE OF THAT MATERIAL TONIGHT. >> ALTHEA FOLLOWED BY DENNIS, FOLLOWED BY KEITH. >> MADAM PRESIDENT, HOW DO YOU SAY I LOVE YOU TO A CITY IN 60 SECONDS. POLICY IS MY LOVE LANGUAGE, NICETIES AND FLOWERS, FOR TONIGHT'S CIVIC DUTY DONE BECAUSE AS COUNCILOR ROGERS SAID REPRESENTATION IS STRUCTURAL. HOW DO I SAY I LOVE YOU WHEN I GOT 41 SECONDS LEFT? IT'S TOO SHORT. AT LEAST ACCORDING TO FOUR OF YOU. I THINK WE CAN USE A MINUTE FROM LUPZ ON. WE CAN CALL YOU AND GIVE YOU EMAILS, BUT THIS TIME IS ALSO FOR TALK FOR EACH OTHER. US ZONING NERDS HAVE BEEN RUNNING A MARATHON SINCE JULY WHEN ANY COUNCILOR CAN PROPOSE AN AMENDMENT AND UNDOING ALL THAT WORK. THERE'S NO TIME. 19 SECONDS. WHEN REPRESENTATION IS STRUCTURAL AND PUBLIC COMMENT HAS CHANGED MY MIND AND HEART, IS THERE TIME? 11 SECONDS, FOR CIVIC DUTY DONE. WHEN WORDS CAN ONLY SCRATCH THE SURFACE, I SAID IT IN A POEM, ALBUQUERQUE I LOVE YOU. RESTORE THE TWO MINUTES. DONE. >>COUN. PEÑA: FIRST WARNING THIS EVENING. >> DENNIS FOLLOWED BY KEITH FOLLOWED BY WILLIAM. >> MADAM PRESIDENT, THANK YOU FOR LETTING ME SPEAK. THIS IS CONCERNING O-26-2. THE INTEGRATED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE PROPOSED CHANGES. BOTTOM LINE, WE NEED TO KEEP R1 ZONING, R1 ZONING. WE NEED SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING ZONES IN THIS CITY PROTECTED. THERE'S A REASON THAT WE ENJOY ALBUQUERQUE SINGLE FAMILY HOUSING NEIGHBORHOODS. THEY'RE QUIETER, THEY'RE HOMIER. THEY'RE A PLACE TO RAISE CHILDREN AND GRANDCHILDREN. THIS IS THE AMERICAN DREAM. PEOPLE WORK FOR 30, 40 YEARS FOR AN R1 ZONING PLACE. WE WANT TO KEEP THOSE REQUIREMENTS. THE ORDINANCE WILL CHANGE THE R1 ZONING TO RT, WITH NO CONSIDERATION FOR THAT NEIGHBORHOOD. THERE'S NOT CONSISTENT WITH OUR CURRENT WAY OF LIFE. R1 ZONING IS CREATED FOR A PURPOSE, THAT IS SINGLE FAMILY HOUSEING. OVER 60% OF HOUSING ENJOYS INCREDIBLE BLESSING OF SINGLE FAMILY HOUSING. PLEASE DO NOT LET THE PROPOSALS GO THROUGH. THANK YOU. >> KEITH FOLLOWED BY WILLIAM FOLLOWED BY JAMES. >> GOOD EVENING, CITY COUNCIL. I AM THE OWNER OF SOPAPILLA PRODUCTIONS. BACK IN AUGUST, MY WIFE AND I SPENT WEEKS COMPLETING PROPOSAL FOR RFP FOR TAKING OVER OPERATION OF KIMO. WE DISCOVERED THIS WAS AN INCREDIBLE OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE A MULTIMILLION DOLLAR ECONOMIC IMPACT ON DOWNTOWN ALBUQUERQUE. AFTER FOUR MONTHS, WE WERE TOLD THE CITY HAD DECIDED TO CANCEL OUR RFP. WE WERE NOT GIVE AN REASON AND TRIED TO REACH TO COUNCILOR BACA, HIS POLICY ANALYST, DIRECTOR OF ARTS AND CULTURE, DEPUTY DIRECTOR, TWICE EACH, TO GET NO RESPONSE. IN AN INTERVIEW, COUNCILOR BACA DISCUSSED NEW RULES REGARDING VACCEN PROPERTIES DOWNTOWN AND SAID HE WOULD LIKE TO SEE UPWARDS OF 12 EVENTS AT THE CAMEO A MONTH. A MILESTONE THE KIMO HASN'T REACHED. THIS IS HOLDING THE CITY TO THE SAME STANDARD. WE'RE LOOKING FOR ANSWERS. WHY WAS THE RFP CANCELED? WHY WAS THE PUBLIC NOT GIVEN NOTICE? WHAT CAN WE DO TO REBUILD ONE OF THE MOST ICONIC VENUES IN ALBUQUERQUE? PLEASE REACH OUT TO US AT SOPAPILLA PRODUCTIONS. >>COUN. PEÑA: COUNCILOR BACA. >>COUN. BACA: THANK YOU, MADAM PRESIDENT. SIR, WE ACTUALLY HAVE A MEETING SCHEDULED WITH DR. SANCHEZ AND DR. SENGEL TO DISCUSS THIS ISSUE. WE WILL REACH OUT TO YOU FOR SCHEDULING. >> WILLIAM FOLLOWED BY JAMES FOLLOWED BY-ROUNDY. >> MADAM PRESIDENT, CITY COUNCIL, I WANT TO GIVE MY VOICE CONCERNING THE IDO AMENDMENTS TONIGHT. I'M A MILITARY MEMBER AND I HAVE BEEN MOVED AROUND THE COUNTRY I'M PLACED IN THE MIDDLE OF COMMUNITY STORIES. I WASN'T HERE WHEN THE IDO WAS FIRST PASSED AND THE IMPACT WHEN I MOVED INTO ALBUQUERQUE WAS CHALLENGING TO FIND A HOME FOR MY FAMILY. THERE ARE MANY EMPTY HOMES AND SINGLE NEIGHBORHOODS THAT AREN'T ABLE TO BE TRANSFORMED INTO USEFUL DUPLEX AND TOWN HOMES. THEY'RE EMPTY BECAUSE SMALL BUILDERS CAN'T BUILD THE HOMES THEY WANT. THE PROPOSED CHANGES WILL WELCOME NEW HOME MEMBERS. THE ZONING CODE WOULD ALLOW THOSE CAN DIFFERENT NEEDS OR FEWER FINANCIAL RESOURCES TO FIND A HOME. MY CHILDREN WILL HAVE THE BENEFIT OF SEEING MORE COMMUNITY AS WE MOVE. FOR HAD CHILDREN GROWING UP IN ALBUQUERQUE, IS ALBUQUERQUE SAYING THEY HAVE A FUTURE IF THEY STAY? THANK YOU. >> JAMES FOLLOWED BY RANDY FOLLOWED BY MARSLEN. >> MADAM PRESIDENT, COUNCILORS, WE REALLY NEED THE COMMUNITY TO BELIEVE IN THIS MODEL. THAT IS A STATEMENT OF A SENIOR CITY OFFICIAL IN AUGUST OF 2024 IN THE NEWS BROADCAST ABOUT THE CONVERSION OF THE SAN MATEO INN AS THE NEW GATEWAY CENTER. AS OF TODAY, THAT CENTER IS STILL UNDER RENOVATION WITH A TOTAL THAT HAS BALLOONED TO $14 MILLION AND PROJECTED OPENING DATE SOMETIME IN THE NOT TOO DISTANT FUTURE WHEN IT WILL HOUSE 40 YOUTH. IN MAY OF LAST YEAR, ACTUALLY IN JUNE OF LAST YEAR, BERNALILLO COUNTY APPROVED ACQUISITION OF A CLOSED COMFORT INN AT 4th AND I-25 FOR RENOVATION AND CONVERSION FOR FAMILY HOUSING. LESS THAN SIX MONTH LATER THEY OPENED THAT FACILITY AND ARE PROVIDING HOUSING FOR 7 6 FAMILIES. SOMETHING IS AMISS HERE. WE ALL KNOW TIME IS MONEY. IN THE CONTEXT OF THE UNHOUSED, TIME IS ALSO A MATTER OF LIFE AND DEATH. I URGE THIS COUNCIL TO APPLY RIGOR NOT ONLY TO BUDGETS OF THE CITY BUT ALSO THE CITY. THANK YOU. >> BRANDY FOLLOWED BY MARSLEN FOLLOWED BY LEX. >> MADAM PRESIDENT, COUNCILORS, I'M AN EMERGENCY ROOM AND FLIGHT NURSE IN ALBUQUERQUE. I AM ONE OF THE FOUNDERS OF STRONG TOWN ALBUQUERQUE. IN MY WORK, I SEE THE DOWN STREAM EFFECTS OF YOUR POLICY DECISIONS. I SEE PEOPLE INJURED ON STREETS DESIGNED FOR SPEED RATHER THAN SAFETY. I SEE ISOLATION AND INSTABILITY AND TOO MANY PEOPLE WITHOUT SHELTER. STRONG TOWN ALBUQUERQUE BEGAN OUT OF EXHAUSTION AND THE BELIEF THAT ALBUQUERQUE CAN DO BETTER. WHAT STARTED OUT INVITING THREE NEIGHBORS TURNED INTO 73 PEOPLE IN OUR FIRST MEETING. MANY ARE HERE TONIGHT IN THIS ROOM. NO DONORS, NO PAID STAFF. JUST COMMUNITY. WE ARE A BIG TENT. WE DON'T AGREE ON EVERYTHING. BUT WE AGREE THAT ALBUQUERQUE SHOULD BE AFFORDABLE, SAFE, AND BUILT FOR PEOPLE. WE BELIEVE IN COMMUNITY FAIRNESS AND RESPONSIBILITY. WE BELIEVE IN TAKING CARE OF EACH OTHER. AND THAT EVERYONE DESERVED DIGNITY. THE ZONING CHANGES BEFORE YOU TONIGHT ARE NECESSARY STEP TOWARD THAT FUTURE TO GETTING OUR COMMUNITY'S NEED MET. STRONG TOWN IS HERE BECAUSE WE LOVE THIS CITY AND WANT TO SHARE OUR VOICE. THANK YOU. >> MARSLEN FOLLOWED BY LEX FOLLOWED BY BRICK. >> PRIVATE EQUITY WILL TAKE EVERYTHING. OUR LAND, HOUSING, UTILITIES AND WATER. THEY WILL USE ALL WE HAVE FOR CONSOLIDATED PROFITS, AND WHAT WILL YOU DO? SO FAR IT SEEMS ALBUQUERQUE WILL BE ONE OF MANY VICTIMS ON A QUEST FOR QUICK PROFIT. YOUR UNWILLINGNESS TO FIGHT IS CLEAR. YOU DON'T CARE ABOUT US, IF YOU DID WE WOULD HAVE BASIC RIGHTS. IF YOU DID WE WOULDN'T BE HERE EVERY MEETING BEGGING TO BE SEEN AND HEARD. WE'RE SCREAMING IN THE STREET FOR HELP AND YOU SPIT IN OUR FACE. I ASK WHEN OUR LEGITIMATE MEANS OF POLITICAL CHANGE ARE KEPT OUT OF OUR HANDS, WHAT REAL OPTIONS DO WE HAVE? WE SHOULD REALLY THINK WHAT HAPPENS NEXT. WE ARE UP AGAINST HISTORIC ECONOMIC PRESSURES AND PEOPLE ARE SUFFERING. YET YOU HAVE THEA DOSTY TO SIT ON YOUR HANDS? WE SEE THE FOUR OF YOU THAT CARE. AND WE APPRECIATE YOU. WE CAN'T WAIT ON FIVE OF YOU TO FIND DECENCY. THE INCREMENTALLISM HERE WILL KILL US. IT WILL KILL PEOPLE. IT WILL KILL US. DO SOMETHING NOW. >> LEX FOLLOWED BY BRICK FOLLOWED BY TABBRIN. >> I PREPARED A TWO-MINUTE SPEECH AND A ONE-MINUTE SPEECH. I WASN'T SURE WHAT WE WERE GOING TO HAVE THE TIME TODAY. FOR THE RECORD, I'LL PUT BOTH THE ONE MINUTE AND TWO MINUTE SPEECH FOR ANYBODY ON YOUTUBE THAT HAS THE ABILITY TO PAUSE AND READ MY COMMENTS. AND WHILE I'M AT IT, MAYBE IN THE YEARS TIME YOU HAD TO FIGURE OUT HOW IF YOU'RE GOING TO LIMIT PEOPLE TO ONE MINUTE NOW, YOU MIGHT WANT TO OPEN UP THE COMMENT SECTION WITHIN THE YOUTUBE COMMUNITY SO THAT YOU MIGHT HEAR FROM OTHER PEOPLE THAT CAN'T MAKE IT HERE. I'LL JUST SUM UP AND SAY IT THAT THE TIME FOR QUIET CONSIDERATION IS OVER. I DEMAND A PUBLIC AUDIT OF ALL OFFICERS WHO TO MY KNOWLEDGE HAVE NOT SIGNED THEIR OATH OF OFFICE AS REQUIRED BY THE NEW MEXICO CONSTITUTION AND THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION. THEY SIMPLY FOLLOW THEIR POLICY WHICH STATES THAT THEY WILL TAKE AN OATH, BUT THEY'RE NOT REGARDING THE POLICY THAT SAYS THEY WILL FOLLOW ALL NEW MEXICO AND FEDERAL LAWS IN DOING SO. THANK YOU. >>COUN. PEÑA: THANK YOU. >> BRICK FOLLOWED BY TABRINE FOLLOWED BY TAD. >> NEVER TIMED IT. I PRETTY SURE I CAN'T WIPE MY ASS IN ONE MINUTE. HERE'S ONE. REMEMBER THIS GUY. THAT'S THE NUT SHAKER THAT WORKS IN YOUR FAMILY ADVOCACY CENTER AROUND CHILDREN. LET'S NOT FORGET HIM. YOU DON'T LIKE ACCOUNTABILITY. THAT'S THE TRUTH. HERE'S THE OATH. THIS IS THE THING THAT THIS OFFICER BACK THERE, THAT ONE, THAT GUY RIGHT THERE, THEY'RE NOT DOING IT. I WANT TO POINT SOMETHING OUT. TRESPASSES. YOU CANNOT CROSS INTO JURISDICTION THAT YOU DO NOT CONTROL. WHEN YOUR OFFICERS GO INTO A STATE OFFICE TO TRESS PASS SOMEONE FROM A STATE OFFICE, THE PUBLIC DEFENDER'S OFFICE, GUESS WITH WHAT? THEY'RE CROSSING JURISDICTIONAL BOUNDARY. THEY FUCKED UP REAL GOOD. I WANT TO POINT SOMETHING ELSE OUT TO THE PEOPLE. THIS IS BLACK HISTORY MONTH. I LOVE WHAT OUR COLORED OR AFRICAN-AMERICAN BROTHERS HAVE DONE FOR US. I APPRECIATE WHAT YOU'VE DONE. BUT WHEN YOU CALL ME WHITEY, WHEN YOU CALL ME WHITEY, YOU'RE A SORRY RACIST PIECE OF SHIT. >>COUN. PEÑA: YOUR TIME IS SUP. -- YOUR TIME IS UP. OKAY. THIS IS THE THING ABOUT PUBLIC COMMENT. PEOPLE GET TO COME HERE AND SAY WHATEVER THEY WANT. THANK YOU. EVEN THOUGH WE DON'T ALWAYS AGREE WITH EVERYTHING EVERYONE SAYS, PUBLIC COMMENT IS PROVIDED FOR THAT REASON. MR. GARRET, CALL THE NEXT SPEAKER. >> TABBINE FOLLOWED BY TAD, FOLLOWED BY ELANOR ON ZOOM. >> I CAN'T I HAVE TO SPEAK AFTER THAT. THANK YOU, MADAM PRESIDENT, CITY COUNCILORS FOR THIS OPPORTUNITY. I'M GOING TO NEED YOUR OVERHEAD IN A SECOND. THANK YOU SO MUCH. I AM HERE TODAY TO TALK TO YOU ABOUT THE BANNERS THAT ARE FOR NEIGHBORHOOD RECOGNITION THAT HAVE BEEN HUNG ALONG CENTRAL IN HONOR OF THE CENTENNIAL. I AM SPECIFICALLY GOING TO BE TALKING ABOUT THE AREA OF CENTRAL BETWEEN I-25 AND UNIVERSITY BOULEVARD. A STRETCH OF ONE MILE IN WHICH THREE NEIGHBORHOODS HAVE BEEN MISREPRESENTED. FIRST, FOR MY NEIGHBORHOOD, THE SYCAMORE NEIGHBORHOOD. IT SAYS SICK-AMORE. I LIVE JUST UP THE STREET FROM CENTRAL. IT'S THE LATTER. THEN WE COME TO SILVER HILLS. SWEET SILVER HILLS. OH, WAIT, THERE'S NO BANNER FOR THEM. INSTEAD OF THEIR BANNER, WE HAVE BANNERS FOR UNIVERSITY HEIGHTS AND YOU GUESSED IT, SYCA-MORE. THOSE NEIGHBORHOODS ON OR CONNECT TO CENTRAL HAVE STRUGGLED FOR SO LONG. THIS IS OUR OPPORTUNITY TO ACTUALLY BRING POSITIVE LIGHT TO CENTRAL AVENUE AND TO MAKE IT MORE INVITING. AND WE NEED PROPER RECOGNITION. I STARTED CALLING THE MAYOR'S OFFICE THE SECOND WEEK OF JANUARY, AND I UNDERSTAND THAT MY MARVELOUS CITY COUNCILOR HAS REACHED TO THE CENTENNIAL COMMITTEE ONLY TO GET PUSHED BACK. I'M HERE ASKING THAT ALL CITY COUNCILORS ASSIST IN MAKING THIS HAPPEN AND JUST IN CASE -- [ INAUDIBLE ]. >>COUN. PEÑA: THANK YOU. COUNCILOR ROGERS. >>COUN. ROGERS: THANK YOU, MADAM PRESIDENT. THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR COMING AND ECHOING. WE DID REACH OUT TO ARTS AND CULTURE. THEY HAVE GIVEN AN IDEA OF WHAT IT WOULD COST TO FIX THEM. I'M HOPEFUL WITH THE ADMINISTRATION'S HELP WE CAN GET THOSE FIXED. >> CAN I ALSO ADD THAT I UNDERSTAND THAT THERE ARE FOUR OTHER DISTRICTS THAT EITHER CROSS OR CONNECT TO CENTRAL AVENUE AND I SUSPECT THAT GIVEN THAT IN A ONE-MILE STRETCH WE'VE HAD THREE NEIGHBORHOODS MISREPRESENTED THAT NEIGHBORHOODS AND CITY COUNCILORS SHOULD DOUBLE AND MAYBE TRIPLE CHECK. I KNOW I WALK THAT SECTION OF CENTRAL THREE TIMES TO SEE WHAT WAS GOING ON. >>COUN. ROGERS: THANK YOU. >>COUN. PEÑA: THANK YOU. >> TAD FOLLOWED BY ELANOR FOLLOWED BY PEGGY. >> THANK YOU. MY NAME IS TAD. WELL, FOR ONE MONTH WE HAD NO HOT-WATER IN THE LOS ALTOS SWIMMING POOL. HOW YOU LIKE THAT? IN THE SHOWER. NOW, LET ME START FROM THE TOP. IF IT'S TOO HOT IN THE KITCHEN, GET OUT. YOU DON'T HAVE TO BE HERE. YOU WANT IT, TAKE THE TIME AND LISTEN AND DO SOMETHING FOR EVERYONE IN THE COMMUNITY. I HAVE A LIST. AND THAT WILL RESOLVE FOR EXAMPLE. AGENDA, AVAILABLE ONLY MONDAY. TRYING TO SPEAK. I STARTED AND ABOUT MORE THAN TEN POINTS WE SEE IN DISTRICT COURT. ? >> MADAM PRESIDENT, COUNCILORS, I BEGAN COMMENTING ON THE 2025 IDO DURING THE PRE-EPC BRIEFINGS AND CONTINUED TO THE EPC HEARINGS AND THE LUPZ MEETINGS. YET PUBLIC COMMENTS ARE NOT CONSISTENTLY CARRIED FORWARD FROM ONE HEARING TO THE NEXT. AT IT THE LUPZ MEETING ALONE, 23 AMENDMENTS WERE INTRODUCED. THE PUBLIC DOES NOT SEE THESE AMENDMENTS IN ADVANCE AND WE DO NOT KNOW HOW MANY MAY BE PRESENTED TONIGHT. THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT DOES NOT SUMMARIZE PUBLIC COMMENTS FOR DECISION MAKERS WHICH MEANS COUNCILORS MUST SORT THROUGH A LARGE VOLUME OF MATERIAL ON THEIR OWN. IT IS UNCLEAR HOW THOROUGHLY THAT CAN BE DONE. WITH THE LIMITED TIME ALLOWED TONIGHT, THERE'S NO MEANINGFUL WAY FOR ME TO FULLY PRESENT MY CONCERNS. FOR THOSE REASONS, I RESPECTFULLY URGE A DO NOT PASS. >> PEGGY HAS DROPPED OUT. I'LL LOOK FOR HER AND CALL HER AGAIN. UP NEXT, WE HAVE JOE FOLLOWED BY BRIAN. >> MADAM PRESIDENT, CAN YOU HEAR ME? >> WE CAN HEAR YOU. PLEASE PROCEED. >> OKAY. MADAM PRESIDENT, CITY COUNCIL, MEMBERS, THANK YOU FOR HEARING ME TONIGHT. I LIVE HALF A BLOCK NORTH OF HEALTH CARE FOR THE HOMELESS. AND I'M SPEAKING AGAIN ABOUT THE HOMELESS CAMPING SITUATION. TONIGHT I WANT TO FOCUS ON HOW MUCH THESE PEOPLE ARE MOVED AROUND TO CREATE THE IMAGE OF PUBLIC SAFETY. THIS IS REALLY UNFAIR TO THEM AS WELL AS TO THE RESIDENTS AND BUSINESSES THEY HAVE MOVE TO THEM EVERY NIGHT. I'VE SEEN THESE PEOPLE MOVED UP A BLOCK, DOWN A BLOCK, AROUND A BLOCK, OVER AND OVER AND OVER AGAIN. THEY HAVE NO WAY THEY CAN JUST PITCH A CAMP AND STAY THERE. THIS IS VERY FRUSTRATING FOR THEM. IT'S VERY DISCOURAGING FOR THEM. THEY HAVE TO FIGHT AGAINST THE ONUS OF BEING HOMELESS. WHY NOT WHILE YOU'RE WORKING ON THE SAFE SPACES PROPOSALS, WHY NOT GIVE THEM A PLACE WHERE THEY CAN CAMP WHERE THEY WON'T BE MOVED AWAY FROM AND WON'T AFFECT THE HEALTH AND WELL BEING OF THE RESIDENTS AND BUSINESSES? IT CAN BE AS SIMPLE AS TAKING SOME OF THE SPACE YOU HAVE THE RAIL YARDS -- I'M SORRY FOR THE RAIL TRAIL, YOU WON'T BE DEVELOPING IT FOR YEARS. JUST FENCE IT OFF AND LET THEM STAY THERE. MAYBE MAKE FOUR OR FIVE ZONES SO YOU CAN MOVE THEM FROM ONE ZONE TO ANOTHER IN ORDER TO CLEAN UP THE PLACE THEY'VE BEEN CAMPING. AND GIVE THEM A LITTLE BIT OF A BREAK. AND GIVE ME A BREAK TOO BECAUSE REALLY THIS RUINS MY ENTIRE LIFE HAVING THEM CAMPING TOO CLOSE. BURNING FIRES. RAISING MY ALLERGIES. MAKING SO MUCH NOISE. >>COUN. PEÑA: THANK YOU, SIR, YOUR TIME IS UP. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >>COUN. PEÑA: BRIAN FOLLOWED BY SHANNON. >> THANK YOU, COUNCIL PRESIDENT, MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL. I AM A HOMEOWNER IN DISTRICT NINE. I'M SPEAKING TODAY ABOUT UNNECESSARY AND COSTLY PARKING AMENDMENTS. I GREW UP IN ALBUQUERQUE AND CAN NAME A NAME NUMBER OF PLACES AROUND TOWN WITH HUGE PARKING LOTS THAT NEVER SEEM TO BE FULL OF CARS AND IN THE MULTIPLE DECADES I LIVED HERE. PARKING IS SOMETHING THAT IS EASY TO TAKE FOR GRANTED BUT EACH INDIVIDUAL PARKING SPOT CAN COST MORE THAN THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS. COSTS PASSED ON TO RESIDENTS OF HOUSING, OR CONSUMERS OF BUSINESSES. ELIMINATING COSTLY PARKING MINIMUMS DOES NOT FORCE REMOVAL OF NEEDED PARKING, IT REMOVES A BURDENSHIP REGULATION AND ALLOWS RESIDENTS AND BUSINESSES TO FIGURE OUT HOW MUCH PARKING MAKES SENSE FOR THEIR INDIVIDUAL SITUATIONS. WHILE I BELIEVE THAT PARKING MINIMUMS CAN AND SHOULD BE ELIMINATED ENTIRELY, I DO WANT TO NOTE THAT THE PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE IDO TAKE UP AN IMPORTANT STEP IN THAT DIRECTION. PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE IDO INCLUDE REDUCTIONS IN COSTLY PARKING MINIMUMS. THESE CHANGES WERE PROVED BY THE ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING COMMISSION AND LAND USE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMUNITY. I URGE THE COUNCIL TO PASS THE IDO AMENDMENTS AS RECOMMENDED BY THE CPC. >>COUN. PEÑA: THANK YOU, SIR, YOUR TIME IS UP. THANK YOU SO MUCH. >> SHANNON. >> CAN YOU HEAR ME? >> WE CAN HEAR YOU. >> HI. I'M REACHING OUT TO YOU FOR THE FOURTH TIME REGARDING AN ISSUE I BELIEVE REQUIRES YOUR IMMEDIATE ATTENTION. I WOULD LIKE TO EXPRESS MY ONGOING CONCERNS ABOUT THE DISCIPLINARY BOARD. I BELIEVE THERE IS SIGNIFICANT ISSUES THAT WARRANT A THOROUGH INVESTIGATION. IT IS CRUCIAL THAT WE ASSURE TRANSPARENCY AND ACCOUNTABILITY WITHIN LOCAL GOVERNANCE. I WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THE USE OF CAMERA LIGHTS THAT ISSUE TICKETS. I BELIEVE THIS PRACTICE IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL AS IT DOES NOT PROVIDE INDIVIDUALS WITH A FAIR OPPORTUNITY TO CONTEST VIOLATIONS. THAT IS LACK OF DUE PROCESS. THIS LACK OF DUE PROCESS IS TROUBLING AND NEEDS TO BE RECTIFIED. COUNCILOR PEÑA, I'M SEEKING FOR YOUR ASSISTANCE. LOOKING INTO THE MATTERS AND INITIATING THESE INVESTIGATIONS. YOUR SUPPORT WOULD BE INSTRUMENTAL IN ADDRESSING THESE CONCERNS AND ASSURING OUR COMMUNITY IS TREATED FAIRLY AND JUSTLY. THANK YOU. >> MADAM PRESIDENT, I COULD NOT FIND PEGGY OR ANDRE. THAT CONCLUDES PUBLIC COMMENT. >>COUN. CHAMPINE: THANK YOU, MADAM PRESIDENT. CURIOUS WITH THE LAST PUBLIC COMMENTER. I'LL GO TO THE ATTORNEY. IS THERE DUE PROCESS IN THE CIVIL MATTER? >> MADAM PRESIDENT, COUNCILOR CHAMPINE YES. SPECIFICALLY, THE SPEED CAMERA TICKETS DO INCLUDE A PROVISION FOR CONTESTING, APPEALING, THAT NOTIFICATION. >>COUN. CHAMPINE: JUST WANTED TO BE SURE. THANK YOU FOR THE CLARIFICATION. >>COUN. PEÑA: THANK YOU. COUNCILOR ROGERS. >>COUN. ROGERS: THANK YOU, MADAM PRESIDENT. I ALSO WANTED TO ADD THAT THIS COUNCIL, INCLUDING COUNCILOR PEÑA, WORKED HARD TO MAKE SURE THERE WAS WAYS FOR FOLKS TO VOLUNTEER AND NOT HAVE TO PAY YOUR SPEEDING TICKETS. WE UTILIZED THAT FOR JUNETEENTH AND I'VE NEVER SEEN SO MANY VOLUNTEERS. THEY DIDN'T WANT TO PAY THE SPEED CAMERA. WE CARE ABOUT EQUITY. WE KNOW THERE'S WAYS TO APPEAL. IF YOU LOSE THE APPEAL, GO TO THE ONE ALBUQUERQUE VOLUNTEER WEBSITE. CLICK ON AUTOMATIC SPEED TICKETS. WE CARE ABOUT FEES AND JUSTICE AND WROTE THAT INTO THE ORDINANCE AS WELL. THANK YOU, MADAM PRESIDENT. >>COUN. PEÑA: COUNCILOR ROGERS. WE ARE NOW ON TO APPROVALS. ITEM A UNDER APPROVALS IS EC549. WEST MESA CPC. I MOVE RECEIPT BE NOTED. THERE'S A MOTION AND SECOND FOR RECEIPT BE NOTED. I KNOW WE HAVE SOME STAFF HERE. I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S ANY DISCUSSIONS RELATED TO THE REPORT. ANY QUESTIONS? THANK YOU. WITH THAT, WE'RE GOING TO MOVE ON TO PUBLIC COMMENT. I THINK WE HAVE A FEW PEOPLE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK. >> THANK YOU, MADAM PRESIDENT. LISA FOLLOWED BY RENEE. FOLLOWED BY JOSHUA. ON ZOOM. RENEE FOLLOWED BY JOSHUA. >> I LIVE ON THE WEST SIDE. SINCE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE WEST MESA COMMUNITY PLANNING ASSESSMENT, WE DID ATTEND THOSE MEETINGS. A LOT OF THE MEETINGS. AND THEY DID QUOTE A LOT OF STUFF IN THAT REPORT THAT WE WERE CONCERNED ABOUT BECAUSE OF OUR NATURAL FEATURES LIKE THE PETROGLYPHS AND MESA AND BOSQUE AND VIEW SCAPE. WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE THOSE THINGS PROTECTED. BUT THE ONE THINGS WE ARE CONCERNED ABOUT THAT I MENTIONED IN MY LETTER WAS NUMBER 13 AND NUMBER 14. BECAUSE WE DIDN'T REALLY BRING THOSE ISSUES UP. NUMBER 14 IN PARTICULAR IS TALKING ABOUT CONVERTING A SINGLE FAMILY TO HIGHER DENSITY. WE DIDN'T MENTION THAT AT ALL. THAT JUST CAME UP. WE HAVE BROUGHT THAT TO THE ATTENTION THAT WE DIDN'T SUPPORT. WE BRING TO TO YOU TO DECIDE ON THIS. NUMBER 13 IS ANOTHER CONCERN. I RECOMMEND SOME REVISIONS ON THAT. THANK YOU. >>COUN. PEÑA: THANK YOU. DOES THAT CONCLUDE? >> WE'RE GOING TO GO TO RICHARD FOLLOWED BY JOSHUA. JOSHUA, TRY TO CONNECT YOUR AUDIO. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. I'M SPEAKING ON BOTH THE IDO AMENDMENT AND THE CPA. MORE THAN 50% OF ALBUQUERQUE LIVE IN R1 ZONE HOMES. THEY INVESTED IN THOSE HOMES BECAUSE THEY LIKED THE ZONING. NOT IN SPITE OF THE ZONING. THEY ARE YOUR CONSTITUENTS. OVERWHELMINGLY, THEY LIKED LIVING, LIKE ME, THEY LIKE LIVING IN R1 ZONES. IT'S A MAGICAL THINKING TO SOMEHOW BELIEVE THE LIBERTARIAN ARGUMENT THAT BREAKING UP R1 ZONES WILL SOMEHOW CREATE AFFORDABLE HOUSING OR RESOLVE HOMELESSNESS. IT WON'T. PLEASE ALSO LISTEN TO YOUR CONSTITUENTS ON THE CPA. BECAUSE AT MY CPA MEETING NO ONE ARGUED FOR BREAKING R1 ZONING. THANK YOU. >> JOSHUA. >> GOOD EVENING. I'M THE PRESIDENT OF -- NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. WE'RE LOCATED IN THE NORTHWESTA. I'M SMEK -- SPEAKING IN OPPOSITION. I'LL SPEAK TO BOTH OF THEM. THEY SEEK TO MAKE CHANGES TO THE R1 ZONING. PROPONENTS OF THE CHANGES FOR R1 ZONING, THEY'RE SEEKING TO REMEDY AN UNDERLYING PROBLEM BY ADDRESSING THE SYMPTOM BUT NOT THE PROBLEM. HOUSING AFFORDABILITY IS MORE COMPLEX THAN ZONING. MUCH OF THE ISSUES EXTENDS FROM LOW HOUSEHOLD INCOMES. WHAT THE CITY NEEDS ARE MORE QUALITY BUSINESSES AND QUALITY EMPLOYMENT. AS WE ATTEMPT TO ATTRACT AND BUILD THE BUSINESSES, YES -- [ INAUDIBLE ]. AND THE REASON FOR THIS IS COMPLEX. AND IT'S WHY WE STRUGGLE TO ATTRACT HIGH QUALITY BUSINESS. IT MAY HAVE TO DO WITH EDUCATION, AND HEALTH CARE, AND CRIME. >>COUN. PEÑA: SIR, YOUR TIME SEX PIRED. THANK YOU SO MUCH. >> CAN I SPEAK ON THIS SECOND PART? >>COUN. PEÑA: NO. I'M SORRY. YOU ARE SIGNED UP. >> THAT CONCLUDES COMMENT. THANK YOU, MADAM PRESIDENT. >>COUN. PEÑA: THERE'S A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR ACCEPTING THE RECEIPT BE NOTED OF EC-459. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY YES AND RAISE YOUR HAND. OPPOSED NO. THAT MOTION PASSES 8-1 WITH COUNCILOR BASSAN DISSENTING. NOW, WE HAVE ITEM B. EC-21, APPOINTMENT OF ASSOCIATE CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER CARLA MARTINEZ TO THE POSITION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER. I MOVE CONFIRMATION. THERE'S A MOTION, AND A SECOND FOR CONFIRMATION. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? DOES ANYONE HAVE ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS OF MS. MARTINEZ? SEEING NONE. WE HAVE PEOPLE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK. WE WERE READY TO GET THIS DONE. >> THANK YOU, MADAM PRESIDENT. WE HAVE ADAM TO SPEAK. >> I WOULD LIKE TO PROVIDE COMMENT ON IDO REGARDING TRIPLEXES. >>COUN. PEÑA: SIR, THIS IS ACTUALLY FOR THE APPOINTMENT OF THE CFO. >> I MADE A MISTAKE. I MEANT THIS -- >>COUN. PEÑA: YOU WANT TO SPEAK ON THE IDO? WE CAN ADD YOUR NAME WHEN THAT COMES UP. WE'LL ADD YOUR NAME FOR THE IDO. THANK YOU SO MUCH. >> OKAY. I CAN PROVIDE COMMENT? >>COUN. PEÑA: YES, DURING THAT ITEM. >> GOT IT. THERE WERE PEOPLE BEFORE ME WHO TALKED ABOUT THE THING. I'M A LITTLE CONFUSED. >>COUN. PEÑA: IT WASN'T GERMANE. THEY SAID THEY WERE GOING TO TALK ABOUT BOTH. THEY ACTUALLY DIDN'T. YEAH. YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT? >> ABOUT TRIPLEXES, DUPLEXES. >>COUN. PEÑA: THAT WAS FOR GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT. YOU CAN SPEAK ON THE IDO. >> THANK YOU. >>COUN. PEÑA: OKAY. THANK YOU, MADAM PRESIDENT. THAT WOULD CONCLUDE EC-26-22. HE WAS SIGNED UP FOR AS WELL. >>COUN. PEÑA: THANK YOU SO MUCH. COUNCILOR GROUT. >>COUN. GROUT: THANK YOU, MADAM PRESIDENT. I LOOK FORWARD TO WORKING WITH YOU CARLA. I THINK IT'S GOING TO BE -- MS. MARTINEZ, I SHOULD SAY. I DID ENJOY OUR VISIT. AND I KNOW THAT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE -- IT'S GOING TO BE A GOOD YEAR. GOING INTO THE BUDGET SEASON, I THINK IT'S -- IT WILL BE GOOD. I'M LOOKING FORWARD TO WORKING WITH YOU. THANK YOU. >>COUN. PEÑA: ANY ADDITIONAL COMMENTS? NO? THERE IS A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR CONFIRMATION OF MS. CARLA MARTINEZ. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR PLEASE SAY YES AND RAISE YOUR HAND. OPPOSED NO. MOTION PASSES. CONGRATULATIONS. [ APPLAUSE ]. NEXT, WE HAVE EC-22. THIS IS APPOINTMENT OF DEPUTY CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER WHELAN TO CHIEF OPERATIONS OFFICER. I MOVE CONFIRMATION. THERE'S A MOTION, AND A SECOND BY COUNCILOR LEWIS. WE HAVE SOMEONE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK. >> MADAM PRESIDENT, THAT'S THE SAME GENTLEMAN. I HAVE HIM WRITTEN DOWN. >>COUN. PEÑA: OKAY. THAT WOULD CONCLUDE PUBLIC COMMENT. ANY COMMENTS FROM ANY OTHER COUNCILORS? SEEING NONE. THERE'S A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR CONFIRMATION OF MR. WHELAN TO THE POSITION OF CHIEF OPERATIONS OFFICER. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY YES AND RAISE YOUR HAND. OPPOSED NO. MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. CONGRATULATIONS, MR. WHELAN. [ APPLAUSE ]. WE ARE NOW ON TO FINAL ACTIONS. WE ARE -- I GUESS I WILL ASK OUR COUNCILORS -- DO YOU WANT TO TAKE BREAK OR GET STARTED? WE'LL GO AHEAD AND WE'LL BREAK FOR -- WE WILL RETURN AT 7:10. [ RECESS ]. >>COUN. PEÑA: OKAY, EVERYONE. WE'RE BACK IN SESSION. I'M GOING TO MOVE THE FINAL AGENDA ITEM O-10 AND WE'LL GO INTO IDO. AMENDING SECTION 14-6-6-4U5 OF THE INTEGRATED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE TO DEFINE AWARDING COST. >> THANK YOU, COUNCIL PRESIDENT, COUNCILORS. O-10 WOULD AMEND SECTION 14-6-6-U5 OF THE IDO TO CLEAN UP SOME OF THE EXISTING CRITERIA UNDER WHICH APPEAL COSTS ARE AWARDED LAND USE APPEALS. CURRENTLY, THE IDO STATES IT'S THE PARTY'S RESPONSIBILITY FOR THEIR OWN COST AND SETS A REASONABLE COST LIMIT FEE OF 1,000 DOLLARS. AND IT MAY HAVE A GRANT FOR THOSE THAT ARE LOW INCOME OR INDIGENT STATUS. THIS INCLUDES FOUR ADDITIONAL FACTORS TO BALANCE REASONABLENESS OF FEES. INCLUDING WHETHER THE CONDUCT OF THE PARTIES WAS IN BAD FAITH OR MALICIOUS, REASONABLENESS OF CLAIMS AND DEFENSE BY A PARTY. ESH -- OR DEFENSES SIMILAR AND APPEALS. EXPENSE WHICH WOULD DEFER OTHERS FROM ASSERTING MERIT AND CLAIMS OF FUTURE APPEALS AND OBJECTIVE REASONABLENESS OF THE PARTIES AND DILLGENTS OF THE PARTIES OR DURING THE PROCEEDINGS. WHAT THIS WOULD DO IS PROVIDE MORE GUIDELINES TO THE EXISTING APPEAL FRAMEWORK BY ADDING FACTORS AND DETERMINING THE REASONABLENESS OF COST AND FEES. IT ALSO BETTER SUPPORTS LUHO DECISIONS THAT MIGHT BE CHALLENGED ON APPEAL BASIS FOR ARBITRARY CAPRICIOUS OR NOT IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW STANDARDS WHEN ASSIGNING COSTS OR FEES. THESE MIRROR ESTABLISHED FACTORS USED IN OTHER ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDINGS. >>COUN. PEÑA: I MOVE DO PASS OF O-10. IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND BY YOU, COUNCILOR BACA? DID YOU SAY SECOND? OH, COUNCILOR GROUT. THERE'S A MOTION AND SECOND. I THINK WE HAVE PEOPLE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK. >> THANK YOU, MADAM PRESIDENT. THOMAS FOLLOWED BY ALTHEA FOLLOWED BY TAD. >> I'D LIKE TO REMIND THIS COUNCIL IF THIS DOESN'T PASS FOR YOU, THIS WILL BE THE FIRST TIME ANY OF THE FIVE PEOPLE BETWEEN COUNCILOR BASSAN, COUNCILOR GROUT, COUNCILOR CHAMPINE, AND COUNCILOR LEWIS ALL HAVEN'T VOTED FOR YOU PAUSE YOU WORK TOGETHER TO PASS LEGISLATION LIKE THIS WHICH YOU CLAIM IS JUST CLEANING UP CITY COUNCIL LAW, BUT WE REALLY KNOW WHAT IT'S ABOUT, WHICH IS REDUCING TRANSPARENCY AND THE AMOUNT OF -- AND INCREASING THE AMOUNT OF VULNERABILITY THAT THESE SMALL PROTEST GROUPS HAVE. THIS IS VERY CLEAR. YOU DON'T LIKE THAT LUHO DOESN'T ASSIGN A THOUSAND DOLLAR FEE VERY OFTEN. THEY USUALLY SAY NO, WE DON'T KNOW IF YOU'RE UNDER HARDSHIP. WHAT THIS BILL DOES IS INCREASE THE BARRIER OF HARDSHIP. NOW ORGANIZATIONS THAT ARE LOOKING AT LAWSUITS LIKE THE MESA STUDIO PROJECT, THOSE FOLKS LIKE INDIGENOUS GROUPS, THEY'RE NOT PART OF THE THINGS THAT WOULD BE SEEN AS HARDSHIP. THEY'RE GOING TO GET A THOUSAND DOLLAR FINE. YOU WANT TO INTAMEIDATE US PENA, AND I'M ASHAMED OF YOU. >> ALTHEA FOLLOWED BY TAD. >> CAN I HAVE OVERHEAD? THANK YOU. SO, RIGHT THERE. GREAT. THANK YOU. THIS IS MY FIRST TIME USING THE OVERHEAD. I WANT TO DEMONSTRATE SOMETHING THAT IS A LITTLE BIT CONCERNING ABOUT THE WAY THESE FEES ARE SET. HERE'S YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION BOUNDARY. THOSE ARE HISTORICAL. THOSE ARE IMPORTANT, RELATED TO THE DEVELOPMENT, MAYBE HOW THAT NEIGHBORHOOD CAME TO BE. THEN YOU HAVE CENSUS TRACKS. THESE ARE ASSIGNED AND THEY NEVER LINE UP WITH NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS. AND THAT IS HOW OUR SOCIAL VULNERABILITY INDEX IS ASSESSED. SAY YOU HAVE A NEIGHBORHOOD THAT HAS MORE GEOGRAPHIC AREA AND IT'S CONSIDERED TO BE A THREE -- I'M GOING TO THROW OUT A NUMBER. LOW SOCIAL VULNERABILITY. YOU HAVE AN AREA THAT'S MAYBE LIKE A SEVEN. WHAT IF MORE PEOPLE LIVE IN THE SEVEN THAN LIVE IN THE THREE? BECAUSE IF YOU'RE ASSESSING BY LAND AREA, YOU'RE NOT ASSESSING BY POPULATION. THAT'S LIKE ONE OF THE PROBLEMS I SEE WITH THE WAY THIS BILL IS -- PROVISION WAS CONSTRUCTED. I THINK IT NEEDS MORE TIME AND MORE WORK. THANK YOU. >> TAD. THAT CONCLUDES COMMENT. THANK YOU, MADAM PRESIDENT. >>COUN. PEÑA: THANK YOU SO MUCH. IS THERE ANY