>> MR. PRESIDENT? AND I AM SORRY TO INTERRUPT, I'D JUST LIKE FOR THERE TO BE A LITTLE BIT MORE DISCUSSION ABOUT WHAT EXACTLY THIS BILL ENTAILS. >> MR. PRESIDENT? >> COUNCILLOR PEÑA, GO AHEAD. SO RIGHT NOW, THIS IS JUST TO GET IT ON THE AGENDA, AND WE CAN HAVE THE DISCUSSION DURING THE BILL PROCESS. I DON'T KNOW IF THE COUNCILORS WANT TO HEAR THE DISCUSSION RIGHT NOW. >> I DON'T THINK A DISCUSSION WOULD BE GERMANE AT THIS POINT. IT IS ONLY THE MATTER OF SUSPENDING THE RULES TO PUT IT ON THE AGENDA. >> CORRECT. >> AND I THINK COUNCILLOR GIBSON HAS A QUESTION. LET ME JUST SAY, THE ADMINISTRATION HAS STARTED A PUBLIC INPUT PROCESS THAT SELF-EVIDENT MONTHS LONG, BY THE TIME THERE IS SOME INPUT. I'M NOT SURE I SEE THE NEED TO DO THIS AS IMMEDIATE ACTION. I THINK IT WOULD BE TO GO THROUGH A PROCESS TO HAVE MORE PUBLIC INPUT ON THE PROCESSOR UNDERSTAND WHETHER THE COUNCILLOR O'MALLEY HAS A ROLE HERE OR NOT. SO I'M INCLINED TO VOTE NO, ONLY BECAUSE I THINK WE CAN GO THROUGH REGULAR WORK FOR THIS. BUT I'M OPEN TO HEARING OTHER DISCUSSION. I SEE COUNCILLOR GIBSON AND OF COURSE, I RECOGNIZE THE SPONSOR, ANY TIME SHE WANT TO RESPOND. BUT QUICKLY, WE WILL MOVE TO COUNCILLOR GIBSON FOR HER COMMENT. >> THANK YOU, MR. PRESIDENT. JUST A POINT OF ORDER HERE. IN ORDER TO DISCUSS THE BILL, WE NEED TO HAVE IT -- YOU KNOW, WE NEED TO MAKE A DECISION ON WHETHER OR NOT WE WANT TO DISCUSS THE BILL, AND THAT'S WHAT THE MOTION IS. I'LL LEAVE IT TO YOU TO MOVE US ALONG HERE, MR. PRESIDENT. >> AGREED. JUST AS A REMINDER, IF THE VOTE, TWO-THIRDS OF THE COUNCILORS DON'T AGREE TO HEAR THIS AS IMMEDIATE ACTION, IT WILL AGREE TO THE FINANCE AND GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS COMMITTEE, WHICH MEETS NEXT WEEK. SO OTHER COMMENTS OR DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION TO SUSPEND THE RULES FOR IMMEDIATE ACTION? SEEING NONE, I'LL ASK MS. ORTEGA TO CALL THE ROLL. >> NO. >> YES. >> NO. >> Coun. Gibson: YES. >> Coun. Harris: YES. >> Coun. Jones: YES. >> Coun. Peña: YES COUNCILOR SENA: >> YES. >> Coun. Davis: NO. >> THAT PASS OS AND 6-3 VOTE FOR IMMEDIATE ACTION TO PLACE IT ON TONIGHT'S AGENDA. >> THAT WILL BE CONSIDERED IN OUR AGENDA LATER THIS EVENING. COUNCILLOR PEÑA, YOU ALSO HAVE R-85. >> THANK YOU, MR. PRESIDENT. I MOVE. THAT THE RULES BE SUSPENDED FOR THE PURPOSE OF PLACING R-85 ON TODAY'S AGENDA FOR FINAL ACTION. THIS IS IS UP LEADERSHIP MEANTING PRIORITIES FOR THE CAPITAL IMPLEMENTATION PROGRAM OF THE CITY OF ALBUQUERQUE BY IMPLEMENTING A RACIAL EQUALITY CRITERIA TO BE USED IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE PLAN, AND AGAIN THIS, CALLS FOR A TWO-THIRDS VOTE TO HAVE A DISCUSSION. I KNOW COUNCILLOR BENTON HAS SUGGESTED THIS IN THE PAST. I THINK THERE IS REALLY KIND OF SOLIDIFIES US MOVING FORWARD. >> THANK YOU, COUNCILLOR PEÑA. I PLEASE BELIEVE I SEE COUNCILOR SENA AS A SECOND. THANK YOU FOR THAT CLARIFICATION. I SAY COUNCILLOR GIBSON AND COUNCILLOR BORREGO FOR DISCUSSION. >> Coun. Benton: THANK YOU, MR. PRESIDENT. COUNCILLOR PEÑA IS CORRECT, THE AMENDMENT THAT I SPONSORED IS REFERENCED IN HER BILL, AND I'M CERTAINLY INTERESTED IN IT. I THINK THIS IS PRETTY NECESSARY LEGISLATION, AND FOR THAT REASON, I CAN'T SUPPORT IT BEING HEARD TONIGHT. BUT I DID WANT TO ASK PROCEDURALLY WHAT COMMITTEE I WOULD ASSUME THIS WOULD GO TO FCO IF IT IS NOT HEARD TONIGHT. IS THAT CORRECT? >> THANKS, COUNCILLOR BENTON. I HAD REFERRED IT TO THE COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE BECAUSE IT IS A PART OF OUR BUDGET, BUT SINCE THE CIP WOULDN'T COME TO OUR COUNCIL UNTIL EARLY 20 IT 1, IT SEEMED LIKE COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE WOULD BE BETTER SUITED. SO IT SEEMED CONSISTENT WITH OUR PRIOR PRACTICE IN THIS AREA. I'M OPEN TO OTHER IDEAS, AND THE RULES WOULD ALLOW US TO CHANGE THAT IF THE COUNCIL SO CHOSE. >> Coun. Benton: MR. PRESIDENT, AS STATED, IN PRINCIPLE, I'M VERY INTERESTED IN THIS TOPIC, BUT I DO THINK IT IS FAIRLY COMPLEX, WHAT SORT OF PROCEDURE WOULD BE PUT IN PLACE TO IMPLEMENT THIS. AND THAT WOULD BE MY RELUCTANCE FOR IMMEDIATE ACTION TONIGHT. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU, COUNCILLOR BENTON, AND I AGREE, IT NEEDS REAL VETTING, BUT I THINK IT COULD BE MOMENTOUS IN THE WAY WE DO IT. COUNCILLOR BORREGO FOR DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION. >> Coun. Borrego: THANK YOU, MR. PRESIDENT. MY QUESTION FOR THIS PROCESS, I THINK THIS IS A GREAT IDEA, ACTUALLY, BUT WHAT I WANTED TO KNOW IS WHEN THE SPONSOR WAS LOOKING TO PUT THIS IN THE NEXT CYCLE OF THE CIP PROCESS, OR IS THIS FOR NEXT YEAR? I WASN'T CLEAR ON THAT. >> IT WOULD BE FOR THE NEXT CYCLE AND MOVING FORWARD IN HISTORY. I THINK THIS IS PART OF, WITHOUT HAVING LOTS OF DISCUSSION, I THINK THIS IS PART OF THE WHOLE NATIONAL MOVEMENT RIGHT NOW ABOUT INEQUITY IN OUR COMMUNITIES AND UNDER SERVED COMMUNITIES, AND THIS WOULD ACTUALLY SET FORTH A POLICY THAT WE REALLY HAVE TO LOOK AT IT FROM THAT LENS MOVING FORWARD. >> COUNCILLOR BORREGO, ANY FOLLOW-UP IN. >> Coun. Borrego: NO, I THINK THE CIP PROCESS HAS JUST BEGUN, AND THAT'S WHAT I'M ASKING. I THINK IT ACTUALLY BEGINS NOW IN SEPTEMBER, AND SO IF WE PASS THIS TONIGHT, THEN THEY WOULD HAVE TO IMPLEMENT IT IN THEIR CYCLE AS THEY MOVE FORWARD. AM I CORRECT IN THAT? >> YES, COUNCILLOR BORREGO, AND THAT'S THE REASON FOR THE URGENCY, BECAUSE I THINK WHEN, EVEN WHEN COUNCILLOR BENTON PROPOSED IT IN THE PAST, IT WAS DURING THE TIME WHEN THE COUNCIL WAS LOOKING AT THE BUDGET, AND IF I THINK -- I THINK IT REALLY GIVES DIRECTION TO THE ADMINISTRATION TO LOOK AT THE BUDGET BEFORE IT EVEN COMES TO US AND MAKE THOSE DECISIONS VIA THE DEPARTMENTS, SO BY THE TIME IT GETS TO US, WE ARE KIND OF JUST -- YOU KNOW, ALL OF US ARE ALL JOCKEYING FOR OUR DISTRICTS, WHICH IS IMPORTANT, AND I THINK THAT REALLY IT GIVES US A BETTER OPPORTUNITY TO SEE THE BUDGET FROM THE ADMINISTRATION'S PERSPECTIVE ON HOW IT LOOKS AT EQUITY AND THEN WHEN IT'S GIVEN TO US, WE HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE THOSE ADJUSTMENTS AS NEEDED. >> THANK YOU, COUNCILORS. OF SEEING NO OTHER DISCUSSION, THE MOTION ON THE FLOOR IS TO SUSPEND THE RULES TO ALLOW FOR IMMEDIATE ACTION ON THIS ITEM FOR TONIGHT. MS. ORTEGA, CALL THE ROLL. >> YES. >> Coun. Benton: NO. >> Coun. Borrego: YES. >> Coun. Gibson: NO. >> Coun. Harris: YES. >> Coun. Jones: NO. >> Coun. Peña: YES. COUNCILOR SENA: >> YES. >> Coun. Davis: NO. >> THAT FAILS ON A 5-4 VOTE. IT REQUIRES SIX. >> THANK YOU, COUNCILORS. SO THAT ITEM WILL BE HEARD AT THE COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE AT ITS NEXT REGULARLY SCHEDULED MEETING. COUNCILLOR BENTON, R-87. >> Coun. Benton: THANK YOU, MR. PRESIDENT. I MOVE THE RULES BE SUSPENDED FOR THE PURPOSE OF PLACING R-87 ON TONIGHT EAS AGENDA FOR FILE ACTION. R-87 IS DIRECTING THE ADMINISTRATION TO EXPAND THE ACTIVE STREETS INITIATIVE ESTABLISHED BY R-20-59, AND ALSO FACILITATE SAFE SOCIALLY DISTANCED OUTDOOR FOOD AND COMMERCIAL BEVERAGE OPPORTUNITIES ON CERTAIN STREETS, DURING THE PRESENT PUBLIC HEALTH EMERGENCY. >> THANK YOU. I BELIEVE COUNCILLOR BORREGO IS THE SECOND FOR THAT. COUNCILORS, ANY DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE, LOOKS LIKE -- NO, THAT ONE IS GONE. SEEING NONE, MS. ORTEGA FOR THE ROLL. >> YES. >> Coun. Benton: YES. >> Coun. Borrego: YES. >> Coun. Gibson: YES. >> Coun. Harris: YES. >> Coun. Jones: YES. >> Coun. Peña: YES. COUNCILOR SENA: YES. >> Coun. Sanchez: YES. >> MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. >> THANK YOU, MADAM CLERK. AND COUNCILOR SENA, I BELIEVE YOU HAVE THE LAST ONE. >> I MOVE THAT THE RIEWS BE SUSPENDED FOR THE PURPOSE OF INTRODUCING R-88 AND PLACING IT ON THE AUGUST 17th COUNCILLOR O'MALLEY AGENDA FOR FILE ACTION. R-88 IS CALLING FOR A STAY OF ENFORCEMENT ON THE PROHIBITION OF MOBILE FOOD TRUCKS AND MOBILE VENDING CARDS IN THE NRPOA ZONE. >> I THINK COUNCILOR JONES IS GOING TO OFFER THE SECOND FOR THIS MOTION. ANY DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION TO PLACE IT ON THE AUGUST 17th AGENDA? SEEING NONE, MS. ORTEGA. >> YES. >> Coun. Benton: YES. >> Coun. Borrego: YES. >> Coun. Gibson: YES. >> Coun. Harris: YES. >> Coun. Jones: YES. >> Coun. Peña: YES. COUNCILOR SENA: YES. >> Coun. Davis: YES. >> MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. >> THANK YOU, COUNCILORS. ANY OTHER MOTIONS OR CHANGES TO THE LETTER OF INTRODUCTION? SEEING NONE, COUNCILLOR GIBSON, YOU HAVE A MOTION. >> Coun. Gibson: I MOVE APPROVAL OF THE LETTER OF INTRODUCTION. >> Coun. Davis: THANK YOU, COUNCILLOR BORREGO, FOR THE SECOND. AND MS. ORTEGA, ROLL ALL. >> YES. >> Coun. Benton: YES. >> Coun. Borrego: YES. >> Coun. Gibson: YES. >> Coun. Harris: YES. >> Coun. Jones: YES. >> Coun. Peña: YES. COUNCILOR SENA: YES. >> Coun. Davis: YES. >> THANK YOU. >> Coun. Davis: THANK YOU, MADAM CLERK, AND THANK YOU, COUNCILORS, FOR WORKING THROUGH THOSE. REPORTS OF COMMITTEE, COUNCILOR SEND THAT, YOU'RE UP FIRST. >> THE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE MET ON THURSDAY, JULY 16, 2020, AND REPORTS OUT THE FOLLOWING ITEMS. IN THE MATTER OF M-3 THAT, IT BE WITHOUT RECOMMENDATION AS AMENDED. IN THE MATTER OF R-65, THAT IT DO PASS. I MAKE A MOTION TO ACCEPT THE COMMITTEE REPORT. >> Coun. Davis: WE HAVE A SECOND, THANK YOU, COUNCILOR. ANY DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE, CALL THE ROLL. >> YES. >> Coun. Benton: YES. >> Coun. Borrego: YES. >> Coun. Gibson: YES. >> Coun. Harris: YES. >> Coun. Jones: YES. >> Coun. Peña: YES. MUCH COUNCILOR SENA: YES. >> Coun. Davis: YES. >> THANK YOU, 9-0. >> Coun. Davis: THANK YOU, COUNCILORS MUCH MOVING ON, WITHDRAWALS. FOR FOLKS FOLLOWING AROUND, THIS IS OR LAST PIECE OF ADMINISTRATION WORK AND THEN WE WILL GET INTO SOME ACTIONS AND OTHER ITEMS. DEFENSOR AND WITHDRAWALS. COUNCILLOR HARRIS. >> Coun. Harris: I DON'T HAVE MY SCRIPT WITH ME, SORRY. >> Coun. Davis: I THINK YOUR MOTION, COUNCILLOR HARRIS, WAS RELATED TO E-436, THE -- I ME YOU WERE RECOMMENDING SUSPENDING THE RULES FOR EC, AND DEFERRING THE MATTER TO THE OCTOBER 5th MATTER. >> Coun. Harris: THAT'S EXACTLY RIGHT, MR. PRESIDENT, THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU THE CLERK FOR THAT. COUNCILOR JONES, THANK YOU FOR THE SECOND. WE NEED TWO-THIRDS VOTE TO APPROVE COUNCILLOR HARRIS'S MOTION. >> YES. >> Coun. Benton: YES. >> Coun. Borrego: YES. >> Coun. Gibson: YES. >> Coun. Harris: YES. >> Coun. Jones: YES. >> Coun. Peña: YES. COUNCILOR SENA: YES. >> Coun. Davis: YES. >> THANK YOU. 9-0. >> Coun. Davis: MOVING FROM THE SOUTHEAST SIDE TO THE SOUTHWEST SIDE, COUNCILLOR PEÑA FROM THE SOUTHWEST AREA. >> Coun. Peña: THANK YOU, MR. PRESIDENT. R-178 IS AMENDED THE ADOPTED CIP PROGRAM FROM THE CITY OF ALBUQUERQUE BY SUPPLEMENTING AN APPROPRIATIONS FOR THE SPACE ACQUISITION. I MOVE THAT THE RULES BE SUSPENDED FOR THE PURPOSE OF PREVENTING R-178 FROM EXPIRING, AND EXTENDING THE EXPIRE STATION UNTIL SEPTEMBER 2nd AND HEARING THIS PARTY ON SEPTEMBER 9th. >> Coun. Davis: I SAW SEVERAL -- ANY DISCUSSION. SEEING NONE? CALL THE ROLL. >> YES. >> Coun. Benton: YES. >> Coun. Borrego: YES. >> Coun. Gibson: YES. >> Coun. Harris: YES. >> Coun. Jones: YES. >> Coun. Peña: YES. COUNCILOR SENA: YES. >> Coun. Davis: YES. >> UNANIMOUS, THANK YOU. >> Coun. Davis: COUNCILLOR PEÑA, I THINK YOU'RE DOING THE NEXT ONE AS WELL. >> Coun. Peña: YES. THIS IS A COMMITTEE SUB. R-189. AMENDING THE COMP POSITION OF THE BOARD OF HOUSING AUTHORITY. I MOVE TO AUGUST 17th. >> Coun. Davis: ANY DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE. MS. ORTEGA. >> YES. >> Coun. Benton: YES. >> Coun. Borrego: YES. >> Coun. Gibson: YES. >> Coun. Harris: YES. >> Coun. Jones: YES. >> Coun. Peña: YES. COUNCILOR SENA: YES. >> Coun. Davis: YES. >> 9-30, THANK -- 9-0, THANK YOU. >> Coun. Davis: COUNCILLOR BENTON, I BELIEVE YOU'RE NEXT. >> Coun. Benton: MR. PRESIDENT, THIS IS ON R-47, APPROPRIATING FUNDS TO IMPLEMENT THE THIRD PHASE OF THE TRANSPORTATION TAX AND MANY IMPLEMENTING THE CAPITALIZATION PROGRAM OF THE CITY. I MOVE DEFERRAL UNTIL AUGUST 17th. >> Coun. Davis: THANK YOU FOR THE SECOND, COUNCILLOR BORREGO, SEEING NO DISCUSSION, CALL THE ROLL. >> COUNSELOR BAZZAN: YES. >> Coun. Benton: YES. >> Coun. Borrego: YES. >> Coun. Gibson: YES. >> Coun. Harris: YES. >> Coun. Jones: YES. >> Coun. Peña: YES. >> COUNCILOR SENA: YES. >> Coun. Davis: YES. >> 9-0, THANKS. >> Coun. Davis: COUNCILLOR BENTON, I BELIEVE -- COUNCILLOR HARRIS, I BELIEVE YOU HAVE SOME. >> Coun. Harris: RENAME BEING THE FOUR HILLS HAD PARK AND PARK, FOR FORM CERTIFICATE LEADERS WHO CHAMPIONED THE AREA OF THE CITY. I MOVE TO OCTOBER 5th. MANY. >> Coun. Davis: DISCUSSION. MS. ORTEGA. >> COUNCILLOR O'MALLEY LOWER BAZZAN: YES. >> Coun. Benton: YES. >> Coun. Borrego: YES. >> Coun. Gibson: YES. >> Coun. Harris: YES. >> Coun. Jones: YES. >> Coun. Peña: YES. >> COUNCILOR SENA: YES. >> Coun. Davis: YES. >> 9-0. >> Coun. Davis: COUNCILLOR HARRIS, ONE MORE. M-1. >> Coun. Harris: THIS IS UNITED STATES CONGRESS TO AMEND THE NATIONAL TRAILS -- (INAUDIBLE) I MOVE DEFERRAL TO OCTOBER 5th. >> Coun. Davis: ANY DISCUSSION, SEEINGS NONE, MADAM CLERK -- I'M SORRY, COUNCILLOR PEÑA, DID YOU HAVE A QUESTION OR ARE YOU OFFERING A SECOND? COUNCILOR BAZZAN I BELIEVE IS ASKING A QUESTION. GO AHEAD. >> I'M JUST CURIOUS WHY WE ARE DEFERRING THIS. IT SEEMS LIKE A GREAT IDEA, AND I JUST WONDER WHAT SORT OF THE RATIONAL