COMMENT FROM COUNCILORS? COUNCILOR FIEBELKORN. >>COUN. FIEBELKORN: THANK YOU, MADAM PRESIDENT. A COUPLE QUESTIONS. I NOTICED ON PAGE TWO, LINE 31, WE CHANGE THE PROCESS FOR THIS CRITERIA FROM THE LUHO TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT. I'M JUST WONDERING WHY WE WOULD MAKE THAT CHANGE? >> THE REASON WHY THAT CHANGE WAS MADE IS BECAUSE FOR THE LUHO TO CONSIDER IT NEEDS TO BE WITHIN THE RECORD FOR THEM TO REVIEW. UNDER THE PREVIOUS STANDARD, IT CREATED A TENSION WHERE THE LUHO WOULD HAVE TO CONSIDER MATTERS OUTSIDE THE RECORD. BY HAVING THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT REVIEW THE CRITERIA AND CONDUCT ADMINISTRATIVELY TO BE INCLUDED IN THE RECORD TRANSMITTED TO THE LUHO THEY CAN CONSIDER THE FACTORS. >>COUN. FIEBELKORN: THANK YOU, MADAM PRESIDENT. WHAT HAVE WE BEEN DOING SINCE THIS BILL PASSED? >> COUNCILOR FIEBELKORN, SINCE THIS BILL HAS BEEN PASSED? >>COUN. FIEBELKORN: YES, SINCE THIS BILL HAS BEEN PUT IN PLACE. >> MADAM PRESIDENT, COUNCILOR FIEBELKORN, WE HAVE NOT YET HAD AN APPEAL THAT TRIGGERS THIS LANGUAGE. SO, THE LUHO HAS LUCKILY NOT BEEN TASKED WITH DOING THAT REVIEW THUS FAR. >>COUN. FIEBELKORN: THANK YOU, MADAM PRESIDENT. THE LUHO IS AN INDEPENDENT OFFICER. HOW ARE THEY HIRED? >> MADAM PRESIDENT, COUNCILOR FIEBELKORN, THEY ARE ON A CONTRACT WITH THE COUNCIL SERVICES DEPARTMENT. >>COUN. FIEBELKORN: THANK YOU, MADAM PRESIDENT. THE -- AND THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT IS UNDER THE ADMINISTRATION'S PURVIEW AND REPORTS TO THE CAO, IS THAT CORRECT? >> MADAM PRESIDENT, COUNCILOR FIEBELKORN, THAT'S CORRECT. >>COUN. FIEBELKORN: WE'RE MOVING THE REVIEW FROM AN INDEPENDENT THIRD PARTY IN COUNCIL SERVICES TO A MEMBER OF THE CITY STAFF? >> MADAM PRESIDENT, COUNCILOR FIEBELKORN, THAT'S CORRECT. WITH THE CAVEAT THAT THE LUHO WOULD STILL REVIEW THE INFORMATION THAT IS TRANSMITTED FROM THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT IN THE APPEAL PACKET THAT WE RECEIVE FOR ALL LUHO APPEALS. AND THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT IS TASKED WITH PUTTING TOGETHER THAT PACKET RIGHT NOW. >>COUN. FIEBELKORN: THANK YOU, MADAM PRESIDENT. EARLIER ON THAT SAME PAGE, LINE 21, WE TALK ABOUT HOW THE LUHO IS GOING TO HAVE A FINDING TO EXTENT WHICH THE AWARD OF COST AND FEES IN THE CASE WOULD DEFER OTHERS FROM ASSERTING GOOD FAITH CLAIMS OR DEFENSES IN SIMILAR APPEALS. I AM NO ATTORNEY, BUT THAT SOUNDS LIKE I COULD MAKE ANYTHING FIT UNDERNEATH THERE. THE EXTENT TO WHICH THIS IS GOING TO DETER OTHERS FROM ASSERTING GOOD FAITH CLAIMS, WHAT DOES THAT MEAN? >> MADAM PRESIDENT, COUNCILOR FIEBELKORN, THAT LANGUAGE -- I READ AS AN INTENT TO NOT AWARD FEES. IF IT WOULD DEFER OTHERS FROM BRINGING GOOD FAITH CLAIMS. THIS IS ALL PART OF THE PICTURE THAT THE LUHO WOULD EXAMINE FOR A PARTICULAR FEE AWARD. >>COUN. FIEBELKORN: THE LUHO WAS GOING TO DETERMINE THE EXTENT TO WHICH SOMETHING WOULD DETER OTHERS, UNNAMED OTHERS, IN THE FUTURE. THE NEXT LINE IS THEY'RE ALSO GOING TO DETERMINE THE EXTENT TO WHICH AN AWARD OF COST AND FEES IN THE CASE WOULD DEFORT OTHERS FROM ASSERTING MERITLESS CLAIMS AND DEFENSES. THAT IS ALL WITHIN THE THIRD PARTY THAT IS UNDER CITY COUNCIL TO MAKE THESE VERY INTERESTING JUDGMENTS ON EXTENT. AND DETERRENCE OF OTHERS. BUT WE MOVE OVER TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT FOR THE DECISION ON HOW COST AND FEE EXEMPTIONS WOULD BE HANDLED. OKAY. THANK YOU, MADAM PRESIDENT. >>COUN. PEÑA: NOW WE'RE GOING TO COUNCILOR LEWIS. >>COUN. LEWIS: THANK YOU, MADAM PRESIDENT. THIS IS AMENDING AN ORDINANCE WE PASSED PRETTY RECENTLY. AND THAT ORDINANCE IS WORKING. AND SPECIFICALLY THE FINE THAT IS ON HERE AND HOW IT'S SPECIFIED AND MET FOR FAIRNESS. AND TO BE ABLE TO TREAT EVERYBODY THE SAME. I THINK WHEN WE MOVE IT TO BE MORE SUBJECTIVE WITH THE INTENT OF TRYING TO BE MORE FAIR WITH IT, I THINK IT ACTUALLY MAKES IT LESS FAIR. SO, I DON'T THINK IT'S A GOOD AMENDMENT FOR SEVERAL REASONS. BECAUSE I DON'T BELIEVE IT'S MORE FAIR. I THINK IT ACTUALLY JUST ADDS A LOT MORE SUBJECTIVISM TO IT. IT PUTS A LOT ON THE LUHO AND OTHERS. WHEREAS, I THINK IT'S PRETTY CLEAR RIGHT NOW WHERE THE ORDINANCE STANDS. ALSO, BECAUSE WE DO HAVE ENOUGH TIME THAT THIS ORDINANCE HAS BEEN IN PLACE TO WHERE WE SEE POSITIVE RESULTS. WE SEE A CLEAR REDUCTION IN PRIVILOUS APPEALS. THERE'S CLEAR DATA THAT SHOWS THAT SINCE THIS BILL PASSED. WE ALSO -- I THINK IT'S TOO EARLY TO HAVE IT FOR THAT REASON. BUT ALSO OF THE FACT WE NEED MORE TIME TO AMEND THE BILL LIKE THIS AT THIS TIME. IT'S NOT THE TIME TO DO IT. I POSE THIS BILL -- IT'S WORKING. THE ORDINANCE IS WORKING RIGHT NOW. >>COUN. PEÑA: COUNCILOR BACA. >>COUN. BACA: THANK YOU, MADAM PRESIDENT. TO ECHO COUNCILOR LEWIS, WE HAVE BEEN TRACKING THE APPEALS AND WHAT'S HAPPENING OVER THE PAST SEVERAL YEARS. I'M A BIG DELIVER IN DATA. TWO YEARS DATA, MINIMUM, AND WHAT I USE IN THE REGULAR WORLD BEFORE I MAKING DECISIONS. I HAVEN'T HAD TIME TO DIGEST TO SEE IF IT MATTERS OR HELP. I HAVEN'T HAD ENOUGH TIME TO SPEAK WITH OUR COUNSEL WITH THAT. THE FIRST TIME I'M SEEING IT IS WHEN I READ IN THE iPAD. AGAIN, TO COUNCILOR LEWIS, I THINK THE PROCESS IS WORKING AS INTENDED AND WE DID DO SOME AMENDMENTS ALREADY TO PROTECT COMMUNITIES AND FOLKS WHO ARE LOWER INCOME. I WANT TO SEE MORE DATA AND SEE HOW IT PLAYS OUT BEFORE WE DO THAT. I HAVE SEEN IN THE AREAS WHERE WE HAVE SEEN MORE HOUSING COME IN. THAT'S SOMETHING WE DESPERATELY NEED HERE. THANK YOU. >>COUN. PEÑA: COUNCILOR TELLES. >>COUN. TELLES: THANK YOU, MADAM PRESIDENT. I HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT THE CURRENT PROCESS. MY UNDERSTANDING RIGHT NOW IS THAT THIS AMENDMENT IS TO NARROWLY ADDRESS POTENTIAL BAD FAITH APPEALS. -- WE HAVE A FIVE-PRONGED APPROACH IN THAT PROCESS FOR APPELLANTS TO FILE SOMETHING. WHAT IS THE REQUIREMENTS THAT EXIST NOW FOR AN APPELLANT TO FILE AND WHAT ARE THE PROCESSES THAT YOU PLAN TO IMPLEMENT, SHOULD THIS PROCEED? >> MADAM PRESIDENT, COUNCILOR PEÑA, THE IDO -- COUNCILOR TELLES, I APOLOGIZE. THE IDO OUTLINES THE APPEAL STANDARD THAT AN APPELLANT -- WHETHER THAT'S APPLICANT DENIED A PERMIT OR MAYBE A PERSON WHO IS IN THE VICINITY UPSET WITH AN APPROVAL HAS TO MEET IN ADDITION TO ESTABLISHING STANDING. GENERALLY, THERE WAS AN ERROR IN THE DECISION MAKING BODY BELOW THAT NEEDS TO BE CORRECTED AND THAT WOULD CHANGE THE OUTCOME OF THE DECISION. THIS BILL SEEKS TO ADD ADDITIONAL CRITERIA THAT THE LUHO WILL REVIEW WHEN AN APPEAL COMES BEFORE THEM AND THE APPEAL COST AWARD MIGHT BE IMPLICATED. SO, IT DOESN'T CHANGE THE EXISTING PROCESS OR FRAMEWORK IN WHICH SOMEONE COULD BE LIABLE FOR UP TO A THOUSAND DOLLARS OF FEES WITH A COUPLE OF EXEMPTIONS BUILT IN. IT ADDS ADDITIONAL CRITERIA THAT THE LUHO IS INSTRUCTED TO REVIEW WHEN MAKING THAT DETERMINATION OF WHETHER SOMEONE SHOULD BE ON THE HOOK FOR UP TO A THOUSAND DOLLARS IN COST AND FEES. AND THESE CRITERIA ARE TAKEN FROM SIMILAR ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS AND COURT CONTEXTS. THAT'S WHERE THEY COME FROM. >>COUN. TELLES: MADAM, DOES THE LUHO HAVE THE ABILITY TO PROMULGATE THEIR OWN RULES FOR THIS. >> >> MADAM PRESIDENT, COUNCILOR TELLES, THE RULES ARE CONTAINED IN COUNCIL RULE OF PROCEDURE. THE LUHO DOESN'T HAVE THE ABILITY TO MAKE CHANGES. THE COUNCIL CAN. THE LUHO HAS PROCEDURAL REQUIREMENTS OUTLINED IN THE IDO ITSELF. >>COUN. TELLES: LAST QUESTION. HOW ARE WE CURRENTLY DECIDING WHAT CONSTITUTES A FRIVOLOUS APPEAL AND WHAT CONSTITUTES A LEGITIMATE APPEAL? AND IS IT -- IT SEEMS ARBITRARY RIGHT NOW. IT JUST DEPENDS WHO IS ON LUHO AT THE TIME. >> MADAM PRESIDENT, COUNCILOR TELLES, THE APPEAL COST LANGUAGE WAS ADDED IN VERY RECENTLY. IT WAS MAYBE A YEAR AGO THAT IT WAS AMENDED INTO THE IDO. AND WE HAVE HAD APPEALS SINCE THEN, HOWEVER THEY HAVE BEEN APPEALED OF DENIALS OF PERMITS, NOT A NEIGHBOR APPEALING AN APPROVAL OF SOMETHING WHICH WOULD FALL INTO THE CATEGORY OF POTENTIAL FOR COST AND FEES. WE HAVEN'T RUN INTO AN APPEAL YET WHERE THIS LANGUAGE HAD TO BE UTILIZED. BUT IT WAS FLAGGED AS SOMETHING THAT COULD USE SOME CLARIFICATION AND CORRECTION TO MAKE IT MORE SOLID FOR THE LUHO. AND HE COULD UTILIZE GIVEN THAT HE IS RESTRICTED TO THE RECORD IN APPEALS. THEY'RE CLOSED RECORD APPEALS. HE CAN'T PULL MATERIAL FROM OUTSIDE THE PACKET. FOR EXAMPLE, IT WOULD BE DIFFICULT TO PULL UP THE SOCIAL VULNERABILITY INDEX BECAUSE HE'S NOT PERMITTED TO GO TO A WEBSITE AND PULL SOMETHING UP AND LOOK UP THE MAP. IT HAS TO BE IN THE PDF PACKET SENT DOWN. THAT'S THE AIM OF THESE AMENDMENTS IS TO ADDRESS THOSE ISSUES. >>COUN. TELLES: THIS IS MY LAST QUESTION. I PROMISE. WHAT IS THE -- DOES THE CURRENT PROCESS ALLOW FOR -- LIKE, SUPREMACY CLAUSE, I GUESS, CAN WE JUST USE CURRENT LAW FOR APPEALS PROCEDURE? LIKE THERE IS A FIVE-PRONG TEST WE HAVE TO PROVE TO APPEAL. WOULD THAT APPLY HERE? >> MADAM PRESIDENT, COUNCILOR TELLES, I THINK THE WAY WE HAVE WORDED THE IDO PUTS THE LUHO IN A DIFFICULT POSITION BECAUSE IT SAYS HE SHALL AWARD COSTS IN THIS CASE. SO, I THINK THAT PUTS HIM IN A BIND OF HAVING CONFLICTING DIRECTIVES TO FOLLOW. THIS WOULD CLEAN THAT UP. >>COUN. TELLES: THANK YOU. >>COUN. PEÑA: THANK YOU. COUNCILOR LEWIS. >>COUN. LEWIS: THANK YOU. I APPRECIATE OUR COUNSEL FOR EXPLAINING THE BILL. CERTAINLY NOT ADVOCATING FOR THIS AMENDMENT. I WOULD EXPECT THAT WASN'T WHAT I JUST HEARD. ANY KIND OF ADVOCATING FOR A CHANGE TO THIS. BECAUSE I THINK WE CAN MAKE THE SAME GOOD SOLID CASE THAT WHAT'SSET IN PLACE RIGHT NOW IS VERY CLEAR AND GIVES THE LUHO REALLY GOOD STANDARDS AND GIVES CLEAR DIRECTION. I THINK WE'VE SEEN THAT. YOU CAN MAKE A CASE THAT BECAUSE IT HAS NOT BEEN APPLIED SPECIFICALLY THAT IT IS CLEAR. IT'S REDUCED THE AMOUNT OF FOGGINESS WHEN IT COMES TO THOSE THAT ARE CONSIDERING AN APPEAL WHERE THIS MIGHT APPLY. SO, WHAT THIS AMENDMENT DOES OR CHANGE WOULD DO IS I THINK IT MAKES IT CLOUDIER. I THINK IT OPENS UP MORE OPPORTUNITIES. IT GIVES A LOT MORE LEEWAY FOR SOME UNCLARITY. SO, AGAIN, IT NEEDS TIME. I THINK THE CURRENT ORDINANCE NEEDS TIME. I THINK IT'S ALREADY PROVEN THAT IT IS CLEAR AND THAT'S GOOD LEGISLATION. AT THE SAME TIME, IT'S NOT THE TIME TO AMEND IT. >>COUN. PEÑA: THANK YOU, COUNCILOR LEWIS. I'M HEARING EVERYBODY'S CONCERN. WE CAN DEFER THIS BILL. THIS ACTUALLY CAME FROM THE LUHO. IT'S NOT NECESSARILY MY -- I PUT MY NAME ON IT, BUT THIS IS A RECOMMENDATION FOR SOME HICCUPS THAT THE LUHO ACTUALLY HAD. I THINK IF WE CAN GIVE IT MORE TIME SO JULIA AND TALKING TO THEM ABOUT THEIR CONCERNS, IT SEEMS LIKE HAD LEGITIMATE CONCERNS ABOUT HOW TO GET SOME OF THIS STUFF DONE, I THINK MORE TIME TO FIGURE THIS OUT PEOPLE CAN VOTE IT DOWN. I THINK THE LUHO IS CONCERNED ABOUT THE WAY IT IS AS IS. JULIA, DID YOU WANT TO ADD ANYTHING TO THAT? >> COUNCIL PRESIDENT, NO. JUST TO ECTHOUGH SENTIMENT THAT THESE AMENDMENTS WERE IDENTIFIED IN COLLABORATION WITH THE LUHO AND OUR LEGAL STAFF AS AREAS FOR IMPROVEMENT IN THE EXISTING ORDINANCE. THAT'S, AS YOU SAID, WHERE IT CAME FROM. I'M HAPPY TO SIT WITH COUNCILORS INDIVIDUALLY TO TALK THROUGH THE NUANCES OF WHAT THIS DOES DO THE EXISTING PROVISIONS OF THE IDO. >>COUN. PEÑA: THANK YOU. WE HAVE ONE MORE PERSON SIGNED UP TO SPEAK? SHE THOUGHT SHE SIGNED UP. OKAY. >> THANK YOU, MADAM PRESIDENT. THAT WAS AN OVERSIGHT. I APOLOGIZE. >> GOOD EVENING, COUNCIL PRESIDENT, AND COUNCILORS. I'M LORETTA. I REPRESENT THE HISTORIC NEIGHBORHOOD ALLIANCE. I'M THE PRESIDENT OF THE SANTA BARBARA MARTINEZ TOWN NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. THE HISTORIC NEIGHBORHOOD ALLIANCE APPRECIATE CITY COUNCIL PRESIDENT FOR EFFORTS TO CONSIDER ANY INDIVIDUAL APPELLATE THAT DEMONSTRATES HARDSHIP OR INDIGENOUS STATUS AND ANY ENTITY APPELLATE WITH GEOGRAPHIC BOUNDARY THAT INCLUDES 50% THAT HAS AN OVERALL SCORE OF 50 OR GRATING ON THE SOCIAL VULNERABILITY INDEX. THE CONSTITUENCY OF THE CITY COUNCILORS ARE NO ABLE TO DEFEND THEIR LAND THROUGH DUE PROCESS. AM THE LANGUAGE DOES NOT GOPHYSICAL TO GIVE INPUT ON CERTAIN LAND USES WHICH WILL OR CAN HAVE SERIOUS IMPACT ON RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY AND NEIGHBORHOODS. APPELLANTS SUCH AS NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS SHOULD NOT BE CHARGED A FWEEN THEY'RE FOLLOWING THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE IDO TO PROTECT THE HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE OF THE RESIDENTS THAT LIVE IN THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD. THIS IS A DEVELOPER ORDINANCE TO STOP ANY INPUT FROM THE PUBLIC AND ONLY ALLOW LAND SPECULATORS TO CONTROL THE LAND IN ALBUQUERQUE. THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK. >>COUN. PEÑA: THANK YOU. WITH THAT, I GUESS I CAN -- SO YOU HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO TALK TO THE REST OF THE COUNCIL AND RELAY SOME OF THE CONCERNS FROM THE LUHO, I WOULD MOVE DEFERRAL OF O-10. THERE'S A MOTION, AND A SECOND. WHAT'S THE DATE OF THE NEXT MEETING? >> MARCH 2nd. >>COUN. PEÑA: TO MARCH 2nd. SECOND BY COUNCILOR GROUT. ANY DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND AND SAY YES. OPPOSED, SAME MOTION. MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. THANK YOU SO MUCH. OKAY. NOW, WE ARE BACK ON O-2. AND THIS IS COUNCILOR FIEBELKORN. >>COUN. FIEBELKORN: THANK YOU, IMMEDIATEM PRESIDENT. O-2 IS ADOPTING TEXT AMENDMENTS TO THE INTEGRATED TEXT AMENDMENT FOR THE BIENNIAL UPDATE. I MOVE DO PASS. >>COUN. PEÑA: THERE'S A MOTION AND SECOND FOR O-2. WE HAVE SEVERAL PEOPLE IND UP TO SPEAK. I DON'T KNOW IF YOU WANT TO OPEN FIRST, COUNCILOR FIEBELKORN. CAN WE JUST GO TO PUBLIC SPEAKERS. >>COUN. FIEBELKORN: GO TO PUBLIC SPEAKERS. >>COUN. PEÑA: THANK YOU SO MUCH. CALL THE FIRST SPEAKER. >> THANK YOU, MADAM PRESIDENT. >> MADAM PRESIDENT, YOU HAVE TO READ THE PROCEDURE. >>COUN. PEÑA: I'M SORRY ABOUT THAT. WE HAD SOMETHING ADDED. AS A REMINDER, PURSUANT TO THE RULES OF PROCEDURE, ARTICLE ONE, SECTION 8C, GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT SHALL NOT BE PERMITTED, PLEASE DON'T INCLUDE ANYTHING TO THE MESA FILM CASE OR ANY OTHER QUASI-JUDICIAL CASE, FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH THIS RULE MAY RESULT IN YOUR COMMENT BEING CUT OFF. PLEASE TAKE THIS TIME NOW TO EDIT YOUR COMMENTS. >> WE'LL START WITH JANE FOLLOWED BY STEVEN FOLLOWED BY PAUL. >> MADAM PRESIDENT, COUNCILORS, IN A SOCIAL MEDIA POST PATTY WILSON SAID THE IDO REVIEW PROCESS IS BROKEN, ARBITRARY AND CAPRICIOUS AND A LITTLE BIT INSANE. I CONCUR. TONIGHT, COUNCIL IS POISED TO ADD ARBITRARY AND CAPRICIOUS DECISIONS. AMONG THOSE ARE HOUSING PROPOSALS WHICH CLAIM TO INCREASE AFFORDABILITY AND SUPPLY WHERE SCHOLARLY RESOURCES REFUTE THAT ARGUMENT. OTHER ARBITRARY AND CAPRICIOUS DESIGNATIONS ARE LEGISLATIVE ZONING CONVERSIONS AND NEGOTIABLE ZONE DISTRICTS. LIKE MANY WHO HAVE SPOKEN ON THIS, I HAVE COMMENTED SINCE JULY OF 2025. THE ENTIRETY OF THE AMENDMENT IS BEYOND THE POSSIBILITY OF COMMENTING INDIVIDUALLY. THEREFORE, I URGE YOU DO NOT PASS. THANK YOU SO MUCH. >> STEVEN FOLLOWED BY PAUL. FOLLOWED BY JACKIE. >> MADAM PRESIDENT, CITY COUNCIL, YOU HAVE THE TOOLS TO MAKE THIS RIGHT WITH THE COMMUNITY BASED PLANNING. THIS IN NO WAY MANDATE FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING. COUNCILOR FIEBELKORN SHOWED UP FOR THE STATE HEARING. ON TOP OF THAT, HER INTENT AND ANNOUNCING HER PRESENCE AS A CITY COUNCILOR IN SUPPORT WAS TO UNDERMINE THE PROCESS OF THE IDO. WHO ELSE WAS THERE? WELL, WE HAD THE NEW MEXICO HOME BUILDER ASSOCIATION, APARTMENT ASSOCIATION OF NEW MEXICO, ALL PRO-DEVELOPER GROUPS. GUESS WHO ELSE SUPPRESSED SUPPORT FOR SB-131 AT THE STATE SENATE? STRONG TOWNS. THEY ADVOCATED TO YOU SURP USURP THE IDO PROCESS. IN OUR COUNTY, A CHANGE OF USE IS IF YOU'RE GETTING REZONED. ON TOP OF THAT WE HAVE A THOUSAND PETITION SIGNATURES SUBMITTED ACROSS THE CITY IN OPPOSITION. I ASK PLEASE LISTEN TO YOUR CONSTITUENTS DON'T ALLOW PEOPLE TO ? >> I'M VERY CONCERNED ABOUT THE ZONING ASPECT OF THE IDO. IT'S A GOOD IDEA, BADLY EXECUTED. THE WHOLE SALE CHANGE OF R1 TO RL IS A TERRIBLE IDEA. IT NEEDS A LOT MORE DISCRIMINATION ABOUT WHICH NEIGHBORHOODS ARE AFFECTED. THIS IS THE WHOLE CITY. IT'S NOT JUST MY NEIGHBORHOOD. MAJOR TRANSIT CORRIDORS ARE WAY TOO LARGE FOR A ZONING CHANGE LIKE THIS. IT TAKES UP BLOCKS OF EXISTING NEIGHBORHOODS. I HOPE THAT THIS AMENDMENT TO O-26 STAYS AND THAT THE UPZONING IS NOT INCLUDED IN THIS IDO. THANK YOU. >> JACKIE FOLLOWED BY PRUTRISHA FOLLOWED BY LORETA. >> GOOD EVENING, MADAM PRESIDENT. COUNCILORS, I AM HERE TO URGE YOUR SPOERALITY TO A IN ORDER TO ALLOW MORE HOUSING CHOICES. STATES BOTH RED AND BLUE ACROSS THE COUNTRY ARE ADOPTING THESE CHANGES TO MAKE THEIR COMMUNITIES HEALTHIER, SAFER AND MORE AFFORDABLE. MONTANA ALLOWED DUPLEXES IN MUNICIPALABILITIES ABOVE A SINGLE POPULATIONS. ARKANSAS PASSED A SIMILAR BILL IN 2023 THAT ALLOWED ATTACHED ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS, GARAGE, APARTMENTS, AND LIMITED PARK REGULATION. COLORADO PASSED A SIMILAR BILL TO THE ARKANSAS BILL IN 2025 TO ALLOW ATTACHED AND DETACHED ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS. THIS TRANSCENDS PARTY LINES. I URGE YOUR SUPPORT AND ALLOWING MORE HOUSING OPTIONS. THANK YOU. >> PATRICIA FOLLOWED BY LORETTA FOLLOWED BY JORDAN. >> MADAM PRESIDENT, COUNCILORS, THERE'S NOTHING I CAN SAY IN 60 SECONDS THAT I'VE NOT ALREADY SAID. STARTING WITH THE PRE-EPC SUBMITTED SPREADSHEET LAST JULY. AND I OTHERS HAVE SUBMITTED HUNDREDS OF LETTERS AND ONLINE COMMENTS. THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT'S SLIDE FINDING THE BALANCE SHOWS, QUOTE, PROTECTING NEIGHBORHOODS SPECIAL PLACES AND CITY OPEN SPACE ON AN EQUAL FOOTING WITH INCENTIIZING HIGH QUALITY DEVELOPMENT IN APPROPRIATE AREAS. WHY DOES IT NEVER FEEL BALANCED? ONCE NEIGHBORHOOD PROTECTIONS ARE LOST, YOU CAN NEVER GET THEM BACK. NONE OF THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS HAVE CRITERIA FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING. BILLS STILL UNDECIDED AT THE STATE SEEK TO ELIMINATE REGULATION. THE LACK OF MISSING MIDDLE HOUSING HAS MORE TO DO WITH PROFESSIONAL LIABILITY RISK THAN ZONING REGULATIONS AND HOW CAN OVER 715 CHANGES IN SIX YEARS POINT TO ANYTHING OTHER THAN A BROKEN PROCESS? I URGE A DO NOT PASS. THANK YOU. >> LORETTA FOLLOWED BY JORDAN FOLLOWED BY BRIAN. >> COUNCIL PRESIDENT, COUNCILORS, I REQUEST THIS MATTER GO BACK TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT TO REQUEST WITH THE PROPERTY OWNERS AND YOUR CONSTITUENTS IN ORDER THEIR INPUT IS HEARD AND IMPLEMENTED. ONE OF THE ORIGINAL PURPOSES OF ZONING WAS TO KEEP INCOMPATIBLE USES SEPARATE FROM AREAS. ALLOWING HIGHER DENSITY HOUSING IN SINGLE FAMILY NEIGHBORHOODS CHANGES THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. MARTINEZ TOWN NEIGHBORHOOD WAS ZONED HEAVY COMMERCIAL. WE HAVE ALMOST EVERY ZONE CATEGORY THAT IS IN THE IDO. OUR NEIGHBORHOOD IS CURRENTLY DEEMED GENTRIFIED AND THE CITY STILL HAS NO PLANS TO HELP THE HISTORIC NEIGHBORHOODS FROM THE GENTRIFICATION. THE ARTICLE ON THE TALK OF SINGLE FAMILY ZONING, THE ARTICLE STATES WHY RESTRICTIONS ARE NECESSARY ON BUILDING HEIGHT AND NUMBER OF STORIES ON WHY NOT ALLOWING DUPLEXES AND TOWN HOMES IN ESTABLISHED RESIDENTIAL ZONES BUT IN RT ZONE AND MX ZONES. WE ASK THAT YOU STOP THE DISCRIMINATION AND PROTECT AND PRESERVE OUR NEIGHBORHOODS. THANK YOU FOR THIS OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK. >> JORDAN FOLLOWED BY BRIAN FOLLOWED BY LEE. >> GOOD EVENING, I WANT TO NAME SOMETHING THAT'S BEEN IMPOSSIBLE TO IGNORE ON THE DEBATES OVER IDO AMENDMENTS, THE PEOPLE SPEAKING IN FAVOR OF THESE AMENDMENTS ARE OVERWHELMINGLY YOUNGER THAN THE PEOPLE SPEAKING AGAINST THEM. THAT'S NOT A COINCIDENCE, IT'S THE GENERATION THAT'S TRYING TO STAY HERE AND BUILD A LIFE IN ALBUQUERQUE ASKING YOU TO MAKE THE SMALLEST AMOUNT OF ROOM FOR US. AND THERE ARE MORE OF US THAN YOU THINK. WE'RE TIRED OF HEARING YOU SAY YOU SUPPORT AFFORDABILITY WHILE WATCHING YOU VOTE AGAINST THAT. WHILE CLAIMING YOU WORK FOR US AND WANT US TO STAY HERE. THESE AMENDMENTS ARE INCREDIBLY MILD. THEY DON'T ERASE NEIGHBORHOODS. THEY DON'T ENFORCE THINGS OVERNIGHT. IT'S ALSO HARD TO FIND R1 ZONING SACRED WHEN SO EXLUTIONCLUSIONARY SET EGO ASIDE, LISTEN TO THE FUTURE OF THE CITY STANDING IN FRONT OF YOU TONIGHT. VOTE YES AS RECOMMENDED BY THE EPC. THE EXPERTS YOU CHOSE TO GUIDE THESE DECISIONS. THANK YOU. >> BRIAN FOLLOWED BY LUIS. >> GOOD EVENING, COUNCIL. I'M A HOMEOWNER IN DISTRICT ONE. CHANGE ALLOWS OUR NEIGHBORHOODS TO MATURE. RIGIDITY AND CONTROL DOES NOT EQUAL STABILITY. ASK MY NEIGHBOR WHO IS NO LONGER ABLE TO DRIVE. HE'S DEPENDENT ON PAYING FOR A CAREGIVER BECAUSE HE CAN'T WANT TO WALK TO GET GROCERIES. OR ASK MY NEIGHBORS WHO ARE STILL LIVING AT HOME BECAUSE THEIR BOAST GRADUATION WAGES CAN'T GET THEM ON THE HOUSING LADDER. ASK MY NEIGHBORS THAT HAD TO LEAVE THE COMMUNITY OF 30 YEARS BECAUSE THERE'S NOTHING TO DOWNSIZE INTO AFTER THEY HAD BACK SURGERY. ASK MY FRIEND WHO IS TRAPPED LIVING WITH HER ABUSER BECAUSE SHE CAN'T LIVE ON HER OWN. HOUSE IS HOUSING. WHY CAN'T WE SUPPORT CHANGES THAT WILL RESTORE SANE PRICES? A LOT OF US HERE TONIGHT WANT TO LIVE HERE FOR THE NEXT 30 YEARS. WE NEED HOUSING AND IT SHOULD BE AFFORDABLE. >> BRIAN -- LUIS FOLLOWED BY DEBRA FOLLOWED BY CARLOS. >> HELLO, COUNCIL PRESIDENT, COUNCIL MEMBERS. I'M A HOMEOWNER IN DISTRICT SEVEN. I'M HERE TO EXPRESS MY SUPPORT FOR THE ZONING REFORMS RECOMMENDED BY THE EPC. IN PARTICULAR, THE ALLOWANCE OF DUPLEXES, TOWN HOMES, ATTACHED EDU, AND RECLASSIFICATION ALONG MAJOR TRANSIT CORRIDORS. THESE ARE SMART REFORMS THAT TAKE ADVANTAGE OF UPCOMING AND EXISTING RESOURCES. THESE ARE HELPING SUPPORT SMALL LOCAL BUILDERS AND REDUCE THE POTENTIAL FOR DISPLACEMENT. IF A LOCATION WITHIN ALBUQUERQUE BECOMES HIGHLY DESIRABLE IT IS BEST TO ALLOW BUILDING OPTIONS VARIETY IF NOT, THE WELL-OFF WILL BUY UP AND EXPAND THEIR HOMES AND IN THE DESIRABLE LOCATIONS RATHER THAN HAVING A MIX OF OPTIONS. PLEASE SUPPORT VARIETY AND FREEDOM AND PASS THE REFORMS AS RECOMMENDED BY THE EPC. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. >> DEBRA FOLLOWED BY CARLOS FOLLOWED BY MICHELLE. >> I ASK THAT R1 BE RETAINED. THE IDEA INCREASING HOUSING DENSITY WILL REDUCE RENTAL PRICEICIZE A FALSE PREMISE. -- AFFORDABLE HOUSING IS EXACTLY WHAT WILL BE DEALT. A BODY OF RECENT INDEPENDENT RESEARCH INDICATES THAT R1 ELIMINATION DOES NOT ACHIEVE THE STATED GOAL OF INCREASING AFFORDABLE HOUSING. THE URBAN INSTITUTE MARCH 2023 COMPREHENSIVE STUDY OF 1,000 U.S. CITIESES OVER THE TIME PERIOD OF 2000 TO 2019 FOUND NO STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT EVIDENCE THAT ADDITIONAL LOWER COST UNITS BECAME AVAILABLE OR MODERATED IN COST FOLLOWING REFORMS. RATHER, THE INCREASE OCCURRED PREDOMINANTLY FOR UNITS AT THE HIGHER END OF RENT DISTRIBUTION. THIS WAS CORROBORATED BY A 2023 STUDY FROM THE WHARTON SCHOOL IN PENNSYLVANIA. I HAVE MORE RESEARCH, BUT I'M OUT OF TIME. THANK YOU. >> CARLOS FOLLOWED BY MICHELLE FOLLOWED BY MICHAEL. >> GOOD EVENING, COUNCILORS. I LIVE IN DISTRICT TWO. I'M HERE TO URGE YOU TO RESTORE CITYWIDE PROVISIONS THAT WERE PASSED BY THE EPC UNANIMOUSLY. YOUR EPC. EXPERTS YOU ASSIGNED TO LOOK AT THIS ISSUE. AND BEFORE THAT, PROFESSIONAL CITY PLANNING AND PUBLIC INPUT SINCE JULY AS SEVERAL PEOPLE HAVE SAID. JUST FOR THE LUPZ COMMITTEE TO REMOVE ONE AFTER ANOTHER OF THE PROVISIONS THAT HAVE BEEN IN THE WORKS FOR SIX MONTHS. IF YOU WANT TO ATTRACT INVESMENTS AND STOP BRAIN DRAIN AND GIVE YOUNG PROFESSIONALS A REASON TO BUILD THEIR LIVES HERE, OUR ZONING CODES NEED TO ALLOW FOR CHANGE. NOT FREEZE OUR CITY IN AMBER. FAMILIES FORM WHERE HOMES ARE AVAILABLE. IF WE KEEP RESTRICTING THE MOST MODEST OF HOUSING CHOICES, YEAH. PLEASE PASS EVERYTHING ON THE EPC. >> MICHELLE FOLLOWED BY MICHAEL FOLLOWED BY BRENDA. >> GOOD EVENING. I'M FROM DISTRICT SIX. I WORK ONE JOB. I'VE WORKED TWO JOBS IN THE PAST. I DON'T HAVE TIME TO CALL AND EMAIL REPEATEDLY. PUT I HAVE FRIENDS ACROSS MULTIPLE DISTRICTS AND WE'RE ALL WATCHING. I SUPPORT THE EPC APPROVED AMENDMENT FOR THE IDO. ALBUQUERQUE IS GROWING AND WE NEED HOUSING OPTIONS. WE NEED WALKABLE NEIGHBORHOODS AND SAFE SPACE FOR OUR UNHOUSED NEIGHBORS. MOST OF US ARE ONE BAD YEAR FROM NEEDING EXACTLY WHAT THIS ORDINANCE WOULD CREATE. AS THE SAYING GOES,THERE BUT FOR THE GRACE OF GOD GO I. SOMETHING I USED TO HEAR FROM MY MOM ALL THE TIME WHO MANAGED TO PULL HERSELF FROM A LOT OF HELP FROM A LOT OF DIFFERENT PEOPLE. HONESTLY, ME AND MY FRIENDS ARE PAYING ATTENTION. THEY'RE IN DIFFERENT AREAS OF THE CITY. WE ALL VOTE. PLEASE SUPPORT THIS EPC APPROVED AMENDMENTS. AND GET RID OF THE EXCLUSIONARY ZONING THAT HAS ALWAYS BEEN EXCLUSIONARY SINCE THE BEGINNING OF THE 20th CENTURY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> MICHAEL FOLLOWED BY BRENDA FOLLOWED BY DENNIS. >> MADAM CHAIR, I SEE MICHAEL ON ZOOM. I WILL TRANSFER HIM OVER TO MY LIST. WE'LL GO TO BRENDA FOLLOWED BY DENNIS FOLLOWED BY ADRIAN. >> MADAM PRESIDENT, MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL, I AM BRENDA. I'M PRESIDENT OF THE CASEAL NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. YOU RECEIVED A LETTER FROM US OVER THE WEEKEND. I HOPE YOU DID. IF YOU DIDN'T, I'M HAPPY TO GIVE YOU ONE. AS I SAID IN THE LETTER, O-69 OVERLAY DUPLEXES, TOWNHOMES AND LOW RISE MULTIFAMILY IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. SO FAR, WE HAVE PRODUCED NOTHING. THAT DOESN'T MEAN WHEN HOUSING -- WHEN MONEY GETS CHEAPER AND PRODUCTS GET CHEAPER THAT IT WON'T HAPPEN. WHAT CONCERNS US IS THE ZONING CONVERSION LANGUAGE IF IT'S REINSTATED YOU'RE GOING TO SWITCH US FROM R1 TO RT AND THEN THERE'S NOTHING IN THAT LANGUAGE THAT PREVENTS A DEVELOPER FROM SWITCHING RT TO MX-T IMMEDIATELY. THERE'S NO STOP. IT GOES FROM ONE TO THE NEXT. AND THAT WILL PUT COMMERCIAL ZONING IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD WHICH WILL RUIN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. I URGE YOU TO VOTE NO. >> DENNIS FOLLOWED BY ADRIAN FOLLOWED BY BENJAMIN. >> GOOD EVENING, COUNCIL. I ATTENDED THE LAST TWO LUPZ MEETINGS. AND THE LAST LUPZ MEETING LUPZ WAS DISCUSSING PARKING MINIMUMS. GENERAL CONSENSUS WAS WHY DO WE NEED TO REGULATE -- WE SHOULD THE CITY TELL BUSINESSES HOW MANY PARKING SPOTS TO PUT, WHY CAN'T THE BUSINESSES DECIDE? WE SHOULDN'T MICROMANAGE BUSINESSES IN THAT WAY. AND DEVELOPERS IN THAT WAY. THEN I HEAR A CONTRADICTION BECAUSE THE SAME FOLKS WHO AGREED WE SHOULDN'T MICROMANAGE BUSINESSES NOW WE'RE MICROMANAGING PROPERTY OWNERS WHO MAY WANT TO CONVERT THEIR HOMES INTO DUPLEXES OR SMALL DEVELOPERS THAT WANT TO BUILD STARTER HOMES IN THEIR NEIGHBORHOODS. JUST A REMINDER, FOR EVERYONE, A DUPLEX -- ALL A DUPLEX IS A HOUSE WITH TWO HOUSING UNITS INSIDE IT. A TOWN HOME IS A SINGLE FAMILY HOME THAT SHARES A WALL WITH ANOTHER SINGLE FAMILY HOME. I DON'T THINK THIS IS THAT RADICAL. THANK YOU. >> ADRIAN FOLLOWED BY BENJAMIN FOLLOWED BY TYLER. BENJAMIN FOLLOWED BY TYLER FOLLOWED BY ANDREW. >> MADAM CHAIR, COUNCILORS, TONIGHT YOU CHOOSE PROSPERITY OR POVERTY. THAT'S YOUR CHOICE. NO DOUBT YOU'VE BEEN RECEIVING MANY IMPOSITIONED EMAILS FROM PEOPLE WHO ARE SCARED OR ANGRY OVER WHAT O-26-2 WILL DO TO THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD. I'M SCARED TOO. I'M AFRAID OF WHAT WILL HAPPEN TO THE CITY WITHOUT THE CHANGES TO THE IDO. UNFORTUNATELY FOR US, OUR CITY WILL CHANGE WHETHER WE WANT IT TO OR NOT. IF WE KEEP GOING AS WE ARE NOW, OUR NEIGHBORHOODS WILL CRUMBLE OVER THE WEIGHT OF TIME WITHOUT ENOUGH PEOPLE TO SPREAD OUT THE LOAD. ROADS WILL GET WORSE, AND IT WILL BECOME UNAFFORDABLE TO MAINTAIN THEM AND ESSENTIAL SERVICES WILL BE CUT. I'M HOPEFUL. WITH THESE CHANGES WE CAN GROW INFILL BUSINESSES. MORE PEOPLE CAN HAVE THEIR SHARE OF ROADS AND INFRASTRUCTURE. MORE BUSINESSES TO GENERATE REVENUE AND MAKE OUR CITY THRIVE. IT WILL MEAN ABUNDANCE FOR ALBUQUERQUE. THANK YOU FOR REPRESENTING BURQUENO. >> TYLER FOLLOWED BY ANDREW FOLLOWED BY RHIANNON. >> GOOD EVENING. WE JUST TALK ABOUT THE EXECUTION FAILURE OF THE $14 MILLION ROUTE 66 CENTER. IT STILL ISN'T OPEN. LET'S TALK ABOUT HOUSING. WE ARE IN A HOUSING SHORTAGE. WE'RE PRICING OUT WORKING FAMILIES. WE'RE LOSING YOUNG PROFESSIONALS. HOUSING SUPPLY IS NOT PHILOSOPHICAL, IT IS MASS. THE EPC CHANGES TO THE IDO RESTORE TRADITIONAL NEIGHBORHOOD BUILDING PATTERNS. THEY ALLOW INCREMENTAL DENSITY. THEY LET DEVELOPMENT DO WHAT GOVERNMENT HAS PROVEN IT CANNOT, DELIVER HOUSING EFFICIENTLY. THIS IS THE CONTRAST. WHEN GOVERNMENT TRIES TO MANAGE AND OPERATE WE GET LOCKED GATE AND WEEDS IN PARKING LOTS. WE NEED MODERNIZED ZONING. EXECUTION MATTERS. IF WE'RE SERIOUS ABOUT AFFORDABILITY, STOP STALLING INCREMENTAL HOUSING. REFORM AND PASS THE EPC SUPPORTED CHANGES. LET THE BUILDERS BUILD. LET THE NEIGHBORHOODS GROW RESPONSIBLY. AND DELIVER RESULTS. >> ANDREW FOLLOWED BY RHIANNON FOLLOWED BY PHOEBE. >> GOOD EVENING, COUNCIL PRESIDENT COUNCILORS. THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE. I'M A RESIDENT OF DISTRICT SEVEN. I COME TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF THE AMENDMENT PACKAGE AS PASSED BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION. IN PARTICULAR, I WISH TO VOICE MY SUPPORT FOR THE