IS. >> (INAUDIBLE). >> Coun. Davis: ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? I'M SORRY I CUT THAT OFF. DON'T BE AWE GRADE TO YELL AT ME. -- DON'T BE AFRAID TO YELL AT ME. GO AHEAD AND CALL THE ITEM. >> COUNCILOR BAZZAN: YES. >> Coun. Benton: YES. >> Coun. Borrego: YES. >> Coun. Gibson: YES. >> Coun. Harris: YES. >> Coun. Jones: YES. >> Coun. Peña: YES. >> COUNCILOR SENA: YES. >> Coun. Davis: YES. >> THANK YOU FOR ALL WORKING THROUGH THAT. L ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR DEFENSOR? FOR DEFERRALS? SEEING NONE, TONIGHT WE DON'T HAVE ANY CONSENT ITEMS. FOR THOSE OF YOU WATCHING TO SEE WHERE YOUR APPOINTMENT MIGHT BE IN THE PROCESS, WATCH NEXT WEEK, I THINK WE WILL HAVE A LOT OF THEM COMING TO US. OR IN TWO WEEKS ORANGES THE 17th. NEXT UP IS GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT. AS WE MENTIONED EARLIER, WE TAKE PUBLIC COMMENT CURRENTLY BY WRITTEN COMMENT, AND THOSE WERE PROVIDED TO THE COUNCILORS, AND AGAIN, AT OUR NEXT MEETING ON THE 17th, WE INTEND TO PUT OUT A PROCESS TO ALLOW PEOPLE TO PARTICIPATE BY ZOOM OR BY PHONE TO PROVIDE US PUBLIC COMMENT. SO WATCH FOR OUR AGENDA AND THOSE RULES AHEAD OF THAT MEETING. NEXT UP WE ARE MOVING TO ANNOUNCEMENTS. IF YOU HAVE AN ANNOUNCEMENT, WE WILL LET YOU GET IN TWO HERE. WE WILL START WITH COUNCILLOR BENTON. >> Coun. Benton: MR. PRESIDENT, THERE WILL BE A RAIL YARDS ADVISORY BOARD MEETINGS ON WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 5th, AT 8:30 A.M., VIA ZOOM VIDEO CONFERENCE, AND MR. PRESIDENT, WE DID MISS OUR LAST REGULARLY SCHEDULED. WE HAVE THREE MEETINGS A YEAR OF THE RAIL YARDS ADVISORY BOARD. WE DID MISS THAT AFTER THE PANDEMIC TOOK OFF. SO WE WILL HAVE A LOT OF GOOD UPDATES ON WHAT'S GOING ON AT THE RAIL YARDS. >> Coun. Davis: THANK YOU. >> Coun. Gibson: MR. PRESIDENT HAD THERE WILL BE A FINANCE AND GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS COMMITTEE MEETING ON MONDAY, AUGUST 10, AT 5:00 P.M., VIA ZOOM VIDEO CONFERENCE. >> Coun. Davis: THANK YOU, MA'AM. >> Coun. Jones: THANK YOU HAD MR. PRESIDENT. THERE WILL BE A LAND USE PLANNING & ZONING COMMITTEE MEETING ON WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 12, AT 5:00 P.M., VIA ZOOM VIDEO CONFERENCE. >> Coun. Davis: THANK YOU, MA'AM. AND THERE WILL BE AN INTERNAL OPERATIONS COMMITTEE MEETING ON WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 5th, AT 3:00 P.M., VIA ZOOM VIDEO CONFERENCE. NEXT IN OUR AGENDA IS PUBLIC HEARINGS. WE HAVE TWO ITEMS TONIGHT ON THE AGENDA FOR APPEALS, BUT THEY ARE BOTH RELATED AND WE WILL BE TAKING THEM IN DISCUSSION. BUT BEFORE WE DO THAT, WE HAVE TWO COUNCILORS WHO NEED TO MAKE AN ANNOUNCEMENT AND I'LL START WITH COUNSELOR SENA. >> THANK YOU, MR. PRESIDENT. BECAUSE I BELIEVE IN A FAIR JUDICIAL PROCESS AND THE INTEGRITY OF THE DECISIONS BEFORE COUNCIL, I WILL BE RECUSING MYSELF, AND I HAVE RECUSED MYSELF IN THE MATTERS OF THE FULL PROPERTY DECISION BECAUSE OF MY PRIOR INVOLVEMENT AS A NEIGHBORHOOD LEADER, FIGHTING THE APPEAL, AND BECAUSE OF THAT, I AM BE RECUSING MYSELF FROM THAT DECISION. THANK YOU, MR. PRESIDENT. >> Coun. Davis: THANK YOU. THE RECORD WILL REFLECT THAT YOU RECUSED YOURSELF FROM THESE MATTERS. COUNCILLOR BORREGO, I BELIEVE YOU HAVE AN ANNOUNCEMENT. >> Coun. Borrego: (INAUDIBLE). >> Coun. Davis: COUNCILLOR BORREGO IS GOING TO JOIN US HERE LIVE. GO AHEAD. >> Coun. Borrego: THANK YOU, COUNCILORS. I'M HAVING SOME TECHNICAL DIFFICULTIES WITH MY CONNECTION. SO I HAVE A A STATEMENT. I ALSO SERVE AS THE DIRECTOR OF THE AMAFCA BOARD, AND REPRESENTING A LARGE SWATH OF ALBUQUERQUE'S WEST SIDE, WHICH INCLUDES DISTRICT 5, COUNCILOR SENA'S DISTRICT AND COUNCILLOR PEÑA'S DISTRICT. THIS APPEAL DEALS WITH LAND THAT IS SUBJECT TO AN AMAFCA EASEMENT AND DEDICATION OF OPEN SPACE. WITHOUT TAKING A POSITION ON THE USE OF THAT EASEMENT FOR OPEN SPACE AS PART OF THIS APPEAL, AS DISCUSSIONS WITH AMAFCA ENGINEERING AND LEGAL STAFF, AND THE CITY COUNCIL CITY ATTORNEY, I DETERMINED THAT I SHOULD RECUSE MYSELF FROM THIS VOTE TO AVOID ANY POTENTIAL CONFLICTS IN MY DUAL ROLLS. -- ROLES. >> Coun. Davis: THANK YOU. THE L RECORD WILL REFLECT THAT COUNCILLOR BORREGO HAS RECUSED HERSELF FROM THESE MATTERS. I'LL ASK THE MODERATOR TO TAKE BOTH OF THOSE COUNCILORS OUT OF THIS DISCUSSION AND PUT THEM IN A WAITING ROOM. SO THE FIRST ITEM UP TONIGHT, AND I'LL INTRODUCE THEM BOTH AND ASK MR. MELENDREZ TO GIVE US A SUMMARY EACH. EC-20-4, THOMAS GULLY APPEALS THE DECISION OF THE EPC, APPEAR NEXT IS EC-20-5, AND THE YNETNA LAW FIRM, WHO APPEALS THE ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING COMMISSION. EXPLAIN THE APPEALS AND REMIND US THE RULINGS RELATING TO THE COUNCILORS ABILITY TO ENGAGE OR READ OR PARTICIPATE IN PUBLIC COMMENT. >> THANK YOU, MR. PRESIDENT, COUNCILORS. THESE MATTERS ARE NOT GENERAL LEGISLATIVE BUSINESS AS USUAL BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL, AND THAT'S LARGELY THE REASON WHY WE SOUTH TO RE-- SOUGHT TO RECUSE THEM BEFORE. THE CITY COUNCIL HAS TO BE LIMITED TO THE MATERIAL THAT'S IN THE RECORD. THERE IS A FORMAL PROCESS THROUGH WHICH INFORMATION COMES INTO THAT RECORD IN THE FORM OF HEARINGS, AND THESE ARE ALL THE LEGAL REQUIREMENTS RELATED TO THE CITY COUNCIL'S REVIEW OF THESE MATTERS. CITY COUNCIL OF SITS IN JUDGMENT OF THIS TYPE OF APPEAL, NOT AS A LEGISLATOR, WITH YOU MORE AS A -- BUT MORE AS A JUDGE, LIKE A DECISION MAKER, BASED ON EVIDENCE, RULES, AND SPECIFIC FINDINGS. FOR THAT REASON, WE DID GET SOME COMMENTS IN OUR PUBLIC COMMENTS THAT CAME IN THROUGH THE E-MAIL SYSTEM, AND WHEN WE GET THAT TYPE OF INFORMATION FOR THIS TYPE OF APPEAL, IT IS COLLECTED, AND MADE A PART OF THE RECORD, BUT SEPARATE FROM THE MATERIAL THAT IS PRESENTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL, BECAUSE IT DOES NOT COME IN THROUGH THE APPROPRIATE FORMAL PROCESS. SO THE COUNCIL IS GENERALLY PROHIBITD FROM EX PARTE CONTACTS WITH PEOPLE ABOUT THESE TYPE OF APPEALS IN ADVANCE OF THEIR DECISION MAKING ON THEM. WITH THAT, I'LL GIVE A BRIEF OVERVIEW OF THESE MATTERS. AC 4 AND 5 ARE BOTH RELATED. THEY ISSUE IN THE APPEAL IS WHETHER THE ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING EXAMINATION LARKED IN APPROVING A SITE PLAN FOR A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENT HAD DEVELOPMENT ON APPROXIMATELY 22 ACRES ADJACENT TO THE CITY'S SAN ANTONIO OXBOW OPEN SPACE. THIS MATTER CAME TO THE COUNCILLOR O'MALLEY BRIEFLY IN AC 6 AND 7, AND THOSE APPEALS RESULTED IN A REMAND TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING COMMISSION TO ADDRESS CERTAIN ISSUES, TO REVIEW OR REVISE THE VIET CABQ.gov/ PLAN THAT MORE CLOSELY REFREQUENTED THE CITY COUNCIL INTERPRETATION OF CLUSTER DEVELOPMENT DESIGN WITH INTEGRATED DEVELOPMENT L ORDINANCE. IN ADDITION, THE CITY COUNCIL ASKED THE ECP TO REVIEW WHETHER OR NOT AREAS DEDICATED TO AMAFCA ARE PERMISSIBLE FOR USE AS OPEN SPACE, AND ENSURE THAT SET BACKS WERE SET FOR CLUSTER DEVELOPMENT, AND TO ENSURE THAT THE PROCEDURE WAS CORRECT THAT THE EPC FOLLOWED. THERE IS NO FINDING THAT THE EPC THE FIRST TIME AROUND WAS FLAWED, BUT THERE WAS PLANNING ADDED BY THE COUNCIL JUST FOR SAFEKEEPING, I SUPPOSE, TO MAKE SURE THAT THE EPC RECORD WAS DONE CORRECTLY. WITH THAT REMAND, THE MATTER DID GO BACK TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL HAD PLANNING COMMISSION, IT WAS ADDRESSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL AND APPROVED A SITE PLAN, ISSUED A 12 PAGE NOTICE OF DECISION LETTER, AND THAT MATTER WAS APPEALED TO THE CITY COUNCIL, REFERRED TO THE LAND USE HEARING OFFICER, THE LAND USE HEARING OFFICER REVIEWED THIS AND DETERMINED THAT THE EPC DID HAVE SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE FOR ITS FINDINGS AND APPEARS TO HAVE SOLVED THE REMAND INSTRUCTIONS. IN THE INTER LIMB, THE APPLICANT FOR THE SUBDIVISION DID RESUBMIT A SITE PLAN. THE SITE PLAN THAT CAME BEFORE THE COUNCIL PREVIOUSLY HAD 76 PLOTS, AND THE REVISED HAD 69, AND CLEARER DELINEATION BETWEEN THE CLUSTERS IN THE FORM OF AN OPEN SPACE DEDICATION. THE LUHO AGAIN DETERMINED THAT THE EPC DID NOT ERR AND THE SITE PLAN SHOULD BE APPROVED. YOU WILL NOT HEAR FROM THE PARTIES THIS EVENING. YOU WILL MAKE A DECISION TONIGHT ONLY WHETHER TO ACCEPT OR REJECT THAT RECOMMENDATION FROM THE LAND USE HEARING OFFICER. I WILL DO MY BEST TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU HAVE. AND IF I CANNOT SATISFY ALL YOUR QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS THIS EVENING, YOU WILL REJECT THE LAND USE HEARING OFFICERS RECOMMENDATION AND SCHEDULED THIS FOR A LITTER HEARING, WHERE YOU WILL HEAR FROM THE PARTIES. >> Coun. Davis: THANK YOU. AND JUST AS A MATTER OF HOUSEKEEPING, CAN YOU REMIND US THROUGH THE ORDINANCE, WE NOW HAVE SEVEN COUNCILORS THAT CAN SIT IN THIS HEARING. IS THE MAJORITY HERE FOUR VOTES, A SIMPLE MAJORITY, OR IS THERE A REQUIRED MAJORITY? >> MR. PRESIDENT, IT DEPENDS ON THE MOTION. ADDING AN ADDITIONAL WRIMPG L HERE, THE I -- WRINKLE HERE, THE IDO SETS REQUIREMENTS FOR VOTING PROCEDURES, AND SO DOES STATE LAW, BUT SPECIFICALLY, THE IDO STATES THAT TO ACCEPT OR REJECT THE LUHO RECOMMENDATION, THAT A MAJORITY OF THE MEMBERSHIP OF THE COUNCIL IS REQUIRED. SO EITHER MOTION TO SUCCEED, THEN FIVE VOTE WOULD BE REQUIRED TO ACCEPT OR REJECT, EVEN THOUGH WE HAVE RECUSALS, BECAUSE OF THAT REQUIREMENT THAT A MAJORITY OF THE MEMBERSHIP, WHICH REFERS TO A MAJORITY OF THE BODY WHETHER THEY ARE SITTING OR NOT. >> Coun. Davis: JUST TO RIGHT MINE US, THE OTHER OPTION FOR THE COUNCIL IS ANOTHER REMAND BACK TO THE EPC, AND THAT CAN BE SATISFIED BY THE MAJORITY OF THOSE SITTING; IS THAT RIGHT? >> MR. PRESIDENT, THE REQUIREMENT TO ACCEPT OR REJECT REQUIRES A MAJORITY OF FIVE. OTHER ACTIONS, OTHER THAN ACCEPT OR REJECTION, WOULD BE SIMPLE MAJORITY. >> Coun. Davis: THANK YOU, WANTED TO GET THAT ON THE RECORD, SO WE KNOW WHAT THE RULES ARE. COUNCILORS, AT THIS POINT, WE WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION. THE OPTIONS AVAILABLE BEFORE THE COUNCIL ARE TO ACCEPT THE LUHO RECOMMENDATIONS AND FINDINGS, WHICH WOULD APPROVE ESSENTIALLY THE SITE PLAN, ACCEPT THE LUHO RECOMMENDATIONS ABOUT DIFFERENT FINDS THAT WOULD ALSO APPROVE THE PLAN, OR REJECT THE LUHO RECOMMENDATIONS. THAT WE REQUIRE A FULL HEARING AT OUR NEXT CITY COUNCIL MEETING ON THE 17th. OR REMAND BACK TO THE EPC. WE WILL TAKE YOU THROUGH THESE ITEMS ONE BY ONE, WHILE THE DISCUSSION CAN BE HAD ABOUT BOTH. FOR PURPOSES OF DISCUSSION, I'LL BE ENTERTAIN A MOTION ON EC-4. COUNCILOR JONES. >> Coun. Jones: THANK YOU, MR. PRESIDENT. I MAKE A MOTION TO ACCEPT THE LUHO RECOMMENDATION. >> Coun. Davis: THANK YOU, COUNCILOR JONES. I THINK COUNCILOR BAZZAN IS OFFERING A SECOND THERE. I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO ACCEPT THE LUHO REALSES AND FINDINGS WHICH WOULD APPROVE THE SITE PLAN. COUNCILORS, DISCUSSION ON THIS ITEM. >> Coun. Benton: THANK YOU, MR. PRESIDENT. I READ SOMEWHERE IN SOME PART OF THE STAFF WRITE UP SOMETHING ABOUT COOL PROPERTY FATIGUE. I HOPE WE ARE NOT SUFFERING FROM THAT AS COUNCIL TODAY. THIS IS A LANDMARK TYPE DECISION, IN A SENSE. THIS IS THE FIRST TIME THAT A LAND USE APPLICATION, AND CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, MR. MELENDREZ, IT IS FIRST TIME A LAND USE APPLICATION HAS COME FORWARD UNDER THE NEW PROVISIONS OF THE IDO THAT GIVE SPECIAL CONSIDERATION FOR DEVELOPMENT ADJACENT TO PUBLIC OPEN SPACE. THAT'S PRETTY IMPORTANT. AM I RIGHT ABOUT THAT? I THINK THIS IS FIRST ONE. >> WE HAVE HAD IET PLANS COME BEFORE THE COUNCIL BEFORE, BUT THIS IS FIRST CLUSTER CONCEPT THAT HAS COME THAT IS ADJACENT. >> Coun. Benton: THANK YOU. I FIND THIS TO BE VERY COMPLEX. I HAVE READ THE LUHO RECORD. I HAVE NOT BEEN ABLE TO DELVE INTO THE EPC RECORD, AS WELL AS I WOULD LIKE. I'VE HAD SOME DIFFICULTIES WITH THAT BEING AVAILABLE. OF AT THIS POINT, I CANNOT VOTE FOR THIS MOTION. I DO FEEL AS PAINSTAKING AS IT IS GOING TO BE THAT WE NEED TO HEAR THIS APPEAL. THANK YOU, MR. PRESIDENT. >> Coun. Davis: THANK YOU, COUNCILLOR BENTON. WE WILL CONTINUE THE DISCUSSION AND I WILL OFFER MY OWN COMMENTS. I AGREE WITH COUNCILLOR BENTON. THIS IS SORT OF A DE NOVO ISSUE ANOTHER US. NON LAWYER, I AM USING LEGAL TERMS. I THINK THIS IS A NEW ISSUE FOR US. PART CHALLENGE HERE IS THAT WHEN THE COUNCIL SEPTEMBER THIS BACK TO EPC, IT WAS PART OF THE EPC'S JOB TO INTERPRET OUR REMAPPED INSTRUCTIONS AND IN DOING SO ONE OF THE THINGS THAT THEY FOUND WAS THAT NOTHING IN THE IDO EXPRESSLY PROHIBITS THE HAD DEPICTION OF TWO DEVELOPMENT CLUSTERS IN THE SITE PLAN, BUT I ALSO FAILED TO SEE IN THE RECORD THAT THERE WAS AN EXPLICIT AUTHORIZATION FOR THE WAY THAT THE CLUSTERING WAS DESIGNED OR THE WAY THAT THE PROPERTY WAS OUTLINED, AND ESSENTIALLY, THAT WE LEFT IT TO THE EPC TO DECIDE IF THE SITE PLAN SATISFIED THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE IDO, THE COMP PLAN, AND THE COUNCIL'S REMAND INSTRUCTIONS AND NOT ALL OF THOSE ARE AS SIMPLE AS JUST, OR AS PLAIN AS SIMPLE AS IT MIGHT SEEM. AND BECAUSE THIS IS THE IDO, AND WHATEVER WE DECIDE TO DO HERE DOES SEEPTIONLY CREATE NEW CASE LAW GOING FORWARD THAT, OTHERS WILL RELY ON IN THE FUTURE, I THINK THIS IS IMPORTANT ENOUGH THAT THIS COUNCIL SHOULD BE HOLDING A FULL HEARING. I WILL JOIN COUNCILLOR BENTON FOR A MOTION TO HEAR IT AT THE NEXT MEETING. COUNCILLOR PEÑA, GO AHEAD. >> Coun. Peña: THANK YOU, MR. PRESIDENT. I HAVE A QUESTION. I