ALLOWANCE OF INCREASED DENSITY. CORNER STORES AND LESS ONEROUS PARKING REQUIREMENTS. AS COUNCILORS CONSIDER THE AMENDMENT PACKAGE, I WOULD ASK YOU TO KEEP IN MIND THE BENEFITS OF CORNER STORES AND INCREASED DENSITY FOR OLDER FOLKS. FOR THE SUBURBAN ELDERLY, A LOCK OF WALKABILITY AND ABSENCE OF SHOPS MEANS THEY'RE DEPENDENT ON DRIVING. FOR MANY ELDERLY, ALBUQUERQUE DRIVING BECOMES A FRIGHTENING PROSPECT AS THEY AGE. MANY OF US HAVE HAD TO HAVE THAT CONVERSATION WITH OLDER PARENTS OR PARENTS ABOUT STOPPING DRIVING? THEY CAN BECOME ISOLATED IN A CITY MANDATED LOW DENSITY SPRAWL. I ENCOURAGE YOU TO PASS THE AMENDMENT PACKAGE. THANK YOU. >> RHIANNON FOLLOWED BY MONEARING. >> GOOD EVENING, I'M WITH NAOP NEW MEXICO. WE HAD A TRACK RECORD OF ADVOCATING FOR THE EASING OF RESTRICTIVE ZONING. AND UNNECESSARY REGULATION. WE HAVE ALSO HAD A TRACK RECORD OF SUPPORTING A RANGE OF HOUSING OPTIONS ACROSS OUR CITY BECAUSE WE RECOGNIZE THAT ALBUQUERQUE IS IN A HOUSING CRISIS. OVERALL, WE BROADLY SUPPORT THE IDO AMENDMENT BEFORE YOU AND WE UNDERSTAND THERE'S A FEW AMENDMENTS BEFORE YOU THIS EVENING TOO TO HELP FOR DUPLEXES, TOWN HOMES AND ALL THE THINGS THAT NATURALLY INCREASE DENSITY. SOMETHING NAOP HAS BEEN ON THE RECORD FOR A LONG TIME. I WILL CONTINUE TO ASSERT IF WE WANT TO REALLY HAVE AN IMPACT ON HOUSING, WE NEED TO WORK ON DENSITY. WE NEED HEIGHT RESTRICTIONS. BECAUSE WHAT WE'RE SEEING ON THE DEVELOPERS SIDE OF THINGS IS THAT PEOPLE AND CONSUMERS ARE LOOKING FOR WALKABLE MIXED USE INFILL ENVIRONMENTS. AND THE MORE WE RESTRICT AND HAVE MORE MICROMANAGEMENT THE LESS THAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN. THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION. >> PHOEBE FOLLOWED BY MONIQUE FOLLOWED BY RAYMOND. >> MADAM PRESIDENT, COUNCILORS, I AM A RESIDENT OF DISTRICT SIX. I'M HERE IN STRONG SUPPORT OF THE THOUGHTFUL AND VERY MODERATE AMENDMENTS PROPOSED IN THE EPC VERSION OF O-26-2. I BELIEVE AND I THINK ALL OF YOU DO THAT ACCESS TO HOUSING AND FOOD ARE JUST BASIC HUMAN RIGHTS. TONIGHT YOU DO HAVE IT OPPORTUNITY TO ACT ON THAT BELIEF AND MAKE FOOD AND HOUSING MORE ACCESSIBLE TO NEIGHBORS ACROSS THE BEAUTIFUL CITY. FAMILIES CAN EASILY BUILD CASITAS. ENTREPRENEURS CAN OPEN SMALL GROCERY STORES. AND REAL COMMUNITY WEALTH COULD BE BUILT IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. I LIVE IN A WONDERFUL COMMUNITY OF NEIGHBORS DISTRICT SIX. MANY HAVE TO RENT BECAUSE THEY CAN'T FIND AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN THE COMMUNITY THEY LOVE SO MUCH. THEY WANT TO INVEST IN THE COMMUNITY AND BUILD FAMILIES BUT THEY DON'T HAVE OPTION TO DO SO. THIS IS NOT RAD CAL. PLEASE PASS THE FULL IDO AMENDMENT. THANK YOU. >> I'M A RESIDENT OF DISTRICT SIX. I OPPOSE O-26-2. I'M DEEPLY CONCERNED ABOUT THIS SITUATION IN ALBUQUERQUE WHICH SEEMS TO BE SPIRALLING OUT OF CONTROL. COUNCIL MEMBERS HAVE FAILED TO LISTEN TO US. EVERY WEEK RESIDENT ATTEND THE MEETINGS TO EXPRESS SUPPORT OR OPPOSITION TO THE POLICIES AND PROJECTS YOU ADVOCATE OR OPPOSE. AS YOU KNOW, NEW MEXICO IS A BEAUTIFUL STATE WITH SACRED SITES AND SUNSETS AND MANY PEOPLE VISIT FORPUTY. WE'RE PROUD TO CALL IT HOME. THE PROPOSED CHANGES THAT WOULD END SACRED SITES AND HISTORIC NEIGHBORHOODS WILL ONLY MAKE OUR CITY LOOK LIKE ANY OTHER. A FEATURE THE PEOPLE OF ALBUQUERQUE DO NOT WANT. WE SUPPORT MORE AFFORDABLE HOUSING, AND EFFORTS TO BEAUTIFY OUR CITY, BUT WE DESERVE A REAL VOICE IN DECISIONS THAT AFFECT OUR NEIGHBORHOODS. I URGE YOU TO STOP LISTENING TO THOSE WHO RYE TO INFLUENCE YOU WITH MONEY AND INSTEAD LISTEN TO THE PEOPLE WHO ELECTED YOU. >> GOOD EVENING, PRESIDENT, COUNCILORSES. I LIVE IN DISTRICT TWO. I HAVE SPOKEN BEFORE ABOUT LEARNING NOT TO FEAR ZONING UPDATES. AND ABOUT AN EIGHTH GENERAL NEW MEXICAN WHO SAW NO PATH TO OWNING THEIR OWN HOME HERE. THESE CONVERSATIONS CLARIFIED WHAT THIS IS REALLY ABOUT. HISTORICALLY AFFORDABILITY WAS CLOSER TO THREE TIMES INCOME. HERE IN ALBUQUERQUE, WE'RE BETWEEN SIX AND EIGHT TIMES MEDIAN INCOME. THAT GAP IS NOT ABOUT PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY, IT'S ABOUT POLICY. HOUSING SCARCITY DECIDES WHO GETS TO STAY. PRO-HOUSING ELEMENTS OF O-26-2 PASSED BY THE EPC RESTORE A GREATER VARIETY OF HOUSING TYPES AND ALLOW NEIGHBORHOODS SCALE LOCAL SHOPS AGAIN. HOUSING SHORTAGE WILL NOT SOLVE ITSELF AND DELAY ONLY DEEPENS THE INEQUITY. STAND BY THE WORK YOU COMMISSIONED. KEEP THE PRO-HOUSING COMMISSIONS PASSED BY THE EPC. >> ALTHEA FOLLOWED BY BRITNEY FOLLOWED BY DENICE. >> MADAM PRESIDENT, I URGE YOU TO PASS THE IDO UPDATE AS IT PASSED THE EPC. AS FOR THE MAIN STREET AMENDMENT, WHILE I APPLAUD THE PARTS OF AUTO-CENTRIC BUSINESSES, AND WILL HAVE A LOT OF UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES. IF YOU'RE NOT SURE WHAT THOSE DEFINITIONS ARE, LOOK AT PAGE 562 AND PAGE 612. WHEN YOU HAVE A MEDICAL ISSUE WITH PUBLIC DYSFUNCTION OR IF YOU HAD SURGERY ON YOUR PELVIC FLOOR, YOUR DOCTOR MAY SEND YOU TO GET A DILATORS. YOU CAN'T BUY THOSE AT WALGREEN'S OR THE PHARMACY. THEY SEND YOU TO THE SEX SHOP FOR THAT. WE WANT TO BE ABLE TO SPEND THAT MONEY IN ALBUQUERQUE ON ROUTE 66. AND WHAT ABOUT SEX ED? I LIVE LIFE SAVING MEDICAL INFORMATION BASED CLASS. THROUGH THE LENS OF PLEASURE. I DON'T WANT TO UPDATE MY CURRICULUM BASED ON ZONING CODE OF WALKABILITY. THANK YOU. >> BRITNEY FOLLOWED BY DENICE FOLLOWED BY THOMAS. >> GOOD EVENING. I LIVE IN DISTRICT SIX. I AM HERE TO SUPPORT THE IDOPLEMENT TO EXPAND HOUSING CHOICES AND IMPROVE AFFORDABILITY IN ALBUQUERQUE. AS MUCH AS I LOVE THE IDEA OF WALKING DOWN THE STREET FOR GROCERIES AND ENTERTAINMENT. I'M HERE TO SUPPORT BECAUSE OF THE POTENTIAL FOR REDUCING HOMELESSNESS. OTHER LARGE CITIES LIKE HOUSTON AND MINI APILOUS HAVE USED THIS TO DECREASE ENCAMPMENTS NOT THROUGH INHUMANE SWEEPS OR STEALING BELONGINGS, BUT THROUGH PROVIDING RESOURCES. A STUDY FROM THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT SHOW RESTRICTIVE LAND USE REGULATIONS INCREASE HOMELESSNESS BY 12% AND AN INCREASING HOUSING SUPPLY BY JUST ONE STANDARD DEVIATION DECREASES BY 10%. EVERY TIME SOME COMMON SENSE MEASURE COMES UP, CERTAIN MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL HIM AND HA ABOUT MADE UP CONCERNS SO FAR REMOVED IT'S ALMOST LAUGHABLE. PLEASE SUPPORT THIS. DENICE FOLLOWED BY THOMAS FOLLOWED BY JOSEPH. >> THANK YOU. GOOD EVENING, MADAM CHAIR, COMMUNITY MEMBERS. A COMMUNITY MEMBER OF ALBUQUERQUE. I LIVE IN DISTRICT ONE. I AM HERE TO OPPOSE THE AMENDMENT. HAVING LIVED IN ALBUQUERQUE FOR TWO YEARS, I MUST ASK MYSELF WHAT BROUGHT ME BACK. MY FAMILY ENJOYS THE CULTURE, MANY TRAILS, AND THE URBAN AESTHETICS. I ALSO CARE ABOUT PROTECTING SACRED SITES AND PRESERVING NEIGHBORHOODS. PROVIDING AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND ECONOMIC SECURITY FOR ALBUQUERQUE RESIDENTS. YOU CAN DEVELOP WITH SOUND JUDGMENT AND IN COMPLIANCE WITH APPLICABLE LAND USE REGULATION. THE CITY COUNCIL DISREGARD FOR CONSTITUENTS COMMENTS REFLECTS POOR DECISION MAKING AND TREATS US AS IF WE DIDN'T MATTER. KEEP IN MIND THE PEOPLE WHO LIVE HERE AS WELL AS YOURSELVES. DON'T DECIDE FOR US, WE SHOULD DECIDE TOGETHER. THANK YOU. >> THOMAS FOLLOWED BY JOSEPH FOLLOWED BY ELIZABETH. >> THIS IS QUITE THE LEGISLATION YOU'VE PUT UP. UNFORTUNATELY, WHETHER OR NOT YOUR FELLOW CITY COUNCILORS SUPPORT IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH ANYTHING WE SAY HERE TONIGHT. THAT IS BECAUSE, AS I KEEP REPEATING, YOU'RE BRIBED, COUNCILOR PEÑA. IN FACT, LET ME CONTINUE MAKING THAT ARGUMENT WHY THE WAY YOU VOTE IS DETERMINED BY FOLKS LIKE N A, -- NAOP. GAR. IF I CAN HAVE THE OVERHEAD PLEASE. OVERHEAD. I SEE IT WAS ON. THIS YEAR, IT SAYS WHO IS PUTTING OUT YOUR CAMPAIGN MATERIAL. PAID BY THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION FORERAL REALTOR. ONE OF THE BIG DONORS, THE GREATER ALBUQUERQUE ASSOCIATION FOR REALTOR. YOU SAY MORE CONSTRUCTION. HERE'S A CHANCE TO VOTE ON THAT. WHY? BECAUSE GAR WILL TELL YOU TO. HERE YOU GO. ALL THE WAY AT THE BOTTOM. IT SAYS WHO PAID FOR YOU. GAR. THEY FUND YOUR CAMPAIGN. I COULDN'T FIND ONE FOR YOU. BUT THIS IS ALSO YOU. IT SAYS THE SAME THING DOWN HERE. PAID FOR BY THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION -- NATIONAL COALITION FOR REALTORS. THEY WANT MORE REAL ESTATE. YOU'RE GIVING THEM EXACTLY WHAT THEY WANT. WHETHER OR NOT THIS IS GOOD LEGISLATION OR BAD LEGISLATION IS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE WAY YOU VOTE. YOU'RE BRIBED AND YOU'RE GOING TO VOTE HOWEVER THEY TELL YOU TO. >> JOSEPH FOLLOWED BY ELIZABETH FOLLOWED BY ADAM. >> MADAM PRESIDENT, COUNCILORS, I'M A RESIDENT OF DISTRICT TWO. AS A ROADRUNNER FOOD BANK EMPLOYEE OF EIGHT YEARS, SOMETHING I'M PROUD OF IS THE WORKFORCE SOLUTIONS PROGRAM THAT WE HAVE TO HELP LOW INCOME PEOPLE TAKE THEIR NEXT STEPS. YEARS WHEN I SUPERVISED THE INTERNS I FOUND HOUSING INSECURITY IS PERVASIVE. GIVEN THAT MANY OF THEM DON'T HAVE AUTOMOBILES, PROXIMITY TO WORKPLACE IS OF UTMOST IMPORTANCE. ROADRUNNER FOOD BANK IS LOCATED AT I-25 AND JEFFERSON. IN AN AREA OF LIGHT MANUFACTURING. IN THE ADJACENT NORTH VALLEY AREA AND AREAS TO THE EAST ONE IS HARD PRESSED TO FIND A RENTAL THAT IS LESS THAN A THOUSAND PER MONTH. THIS IS UNTENABLE FOR THE INTERNS I WORK WITH. ALLOWING MULTIFAMILY AND MIXED ZONING IN EVERY PART OF THE CITY WOULD PUT US ON THE PATH TO GIVE EVERYONE, ESPECIALLY THOSE ECONOMICALLY VULNERABLE, THE CHANCE TO LIVE NEAR WHERE THEY WORK. I ASK YOU TO PLEASE BRING BACK EPC AMENDMENTS. I APPRECIATE IT. >> ELIZABETH FOLLOWED BY ADAM FOLLOWED BY WILLIAM. >> GOOD EVENING, MADAM PRESIDENT COUNCILORS. I'M HERE TO SPEAK IN SUPPORT OF THE FULL IDO AMENDMENT PACKAGE. I WORK AS A COMMUNITY HEALTH NURSE IN ALBUQUERQUE AND I VIEW THIS ORDINANCE AS A MATTER OF PUBLIC HEALTH. HOMELESSNESS IN ALBUQUERQUE DOUBLED FROM 2023 TO 2024. DOUBLED. THAT IS A WILDLY UNSUSTAINABLE GROWTH FOR INDIVIDUALS WHO CANNOT AFFORD A PLACE TO LIVE. HOUSING DEMANDS SEVERELY EXCEEDS SUPPLY. THE EPC AMENDMENT TO THE IDO WOULD INCREASE SUPPLY AND DO SO IN GENTLE WAYS THAT DON'T ENCROACH ON LAND AND RUIN NEIGHBORHOODS AND USE EXISTING INFRASTRUCTURE. HOMELESSNESS IS A HOUSING PROBLEM. THE DATA SHOWS IT. IF WE WANT A CITY THAT IS A PROSAREPOROUS PLACE, WE NEED TO SUPPORT THE CHANGES. IF WE WANT INCREASED FOOD ACCESS AND LOCAL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, WE NEED TO SUPPORT THESE CHANGES. PLEASE SUPPORT THE EPC AMENDMENTS TO THE IDO AND SUPPORT ACCESS TO HOUSING, FOOD, AND COMMUNITY FOR OUR NEIGHBORS. >> ADAM FOLLOWED BY WILLIAM FOLLOWED BY JAMES. >> I'M SURE YOU'VE HEARD BOTH SIDES OF THE IDO CHANGE. I'M HOPING TO PRESENT SOMETHING SORT OF THAT IS KIND OF RARE NOWADAYS. THE MIDDLE GROUND. AS YOU MIGHT KNOW, COULD WE GET THE HEAD ROOM? I THINK THERE ARE WAYS TO HAVE BOTH SIDES -- I'M SORRY. I CAN'T. I'VE NEVER DONE THIS BEFORE. >>COUN. PEÑA: YOU CAN KEEP GOING. >>COUN. CHAMPINE: MADAM PRESIDENT, MAY I REQUEST HE'S ALLOWED EXTRA TIME. >>COUN. PEÑA: ABSOLUTELY. >> IS IT OKAY IF I READ WHAT HE HAS? >>COUN. PEÑA: I THINK YOU GOT THIS. >> I'LL READ. I ALONG WITH OTHERS HAVE CONCERNS AND FEEDBACK REGARDING THE CHANGES TO THE IDO AMENDMENTS. THE ORIGINAL AMENDMENT IS SOUGHT TO INCREASING SUPPLY FOR TRIPLEX AND SINGLE ZONED AREAS. HOWEVER, I THINK THERE WAYS THAT BALANCE BOTH THE ISSUES WITH PARKING, CHARACTER PROTECTION, ALSO A LOT OF DUPLEXES. ONE THING IS YOU HAVE -- I SUGGEST DOING AN OCCUPANCY REQUIREMENT. ALLOW DUPLEX IF ONE IS OCCUPIED. AND ALLOWING A SECOND UNIT PUT RESTRICTING INVESTOR OWNED DUPLEXES. EFFECTIVELY REDUCING SPECULATION, ENCOURAGING LONG-TERM RESIDENCES. ANOTHER THING I WOULD LIKE TO ADD ON IS ALSO PROTECTING NEIGHBORHOODS BY REQUIRING DUPLEXES TO RESEMBLE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES OR CAPPING THE HEIGHT AND SETBACKS ON THE DUPLEXES WHILE RETAINING THE CHARACTERS. THERE ARE WAYS TO BALANCE BOTH THE NEED FOR HOUSING BUT ALSO ACKNOWLEDGING CHARACTER. YOU CAN SEE IN THE OVERHEAD. I DON'T HAVE ENOUGH TIME TO SAY EVERYTHING. YEAH. IF YOU WANT TO TAKE A PICTURE. THERE ARE WAYS TO ACCOMMODATE BOTH SIDES OF THE ISSUE. I URGE YOU TO RECONSIDER. THANK YOU. >>COUN. PEÑA: ADAM. IF YOU WANT TO LEAVE YOUR NOTES WITH YOU AND WE CAN GET COPIES AND GET THEM TO THE COUNCILORS. >> I HAVE 12 COPIES. HERE. HERE'S A BUNCH. >>COUN. PEÑA: THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR COMMENTS. WITH ALL THE DIALOGUE, IT'S A BREATH OF FRESH AIR TO HEAR SOMEBODY TALK ABOUT COMPROMISE AND WORKING TOGETHER. THANK YOU SO MUCH. I THINK YOU'VE BEEN THE BEST PUBLIC SPEAKER TONIGHT. >> THANK YOU, MADAM PRESIDENT. WILLIAM FOLLOWED BY JAMES, FOLLOWED BY SEBASTIAN. >> IF YOU WANT INCREASED HOUSING SUPPLY, YOU NEED TO PASS. ALLOWING DENSITY CITY WIDE REDUCES COST FOR CONSTRUCTION. IF YOU WANT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ALL THIS TAKEN TOGETHER ALBUQUERQUE IS WORTH INVESTING IN. IF YOU'RE CONCERNED ABOUT LOCAL BUSINESSES, ZONING ALLOWS THEM TO CREATE JOBS RATHER THAN LARGE DEVELOPERS TO DICTATE. PREVENTING CHANGE RESULTS IN STAGNATION WHILE NEW FAMILIES CAN BRING LIFE AND LAUGHTER. TOWN HOMES AND COTTAGE INT GREAT WITHIN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. THEY DON'T TAKE OVER. IF YOU CARE ABOUT THE FABRIC OF YOUR COMMUNITY, NEIGHBORHOOD STORES BUILD THE FACTRIC OF THE COMMUNITIES. WE'RE CALLED TO BE HOSPITABLE NEIGHBORS. FOR THOSE WHO HAVE BEEN SHOWN GENEROSITY -- WE MUST MAKE EVERY EFFORT TO REMOVE BARRIERS AND BUILD CAPACITY FOR THE LAES OF CITIZENS. I IMPLORE YOU TO ACT OUT OF LOVE AND WELCOME THE OUTSIDER. >> JAMES FOLLOWED BY SEBASTIAN FOLLOWED BY RENÉ. >> MADAM PRESIDENT, COUNCILORS, I CERTAINLY DO NOT ENVY ANY OF YOU HAVING TO PARSE SO MANY ABSOLUTE ASSERTIONS OF FACTS THAT ARE IN DIRECT CONTRADICTION WITH EACH OTHER. I THINK WE CAN ALL AGREE THERE ARE CERTAIN FACTS IN THIS CITY. ONE IS WE HAVE THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE WHO ARE UNHOUSED. THEIR ISSUE IS NOT HOUSING AVAILABILITY IT'S AFFORDABILITY. WE ALSO KNOW THE FACT THAT WE HAVE A 20% COMMERCIAL PROPERTY VACANCY RATE. IT'S REALLY HARD TO CONTRAST THAT WITH A VIABLE BUSINESS PLAN FOR A CORNER BODEGA THAT'S GOING TO DEPEND ON JUST WALKABLE CUSTOMERS. THERE IS A REAL NEED FOR PRACTICALITY AND ALSO FOR COMPROMISE. IF WE WANT THEM TO FIND HOUSING THAT IS AFFORDABLE, RIGHT NOW IT HAS TO BE DEVELOPED ON THE CORRIDORS. BECAUSE THEY'RE SCREAMING FOR THAT OPPORTUNITY. AND THAT'S WHERE THE LAND VALUES ARE. NOT IN THE PRESENT VALUE OF SINGLE FAMILY HOMES. RATHER THAN DICTATE CHANGE, LET'S FIND SOME CONDITIONAL OPPORTUNITIES THAT ARE NOT UNDUALLY OBSTRUCTIVE FOR NEIGHBORHOODS TO COLLABORATE AND AGREE ON OPTIONS TO DEVELOP FOR A BETTER FUTURE FOR ALBUQUERQUE. THANK YOU. >> SUBASTION FOLLOWED BY RENÉ FOLLOWED BY AMY. >> GOOD EVENING. I LIVE IN DISTRICT EIGHT. FROM MY APARTMENT I'M A WALK AWAY FROM A WONDERFUL PARK AND DPROEGSRY STORE AND OTHER SMALL BUSINESSES. I CAN BIKE TO BEAR CANYON. I COME TO ENJOY THIS NEIGHBORHOOD. BUT IT'S UNLIKELY THAT I'LL BE ABLE TO AFFORD TO BUY A HOME THERE DUE TO LACK OF HOUSING SUPPLY AND THE GENERAL UNAFFORDABILITY. I MIGHT HAVE TO GO TO THE WEST MESA. SOMEWHERE CAR DEPENDENT TO AFFORD A HOME OF MY OWN AND LOSE THE PERKS I HAVE COME TO ENJOY. THAT'S WHY I SUPPORT THE RESTORE PROHOMES AMENDMENT TO THE ID ORBS. ALLOWING MORE HOUSING TYPES IN THESE NEIGHBORHOODS WILL HELP YOUNG PEOPLE LIKE MYSELF ESTABLISH THEMSELVES WHEN IT'S ALREADY BECOME INCREASINGLY DIFFICULT FOR US TO GET A FOOT IN THE DOOR OF THE HOUSING MARKET. PLEASE CONSIDER YOUNG WORKERS AND STUDENTS AND FAMILIES IN YOUR DECISION. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> RENÉ FOLLOWED BY AMY FOLLOWED BY GRACE. >> GOOD EVENING, AGAIN. I LIVE AT THE WEST SIDE. AND I AM THEIR LAND USE DIRECTOR. I DEAL WITH A LOT OF EPC HEARINGS. AND WE DID CHANGE THE ZONE CODE IN 2018. THAT WASN'T LONG AGO. TO INCREASE THE DENSITY. SO, WE AND THE TALLER BUILDINGS -- THEY'RE MAKING TALLER BUILDINGS, LESS PARKING, LESS USABLE OPEN SPACE AROUND THAT. WE ALREADY DID THAT. WHAT I'M SEEING -- WE'RE BUILDING TONS OF APARTMENTS ON THE WEST SIDE. AND NONE OF THEM ARE AFFORDABLE. EVEN THOUGH YOU INCREASE THE DENSITY. NOW YOU'RE LOOKING AT THE R1 ZONING AND YOU WANT TO CHANGE THAT, THINKING IT'S GOING TO SOLVE AFFORDABILITY ISSUES. IT ISN'T. IT'S GOING TO MAKE THINGS WORSE BECAUSE YOU INCREASED THE DENSITY. IT'S STILL GOING TO BE RENTALS. AND YOU'RE AT THE MERCY OF THE RENT. IF THEY DECIDE TO UP RENT, YOU HAVE TO PAY FOR IT. YOU WANT TO MAINTAIN R1 ZONING BECAUSE YOU OWN THE HOME AND YOU CAN AFFORD IT. NONE OF THE CITIES THAT TRIED THIS -- IT HAS FAILED. INCREASING DENSITY HAS NOT SOLVED OUR PROBLEMS. WE NEED TO RE-EXAMINE HOW WE DO IDO AMENDMENTS BECAUSE THERE'S STILL A LOT THAT NEEDS TO BE DEALT WITH. THANK YOU. >> AMY FOLLOWED BY GRACE FOLLOWED BY NICOLE. >> HELLO, COUNCIL PRESIDENT AND COUNCIL MEMBERS. I LIVE IN DISTRICT SIX. I WANT TO THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF THE IDO FOR HOMES AMENDMENTS AS RECOMMENDED BY THE EPC. I LOVE ALBUQUERQUE, BUT I SEE ITS PROBLEMS, PARTICULARLY A LACK OF ACCESS TO AFFORDABLE HOUSING. I BELIEVE THESE AMENDMENTS WILL HELP BY CREATING MORE NEIGHBORHOOD-BASED HOUSING. CURRENT ZONING LAWS LIMIT TOWN HOMES AND MANDATE UNUSED PARKING LOT AND PROHIBIT SMALL SCALE NEIGHBORHOOD BUSINESSES. THESE AMENITIES ARE UNNECESSARY. AND THEY'RE NOT PART OF ALBUQUERQUE HISTORY. WE BEGAN WITH THE FREEDOM TO BE ABLE TO INTERMIX RESIDENCES AND BUSINESSES. THAT'S WHY OLDER AREAS LIKE OLD TOWN AND NOB HILL ARE WALKABLE AND FUN TO VISIT AND FUN TO LIVE IN. THEY'RE IN SUCH DEMAND. I THINK WE ALL WANT BETTER AND MORE PLACES FOR PEOPLE TO LIVE AND EXIST. I WANT MY MOTHER TO BE ABLE TO WALK TO A BODEGA AND I WANT YOUNG PEOPLE TO FIND AFFORDABLE PLACES TO LIVE. I URGE YOU TO SUPPORT THE IDO AMENDMENTS AS RECOMMENDED BY THE EPC. THANK YOU. >> GRACE FOLLOWED BY NICOLE FOLLOWED BY JOE. >> THANK YOU. MADAM PRESIDENT, MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL, I AM A RENTER IN DISTRICT FOUR. I'M A STUDENT AT UNM. I'M IN SUPPORT OF THE AMENDMENTS TO THE INTEGRATED DEVELOPMENT CODE. IT IS IMPORTANT THAT WE PRIORITIZE AFFORDABILITY AMONG ALL ELSE. AS A STUDENT, AS SOMEONE WHO RENTS, I UNDERSTAND THAT MAYBE SOME THINGS HAVE HIGHER PRICES THAN THEY SHOULD BE. ONE THING IS HOUSING. IT IS VERY HARD TO FIND AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN ALBUQUERQUE. I HAD TO MOVE 20 MINUTES AWAY FROM UNM TO FIND AFFORDABLE OFF CAMPUS HOUSING. AND MY APARTMENT'S PRICING IS MANAGED BY AI. YOU CAN GO ON THEIR WEBSITE. THERE'S A MAP OF ALL OF THE APARTMENT COMPLEXES IN ALBUQUERQUE THAT USE REAL PAGE INCLUDING UNM CAMPUS. I ASK THAT YOU APPROVE THE AMENDMENTS TO THE IDO. AND YOU GO FURTHER AND BAN REAL PAGE FROM MANAGER ALBUQUERQUE PRICES. >> NICOLE FOLLOWED BY JOE FOLLOWED BY ISABELLEA. >> GOOD EVENING. I'M A NATIVE NEW MEXICAN. MY FAMILY HAS BEEN HERE FOR GENERATIONS. I SPENT THE LAST FOUR YEARS FINALLY GETTING OUT OF NEW MEXICO AND SEEING WHAT ELSE EXISTS IN THE U.S. I LIVE IN ATLANTA AND MIMAECHL -- THE VIBRANCY OF A CITY. ATLANTA IS A PERFECT EXAMPLE. THE VIBRANCY DIDN'T HAPPEN BY ACCIDENT. IT HAS UNIQUE NEIGHBORHOODS AND CREATED A SENSE OF MOVEMENT AND POSSIBILITY. THEIR BELT LINE CONNECTS THE CITY IN A WAY THAT INVITES PEOPLE TO LIVE WALK AND GATHER. THAT IS NOT CREATED BY RESTRICTING DEVELOPMENT. IT'S CREATED BY ALLOWING IT. I WORK IN AN INDUSTRY FOCUSED ON BRINGING COMPANIES AND FOUNDERS TO ALBUQUERQUE. IT'S A DIFFICULT SELL. NOT BECAUSE PEOPLE DON'T LOVE OUR CULTURE OR LANDSCAPE BECAUSE BECAUSE THE ECOSYSTEM HASN'T BEEN BUILT TO SUPPORT THE POPULATION. MANY PEOPLE WANT MULTIPLE HOUSING OPTIONS. INCLUDING CONDOES, NEIGHBORHOODS WITH CAFES AND WALKABLE CORRIDORS. THANK YOU. >> JOE FOLLOWED BY ISABELLEA. FOLLOW BIDE ADAM. >> GOOD EVENING, COUNCILORS. I GUESS I FOUND MYSELF REFLECTING ON COMMENTS I HEARD. NOT JUST IN THIS MEETING BUT ALSO THE LAST COUPLE. I THINK THE FACT THAT WE CAN ALL RECOGNIZE THAT THE COSTS ARE GOING UP FOR FOLKS IN A LOT OF AREAS. AND I THINK ABOUT WHEN I GO TO SMITHS THE BAG OF GROCERIES USED TO BE $35, NOW IT'S 60 BUCKS. YOU LOOK AT THE PERSON NEXT TO YOU AND YOU'RE LIKE YOU'RE PUTTING SOMETHING AWAY TOO. I THINK THAT'S HAPPENING TO A LOT OF PEOPLE IN A LOT OF WAYS. THOSE DECISIONS ARE GETTING MADE IN THE UTILITY BILLS AND GROCERIES. AND WE'RE HAVING TO MAKE A LOT OF HARD CHOICES. ZONING CODE IS A TOOL. IT'S NOT GOING TO FIX EVERYTHING. I THINK EVERYONE KNOWS THAT. IT'S A TOOL USED TO MAKE THINGS EASIER. I WOULD ARGUE A BIT EASIER FOR THE POKES -- FOLKS WHO ARE THE BACKBONE. I WOULD SAY I LIVE A COUPLE BLOCKS FROM QUIRKY BOOKS. I KNOW EVERY COUNCILOR IS FAMILIAR WITH THAT SCENARIO. BUT QUIRKY BOOKICIZE -- I PICK UP NEEDLES ON THE REGULAR. I LOOK AFTER A LOT OF NEIGHBORS WHO ARE ELDERLY. UNHOUSED. LIVING IN A TOUGH SITUATION. I THINK THESE CHANGES WE'RE SEEING AND WHAT THE EPC PUT FORWARD IS SENSIBLE AND MEANINGFUL. I ENCOURAGE THE COUNCIL TO GIVE IT A GOOD LOOK AND CONSIDER BRINGING IT BACK. I APPRECIATE YOU. >> HELLO. I AM A SECOND YEAR STUDENT IN ENVIRONMENTAL DESIGN AT UNM. I'M HERE TODAY TO SPEAK IN SUPPORT OF THE FULL PACKAGE OF IDO AMENDMENTS AS RECOMMENDED BY THE EPC. AS A SOCIETY, WE ARE FACING MANY STRUGGLES INCLUDING ECONOMIC INSTABILITY, GLOBAL CLIMATE CHANGE AND REDUCED SOCIAL CONNECTION. CHANGES TO THE IDO ARE NECESSARY FIRST STEPS. DENSER NEIGHBORHOODS WITH MIXED USES PROVIDE INCUBATORS FOR LOCAL BUSINESSES AND REDUCE THE MONEY WASTED BY DRIVING TO SCHOOL WORK. THEY REDUCE DEVELOPMENT PRESSURE ON THE BUTTEINAL NATURAL LANDSCAPE THAT SURROUND US AND MAKE IT EASIER TO CONNECT WITH NEIGHBORS WHILE WE DO DAILY ERRANDS. THE TYPE OF MIXED USE NEIGHBORHOODS THAT THE IDO WOULD MAKE LEGAL ARE A GREAT FIRST STEP TOWARD THE SOLUTIONS WE NEED TO FACE CURRENT AND FUTURE ISSUE. BECAUSE OF THE ROLE OF ADAPTING THE CITIES TO THE WORLD WE'RE LIVING IN TODAY, I SUPPORT THE AMENDMENTS AS RECOMMENDED BY THE EPC. THANK YOU. >> ADAM FOLLOWED BY RAJ FOLLOWED BY ERIC. >> TONIGHT I WISH TO ADDRESS THIS COUNCIL ABOUT THE REAL EFFECTS OF O-26-2 IF GIVEN FINAL PROVAL. I BELIEVE HOUSING AFFORDABILITY IS A MAJOR ISSUE THAT SHOULD BE ADDRESSED, THIS WILL BE DEVASTATE TO SOME OF THE MOST VULNERABLE RESIDENTS. UNDER THE PROPOSAL, THE VAST MAJORITY OF THE HOMES WOULD FALL UNDER THE EXCLUSION OF TAX EVALUATION CAP AND THEIR HOME EVALUATION WILL BE TAXED AT MARKET VALUE. THIS WILL BE DEVASTAING FOR EVERYONE WHO PURCHASES PRIOR TO 2020. USING DATA DERIVED FROM THE ALBUQUERQUE ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS IT'S ESTIMATED THAT THE AVERAGE PERSON'S PROPERTY TAXES WILL RISE BY 29.11%. IF THIS PROPOSAL PASSES, THE GOAL OF HOUSING AFOURABILITY WILL NOT BE ACCOMPLISHED. THE ONLY THING THAT WILL HAPPEN IS THE EXISTING PROPERTY OWNERS WILL BE FORCED TO SELL THEIR HOME DUE TO FINANCIAL CONTRIBUTIONS CAUSED BY THIS COUNCIL. I URGE EVERY MEMBER TO NOT PASS THIS. THANK YOU. >> RAJ FOLLOWED BY ERIC FOLLOWED BY STEVE. >> GOOD EVENING. I'M A RESIDENT OF DISTRICT NINE. AS A RESIDENT WHO CARES ABOUT THE CITY'S FUTURE I SUPPORT THE FULL IDO RECOMMENDED BY THE EPC. THE UPDATE ALLOW FOR INCREASED WALKABILITY IN THE NEIGHBORHOODS AND GREATER URBAN MOBILITY FOR ALL CITIZENS OF THE CITY. ADDITIONALLY REDUCING RER REMOVING PARKING MINIMUMS ROMOATS BETTER LAND USE PARTICULARLY IN CAR DEPENDENT AREAS LIKE DISTRICT NINE. THIS ALLOWS FOR INCREMENTAL HOUSING GROWTH AND CREATES SAFER STREETS IN THE PROCESS. THE CHANGES BUILD STRONGER NEIGHBORHOODS THAT BETTER SERVE THE NEEDS OF RESIDENTS CONSIDER THE CHANGES THAT RESTORE DEVELOPMENT RIGHT FOR HOMEOWNERS AND PROMOTE FISCALLY RESPONSIBLE URBAN PLANNING IN THE CITY. THANK YOU. >> ERIC FOLLOWED BY STEVE FOLLOWED BY BENJAMIN. >> MADAM PRESIDENT, I AM ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING COMMISSIONER FOR DISTRICT NINE. OF COURSE, I'M IN SUPPORT OF THE EPC VERSION. I JUST WANTED TO SPEAK OUT. FIRST OF ALL, OUR PLANNERS PUT IN A WHOLE BUNCH OF HARD WORK ON THIS IDO UPDATE. I THINK TO DO THEM JUSTICE WE AT THE CITY OF ALBUQUERQUE AND YOU AS COUNCILORS SHOULD PASS THIS EPC, BUT I GUESS TALKING ABOUT LUPZ AMENDMENTS, IF YOU COULD CHANGE ONE SINGLE AMENDMENT, I RECOMMEND YOU CHANGE AMENDMENT A FROM HEARING TO ZONING ALONG MAJOR URBAN TRANSIT CORRIDORS. SO THE MAJORITY OF ALBUQUERQUE WOULD NOT BE AFFECTED IF YOU UP ZONED AN EIGHTH MILE WITHIN LOMAS AND JUAN TABO. YOU ADD DENSITY THERE, THAT'S WHERE PEOPLE CAN TAKE PUBLIC TRANSIT SO YOU'RE NOT COMPETING WITH OTHER CARS ON THE ROAD. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. >> STEVE FOLLOWED BY BENJAMIN FOLLOWED BY ELANOR ON ZOOM. >> MADAM PRESIDENT, COUNCIL, WE APPRECIATE YOUR TIME HERE. BIG THANKS TO THE PLANNERS AND EPC THAT SPENT SO MUCH TIME ON THIS. I REALLY STRUGGLE IN THIS COUNTRY. WE DON'T KNOW EXACTLY WHAT THE CORE OF THE ISSUES ARE. THE ECONOMY IS COMPLEX. AND ONE THING WE KNOW IS THAT ROBUST SYSTEMS ARE MUCH MORE RESILIENT THAN SIMPLE ONES. ALBUQUERQUE HAS A PRETTY SIMPLE WAY OF LIVING HERE WHICH CONSISTS PRIMARILY OF SINGLE FAMILY HOUSING, OR LARGE COMPLEXES WHICH PEOPLE DON'T -- PEOPLE WITH HOMES DON'T LIKE IN THEIR NEIGHBORHOODS. BY ALLOWING FOR MORE OF THAT MIDDLE HOUSING TYPE AROUND, WE ALSO ALLOW FOR THE BURDEN OF DEVELOPING THAT TO BE SPREAD ACROSS MANY HOMEOWNERS, SMALL DEVELOPERS AND NOT JUST THE BIG DEMONIZED DEVELOPERS IN THE CITY WHICH IS PRETTY HARD TO DEVELOP ANYWAY. PLEASE SUPPORT VARIETY. AND PLEASE DON'T LET R1 STAY SACRED. IT WAS BORN OUT OF RACISM AND CLASSISM. >> BENJAMIN FOLLOWED BY ELANOR FOLLOWED BY AARON. >> GOOD EVENING, COUNCIL. AS AN ICU NURSE I SEE THE SICKEST PEOPLE ON THEIR WORST DAYS. THE PATIENT THAT REACH MY UNIT HAVE FACE EVERY KIND OF SYSTEMIC FAILURE IMAGINABLE. FOR SO MANY INDIVIDUALS I SEE SO CLEARLY HOW ACCESS TO AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND SAFE PEDESTRIAN ACCESS TO NEIGHBORHOOD BUSINESSES COULD HAVE PROTECTED THEM FAR UPSTREAM OF VISIT TO THE ICU. THESE VISITS ARE ALWAYS LIFE CHANGING AND OFTEN DEADLY. I SUPPORT O-26-2 BECAUSE I WANT SAFER CONDITION AND MORE ACCESS TO AFFORDABLE HOUSING SO THE MOST VULNERABLE CAN HAVE SOMEWHERE TO SLEEP. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> ELANOR FOLLOWED BY AARON FOLLOWED BY PEGGY. >> OKAY. IT'S NOT LETTING ME DO MY VIDEO. YOU SAW ME BEFORE. I HAVEN'T CHANGED MUCH. COUNCILORS CHAIRPERSON PRESIDENT, NOW I CAN START MY CAMERA. OKAY. I WANT TO TALK ABOUT SAFE OUTDOOR SPACES. TALKING -- YOU WANT TO TALK ABOUT THE MOST VULNERABLE, THEY'RE THE MOST VULNERABLE PEOPLE IN OUR COMMUNITY ARE THE PEOPLE THAT WOULD USE THESE SPACES. AND TO HAVE REQUIRED PERMANENT PLUMBING ON A TEMPORARY FACILITY JUST DRIVES UP THE COST. YOU TALK ABOUT WANTING TO LOWER COSTS FOR OTHER THINGS. WHY NOT FOR SAFE OUTDOOR SPACES? AND IN TERMS OF DUPLEXES AND TRIPLEXES, YOU CAN HAVE THEM IN R1 ZONES NOW, BUT THEY'RE NOT PERMISSIVE. YOU CAN DO A ZONING MAP AMENDMENT CHANGE. IT'S A PROCESS. IT EXISTS. SO THE QUESTION IS, ARE YOU GOING TO GIVE RESIDENTS A SAY OR NOT? THANK YOU. >> AARON FOLLOWED BY ALAN. >> GOOD EVENING, MADAM PRESIDENT, AND COUNCILORS. I'M A HOMEOWNER IN DISTRICT SIX. I'M HERE ASKING THAT YOU DEMONSTRATE FORWARD THINKING LEADERSHIP AND SUPPORT THE PACKAGE OF AMENDMENTS AS PASSED BY THE EPC. I HEARD MANY COUNCILORS SAY AT THIS POINT LET'S SLOW DOWN, LET'S SEE WHAT HAPPENS WITH THE CHANGES WE'VE ALREADY MADE. WE'VE HAD MULTIPLE YEARS OF LEGALIZED CASITA AND ONLY SEEN A HANDFUL BUILT. I KNOW MANY THAT WANT TO HAVE THEM BUILT ONLY TO FIND HOW RESTRICTIVE THE RULES ARE. WE HAVE HAD SAFE OUTDOOR SPACES LEGALIZED, ONLY ONE BUILT. AGAIN, THE ORIGINAL PASSAGE WAS TOO RESTRICTIVE. WE'VE WAITED AND SAW WHAT HAPPENED AND IT'S TIME TO ACCEPT THE AMENDMENTS THAT ADDRESS THESE CHANGES. DOING NOTHING AND PASSING HALF MEASURES CAN KICK THE CAN DOWN THE ROAD AND NOT IMPROVING ISN'T WISDOM. SEEING PROBLEMS, TRYING NEW SOLUTIONS AND ITERATING ON THEM IS. I URGE YOU TO PASS THE EPC APPROVED AMENDMENTS. >> ALAN FOLLOWED BY OLIVER. >> THANK YOU, COUNCILORS, FOR TAKING MY COMMENT. I'M A RSIDENT OF DISTRICT TWO. I WANT TO SHOW SUPPORT FOR THE IDO AMENDMENT AS PASSED BY EPC WHICH IS IN LINE WITH WHICH COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. HIGHER DENSITY MIXED USE MIDDLE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT AS WELL AS -- WILL BRING MORE YOUNG PROFESSIONALS TO ALBUQUERQUE AND PROMOTE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT. I ALSO SUPPORT THE ADDING OF THE DEFINITION OF A -- FACILITY AND HOPE MORE FACILITIES CAN COME TO ALBUQUERQUE. ALL AND ALL, THE MORE WALKABLE AND DENSE WE CAN MAKE NEIGHBORHOODS HERE AND HELP REDUCE SPRAWLED OUT SINGLE FAMILY HOMES THAT ARE NOT ACCESSIBLE TO COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT OVERALL WILL JUST BENEFIT THE CITY AS A WHOLE. THANK YOU. >> OLIVER FOLLOWED BY DAVID. >> HI. MY NAME IS OLIVER. AND I'M HERE TO TALK IN SUPPORT OF THE ORIGINAL AMENDMENT TO O-26-2, AS THEY SUPPORT LIVEABILITY AND INCLUSION ACROSS LIFETIME. IT WOULD BE EXTREMELY BENEFICIAL TO PEOPLE LIKE MY SISTER WHO IS A YOUNG ADULT WITH DOWNS SYNDROME. SHE'S IN AUDIBLE TO DRIVE SO BEING ABLE TO MEET HER NEEDS ON FOOT IS NOT A LUXURY, BUT IT IS A BASIC ESSENTIAL. SO, WHEN PEOPLE SAY THAT ALBUQUERQUE ISN'T READY FOR NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICES, THEY'RE SAYING THAT ALBUQUERQUE IS NOT READY FOR PEOPLE LIKE MY SISTER. SO, I'M HERE TO URGE YOU TO SUPPORT THE ORIGINAL AMENDMENTS AND OVERTURN AMENDMENT J AND M. THANK YOU. >> DAVID FOLLOWED BY LILA. >> GOOD EVENING. I WAS BORN AND RAISED IN ALBUQUERQUE. LIVING IN DISTRICT FOUR. I SUPPORT THE ORIGINAL AMENDMENTS. I LIVE IN A MANUFACTURED HOME COMPLEX. IT'S CLEAR THAT COMMUNITIES LIKE OURS ARE MOST VULNERABLE TO PRIVATE EQUITY FIRMS. THIS IS SOME OF THE LAST REMAINING TYPES OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN THE CITY. THIS IS ONLY A TESTING GROUND FOR THE EXPLOITATION OF THE OWNERS THAT CAN MOVE EASILY. I KNOW KIDS AND SENIORS THAT CAN'T DRIVE AND SOME WALK AND ROLL AROUND THE COMMUNITY. AND THOSE THAT CHOOSE TO LIKE ME, THE FACT THAT WE RESTRICT BUSINESSES AND MANDATE A LARGER AMOUNT OF PARKING MEANS NOT ONLY IS DEVELOPMENT BUSINESSES HIGHER, BUT DESTINATIONS ARE SPREAD OUT MAKE IT LESS PLEASANT AND FEASIBLE FOR PEOPLE NOT DRIVING WHICH ONLY INCREASES CAR TRAFFIC, WHICH EXACERBATES THE ISSUE. THIS IS UNLIKE THE HISTORIC NEIGHBORHOODS WITH CORNER STORES. OUR ZONING PRACTICE IGNORE SUPPLY AND DEMAND WITH A COST OF LIVING, BUT MAKES IT LESS HEALTHY FOR EVERYBODY HERE. WE CAN'T CHANGE INCREMENTALLY, WE SHOULD EXPECT DECLINED RESOURCES AND MORE STAGNATING GROWTH. >>COUN. PEÑA: THANK YOU, SIR. YOUR TIME IS UP. >> LILA FOLLOWED BY MICHAEL. >> COUNCILORS, I'M HERE SPEAKING ON BEHALF OF THE NORTH VALLEY NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION OF WHICH I'M A BOARD MEMBER. SPECIFICALLY CONCERNING SAFE OUTDOOR SPACES. THE IDO SHOULD SUPPORT THE INTENT OF SOS TO ALLOW ORGANIZATIONS TO PROVIDE HOUSES TO UNHOUSED PERSONS WHO MIGHT NOT BE READY FOR THE RIGIDITY OF A FORMAL SHELTER WITH SAFE, SECURE PLACES TO EXIST. A MODERN PLACE FOR PEOPLE TO GO TO WORK, SCHOOL, AND APPOINTMENTS KNOW THEY CAN GO HOME TO SOUND BELONGS. WE WANT TO REITERATE THAT OUR BOARD SUPPORTS MOST OF THE AMENDMENTS TO THE SOS ORDINANCE AS WRITTEN IN THE POST EPC REDLEN. ALLOWING PERMIT FOR THESE SPACES TO THE EXTENT EVERY TWO YEARS REMOVING THE REQUIREMENT FOR PERMANENT PLUMBING, AND REMOVING THE REQUIREMENT FOR 24-7 ON-SITE SUPPORT. WE DO THINK THE ORDINANCE NEEDS TWO KEY IMPROVEMENTS. REQUIREMENT FOR ON CALL SUPPORT AND POTABLE DRINKING WATER THAT DOES NOT EXIST IN THE IDO OR PROPOSED AMENDMENT. THANK YOU. >> MICHAEL FOLLOWED BY BRANDY. >> GOOD EVENING. I'M A RESIDENT OF DISTRICT SIX. I COMPLETELY AGREE WITH CONCERNS ABOUT PRESERVING NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTER. WHICH IS WHY I STAND IN SUPPORT OF THE EPC VERSION OF O-26-2 ALLOWING DUPLEXES AND TOWN HOMES. WHEN I LOOK AT OLD TOWN AND SANTA FE PLAZA, I SEE MIXED USE WITH VARIOUS HOUSING TYPES. WALKABLE SOCIAL. [ INAUDIBLE ]. THAT IS NEW MEXICO'S DEVELOPMENT TRADITION. NOT PASSING THE ORIGINAL VERSION WILL DESTROY ABILITY THE NEIGHBORHOODS -- SINGLE USE ZONING ISN'T OUR HEYTAGE. IT'S AN EXPERIMENT THAT IS LESS AN CENTURY OLD. THE EPC VERSION ISN'T RADICAL. IT'S A POSITIVE STEP TOWARD RESTORATION. I URGE YOUR SUPPORT. THANK YOU. >> RANDY FOLLOWED BY LANA. PLEASE ACCEPT PROMOTION TO PANELIST. BRANDY FOLLOWED BY LANA. YOU ARE MUTED, BRANDY. BRANDY, WE'LL COME BACK TO YOU. LANA, FOLLOWED BY BRANDY. GO AHEAD, BRANDY. YOU'RE MUTED. AND THEN LANA. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. MADAM PRESIDENT, COUNCIL, LET'S TALK ABOUT SOMETHING THRILLING. MUNICIPAL FINANCE. RIGHT NOW ALBUQUERQUE HAS ABOUT ONE BILLION DOLLARS IN LIABILITY THAN INCOME. THAT'S LIKE PUTTING GROCERIES ON A CREDIT CARD AND HOPING THE BILL SORTS ITSELF OUT. OUR ROADS -- OUR PLAYGROUNDS GET FIXED AFTER WE ASK THE STATE FOR HELP. IT'S BECAUSE WE BUILT A CITY THAT COSTS MORE TO MAINTAIN THAN EARNS. THE EPC ZONING CHANGES AREN'T RADICAL, THEY'RE FISCALLY RESPONSIBLE. THEY ALLOW MORE HOMES ON LAND WE'VE ALREADY PAID FOR STREETS PIPES AND SERVICES, GENERATING MORE TAX REVENUE PER ACRE WITHOUT RAISING TAXES. YOU CAN'T CUT YOUR WAY TO PROSPERITY ASK YOU CAN'T SPRAWL YOUR WAY OUT OF DEBT. IF YOU WANT A CITY TO AFFORD ROADS AND PARKS IN THE FUTURE, WE NEED ZONING THAT MAKES FINANCIAL SENSE. AND THESE CHANGES DON'T THREATEN ALBUQUERQUE'S FUTURE, THEY HELP US PAY FOR IT. PLEASE APPROVE THE EPC VERSION OF THE IDO AMENDMENT. THANK YOU. >> LANA FOLLOWED BY MILES. WE'RE HAVING TROUBLE HEARING YOU LANA. >>COUN. PEÑA: I'M SORRY. WE CANNOT HEAR YOU. WE'RE GOING TO TRY TO WORK THIS OUT. WE'RE GOING TO GO TO THE NEXT SPEAKER. >> WE'LL COME BACK TO YOU, LANA. MILES FOLLOWED BY RICHARD. >> CAN YOU HEAR ME? >> WE CAN HEAR YOU, SIR. >> MADAM PRESIDENT, MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL, THANKS FOR HEARING ME. I'M THE CEO FOR THE NEW MEXICO HOME BUILDER'S ASSOCIATION. WE REPRESENT OVER 300 CONTRACTORS, HOME BUILDERS HERE IN NEW MEXICO. WE ARE THE MEN AND WOMEN WORKING TO IMPROVE HOUSING IN NEW MEXICO. WE'RE HERE AT THE INTERNATIONAL BUILDER SHOW. THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF HOME BUILDER MEETING. WE'RE ALL CLAMORING TO UNDERSTAND HOW WE ARE GOING TO ADDRESS THIS HOUSING AFFORDABILITY CHALLENGE. IN WASHINGTON, D.C. LAST WEEK THEY PASSED THE 66-44, HOUSING FOR THE 21st CENTURY. THIS IS TO ADDRESS AND STIMULATE HOUSING PRODUCTION ACROSS NEW MEXICO. WE'RE ALL WAITING FOR A BOLD IDEA AND A BOLD BODY, WHETHER IT'S LOCAL, NATIONAL, OR LOCAL LEVEL TAKE THE LEAD. WE STAND IN STRONG SUPPORT OF THIS LEGISLATION. WE AGREE MORE HOUSING NEEDS TO BE BUILT AND ALBUQUERQUE CAN MAKE LEAD AND DELIVER THIS. >> RICHARD FOLLOWED BY LANA. WE'LL TRY AGAIN. >> HOUSING SHOULD BE HOUSING. IT SHOULDN'T BE A FORM OF INVESTMENT SPECULATION. AND I FEAR VERY MUCH THIS IDO AMENDMENT ARE A WELFARE FOR LAND SPECKILATERS AND DEVELOPERS. ALBUQUERQUE'S POPULATION IS NOT GROWING, ACCORD TO THE CENSUS BUREAU. WE'VE LOST POPULATION THE LAST FEW YEARS. SO, I'M NOT SURE WHERE THE GROWTH IS GOING TO COME FROM. THE COUNTRY ACTUALLY IS PROBABLY GOING TO LOSE POPULATION IN THE NEXT FEW YEARS. THERE ARE ALREADY AREAS ZONED FOR DUPLEXES, APARTMENTS AND COMMERCIAL USES. AND THERE'S INCREDIBLE AMOUNT OF VACANCIES IN THOSE AREAS. FINALLY, VIEW PROTECTIONS ARE -- AND HEIGHT LIMITATIONS, ARE THERE SO VIEWS CAN BE SHARED BY A LOT OF PEOPLE. NOT SO THAT ONE PERSON CAN HAVE A VIEW. >>COUN. PEÑA: THANK YOU, SIR. YOUR TIME IS UP. >> OBVIOUSLY, I REJECT THE AMENDMENTS. >> GO BACK TO LANA FOLLOWED BY JACOB. STILL UNABLE TO HEAR YOU, LANA, UNFORTUNATELY. I WILL TRY YOU AGAIN AT THE END. THANK YOU. JACOB FOLLOWED BY DAVID. >> >> GOOD EVENING, COUNCILORS. THANK YOU FOR CONSIDERING THIS UPDATE. I JUST WANT TO SAY IT'S INCREDIBLE TO SEE ALL THESE PEOPLE SPEAK FOR A MORE LIVABLE ALBUQUERQUE. I WANT TO EXPRESS MY SUPPORT TO THE ORIGINAL IDO PASSED BY THE EPC. ALBUQUERQUE IS SQUEEZED FOR HOUSING. ESPECIALLY FOR NEW COMERS AND YOUNG PEOPLE LIKE MYSELF. -- THIS ISN'T TEARING APART SINGLE FAMILY NEIGHBORHOODS, IT'S ADDING THE ABILITY TO HAVE MIDDLE DENSITY HOUSING. AS WELL, EVEN FURTHER, CORNER STORES IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS SUPPORTS HEALTHIER LIFESTYLES AND QUALITY OF LIFE AND ACCESS TO FOOD AS WELL. AND IN ADDITION TO THAT PARKING REQUIREMENTS PROVIDES FOR VIBRANCY AND SUPPORTING MUBABILITY AND HELPING ALBUQUERQUE CONNECT AND GROW. I HOPE YOU SUPPORT THE ORIGINAL EPC VERSION OF THIS UPDATE. THANK YOU. >> DAVID FOLLOWED BY BRIAN. DAVID? WE ARE UNABLE TO HEAR YOU. I WILL COME BACK TO YOU AS WELL. PLEASE STAND BY. WE'LL GO TO BRIAN FOLLOWED BY PEGGY. >> THANK YOU, COUNCIL PRESIDENT, AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL. I WAS BORN AND RAISED IN ALBUQUERQUE. I'M A HOMEOWNER IN DISTRICT NINE AND I'M SPEAKING IN SUPPORT OF THE PROPOSED IDO AMENDMENT AS RECOMMENDED BY THE ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING COMMISSION. I SUPPORT THESE CHANGES FOR MANY REASONS. THE MAIN REASON IS FLEXIBILITY. GIVING MORE OPTIONS FOR LOCAL CORNER STORES CLOSER TO WHERE WE LIVE WILL SUPPORT LOCAL CHOICES FOR WHERE WE SHOP, AND IMPROVE ACCESSIBILITY TO GET THERE. GIVING MORE OPTIONS FOR HOUSING TYPES WILL ALLOW MORE OF OUR NEIGHBORS TO CHOOSE SOMETHING THAT MAKES SENSE FOR THEM. THE PROPOSED IDO AMENDMENTS DO NOT REMIEFB ALL ZONING DEFINITIONS AND BUILDING RESTRICTIONS ALTOGETHER. RATHER THE CHANGES PROVIDE MORE FLEXIBILITY FOR WHAT MAKES SENSE IN EXISTING NEIGHBORHOODS. GIVE THOSE OF US IN R1 ZONING WHO WANT TO MAKE REASONABLE CHANGES ON OUR OWN PROPERTY THE FLEXIBILITY TO DO SO WHILE PRESERVING THE OPTION FOR THOSE WHO DO NOT WANT TO MAKE CHANGES TO THE PROPERTY THE ABILITY TO DO SO. I LOOK TO THE POTENTIAL CHANGES THESE CAN ENABLE INCREASING IN HOUSING INSTALL BUSINESSES AND TRANSPORTATION OPTION. FOR THESE REASONS, I STRONGLY ENCOURAGE YOU IN SUPPORT OF THE PROPOSED IDO AMENDMENTS AS RECOMMENDED BY THE EPC. THANK YOU. >> PEGGY FOLLOWED BY DAVID. >> MADAM PRESIDENT, COUNCILORS, I SUBMITTED NUMEROUS LETTERS ON O-26-2, DISCUSSING NUMEROUS ISSUES. I SUPPORT THE AMENDMENTS ADDED BY LUPZ. ALL ADJACENT NEIGHBORHOODS OPPOSE THE REDESIGNATION OF MENAUL. I OPPOSE THE REZONING OF THE CORRIDOR WITH NO PUBLIC NOTIFICATION AND SUPPORT LIMITING SOME MAIN STREET USES. OUR CURRENT PLANNING CODE IS NOT DATED. IT IS SEVEN YEARS OLD. AND ALLOWS NUMEROUS HOUSING OPTIONS. IT SEEMS INAPPROPRIATE FOR AN EPC COMMISSIONER TO STATE ON YOUTUBE THE GOVERNMENT SHOULD NOT TELL US WHAT WE CAN AND CANNOT DO ON OUR OWN PROPERTY. THIS RESPONSIBILITY IS DO EXACTLY THAT. WHY WOULD A CITY COUNCIL SUPPORT. HOW DOES THIS GIVE US CONFIDENCE IN THIS PROCESS? JUAN TABO IS NOT MAJOR TRANSIT. >> DAVID, FOLLOWED BY JOSH. >>-- WE NEED MORE HOUSING OF EVERY KIND. WE TALKED ABOUT THIS MORE AND MORE TIMES THAN EVER. WHAT I DO WANT TO SAY IS THAT REALTORS AND PROPERTY MANAGERS ARE ADAPTABLE. WE'RE ADAPT TO ANYTHING DECIDED TODAY. WE WANT MORE HOUSING. WE BOTH BELIEVE IN PRIVATE PROPERTY RIGHTS AND THE I IDEA OF THE AMERICAN DREAM. I'M SOMEBODY WHO ABSOLUTELY WANTS PEOPLE TO BE IN HOUSING AND HAVE A COMFORTABLE PLACE TO LIVE. AND WE THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR CONTINUING THIS CONVERSATION. AND DOING THE WORK THAT YOU'RE DOING IN ORDER TO MAKE ALBUQUERQUE BETTER. AND IF THERE'S ANY WAY WE CAN HELP YOU, WE ABSOLUTELY WILL. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> RYAN FOLLOWED BY BRANDON. >> MADAM PRESIDENT, COUNCILORS, GOOD EVENING. I'M THE CEO FOR THE GREATER ALBUQUERQUE ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS. HOUSING AFFORDABILITY AND AVAILABILITY IS THE PRESSING CHALLENGING FACING OUR COMMUNITY. WE BELIEVE ONE OF THE MOST MEANINGFUL LEVERS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CAN USE TO ADDRESS THE CHALLENGES IS ASSURING ZONING WORKS FOR HOUSING. BY REMOVING UNNECESSARY BARRIERS RATHER THAN CREATING NEW ONES. RIGID REGULATIONS DON'T AFFECT DEVELOPERS, THEY EVERYBODY SEEKING TO A HOME. WE ENCOURAGE CAREFUL EVALUATION OF HOW EACH PROPOSAL AFFECTS HOW WE SUPPLY PRIVATE PROPERTY RIGHTS, HOMEOWNERSHIP OPPORTUNITIES, AND PREDICTABILITY AND LAND USE. CLEAR BY RIGHT STANDARDS AND FLEXIBILITY AND HOUSING TYPES CREATE A MORE STABLE AND ACCESSIBLE MARKET WHILE MAINTAINING NEIGHBORHOOD QUALITY. WE SINCERELY APPRECIATE EVERYBODY THAT HELPED WITH THE BILL. THANK YOU ALL. >> BRANDON FOLLOWED BY JOHANNA. >> GOOD EVENING, MADAM PRESIDENT COUNCIL. THANK YOU FOR TAKING COMMENT TONIGHT. I APPRECIATE YOU LISTENING TO THE MEMBERS OF OUR COMMUNITY. I DON'T THINK ANYONE HAS ARGUED IN THE PAST FIVE MONTHS THAT WE HAVE ENOUGH HOUSING IN ALBUQUERQUE. WE DO NOT. I WOULD ASK THAT YOU PLEASE CONSIDER THE FULL IDO PACKAGE, NOT JUST FOR THE MIING MISSING MIDDLE, BUT ALSO FOR UNHOUSED NEIGHBORS. I AM A RESIDENT AND TAX PAYING MEMBER OF DISTRICT FOUR. I GO THROUGH MY WALKS THROUGH THE ARROYOS AND PARKS, I SEE THERE ARE FOLKS UP HERE THAT NEED HOUSING. PLEASE CONSIDER HOW WE DO THIS. I THINK THERE ARE MANY GOOD IDEAS, INCLUDING IDEAS THAT ARE NOT PART OF THE PACKAGE THAT CAN BE CONSIDERED LATER. I ASK YOU TO PLEASE DO WHAT YOU CAN TO PROVIDE MORE HOUSING FOR ALL BURQUENOS. THANK YOU VERY MUCH AND HAVE A GOOD NIGHT. >> JOANNA FOLLOWED BY MEREDITH. >> FIRST OF ALL, I WANTED TO SAY THANK YOU TO ALL THE COUNCILORS AND THE FOLKS IN THE CITY PLANNING DEPARTMENT AND EPC THAT WORKED SO HARD ON THE PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE LEGISLATION. PEOPLE HAVE BEEN WORKING HARD ON THIS FOR FIVE YEARS OR MORE. JUST TO HOPEFULLY VERT US BACK TO SOME OF THE HOUSING REGULATIONS THAT WERE IN PLACE IN THE 60s, 70s, AND 80s WHEN MUCH OF THE VERY DIVERSE PART OF THE CITY IS DEVELOPED. THESE ARE NOT UNTRIED METHODOLOGIES FOR DEVELOPMENT. WE'RE JUST RETURNING TO A PAST TIME WHERE DENSITY WAS MORE OF A FOCUS AND I WOULD URGE YOU TO USE THE EPC RECOMMENDED AMENDMENTS INSTEAD OF SOME OF THE OTHER FURTHER AMENDMENTS THAT WERE APPROVED LATER ON BY THE LUPZ COMMUNITY. AND THANK YOU AGAIN FOR ALL THAT YOU'VE DONE TONIGHT. >> MEREDITH FOLLOWED BY CARLOS. >> HELLO. I REPRESENT -- PARK NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. WE'RE THE EXISTING MIDDLE GROUND. WE HAVE BEEN PRAISED FOR ACCOMMODATING A SUBSTANTIAL NUMBER OF DWELLINGS WITH HIGHER DENSITIES THAN OUR HISTORIC SINGLE FAMILY HOMES. WHICH ARE LISTED ON NATIONAL AND STATE REGISTERS OF CULTURAL PROPERTIES. WE WISH TO SAVE SOME R1 HOMES. WE URGE YOU TO VOTE AGAINST O-26-2, ESPECIALLY CHANGING R1 TO RT AND FURTHER DIRECT ZONING OF HOMES. AND ELIMINATION OF PARKING REQUIREMENTS. BECAUSE WE ARE DIRECTLY ACROSS UNIVERSITY BOULEVARD FROM THE MAIN UNM CAMPUS AND ARE WITHIN THE CENTRAL AVENUE MSPC CORRIDOR, WE'RE ESPECIALLY VULNERABLE TO CONVERSION OF OUR REMAINING SINGLE FAMILY HOMES TO LARGE APARTMENT BUILDINGS. PREVIOUS IDO CHANGES HAVE REMOVED LIMITS ON HEIGHTS AND NUMBERS OF UNITS, LEAVING US OPEN TO CONSTRUCTION LIKE 303 PRINCETON WHICH YOU SHOULD BE LOOKING AT. ALLOWING THE -- ALLOWED BY THE 1969 UP ZONING IT WAS LIMITED BY ONLY PARKING REQUIREMENTS. THE PROBLEMS THAT CREATED WERE SO SERIOUS THAT RESIDENTS DEMANDED AND GOT DOWN ZONING IN 1978. SPRUCE PARK IS AN IMPORTANT CONTRIBUTOR TO THE CITY'S CULTURAL HERITAGE AND URGELY NEED FURTHER PROTECTION FROM DEVELOPMENTS LIKE THIS. NOT WEAKENING OF THE FEW REMAINING ONES. THANK YOU FOR LISTENING. >> CARLOS FOLLOWED BY MELINDA. >> GOOD EVENING, COUNCILORS. I'M IN SUPPORT OF EPC. AS A PROPERTY OWNER, MY PREFERENCE MIGHT BE TO HAVE A LARGE PROPERTY WITH A BIG SHOP SPACE FOR CHICKENS AND A NICE GARDEN. BUT IT'S NOT PREFERENCES, IT'S ABOUT THE ROLE OF GOVERNMENT. SHOULD LOCAL GOVERNMENT PREVENT HOUSING ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT OPTIONS THROUGH BUREAUCRATIC RED TAPE. LOCAL MARKET DATA SAYS HOMES ON LARGER R1 LOTS COST $500-850,000 TO DEVELOP NEW. WHEREAS IT'S ONLY 350 TO 450 DO DEVELOP NEW SMALL HOMES AND CONDOS. COUNCIL SHOULDN'T PROHIBIT MORE AFFORDABLE HOUSING OPTIONS OR PROHIBIT SMALL BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT. I HOPE INDIVIDUALS THAT WANT BIGGER SINGLE FAMILY HOMES HAVE THE RIGHTS TO DO SO, BUT INDIVIDUALS WHO WANT SMALLER MORE AFFORDABLE HOUSING SHOULD HAVE THE EQUAL AND FULL RIGHT TO DO SO WITHOUT THE COUNCIL UPHOLDING MANDATE AND PROHIBITION AGAINST THEM. THE GOVERNMENT SHOULD ALLOW MORE HOUSING FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND WE NEAR FLEXIBILITY TO DO THAT IN ENTREPRENEURIAL WAYS. >>COUN. PEÑA: THANK YOU. >> MELINDA FOLLOWED BY MERIT. >> HELLO. GOOD EVENING, COUNCIL PRESIDENT, AND MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL. I'M A CONSTITUENT OF DISTRICT SEVEN. I'M HERE TO SPEAK IN SUPPORT OF AMENDING BACK TO THE ORIGINAL EPC VERSION. LAST YEAR, WITH I WAS HERE TO TALK ABOUT SAFER ROADS AFTER MY DAUGHTER LOST HER LIFE IN ALBUQUERQUE. THIS VERSION OF THE IDO UPDATE RELATES TO A SAFER STREET IN TRANSANT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT AND MIXED DWELLING. THEY NEED COMPLETE STREAK UPDATE FOR WALKABLE NEIGHBORHOODS. THE RESEARCH IS CLEAR WITH IDO REFORMS WITH INCREMENTAL AND MULTIMODAL STREET DESIGN WE CAN LEAD TO REDUCTION IN TRAFFIC RELATED INJURIES AND FATALITIES. EVERY DEATH REPRESENTS SYSTEMIC FAILURE. WE CAN REALLY ADDRESS MAJOR HEALTH DETERMINEINANTS WHICH IS IN SYSTEMIC CHANGE TO LEAD TO A HEALTHIER AND SAFER CITY. PLEASE SUPPORT THE EPC VERSION. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND SERVICE. AND THANK YOU. >> MERIT FOLLOWED BY OSCAR. >> COUNCIL PRESIDENT, COUNCILORS, I REPRESENT NORTH VALLEY NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. WE SENT A LETTER DETAILING OUR VIEWS. SOME PRO, SOME CON. QUICKLY REGARDING GROCEGROCERIED RESTAURANTS, WE SUPPORT THIS IF THE USES ARE MADE CONDITIONAL. EVERY NEIGHBORHOOD IS DIFFERENT. SOME HAVE FOOD DESERTS, OTHERS LIKE OURS DON'T. IN SOME AREAS YOU CAN'T WALK TO SHOPPING. IN OURS YOU CAN. WE DON'T NEED COMMERCIAL REPLACING HOUSING, AND WE DON'T NEED TO UNDERMINE ONGOING EFFORTS TO REDEVELOP OUR EXISTING ZONES. EXPANDING SITUATIONS CAN SERVE TO MAKE HOMEOWNERSHIP MORE FEASIBLE, PLEASE MAKE THE CONDITIONAL. IT'S A COMPROMISE RECOGNIZING DIFFERENCES BETWEEN NEIGHBORHOODS. REGARDING HOUSING, TAKE A NUANCED APPROACH. VOTE DOWN CORRIDOR UPZONING. IT'S NOT RIGHT. IT'S NOT FAIR. AND IT'S COUNTER PRODUCTIVE. THANK YOU. >> OSCAR FOLLOWED BY LANA. YOU ARE MUTED, SIR. PLEASE UNMUTE. >> THANK YOU, CITY COUNCILORS. I'M LIVING IN DISTRICT TWO. I'M OPPOSED TO THE REVISED EDITIONS OF THE EPC. OR REINSTATING THE ORIGINAL EPC. WHAT I HAVE SEEN FROM THE ECONOMICS ARE WHAT I OBTAINED FROM THE ECONOMICS AND EVALUATING THE WHOLE PROCESS. THIS PROCESS REALLY NOT SOLVE AFFORDABILITY IN OUR LACK OF HOUSING. WE NEED TO -- IN MY OPINION, WE NEED TO START OVER AND FIGURE OUT WHAT IS GOING TO WORK. WE NEED LOOK AT ALL THE ECONOMICS. CERTAIN ZONE KZ BE REDEVELOPED OR REZONED. ON A CITYWIDE BLANK, CITYWIDE STATUS, THIS IS NOT A WORKABLE SOLUTION. THANK YOU A BUNCH. >> LANA FOLLOWED BY DAVID. I'M SORRY, LANA. WE'RE UNABLE TO HEAR YOU. YOU'RE WELCOME TO SUBMIT SOME COMMENTS IN WRITING. WE JUST -- WE CAN SEE YOU, BUT WE CAN'T HEAR YOU. I APOLOGIZE. LET'S TRY DAVID. HI DAVE. WE STILL CAN'T HEAR YOU. I APOLOGIZE. IT'S WEIRD TECHNICAL ISSUES. I'M SORRY. LANA, AND DAVID, I APOLOGIZE. THANK YOU. MADAM PRESIDENT, THAT SEEMS TO CONCLUDE COMMENT. I'M SORRY FOR THE TECHNICAL DIFFICULTIES. >>COUN. PEÑA: THANK YOU. IF THE TWO SPEAKERS THAT -- WE COULDN'T HEAR, IF YOU WANT TO -- IF YOU WANT TO EMAIL YOUR COMMENTS IN, WE CAN ACTUALLY SHARE THEM THIS EVENING WITH THE REST OF THE COUNCILORS ON THEIR MY iPADS. THANK YOU SO MUCH. THAT CONCLUDES PUBLIC COMMENT. >> YES, MADAM PRESIDENT. >>COUN. PEÑA: OKAY. COUNCILOR FIEBELKORN, WE'RE BACK ON YOUR BILL. I THINK WE'LL GET START WOULD THE AMENDMENTS, UNLESS YOU WANTED TOADDRESS ANYTHING. >>COUN. FIEBELKORN: I'LL DO A QUICK OPENING. I REALLY WANTED TO CLARIFY A FEW THINGS THAT I'VE HEARD TONIGHT THAT ARE INCORRECT. FIRST OF ALL, I WOULD LOVE IT IF THIS BILL WAS MINE. I GUARANTEE YOU THAT IF I HAD WRITTEN THIS BILL IT WOULD BE MORE PROGRESSIVE AND HAVE MORE IN IT. I DO WANT PEOPLE TO UNDERSTAND THE PROCESS BY WHICH THIS BILL COMES FORWARD. IT STARTED MONTHS AND MONTHS AGO IN THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT. THEY MET WITH THE PUBLIC. THEY DEVELOPED PROPOSALS. THOSE PROPOSALS HAD PUBLIC HEARINGS. THEN THE PROPOSALS WENT TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING COMMISSION. THE ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING COMMISSION HAS ONE REPRESENTATIVE FOR EACH PERSON UP HERE ON THE DAIS. THEY ARE EXPERTS IN THIS SUBJECT MATTER. THAT IS WHY WE APPOINT THEM TO DO THIS WORK. I CERTAINLY TRUST MY APPOINTEE. AND I TRUST ALL THE OTHER APPOINTES IN THAT ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING COMMISSION. THE ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING COMMISSION HELD A SERIES OF PUBLIC MEETINGS AS WELL. AND TOOK FEED BACK AND COMMENTS. AND I WILL TELL YOU THAT WHAT CAME OUT OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING COMMISSION WAS NOT ALL OF MINE. MANY OF MY PROPOSALS THAT I PUT IN, JUST LIKE EVERYBODY ELSE HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO DO, WERE NOT INCLUDED. I THINK THEY WERE WRONG, BUT AT SOME POINT YOU HAVE TO TRUST THE EXPERTS THAT WHAT THEY SENT OUT WAS IN THE BEST INTEREST OF ALBUQUERQUE. NOT IN THE BEST INTEREST OF PROPERTY OWNERS, BUT IN THE BEST INTEREST OF ALBUQUERQUE. WE HEARD OVER AND OVER TONIGHT BY WELL OVER HALF THAT THE CITY WANTS THE CHANGES THAT WERE IN THAT VERSION THAT CAME OUT OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING COMMISSION. I AGREE. WE'VE HEARD IN THE PAST THAT THERE WERE LOTS OF COMMENTS TO THE CONTRARY THAT DIDN'T COME TO THE COUNCIL MEETING BUT THEY EMAILED. THAT IS TRUE. WE'VE HEARD FROM FOLKS ON BOTH SIDES. BUT THE VAST MAJORITY HAVE BEEN FROM PEOPLE WHO WERE IN SUPPORT OF THE VERSION THAT CAME OUT OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING COMMISSION. I THINK THAT SAYS A LOT. JUST QUICKLY, POINT OF PERSONAL PRIVILEGE. WE'VE HEARD A LOT OF FOLKS SAY THEY'RE IN SUPPORT. WE DID HEAR SOMEONE SAY, WE'VE PUT IN A PETITION THAT HAS A THOUSAND PEOPLE SIGNED IT. WELL, IT'S VERY INTERESTING TO ME THAT YOU WOULD PUT IN A PETITION AND SHOW SIGNATURES BUT NOT INCLUDE WHAT THEY'RE SIGNING. I'VE BEEN AN ADVOCATE FOR A VERY LONG TIME AND I NEVER SUBMITTED A SIGNATURE LIST WITHOUT INFORMATION ON WHAT THEY'RE SIGNING. LET ME TELL YOU WHY THAT WAS NOT INCLUDED. IT'S JUST FULL OF INCONSISTENCY AND FLAT OUT LIES. I'LL START WITH THE TITLE. STOP THE EXCLUSIONARY UP ZONING. THERE'S NOTHING EXCLUSIONARY ABOUT ADDING DUPLEXES. OF MAYOR KELLER AND COUNCILOR FIEBELKORN. TO MY KNOWLEDGE, MAYOR KELLER DID NOT ATTEND ANY EPC MEETINGS AND I CERTAINLY DID NOT EITHER. I LEARNED ABOUT WHAT MADE IT THROUGH EPC THROUGH MANY ADVOCATES WHO WERE WATCHING IT WHEN I WAS NOT THERE. IT GOES ON. THE VERY FIRST SENTENCE. THE IDEA IS CHANGE RESIDENTIAL ZONING TO HIGH DENSITY. THAT IS NOT THE IDEA BEHIND ANYTHING THAT CAME OUT OF THE EPC. THAT IS NOT TRUE. IF YOU ARE LISTENING TO -- IF YOU'RE USING THESE KINDS OF SOURCES AS YOUR SOURCE OF INFORMATION, YOU REALLY SHOULD THINK ABOUT EXPANDING WHERE YOU GET YOUR NEWS. NEXT PARAGRAPH. HIGH COST HOUSING IN NEIGHBORHOODS. THAT'S NOT TRUE. THEY QUESTION THE -- QUESTIONABLY AMENDING UPDATES TO THE IDO. THIS PROCESS WAS VERY PUBLIC. IT HAS BEEN AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC FROM THE VERY BEGINNING TO THE VERY END. I DID NOT CHOOSE TO PARTICIPATE IN THE VERY BEGINNING. BECAUSE I THOUGHT IT WAS IMPORTANT IT GO THROUGH THAT PROCESS. IT DID GO THROUGH THAT PROCESS AND THAT WAS CAME OUT. AGAIN, I'M GOING TO HAVE TO DISCOUNT THE THOUSAND PEOPLE THAT SIGNED SOMETHING THAT QUITE FRANKLY, I WOULD HAVE SIGNED TO, BECAUSE IT'S FULL OF INACCURACIES. IF YOU COUNT THE PEOPLE THAT EMAILED AND CALLED AND SHOWED UP TO SPEAK, I THINK YOU'LL SEE THE VAST MAJORITY OF ALBUQUERQUE RESIDENTS HAVE EXPRESSED SUPPORT FOR THIS. I ALSO WANT TO THANK ALL THE PEOPLE THAT SHOWED UP TO SPEAK. EVEN THOSE THAT HAVE NEVER SPOIK IN PUBLIC BEFORE. I KNOW HOW HARD THAT IS. I'M A BIG MOUTH. I TALK A LOT. I REMEMBER THE FIRST TIME I TALKED IN PUBLIC. IT WAS HORRIFYING. I JUST APPRECIATE THAT YOU ALL SHOWED UP AND DID THAT. I THINK IT SAYS A LOT THAT THIS IS ISSUE THAT YOU DECIDED TO SHOW UP FOR. YOU ALL SEE THE VITAL NEED IN OUR CITY FOR CHANGE. SO, WITH THAT, MADAM PRESIDENT, I'D LIKE TO MOVE TO THE AMENDMENTS. >>COUN. PEÑA: THANK YOU, COUNCILOR FIEBELKORN. WE ARE NOW ON AMENDMENT -- UNLESS THERE'S ANY OTHER COMMENTS FROM COUNCILORS OUT THE DPAET. I THINK I WOULD LIKE TO GO TO COMMENTS FIRST AND THEN HAVE COMMENT FROM COUNCILORS. WE'RE NOW ON FLOOR AMENDMENT A. WHICH WOULD BE FLOOR AMENDMENT NUMBER ONE. THIS IS COUNCILOR FIEBELKORN AND COUNCILOR ROGERS. >>COUN. FIEBELKORN: THANK YOU, MADAM PRESIDENT. I'LL MOVE FLOOR AMENDMENT NUMBER ONE. THIS IS SPONSORED BY MYSELF AND COUNCILOR ROGERS. IT IS TO REPEAL THE LUPZ AMENDMENT NUMBER TEN AND REINSTATE THE EPC RECOMMENDED LANGUAGE FROM ITEMS M1 CONDITION 9AIXE AND C5 INTO EXHIBIT ONE OF O-26-2 AS FOLLOWS. WE WILL PUT THAT ON THE SCREEN. THIS IS THE REINSTATEMENT OF THE IMPROVEMENTS TO THE SAFE OUTDOOR SPACES FOR THE CITY OF ALBUQUERQUE. I WILL MOVE A DO PASS. >>COUN. PEÑA: THERE'S A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR FLOOR AMENDMENT NUMBER ONE FOR A DO PASS. DID YOU GET THE SPONSORS? >>COUN. FIEBELKORN: THANK YOU, MADAM PRESIDENT. I'LL OPEN BY GOING THROUGH WHAT THIS DOES. LIKE MANY THINGS WE'VE HEARD, THERE'S A LOT OF MISINFORMATION. THE FIRST THING THAT THIS DOES, AND IT'S VITALLY IMPORTANT, IT TAKES AWAY THE NECESSARY AND REQUIRED SIX-MONTH BREAK IN A SAFE OUTDOOR SPACE. IT SEEMS RIDICULOUS TO ME, AND I BELIEVE WITH TWO EXCEPTIONS, EVERYONE WHO EMAILED ME, ALSO AGREES THIS IS RIDICULOUS. IT SAYS YOU CAN HAVE A SAFE OUTDOOR SPACE, YOU HAVE TO SPEND ALL THE MONEY TO UPDATE IT, AND WITHOUT THIS AMENDMENT YOU CAN ONLY HAVE IT OPEN FOR TWO YEARS AND YOU HAVE TO WAIT SIX MORE MONTHS OF NOT HAVING IT BEFORE YOU CAN HAVE A SAFE OUTDOOR SPACE AGAIN. THAT IS VERY, VERY STRANGE. QUITE FRANKLY, THIS ONE THING IS WHAT IS KEEPING MOST PEOPLE FROM BEING ABLE TO PROVIDE SAFEOUT DOOR SPACES ON PRIVATE PROPERTY. IT GOES TO REMOVE THE REQUIREMENT FOR PLUMBING. AGAIN, I SPOKE WITH REAL ESTATE PROFESSIONAL TODAY, I ASKED HOW MUCH IT WOULD COST TO DIG UP A PARKING LOT AND PLUM IT. THE ANSWER WAS $20,000, NO PROBLEM. I DON'T SEE HOW WE COULD PUT THAT KIND OF A FINANCIAL RISK ON PEOPLE WHO ARE JUST TRYING TO HELP THEIR UNHOUSED NEIGHBORS. THAT IS SHAMEFUL. SO, REMOVE THOSE REQUIREMENTS. IT ALSO SETS FORWARD REQUIREMENT FOR HAVING SOMEONE WHO IS AVAILABLE 24-7 TO HELP IF SOMETHING HAPPENS AT THE SAFE OUTDOOR SPACES. VERY IMPORTANT. ALSO, NOT -- THERE'S NO REASON TO OVERREGULATE THESE. WE JUST NEED SAY YOU NEED SOMEONE AVAILABLE IF SOMETHING HAPPENS. IT ALSO SAYS YOU HAVE TO HAVE SUPPORTIVE SERVICES AND FACILITIES. IT GOES THROUGH WHAT THAT MEANS. NOW, AGAIN, I AGREE THAT IT IS IMPORTANT WE HAVE SOME SERVICES. WE CANNOT JUST PUT PEOPLE IN A LOT AND LEAVE THEM THERE. BUT THIS CLARIFIES WHAT EXACTLY YOU HAVE TO OFFER TO MAKE IT SOMETHING THAT INDIVIDUALS WHO HAVE PROPERTY WHO WANT TO HAVE A SAFE OUTDOOR SPACE CAN ACTUALLY DO. SO, THAT IS REALLY IMPORTANT. AND THAT IS THE END OF THAT AMENDMENT. AGAIN, THIS IS REALLY MEANT TO MAKE IT SLIGHTLY EASIER FOR PRIVATE PROPERTY OWNERS WHO WANT TO HELP THEIR UNHOUSED NEIGHBORS BY PROVIDING A SAFE OUTDOOR SPACE. IT'S IMPORTANT WE SUPPORT THIS EFFORTS BECAUSE WE'RE NOT DOING ANYTHING FOR THOSE FOLKS AND WE REALLY SHOULD BE. I KNOW ONE OF THE ARGUMENTS WILL BE THAT WE HAVE A LOT OF BEDS. I JUST WANT TO QUICKLY GO THROUGH THE NUMBER OF BEDS WE HAVE FOR OVERNIGHT SHELTERS. THIS IS FOR THE RECENT UPDATE FROM THE CAO. WOMEN'S GATEWAY, 50. MEDICAL RESPITE, 50. SOBERING 50. GATEWAY RECOVERY, 50. GATEWAY FAMILY, 195. GATEWAY WEST, 713. AND FOR THOSE OF YOU THAT CAN'T ADD THAT FAST, THAT IS 1,123 BEDS. THOSE ARE VITAL AND I SUPPORT EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THEM. BUT I BELIEVE THE LAST PIT COUNT SAID WE HAVE 2,960 PEOPLE UNHOUSED IN THE COMMUNITY. SO, CLEARLY, WE DO NOT HAVE ENOUGH PLACES FOR THEM ALL TO GO, EVEN IF THEY WERE READY FOR THAT. AND I WILL SAY, WE HAVE MANY PEOPLE OURN STREETS WHO ARE NOT READY TO GO INTO A SHELTER RIGHT NOW. THEY'RE VETERANS WITH PTSD. THEY'RE DOMESTIC VIOLENCE VICTIMS THAT ARE REALLY TRAUMATIZED AND CANNOT GO SOMEWHERE WHERE THEY'RE LOCKED IN. WE DO HAVE TO THINK THROUGH HOW WE CAN SUPPORT THOSE MEMBERS OF OUR COMMUNITY AS WELL. AND SO, THAT ALL THIS AMENDMENT IS TRYING TO DO. IT MADE IT THROUGH THE EPC. THOSE ARE THE EXPERTS THAT ARE TELLING US WHAT IS THE BEST PRACTICES AND THEY ARE THE EXPERTS. AGAIN, I JUST THINK THIS SHOULD BE ADDED BACK IN TO THE BILL BEFORE WE MOVE FURTHER WITH THE BILL TONIGHT. >>COUN. PEÑA: COUNCILOR BACA. SDMRB THANK YOU, MADS . >>COUN. BACA: I LIKE TO REQUEST A COUPLE PRETENDLYDISH . >>COUN. BACA: NUMBER ONE. FOR SITES 20 OR FEWER. EIGHT TO FIVE. THERE'S ALWAYS 24-HOUR ON-CALL SUPPORT. SOME OF THESE FOLKS NEED A LOT OF HELP. IT'S NOT 8 TO 5. THAT WOULD BE ONE. NEXT PAGE, 4-3-G91. AT LEAST THREE SERVICES. I LIKE TO DOUBLE THAT TO SIX. MOST OF THESE WORK HAND AND HAND WITH EACH OTHER. IF YOU ONLY DO A COUPLE, THERE'S SO MUCH MORE THAT NEEDS TO BE DONE. >>COUN. FIEBELKORN: MADAM PRESIDENT, WE'RE HAPPY WITH THAT AMENDMENT. >>COUN. BACA: THANK YOU. >>COUN. PEÑA: JUST FOR CLARIFICATION PURPOSES, WE DO THOUGHT -- IT'S JUST ADDED TO COUNCILOR FIEBELKORN'S AMENDMENT. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COUNCILOR CHAMPINE. >>COUN. CHAMPINE: I JUST NEED ONE POINT OF CLARIFICATION. 