DON'T KNOW WHAT I CAN ASK OR NOT ASK OF MR. MELENDREZ. JUST MY CONCERN HERE IS, YOU KNOW, I DON'T KNOW IF IT IS FATIGUE OR WHATNOT, BUT CAN I ASK, ON THE COMPANY, COULD THEY JUST KIND OF GET RID OF THEIR ENTIRE APPLICATION AND BUILD AS IS? BECAUSE I KNOW WHEN WE HAD A DEVELOPMENT ON COORS AND I-40, THERE WERE A LOT OF CONCERN ABOUT IT GOING IN, AND WHAT ENDED UP HAPPENING IS THE WAL-MART -- IT WAS THE WAL-MART. THEY WERE GOING TO PUT A MOVIE THEATER AND THEN THEY WERE GOING TO PUT A HOTEL ON A MAJOR SITE PLAN. AND THEN AT THE END OF THE DAY, THERE WAS SO MUCH CONTROVERSY FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD FIGHTING THAT PROJECT THAT THEY ENDED UP PULLING THEIR REQUESTS, AND THEY ENDED UP JUST PUTTING IN THE WAL-MART ANYWAY, AND NOW WE HAVE A STORAGE UNIT AND WE HAVE A SCHOOL, A CHARTER SCHOOL THERE. SO I'M WONDERING FIRST OF ALL, CAN THEY DO THAT. AND THEN, AFTER YOU ANSWER THAT, I KNOW THERE WAS NO -- THERE WAS SOMETHING SAID THE LAST TIME THAT THE EPC DIDN'T MAKE ANY MISTAKES, BUT WHEN THEY CAME TO US, THEY ASKED US ABOUT CLUSTERING, AND SO WHAT I'M AFRAID OF IS BECAUSE THERE WASN'T ENOUGH OPEN SPACE, IT WAS KIND OF FAKE OPEN SPACE BECAUSE OF THE TRAILS, AND SO WHEN WE ASKED THEM TO GO BACK AND LOOK AT THE CLUSTERING, THEY PROVIDED A PLAN WITH MORE OPEN SPACE THAT MET MORE OF THE NEEDS OF THE COMMUNITY, ALTHOUGH NOT THE TOTAL. SO MY CONCERN HERE IS THAT, YOU KNOW, I FEEL LIKE THIS IS GOING TO GO TO COURT NO MATTER WHAT, ONCE THE DECISION OF THIS BODY MAKES, IT SEEMS IT IS GOING TO GO TO COURT BEYOND US, BUT IF WE DON'T -- COULD THEY POTENTIALLY PULL HAD THE APPLICATION AND THEN JUST BUILD SOMETHING NOT FAVORABLE TO THE COMMUNITY? >> MR. PRESIDENT, COUNCILLOR PEÑA, THE SUBJECT SITE IS ZONED R-A AND IT HAS THE MINIMUM LOT SIZE OF 10,890 SQUARE FEET. WHAT THE APPLICANTS ARE ASKING IS BE PERMITTED TO DO A CLUSTER DEVELOPMENT AT THIS SITE, WHICH KIND OF OUTLINED DOES MEAN AN EXCHANGE FOR SOME SMALLER LOTS, OPEN SPACE WOULD BE SOCIETY ASIDE WHICH -- SET ASIDE, WHICH IS THE PREFERENCE BY THE CITY IN THE IDO. IF POSSIBLE, THE IDO DOES ENCOURAGE OPEN SPACE BE SET ASIDE, ESPECIALLY IN PROPERTIES ADJACENT TO MAJOR OPEN SPACE, AND THE IDO DOES ENCOURAGE CLUSTER DEVELOPMENT WHERE POSSIBLE IN THIS TYPE OF SCENARIO. HOWEVER IT DOES NOT PRECLUDE TRADITIONAL SUB DEVELOPMENT EITHER. SO I THINK WHAT YOU'RE KEYING IN ON IS THERE ARE OPTIONS WITH RESPECT TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF ANY PROPERTY, AND RA ZONE IS NOT LIMITED TO THE ONLY TYPE OF PROJECT THAT'S BEFORE YOU. AND SO IF CLUSTER PRESERVED -- CLUSTER DEVELOPMENT THAT PRESERVED OPEN SPACE IS NOT POSSIBLE ON THIS SITE, THEN THE DEVELOPER WOULD HAVE THE OPTION AS THE PROPERTY OWNER AND THE DEVELOPER OF THE SITE, TO DO ANYTHING ELSE THAT IS PERMITTED UNDER THE ZONING HAD INCLUDING A MORE TRADITION A SUBDIVISION DESIGN THAT WOULDN'T NECESSARILY INCLUDE THE SAME TYPE OF OPEN SPACE SET ASIDE. THE OPEN SPACE SET ASIDE THAT YOU REFERENCED IS 7.96 ACRES. 6.14 ACRES, I BELIEVE, IS WHAT IS REQUIRED. 6.14 IS REQUIRED, AND 7.97 IS PROPOSED. THE OPEN SPAILS HAS SORT OF BEEN REARRANGED ON THE SITE. IT APPEARS THAT THAT WAS DONE IN ORDER TO ATTEMPT TO GET TO WHAT THE COUNCIL WAS DIRECTING WITH THE REMAND INSTRUCTIONS, MORE IDENTIFIABLE CLUSTERS, BECAUSE WHAT WE ARE SEEING BASED OWN THE RECORD AND THE SITE PLANS IN THE RECORD ARE THAT THE HOMES WILL BE CONCENTRATED A LITTLE BIT MORE CLOSELY INSIDE, TO SEPARATE THOSE OUT. >> OKAY. THANK YOU, MR. MELENDREZ. >> Coun. Davis: THANK YOU, COUNCILLOR PEÑA. COUNCILLOR GIBSON. >> Coun. Gibson: THANK YOU, MR. PRESIDENT. THANK YOU, MR. MELENDREZ. THIS IS LIKE AN ALBATROS, IT FEELS LIKE. WE JUST KEEP TALKING ABOUT THIS. CERTAINLY THE PEOPLE WHO ARE APPEALING THIS -- I'M HEARING REALLY LOUD AND CLEAR FROM YOU IS ONE THING WE ARE TRYING TO ENCOURAGE IS CLUSTER DEVELOPMENT, AND THIS PROBABLY, OR PROJECTS LIKE THIS, WE COULD SEE -- (INAUDIBLE) -- AND I'M NOT SURE THAT'S THE INTENTION. HOWEVER, IT IS NOT UP TO ME, OR PROBABLY ANYBODY ON THIS BOARD TO SECOND-GUESS THE OTHER PEOPLE -- WHAT OTHER PEOPLE ARE THINKING. I HATE TO HAVE TO AGREE, BUT I THINK WE DO NEED A FULL HEARING ON THIS, AND IT HAS BEEN QUITE A WHILE SINCE WE HEARD IT LAST. I'M GOING TO NOT VOTE TO APPROVE. THANK YOU. >> Coun. Davis: THANK YOU. COUNCILOR BAZZAN. WE ARE GOING TO CHECK YOUR MIC ONE MORE TIME. >> THERE THANK YOU, MR. PRESIDENT. MR. MELENDREZ, WILL YOU PLEASE CLARIFY, WE ARE SUPPOSED TO BE VOTING ON WHETHER OR NOT WE AGREE WITH THE LUHO'S FINDINGS, CORRECT? >> MR. PRESIDENT, COUNCILOR BAZZAN, YES, THAT IS CORRECT. >> THANK YOU. >> Coun. Davis: THANK YOU, COUNCILOR BAZZAN. THE MOTION ON THE FLOOR IS TO ACCEPT HAD THE LUHO RECOMMENDATIONS AND FINDINGS AS PRESENTED BY COUNCILOR JONES AND SECONDED BY COUNCILOR BAZZAN. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION ON THAT? SEEING NONE, AS A REMINDER, WE NEED FIVE COUNCILORS TO APPROVE THAT MOTION. MS. ORTEGA, WOULD YOU CALL THE ROLL OF THE COUNCILORS PRESENT. >> COUNCILOR BAZZAN: YES, I DO AGREE WITH THE LUHO FINDINGS. I WANT TO MAKE SURE IT IS THE RIGHT VOTE, WITH RECOMMENDATIONS. >> Coun. Benton: NO. >> Coun. Gibson: NO. >> Coun. Harris: YES. >> Coun. Jones: YES. >> Coun. Peña: NO. >> Coun. Davis: NO. >> OKAY, THAT MOTION FAILS ON A 3-4 VOTE. >> Coun. Davis: THANK YOU, COUNCILORS. IS THERE ANOTHER RECOMMENDATION? IF NOT, I'LL MAKE ONE. COUNCILLOR BENTON. >> Coun. Benton: MR. PRESIDENT, I THINK YOU TELEGRAPHED WHAT YOUR MOTION WAS GOING TO BE, SO WHY DON'T YOU MAKE IT AND I'LL SECOND IT. >> Coun. Davis: WHOEVER HAS THE FLOOR, DOESN'T MATTER TO ME. I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO REJECT THE LUHO RECOMMENDATION WHICH WOULD REQUIRE THAT THIS MATTER BE SCHEDULED FOR A HEARING AT THE NEXT MEETINGS BE ON THE 17th. COUNCILLOR BENTON, IS THAT YOUR SECOND? >> Coun. Benton: YES. >> Coun. Davis: GREAT. COUNCILORS, THE MOTION ON THE FLOOR IS TO REJECT THE LUHO RECOMMENDATIONS. COUNCILLOR BENTON IS THE SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION? SO WE WILL NEED FIVE VOTES AGAIN ON THIS MATTER TO HOLD A HEARING. MS. ORTEGA. >> COUNCILOR BAZZAN: NO. >> Coun. Benton: YES. >> Coun. Gibson: (INAUDIBLE). >> Coun. Harris: NO. >> Coun. Jones: NO. >> Coun. Peña: YES. >> Coun. Davis: YES. >> THAT'S A 4-3 VOTE. I BELIEVE MR. MELENDREZ EXPLAINED THAT IT REQUIRED FIVE TO REJECT. >> Coun. Davis: SO MR. MELENDREZ, IF WE DON'T GO BACK TO A MOTION TO RECONSIDER, WHERE DO WE GO WITH THIS MATTER? DOES IT DIE HERE IN COUNCILLOR O'MALLEY? >> COUNCIL? >> NO, MR. PRESIDENT. THERE CAN BE A FINAL STEP DEPENDING ON THE OUTCOME. IN ORDER TO NOT HOLD A HEARING, THERE WOULD HAVE HAD TO HAVE BEEN A FIVE MEMBER VOTE TO ACCEPT THE LUHO RECOMMENDATION. THE IDO PROVIDES THAT IF NEITHER MOTION PASS WEIGHS HOLD A HEARING ANYWAY. SO GIVEN THAT BOTH MOTIONS FAILED, AND IF THERE ARE NO OTHER MOTIONS FOR REMAND OR OTHERWISE, THEN A SIMPLE OUTCOME WILL BE THAT BASED ON THE MOTIONS THAT HAVE BEEN MADE AND FAILED, WE WILL HEAR THIS MATTER ON AUGUST 17th. >> Coun. Davis: THANK YOU. >> Coun. Benton: MR. PRESIDENT, I WANT TO DID MR. MELENDREZ, GIVEN THE RECUSALS ON THAT MEETING ON THE 17th, WE HAVE THE SAME STANDARD OF FIVE VOTES? >> MR. PRESIDENT, THE STANDARD CHANGES A LITTLE BIT. NEXT TIME, THE IDO SPECIFIES THAT TO ACCEPT OR REJECT REQUIRES FIVE, AND IN THE ABSENCE OF THAT, YOU CAN REMAND, OR IF NONE OF THOSE MOTIONS HAPPEN, THEN WE WOULD HAVE A HEARING. WHEN IT COMES TO THE ACTUAL HEARING, THE VOTING STANDARD CHANGES AND IT IS SUCH THAT FIVE VOTES WOULD BE REQUIRED TO REVERSE THE DECISION OF THE EPC. IF A VOTE OF FIVE IS NOT SUCCESSFUL TO REJECT THE LUHO, OR ACTUALLY, IT WOULDN'T BE REJECT THE LOU HIGHWAY, BUT HE -- LUHO, BUT REVERSE THE EPC, THE EPC DECISION WOULD REMAIN UNHARMED. >> Coun. Benton: THANK YOU, MR. PRESIDENT. >> Coun. Davis: MR. MELENDREZ, ONE MORE ODD LEGAL QUESTION. THE COUNCILORS WITH RECUSAL ISSUES, DO THEY SORT OF GET REMEDIED BY A NEW HEARING? IF THEIR ISSUES STILL REMAIN, DO THEY STILL HAVE THE OPTION TO RECUSE OTHER RECOMMENDATION TO RECUSE? >> MR. PRESIDENT, THINK RECUSE RELATIVE TO THE SUBJECT PARTY AND SINCE THE SUBJECT MATTER MATTER CONTINUES, THEIR RECUSAL WOULD STILL BE EXPECTED. >> Coun. Davis: GOT IT. COUNCILLOR BENTON. >> Coun. Benton: ANOTHER QUESTION FOR MR. MELENDREZ. I FULLY UNDERSTAND THE RECUSAL OF COUNCILOR SENA, THE RECUSAL OF COUNCILLOR BORREGO DOES SOMEWHAT CONCERN ME. FIRST OF ALL, THE EXISTENCE AN AMAFCA EASEMENT, AND LET ME CORRECT THAT, IS IT AN EASEMENT OR -- IT IS AN EASEMENT T CROSSES THE PROPERTY. IT IS AN AMAFCA EASEMENT. THAT EXISTENCE, PRIOR EXISTENCE, AND CONTINUING EXISTENCE OF THAT EASEMENT, YOU KNOW, I HAVE TO QUESTION WHY THAT WOULD IN ANY WAY INFLUENCE THE LAND USE MATTER. I MEAN, I UNDERSTAND MR. MELENDREZ'S CAUTION, AND I HAVE TOTAL RESPECT FOR COUNCILLOR BORREGO, BUT I WANT TO RAISE THAT AS A QUESTION, BECAUSE OF THE RECUSALS, WE ARE IN A DIFFICULT POSITION WHERE THERE IS GOING TO BE FAULT, POTENTIALLY, SIMILAR VOTES TO WHAT HAPPENED TONIGHT. I KNOW THAT'S THE COUNCILOR PREROGATIVE AND WE CANNOT OVERRIDE IT CORRECT? >> MR. PRESIDENT, NO, YOU CANNOT. THE COUNCILOR HAS MADE HER STATEMENT FOR THE RECUSAL, AND SHE IS EFFECTIVELY NOT A PART OF THESE PROCEEDINGS AND THE COUNCIL CANNOT OVERRIDE THAT. >> AND MR. PRESIDENT, THAT WOULD STAND, IF WE WERE TO OFFER HER ANOTHER OPPORTUNITY TO PARTICIPATE? >> MR. PRESIDENT, THE PROCESS FOR RECUSAL IS SUCH THAT THE COUNCIL WILL REAL ESTATE EXCUSE AT THE BEGINNING -- WILL RECUSE AT THE BEGINNING OF AN ITEM EACH TIME IT IS UP FOR CONSIDERATION BY THE COUNCIL. SO WHILE I WOULD ANTICIPATE THAT THE CONCERN OVER THE CONFLICT WOULD EXTEND TO THE NEXT TIME THIS MATTER IS CONSIDERED, COUNCILOR SENA AND COUNCILLOR BORREGO WILL BOTH BE CALLED UPON AT THAT TIME TO MAKE THEIR DETERMINATION ABOUT RECUSAL. >> Coun. Davis: SEEING NO OTHER MOTIONS ON THE FLOOR, LAST CALL FOR THAT. I SEE COUNCILLOR HARRIS. >> Coun. Harris: I JUST WANT TO SAY, THIS IS GOING TO END NEW THE COURT NO MATTER WHAT, A DISTRICT COURT JUDGE IS GOING TO BE DECIDING THIS, AND THE LAST THING WE NEED TO BE DOING IS GIVING SOMEONE A REASON TO INVALIDATE THE DECISION. ONE THING THAT COULD DO THAT IS THE REAL ESTATE EXCUSE A (INAUDIBLE). >> Coun. Davis: COUNCILORS, ANY OTHER DISCUSSIONS OR MOTIONS? SEEING NONE, WE WILL ORDER THIS HEARING TO BE SCHEDULED AT OUR AUGUST THE 17th HEARING. EXCUSE ME, THE MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL, FOR A FULL HEARING. AND WE WILL MOVE ON TO AC-5. AS A REMINDER, THIS IS THE SECOND APPEAL RELATING TO THE SAME APPEAL. IT IS THE AGENT FOR THE TAILOR RANCH NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, APPEALING THE EPC. MR. MELENDREZ, ANY ADDITIONAL GUIDANCE? >> MR. PRESIDENT, ONLY THAT WE DON'T HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE MOTION OF TRYING TO ACCEPT OR REJECT. THE IDO SAYS THAT IF NO MOTION, TO SEPTEMBER OR REJECT, IS IS HE -- ACCEPT OR REJECT IS SUCCESSFUL, WE GO TO A FULL HEARING, AND I THINK THAT'S THE WILL OF THE COUNCIL. YOU CAN CALL FOR MOTIONS AND IF THERE ARE NONE THAT, WILL BE THE RESULT. >> Coun. Davis: THANK YOU FOR THAT EXPEDITIOUS WAY OF DOING THIS. UNLESS ANY COUNCILORS WANT TO REVERSE THEMSELVES FROM THE LAST, I'LL OPEN THE FLOOR FOR MOTIONS ON AC-5. GOING ONCE, TWICE, AND SEEING NONE, THIS MATTER WILL ALSO BE SCHEDULED FOR A HEARING ON THE 17th WITH AC-4. MR. MELENDREZ, CAN YOU EXPLAIN AC-1 VERY QUICKLY FOR US? DO WE NEED TO ACT ON THIS TODAY, OR DOES THIS CARRY FORWARD? >> MR. PRESIDENT, COUNCILORS, IS I WOULD END DO YOU REMEMBER YOU TO ACT ON THIS TODAY. IT IS RELATED AND SOMEWHAT MOOTED BY THE AC-4 AND 5 APPEALS. THE LUHO HERD THIS MAT -- HEARD THIS MATTER FIRST, AND IT WAS HELD TOGETHER WITH THE SITE PLAN FOR THE FULL PROPERTY DEVELOPMENT. THROUGH THE LOU HIGHWAY PROCESS, THEY -- LUHO PROCESS, THEY NOTICE THAT HAD THE DECLARATORY RULING, WHICH IS THE UNDERLYING SUBJECT OF THIS APPEAL, COULD BE VOIDED AND COULD GO AWAY. AND IT WOULD NOT EFFECT THE ULTIMATE OUTCOME OF THE SITE PLAN THAT YOU'LL BE CONSIDERING ON AUGUST 17th. SO FOR THAT REASON, I THINK IT WOULD EXPEDITE THINGS IF THE COUNCILLOR O'MALLEY WOULD ACCEPT THE LUHO RECOMMENDATION, THE RESULT OF WHICH WOULD BE TO AVOID THAT DECLARATORY RULING, AND IT WOULD GIVE YOU THE OPPORTUNITY TO TAKE UP THE ISSUE RELATED TO THE SITE PLAN ON THE 17th. >> Coun. Davis: THANK YOU, MR. MELENDREZ. AS I UNDERSTAND, ALL THE PARTIES HAVE AGREED WITH THE LUHO HERE, SO ACCEPTING A RECOMMENDATION WOULD MAKE OUR PROCESS NEXT TIME A LITTLE EASIER. IS THERE A MOTION? I WILL MAKE IT, IF NO ONE ELSE DOES, TO MAKE A MOTION TO ACCEPT THE LUHO RECOMMENDATIONS AND FINDINGS. IS THERE A SECOND? THANK YOU, COUNCILOR BAZZAN. ANY DISCUSSIONS? SEEING NONE, MS. ORTEGA, WOULD YOU CALL THE ROLL ON THE MOTION TO ACCEPT LUHO FINDINGS FOR AC-1. >> COUNCILOR BAZZAN: YES. >> Coun. Benton: YES. >> Coun. Gibson: YES. >> Coun. Harris: YES. >> Coun. Jones: YES. >> Coun. Peña: (INAUDIBLE) >> FOR THOSE OF YOU JUST JOINING US -- >> TODAY. WE ARE GOING TO GIVE EVERYBODY FIVE MINUTES TO STRETCH YOUR LEGS, GRAB A CUP OF WATER, ANYTHING YOU NEED, AND THEN WE WILL INVITE THOSE TWO COUNCILORS WHO WERE RECUSED FROM THOSE ITEMS TO COME BACK AND JOIN US. IT IS NOW ONE MINUTE AFTER 5:00, SO WE WILL ASK YOU TO COME BACK ABOUT 5:05, AND WE WILL GET INTO FINAL ACTION, AND WE WILL STAND IN RECESS FOR FIVE MINUTES