4-3G9E, NUMBER SIX. I THINK IT'S ON PAGE TWO. ONE SHOWER FOR EVERY TEN DESIGNATED SPACES. AND IT HAS A AND B CROSSED OUT. IS THAT SUPPOSED TO BE CROSSED OUT? >> YES. WE'RE NO LONGER REQUIRING PLUMB SERVICES. THAT CAN BE A SHOWER TRUCK. WE HAVE ONE THAT WE OWN IN THE INTERNATIONAL DISTRICT. IT'S NOT A PLUMBED UNIT. >>COUN. CHAMPINE: IT SAYS PORTABLE SHOWERS MAY BE NEEDED TO MEET THE REQUIREMENT. THAT'S SLASHED OUT. IT SAYS SHOWERS ARE NOT -- SHOWERS WON'T BE PROVIDED TO MEET THE REQUIREMENT? >>COUN. FIEBELKORN: MADAM CHAIR, IT'S NO LONGER NEEDED BECAUSE WE'RE NOT REQUIRING THE PLUMED SHOWERS. PORTABLE SHOWERS WOULD BE ALLOWED ANYWAY. THIS IS WRITTEN BACK WHEN WE -- ORIGINALLY, IT HAD THE REQUIREMENT FOR PLUMBING. SO, WE HAD SAID BECAUSE IT IS SO EXPENSIVE TO PUT THE PLUMBING WE ALLOWED SHORT-TERM USE OF TEMPORARY SHOWERS, BUT NOW WE'RE SAYING YOU CAN USE A PORTABLE SHOWER ALL THE TIME. >>COUN. CHAMPINE: THANK YOU, MADAM PRESIDENT. >>COUN. PEÑA: I THINK WE'LL GO TO CLOSE. COUNCILOR ROGERS. >>COUN. ROGERS: I JUST WANT TO POINT OUT ONE THING. COUNCILOR FIEBELKORN, THANK YOU FOR THE AMAZING OPEN AND DESCRIPTION. I WANT TO MAKE SURE PEOPLE KNOW THAT WE DID ADD, BASED ON PUBLIC FEEDBACK, THE MAJOR PUBLIC OPEN SPACES THAT WE HAVE A BUFFER OF A 1,320 FEET ADJACENT TO ANY OPEN SPACE. I JUST WANT TO MAKE THAT POINT. WE DID INCLUDE THAT IN THIS AS WELL. WITH THAT, I URGE YOUR SUPPORT. >>COUN. PEÑA: THANK YOU SO MUCH. THERE'S A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR FLOOR AMENDMENT NUMBER ONE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR RAISE YOUR HAND AND SAY YES. OPPOSED? MOTION FAILS ON A 5-4. >>COUN. ROGERS: THANK YOU, I'LL OPEN ON AMENDMENT B. NUMBER TWO IN YOUR PACKETS. THIS AMENDMENT IS TO BRING BACK THE TOWNHOMES USED AS PERMISSIVE IN R1. TOWNHOUSES ARE CAPPED AT THREE UNITS MAX. ESSENTIALLY, MAKING THE USE A TRIPLEX. WE HAVE IT ON THE SCREEN AS WELL. BASICALLY THIS AMENDMENT -- I'M SORRY. >>COUN. FIEBELKORN: MADAM PRESIDENT. >>COUN. ROGERS: I JUMPED AHEAD. LET ME REWIND THAT. THIS AMENDMENT WOULD MAKE DUPLEXES PERMISSIVE IN R1 ZONE DISTRICTS. JUST BRINKING BACK THE EPC, REINCERTING THE EPC RECOMMENDED LANGUAGE FROM ITEM C TO AS FOLLOWS. JUST TAKING OUT THE DETACH. AND MAKING THEM PERMISSIVE WITH AN R1 ZONE DISTRICT. URGE YOUR SUPPORT. >>COUN. PEÑA: THANK YOU, COUNCILOR ROGERS. THERE WAS A SECOND ON THE MOTION. THERE'S A MOTION AND SECOND BY COUNCILOR FIEBELKORN. YOU LOST ME FOR A SECOND. WE GOT BACK ON TRACK. FLOOR AMENDMENT NUMBER TWO. COUNCILOR CHAMPINE. OKAY. ANY OTHER COMMENTS? COUNCILOR ROGERS OR COUNCILOR FIEBELKORN TO CLOSE. >>COUN. FIEBELKORN: THANK YOU, MADAM PRESIDENT. THIS IS REALLY THE FIRST PART OF THE HOUSING REQUIREMENTS THAT -- WE'VE HEARD FROM SO MANY PEOPLE THAT THEY WANT. I DO WANT TO MAKE A FEW COMMENTS ABOUT THIS. ONE COMMENTER EARLIER TODAY MADE THE STATEMENT THAT R1 WAS CREATED FOR A PURPOSE. I WANT TO SAY, YEAH, IT WAS. IT WAS CREATED FOR THE PURPOSES OF KEEPING THOSE PEOPLE OUT OF YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD. THERE IS NO OTHER REASON TO THINK THAT YOU COULD NOT WANT A DUPLEX NEXTDOOR TO YOU. I WOULD LOVE A DUPLEX NEXTDOOR TO ME. THIS DOESN'T CHANGE ANYBODY'S ZONE. IT DOESN'T ALLOW ANY KIND OF FURTHER DENSITY. IT JUST SAYS THAT THE HOUSE NEXTDOOR TO YOU COULD POSSIBLY CHANGE INTO A DUPLEX. WHEN I BOUGHT MY HOUSE, IT WAS BUILT IN THE EARLY 50s, SOMEBODY AMENDED IT TO BE A DUPLEX. IT JUST CUT THE KITCHEN IN HALF WITH THE WALL AND SO THERE WERE TWO STRANGELY SHAPED KITCHENS AND BEDROOMS AND BATHROOMS AND CLOSETS. I DON'T FIND THAT OFFIVE -- OFFENSIVE. I FIND THAT GREAT THAT THERE WILL BE THE POSSIBILITY OF HAVING TWO PEOPLE IN MY HOME RATHER THAN ONE. I DO WANT TO SAY THAT I THINK ONE OF THE THINGS WE'VE HEARD THE MOST IS THAT DUPLEXES ARE CONDITIONAL. IA CAN JUST GO TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT AND GET A VARIANCE. I THINK THAT IS INCREDIBLY UNFAIR. IF YOU HAPPEN TO LIVE NEXT TO ME, I'M GOING TO BE LIKE GO FOR IT. I'LL COME WITH YOU TO THE HEARING AND TRY TOYOU HELPIA GET THAT. IF YOU -- WE'RE SETTING YOU UP FOR A LOT OF PAIN. THAT IS REALLY AN UNFAIR THING TO DO TO PEOPLE. I WOULD LIKE TO ASK MR. COX, IF I MAY, WHAT'S THE PROCESS IF I WANT A CONDITIONAL PERMISSION TO MAKE MY HOME INTO A DUPLEX? >> PRESIDENT, COUNCILOR FIEBELKORN, BASICALLY THE CONDITIONAL USE APPLICATION IS ONE THAT IS APPLIED FOR TO SEE IF THAT USE CAN BE MORE IN LINE WITH THE SURROUND AREA. SO SOMEONE WOULD SUBMIT A CONDITIONAL USE TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT. GO THROUGH THE DIFFERENT REQUIREMENTS AND CRITERIA AND THEN GO TO THE ZONING HEARING EXAMINER FOR A PUBLIC PROCESS. AT THAT POINT, IT ISOPE -- OPEN TO THE PUBLIC. AND YOU'RE TRYING TO JUSTIFY WHY THAT USE IS ADEQUATE FOR THE SITE YOU HAVE APPLIED FOR. AT THAT POINT, IF IT GETS APPROVED, THERE CAN BE AN APPEAL PROCESS OR IF IT'S NOT APPEALED YOU HAVE TO ADHERE TO THE DIFFERENT CONDITIONS THAT ARE PUT ON THROUGH THE ZHE PROCESS FOR THAT, IN THIS CASE, DUPLEX. I SHOULD ALSO CLARIFY, THE DUPLEXES -- THE PROCESS OF THE COMMENTERS WERE TALKING ABOUT WAS THE REZONING CASE WHICH IS ALSO YOU WOULD HAVE TO CHANGE YOUR R1 ZONE DISTRICT TO RP ZONE DISTRICT TO ACTUALLY GET DUPLEXES ON. SO, THERE IS AN ADDED STEP TO THAT AS WELL. WHICH AT THAT POINT ALL R1 IS ALSO WITHIN AREA OF CONSISTENCY WHICH WE HAVE POLICY THAT SAYS TRY NOT TO REZONE THAT. >>COUN. FIEBELKORN: THANK YOU, MADAM PRESIDENT. >> PRESIDENT, COUNCILORS, I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY ONE THING. CURRENTLY, YOU CAN'T REQUEST A CONDITIONAL USE TO GET A DUPLEX. IT'S NOT POSSIBLE. IT'S NOT ALLOWED. YOU WOULD HAVE TO GO THROUGH A ZONE CHANGE PROCESS TO HAVE A DUPLEX. >>COUN. FIEBELKORN: MADAM PRESIDENT, CAN YOU TALK US THROUGH THAT PROCESS? >> SURE. REZONING REQUIRES AN APPLICATION CYCLE OF SIX WEEKS. AT LEAST. IT STARTS WITH NOTIFICATION TO PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 100 FEET. A SIGN. AN EMAIL TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. THEN APPLICATION TO THE CITY. THAT GOES TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION THAT ARE OUR EXPERTS. AND THEY'RE WONDERFUL. THAT HEARING IS SCHEDULED FOR A MONTH OUT. SO, THAT HEARING INCLUDES THE OPPORTUNITY FOR PEOPLE TO MAKE PUBLIC COMMENT AND AS YOU SAID PROPERTY OWNERS WHO ARE WORRIED ABOUT THOSE PEOPLE COME AND ARE HIGHLY MOTIVATED TO COME TO THE HEARINGS AND SAY THEY'RE NOT IN SUPPORT. IT'S A MUCH HIGHER BAR THAN THE CONDITIONAL USE. >>COUN. FIEBELKORN: THANK YOU, MADAM PRESIDENT. THAT'S A LOT. THAT'S A LOT FOR ME TO BE ABLE TO PUT THE WALL BACK UP THAT WAS THERE WHEN I BOUGHT MY HOUSE. I TORE THE WALL DOWN BECAUSE I HAVE CHOSEN,PROBABLY WRONGLY, TO REHABILITAING SENIOR SPECIAL NEEDS DOGS, BUT I CAN SEE THE POINT WHERE I NEED TO MAKE MORE INCOME. AND TO GET TO BE ABLE TO PUT THAT WALL BACK UP, I WOULD HAVE TO DO ALL THOSE STEPS. AND THAT JUST SEEMS INCREDIBLY UNFAIR. AGAIN, WE TALK A LOT ABOUT PRIVATE PROPERTY RIGHTS, BUT I DON'T KNOW WE MEAN IT. I DON'T KNOW THAT WE THINK THAT PEOPLE ACTUALLY HAVE PRIVATE PROPERTY RIGHTS UNLESS WE DO WHAT WE THINK THE RIGHT THING ON THEM. AGAIN, I DO NOT FIND A DUPLEX TO BE IN ANY WAY SHAPE OR FORM SCARY. I WELCOME MORE PEOPLE IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD. I THINK IT'S REALLY INTERESTING THAT I'M AGREEING WITH NAOP TONIGHT ON THIS ISSUE. I THINK THAT SIZ -- SAYS A LOT. I THINK ONE OF THE THINGS WE HEARD FROM THE OTHER COMMENTER IS WE DON'T WANT TO LOOK LIKE ANY OTHER CITY. WELL, I THINK IF YOU GO TO ANY OTHER CITY, IF YOU GO WITH THE SUBURBS WHAT YOU SEE IS A BUNCH OF SINGLE FAMILY HOMES. WHAT I THINK IS REALLY GREAT ABOUT ALBUQUERQUE IS THAT IF YOU DRIVE AROUND ALBUQUERQUE, IN ANY NEIGHBORHOOD, YOU SEE A LOT OF COOL STUFF. YOU SEE TRIPLEXES AND SMALL FOURPLEXES. YOU SEE COTTAGE DEVELOPMENT. BECAUSE WE'RE BUILT BEFORE ZONING CODES. WE WERE BUILT WHEN WE STILL HAD COMMUNITY. WHERE WE DEVELOPED AROUND A SMALL PLAZA AREA WHERE WE REALLY HAD THE IDEA THAT YOU KNOW YOUR NEIGHBORS, THAT ORGANICLY APPEARS. THEN WE CHANGED THAT WITH ZONING CODES TO SAY WE DON'T WANT THOSE PEOPLE IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. IF THERE WAS ONE THING THAT WAS GOING TO PASS TONIGHT, I WOULD HOPE THAT IT WOULD BE DUPLEXES. THIS IS A VERY GENTLE WAY OF INCREASING HOUSING STOCK. AND GIVING MORE FAMILIES AN ACTUAL HOME IN OUR COMMUNITY. WITH THAT, I'LL URGE YOUR SUPPORT. >>COUN. PEÑA: IS THAT YOUR CLOSE? THANK YOU. THERE WAS A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR FLOOR AMENDMENT NUMBER TWO. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY YES AND RAISE YOUR HAND. OPPOSED? THAT MOTION FAILS ON A 5-4. WE'RE NOW ON FLOOR AMENDMENT NUMBER C, WHICH WILL BE LABELED THREE. COUNCILOR FIEBELKORN AND COUNCILOR ROGERS. >>COUN. FIEBELKORN: MADAM PRESIDENT, I WILL MOVE FLOOR AMENDMENT NUMBER THREE. AND THAT WILL REPEAL LUPZ AMENDMENT NUMBER THREE AND REINSERT THE EPC RECOMMENDED LANGUAGE FROM ITEM C3 AS FOLLOWS. THIS IS THE ONE THAT WOULD ALLOW TOWNHOMES. I'LL MOVE THAT AMENDMENT. THANK YOU. >>COUN. PEÑA: THERE'S A MOTION, AND A SECOND ON FLOOR AMENDMENT NUMBER THREE. COUNCILOR FIEBELKORN. >>COUN. FIEBELKORN: THANK YOU, MADAM PRESIDENT. LOTS OF MISINFORMATION ABOUT THIS. I'M GOING TO ASK A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS AS MY OPENING. I KEEP HEARING THAT THIS AMENDMENT WOULD ALLOW FIVE, SIX, SEVEN UNITS NEXT DOOR TO ME. MR. COX, DOES THIS ALLOW MORE THAN THREE UNITS? IT ALLOWS DUPLEX, IS THAT CORRECT? >> PRESIDENT, COUNCILOR FIEBELKORN, IN REGARDS TO JUST TOWN HOMES, IF -- WHERE DUPLEX IS ALLOWED ON A SINGLE PROPERTY, LET'S SAY RT, YOU CAN HAVE A THIRD UNIT. AS FAR AS TOWN HOMES GO, WHICH ARE ALL CONNECTED, THEY ARE LIMITED TO THREE UNITS ADJACENT TO A SINGLE FAMILY JOAN DISTRICT. -- THIS IS BEING MISREPRESENTED AS HIGH DENSITY. THREE UNITS ON A LOT IS NOT HIGH DENSITY. I WILL LEAVE IT AT THAT. >>COUN. PEÑA: ANY OTHER COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS? COUNCILOR TELLES. >>COUN. TELLES: THANK YOU, MADAM PRESIDENT. I JUST WANT TO SHARE A QUICK LITTLE STORY. I WAS A MEMBER OF THE SANDWICH GENERATION FOR THE LAST TEN YEARS. I HAVE A FIVE-YEAR-OLD DAUGHTER. I TOOK CARE OF MY MOM WHO WAS SUFFERING FROM DEMENTIONA. MY MOM PASSED AWAY RIGHT BEFORE CHRISES. WE TRIED EVERYTHING THAT WE COULD DO TO BUILD A CASITA ON MY PROPERTY FOR MY MOM. THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS THAT I DID NOT HAVE, THAT I'M STILL PAYING CREDIT CARDS ON WITH HIGH INTEREST RATES BECAUSE OF PERMITTING FEES. BECAUSE OF PAYING ARCHITECTS TO DESIGN THE DWELLING. TO GET FOLKS OUT THERE TO MEASURE ALL THE PHASES. IT IS NOT AN EASY PROCESS. IT IS INSANELY PROHIBITIVE FOR PEOPLE WHO WANT TO TAKE CARE OF THEIR FAMILY MEMBERS. THE BENEFITS OF THESE TYPE OF MULTIGENERATIONAL HOME BUYING IS BEYOND ANYTHING I CAN EVEN REALLY EXPLAIN, QUITE FRANKLY. AND NOT ONLY THAT, IT'S JUST WE HAVE A MORAL IMPERATIVE. IT IS A MORAL IMPERATIVE TO PROVIDE ACCESS FOR INDIVIDUALS WHO WANT TO CARE FOR THEIR FAMILIES. WE CANNOT DO THAT WITH THE WAY THINGS ARE CURRENTLY. I COULD NOT BUILD THE CASITA FOR MY MOM. SO SHE LIVED WITH US IN OUR HOUSE. IT WAS TIGHT. MAN, I HAD -- I HAVE A SINGLE FAMILY HOUSE. YOU KNOW, IT'S MODEST. IT'S 1600 SQUARE FEET. AND IT WAS HARD. AND AS MY MOM GOT SICKER AND WE HAD TO BRING IN MEDICAL BEDS AND NURSES AND CARE TEAMS, IT BECAME MORE AND MORE -- I'M TRYING NOT TO CRY. I FAILED MY MOM BECAUSE I COULDN'T DO THIS. I FAILED MY MOM. CAREGIVERS ARE FAILING THEIR FAMILIES BECAUSE THEY CAN'T DO THIS. WE HAVE A MORAL IMPERATIVE TO MAKE THINGS EASIER AND ACCESSIBLE. AND EQUITABLE FOR FAMILIES IN OUR CITY. WE ARE A MULTIGENERATIONAL CITY. THAT IS OUR CULTURE. MY TIA LIVED WITH ME, MY GRANDMA, MY PARENTS. WE CAN'T DO THAT WITHOUT THIS. I AM URGING YOU, I'M BEGGING YOU, BEGGING YOU, TO HELP FAMILIES SO THEY DON'T HAVE TO LIVE WITH THE GUILT THAT I LIVE WITH EVERY DAY. [ INAUDIBLE ]. >>COUN. PEÑA: WE'RE BACK ON FLOOR AMENDMENT NUMBER THREE. ARE THERE ANY OTHER -- DID YOU FINISH YOUR COMMENT, COUNCILOR TELLES? THANK YOU. I GUESS WE'LL CLOSE ON THIS MOTION. COUNCILOR ROGERS. >>COUN. ROGERS: THANK YOU, MADAM PRESIDENT. I DON'T HAVE MUCH ELSE TO ADD. I KNOW THAT WE HAD SOME QUESTIONS FROM OUR ADMINISTRATION JUST ABOUT -- WAS THIS THE ONE -- I'M SORRY. I'LL URGE YOUR SUPPORT. >>COUN. PEÑA: THERE'S A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR FLOOR AMENDMENT NUMBER THREE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY YES AND RAISE YOUR HAND. OPPOSED NO. WE ARE NOW -- FLOOR AMENDMENT D. FLOOR AMENDMENT NUMBER FOUR. >>COUN. ROGERS: THANK YOU, MADAM PRESIDENT. FLOOR AMENDMENT D IS REINSERTING EPC RECOMMENDED LANGUAGE FROM EPC CONDITION EIGHT, ITEM TWO, ITEM 29 AND EPC CONDITION EIGHT. AND 4 INTO EXHIBIT ONE OF O-26-2 AS FOLLOWS. THIS AMENDMENT ON THE SCREEN IS PRETTY LONG. THIS AMENDMENT BRINGS BACK ALL THE AMENDMENTS BROUGHT FORTH BY OUR EPC FOR ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT. THIS FOCUSES ON ALLOWANCE OF ATTACHED ADU, AND FLEXIBILITY SITE ALLOWANCE. YURJ YOUR SUPPORT. >>COUN. FIEBELKORN: SECOND. >>COUN. PEÑA: THERE'S A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR FLOOR AMENDMENT NUMBER FOUR. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION, COUNCILORS ? COUNCILOR FIEBELKORN TO CLOSE. >>COUN. FIEBELKORN: THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. WE ALL KNOW HOW THIS IS GOING. I'M GOING TO TALK ABOUT EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THESE. BUCKLE UP. THE IDEA THAT WE WOULD NOT LOOSEN UP SOME OF THE ADU RESTRICTIONS THAT WERE IN THE IDO IS UNFATHOMABLE TO ME. MR. COX, CAN YOU TELL US WHAT THE RESTRICTIONS IN THE CURRENT IDO FOR AN ADU INCLUDES? >> CURRENTLY, WITHIN THE IDO RIGHT NOW FOR ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS, ADU ARE LIMITED IN SIZE. 750 SQUARE FEET. THEY ARE LIMITED BY THE HEIGHT OF THE PRINCIPLE HOUSE ON THE PROPERTY. THEY HAVE TO MEET SETBACKS. WITHIN THE SIDE YARD OR BACKYARD, WHEREVER THEY EXIST. THEY HAVE TO ADD PARKING FOR PARKING REQUIREMENTS SIMILAR TO MOST OTHER RESIDENTIAL UNITS. THEY HAVE TO BE BEHIND THE MAIN HOUSE. THEY CAN'T TAKE UP MORE THAN 25% OF THE YARD. THEY CAN'T JUST CONVERT PART OF AN EXISTING HOUSE OR GARAGE. THAT'S WHERE THIS AMENDMENT IS TIED TO. HAVE TO BUILD ALL WALLS, SINCE IT HAS TO BE DETACHED WHICH GUARANTEES COST PROHIBITIVENESS. AND THEN HAVE TO -- WHEN YOU WANT TO PUT UP AN ADU, YOU HAVE TO EMAIL THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION AND GET A SITE PLAN. >>COUN. FIEBELKORN: THANK YOU, MADAM PRESIDENT. IT IS NO SURPRISE THAT WITH ALL OF THOSE RESTRICTIONS SINCE WE PERMITTED THEM IN 2025, THERE HAVE ONLY BEEN 22 PERMITTED IN THE CITY. NO ONE CAN DO THAT. I WOULD LOVE TO HAVE AN ADU IN MY BACKYARD. I DO NOT HAVE THE SPACE FOR OFFSTREET PARKING. SO I'M OUT. THERE ARE LOTS OF FOLKS WHO WANT AN ADU AND TO MAKE IT CHEAPER IT IS CHEAPER TO BUILD ON TO THE EXISTING STRUCTURE THAN IT IS TO CREATE AN ALL NEW STRUCTURE. NOW, STILL WOULDN'T BE BULLDOZING HOMES OR DOING ANYTHING RADICAL. IT'S JUST SAYING IF YOU WANT TO BUILD ON TO YOUR EXISTING STRUCTURE AND CREATE AN ADOU SO YOU CAN HAVE YOUR MOM LIVE WITH YOU IN HER TWILIGHT YEARS, IF YOU WANT TO BE ABLE TO HAVE YOUR KIDS COME AND LIVE WITH YOU WHILE THEY'RE IN COLLEGE OR AFTER BECAUSE THEY MIGHT HAVE TO BE THERE FOR 20 YEARS AT THE RATE WE'RE GOING ON AFFORDABILITY, OR YOU CAN HAVE YOUR CAREGIVER, IF YOU'RE LUCKY TO HAVE THE ABILITY AS YOU GROW OLDER, YOU CAN HAVE CAREGIVERS LIVE THE. THOSE ARE BASIC OPTIONS EVERYBODY IN THE COMMUNITY SHOULD HAVE. THERE IS NO GOOD REASON FOR NOT SAYING THAT AN ADU CAN BE DETACHED OR ATTACHED. SO, I WILL MENTION THIS ALSO PASSED THE EPC UNANIMOUSLY. AGAIN THE EXPERTS WHO WORK IN THESE FIELDS AND DO THIS WORK EVERY SINGLE DAY ALL OF THEM SAID THIS IS A GOOD IDEA. WITH THAT, I URGE YOUR SUPPORT. >>COUN. PEÑA: THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM COUNCILORS? NO. MR. COX, I'M SORRY. COUNCILOR LEWIS. >>COUN. LEWIS: THANK YOU, MADAM PRESIDENT. JUST A FEW COMMENTS. IT DOESN'T HAVE TO DO WITH THIS AMENDMENT, BUT ON A LOT OF THESE. MY DISTRICT WAS BUILT WITH ZONING CODES. I REALIZE THAT NOT EVERY DISTRICT AND EVERY PART OF ALBUQUERQUE. BUT WE DON'T HAVE TOWN HOMES OR DUPLEXES OR AVAILABILITY TO BE ABLE TO BUILD THOSE. ONLY WHERE THEY'RE ZONED IN MY DISTRICT. NO TENT ENCAMPMENTS OR SAFE OUTDOOR SPACES. THE ENTIRE DISTRICT WAS BUILT ON HOW IT WAS ZONED. PEOPLE BOUGHT THEIR HOMES AND LIVE IN THEIR NEIGHBORHOODS. KNOWING THAT. YOU KNOW, IF YOU WANT TO KNOW WHO I'M BOUGHT AND SOLD BY, IT STARTS WITH 500 PEOPLE THAT GAVE ME $5. AND HELPED ME GET ELEBLTHED. AND THE PEOPLE THEY REPRESENT WHICH ARE MY NEIGHBORS. AND 75,000 PEOPLE THAT LIVE IN MY DISTRICT. I'M VOTING HERE ON THESE AMENDMENTS AND THIS BILL ACCORDING TO WHERE I LIVE. AND WHO I REPRESENT. YOU'VE HEARD NAOP AND REALTORS AND OTHERS YOU CHOOSE TO BE BOUGHT AND SOLD BY, YOU HEARD WHERE THEY STAND TONIGHT ON THOSE AMENDMENTS. PROBABLY NOT A GOOD IDEA TO ASSUME HOW I WOULD HAVE VOTED ON THIS BY THAT. I'M BOUGHT AND SOLD BY THE PEOPLE I REPRESENT. I ALSO UNDERSTAND THAT SOME OF THESE AMENDMENTS AND SOME OF THESE ZONING CHANGES ARE GOOD. CERTAIN PARTS OF THE CITY AND I COMPLETELY UNDERSTAND WHY SOME COUNCILORS WOULD BE VOTING FOR THESE. THAT'S WHERE I'M AT ON IT. I'D ALSO, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVES ON THE EPC. EPC, VERY IMPORTANT PART OF THE PROCESS FOR THESE DECISIONS. GREAT PEOPLE. WITH GREAT EXPERTISE THAT WE APPOINT. THEY'RE NOT ELECTED BY THE PEOPLE IN OUR DISTRICTS. THEY'RE APPOINTED BY US. THEY HAVE A LOT OF TALENT. THEIR PART OF THE PROCESS IS TO REVIEW PROPOSALS. THEY DON'T CREATE PROPOSALS. THEY DON'T CREATE THESE CHANGES. MOST OF THESE CHANGES AND PROPOSALS CAME FROM THE ADMINISTRATION. THEY CAME FROM THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT. THEY MADE HAVE ORIGINATED FROM SOME PEOPLE IN OUR COMMUNITY. MAYBE ORIGINATED FROM CITY COUNCILORS BUT THE HEART AND MAJORITY OF THESE AMENDMENTS, AND THESE CHANGES WE'RE DEALING WITH TONIGHT, AND WE HAVE BEEN IN COMMITTEE AND TALKING THROUGH FOR A GOOD PERIOD OF TIME, THEY'VE COME FROM THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT. THE EPC DOES THEIR JOB TO REVIEW, LOOK AT THESE ACCORDING TO OUR EXISTING CODES AND GIVES US RECOMMENDATIONS. THEY'RE NOT THE END-ALL ON HOW WE SHAPE POLICY. THAT'S WHERE WE COME IN. THAT'S WHERE THIS COUNCIL COMES IN. THIS COUNCIL IS A REPRESENTATIVE BODY THAT REPRESENTS CERTAIN AREAS OF OUR CITY. AND I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO UNDERSTAND. THAT'S WHERE I'M AT. I THINK THAT'S CERTAINLY THE MOTIVE OF EVERY COUNCILOR HERE. YOU KNOW, OVERWHELMINGLY, AND I AURAL SAID IT, THE SENTIMENT IN MY DISTRICT IS THEY HAVE BEEN VERY OPPOSED TO THIS. BY THE WAY, THOSE DISCUSSIONS HAPPENED IN THE EPC AND THEY HAPPENED THROUGH MANY EMAILS. AND WE TAKE ALL THAT INTO ACCOUNT. PHONE CALLS AND EMAILS. TEXTS AND CONVERSATIONS WITH PEOPLE THAT LIVE IN OUR DISTRICT. WE WANT TO REPRESENT THEM AND REPRESENT THEM WELL ESPECIALLY WHEN IT COMES TO SWEEPING CHANGES THAT REALLY CHANGE THE MAKE-UP OF A COMMUNITY. I'M NOT SURE IF IT'S EVEN LEGAL OR IT CAN HAPPEN, BUT THE IDEA OF MAKING SOME OF THESE CHANGES IN SMALLER AREAS AND CERTAIN PARTS IS DIFFICULT TO DO. I UNDERSTAND IT AS WELL. I HAVE BEEN SUPPORTIVE OF BILLS IN THE PAST, THE CORRIDORS IN CERTAIN AREAS OF THE CITY THAT HAVE CONTRIBUTED WELL TO REALLY BE ABLE TO IN THE RIGHT AREAS AND RIGHT PLACES TO BE ABLE TO CHANGE THINGS AND CHANGE ZONINGS IN WAYS THAT REALLY HELP THE AREAS GROW. IF I LIVED IN AN ANOTHER CITY OR PART OF TOWN, I THINK THAT MAYBE WE WOULD LOOK AT THESE THINGS DIFFERENTLY. WE HAVE TO REPRESENT THE PEOPLE THAT PUT US HERE. THANK YOU, MADAM PRESIDENT. >>COUN. PEÑA: THANK YOU. COUNCILOR ROGERS. >>COUN. ROGERS: THANK YOU, MADAM PRESIDENT. COUNCILOR LEWIS'S COMMENTS MAKE ME THINK OF SOMETHING I'VE BEEN ASKING THE QUESTION ABOUT OF OUR ADMINISTRATION AND OUR TEAM. I'VE BEEN GETTING CONFLICTING ANSWERS. I REALLY WANT TO DIG IN QUICKLY AROUND -- I WAS TOLD FOR -- I TRUST OUR TEAM ABOUT SMALL MAP AREAS. I THOUGHT THAT WAS RIGHT FOR OUR BODEGA ONE. IF WE DON'T WANT THIS ACROSS THE CITY, HOW CAN I PUT THIS IN MY AREA BECAUSE I HAVE A FOOD DESERT AND I NEED THESE FOR FOOD SECURITY. I WAS TOLD THE SMALL MAPPED AREA WOULD BE QUASI-JUDICIAL THAT REQUIRES MAILED NOTICE TO PROPERTY OWNERS BEFORE WE DO SOME OF THIS WITHIN THE BOUNDARY. HEIGHTENED DUE PROCESS FOR HEARING PROCEDURES BEFORE ADOPTION. AND THEN, I HEAR FROM THE ADMINISTRATION, NO, COUNCIL CAN DO THAT. I'D LIKE TO GET A CLEAR ANSWER ON THE RECORD SO I CAN MAKE SOME DECISIONS. I KNOW I TALKED TO OTHER COLLEAGUES WHO FOR SAFE OUTDOOR SPACES, I DON'T AGREE WE SHOULD HAVE ONE RULE FOR ONE PART OF THE CITY AND A DIFFERENT RULE FOR THE OTHER PART. THAT IS TOO HARD FOR US TO FIGURE OUT. DISTRICT SIX ALREADY CARRIED THE BRUNT OF HOMELESSNESS. WE'RE THE ONLY PLACE THAT HAS A SAFE OUTDOOR SPACE. I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE THE SAFE OUTDOOR SPACE ORDINANCE HAS TWO PER DISTRICT. THAT DOESN'T APPLY TO CHURCHES. IN MY DISTRICT, IT'S AT A CHURCH. IT DOESN'T COUNT TOWARD THE TWO CAP. OUR ADMINISTRATION IS MARKETING THESE TO CHURCHES. MY DISTRICT WILL END UP WITH MORE THAN THOSE. I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR FROM LEGAL ABOUT YOUR POSITION AND I WOULD LIKE TO COME OUR CAO OR CITY ATTORNEY TO GET THEIR POSITION. >> COUNCIL PRESIDENT, COUNCILOR ROGERS, SLIGHT UPDATE TO OUR PRIOR CONVERSATIONS ON THIS TOPIC. FIRST, WE DO HAVE SMALL MAP AREA AMENDMENTS IN THE IDO WHERE WE CAN MAP OUT CERTAIN AREAS WHERE THERE ARE DIFFERENT REGULATIONS THAT APPLY. NORMALLY, THOSE WOULD BE QUASI-JUDICIAL WHERE THEY'RE RUN THROUGH THE EPC AND PRESENTED TO THE COUNCIL INCLUDING THE QUASI-JUDICIAL PROCEDURES LIKE MAILED NOTICE AND HEARING AND ALL THOSE EXTRA PROCESSES THAT WE HAVE TO GO THROUGH. HOWEVER, O-69 THE BILL ADOPTED BY THE COUNCIL THAT MADE SOME OF THESE IMPORTANT CHANGES TO APPEALS AND DIFFERENT PROCESSES DID CARVE OUT FOR THE COUNCIL AN EXEMPTION FROM THOSE PROCEDURES TO SAY THAT WHEN COUNCIL WANTS TO DOPT A SMALL MAPPED AREA AMENDMENT THEY DO NOT HAVE TO SUBMIT TO EPC AND THEY DO NOT REQUIRE CONSIDERATION BEYOND WHAT'S REQUIRED BOY THE COUNCIL TO ADOPT ANY OTHER ORDINANCE. THAT COULD BE INCORPORATED AS A CHANGE WITHOUT SOME OF THE EXTRA STEPS. >>COUN. PEÑA: COUNCILOR ROGERS, WITH WOULD YOU LIKE TO HEAR FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY? >> COUNCIL PRESIDENT, COUNCILOR ROGERS, I DO ALSO THINK AS COUNCILOR LEWIS SAID THERE ARE WAYS TO CREATE -- MAKE THEM NEAR CORRIDORS SO THE CHANGES DON'T APPLY CITYWIDE BUT YOU CAN APPLY THEM IN AREAS DEPENDING ON CHARACTERISTICS. THAT'S ONE WAY COUNCIL HAS DONE IT IN THE PAST TO CREATE A CHANGE THAT DOES NOT APPLY CITYWIDE. THAT'S WHAT WHERE WAS THINKING WHEN I SAID THERE ARE WAYS COUNCIL CAN ADOPT AMENDMENTS THAT DON'T APPLY TO EVERY SINGLE PART OF THE CITY. I WOULD ACTUALLY ASK IF SHE AGREES BECAUSE SHE'S THE EXPERT. >> MADAM PRESIDENT, COUNCILORS, YES. I WOULD AGREE THAT'S ANOTHER APPROACH WE HAVE TAKEN TO LIMITED CORRIDORS FOR THE CITY. >>COUN. PEÑA: COUNCILOR ROGERS, DOES THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION SOME. >>COUN. ROGERS: THANK YOU, MADAM PRESIDENT. YEAH, IT DOES. IT MEANS COUNCIL CAN DO WHAT WE WANT. BUT MY MO IS COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT, COMMUNITY BUY IN. COMMUNITY WEIGHING IN ON THESE THINGS. FOR ME, I THINK OUR COMMUNITY HAS BEEN ABLE TO WEIGH IN ON ALL THIS OVER THIS SINCE JULY. THAT HELPS ME A LOT. THANK YOU. >>COUN. PEÑA: THANK YOU. COUNCILOR TELLES. >>COUN. TELLES: THANK YOU, MADAM PRESIDENT. I JUST HAVE A QUESTION REGARDING AMENDING SPECIFICALLY FOR COUNCIL DISTRICTS. WHAT HAPPENS WHEN REDISTRICTING OCCURS AND WE ESTABLISH THESE TYPE OF REGULATIONS ON PROPERTY OWNERS WHO DIDN'T KNOW THAT A PIECE OF ORDINANCE FROM YEARS AGO APPLIES TO THEM? WHAT IF I MOVE FROM DISTRICT TWO TO DISTRICT SIX AND I DON'T KNOW THAT APPLIES? WHAT HAPPENS? >> MADAM PRESIDENT, COUNCILOR TELLES, ULTIMATELY WHAT YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO CONTEND WITH -- IF IT IS APPROVED, ULTIMATELY, IF BOUNDARIES CHANGES AUTOMATICALLY OUTSIDE OF THIS COUNCIL DISTRICT, YOU ARE RUNNING THE RISK OF PUTTING PROPERTIES INTO NON-CONFORMING STATUS WHICH IS SOMETHING WE HIGHLY TRY TO VOID. ULTIMATELY, WITHOUT KNOWING WHERE A COUNCIL DISTRICT IS ACTUALLY GOING TO LIE THE NEXT TIME WE REDISTRICT IN 2030 OR SOMETHING, DEMOGRAPHICS CHANGE, DEVELOPMENT CHANGED, THOSE BOUNDARIES CAN BE DRASTICALLY DIFFERENT AND WE PUT REGULATIONS ON A PLACE THAT WAS UNKNOWN, NOT NOTIFIED, AND YEAH. POINT-BLANK. >>COUN. TELLES: THANK YOU, MADAM PRESIDENT. I'M GOING TO USE I'M STILL NEW BECAUSE THIS IS MY FIFTH MEETING. >> CITY COUNCILORS, AS AN ATTORNEY, I CAN TELL YOU THAT IS INCORRECT. THE BOUNDARY WOULD BE DEFINED WHEN THE LAW WENT INTO PLACE. SHIFTING COUNCIL DISTRICTS LATER ON, THIS IS NOT A MOVING TARGET. THIS WOULD BE BASED ON IT BEING DEFINED AT THE TIME THE LAW IS PASSED. >>COUN. TELLES: THANK YOU. OKAY. AGAIN, I'M NEW. I UNDERSTOOD THAT THIS PROCESS WAS NOT CONSIDERED QUASI-JUDICIAL BECAUSE ALL AMENDMENTS WERE CITYWIDE. WOULD THIS THEN -- IS IT LEGAL TO ESTABLISH REGULATIONS WITHOUT PROPER NOTICE? DOES IT THEN BECOME A QUASI-JUDICIAL ISSUE? ARE THESE -- DO WE NEED TO ASK OUR A.G. FOR AN OPINION? WE HAVE VERY CONFLICTING RESPONSES FROM LAWYERS. >>COUN. PEÑA: MS. KEEFE. >> COUNCIL PRESIDENT, COUNCILOR TELLES, I THINK WHAT WOULD HELP CLARIFY IS MOST OF THESE ARE CITYWIDE. WE NEED A QUASI-JUDICIAL HEARING WHEN WE HAVE A SMALL MAPPED AREA. THERE IS SOMETHING IN BETWEEN. IF THIS APPLIES TO LARGE BLOCKS OF THE CITY, IT'S NOT A SMALL MAPPED AREA AND WE DON'T HAVE TO GO TO QUASI-JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS. MOST OF THESE APPLY CITYWIDE OR TO EVERY ZONED IN THE CITY. BUT IF IT APPLIES TO LARGE ENOUGH AREA OR NUMBER OF HOUSEHOLDS, THEN WE WOULDN'T BE QUASI-JUDICIAL. MR. COX. >> COUNCILOR TELLES, WHAT MS. KEEFE AND WHAT WE HAVE DONE HISTORICALLY IS TIED TO CITYWIDE POLICY. THAT POLICY IS DICTATED BY A NUMBER OF DIFFERENT METRICS, HISTORIC CORRIDORS, AND IT'S TIED TO CITYWIDE POLICY. A SMALL MAPPED AREA HAS A MINIMUM SIZE REQUIREMENT, BUT NO CAP ON THE OTHER SIDE. BUT, IT DOES HAVE TO MEET THAT MINIMUM SIZE REQUIREMENT AND IT'S TIED TO A SPECIFIC BOUNDARY WITHIN OUR JURISDICTION NOT TIED TO CITYWIDE POLICY. >>COUN. TELLES: THANK YOU. MADAM PRESIDENT, I JUST -- THIS SEEMS LIKE A SCARY PRECEDENT TO SET HERE. BECAUSE WE CHANGE. WE'RE NOT GOING TO BE THE SAME COUNCIL IN FOUR YEARS. EIGHT YEARS. 12 YEARS. 16 YEARS. WE CHANGE EVERY FOUR YEARS. WHAT THAT MEANS IS WE OPEN THE POSSIBILITY OF REGULATIONS CHANGING EVERY FOUR, EIGHT, 12, 16 YEARS. HOW DO WE DEAL WITH CONFORMITY IN THE SYSTEM WHEN WE DO THAT? HOW? >>COUN. PEÑA: ANY OTHER COMMENTS FROM COUNCILORS? SEEING NONE. I THINK WE ARE ON COUNCILOR ROGERS. >>COUN. FIEBELKORN: I WAS GOING TO CLOSE. I ALREADY CLOSED BUT WHY -- WE OPENED IT UP. I'M GOING TO CLOSE AGAIN. LET ME SAY, FIRST OF ALL, I'M IN NO WAY SHAPE OR FORM INTERESTED IN BACKSLIDING INTO A RED LINE SITUATION WHERE WE CREATE DISTRICTS THAT HAVE ALL THE BURDEN AND DISTRICTS THAT HAVE NONE OF THE BURDEN. IT'S BAD POLICY. I'M NOT INTERESTED IN THAT. TO BRING US BACK TO WHAT WE WERE ACTUALLY DISCUSSING WHICH WAS FLOOR AMENDMENT NUMBER FOUR, WHICH IS ALLOWING ATTACHED ADUs, AND AGAIN ATTACHED ADUs NOT A PROBLEM. I HEARD A VALID POINT THAT SOME NEIGHBORHOODS ARE SPECIFICALLY SINGLE FAMILY BECAUSE THEY WERE ON THE WEST SIDE AND THAT'S HOW THEY WERE DEVELOPED RECENTLY. I DON'T ARGUE THAT. I WILL ARGUE THAT THERE ARE PEOPLE IN THOSE NEIGHBORHOODS WHO ALSO NEED TO TAKE CARE OF A SENIOR, OF A CHILD, WHO IS IN COLLEGE, WHO MIGHT WANT TO HAVE A CAREGIVER LIVING THEM, WHO WANT TO AS THEY AGE IN PLACE MOVE INTO AN ADU AND RENT OUT THEIR HOUSE. SO THEY CAN HAVE SOME INCOME. THERE ARE A LOT OF THINGS THAT COULD LEAD TO NEEDING AN ADU, AND THOSE ARE PRETTY UNIVERSAL NO MATTER WHAT NEIGHBORHOOD YOU LIVE IN. AGAIN, URGE YOUR SUPPORT TO ALLOW ATTACHED ADUs. >>COUN. PEÑA: WITH THE CLOSE -- THANK YOU, COUNCILOR FIEBELKORN. THERE'S A MOTION AND SECOND FOR FLOOR AMENDMENT NUMBER FOUR. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY YES AND RAISE YOUR HAND. OPPOSED NO. POINT OF PERSONAL PRIVILEGE ON THIS. JUST WANTED TO SAY I DIDN'T REALIZE I ASKED YOU TO CLOSE BEFORE. JUST WANTED TO SAY THIS, I SUPPORT THE CASITA FOR THE REASONS COUNCILOR TELLES SAID. I DO UNDERSTAND CONCERNS OF OTHER COUNCILORS. I THINK IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE ALREADY HAVE CASITAS, I KNOW IT'S MORE DIFFICULT TO GET ACCOMPLISHED. BUT THAT'S FOR ANOTHER DAY. NOW WE'RE ON FLOOR AMENDMENT NUMBER E. WHICH WILL BE FLOOR AMENDMENT NUMBER FIVE. COUNCILOR FIEBELKORN AND COUNCILOR ROGERS. >>COUN. FIEBELKORN: MADAM PRESIDENT, I'LL MOVE FLOOR AMENDMENT NUMBER FIVE. THIS IS TO REPEAL THE LUPZ AMENDMENT NUMBER NINE AND REINSERT THE EPC RECOMMENDED LANGUAGE FROM C7, CONDITIONS 10A INTO CONDITION 10 AND EXHIBIT ONE. AND REPLACE THIS ON THE OVERHEAD. THIS IS JUST BRINGING BACK THE ALLOWANCE FOR BODEGA. I'LL MOVE THAT AMENDMENT. >>COUN. PEÑA: THERE'S A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR FLOOR AMENDMENT NUMBER FIVE. ARE THERE ANY OTHER -- COUNCILOR BACA. >>COUN. BACA: THANK YOU, MADAM PRESIDENT. I'LL BE QUICK. DISTRICT TWO IS THE OLDEST DISTRICT. WE HAVE THESE GRANDFATHERED IN. WE HAVE ANOTHER ONE COMING BACK IN MARTINEZ TOWN. MANUEL'S MARKET. I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT JUST BECAUSE SOMETHING CAN EXIST DOESN'T MEAN IT WILL EXIST. TO COUNCILOR LEWIS'S POINT, I SERIOUSLY DOUBT THAT ANYONE IS GOING TO BUILD A BODEGA ANYWHERE IN HIS DISTRICT BECAUSE OF HOW IT'S LAID OUT. YOU HAVE TO A CUSTOMER BASE FOR THAT BODGEA. IF IT'S ONLY SINGLE FAMILY HOMES, THAT CUSTOMER BASE DOESN'T EXIST. I URGE FOLKS SUPPORT. WE DO NEED THESE THROUGHOUT THE CITY. MAYBE NOT THROUGHOUT THE CITY, BUT IN PARTS OF THE CITY. WE ABSOLUTELY DO. THANK YOU. >>COUN. PEÑA: ANY OTHER COUNCILORS? COUNCILOR ROGERS. >>COUN. ROGERS: THANK YOU, MADAM PRESIDENT. I JUST WANTED TO ASK MR. COX A QUESTION. I KNOW IN LUPZ WE'VE MOVED IT FROM 5,000 TO 3,000 SQUARE FEET. I WOULD WANT TO MAKE THAT SAME AMENDMENT TO THIS ONE. I'M SORRY I DIDN'T CATCH THAT ONE BEFORE. THIS IS JUST FROM FEEDBACK FROM MY CONSTITUENTS AROUND CIRCLE K LOOKING FOR 5,000 SQUARE FOOT FOOTPRINT FOR THEIR STORE. I KNOW THEY'RE HEAVY ON ALCOHOL AND NICOTINE AND WE'VE RESTRICTED THAT HERE. I DON'T THINK THEY WOULD WANT TO OPEN THEM, BUT JUST TO MAKE EXTRA SURE I WANT TO MAKE THAT 3,000 SQUARE FEET. THAT WOULD BE ON PAGE TWO. WHERE IT SAYS MINIMUM OF 5,000 SQUARE FEET. PUT THAT TO 3,000. AND THE SAME ON PAGE THREE. TO 3,000 SQUARE FEET. AND AGAIN ON PAGE FOUR. THERE'S ANOTHER REFERENCE TO 5,000 SQUARE FEET. >> COUNCIL PRESIDENT, COUNCILOR ROGERS, THERE'S A COUPLE OF DIFFERENT NUMBERS. ONE, 5,000 ARE REFERENCING THE LOT SIZE RATHER THAN THE SIZE OF THE STORE. I BELIEVE THE ONLY CHANGE IS ON PAGE THREE UNDER 4-3D37. THAT HAS TO CHANGE FROM 5,000 TO 3,000. I SAY THAT AS A -- FORMATTING ERROR. THAT AMENDMENT DID PASS AT THE LUPZ HEARING. I DID NOTFLECT THE SECOND 3,000. AS O-26 EXISTS RIGHT NOW, THAT 3,000 FEET IS A GHOST. BUT IT IS THERE. I'LL CORRECT IT. >>COUN. ROGERS: THANK YOU. >>COUN. CHAMPINE: MADAM PRESIDENT, PAGE FOUR, 43D-48C. >>COUN. PEÑA: THANK YOU. COUNCILOR GROUT. >>COUN. GROUT: THANK YOU, MADAM PRESIDENT. MR. COX, I HAVE A FEW QUESTIONS. CAN YOU TELL ME WHAT ARE THE REQUIREMENTS FOR OFFSTREET PARKING AT A RETAIL STORE? >> COUNCILOR GROUT, THE PARKING FOR THE RETAIL STORE ARE THE SAME CITYWIDE. SO, FOR RETAIL, LET ME PULL UP THE PARKING TABLE. MY APOLOGIES. GENERAL RETAIL, ESTABLISHMENTS LESS THAN 10,000 SQUARE FEET, YOU WOULD BE REQUIRED TO HAVE THREE AND A HALF SPACES PER ONE THOUSAND SQUARE FEET. IF YOU ADDED GENERAL RETAIL OF THREE THOUSAND SQUARE FEET WITHIN A RESIDENTIAL AREA, YOU WOULD HAVE TO PROVIDE 10.5 -- AND WE ROUN DOWN TO 10 PARKING SPACES. IF IT IS NOT WITHIN ONE OF THE CORRIDORS THAT OFFERS PARKING REDUCTIONS. >>COUN. GROUT: THANK YOU. DO THESE REQUIREMENTS APPLY TO ALL RETAIL, WHATEVER ZONE THEY'RE LOCATED IN? >> REPEAT THE QUESTION. >>COUN. GROUT: DO THESE REQUIREMENTS APPLY TO ALL RETAIL, WHATEVER ZONE THEY'RE LOCATED IN? >> COUNCIL PRESIDENT, COUNCILOR GROUT YES. >>COUN. GROUT: THANK YOU. MADAM PRESIDENT, WHAT ARE THE REQUIREMENTS FOR HANDICAP ACCESSIBLE PARKING? >> COUNCIL PRESIDENT, COUNCILOR GROUT, THAT IS AT THE FEDERAL LEVEL. IT GOES BY -- THE FIRST ONE THROUGH TENTY, YOU HAVE TO HAVE ONE OR TWO ADA SPACES. YOU WOULD STILL HAVE TO HAVE AT LEAST ONE ADA SPACE AVAILABLE FOR A RETAIL STORE. >>COUN. GROUT: MOST SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS ARE BUILT WITH A DRIVEWAY FOR ONE OR TWO CARS. WHERE IS THIS PARKING SUPPOSED TO GO? >> COUNCIL PRESIDENT, COUNCILOR GROUT, THAT IS UP TO THE PROPERTY THAT YOU FIND. SO, IF YOU'RE ABLE TO FIND OR BASICALLY WHERE WE SEE CORNER LOTS OFTENTIMES IT WILL BE A MAXIMUM OF 10,000 SQUARE FEET IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS. YOU'LL BE HARD PRESS TO FIT EVERYTHING. >>COUN. GROUT: IS THERE A LIMITATION IN THE IDO ON PERCENTAGE OF FRONT YARD THAT CAN ME PAVED OR IMPROVED FOR PARKING IN R1 NEIGHBORHOODS? >> COUNCIL PRESIDENT, COUNCILOR GROUT, THAT MIGHT BE THE EXTENT OF MY FRONT YARD. I BELIEVE THERE IS A REQUIREMENT FOR IMPERVIOUS SURFACE. >> THERE ARE TWO THINGS, PRESIDENT AND COUNCILORS. ONE IS A LIMIT TO HOW MUCH OF YOUR FRONT YARD CAN BE USED FOR PARKING. AND TWO, ANYWHERE YOU'RE GOING TO PARK HAS TO BE IMPROVED FOR PARKING. >>COUN. GROUT: IF WE ALLOW THIS TYPE OF USE IN R1 IT SOUNDS LIKE PROPERTIES WOULD BE OUT OF COMPLIANCE. >> THEY WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO START THE USE. IF IT'S AN A CORNER LOT YOU CAN USE ON STREET. YOU GET A ONE FOR ONE CREDIT AS OFFSTREET PARKING. YOU NEED TO HAVE ENOUGH FRONTAGE. >>COUN. GROUT: THANK YOU. >>COUN. PEÑA: THANK YOU. ANY OTHER COMMENTS? >>COUN. FIEBELKORN: I'M NOT CLOSING. THANK YOU, MADAM PRESIDENT. IT WAS SAID EARLIER TODAY THAT WE HAVE A LOT OF EMPTY RETAIL SPACE SO WHY WOULD WE NEED TO CREATE MORE? I THINK THE REASON WE HAVE A LOT OF EMPTY RETAIL SPACE IS IT COSTS A LOT OF MONEY TO OPEN A GIANT BUSINESS ON CENTRAL. THE RENT ON CENTRAL IS HIGH. THERE IS A POSSIBILITY, A HIGH POSSIBILITY, THAT IF YOU START A SMALLER BUSINESS A NEIGHBORHOOD BUSINESS THAT IS MUCH LESS CAPITAL INTENSIVE -- I JUST WANTED TO SAY I THINK THAT BACKWARDS THINKING. OF COURSE I CAN'T START A BODEGA IN THE OLD WAL-MART. I DON'T HAVE ENOUGH MONEY TO BUY THE GOODS TO STAY IN THERE. ALSO, MR. COX, ARE THESE GENERALLY DEPENDENT ON PARKING OR ARE THEY MORE WALKABLE BUSINESSES? >> COUNCIL PRESIDENT, COUNCILOR FIEBELKORN, THE INTENT OF THE BILL IS TO MAKE MORE WALKABLE ENVIRONMENTS. THAT'S WHY THEY FOCUS ON CORNER LOTS FOR LINES DOWN THE STREET TO SEE COMMERCIAL AREAS AND WHY THE FOCUS IS ON RESIDENTIAL AREAS BECAUSE WE HAVE LARGE SWATHS OF SINGLE FAMILY ZONING. >>COUN. FIEBELKORN: THANK YOU, MADAM PRESIDENT. I THINK THAT'S REALLY INTERESTING. AGAIN, IF I HAD WRITTEN THE IDO THAT'S BEFORE US, I WOULD HAVE NOT ALLOWED -- OR NOT REQUIRED PARKING. BUT WE HAVE A MIDDLE GROUND THAT EPC SENT TO US THAT SAYS IF YOU DON'T HAVE A SPACE THAT WORKS FOR THESE YOU WON'T BE ABLE TO DO THEM. MUCH LIKE ADUs, THEY'RE GOING TO BE FEW AND FAR BETWEEN BECAUSE OF THE RESTRICTIONS AND REQUIREMENT FOR SPACE. THAT DOESN'T MEAN WE SHOULDN'T ALLOW THEM. IT MEANS WE SHOULD BE SAYING YOU'RE NOT GOING TO SEE ONE ON EVERY CORNER OR EVERY NEIGHBORHOOD, BUT YOU MIGHT SEE THEM POP UP WHERE THEY'RE NEEDED MOST. WE DO HAVE FOLKS IN OUR COMMUNITY IN DISTRICT SEVEN AND DISTRICT SIX AND OTHER DISTRICTS THAT HAVE PROBLEMSES GETTING TO FOOD. AND THAT IS A GIANT PROBLEM IN OUR COMMUNITY. I SAID THIS AT LUPZ, BUT I'LL REPEAT IT HERE, I HAVE MASSIVE PRIVILEGE. WHEN I NEED FOOD, I GO GET IN MY CAR AND DRIVE MYSELF TO THE GROCERY STORE, MAYBE SOMETIMES I GO TO TWO GROCERY STORES. THAT'S HOW PRIVILEGED I AM. I GO IN AND BUY WHATEVER I NEED AND I DRIVE IT BACK HOME. WE HAVE PEOPLE WHO ARE LIVING IN NEIGHBORHOODS THAT HAVE TO WALK UP TO A MILE TO GET TO A BUS STOP. THEY HAVE TO CARRY THEIR CART. THEY HAVE TO GET ON THE BUS. THEY HAVE TO TAKE THE BUS TO THE STORE. THEY HAVE TO GO INTO THE STORE DECIDE WHAT TO BUY THAT WILL FIT IN THEIR TRANSIT APPROVED CARRYING CASE. THEY MAY HAVE TO TAKE THE BUS BACK HOME. NAVIGATE OUT OF THE BUS WITH A THING FULL OF GROCERIES AND THEY HAVE TO WALK BACK TO A MILE TO THEIR HOUSE. I'VE HEARD FROM A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT ARE IN THIS SITUATION. AND I DON'T WANT TO BE IN THIS SITUATION. I DON'T THINK WE WANT ANY OF OUR CONSTITUENTS TO BE IN THAT SITUATION. ALLOWING OCCASIONAL NEIGHBORHOOD MARKETS THAT WOULD FILL THE NEED FOR FOOD FOR OUR CITIZENS SEEMS LIKE AN OBVIOUS THING TO DO. >>COUN. PEÑA: THAT WASN'T A CLOSE. COUNCILOR ROGERS, BEFORE I GO TO YOU, I WANT TO SAY A COUPLE OF THINGS. I TALKED TO THE ADMINISTRATION AND SOME OF OUR STAFF. I WOULD REALLY LIKE TO LOOK AT THIS IN THE FUTURE FOR HOW TO LAX REQUIREMENTS IN THE COMMUNITY. I LIVE IN THE ALAMOSA NEIGHBORHOOD. WE HAVE TWO BEAUTY SALONS. WE HAVE A BAKERY. AND WE HAVE A LADY WHO DOES TAXES. THESE ARE BUSINESSES IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT I LIVE IN. IT'S A 1500 HOME NEIGHBORHOOD. AND THERE'S A LOT OF SERVICES, BUT BECAUSE OF THE WAY OUR PERMITTING IS NOW, WE DON'T REALLY HAVE WHERE THESE PEOPLE CAN ADVERTISE OR TALK ABOUT THE BUSINESSES THEY HAVE IN THEIR COMMUNITY. WE SHOULD CARRY THIS DIALOGUE ON IN TERMS OF HOW TO ACCOMMODATE THE PEOPLE THAT ALREADY HAVE BUSINESSES. I SEE IT AS WINNERS AND LOSERS WHEN YOU LOOK AT PUTTING SOMEBODY ON THE CORNER AND WHEN I HAVE SOMEBODY WHO ACTUALLY HAS A BEAUTY SHOP RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE OF THE STREET, AND SOMEBODY AS THE THE PROPERTY ON THE CORNER, IT GIVES THEM THE ADVANTAGE OVER THIS PERSON THAT HAS BEEN THERE FOR YEARS DOING HAIR. I THINK WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT EQUITY AND FAIRNESS AND HOW TO ACCOMPLISH IT BECAUSE WE'RE ALLOWED TO HAVE BUSINESSES IN OUR HOMES. I'D LOVE TO CARRY THIS DISCUSSION BEYOND THIS. THEN I DO WANT TO ADD SOMETHING. BECAUSE PEOPLE KEEP TALKING ABOUT THESE BODEGAS. I KNOW IT'S NOT IN THE AMENDMENT OR IDO, BUT IF PEOPLE TALK TO US ABOUT THESE CORNER STORES AND CALLING THEM BODEGA. WHILE THE TERMS ARE OFTEN USED INTERCHANGEABLY BY PEOPLE FROM THE OUTSIDE OR OTHERS, CHOOSING ONE OR THE OTHER CAN BE SEEN AS OFFENSIVE DUE TO REGIONAL IDENTITY AND HERITAGE AND SPECIFIC HISTORY OF COMMUNITIES INVOLVED. BODEGA CAN BOW PROBLEMATIC OUTSIDE OF CONTEXT. REGIONAL INACCURACY, WHERE MANY MEXICANS AND CENTRAL AMERICANS BODEGA IS WAREHOUSE, STORE ROOM OR CELLAR. USING IT TO DESCRIBE A SHOP CAN FEEL LIKE A LINGUISTIC IMPOSITION FROM A DIFFERENT CULTURE. TYPICALLY, THIS IS NEW YORK CITY CARIBBEAN HISPANIC CULTURE. CULTURAL APPROPRIATION. RIANT YEARS IT'S BEEN A TRENDY MARKETING TERM USED BY TECH START UPS OR DEVELOPERS TO BRAND BUSINESSES AND GENTRIFYING NEIGHBORHOOD. FOR THOSE IN THE COMMUNITY SEEING THE TERM CO-OPTED WHILE THE ACTUAL IMMIGRANT OWNED SHOPS ARE BEING DISPLACED, FEELS DISRESPECTFUL AND DISRUPTIVE. ERASER OF IDENTITY. FOR DOMINICAN NEW YORKERS, IT'S A SPECIFIC SACRED SOCIAL INSTITUTION. APPLYING THE TERM TO ANY CORNER STORE REGARDLESS OF OWNER HERITAGE OR COMMUNITY ROLE CAN DILUTE THE SPECIFIC HISTORY OF THE APHROLATINA AND CARIBBEAN CULTURE. IN MEXICO, AND THE WESTERN U.S., TIENDITA CARRIES THE SAME MOM AND POP SENTIMENT. USIN TIENDITA ACKNOWLEDGES THE MEXICAN HERITAGE OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. IT OPERATES AS A SOCIAL BANK OR A HYPERLOCAL HUB THAT SERVES JUST A FEW BLOCKS. USING A COOLER SOUNDING TERM CAN MAKE IT SEEM LIKE THE SHOP IS USED THROUGH A TOURIST LENS RATHER THAN LEGITIMATE LOCAL FIXTURE. I JUST WANTED TO READ THAT INTO THE RECORD. COUNCILOR ROGERS TO CLOSE. >>COUN. ROGERS: THANK YOU, MADAM PRESIDENT. I APPRECIATE THE HISTORY ON THE WORD. I THINK I KNOW THAT THE WORD BODEGA CAME FROM SPAIN TO REFER TO A WINE CELLAR OR, WINERY. IN OTHER LATIN-AMERICAN COUNTRIES IT'S A SMALL GROCERY, STORE WAREHOUSE. MENTIONING NEW YORK DEFINITELY WAS BROUGHT TO THE POPULAR CULTURE THROUGH OUR PUERTO RICAN BROTHERS AND SISTERS. MAYBE THE ENGLISH WORD WOULD FIT BETTER. BOUTIQUE. MAKE IF WE CALLED IT A BOUTIQUE. REGARDLESS OF THE WORD YOU CHOOSE TO CALL THESE, WHAT THIS IS ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT FOR PEOPLE OF COLOR. IT IS ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT FOR IMMIGRANTS IN MY DISTRICT WHO UNFORTUNATELY HAVEN'T BEEN AFFORDED ACCESS TO THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT THAT A BOUTIQUE MIGHT BRING. WHILE I APPRECIATE THAT, I THINK IT DOESN'T MATTER WHAT WE CALL IT, I'M HAPPY I HAVE HISPANIC ROOTS AND CALL IT A TIENDITA, REGARDLESS THIS IS ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT FOR MY COMMUNITY. OUR COMMUNITY. SO, I KNOW I'M DOING A CLOSE. I URGE YOUR SUPPORT. >>COUN. PEÑA: THANK YOU, COUNCILOR ROGERS. WE CLOSED THE FLOOR, COUNCILOR TELLES. WE HAVE A MOTION AND SECOND FOR FLOOR AMENDMENT NUMBER FIVE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR RAISE YOUR HAND AND SAY YES. OPPOSED NO. THAT MOTION FAILS. >>COUN. CHAMPINE: MADAM PRESIDENT. I LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO SUSPEND THE RULES. EXTEND THE MEETING TO MIDNIGHT. BECAUSE WE ARE ON E OF P. >>COUN. PEÑA: MOTION AND SECOND BY COUNCILOR GROUT TO EXTEND THE MEETING TO MIDNIGHT. ANY DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY YES AND RAISE YOUR HAND. OPPOSE NO. THAT MOTION CARRIES. I DIDN'T GET THE VOTE. 7-2. OKAY. WE'RE ON FLOOR AMENDMENT LABELED F. WHICH WILL NOW BECOME FLOOR AMENDMENT NUMBER SIX. >>COUN. ROGERS: I'M GOING TO MOVE -- MR. COX CAN HELP ME PASS OUT PLAN A AND PLAN B FOR THE -- BODEGA. MR. COX IS GOING TO PASS THIS OUT. THIS IS -- BASED ON WHAT WE HEARD FROM PUBLIC COMMENTERS. THEY WOULD BE SUPPORTIVE OF IT TO MAKE IT CONDITIONAL USE INSTEAD OF PERMISSIVE. I OFFER THIS AMENDMENT AS AN ALTERNATIVE TO -- I'M OPEN TO ADDING COUNCILOR PEÑA THE TERM TO THE BILL AS WELL. SO WE CAN MAKE SURE WE COVER ALL THE BASES. AND THIS MAKES IT CONDITIONAL USE, WHICH MEANS -- ACTUALLY, MR. COX, CAN YOU EXPLAIN THAT FOR US? THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN WHAT WE JUST DID NOT PASS AND WHAT CONDITIONAL USE -- WHAT WOULD BE THE DIFFERENCE? >>COUN. PEÑA: MR. COX, BEFORE YOU ANSWER THAT WE'RE HANDED ANOTHER FLOOR AMENDMENT. WE ALREADY HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND ON FLOOR AMENDMENT NUMBER SIX. >> COUNCIL PRESIDENT, COUNCILOR ROGERS, MY UNDERSTANDING IS WE'RE DOING THE CONDITIONAL USE AMENDMENT WHICH WAS A NEW AMENDMENT ADDED TO ONE DRIVE DURING THE MEETING TODAY. SO, THAT PAPER COPY YOU HAVE IN FRONT OF YOU THAT I PASSED OUT IS ALSO INCLUDED IN ONE DRIVE RIGHT NOW. BUT THE LETTERING IS -- >>COUN. PEÑA: THE FLOOR AMENDMENT YOU HANDED US IS NOT LABELED. WE VOTED ON FLOOR AMENDMENT E, WHICH IS FIVE. I PICKED UP FLOOR AMENDMENT F. >> I BELIEVE THE WISH IS FLOOR AMENDMENT F AS IT WAS IN THE PACKET IS NOW WITHDRAWN. AND WE'RE GOING TO AN AMENDMENT -- OR MY APOLOGIES. WE'RE SWAPPING THOSE AMENDMENTS. >>COUN. ROGERS: YES, I'M ADDING A NEW AMENDMENT TO -- BASED ON WHAT WE HEARD FROM PUBLIC COMMENTERS WHO WERE ORIGINALLY OPPOSED TO THIS IF WE MADE IT CONDITIONAL, THEY WOULD BE SUPPORTIVE OF IT. WHAT I'M ASKING MR. COX TO EXPLAIN -- I'M MOVING IT WOULD BE BECOME F, AMENDMENT NUMBER SIX. AND THE SAME EXACT THING, BUT WE'RE JUST MAKING IT A CONDITIONAL USE RATHER THAN PERMISSIVE RIGHT NOW. MR. COX, HELP ME. >> COUNCIL PRESIDENT, COUNCILOR ROGERS, THE AMENDMENT IS PART OF THE PACKET. IT ADDED A PROVISION THAT SAID THE GENERAL RETAIL AND GROCERY STORE USE INCLUDED IN THE BODEGA WOULD NOT BE ALLOWED WITHIN A QUARTER MILE OF MAJOR TRANSIT AND ACTIVITY CENTERS. NOW, WHAT THE AMENDMENT YOU HAVE IN FRONT OF YOU DOES IS BUILD UPON THAT EVEN BY ADDING MORE PROVISIONS THAT, ONE, IT WOULD ALSO NOT BE ALLOWED IN RESIDENTIAL ZONE DISTRICTS WITHIN 660 FEET OF EACH OTHER. IF YOU HAD A GROCERY STORE YOU HAVE TO HAVE TWO BLOCKS AWAY BEFORE YOU CAN DO THAT AGAIN. AND THE THIRD ASPECT OF THE BILL THAT ADDS ON FROM THE AMENDMENT YOU HAD EARLIER WAS ALSO MAKING GENERAL RETAIL AND GROCERY STORE CONDITIONAL WITHIN RESIDENTIAL ZONE DISTRICTS. IT DID NOT AMEND THE LIVE WORK USE AT ALL, BUT JUST GROCERY STORES AND RETAIL AS PART OF THE BILL IN FRONT OF YOU ALL. . >>COUN. PEÑA: THANK YOU. PROCEDURALLY, WE MADE A SECOND AND A MOTION ON F. YOU'RE SAYING SHE WITHDRAW IT. NOW, SHE'S -- >>COUN. ROGERS: NO. SINCE THAT FAILED, I HAVE A PLAN B. THIS AMENDMENT IS NUMBER SIX. IT'S NEWLY LABELED NUMBER SIX OR F. I'M MOVING A NEW AMENDMENT. >>COUN. PEÑA: I'VE GOT YOU. I THINK YOU KNOW WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT. >> MADAM PRESIDENT, TO MAKE IT SIMPLE THE REASON WHY WE STARTED LETTERING IS SO WE WASN'T -- WOULDN'T GET CONFUSED. THIS AMENDMENT O, AND IT WOULD BE FLOOR AMENDMENT NUMBER SIX SO PEOPLE UNDERSTAND WE WON'T RELABEL. THIS IS AMENDMENT O. >>COUN. PEÑA: THERE YOU GO. THANK YOU. >> THEN IT WOULD BE Q. >>COUN. PEÑA: THIS IS LABELED -- THANK YOU. THAT'S WHERE MY PROBLEM WAS. THANK YOU, MR. PADILLA. >>COUN. PEÑA: WE ARE GOING TO DO F? >>COUN. ROGERS: ALL WE'RE DOING IS INSERTING -- THIS IS WILL BE LABELED Q. IT WON'T MESS UP THE LETTERING. F WILL BE MOVED, BUT IT WILL BE NEXT. >>COUN. PEÑA: OKAY. JUST FOR THE RECORD, MR. MONTOYA, SHE MOVED AND SECONDED F. THIS IS WHERE I AM STUCK. NO? OKAY. OKAY. >>COUN. ROGERS: THANK YOU, MADAM PRESIDENT. I'LL DO IT AGAIN. I WOULD LIKE TO MOVE FLOOR AMENDMENT NUMBER SIX, LABELED Q. BECAUSE IT'S NEW. AND I'D LIKE TO MOVE THAT AMENDMENT. >>COUN. PEÑA: THERE'S A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR FLOOR AMENDMENT TWO, NOW SIX. ANY QUESTIONS? COUNCILOR BASSAN. >>COUN. BASSAN: MADAM PRESIDENT, MY QUESTION IS REGARDING THE 660 FEET THAT WAS MENTIONED. HOW DOES THAT APPLY TO THE LOCATIONS THAT ARE ALREADY OPERATING IN THE CITY OF ALBUQUERQUE? >> COUNCIL PRESIDENT, COUNCILOR BASSAN, THIS 660 FOOT IS ONLY REQUIRED WITHIN RESIDENTIAL ZONE DISTRICTS. SO, GENERALLY OUR RETELL AND GROCERY STORES EXIST WITHIN MX ZONES AND CORRIDORS. WE TYPICALLY DON'T FIND THEM WITHIN RESIDENTIAL ZONED DISTRICTS. BUT IF THEY DO EXIST, WITHIN RESIDENTIAL ZONE DISTRICTS, THEN THIS REGULATION WOULD STILL APPLY AND YOU WOULD HAVE TO HAVE A PUFFER OF 660 FEET. >>COUN. BASSAN: MY QUESTION IS REGARDING EARLIER, MADAM PRESIDENT, YOU INDICATED AND I KNOW I HAD DISCUSSIONS ABOUT BUSINESSES OPERATING IN HOMES CURRENTLY WITHOUT ANY OF THIS. HOW DOES THIS 660 FEET IMPACTS THE BUSINESSES IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS THAT CURRENTLY OPERATE AND EXIST TODAY? >> COUNCIL PRESIDENT, COUNCILOR BASSAN, IF -- JUST FOR CLARITY ON MY SAKE BECAUSE WE'RE TALKING POSSIBLY HOME OCCUPATION WHERE SOMEONE MIGHT HAVE SOMETHING OR ARE WE TALKING RETAIL? >>COUN. BASSAN: MADAM PRESIDENT GAVE AN EXAMPLE IN HER NEIGHBORHOOD WHERE THERE ARE HAIRDRESSER, SHE SAID. A COUPLE HAIR DRESSERS AND A COUPLE PEOPLE THAT DO TAXES. THEY OPERATED IN HER NEIGHBORHOOD FOR YEARS. IN ADDITION TWO OTHERS THROUGHOUT THE CITY. HOWEVER, IT IF THIS AMENDMENT PASSES FOR CONDITIONAL USE, AND THERE WAS SOMEBODY THAT APPLIED FOR THAT CONDITIONAL USE, AND THEY WERE NEXTDOOR TO THE HAIRDRESSER, DOES THAT MEAN THE HAIRDRESSER NO LONGER GETS THEIR JOB AND WHAT THEY'VE BEEN DOING IN THE CURRENT WAY WE'RE DOING THINGS? >> COUNCIL PRESIDENT, COUNCILOR BASSAN NO. EXISTING BUSINESSES WOULD BE CONSIDERED LEGALLY NON-CONFORMING IF THEY ALREADY EXIST IN THEIR CERTAIN PROPERTY. >> [ INAUDIBLE ]. >> THEY STAY, THEY KEEP OPERATING. IT'S AWESOME. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT ADDING A RETAIL USE OR ADDING A GROCERY USE IN THE RESIDENTIAL ZONE DISTRICTS. SEPARATE USES, REGULATED SEPARATELY. >>COUN. BASSAN: MADAM PRESIDENT, IN DISCUSSIONS I'VE HAD WITH YOU, ARE THERE GROCERY STORES OR PEOPLE THAT SELL GROCERY GOODS IN YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD RIGHT NOW THAT MIGHT QUALIFY AS A GROCERY STORE OR NOT? I'M CONCERNED THIS IS GOING TO -- WE'RE TRYING TO DO A REALLY GOOD THING. WE'RE TRYING TO SEE ABOUT FOOD DESERTS, YET I ALSO SEE THE ARGUMENT ON THE OTHER SIDE TO PROTECT PEOPLE WHO ARE ALREADY DOING SOMETHING LIKE THIS. AND IT'S ALREADY EXISTING TO HELP THEM HELP THE NEIGHBORS AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD. BUT I DON'T WANT THE UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCE TO BACKFIRE AND SCREW IT UP ON A DIFFERENT WAY, EVEN THOUGH INTENTION IS GOOD. >>COUN. PEÑA: YES. I'LL ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, COUNCILOR BASSAN, BEFORE I TURN IT OVER TO COUNCILOR ROGERS. YES, IT'S A REALLY BIG THING NOW. A LOT OF PEOPLE ARE BUYING PALLETS. THEY BUY PALLETS OF FOOD OR CLOTHING OR WHETHER IT'S LAUNDRY DETERGENT. PEOPLE ARE BUYING PELLETS AND THEY OPEN THE GARAGE DOOR AND PEOPLE FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD WILL GO IN AND THEY CLOSE THE GARAGE DOOR. I KNOW SOME OF THEM -- BECAUSE THEY CAN'T ADVERTISE, I THINK THERE'S A LIMIT OF TWO YARD SALES OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT PER YEAR. YOU KNOW ABOUT THEM WHEN THEY HAVE THE GARAGE DOOR OPEN, OTHER THAN THAT YOU WOULDN'T KNOW ABOUT THEM BECAUSE THEY HAVE TO OPERATE WITHOUT HAVING ALL THIS COMMOTION. >>COUN. BASSAN: MADAM PRESIDENT, IF I MAY, IT SEEMS THERE'S A DIFFERENCE OF OPINION ON WHAT THAT ACTUALLY -- HOW THAT IS GOING TO BE REFLECTED VERSUS WHAT THE INTENT IS GOING TO BE ON THE CONDITIONAL USE. >>COUN. PEÑA: CORRECT. FOR THE RECORD, WE'RE GETTING CONFLICTING STUFF TONIGHT. I THINK IT'S A CHALLENGE FOR US AS COUNCILORS THAT WE'RE -- MAYBE NEXT TIME WE GO THROUGH THE IDO PROCESS WE REALLY WORK TOGETHER AND COLLABORATIVELY SO WE CAN REALLY BE ON THE SAME PAGE BECAUSE THEN IT LEAVES US UP HERE AND WE'RE MAKING MAJOR DECISIONS AND I THINK IT'S LIKE THE FOURTH TIME THIS EVENING WE'VE GOTTEN CLICKING INFORMATION. >> COUNCILORS, HAVING THESE AMENDMENTS AHEAD OF TIME WE CAN LOOK UP SOME OF THE QUESTIONS. THE FRONT -- WHAT YOU DESCRIBED WOULD BE A YARD SALE. WHICH IS A TEMPORARY USE. ANYONE CAN DO UP TO A CERTAIN NUMBER OF TIMES PER YEAR. ALSO SEPARATE USE REGULATED SEPARATELY WOULD NOT BE AFFECTED BY THESE CHANGES. >>COUN. PEÑA: COUNCILOR ROGERS. >>COUN. ROGERS: THANK YOU, MADAM PRESIDENT. IN RESEARCHES THIS LEGISLATION, WE WORKED WITH UNM. THIS DIDN'T COME BECAUSE I THOUGHT IT WOULD BE A GOOD IDEA. THIS IS ACTUALLY RESEARCHED BY UNM SUSTAINABILITY AND WE MAPPED OUT WHERE THEY ARE IN THE CITY. TYPICALLY A LOT OF THEM ARE IN DISTRICT TWO. I HAVE SOME IN DISTRICT SIX. AND THIS DEFINITELY WOULDN'T DISPLACE ANY CURRENT BUSINESSES. WE'RE THOUGHTFUL ABOUT MAKING SURE ABOUT THAT ESPECIALLY FOR MY AREA FOR THE ONES THAT EXIST BECAUSE THEY'RE IN OPERATION BEFORE WE MADE THEM ILLEGAL. SO, WE HAVE BEEN VERY THOUGHTFUL. IT IS EXACTLY WHAT IT IS INTENDED TO DO. IT'S TO MAKE SURE FOLKS IN ESPECIALLY MY AREA THAT ARE TRANSIT DEPENDENT, MY SENIORS WHO CANNOT -- THEY HAVE TO GO TO THE STORE NOW LITERALLY THREE TIMES A WEEK BECAUSE WE DON'T ALLOW THEM TO BRING CARTS ON THE BUS THAT ARE ONLY A CERTAIN SIZE. THEY CAN'T CARRY THEIR FOOD. THEY CAN'T TAKE MORE THAN TWO DAYS WORTH OF FOOD HOME ON THE BUS. THIS IS MEANT TO -- FOR FOLKS IN THE NEIGHBORHOODS TO WALK TO THEM TO GET WHAT THEY NEED FOR ODDS AND ENDS. WE WERE VERY THOUGHTFUL IN LOOKING AT THESE. RIGHT NOW IN THE CITY MOSTLY ALL OF THEM ARE IN DISTRICT TWO AND SOME IN DISTRICT SIX. >>COUN. PEÑA: COUNCILOR TELLES. >>COUN. TELLES: THANK YOU, MADAM PRESIDENT. I HAVE A QUESTION FOR PLANNING. I DON'T KNOW WHO THIS QUESTION IS FOR. WITH THE NEW BUSINESS LICENSE PROCESS, COULD -- I OPERATE A BUSINESS FROM MY HOME. I'M AN ACCOUNTANT. I WORKED FOR HOME. I HAVE DONE IT FOR 14 YEARS I'VE WORKED FROM HOME. I HAVE TO APPLY FOR A BUSINESS LICENSE, WHICH I HAVE. WHEN I DO THAT, I HAVE TO SELECT ON THE APPLICATION DO I MANUFACTURE FROM MY HOME, DO YOU RETAIL FROM YOUR HOME, DO YOU ALL THESE THINGS FROM YOUR HOME. WE ASK THOSE QUESTIONS BECAUSE THE USES ARE DIFFERENT, CORRECT? >> COUNCILORS, YES. BUSINESS LICENSING DOES CHECK THE USE IS ALLOWED IN THE ZONE DISTRICTS OR IN THE AREA WHERE THE USE IS PROPOSED. >>COUN. TELLES: MY BUSINESS. MY CONSULTING COMPANY I OWN AND WORK FROM MY KITCHEN IS SAFE. I WILL STILL BE ABLE TO DO THAT AND SOMEBODY ELSE WILL BE ABLE TO DO THEIR RETAIL SPACE? CORRECT? >> MADAM PRESIDENT, COUNCILOR TELLES, IF WHAT YOU'RE DOING FALLS UNDER HOME OCCUPATION, THEN YES. THAT'S REGULATED SEPARATELY. SEPARATE USE WOULDN'T BE AFFECTED BY THE SEPARATION. I JUST WANT TO SAY ONE MORE THING, FIRST IN GETS IT, AND THE NEXT ONE HAS TO BE 660 FEET AWAY. IF A NEW ONE WANTS TO COME IN, ZONING LOOKS AT IS THERE AN EXISTING ONE ALREADY WITHIN 660 FEET. IF SO, NEXT ONE IN CAN'T GO. IF YOU'RE THE FIRST ONE IN, YOU GET APPROVED. >>COUN. TELLES: THIS ALSO HELPS US KEEP TRACK OF THE BUSINESSES OPERATING IN THE CITY BECAUSE NOW WE HAVE TO ENSURE THEY'RE GOING TO GET A BUSINESS LICENSE TO OPERATE, CORRECT? >> COUNCILOR TELLES, YES. IT HELPS US KEEP TRACK. >>COUN. TELLES: REDUCING ILLEGAL OPERATING BUSINESSES? >> ABSOLUTELY. >>COUN. TELLES: THANK YOU. >>COUN. PEÑA: COUNCILOR CHAMPINE. . >>COUN. CHAMPINE: IF THIS PASSES IS THIS STILL CITYWIDE, MR. COX? >> COUNCIL PRESIDENT, COUNCILOR CHAMPINE, IT WOULD BE CITYWIDE IN THE FACT IT'S DICTATED BY CITYWIDE POLICY. IT WOULD BE PROHIBITED WITHIN QUARTER MILE OF ACTIVITY CENTERS AND MAJOR TRANSIT. THAT DISTANCE BUFFERS SEPARATION. TECHNICALLY YES. >>COUN. PEÑA: OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COUNCILOR ROGERS TO CLOSE. THE ONLY PERSON I HAVE ON HERE IS COUNCILOR ROGERS. >>COUN. ROGERS: I'M SORRY. THANK YOU, MADAM PRESIDENT. MY KIDS CAME TO SURPRISE ME. THANK YOU. I APPRECIATE THE CONVERSATION AROUND THIS. I THINK IT HELPED ME CLARIFY WHAT WE CAN AND CAN'T DO AS COUNCIL. I URGE THIS SUPPORT. I TRIED TO CHANGE THIS BASED ON PUBLIC COMMENTS, BASED ON CONVERSATIONS WITH COUNCILORS. I REALLY DO NEED THIS FOR MY DISTRICT. I THINK MY HESITATION FOR PUTTING MY DISTRICT IN THERE IS THE PRECEDENCE OF A SMALL MAP AREA. I JUST THINK IT SETS A PRECEDENCE DANGEROUS FOR OUR CITY, EVEN THOUGH I REALLY WANT TO DO IT. BECAUSE I REALLY NEED FOOD JUSTICE IN MY DISTRICT. I URGE YOUR SUPPORT. >>COUN. PEÑA: THAT WAS THE CLOSE. THERE'S A MOTION AND SECOND ON FLOOR AMENDMENT LABELED Q THAT IS NOW SIX. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY YES AND RAISE YOUR HAND. I'M SORRY. I MEANT TO SAY NO. OPPOSED NO. I DID THE INDICATED TO SAY YES, BUT I WASN'T INDICATING YES. OPPOSED NO. MOTION FAILS. AGAIN, I WAS INDICATING THE SIGN. I APOLOGIZE FOR THAT. NOW WE'RE ON FLOOR AMENDMENT F, CORRECT? AND THIS IS COUNCILOR ROGERS. >>COUN. ROGERS: THANK YOU, MADAM PRESIDENT. JUST GIVEN THE CURRENT -- >>COUN. PEÑA: THAT WOULD BE FLOOR AMENDMENT NUMBER SEVEN. >>COUN. ROGERS: BASED ON THE LAST CONVERSATION, I WILL SAVE US TIME AND NOT MOVE THIS. THANK YOU. >>COUN. PEÑA: WE ARE NOW ON FLOOR AMENDMENT G. WHICH WILL BE FLOOR AMENDMENT SEVEN. >>COUN. FIEBELKORN: MADAM PRESIDENT, I'LL MOVE FLOOR AMENDMENT NUMBER SEVEN. THAT IS TO REPEAL THE LUPZ AMENDMENT NUMBER FOUR AND REINSERT THE EPC RECOMMENDED LANGUAGE IN THE IDO AS FOLLOWS. WE'LL PUT THAT ON THE SCREEN. I'LL MOVE THAT AMENDMENT. TO EXPLAIN THIS, WE HAVE HEARD -- FIRST OF ALL, THIS IS ONLY IN ACTIVITY CENTERS, MAJOR TRANSIT AREAS, MAIN STREET AREAS. THOSE KINDS OF LARGE PLACES. AND WE HAVE CONTINUALLY HEARD FROM THE COMMUNITY AND I AGREE 100% WE SHOULD BE DEVELOPING HOUSING ON TRANSIT CENTER LINES BECAUSE THAT'S AN EASY PLACE TO LIVE. ESPECIALLY IF YOU NEED TRANSIT TO GET WHERE YOU NEED TO GO. I DON'T AGREE WE CAN PUT EVERYBODY ON THOSE CORRIDORS, BUT WE HAVE HEARD OVER AND OVER AGAIN THAT IS SOMETHING THAT THE COMMUNITY IS INTERESTED IN. SO, IF WE ARE GOING TO BE MOVING ALL THOSE PEOPLE TO CORRIDORS AND TRANSIT LINES, THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE TO HAVE SPACE TO PUT THEM. THERE IS -- WE'RE NOT HITTING AT ALL THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENT FOR PARKING. WE'RE SAYING IN THOSE AREAS WE DON'T MEAD AS MUCH PARKING. WE'RE TRYING TO REDUCE THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF PARKING AVAILABLE SO WE FREE UP SPACE FOR HOUSING AND OTHER BETTER HIGHER USES FOR LAND ON TRANSIT CENTER CORRIDORS AND MAIN STREETS AND ALL OF THOSE TYPES OF AREAS. >>COUN. PEÑA: THANK YOU, COUNCILOR FIEBELKORN. ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? COUNCILOR ROGERS TO CLOSE. >>COUN. ROGERS: THANK YOU, MADAM PRESIDENT. I URGE YOUR SUPPORT. >>COUN. PEÑA: THERE'S A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR FLOOR AMENDMENT NUMBER SEVEN. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY YES AND RAISE YOUR HAND. OPPOSED NO. MOTION FAILS, 5-4. 4-5. IEST. I'M SORRY. WE'RE NOW ON FLOOR AMENDMENT J. WHICH IS -- WHICH IS H? WE'RE ON FLOOR AMENDMENT 8. COUNCILOR FIEBELKORN AND COUNCILOR ROGERS. >>COUN. ROGERS: THANK YOU, MADAM PRESIDENT. H OR 8 IN OUR PACKETS IS REPEALING LUPZ NUMBER ONE AND REINSERTING SECTION FOUR ON PAGE FOUR LINE ONE OF O-26-2. EPC RECOMMENDED ITEMS AS FOLLOWS. THIS AMENDMENT BRINGS BACK LEGISLATIVE ZONING CONVERSIONS ALONG THE MAJOR TRANSIT CORRIDORS AND WITHIN ACTIVITY CENTERS. THE ZONING CONVERSIONS CHANGE R1 TO R2. RT TO MXT AND ML TO MXL. AND I MOVE A DO PASS. >>COUN. FIEBELKORN: SECOND. >>COUN. PEÑA: MOTION AND SECOND FOR DO PASS OF FLOOR AMENDMENT NUMBER EIGHT. ANY QUESTIONS FROM COUNCILORS? NO? COUNCILOR FIEBELKORN TO CLOSE. >>COUN. FIEBELKORN: THANK YOU, MADAM PRESIDENT. THIS IS THE MOST MISUNDERSTOOD PROPOSAL OUT THERE. I DO WANT TO SAY FOR THE FOLKS THAT READ THIS AND SAID OH, MY GOSH YOU GOAL FROM R1 TO MXL. THAT WAS NEVER THE INTECTION. IT WILL BE A ONE-TIME ZONE CHANGE. R1 TO R2. RT YOU GO TO MXT. THERE WILL BE NO JUMPING ALONG THAT LINE. I ALSO WANT TO POINT OUT THAT THIS WAS PASSED THROUGH THE EPC UNANIMOUSLY. I DO WANT TO CLARIFY THAT WE FOUND IN WORKING WITH DAMIAN LARA, WE FOUND THERE WAS AN ISSUE WITH THE STATE LAW. THERE'S A VERY ARCHAIC STATE LAW IN PLACE THAT SAYS A ZONE CHANGE CAN REMOVE YOUR 3% PROPERTY TAX CAP. AND WE SADLY TONIGHT THAT BILL DID FAIL AT THE STATE LEVEL. WHILE THE CURRENT ASSESSOR HAS ASSURED US NUMEROUS TIMES THAT HE WOULD NEVER AND HE DOES NOT SEE ANY OPPORTUNITY FOR ANY OTHER ASSESSOR TO CHANGE THE 3% PROPERTY TAX, BASED ON A ZONE CHANGE, I FEEL LIKE SINCE WE DID NOT GET THAT BILL PASSED WE REALLY DO HAVE TO WITHDRAW THIS AMENDMENT. I WILL MOVE FOR WITHDRAWAL. >>COUN. PEÑA: DO WE HAVE TO VOTE ON A WITHDRAWAL? OKAY. THANK YOU. WE ARE NOW ON FLOOR AMENDMENT I. AND IT WILL BE LABELED 8. I'M SORRY. THIS IS COUNCILOR FIEBELKORN. >>COUN. FIEBELKORN: WE'RE THROUGH WITH THE ONES I WOULD BRING BACK. THIS IS TO AMEND EXHIBIT ONE O-26-2. TO INCLUDE A REFERENCE TO ADVERSE CUMULATIVE IMPACTS IN THE CRITERIA THAT FOLKS CAN INCLUDE IN THEIR COMMENTS TO THE HEARING EXAMINER AS CASES MOVE THROUGH. I'LL MOVE THAT AMENDMENT AND I'LL EXPLAIN. >>COUN. PEÑA: THERE'S A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR FLOOR AMENDMENT NINE. >>COUN. FIEBELKORN: I'VE HAD A LOT OF REQUESTS FOR THIS. I WANTED TO GET IT INTO THE EPC PROCESS. WE JUST DIDN'T HAVE TIME. RIGHT NOW, THERE'S A DEVELOPMENT ISSUE HAPPENING IN YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD, FOR EXAMPLE, THE CONDITIONAL USE CRITERIA DOES NOT ALLOW FOR CONSIDERATION OF CUMULATIVE IMPACTS. SO, YOU HAVE TO GO INTO THOSE HEARINGS AND COMMENT SPECIFICALLY ON WHAT THAT ONE INDIVIDUAL DEVELOPMENT WOULD DO TO IMPACT YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD. I THINK THAT IS OFTEN MISLEADING. FOR EXAMPLE, I THINK IF I WAS LIVING IN A NEIGHBORHOOD WHERE THERE WAS ONE FAST FOOD RESTAURANT THAT WOULD BE FINE. IF THERE WAS THREE THAT WOULD BE FINE. BUT IF YOU GET TO WHERE THERE'S SIX, THERE MAY BE SOME CUMULATIVE IMPACT THAT YOU CAN'T BLAME THAT ONE INDIVIDUAL DEVELOPMENT ON, BUT YOU'RE GOING TO BE FEELING THE PAIN FROM THE MULTIPLE BUSINESSES IN THAT AREA. I THINK THAT IS THE CASE WITH A RESTAURANT. I THINK IT'S ALSO THE CASE WITH A CAR WASH OR A COFFEE SHOP. IF THERE'S SIX COFFEE SHOPS WRUR SUDDENLY GOING TO HAVE A LOT MORE TRAFFIC AND DISRUPTION. SO, THIS IS WHAT WE CAME UP WITH. THIS DOES NOT REQUIRE ANY SORT OF CUMULATIVE IMPACT STUDY OR ANALYSIS, BUT IT DOES ALLOW PEOPLE ENGAGING THIS PROCESS THROUGH THE HEARING EXAMINER AND THE PROCESS WE IN THE IDO TO AT LEAST BRING UP THOSE CUMULATIVE IMPACTS THEY'RE FEELING FROM ADDITIONAL DEVELOPMENT THAT THEY FEEL MAY NEGATIVELY IMPACT THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD OR COMMUNITY. THAT'S WHAT THIS IS ABOUT. >>COUN. PEÑA: ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM COUNCILORS? SEEING NONE. THERE'S A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR FLOOR AMENDMENT NUMBER NINE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY YES AND RAISE YOUR HAND. OPPOSED NO. THAT PASSES, 7-2. >> MADAM PRESIDENT, ON THE PREVIOUS AMENDMENT IT WAS ACTUALLY A MOTION AND A SECOND. THAT MEANT IT BELONGED TO THE BODY. AMENDMENT NUMBER EIGHT, YOU NEED TO TAKE A VOTE TO WITH DRAW IT. HAD THEY NOT MOVED IT, IT WOULD BE OKAY. BUT IT WAS MOVED AND SECOND. IF YOU WANT TO WITHDRAW,IA --IA NEED YOU NEED TO TAKE VOTE. >>COUN. PEÑA: THIS IS TO WITHDRAW FLOOR AMENDMENT NUMBER SEVEN. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY YES AND RAISE YOUR HAND. MOEPGZ MOTION BRNG MOTION PASS MOTION PASSES. FLOOR AMENDMENT -- THIS IS LABELED FLOOR AMENDMENT J. AND THIS WOULD BE FLOOR AMENDMENT 10. >>COUN. FIEBELKORN: I'M GOING TO MOVE FLOOR AMENDMENT NUMBER TEN. WE'LL PUT IT ON THE SCREEN. I'M NOT GOING TO READ THE ENTIRE THING BECAUSE IT'S RATHER LONG. THIS IS AMENDING THE LIGHT VEHICLE FUELLING STATION SECTION OF THE IDO TO MAKE IT NOT A PERMISSIVE USE WITHIN 330 FEET OF ANY RESIDENTIAL HOMES. I'LL MOVE THAT AMENDMENT. >>COUN. PEÑA: THERE'S A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR FLOOR AMENDMENT NUMBER TEN. THERE ANY DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY YES AND RAISE YOUR HAND -- >>COUN. FIEBELKORN: I'D LIKE TO CLOSE. >>COUN. PEÑA: I'M SORRY. COUNCILOR FIEBELKORN. >>COUN. FIEBELKORN: THANK YOU. WE'VE HEARD A LOT TONIGHT ABOUT WE DON'T REALLY WANT RETAIL AND OTHER THINGS IN OUR RESIDENTIAL AREAS THAT RESIDENTIAL AREAS ARE SACK RUSANKT AND WE CAN NEVER TOUCH THEM. IN THAT WAY OF THINKING, USES THAT ARE DETRIMENTAL TO RESIDENTIAL AREAS SHOULD NOT BE ALLOWED. AND LIGHT FUELLING STATIONS HAVE A LOT OF NEGATIVE EXTERNALALITIES TO THE RESIDENTS WHO LIVE NEAR THEM. THERE'S FUMES AND PROBLEMS WITH AIR QUALITY AND INCREASED ASTHMA WITH ALL THOSE THINGS. THERE'S ALSO AN ADDITIONAL AMOUNT OF TRAFFIC. BY DEFINITION EVERYONE COMING THERE IS IN A CAR. THERE'S ALSO A PROBLEM OF SPILLS AND LEAKS AND THINGS LIKE THAT. THIS DOES NOT SEEM TO BE CONDUCIVE TO COEXISTENCE IN A RESIDENTIAL AREA. MANY, MANY OF MY CONSTITUENTS ASKED FOR THIS AND THAT'S WHAT I'M ASKING FOR SUPPORT FOR. I URGE YOUR SUPPORT. >>COUN. PEÑA: THERE'S A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR FLOOR AMENDMENT NUMBER TEN. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY YES AND RAISE YOUR HAND. OPPOSED NO. MOTION FAILS ON 4-5. WE'RE NOW ON FLOOR AMENDMENT K. LABELED K. IT WILL BE FLOOR AMENDMENT NUMBER 11. COUNCILOR FIEBELKORN TO OPEN. >>COUN. FIEBELKORN: MADAM PRESIDENT, I MOVE FLOOR AMENDMENT NUMBER 11. EXHIBIT ONE OF O-26-2 REMOVING THE FOLLOW LANGUAGE ON PAGES 273 OF THE POST EPC RED LINE. IT WILL PUT ON THE SCREEN. THIS IS BASICALLY CLARIFICATION THAT WAS REQUESTED BY PNM. THEY WORKED WITH OUR PLANNING STAFF AND FROM THE CITY AND COUNCIL SERVICES TO CLARIFY WHEN DISTRIBUTION LINES HAVE TO BE INSTALLED UNDERGROUND AND WHEN THEY DON'T. THERE'S SOME CONFUSION. THERE'S MISUNDERSTANDING OF THAT IDO ON OUR STAFF'S PART. WE WANTED TO LAYERIFY THAT MOVING FORWARD SO EVERYONE KNOWS WHAT THOSE RULES ARE. I'LL MOVE THAT AMENDMENT. >>COUN. PEÑA: THERE'S A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR FLOOR AMENDMENT NUMBER 11. ANY DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE. COUNCILOR FIEBELKORN TO CLOSE. >>COUN. FIEBELKORN: URGE YOUR SUPPORT. >>COUN. PEÑA: ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF FLOOR AMENDMENT 11, RAISE YOUR HAND AND SAY YES. OPPOSED NO. THAT PASSES. 7-2. WE'RE NOW ON FLOOR AMENDMENT L. LABELED L. IT WILL BECOME NUMBER 12. COUNCILOR FIEBELKORN TO OPEN. >>COUN. FIEBELKORN: THANK YOU, MADAM PRESIDENT. I'LL MOVE FLOOR AMENDMENT NUMBER 12. WE ARE GOING TO PLACE IT ON THE SCREEN. AMEND EXHIBIT ONE OF O-26-2 BY REVISING THE FOLLOWING LANGUAGE. AND RENUMBERING SUBSECTIONS ACCORDINGLY. THIS IS AN AMENDMENT REQUESTED BY FOUR OF OUR NEIGHBORING TRIBES THAT HAVE REQUESTED ADDITIONAL TIME FOR SPECIFICALLY FOR MASTER PLAN DEVELOPMENT SITE PLAN AND SUBDIVISION MAJOR ZONING MAP AMENDMENTS AND ZONING MAP AMENDMENTS THAT GO THROUGH THE EPC OR THROUGH THE CITY COUNCIL FOR THOSE CASES. THEY REQUESTED 30 DAYS TO REVIEW AND PROVIDE INPUT. SO, THAT IS WHAT IS BEFORE US IN FLOOR AMENDMENT NUMBER 12. I'LL MOVE THAT AMENDMENT. >>COUN. PEÑA: THERE'S A MOTION AND A SECOND. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? NO DISCUSSION. COUNCILOR LEWIS. >>COUN. LEWIS: THANK YOU, MADAM PRESIDENT. I GUESS THIS IS PRETTY CLEAR, BUT WE'RE JUST ADDING -- THIS IS BEFORE ANY KIND OF DETERMINATION -- ANY NEW APPLICATION. WE'RE JUST ADDING ADDITIONAL HEARINGS. AGAIN, IT JUST -- I'M A LITTLE CONCERNED ABOUT THIS PARTLY BECAUSE THIS DIDN'T GO TO COMMITTEE EITHER. THIS IS NEW TONIGHT AND SOME OF THESE MIGHT SEEM LIKE SMALL AMENDMENTS, BUT THEY'RE ACTUALLY PRETTY BIG. MAYBE -- GIVE A LITTLE EXPLANATION OF THIS AMENDMENT. >> COUNCIL PRESIDENT, COUNCILOR LEWIS, ULTIMATELY WHAT THIS DOES IS GIVE TRIBES 15 MORE DAYS THAN THEY CURRENTLY HAVE TO REVIEW AND COMMENT ON THE LIST OF APPLICATIONS YOU SEE ABOVE MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLANS, SITE LINE EP KRRBG, SUBDIVISION MAJOR, ZONE MAP AMENDMENT AND CITY COUNCIL. SPECIFICALLY WITHIN THE BUFFER SHOWN AT THE BOTTOM OF THE AMENDMENT. SO, THE AREAS IN BLACK AS WELL AS THE ESCARPMENT AREA YOU SEE IN THE OTHER ONE. JUST EXTENDING THE TIMELINE THEY HAVE TO PROVIDE COMMENTS. >>COUN. LEWIS: WE'RE ALREADY -- SOME OF THE TIMELINE REVIEWS AND JUST GETTING ANYTHING DONE IN THIS CITY TO BUILD ANYTHING, THE PROCESS IS SO LONG. I KNOW IT'S 15 DAYS, BUT 15 DAYS COULD BE WAITING FOR ANOTHER MEETING. IT COULD TURN INTO MONTHS. IF THIS IS HOW WE WANT TO RUN OUR PLANNING DEPARTMENT AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND OUR CITY, JUST ADDING MORE AND MORE RESTRICTIONS AND REQUIREMENTS ON PEOPLE'S ABILITY TO SPEND THEIR MONEY AND CREATE HOUSING TO PROVIDE SERVICES AND THINGS LIKE THAT, IT'S JUST -- THERE'S ALREADY A PROCESS THAT GIVES AMPLE TIME FOR THESE KINDS OF REVIEWS. I JUST THINK THIS IS A WRONG DIRECTION. I THINK IT'S BECAUSE WE'VE ADDED SO MUCH OF THIS IN THE PAST IS ONE OF THE REASONS WHY THERE'S NOT LOT OF DEVELOPMENT IN OUR CITY RIGHT NOW. WHY THERE'S NOT A LOT OF DEVELOPMENT OF HOUSING LIKE THERE COULD BE AND SHOULD BE, ESPECIALLY IN AREAS THAT ARE EVEN ON THIS MAP HERE, WHICH INCLUDES MASSIVE PART OF MY DISTRICT WHICH IS WHERE A LOT OF THESE AREAS OF OPPORTUNITY ARE TO CREATE MORE HOUSING. I'M DEFINITELY OPPOSED TO THIS AMENDMENT. A LOT OF THESE AMENDMENTS I THINK BOIL DOWN T IDEOLOGICAL DIFFERENCES, BUT THIS ONE CERTAINLY DOES. IT'S JUST A BAD ADDITION. THANK YOU, MADAM PRESIDENT. >>COUN. PEÑA: COUNCILOR ROGERS. >>COUN. ROGERS: THANK YOU, MADAM PRESIDENT. I JUST HAVE A QUICK QUESTION ABOUT THE TABLE. IT HAS IN THE TABLE ERROR REFERENCE. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE -- IT'S JUST A SPREADSHEET ISSUE. >> COUNCIL PRESIDENT, COUNCILOR ROGERS THE FORMATTING GOT MESED UP WHEN WE COPIED THAT OVER. IT WILL BE EDITORIAL CHANGE. >>COUN. ROGERS: MADAM PRESIDENT, I KNOW WE HAVE OUR TRIBAL LIAISON HERE. I WOULD LIKE TO ASK THEM A COUPLE QUESTIONS. WE SPENT A LOT OF TIME WORKING WITH MR. SLOEN IN EQUITY AND INCLUSION. HE'S THE PERSON IN THE CITY RESPONSIBLE FOR DOING THESE TRIBAL CONSULTATIONS AND MAKING SURE OUR TRIBES AND PUEBLOS ARE AWARE. CAN YOU EXPLAIN TO US WHY IT'S IMPORTANT TO HAVE 15 EXTRA DAYS WHEN YOU'RE TRYING TO CREATE WITH OUR MANY PUEBLOS AND TRIBES IN OUR SURROUNDING AREAS? >> MADAM PRESIDENT, COUNCILOR ROGERS, WE HAVE BEEN HEARING FROM THE TRIBES SINCE WE IMPLEMENTED THE IDO FOR TRIBAL NOTIFICATION AND ENGAGEMENT THAT THE 15 DAYS IS REALLY NOT ENOUGH TIME FOR THE TRIBES TO ADEQUATELY REVIEW THE NOTIFICATIONS WHERE SOMETIMES THEY CONTAIN TECHNICAL DETAILS THAT THEY HAVE TO REVIEW ALSO. WHAT WE'RE ALSO HEARING TOO IS THAT WITH WHAT'S HAPPENING WITH THE EPA BEING DISMANTLED AND ISSUES COMING UP, A LOT OF THE TRIBAL HISTORICAL PRESERVATION OFFICERS ARE DEALING WITH THOSE ISSUES TOO. THEY'RE PART OF THE REASON WHY THERE'S AN ADDITIONAL ASK FOR THE 15 DAYS. I THINK PARTLY WHAT HAPPENED TOO IS THESE PROJECTS OCCUR WHEN THERE'S CULTURAL ISSUES AND CULTURAL ACTIVITIES ALSO CAUSE DELAYS FOR THEM TO RESPOND TO IT. I THINK WE'RE TRYING TO GET AN UNDERSTANDING HOW THIS PROCESS WORKS OF WHEN THESE TYPE OF EVENTS OCCUR. AND THEY DO CHANGE FROM YEAR TO YEAR SOMETIMES. ALSO, WHAT WE RUN INTO IS WE HAVE SOME TRIBES ON A YEARLY BASIS CHANGE TRIBAL LEADERSHIP. SO, WE HAVE LEADERSHIP CHANGES THERE'S A MISUNDERSTANDING WHAT THE IDO IS ABOUT AND WHAT THE TRIBAL NOTIFICATION IS ABOUT. WE'RE WORKING WITH PLANNING TO CREATE A PROCESS WHERE WE PROVIDE A YEARLY UPDATE AT THE BEGINNING OF THE YEAR AS THE TRIBAL LEADERS CHANGE TO PROVIDE THEM SOME IDEA OF WHAT THE IDO AND WHAT THIS NOTIFICATIONS ARE ABOUT AND GETTING A BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT THIS WHOLE PROCESS DOES. I THINK THERE'S STILL A LEARNING CURVE THIS IS PROCESS. AGAIN, WE ARE PROBABLY THE FIRST MUNICIPALITY IN THE COUNTRY TO BE DOING THIS. THERE'S NO OTHER CITY IN THE COUNTRY DOING THIS. NOT EVEN THE UNITED STATES DOES THIS. WE'RE SETTING PRECEDENCE. I BELIEVE ADDING 15 MORE DAYS WOULD BE ALSO HELPING WITH TRIBAL SOVEREIGNTY. RESPECT AND HONOR THEY DESERVE ON OCCASION. I THINK WE SHOULD REALLY TAKE A GOOD LOOK AT THIS. I THINK IT COULD HELP THEM TO HAVE A BETTER UNDERSTANDING AND RESPOND IN A MORE MEANINGFUL WAY. THAT WAY IF THEY SUPPORT A PROJECT OR IF THEY HAVE NOTHING TO SAY ABOUT A PROJECT, IT'S BETTER FOR THEM. >>COUN. ROGERS: THANK YOU FOR THAT. MR. SLOAN, FOR THE PUBLIC, WHEN YOU'RE ENGAGING, HOW MANY TRIBES AND PUEBLOS ARE YOU RESPONSIBLE CONDUCTING THESE TYPES OF NOTIFICATIONS FOR? >> MADAM PRESIDENT, COUNCILOR ROGERS, WE DO NOTIFY 23 TRIBES IN THE STATE IN THE NOTIFICATION PROCESS. IT INCLUDES NAVAJO NATION, APACHE TRIBES. >>COUN. ROGERS: THANK YOU, MADAM PRESIDENT. FOR ME, KNOWING THE HISTORY OF YOUR COMMUNITY BEING THE STEWARDS OF OUR LAND I WANT TO DPR TO EXPERTISE ON YOUR COMMUNITY TO BEST PRESERVE MOTHER EARTH. I JUST WANT TO REAL UNDERSTAND THAT MEANS YOU HAVE 15 DAYS TO ENGAGE MEANINGFULLY WITH 23 TRIBES AND PUEBLOS. I DON'T THINK I HAVE OFTEN BEEN HARD WHEN WE HEAR FROM TRIBES AND PUEBLOS SAYING THEY DIDN'T HEAR ABOUT THESE THINGS. I THINK GRANTING YOU THE GRACE OF 15 MORE DAYS IS -- IF EVERYTHING IS IN GOOD FAITH, WHICH IT TALKS ABOUT IN OUR GOOD FAITH EFFORT REQUIRED, I THINK WE'LL HAVE A BETTER TIME ACHIEVING THAT. WITH A LITTLE BIT EXTRA TIME. THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR TIME AND WORK. >>COUN. PEÑA: BEFORE YOU STEP AWAY, COUNCILOR CHAMPINE. >>COUN. CHAMPINE: THANK YOU, MADAM PRESIDENT. THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE, SIR. OUT OF CURIOSITY. THE MAP THAT WE'RE PROVIDING HERE, WHICH INCLUDED THE PETROGLYPHS, YOU WOULD NOTIFY 22 TRIBES THAT SOMETHING IS GOING TO HAPPEN OR OCCUR ON THE PRET -- PETROGLYPHS. >> YES. >>COUN. CHAMPINE: TRIBES DOWN SOUTH OR THOSE THAT WON'T BE AFFECTED? >> CORRECT. WHEN IT COMES TO THE TRIBES AND NATIONAL MONUMENTS, IT ACTUALLY HAS AN INFLUENCE NATIONWIDE. ACTUALLY INTERNATIONALLY. IT'S A SACRED PLACE. IT'S A BREATHING, LIVING SACRED PLACE THAT ALLOW THE TRIBES TO REVERE. IT'S WHY THE TRIBES TRY TO PROTECT IT. IT GETS LIGHT AND AIR AND WIND. IT IS A BREATHING MONUMENT IS HOW THEY VIEW IT. >>COUN. CHAMPINE: MADAM PRESIDENT, IS 15 EXTRA DAYS ENOUGH? >> MADAM PRESIDENT, COUNCILOR CHAMPINE, I BELIEVE IT IS ENOUGH. THEY HAVE SAID THEY'RE OKAY WITH 30 DAYS. >>COUN. CHAMPINE: OKAY. >> I JUST RECENTLY ATTENDED A MEETING WITH TWO TRIBAL REPRESENTATIVES. THE GOVERNOR FROM THE PUEBLO OF LAGUNA AND SANTA CLARA. THEY MET WITH THE NATIONAL PARKS SERVICE ABOUT THE PETROGLYPHS. THIS IS A WEEK AND A HALF AGO. THEY BROUGHT UP THE 15 DAYS NOTICE. THEY WISHED THEY HAD 30. I THINK 30 WOULD BE GREAT. >>COUN. CHAMPINE: THANK YOU. I JUST WANT TO BE SURE. HOW YOU EXPRESS IT MEANS A LOT. SO WHEN IT SAYS DOUBLING FROM 15 TO 30 AND THE AMOUNT OF EFFORT THAT GUESS INTO IT, WE WANT TO MAKE SURE 30 IS ENOUGH. >>COUN. LEWIS: THANK YOU. MY UNDERSTANDING IS ONCE A PROJECT IS GOING THROUGH DETERMINATION AND APPLICATION IS COMPLETE AND THERE'S A PRETTY GOOD AMOUNT OF TIME FOR THE NEIGHBORHOODS AND EVERYBODY TO REVIEW. MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT YOU'RE NOT COMMENTING ON -- THERE'S MULTIPLE OPPORTUNITIES AND PROCESS FOR COMMENTING ALL THE WAY THROUGH THE PROCESS. NOWADAYS IT'S MANY MONTHS OF CONVERSATIONS AND COMMENTING. BEFORE A PROJECT AN ULTIMATELY APPROVED. MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT YOU'RE NOT COMMENTING ON EVERY ONE OF THEM. BUT ALSO, YOU'RE COMMENTING ON VERY FEW OF THEM. IF ANY. WHAT WOULD GIVING YOU ANOTHER 15 DAYS LONGER THAN THE NEIGHBORHOODS AND THE EPC, EVERYBODY, WHAT WOULD BE THE PURPOSE OF THAT? >> MADAM PRESIDENT, COUNCILOR LEWIS, THE GOAL IS TO REALLY ALLOW THE TRIBES TIME TO THINK ABOUT AND ASSESS WHAT IS HAPPENING. WHAT HAPPENING TOO WITH THIS TRIBAL NOTIFICATION PROCESS IN THE IDO IS THEY'RE BEGINNING TO SEE THAT WE HAVE A VOICE AND A CHANCE TO OPINE ON THINGS. LET'S GET INVOLVED. THERE IS A LOT OF ACTIVITY HAPPENING. I'M SEEING THINGS ALMOST EVERY DAY COME IN MY EMAILS ABOUT PROJECTS. THEY'RE BEGINNING TO REALLY TAKE NOTICE THAT THE CITY IS OFFERING THIS. LET'S TAKE THEM UP ON IT. IT'S A GOOD OPPORTUNITY FOR US TO BE ENGAGED. THEY'RE VERY APPRECIATIVE OF THIS PROCESS. AND APPRECIATIVE OF MAYOR KELLER'S EFFORT, THE CITY COUNCIL EFFORT. I THINK IT ALSO, AGAIN, SATISFIES THEIR DESIRE TO, AS COUNCILOR ROGERS MENTIONED, PROTECT THE LAND AND RESPECT THE LAND. BECAUSE A LOT OF THE LAND IN THIS AREA BECAUSE THEY ARE THE ORIGINAL CARETAKERS OF THIS LAND SINCE TIME IMMEMORIAL. THERE'S PLANTS AND FLOWERS AND BUSHES AND ANIMALS AND GOPHERS THAT THEY REVERE TO SOME DEGREE. THEY MAY HAVE AN INTEREST IF A PROJECT IS IN THAT LOCATION THAT IS SACRED LAND, THEY MIGHT WANT TO BE ABLE TO SET THAT WITHIN THEMSELVES. THEY WILL TALK TO THEIR OWN SPIRITUAL LEADERS THEY WILL TALK TO. THEY'LL GET AN ASSESSMENT IF IT'S OKAY TO DEVELOP THAT AREA. IT'S A MATTER OF REALLY GIVING THEM THE RESPECT TO PROVIDE THAT RESPONSE AND FEEDBACK TO THE CITY. >>COUN. LEWIS: SIR, IF THIS AMENDMENT WERE TO PASS, YOU WOULD BE GIVEN MORE TIME TO COMMENT AND LOOK AT EVERY -- JUST ABOUT EVERY DEVELOPMENT IN THE CITY, THE ENTIRE CITY. MUCH LONGER THAN THE NEIGHBORS WHO EVEN LIVE NEXT DOOR WHO HAVE A LOT OF TIME. AND A LOT OF PROCESS. COULD YOU ACCOMPLISH EVERYTHING THAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT WITHIN THE MANY MONTHS OF TIME THAT ALL THE OTHER NEIGHBORS ARE GIVEN THAT LIVE RIGHT NEXT DOOR TO THE PROJECTS? IS THAT NOT POSSIBLE? >> MADAM PRESIDENT, COUNCILOR LEWIS, THE NOTIFICATION PART ONLY DEALS WITH 660 FEET OF A MAJOR PUBLIC OPEN SPACE. THOSE ARE THE ONLY ITEMS THEY ARE REQUIRED OR BEING ASKED TO RESPOND TO. IT'S NOT EVERY DEVELOPMENT IN THE CITY. IT'S JUST THOSE AREAS THAT ARE BEING AFFECTED. >>COUN. LEWIS: IT'S A MASSIVE PART OF THE CITY THAT WE WOULD BE INCLUDING YOU ALL IN. MANY OF THESE AREAS -- THESE ARE LARGE VAST PARTS OF THE CITY AND DEVELOPMENT AREAS OF GROWTH. YOU WOULD HAVE MORE OPPORTUNITY, MORE NOTICE THAN THE VERY PEOPLE WHO LIVE NEXT DOOR. YOU WOULD. SO, I GUESS MY QUESTION IS WOULDN'T YOU HAVE ENOUGH -- WOULDN'T YOU BE ABLE TO ACCOMPLISH EVERYTHING YOU WANT TO ACCOMPLISH IN THE SAME AMOUNT OF TIME OF ALL THE NOTICE THAT'S GIVEN TO THOSE FOLKS THAT LIVE RIGHT NEXT DOOR? >> MADAM PRESIDENT, COUNCILOR LEWIS, I CAN'T SAY THAT PAUSE I CAN'T MAKE THE DECISION OR DECIDE WHAT THE TRIBES DO THAT COME TO A DECISION ON ANY DEVELOPMENT. IT'S REALLY UP TO THEM TO REALLY FIGURE THAT OUT. IF WE REALLY WANT TO FIND OUT WHAT IT TAKES FOR THEM TO DO THAT, YOU PROBABLY HAVE TO ASK FOR A MEETING WITH THE TRIBES AND HAVE THEM COME AND DISCUSS WITH YOU WHAT THEY NEED TO MAKE A DECISION. >>COUN. LEWIS: MADAM PRESIDENT, I GUESS MY QUESTION WAS WHY AREN'T YOU DOING THAT NOW WITH THE MANY MONTHS YOU HAVE? YOU HAVE ALL THAT OPPORTUNITY TO DO THAT NOW. AND YOU'RE NOT COMMENTING ON IT. MOST OF THEM OR ANY OF THEM. WHAT WOULD STOP YOU ALL FROM DOING THAT NOW WITHOUT HAVING AN AMENDMENT LIKE THIS THAT WOULD GIVE YOU A SPECIAL AMOUNT OF TIME WAY BEYOND WHAT'S EVEN GIVEN TO THE NEIGHBORS AND FOLKS THAT LIVE RIGHT NEXT DOOR? >> MADAM PRESIDENT, COUNCILOR LEWIS, WELL THEY ARE OPINING ON PROJECTS. THOSE ARE IN PROCESS. THEY'RE MAKING AN EFFORT TO DO THAT. AGAIN, I JUST THINK THAT ADDITIONAL TIME WILL GIVE THEM TIME TO REALLY ASSESS THE SITUATION WHEN IT COMES TO A PROJECT. NATIVE AMERICAN CULTURE, WE'RE NOT PRESSED BY TIME. WE'RE PRESSED BY TAKING THE TIME WE NEED TO DO WHAT WE FEEL WE SHOULD DO. THAT ALSO COMES INTO PLAY AND IN THEIR THINKING. I SHOULDN'T SAY THAT ABOUT TRIBES. THIS IS MY OWN PERSONAL EXPERIENCE BEING NATIVE. SOMETIMES WE TAKE THE TIME WE NEED TO MAKE THE DECISION ON SOMETHING. WE DON'T MAKE HASTE DECISIONS. THAT WAY WHEN WE DECIDE ON SOMETHING, IT'S THE BEST DECISION WE CAN FOLLOW. >>COUN. PEÑA: COUNCILOR TELLES. >>COUN. TELLES: MADAM PRESIDENT, THANK YOU SO MUCH. I JUST REALLY WASN'T TO URGE MY COLLEAGUES TO SUPPORT THIS BECAUSE WHAT THIS IS WE'RE NOT GIVING EXTRA TIME. WE'RE CREATING EQUITABLE TIME. WE ARE ASSUMING THAT EQUAL ASSUMES THAT EVERYBODY IS AT THE SAME STARTING POINT. AND WE HAVE TRIBAL -- WE HAVE OUR INDIGENOUS COMMUNITIES. AND THEY'RE NOT STARTING AT THE SAME POINT. THEY DON'T LIVE NEXT DOOR. AND WE DO HAVE TO REACH OUT TO FOLKS ALL ACROSS THE STATE. AND IT'S MORE THAN -- IT'S NOT JUST A PROCEDURAL COURTESY. IT'S A MATTER OF HONORING SOVEREIGNTY. IT'S A MATTER OF RESPECTING OUR INTERGOVERNMENTAL RELATIONSHIP. AS PUBLIC SERVANTS, I THINK WE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY FOR MEANINGFUL CONSULTATION. I THINK SHOULD WE PROVIDE EQUITABLE OPPORTUNITY FOR OUR INDIGENOUS COMMUNITIES TO RESPOND AND PARTICIPATE, WE MIGHT HAVE THEM INVOLVED MORE. IF THEY'RE NOT COMMENTING ENOUGH NOW, THIS PROVIDES AN OPPORTUNITY TO ALLOW THEM THAT CHANCE. YOU LIKE THE OLYMPICS? TRACK. THERE'S STAGGERED STARTS. IT'S STAGGERED STARTS. SO WE CAN HAVE EQUITABLE TIME RUNNING THAT TRACK. BECAUSE WE'RE NOT ALL STARTING FROM THE SAME PLACE. THANK YOU. >>COUN. PEÑA: COUNCILOR ROGERS. >>COUN. ROGERS: THANK YOU, MADAM PRESIDENT. >> MADAM PRESIDENT, COUNCILORS, THANK YOU. I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT NEIGHBORS GET NOTICE FIRST. THE APPLICANT SENDS NOTICE OF THE APPLICATION BEFORE THE CITY RECEIVES IT. NEIGHBORS GET NOTICED FIRST. PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 100 FEET GET NOTICED FIRST. THEN THE APPLICATION COMES IN. PLANNING PROCESSES IT. WE REFER THAT OUT TO THE TRIBAL REPRESENTATIVES ABOUT TWO WEEKS AFTER THE APPLICATION IS RECEIVED. NEIGHBORS DO HAVE MORE TIME THAN SOVEREIGN DPUMENT GOVERNMENTS TO REVIEW THE CASE. JUST TO CLARIFY. >>COUN. PEÑA: COUNCILOR GROUT. YOU'RE GOOD? OKAY. >>COUN. ROGERS: I JUST WANT TO ACKNOWLEDGE HER. I HAVE A QUESTION. I WANT TO REITERATE ON SOME OF THE THINGS YOU MENTIONED ABOUT WHY THIS IS IMPORTANT. I AGREE. THIS IS NOT -- I THINK THE REASON THEY'RE NOT COMMENTING, COUNCILOR LEWIS, IS BECAUSE OF THE 15 DAYS. I THINK I WOULD LOVE TO INVITE YOU TO ONE OF THE FEAST DAYS AND REALLY UNDERSTAND WHAT THAT PROCESS IS LIKE FOR THE COMMUNITY. MAYBE YOU CAN EXPLAIN THAT FOR US REALLY QUICKLY ABOUT THE PREPARATION. IT'S ACTUALLY AN AMAZING CULTURAL EXPERIENCE. DURING THAT TIME, THERE'S NO BUSINESS CONDUCTED LIKE THIS ON OUR TRIBAL CONSULTATION. IT'S NOT APPROPRIATE TO CONDUCT BUSINESS CURING -- DURING THAT TIME. I THINK THE 15 DAYS IS EXACTLY WHY WE DON'T HAVE MORE COMMENTS FROM OUR TRIBES AND PUEBLOS. I THINK YOU MENTIONED THE LEGAL AND FEDERAL OBLIGATIONS. THEY MIGHT BE A LITTLE SHADY BUT THEY'RE STILL IN PLACE. WE HAVE LEGAL FEDERAL OBLIGATIONS ON NATIONAL HISTORIC PRESERVATION, NATIONAL ENVIRONMENT POLICY ACT, THAT DICTATE ALL THESE THINGS. AND I WOULD BE REMISED TO NOT TALK ABOUT THIS IS THEIR LAND. I'M NOT SURE WHERE YOUR PEOPLE CAME FROM, COUNCILOR LEWIS, I'M JUST SAYING. >>COUN. PEÑA: I THINK THAT'S OUT OF ORDER. THAT IS OUT OF ORDER. >>COUN. PEÑA: THAT'S YOUR FIRST WARNING. >>COUN. ROGERS: COUNCILORS CULTURAL BACKGROUNDS CHANGED THE LENS WHICH WE'RE SPEAKING. I WOULD LOVE TO GET TO KNOW THAT. I'M PRETTY SURE THEY'RE NOT NATIVE TO THIS LAND. I SAY THAT AND IT'S ABSOLUTELY APPROPRIATE TO SAY THAT. I WILL SAY LAND BACK. LET'S NAME THAT. THIS IS THEIR LAND THAT WE OCCUPY RIGHT NOW. WHETHER YOU LIKE THAT TERM OR NOT. OR WE THINK IT'S APPROPRIATE OR NOT, THAT IS THE TRUTH. THAT IS THE FACTS. AND WE SHOULD RESPECT OUR NATIVE BROTHERS AND SISTERS. AND THEY'RE THE STEWARDS OF THIS LAND. WE HAVE DECIMATED THIS LAND. BECAUSE WE'RE NOT LISTENING TO THIS COMMUNITY. SO, I AM ABSOLUTELY GOING TO SAY IT AGAIN. LAND BACK. THEIR LAND. WE ARE ALL VISITORS ON STOLEN LAND. LET'S BE REAL. LET'S RESPECT SOVEREIGNTY. LET'S RECOGNIZE TREATY RIGHTS. INTERGOVERNMENTAL PARTNERSHIPS, SHARED REGIONAL PLANNING RESPONSIBILITY AND DO THE RIGHT THING. THANK YOU. >>COUN. PEÑA: ARE THERE ANY OTHER COMMENTS? THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE. WHERE REALLY APPRECIATE YOU BEING HERE. I THINK THAT'S KIND OF THE PROBLEM WITH SOCIETY. WE'RE JUST ATTACKING EACH OTHER AND NOT REALLY PAYING ATTENTION TO EACH OTHER. JUST LIKE YOUIFIES DPIEZ FEEL IKE I JUST WANT TO SAY ABSOLUTELY, MY GREAT GRANDMOTHER IS FROM ISLETA. YES, CHICANA BUT ISLETA. ANYWAY, I WANT TO THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE. I THINK THAT PART OF YOU HAVING THE DIALOGUE -- I THINK WE HAVE TO HAVE A CLOSER RELATIONSHIP BECAUSE WE ARE BOUNDED IN THIS CITY BY THE MOUNTAINS AND BY THE TRIBES. IT MAKES IT DIFFICULT. PART OF THE ENTIRE ARGUMENT WE'RE HAVING HERE TONIGHT IS HOW DO WE GROW. WE'RE SAYING THAT WE WANT TO FREE UP PROPERTIES ALL OVER THE CITY SO WE CAN GROW AND CREATE DENSITY, WHICH IS IMPORTANT AND I DON'T KNOW HOW WE'RE GOING TO GO ABOUT THAT INTO THE FUTURE, BUT I THINK IT'S DEFINITELY IMPORTANT. ON THE WEST SIDE, IT'S REALLY ONE OF THE ONLY OPPORTUNITIES TO GROW. AND IT'S REALLY DIFFICULT BECAUSE WE DO HAVE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS. WE HAVE, YES, WE NEED TO PROTECT THE PETROGLYPHS. AND WE HAVE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS. WE HAVE RENE HORVATH. WE NEED HAVE A CONVERSATION ON HOW WE GROW. I KNOW SOME OF THIS CAME ABOUT BECAUSE THERE'S MOMENTUM. THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT NOT IN MY BACKYARD. WE DO HAVE TO HONOR THE PEOPLE THAT WERE HERE. FIRST YOU, AND WE HAVE TO HONOR COMMUNITIES THAT INVESTED AND BUILT THEIR HOUSES AND BOUGHT R1 ONES AND HOW DO WE ADDRESS THE DENSITY ISSUE. IT'S A TOUGH CONVERSATION THAT WE HAVE TO COME TOGETHER TO TALK ABOUT AND ADDRESS. I JUST HAD A COMMENT. I'M NOT GOING TO EVEN READ THIS LATER BECAUSE I THINK THESE PERSONAL ATTACKS WHEN WE'RE JUST REPRESENTING OUR COMMUNITIES AND WHAT WE BELIEVE ARE THE INTERESTS IN OUR COMMUNITIES JUST LIKE YOU ARE. AND WHEN WE HAVE -- WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT -- THAT'S THE PROBLEM WITH SOCIETY TODAY. SO ANYWAY. WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THAT, WE ALSO HAVE TO RESPECT THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS AND THE PEOPLE THAT HAVE LIVED THERE AND KNOW. I HEAR LOT -- THIS IS DIVISION -- I HAVE 15 GRAND BABIES. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT OUR YOUTH AND THE ISSUES THEY'RE FACED WITH. I HAVE FOUR OR FIVE TALKING ABOUT THE SAME ISSUE THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT TODAY. BUT WE HAVE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS THAT I SEE AS THESE ARE OUR ELDERS. WE CAN LEARN TO WORK TOGETHER TO TRY TO MAKE ALBUQUERQUE BETTER FOR ALL OF US. AND SO, I JUST WANT TO THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE. I APPRECIATE IT. LOVE TO CONNECT. COUNCILOR LEWIS AND WE'RE GOING TO GO TO COUNCILOR FIEBELKORN TO CLOSE. >>COUN. LEWIS: MADAM PRESIDENT. SIR, THANK YOU FOR COMING HERE. AND JUST ANSWERING SOME HONEST QUESTIONS. I COME FROM A BACKGROUND WHERE YOU CAN HAVE AN HONEST DISCUSSION AND ASK SOME HONEST QUESTIONS WITHOUT BEING QUESTION OF DISHONORING AND THINGS LIKE THAT. I APPRECIATE THE HONEST DISCUSSION ABOUT IT. THANK YOU. >>COUN. PEÑA: COUNCILOR FIEBELKORN TO CLOSE. SDMRF THANK YOU, MAD . >>COUN. FIEBELKORN: THANK YOU, MADAM PRESIDENT. I WANTED TO SAY, YOU KNOW, I'VE BEEN IN COUNCIL FOR A LITTLE OVER FOUR YEARS. ONE OF THE THINGS I'M MOST PROUD OF IS THIS TRIBAL NOTIFICATION PROCESS WE WORKED ON FOR A VERY LONG TIME. THANK YOU, MR. SLOAN, FOR WORKING WITH ME ON THAT. AND ON A LAND ACKNOWLEDGMENT. I DO THINK THAT WAS SOMETHING THAT I AM INCREDIBLY PROUD OF. YOU HEARD FROM THE TRIBAL LIAISON WE'RE THE ONLY ONES DOING THIS. I WAS VERY PROUD OF IT. SO, WHEN I HEARD THAT THE TIME FRAME WAS NOT WORKING FOR OUR TRIBAL PARTNERS, IT WAS UPSETTING TO ME. I THINK IT'S VERY, VERY IMPORTANT THAT WE TRY TO GET THEM INVOLVED MORE, NOT LESS. AND IF THE TIME FRAME ISN'T WORKING, I THINK WE SHOULD CHANGE IT. I WANT TO CLARIFY, AGAIN, THAT THIS IS NOT FOR ALL THE DEVELOPMENT. THIS IS NOT FOR ONE HOUSE BEING BUILT. THIS IS FOR -- I WILL QUOTE, MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLANS, SITE PLANS, SUBDIVISION OR ZONING MAP AMENDMENTS. AND IT IS ONLY WITHIN 660 FEET OF MAJOR PUBLIC OPEN SPACE. 660 FEET OF THE PETROGLYPH NATIONAL MONUMENT. 660 FEET OF TRIBAL LAND. OR NORTHWEST MESA ESCARPMENT OVERLAY. THESE ARE VERY, VERY SLIM AREAS IN OUR CITY THAT ARE VERY VITAL TO OUR TRIBAL PARTNERS AND THEY'RE QUITE FRANKLY SACRED. I THINK WE SHOULD DO WHAT WE CAN TO ENSURE THAT OUR TRIBAL PARTNERS HAVE A SAY IN THOSE PROJECTS AND THOSE TYPES OF CASES THAT COME BEFORE THE PLANNING DIRECTOR AND THE ZEO. SO, I JUST URGE YOUR SUPPORT TO RESPECT AND HONOR OUR TRIBAL PARTNERS AS WE TRY TO CONTINUE DOWN THE PATH OF MUTUAL RESPECT, UNDERSTANDING AND WORK TOGETHER. >>COUN. PEÑA: THAT'S A CLOSE ON FLOOR AMENDMENT NUMBER 12. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR RAISE YOUR HAND SAY YES. OPPOSED NO. THAT MOTION -- I DIDN'T SEE THE NUMBER. 