OR SO THANK YOU. AS A REMINDER, I MIGHT REMIND EVERYONE PARTICIPATING TO MUTE YOUR VIDEO AND YOUR AUDIO, WE DON'T HEAR YOUR PERSONAL CONVERSATIONS DURING OUR BREAK. GOV-TV. >> WE MOVE RULES BE SUSPENDED FOR PURPOSE OF PREVENTING O-72 FROM EXPIRING AND EXTENDING EXPIRATION OR 180 DAYS AND DEFERRING THIS MATTER UNTIL SEPTEMBER 9. >> Coun. Davis: OTHER DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE. MS. ORTEGA ON THAT MOTION, WOULD YOU CALL THE ROLE PLEASE. >> Councilor Bassan: YES. >> Coun. Benton: YES. >> Coun. Borrego: YES. >> Coun. Gibson: YES. >> Coun. Harris: YES. >> Coun. Jones: YES. >> Coun. Pena: YES. >> Coun. Sena: YES. >> Coun. Davis: YES. PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. >> Coun. Davis: COUNCILLOR BENTON I BELIEVE YOU ARE UP WITH NEXT ITEM OF, O-6. >> Coun. Benton: YES, THANK YOU. O-6 IS DESIGNATING MAIN LIBRARY COPPER AVENUE AS A CITY LANDMARK. >> Coun. Davis: I SEE COUNCILOR SENA HAS A SECOND. >> Coun. Benton: THANK YOU. SO, THE MAIN LIBRARY I THINK MOST PEOPLE ARE FAMILIAR WITH IT. DOWNTOWN, MAIN LIBRARY WAS BUILT IN ROUGHLY 50 YEARS AGO, I BELIEVE. IN THE 1960'S. IT REPLACED WHAT IS CALLED SPECIAL COLLECTIONS LIBRARY OVER IN EAST DOWNTOWN AT EDITH AND CENTRAL. IT IS A WONDERFUL BUILDING. AND, THE MAIN LIBRARY WAS MOVED TO DOWNTOWN WITH A BRAND NEW BUILDING. AT THAT TIME IT WAS DESIGNED BY GEORGE WILL PEARL, ONE OF THE FOREMOST MODERNIST ARCHITECTS IN ALBUQUERQUE OF THE 20TH CENTURY. THE COMPANY STILL EXISTS. WHAT I WANT TO DO IS JUST QUICKLY READ, WE RECEIVED A WONDERFUL LETTER FROM TAMARA PRESIDENT OF THE FRIENDS OF THE LIBRARY. I'LL QUOTE FROM THEIR LETTER OF QUOTE. >> BY THE WAY, MAIN LIBRARY IS ALREADY ON THE NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES AND STATE CULTURAL REGISTER. IT WAS RECOGNIZED YOU FOR ITS REPRESENTATION OF A PERIOD OF TIME OF MODERN ARCHITECTURE KNOWN AS BRUTALISM. BRUTALISM WASN'T REALLY ABOUT DOING BUILDINGS THAT WERE BRUTAL AND AWFUL. IT CAME FROM THE FRENCH WORD FOR CONCRETE. EXPOSED CONCRETE. AND, THERE ARE QUITE A FEW EXAMPLES IN THE 60'S. ORIGINAL CONVENTION CENTER IS A BRUTAL DESIGN BEFORE IT WAS CHANGED AROUND IN THE LAST FEW YEARS. AND, LET ME JUST READ FROM THIS LETTER FROM PRESIDENT OF THE FRIENDS OF THE LIBRARY. I KNOW THAT THERE ARE THOSE WHO DON'T CARE FOR THE ESTHETICS OF THIS DESIGN. I FIND IT HANDSOME. BEYOND THAT I CONSIDER ALL ARCHITECTURE A BACKDROP FOR LIFE. BUILDING ENHANCES LIVES OF ITS USERS. ONE OF THE USERS ON OPENING DAY WAS A MAN IN A WHEELCHAIR, 15 YEARS BEFORE THE PASSAGE OF THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT HE COULD ENTER LIBRARY WITHOUT ASSISTANCE. THE MAIN LIBRARY DIDN'T WASTE SPACE ON A GRAND STAIRCASE. INSTEAD A FUNCTIONAL STAIRCASE WAS STUCK IN A CORNER. STUDY AND MEETING ROOMS LINE THE WALLS. SENIOR STAFF HAD ROOMY OFFICES, CONFERENCE ROOM AND A SPACE TO EXPAND AND ACCOMMODATE NEW STAFF. THE MOST IMPORTANT FEATURE OF THE LIBRARY'S DESIGN WAS AND REMAINS ITS FLEXIBILITY. IT MEETS CHANGES ADDING COMPUTERS PRINTERS SELF CHECK OUT STATIONS AND TEMPORARY PERFORMANCE SPACES, MOVING FREE STANDING BOOK SHELFS AS REQUIRED. I CAN TESTIFY TO THIS. IN MY ARCHITECTURE CAREER I WORKED ON LIBRARIES AND DECADES AFTER THIS BUILDING WAS BUILT AND WHAT WAS REALLY IMPRESSED UPON ME BY ALLEN CLARK, FORMER DIRECTOR OR ADMINISTER OF THE LIBRARIES AT THAT TIME, WAS THAT KIND OF FLEXIBILITY. AND THAT WAS DURING A TIME WHEN ALL THE NEW TECHNOLOGIES WERE COMING INTO THE BUILDINGS AND THIS BUILDING SEEMED EFFORT LESSLY BE ADENY THE APPEALED. DESPITE ITS BEING BRUTALIST DESIGN IT IS A HUMAN BUILDING. GREAT LITTLE SPACES AND AREAS WITH NATURAL LIGHT AND A VIEW OUT THE WINDOW WHERE YOU CAN TUCK IN AND DO YOUR THING. JUST SETTLE IN WITH A BOOK OR MAGAZINE OR WHATEVER IT IS THAT THEY ARE LOOKING AT AND ENJOY IT. I REALLY THINK HIGHLY OF THIS BUILDING. IT WAS CONSIDERED, I THINK, GEORGE PERAL'S MASTER PIECE IN TERMS OF HIS CAREER. SHE NAILS IT WITH FLEXIBILITY OF THE SPACE THAT WAS AVAILABLE. SO, PRETTY NEAT STUFF. IS THERE A VIDEO? >> Coun. Davis: WE HAVE LOST YOUR VIDEO CONNECTION. YOU MIGHT HAVE TO RESET IT ON YOUR SIDE. WE WERE ABLE TO HEAR YOU BUT WE LOST YOUR VIDEO. THIS IS WELL DESERVED. THERE ARE A LOT OF IMPORTANT BUILDINGS IN THE CITY LIKE KIMO AND AL VADO AND ARE PARTS OF THE RAIL YARDS THAT YOU ARE DESIGNATED AS CITY LANDMARKS AND I MEANS, ONE THING IT MEANS IS THAT SIGNIFICANT CHANGES CAN'T BE MADE TO THE BUILDING DESIGN, FUNDAMENTAL ASPECTS, WITHOUT GOING TO LANDMARK CONSERVATION COMMISSION. IT IS ANOTHER LEVEL OF PROTECTION ALONG WITH THE INCENTIVES THAT EXIST THROUGH THE NATIONAL REGISTER AND STATE REGISTER. >> Coun. Davis: THANK YOU COUNCILOR. RECOGNIZE THAT THE COUNCIL PLANNING MANAGER HAS JOINED US TO HELP ANSWERS QUESTIONS. I SEE TWO COUNCILORS IN LINE, WE'LL START WITH COUNCILOR FROM THE FAR HEIGHTS, COUNCILOR BASSAN THE. >> Councilor Bassan: I AM CURIOUS WHAT IS THE PROCESS ONCE SOMETHING BECOMES A CITY LANDMARK. WHAT IS NEXT? ASIDE FROM BEING ADDED TO REGISTRY? >> Coun. Benton: PROCEDURALLY PROBABLY MS. MORRIS COULD ANSWER. IT GETS ON THE LIST AND IT MEANS THAT IT HAS, AT THAT POINT ONCE THE MAYOR SIGNS IT, IT WOULD BE PROTECTED, ROCKED LANDMARK WITHIN THE CITY, PROBABLY RECEIVE SOME PROMOTION. AT LEAST YOU WOULD NEED A HEARING BEFORE CHANGES ARE MADE. I DEFER TO MS. MORRIS. >> MORRIS: SO, THE VERY NEXT STEP IS THAT THE DESIGN GUIDELINES WILL BE ADOPTED BY THE LANDMARKS COMMISSION. SO, STAFF WILL PUT TOGETHER A LIST OF KEY FEATURES THAT NEED TO BE CONSIDERED IN ANY ALTERATIONS AND SO THAT WOULD BE WITHIN THE GUIDELINES THAT GO WITH THE LANDMARKING SPACES AND THAT WILL BE APPROVED BY THE LANDMARK'S COMMISSION. AFTER THAT NOTHING MUCH UNTIL ANY ALTERATIONS ARE NEEDED. DEPENDING ON THE SCALE OF ALTERATIONS, THEY WOULD BE EITHER REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY STAFF OR BY THE LANDMARKS COMMISSION. >> Coun. Davis: DON'T FORGET TO INTRODUCE YOUR ASSISTANT THERE. YOU HAVE HANDSOME HELP. COUNCIL BORREGO? >> Coun. Borrego: I AM REALLY HAPPY TO SEE, THAT COUNCILLOR BENTON IS SPONSORING THIS AND, YOU KNOW, IT IS KIND OF IRONIC TO THINK WHEN I WAS IN COLLEGE I WENT TO THAT LIBRARY AND THEN WHEN I WORKED FOR THE CITY I WENT TO THAT LIBRARY AND IT IS KIND OF IRONIC TO THINK THIS IS ACTUALLY A HISTORIC SITE AT THIS POINT IN TIME. THAT GOES TO SHOW WE HAVE BEEN AROUND FOR A WHILE. I THINK THE NEXT STEP, THOUGH, COUNCILOR, IS THAT WE APPLY FOR APPLICATION AT THE STATE AND NATIONAL LEVELS AND PRESERVING SOME OF OUR DOWNTOWN LANDMARKS IS REALLY IMPORTANT, AS WE HAVE SEEN SO MANY THAT WE HAVE LOST OVER THE YEARS. SO, I FIGURE THAT P THE ETRA'S BABY WILL BE THE ONE TO GET THESE APPROVED. >> Coun. Davis: I