6-3. THAT PASSES, 6-3. >> MADAM PRESIDENT. THANK YOU. >>COUN. PEÑA: THIS IS FLOOR AMENDMENT LABELED M. WHICH WILL BE FLOOR AMENDMENT 13. COUNCILOR FIEBELKORN. >>COUN. FIEBELKORN: THANK YOU, MADAM PRESIDENT. FLOOR AMENDMENT 13. I'M GOING TO AMEND LAND USE PLANNING ZONING COMMITTEE AMENDMENT 12 BY STRIKING THE FOLLOWING LANGUAGE. STRIKING THE ADULT ENTERTAINMENT OR RETAIL USE. TRIKING CANNABIS RETAIL. AND STRIKING PAWNSHOP. I'LL MOVE THE AMENDMENT AND EXPLAIN. >>COUN. PEÑA: MOTION AND SECOND FOR FLOOR AMENDMENT 13. ANY DISCUSSION? COUNCILOR FIEBELKORN. >>COUN. FIEBELKORN: OPEN OR CLOSE? >>COUN. PEÑA: IT WOULD BE A CLOSE. >>COUN. FIEBELKORN: THANK YOU. AT THE LAND USE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMITTEE THERE'S A REALLY GOOD AMENDMENT THAT WAS PASSED THAT SAID THAT MAIN STREET WE WANT COO KEEP MAIN STREET CORRIDORS IN THE MANNER OF RETAIL ESTABLISHMENT THAT PEOPLE CAN WALK TO. REALLY WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT MAIN STREETS ARE WALKABLE, BIKABLE. THEY'RE A PLACE FOR PEOPLE TO CONGREGATE. THERE WERE SOME PLACES NOT CONDUCIVE TO THAT. CAR WASHES AND SELF-STORING UNITS THAT ARE NOT GATHERING PLACES FOR PEOPLE. ALSO IN THAT VALID AMENDMENT THAT I WANTED TO SUPPORT WERE THREE THINGS I CONSIDER TO BE MORAL JUDGMENTS THAT DON'T NECESSARILY IMPACT THE ABILITY OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD OR FAMILIES TO USE MAIN STREET ENTERTAINMENT. THOSE ARE ADULT RETAIL, CANNABIS RETAIL, AND PAWNSHOPS. SO, I THINK IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT THAT WE ACKNOWLEDGE THAT THESE ARE ALL SMALL RETAILS. THEY'RE MOSTLY LOCALLY OWNED RETAIL SHOPS THAT WE DO WANT TO ENCOURAGE TO BE IN OUR COMMUNITY. AND THAT WE SHOULD NOT BE AS A BODY PASSING MORAL GUIDELINES ONLY ZONING RULES THAT HAVE SOMETHING TO DO WITH EXTERNALALITIES OR HEALTH AND WELL BEING OF THE COMMUNITY. CERTAINLY THE IDEA THAT THESE THREE USES -- THEY'RE NOT FAMILY FRIENDLY. I WOULD ARGUE THAT I HAVE A FAMILY. WE WOULD GO TO ALL OF THESE. I DON'T THINK WE CAN DECIDE WHAT IS A FAMILY FRIENDLY THING OR NOT. SO, WITH THAT, I WOULD URGE YOUR SUPPORT TO MAKE MAIN STREETS AN AREA WHERE THERE ARE SMALL BUSINESSES THAT A VARIETY OF PEOPLE CAN GO TO AND ENJOY THEMSELVES BECAUSE I WILL REMIND YOU THERE'S A MAP IN HERE. MAIN STREETS ARE THE ENTIRETY OF CENTRAL. THEY ARE A LARGE PORTION OF 4th STREET AND SAN PEDRO. THESE ARE IMPORTANT AREAS WE DON'T WANT TO LIMIT BUSINESSES WHO ARE SMALL, LOCALLY OWNED RETAILS FROM OPENING SHOP. AND FLOURISHING IN THE COMMUNITY. >>COUN. PEÑA: THERE'S A MOTION AND SECOND ON FLOOR AMENDMENT 13. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY YES AND RAISE YOUR HAND. OPPOSED, SAME MOTION. THAT FAILS ON A -- 4-5. 3-6. >>COUN. GROUT: MADAM PRESIDENT, MAY I REVISIT FLOOR AMENDMENT NUMBER NINE? I WOULD LIKE TO RECONSIDER THAT. >>COUN. PEÑA: THIS IS THE MOTION THAT PASSED. THIS IS LABELED NINE. WE HAVE A FEW MORE AMENDMENTS TO GO. I GUESS I CAN TAKE IT OUT OF ORDER AT THE REQUEST OF THE COUNCILOR. THIS WAS SPONSORED BY COUNCILOR FIEBELKORN. COUNCILOR GROUT, GO AHEAD. >>COUN. GROUT: THANK YOU, MADAM PRESIDENT. I THINK WE HAVE TO MOTION FOR RECONSIDER. >>COUN. PEÑA: THERE'S A MOTION AND A SECOND BY COUNCILOR LEWIS FOR RECONSIDERATION OF O-26-2. COUNCILOR GROUT, DID YOU WANT TO OPEN? >>COUN. GROUT: WE HAVE TO VOTE. >>COUN. PEÑA: WE HAVE TO VOTE TO RECONSIDER. >> I THINK IT'S A MOTION OF RECONSIDERATION FOR AMENDMENT NUMBER NINE? >>COUN. GROUT: YES. >>COUN. PEÑA: THERE'S A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR RECONSIDERATION OF FLOOR AMENDMENT NUMBER NINE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY YES AND RAISE YOUR HAND. OPPOSED? SAME MOTION. >>COUN. GROUT: WE CAN TALK ABOUT IT. >>COUN. PEÑA: COUNCILOR GROUT. >>COUN. GROUT: THANK YOU. I WOULD -- COUNCILOR FIEBELKORN, COULD YOU -- COULD WE GO THIS A LITTLE BIT AGAIN. ARE WE TALKING ABOUT SEVERAL DRIVE-THROUGHS? GO INTO IT A LITTLE BIT MORE. I THINK I MISUNDERSTOOD THIS ONE. >>COUN. FIEBELKORN: THANK YOU, MADAM PRESIDENT. AS IT CURRENTLY STANDS, IF YOU'RE A NEIGHBORHOOD PERSON AND YOU WANT TO BE INVOLVED IN AN APPLICATION FOR ANY SORT OF CONDITIONAL USE IN YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD, YOU CAN SPEAK TO A LIMITED NUMBER OF THINGS. IT'S CALLED THE CONDITIONAL USE CRITERIA. AND THE CONDITIONAL USE CRITERIA RIGHT NOW SAY THAT IT WILL NOT -- THAT'S THE IMPORTANT WORD, JUST THAT ONE THING, WILL NOT CREATE SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE IMPACTS ON ADJACENT PROPERTIES SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOODS. AND IT WILL NOT CREATE MATERIAL ADVERSE IMPACTS ON LAND SURROUNDING IT. WHAT I'VE HEARD FROM FOLKS THAT WANT TO BE INVOLVED IN THESE CASES IT'S NOT ALWAYS YOU CAN'T SAY IT'S JUST THAT ONE THING THAT'S BEING PROPOSED. I USED THE EXAMPLE, BUT IT COULD BE ANYTHING, FAST FOOD JOINTS. ONE FAST FOOD JOINT YOU MIGHT NOT GET A LOT OF INCROSED TRAFFIC OR SMELL. BUT IF THERE ARE SEVEN OF THEM, THAT SEVENTH ONE, THE CUMULATIVE IMPACT OF THE SEVENTH ONE MAY BE SOMETHING YOU SHOULD BOW -- BE ABLE TO RAISE THAT WITHIN THE CONDITIONAL USE HEARING AS AN ADVOCATE FOR YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD. >>COUN. GROUT: THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR THAT EXPLANATION. I APPRECIATE THAT. MY NEXT QUESTION WOULD BE, WE HAD A CONSTITUENT COMPLAINING ABOUT THE DRIVE-THROUGHS BEING BUILT IN THE STRIP MALL. AND I'M VERY EXCITED ABOUT IT BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE VERY MANY PLACES TO GO EAT. SO, I'M LIKE WE HAVE MORE IN THERE. WHAT IS THE AMOUNT THAT WOULD MAKE IT CUMULATIVE? >>COUN. FIEBELKORN: MADAM PRESIDENT, IT'S NOT A CRITERIA THAT HAS A NUMBER AMOUNT. IT REALLY DEPENDS ON WHAT THE APPLICATION IT IS. ALL THIS IS SAYING IS ADVOCATES WILL BE ABLE TO RAISE THE ISSUE OF WHAT THEY FEEL WILL BE CUMULATIVE IMPACTS. NOT SAYING THE HEARING EXAMINER WILL JUDGE ON THAT. I AGREE, IT WOULD NOT WARRANT IF IT'S IN A STRIP MALL, I DON'T KNOW IF THAT WOULD WORK. MY NEIGHBORHOOD I ABUT AGAINST A LARGE COMMERCIAL AREA. IF THERE WERE SUDDENLY SEVEN FAST FOOD JOINTS WITHIN A BLOCK ROLLING INTO INDIAN SCHOOL WHICH IS VERY PROBLEMATIC WITH LOTS OF NEW CARS AND SMELLS AND LOTS OF NEW PEOPLE MILLING ABOUT, THAT MIGHT HAVE A NEGATIVE IMPACT THAT YOU COULDN'T SAY WITH THAT ONE. BUT IT WOULD BE THE SEVENTH ONE. I DON'T MEAN TO PICK ON RESTAURANTS. THE ONE THAT I HAVE BEEN HAVING RAISED TO ME IS FUELLING STATIONS. WE HAVE A LOT OF ISSUES AROUND WHAT IF IF THERE WERE FOUR CAR WASHES ON THE END OF MY STREET, WHICH COULD HAPPEN. I WOULDN'T MIND HAVING ONE. THE FOURTH ONE SUDDENLY, THAT'S LOT OF PEOPLE COMING AND STAYING OUTSIDE MILLING ABOUT AT MIDNIGHT. MAYBE THAT'S NOT THE BEST USE. IT'S NOT THAT THEY WOULD BE DECIDED ON. IT'S SAYING AS A PERSON AND ANYBODY INVOLVED IN THIS CASE, I CAN RAISE IT IN MY TESTIMONY. >>COUN. GROUT: THANK YOU. >>COUN. LEWIS: MADAM PRESIDENT. >>COUN. PEÑA: COUNCILOR LEWIS. >>COUN. LEWIS: THANK YOU, IMMEDIATE -- MADAM PRESIDENT. MY CONCERN IS WE'RE ADDING ANOTHER CRITERIA SPECIFICALLY TO THIS THAT IS VERY SUBJECTIVE. I GUESS I WOULD ASK, WHAT WOULD BE THE -- I KNOW THIS. THE LUHO HAS A LOT OF OPPORTUNITIES TO BE ABLE TO CONSIDER THINGS TO CONSIDER. BY DOING THIS, WE'RE GIVING HIM A LITTLE MORE AMMUNITION. WE'RE GIVING HIM SOME VALIDITY TO A CUMULATIVE EFFECT OF ANY PROJECT. I'M CONCERNED ABOUT THAT. PARTLY BECAUSE IT'S SO SUBJECTIVE. IT LEAVES THE -- I THINK IT'S HARD TO QUANTIFY. I THINK EVERY EXAMPLE YOU CAN GIVE THERE'S ALWAYS ALREADY A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF CONSIDERATION GIVEN TO IT. EVERY EXAMPLE YOU CAN GIVE, WHETHER IT'S RESTAURANT OR COFFEE SHOP OR ANYTHING, IT BOILS DOWN TO A PERSON'S OPINION OF WHAT'S ADVERSE. FOR SOME PEOPLE, CUMEILATION OF TWO OF ANYTHING IS AVERSE IN CERTAIN AREAS. IT'S SO SUBJECTIVE. AGAIN, JUST PUTTING -- I THINK THE ACCUMULATION OF RESTRICTIONS OR CHANGES LIKE THIS TO THE ORDINANCE IS WHAT I THINK KILLS OUR ABILITY AS AN ECONOMY, AS A CITY, TO THRIVE AND MOVE FORWARD AND TO GROW. SO, I JUST THINK THESE ARE NOT GOOD DIRECTIONS WE SHOULD GO WHEN IT COMES TO MOVING THE CITY FORWARD. >>COUN. PEÑA: THANK YOU, COUNCILOR LEWIS. MS. COULLOUDON. >> THIS CRITERIA WOULD NOT APPLY TO LUHO. IT WOULD APPLY TO THE DISCUSSION BEING MADE BY WHOEVER THE APPLICATION IS. THESE COULD BE APPEALED TO THE LUHO, BUT IT'S NOT SOMETHING HE WILL BE APPLY TO THE APPEALS. >>COUN. LEWIS: MADAM PRESIDENT, AT THE SAME TIME, IF SOMETHING IS APPEALED IN THAT WAY, YOU COULD REFERENCE THIS. SOMEONE COULD REFERENCE THIS AND USE IT AS AN OPPORTUNITY IN ANY CASE. THERE'S WRITTEN APPLICATIONS TO OTHER -- WHETHER IT BE ANOTHER USE THERE. AGAIN, WE'RE WRITING INTO LAW NEW -- WHATEVER YOU WANT TO CALL IT. LEGITIMACY . >>COUN. LEWIS: THIS IS SO SUBJECTIVE, IT'S NOT GOOD. >>COUN. PEÑA: DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING ELSE TO ADD MS. COULLOUDON? >> I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY WHAT THE PURPOSE OF THE CONDITIONAL USE APPLICATION IS FOR. ESPECIALLY WHEN IT COMES TO LANGUAGE LIKE CUMULATIVE IMPACT. IF WE WERE TO -- THE WHOLE PURPOSE OF CONDITIONAL USE IS MAKE SURE THE USE IS ADEQUATE FOR WHATEVER PLACE IT'S BEING PLIED FOR. NOT TO PICK ON DRIVE THROUGHS, BUT AN EASY EXAMPLE WOULD BE IF THEY'RE HAVING NOISE OR LIGHT POLLUTION FROM THAT, FROM THE CARS DRIVING IN AND OUT, ONE OF THE THINGS THE ZHE COULD PUT AS A CONDITION OF APPROVAL WOULD BE TO ADD AN OPAQUE WALL TO MAKE SURE LIGHT DIDN'T EXIT TO RESIDENTS. JUST CLARIFYING THIS PROVIDES CLARITY OF WHAT COULD STOP THE LIGHT POLLUTION. >>COUN. PEÑA: THANK YOU. COUNCILOR LEWIS. >>COUN. LEWIS: JUST THE FACT THAT WE'RE HAVING TO IMAGINE ALL THE DIFFERENT POSSIBILITIES MAKES IT A BAD AMENDMENT. >>COUN. PEÑA: OKAY. COUNCILOR FIEBELKORN. >>COUN. FIEBELKORN: THANK YOU, MADAM PRESIDENT. I WOULD JUST ARGUE THAT ALMOST EVERYTHING IN THE CONDITIONAL USE APPROVAL IS SUBJECTIVE. IT SAYS IT WILL NOT CREATE SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE IMPACTS ON ADJACENT PROPERTIES. WILL NOT CREATE SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE IMPACTS. THAT'S PRETTY SUBJECTIVE. THE POINT IS THAT IF YOU'RE GOING FOR CONDITIONAL USE APPROVAL, PEOPLE FROM THE COMMUNITY HAVE A RIGHT TO PARTICIPATE IN THAT DECISION AND THEY SHOULD BE ABLE TO SAY ALL THE THINGS THAT MATTER TO THEM, NOT JUST THINGS THAT ARE ALLOWED ON THIS FORUM. IT SAYS WILL NOT CREATE SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE IMPACTS -- I'M SORRY. IT SAYS IT WILL NOT CREATE MATERIAL ADVERSE IMPACTS AND NOT NEGATIVELY IMPACT TRANSIT ACTIVITY. THOSE ARE ALL SUBJECTIVE THINGS. THERE'S A REASON FOR THAT. WE'RE SAYING THESE ARE CONDITIONAL USES THE DON'T CONFORM WITH WHAT WE SHOULD HAVE IN THE IDO. I DON'T ALWAYS AGREE THEYED THE BE CONDITIONAL USE. IF WE'RE GOING TO SAY THEY'RE CONDITIONAL USE, THEN THE PEOPLE IN THAT AREA HAVE A RIGHT TO PARTICIPATE IN THAT PROCESS AND POINT OUT ALL THE PROBLEMS THEY'RE GOING TO EXPERIENCE FROM THAT APPROVAL. ALL WE'RE DOING IS ADDING IN TO THIS PRETTY SUBJECTIVE LIST ALREADY ONE MORE ALLOWANCE FOR NEIGHBORHOODS OR INDIVIDUALS TO PARTICIPATE AND STATE THEIR CASE IN THE REALEST TERMS POSSIBLE FOR THEM. >>COUN. PEÑA: WE'RE BACK ON FLOOR AMENDMENT -- I'M SORRY. >> MADAM PRESIDENT, SOMEBODY NEEDS TO MAKE A MOTION. >>COUN. PEÑA: RIGHT. THAT'S WHAT I WAS GOING TO SAY. WE'RE BACK ON FLOOR AMENDMENT NINE. IS THERE A MOTION ON THE FLOOR? >>COUN. FIEBELKORN: I MOVE APPROVAL. >>COUN. PEÑA: MOTION AND A SECOND FOR APPROVAL OF FLOOR AMENDMENT NUMBER NINE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY YES AND RAISE YOUR HAND. ALL THOSE OPPOSED? MOTION FAILS. 4-4. WE ARE ON -- FLOOR AMENDMENT N. IT WILL BE FLOOR AMENDMENT NUMBER 14. COUNCILOR BASSAN. >>COUN. BASSAN: MADAM PRESIDENT, I MOVE FLOOR AMENDMENT NUMBER 14. MADAM PRESIDENT, AMENDMENT 14 IS TO AMEND SECTION 6-4I9 SHOWN IN THE FOLLOWING LANGUAGE. STRIKE OPEN SPACE DIVISION OF THE CITY PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT. IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THE OPEN SPACE DIVISION ACTUALLY REQUESTED THIS BECAUSE THEY ARE ALREADY A COMMENTING AGENCY ON APPLICATIONS WITHIN 330 FEET OF MAJOR PUBLIC OPEN SPACE WITHIN 660 FEET OF PETROGLYPH NATIONAL MONUMENT AND VARIANCES TO THE MAJOR PUBLIC OPEN SPACE. I CAN LET MR. COX ELABORATE OR ANSWER QUESTIONS THAT CAME TO ME AS A REQUEST. IT MINIMIZES DUEPLICATIVE NATURES. WHATEVER WORD YOU WANT TO FIT THEREIN. >>COUN. PEÑA: THANK YOU, COUNCILOR BASSAN. ANY QUESTIONS FROM COUNCILORS? NO? SEEING NONE. COUNCILOR BASSAN TO CLOSE. >>COUN. BASSAN: I URGE YOUR SUPPORT. >>COUN. PEÑA: THERE'S A MOTION AND SECOND FOR FLOOR AMENDMENT 14. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY YES AND RAISE YOUR HAND. OPPOSED, SAME MOTION. DID YOU GET THE -- OKAY. I THINK IT WAS THREE. 7-2. WE'RE ON FLOOR AMENDMENT O. THAT WILL BECOME FLOOR AMENDMENT 15. COUNCILOR LEWIS. >>COUN. LEWIS: THANK YOU, MADAM PRESIDENT. I MOVE FLOOR AMENDMENT 15. >>COUN. PEÑA: THERE'S A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR FLOOR AMENDMENT 15. COUNCILOR LEWIS. >>COUN. LEWIS: ALL RIGHT. THIS AMENDS THIS LANGUAGE. DECK AND OUTDOOR DINING, LIGHTING, LIGHTING USED TO ILLUMEINATE PATIOS, GAZEBOES OR STRUCTURES AS FESTIVE LIGHTING FOR OUTDOOR CURFEW. IT'S EXEMPT FROM THE POINT LIGHT SOURCE RESTRICTION BUT MUST MEET LIGHT TRESPASS TO THE SUBSECTION 14-16-5 AND TOTAL LUMEN ALLOWANCE TO SECTION 14-5-8. THEY'RE REGULATED BY THE TOTAL LUMEN ALLOWANCE AND MEASURED VIA TABLE 5-8-3. FOUND THIS IS ONE OF THOSE AREAS MISSING SPECIFIC TYPE OF LIGHTING THAT DIDN'T FALL UNDER THAT REGULATION. >>COUN. PEÑA: COUNCILOR ROGERS. >>COUN. ROGERS: THANK YOU, MADAM PRESIDENT. I JUST HAVE A QUESTION. THE CURRENT LIGHTING WE HAVE ALL OVER, DOES IT MEET THIS REQUIREMENT OR WOULD THOSE HAVE TO BE CHANGED? >> COUNCIL PRESIDENT, COUNCILOR ROGERS, APPARENTLY THIS LANGUAGE REALLY DOESN'T CHANGE ANYTHING IN THE IDO BUT ULTIMATELY HELPS CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS EXPLAIN WHEN THERE IS LIGHT POLLUTION FROM LIGHTING IT STILL MUST COMPLY WITH THE LIGHT POLLUTION AND THE MEASUREMENTS SHOWN IN THE TABLE IN THE EXPLANATION. AS FAR AS I KNOW, THE LIGHTING ALONG THE STREET IS IN COMPLIANCE. THIS IS HELPING IN CASE OUR CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS HAVE TO GO AND FIGHT THIS VIA A CASE WITH ANOTHER RESIDENT TO SAY THAT THIS IS CLARIFYING THAT THE LIGHTING FALLS UNDER THE MEASUREMENTS STANDARDS. >>COUN. ROGERS: THANK YOU. BECAUSE WE'RE ABOUT TO PUT LOT OF THESE IN DISTRICT SIX. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE WE GOT GRAND -- GRANT FUNDING. THANK YOU SO MUCH. >>COUN. PEÑA: ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS? COUNCILOR LEWIS TO CLOSE. >>COUN. LEWIS: I URGE YOUR SUPPORT. >>COUN. PEÑA: MOTION AND SECOND FOR FLOOR AMENDMENT NUMBER 15. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR RAISE YOUR HAND AND SAY YES. OPPOSED NO. 7-2. WE'RE NOW ON FLOOR AMENDMENT P. WHICH WILL NOW BECOME FLOOR AMENDMENT 16. THAT IS MINE. AND I CAN'T READ ALL THIS. I'M GOING TO DEFER TO MR. COX. I'LL GO TO THE EXPLANATION. THIS AMENDMENT LOOKS TO REMOVE SOME OF THE CRITERIA IN MAJOR WALLS AND FENCES APPLICATIONS AS WELL AS REDUCING THE STANDARDS FOR WALLS AND FENCES RELATED TO OTHER PROPERTIES IN PROXIMITY THAT ALSO HAVE MAJOR WALLS AND FENCES. I'M GOING TO LET YOU, MR. COX, EXPLAIN THIS AMENDMENT. THERE'S A MOTION AND A SECOND FROM COUNCILOR GROUT. >> THANK YOU. MADAM PRESIDENT, THE INTENT AND PURPOSE BEHIND THIS AMENDMENT IS ULTIMATELY TO MAKE IT MORE PREDICTABLE AND EASIER TO GET MAJOR WALLS WITHIN PROXIMITY TO OTHER PROPERTIES THAT ALSO HAVE A MAJOR WALL. SO, ONE OF THE CHANGES THAT I WILL POINT OUT IS UNDER SUBSECTION THREE IT SAYS FRONT YARD WALL TALLER THAN ALLOWED IN TABLE 5-7-1 AT LEAST 10% OF THE PROPERTY AND FORMALLY IT WAS 20%, BUT SAYING IF YOU ARE WITHIN 330 FEET OF THE STREET FRONTAGE OF THE PROPERTY YOU CAN MEET THE CRITERIA THAT WOULD ALLOW YOU TO HAVE A TALLER WALL IF 10% OF THE PROPERTY WITHIN THAT PROXIMITY ALSO HAVE A TALLER WALL WITHIN 30 FEET. THIS AMENDMENT ALSO STRIKES THROUGH SOME LANGUAGE TIED TO ARCHITECTURAL CHARACTER. IT SAYS THE PROPOSED WALL WOULD STRENGTHEN OR REINFORCE THE CHARACTER OF THE SURROUNDING AREA. STRIKING THAT. AND SIMILAR TO THE SECTION JUST BELOW TO TO REMOVE THAT ARBITRARY AESTHETIC LANGUAGE TO IT. BUT THEN IF YOU GO TO TABLE 6-1-1 IT STRIKES THROUGH SOME OF THE PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENT. SPECIFICALLY MAIL NOTICE WITHIN THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND POSTED SIGN ON THE PROPERTY. >>COUN. PEÑA: THANK YOU, MR. COX. ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS ON THE AMENDMENT? COUNCILOR FIEBELKORN. >>COUN. FIEBELKORN: THANK YOU, MADAM PRESIDENT. WE'RE REMOVING NEIGHBORHOOD NOTIFICATION OF AN ENTIRE PAGE? >> COUNCIL PRESIDENT, COUNCILOR FIEBELKORN, WE ARE REMOVING THE MAILED NOTICE OF 100 FEET OF NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS NEAR THE SITE. THEY WILL GET EMAIL NOTIFICATIONS. >>COUN. FIEBELKORN: THANK YOU, MADAM PRESIDENT. I HEARD FROM LOT OF NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS AND A LOT OF INDIVIDUALS. THEY HOLD THAT NOTIFICATION PROCESS PRETTY DEAR. I THINK YOU SHOULD BE CONSISTENT THROUGHOUT. IF WE HAVE NEIGHBORHOOD NOTIFICATION ON ALL THE OTHER THINGS WE TURNED DOWN TODAY, WE SHOULD HAVE IT ON THIS ISSUE AS WELL. >>COUN. PEÑA: COUNCILOR BACA. >>COUN. BACA: THANK YOU, MADAM PRESIDENT. JUST A QUICKLY, ONE, WE VISITED THIS LAST TIME. TWO YEARS AGO. WE HAD SEVERAL APD OFFICERS SHOW UP AND SAY THAT THIS DID NOT MAKE THINGS SAFER. IT MADE IT HARDER FOR THEM TO KEEP AN EYE. IT MADE IT HARDER FOR NEIGHBOR TO KEEP AN EYE ON FOLKS. IN DISTRICT TWO THERE'S NOT THAT MANY HIGH WALLS. COMPLAINTS ABOUT PEOPLE WANTING TO PUT UP FENCES. IT'S REGULAR. SO THIS HAS TO GO THROUGH NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS. EVERY NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION TELLS ME THEY DO NOT WANT FENCES AND WALLS. IF WE CARE ABOUT OUR NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS, THIS IS PART OF THAT. WE ALL KNOW HOW IT IS, IF YOU GO TO A NEIGHBORHOOD WHERE THERE'S BIG FENCES AND BARS ON THE WINDOWS, THOSE PROPERTY VALUES ARE DOWN. THEY'RE NOT THE SAME AS SOME OTHER PARTS OF THE CITY. WE ALL KNOW THAT. THAT'S ONE OF THE BIG THINGS WITH NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS, THEY WANT THEIR PROPERTY PROPERTY AND HOME VALUE TO BE SAFE. I HEAR THEM. THIS WOULD HURT OUR COMMUNITY. I DO NOT SUPPORT THIS. >>COUN. PEÑA: THANK YOU, COUNCILOR BACA. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? I'M GOING TO ASK MR. VARELA TO COME UP. THIS IS ONE THAT'S A TOSS-UP. THIS AMENDMENT HAS BEEN COMING UP YEAR AFTER YEAR. WHAT THE CHALLENGE IS THAT WE WANT TO CREATE AN AMENDMENT THAT WOULDN'T ALLOW FOR THESE NEW FENCES IN COMMUNITIES. BUT THERE'S NEIGHBORHOODS LIKE DISTRICT THREE, I DON'T KNOW WHAT OTHER NEIGHBORHOODS HAVE SIMILAR ISSUE, BUT THEY HAVE FENCES CURRENTLY. THEY'RE ALL OUT OF COMPLIANCE. IT REALLY TURNS INTO A CHALLENGE BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE THE RESOURCES TO GO AFTER EVERYONE THAT HAS A FENCE. SOMEBODY WILL REPORT A NEIGHBOR THAT'S HAD THIS FENCE UP, AND SO IT JUST TURNS INTO THIS ONE NEIGHBOR AND MOST OF THE PEOPLE ON THE ROAD HAVE A FENCE THAT'S OUT OF COMPLIANCE. BUT THE ONE NEIGHBOR HAS TO GO THROUGH THE RIGOROUS PROCESS AND HAVE THEIR FENCE TAKEN DOWN OR GET APPROVAL. IT'S WRITTEN IN A WAY SO IT DOESN'T ADD ANY NEW FENCES. I'LL LET THE DIRECTOR TALK ABOUT THIS. AND IF THIS ACCOMPLISHES THAT. WE DIDN'T WORK WITH YOU ON THIS AMENDMENT. I KNOW WE HAD CONTRADICTIONS TONIGHT. I WANT TO MAKE SURE THIS AMENDMENT DOES WHAT WAS TALKED ABOUT OVER THE YEARS. >> COUNCIL PRESIDENT, YOU'RE CORRECT. THIS DOES NOT CHANGE FENCE HEIGHTS, NECESSARILY OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT. IT JUST SIMPLY MAKES IT EASIER FOR PEOPLE OUT OF COMPLIANCE TO COMPLY OR FOR THOSE WHO DO WANT A FENCE LIKE THEIR NEIGHBORS HAVE, TO HAVE IT BE DONE EASIER. THEY HAVE A BETTER CHANCE OF DOING THAT IN ORDER TO KEEP THEIR PETS IN THE YARD, FOR EXAMPLE, OR PROTECT THEIR CHILDREN OR GRANDCHILDREN PLAYING IN THE YARD. >>COUN. PEÑA: YES. WE JUST HAD ANOTHER COMMUNITY MEMBER WHO HAD A FENCE THEY WERE PUTTING -- THEY PUT UP AND ACTUALLY HE COULDN'T SPEAK ENGLISH. WE WITH WORKED WITH THE DEPARTMENT TO GET SOMEBODY TO HELP HIM. HE COULDN'T FILL OUT THE APPLICATION, SO WE WORKED WITH THE DEPARTMENT TO GET THE APPLICATION COMPLETED. I DON'T KNOW WHERE THAT STANDS. I DON'T WANT TO KNOW. BUT ALL THE OTHER NEIGHBORS HAVE FENCES OUT OF COMPLIANCE. I JUST THINK IT ALLEVIATES THE PROBLEM, BUT WE WERE VERY THOUGHTFUL TO MAKE SURE THIS DIDN'T ADD FENCES THROUGHOUT THE CITY. WITH THAT, I URGE YOUR SUPPORT. THERE WAS A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR FLOOR AMENDMENT NUMBER 16. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY YES AND RAISE YOUR HAND. OPPOSED, SAME MOTION. THAT PASSES ON A 5-4. IT LOOKS LIKE THAT IS ALL THE AMENDMENTS THAT WE HAVE TONIGHT. WE ARE BACK ON THE BILL AS AMENDED 16 TIMES. THAT IS A BUNCH. I'M GOING TO OPEN IT UP FOR COUNCILORS TO SAY A FEW WORDS AND I'LL FINISH BECAUSE I HAVE A COUPLE THINGS TO SAY. IS THERE ANYONE THAT HAS ANYTHING TO SAY, IF NOT -- OKAY. JUST WANT TO SAY THAT -- COUNCILOR TELLES. >>COUN. TELLES: I JUST -- YOU KNOW, I JUST WANT TO REITERATE, LIKE, WE -- I THINK WE'VE ALL COME HERE, ALL OF US ARE HERE, BECAUSE EVERY AMENDMENT HAS BEEN PRESENTED IN GOOD FAITH. I TRULY BELIEVE THAT. I THINK, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE TO REMEMBER THAT OUR CITY IS ONLY AS STRONG AS THE SUM OF ITS PARTSES. BECAUSE OF COLLABORATION AND WHAT WE'VE TALKED ABOUT. WE HAVE TO COLLABORATE AND COORDINATE RIGHT? AND I JUST FEEL LIKE -- I DON'T THINK. I'M SORRY. I'M HAVING FEELINGS. I JUST WANT TO SAY, AS PUBLIC SERVANTS WE ARE TASKED WITH SETTING ASIDE PERSONAL BELIEFS TO ENSURE THE DECISIONS WE MAKE ARE DONE IN THE SPIRIT OF THE COMMON GOOD. AND I THINK THAT WE HAVE A LONG WAY TO DO THAT. I'M GUILTY OF IT. I HAVE BIASES. AND I WORK VERY HARD TO PUT THOSE ASIDE. TO MAKE SURE THAT I AM HERE DOING EVERYTHING I CAN FOR THE PEOPLE OF ALBUQUERQUE. AND NOT JUST MY DISTRICT. EVERYBODY'S DISTRICT. ALL OF OUR DISTRICTS. I JUST -- BECAUSE THAT IS ONE ALBUQUERQUE. >>COUN. PEÑA: ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? NO? >>COUN. FIEBELKORN: I DO WANT TO CLOSE ON MY BILL. >>COUN. PEÑA: YES. >>COUN. FIEBELKORN: OKAY. THANK YOU, MADAM PRESIDENT. THANK YOU FOR THE DEBATE. >>COUN. PEÑA: I WAS GOING TO SAY SOMETHING AND I'LL LET YOU CLOSE. I THINK THIS PROCESS IS REALLY INTERESTING. I WAS HERE WHEN WE PASSED THIS MANY YEARS AGO. AND THIS WHOLE IDO PROCESS WE DID AWAY WITH OUR SECTOR PLANS. WE DID AWAY WITH -- I ENDED UP VOTING AGAINST THE IDO WHEN WE FIRST INITIATED IT. IT'S INTERESTING SOME OF THE CONVERSATIONS WE'RE HAVING NOW ARE OPPOSITE OF THE CONVERSATIONS WE'RE HAVING THEM. THERE'S ALL THIS STUFF GOING ON. AGAIN, WE HAVE TO GROW AS A CITY. I'M JUST GOING TO SAY THAT. I REALLY WANT TO FIGURE OUT HOW WE EITHER WORK TOGETHER TO CREATE A ROUND TABLE DISCUSSION WITH THE TRIBES, WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD GROUPS, THE DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY, BECAUSE THERE -- WE'RE ALL HERE. I THINK COUNCILOR TELLES JUST SAID THIS, WE'RE ALL HERE TO REPRESENT OUR COMMUNITIES THE BEST WAY WE CAN. WE ALL HAVE OUR OPINIONS. WE ALL HAVE DIFFERENCES AND ADAMANTLY DISAGREE WITH EACH OTHER AT TIMES. I THINK I JUST REALLY WANT US TO STEER AWAY -- I THINK WE NEED TO BE LEADERS IN OUR COMMUNITY. WE NEED TO STEER AWAY FROM INSULTING OUR COLLEAGUES BECAUSE WE ALL LIVE IN DIFFERENT AREAS, MUCH DIFFERENT AND SOME OR AFFLUENT AND SOME LESS. WE HAVE TO TRY TO WORK TOGETHER TO UNDERSTAND THE SITUATIONS WE'RE GOING THROUGH. AND WE NEED TO WORK WITH THE COMMUNITY, SOME OF THESE GROUPS THAT ARE OUT THERE, WE NEED TO WORK WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS TO FIGURE OUT BECAUSE WE DO. IF WE CAN'T GET TOGETHER AND DO THAT, WE'RE GOING TO BE IN THIS TERRIBLE CONUNDRUM WHERE WE'RE NOT WORKING TOGETHER. AND I KNOW I SEE MS. HORVATH FROM THE WEST SIDE COALITION. I'LL JUST ASK YOU TO GO BACK AND TALK TO THE COALITION AND NEIGHBORS THAT WE REALLY HAVE TO TRY TO WORK TOGETHER TO DO GOOD GROWTH. I THINK WE'RE HERE TODAY BECAUSE THE DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY FEELS LIKE THERE'S HURDLES AND THERE'S OTHER PEOPLE THAT WE NEED HOUSING IN OUR COMMUNITY. AND WE REALLY JUST HAVE TO BE LEADERS AND FIGURE OUT HOW TO ADDRESS THIS. I AM GOING TO SAY ONE LAST THING ABOUT -- THERE WAS A BLOG AND THEY TALKED ABOUT A NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION LEADER. I'M NOT GOING TO READ THE WHOLE THING. I'M GOING TO READ SOMETHING ABOUT NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS. NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS WERE CREATED -- I'M GOING TO DO RATE WOULD I SAID BECAUSE I'LL LOSE MY TRAIN OF THOUGHT. CONTEMPORARY GROUPS AND BLOGS HAVE SOMETIMES FRAMED NEIGHBORHOOD OPPOSITION AS -- INCLUDING CRITICISM OF LIFELONG RESIDENTS OF HISTORIC NEIGHBORHOODS. SUCH AS THE WOMAN OF COLOR AND A NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION LEADER FROM SANTA BARBARA MARTINEZ TOWN. WHETHER YOU AGREE WITH HER OR NOT, AND SOME OF THE THINGS SHE SAYS I AGREE WITH AND DON'T AGREE WITH. FRAMING A WOMAN OF COLOR IN THIS WAY OVERLOOKS THE HISTORICAL CONTEXT OF CIVIC PARTICIPATION IN THE U.S. CITIES. MID-20th CENTURY CIVIL RIGHTS ACTIVISM AND FEDERAL POLICIES SOUGHT TO EMPOWER MARGINALED COMMUNITIES. NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS ARE THE ONLY GROUP RECOGNIZED BY MUNICIPALITIES THROUGHOUT THE NATION. NONPROFITS AREN'T, FOR PROFITS AREN'T, NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS ARE BECAUSE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS WERE AT THE TIME BEING OVERRUN BY LAND USE ISSUES IN OUR COMMUNITY. AND SO IT WAS TO CREATE SO OVER TIME THESE NEIGHBORHOODS THAT WERE BEING OVERRUN THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT SAID THEY NEED A PLACE IN LAND USE PLANNING. SO, THAT'S WHY WE HAVE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS. THEY'RE THERE FOR A REASON. WHEN WE DISCARD THEM, THAT'S NOT GOOD. BECAUSE WE'RE GOING BACK ON THE CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT THAT PASSED SO MANY YEARS AGO. BUT, MS. HORVATH, I WANT TO SAY WE ALSO HAVE TO LOOK AT THAT OVER TIME MORE FLUENT HOMEOWNER LED ASSOCIATIONS HAVE THE ACCUMULATED RESOURCES AND TECHNICAL EXER TEAS ENABLING THEM TO SHAPE THE DISCUSSION EFFECTIVELY. AND ASSOCIATIONS OF COLOR AND COMMUNITIES OF COLOR BY CONTRAST HAVE HISTORICALLY BEEN UNDERFUNDED, SO WE DON'T HAVE THE RESOURCES. WE DON'T NECESSARILY HAVE PLANNERS THAT LIVE IN THE NEIGHBORHOODS AND LAWYERS TO HELP US TO FIGHT THESE ISSUES. SOMETIMES IT COMES WITH AFFLUENT COMMUNITIES. AND SOME OF THE SAME PEOPLE THAT THESE THINGS WERE MEANT TO HELP HAVE NOT. AS YOU, WHEN YOU'RE COMING TO TALK TO US ABOUT THIS, YOU HAVE TO UNDERSTAND OUR HISTORY AS WE MOVE FORWARD AS A CITY AND GROW TOGETHER. BECAUSE I KNOW THAT MS. HORVATH AND OTHER NEIGHBORHOOD GROUPS WOULD LOVE TO SIT AT THE TABLE TO HAVE THESE DISCUSSIONS ABOUT HOW WE ADDRESS AFFORDABILITY IN OUR CITY AND I'M VERY INTERESTED IN THAT BECAUSE LIKE I SAID I HAVE 15 GRAND BABIES. I THINK FOUR OF THEM ARE IN COLLEGE. AND THEY'RE STRUGGLING WITH THE SAME THINGS THAT YOU GUYS ARE. WITH THAT, I'LL TURN IT OVER TO COUNCILOR FIEBELKORN TO CLOSE. >>COUN. FIEBELKORN: THANK YOU, MADAM PRESIDENT. I FIRST WANT TO THANK ALL THE ADVOCATES THAT WORKED SO TIRELESSLY ON THIS ISSUE. I THINK IT'S INTERESTING THAT WE SAY WE WANT TO SIT DOWN WITH THE TABLE WITH FOLKS THAT CARE ABOUT THIS ISSUE, BUT PEOPLE PARTICIPATED IN THIS PROCESS FROM BEGINNING TO THE END. NOT EVERYBODY GOT WHAT THEY WANTED. THAT'S NOT WHAT IT MEANS TO SIT AT THE TABLE. WHAT IT MEANS IS YOU HAVE INPUT. SOME OF THEM ARE JUST REGULAR PEOPLE WHO LIVE IN OUR COMMUNITY AND WANT TO MAKE IT BETTER. I DON'T THINK THEY ARE ANY LESS IMPORTANT THAN ANY NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. I DON'T THINK ANY NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS LESS IMPORTANT THAN ANYBODY ELSE. BUT WE CANNOT CONTINUE TO SAY THAT NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS HAVE ALL THE RIGHTS AND NO ONE ELSE DOES. SO, I DO WANT TO THANK THEM. I DO APPRECIATE THAT PEOPLE GAVE MANY, MANY, MANY HOURS OF THEIR LIFE ON THIS TOPIC. AND THEY GOT VERY LITTLE. I WILL REMIND EVERYONE THAT THERE ARE STILL SOME VERY GOOD THINGS IN THIS BILL. AND IT WAS NOT A WASTE OF YOUR TIME ENTIRELY. I THINK IT WAS UNFORTUNATE WHAT WE HAVE TONIGHT. YOU DID MAKE A DIFFERENCE. I APPRECIATE THAT. BECAUSE IN THE END WE DIDN'T MAKE IT EASIER TO CREATE DIGNIFIED HOUSING, BUT WE DID MAKE IT EASIER TO PUT IN A FENCE. THAT IS IMPORTANT. URGE YOUR SUPPORT. >>COUN. PEÑA: WITH THAT, WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. IT IS ACTUALLY AMENDED. DID I GET THAT RIGHT? 16 TIMES. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF O-16 -- O-26-2. PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND AND SAY YES. THOSE OPPOSED? THAT PASSES ON A 6-3. >>COUN. ROGERS: MADAM PRESIDENT, MOMENT OF PERSONAL PRIVILEGE. IT WON'T TAKE THAT LONG. I JUST NEED TO ADDRESS SOMETHING DEEPLY TROUBLING. THIS PERSON ALLOWED A PERSON TO SPEAK TO MY COMMUNITY AS COLORED. THAT IS SPEAKS TO EXCLUSION. WHEN I ASKED ABOUT A FELLOW COUNCILORS CULTURAL BACKGROUND IN THE CONTEXTUALIZE OF LIVED EXPERIENCE I WAS IMMEDIATELY CORRECTED. THE CONTRAST IS TRIKEM STRIKE -- ONE INSTANCE GIVES OUTDATED RACIAL TERM. AND OTHER SEEKS UNDERSTANDING. THERE'S A PRIVILEGE OF NEVER HAVING TO EXPLAIN WHO YOU ARE AND HAVING TO EXPLAIN YOUR HISTORY. SOME OF US DO NOT HAVE THAT PRIVILEGE. IF WE'RE GOING TO POLICE LANGUAGE, LET US DO SO CONSISTENTLY. RESPECT MUST BE IN ALL DIRECTION. THANK YOU, MADAM PRESIDENT. >>COUN. PEÑA: I'M SORRY. WE'RE ON TO ITEM 15, OTHER BUSINESS. THERE IS NONE. THERE BEING NO FURTHER BUSINESS, THIS COUNCIL MEETING IS ADJOURNED.