SEE DIRECTOR OF CULTURAL SERVICES AND OTHER FOLKS THAT I CAN'T SEE IN THE WINDOW. DR. SANCHEZ, KNOW LIBRARIES YOUR PART OF YOUR TEAM. THEY HAVE DONE A GREAT JOB KEEPING SERVICES AVAILABLE TO PEOPLE WHO NEED THEM. I WANT TO BE SURE WE GIVE YOU A CHANCE TO WEIGH IN. >> THANK YOU. NO, WE APPRECIATE THE CONSIDERATION AND I APPRECIATE COUNCILLOR BENTON DOING SUCH A FINE JOB OF INTEREST DUESING THIS. YOU KNOW THE LIBRARY SYSTEM BUT ESPECIALLY MAIN LIBRARIES ARE IMPORTANT TO US AND I THINK ANY TIME WE CAN IT IS GREAT TO RECOGNIZE THESE BUILDINGS THAT ARE HISTORIC IN THE LIBRARY SYSTEM. THAT SPEAKS TO HOW LONG THE LIBRARY SYSTEM HAS BEEN PART OF OUR COMMUNITY SO, YEAH, WE APPRECIATE YOUR SUPPORT AND WE LOOK FORWARD TO TOURING YOU THROUGH THE NEWEST LANDMARK AS SOON AS WE ARE ALL ABLE TO COME BACK TOGETHER. THANKS. >> Coun. Davis: COUNCILORS, OUR ADMINISTRATION. ANY OTHER COMMENTS BEFORE WE GO BACK TO THE COUNCIL TO CLOSE? SEEING NONE, COUNCILLOR BENTON. >> Coun. Benton: GO CHECK IT OUT. EVERYONE WHO IS WATCHING. YOU KNOW, IT IS TRULY A HISTORIC BUILDING, BUILT IN THE 60'S. AS COUNCIL BORREGO SAID WE ARE HISTORIC OURSELVES AT THIS POINT BUT CHECK IT OUT. IT IS AN INSPIRING BUILDING AND IT IS A WONDERFUL PLACE TO HANGOUT. AS WE STATED SO MANY SERVICES ARE PROVIDED THERE OUTSIDE OF WHAT WE USUALLY THINK OF IN A LIBRARY. URGE YOUR SUPPORT. >> Coun. Davis: THANK YOU. MS. SANCHEZ, DR. SANCHEZ, CUED KUDOS TO YOUR STAFF DURING COVID-19. IT IS A FABULOUS PLACE AND LIKES BETTER TODAY. >> Councilor Bassan: YES. >> Coun. Benton: YES. >> Coun. Borrego: YES. >> Coun. Gibson: YES. >> Coun. Harris: YES. >> Coun. Jones: YES. >> Coun. Pena: YES. >> Coun. Sena: YES. >> Coun. Davis: YES. >> PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. >> Coun. Davis: THANK YOU COUNCILORS. CONGRATULATIONS COUNCILLOR BENTON. NEXT UP, COUNCILOR JONES, O-12. >> Coun. Jones: O-12 IS ORDINANCE ADOPTING A UNIFORM ADMINISTRATIVE CODE, ADOPTING UNIFORM ADMINISTRATIVE CODE AND TECHNICAL CODE PRESCRIBING MINIMUM STANDARD REGULATING CONSTRUCTION ALTERATION, MOVING, REPAIR AND RULES OF OCCUPANCY OF BUILDINGS AND STRUCTURES. IT IS TIME FOR THE CITY TO DO THIS. IT STATE IS DOING IT RIGHT NOW BECAUSE OF THAT AND FACT WE NEED TO TRY TO MESH THE TWO DIFFERENT ORDINANCES AND THE WAY WE DO THINGS, I THINK IT IS IMPORTANT THAT WE TAKE A LOOK AT THE STATE AND SEE WHAT WE WANT TO DO WITH THEIRS. I AM CHAIRING THIS BY REQUEST. NORMALLY, I WOULD MOVE A DO NOT PASS BUT I WOULD LIKE TO MOVE A DO PASS AND I WOULD LIKE TO MOVE IT WITHOUT MY VOTE BECAUSE IT IS SIMPLY KICKING THE CAN DOWN THE ROAD AND HAVING TO WORK ON TRYING TO PUT OUR CODES WITH THE STATE'S CODE AND THEY CAN -- THIS CITY NEEDS TO GROW AND DEVELOP AND NEEDS TO KEEP PEOPLE EMPLOYED WHEN WE ARE FIGHTING OUR CODES. SO, I WILL MOVE A DO PASS. >> Coun. Davis: THANK YOU. EXAMPLE OF GETTING THINGS DONE EVEN IF YOU DON'T SUPPORT IT. BUT I WILL TAKE YOUR MOTION AND COUNCILOR BENTON'S SECOND. MOTION ON THE FLOOR WOULD BE TO MOVE A DO PASS. COUNCILORS DISCUSSION? I KNOW COUNCILOR BORREGO AS AMENDMENTS. I WANT TO BE SURE BEFORE I GO THERE IF EITHER COUNCILOR JONES OR BENTON WANT TO EXPLAIN ANYTHING MORE ABOUT WHAT IS IN IT BEFORE WE MOVE TO THAT AMENDMENT. JUST BY WAY OF BACKGROUND. BECAUSE I KNOW THERE IS A LOT OF STUFF HERE INCLUDING ENERGY CODE. IF YOU WANT TO ADD ANY OTHER COMMENT. YOU PROVIDED THAT OUTLINE. I WANT TO GIVE COUNCILLOR BENTON A CHANCE TO SPEAK ABOUT THE ENERGY. >> Coun. Jones: I AM FINE WITH COUNCILLOR BENTON GOING FIRST. >> Coun. Davis: EXPLAIN WITH THE ENERGY CODE PORTION HERE. >> Coun. Benton: VARIOUS CODES WITHIN OUR ADMINISTRATIVE CODES ARE REGULARLY UPDATED AND OFTENTIMES AMENDED AS WE MOVE FORWARD. AND WE HAVE, DESPITE SOME OF THE NARRATIVE, WE HAVE BEEN WORKING ON THIS FOR QUITE A LONG TIME. I BELIEVE MR. PRESIDENT YOU SPONSORED THE LAST BILL WE HAD ON IT BUT PRIOR TO THAT, SO, MS. SCHULTZ CAN PHYLLIS IN ON THAT TIMETABLE AND SHE WAS OUR STAFF AND MEMBER OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE. THEY DID NOT MAKE A RECOMMENDATION BUT WE HAVE BEEN TALKING ABOUT THIS FOR WELL OVER TWO YEARS NOW. IF MS. SCHULTZ FCOULD YOU KIND OF GIVE US CHRONOLOGY. >> SCHULTZ: THANK YOU. THE COUNCIL HAS BEEN WORKING ON UPDATE TO ENERGY CODE SINCE 2019. THAT IS WHEN THE COUNCIL PASSED THEIR FIRST RESOLUTION ON THE MATTER, R-18-18, WHICH SET FORTH A COMMITTEE OF EXPERTS TO LOOK AT THE VARIOUS ENERGY CODES NAMELY THE 2015 AND 2018 CODE TO CONSIDER IF THE CITY SHOULD UPDATE AT THIS TIME AND WHICH CODE THEY SHOULD UPDATE TO. SO, THAT COMMITTEE CONSISTED OF REPRESENTATIVES FROM THE HOME BUILDING INDUSTRY, CLIMATE CHANGE ACTIVISTS AND FOLKS FROM THE CITY'S ENERGY BOARD IN ADDITION TO MYSELF. THAT RECOMMENDATION WAS SUPPOSED TO COME DOWN TO THE CITY COUNCIL AS A WAY TO INFORM THEIR DECISION IF THEY WANTED TO MOVE TO THE 2018 CODE. YOU ALSO EXACT RTCC LAY SAID THE COUNCIL NEVER, YOU ALSO ACCURATELY SAID THE COUNCIL NEVER RECEIVED THAT RECOMMENDATION AND THE COUNCIL PASSED ANOTHER RESOLUTION JUST EARLIER THIS YEAR IN FEBRUARY OF THIS YEAR. PASSED R-19-210 WHICH SAID WE ARE MOVING TO THE 2018 CODE. ADMINISTRATION DRAFT THE CODE AND PROPOSE IT TO US. SO, THE LEGISLATION THAT IS BEFORE YOU THIS EVENING IS THE RESPONSE TO THAT RESOLUTION PASSED IN FEBRUARY. IT IS THE 2018 INTERNATIONAL ENERGY CONSERVATION CODE UPDATE. THERE ARE NO AMENDMENTS PROPOSED TO THIS CODE. THE CITIES AND MUNICIPALITIES ACROSS THE STATE WILL OFTEN PROPOSE AMENDMENTS THAT MEET CLIMATE NEEDS AND THEIR LOCAL NEEDS BUT THIS IS THE 2018 CODE, THE FULL VISIONER, VERSIO CHANGES. STATE OF NEW MEXICO IS ALSO WORKING ON A ADOPTING 2018 VERSION OF THE CODE THIS THEY ARE RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE OF THAT PROCESS. IN FACT JUST LAST WEEK THEY HAD PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD. ON JULY 29, SO THAT WAS LAST WEDNESDAY. THEY HOSTED ON PUBLIC MEETING TO TAKE INPUT ON THE VERSION OF THE CODE THEY ARE CONSIDERING ADOPTING AND THE NEXT STEP FOR THE STATE IS TO HAVE THEIR EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE, APPOINTED BOARD BY THE GOVERNOR, TO CONSIDER WHAT VERSION OF THE 2018 CODE THEY WOULD LIKE TO ADOPT. THEIR NEXT MEETING IS NOT SCHEDULED UNTIL SEPTEMBER 15. THAT IS SOME BACKGROUND ON THE CODE AND MANY YEARS OF WORK GOING INTO GETTING A NEW MORE UPDATED ENERGY CODE. I DON'T THINK IT WAS STATED BUT WE ARE OPERATING UNDER 2009 VERSION OF THE ENERGY CODE SO WE ARE OVER A DECADE OUTDATED ON THIS. >> Coun. Davis: THANK YOU. SO, I SEE A COUPLE OF COUNCILORS WITH HANDS BUT I WANT TO GO TO COUNCILOR BORREGO THAT WANTS TO OFFER AMENDMENT AND THEN WE'LL TAKE THAT ALTOGETHER. >> COUNCILOR BORREGO. PRESENT FLOOR AMENDMENT NO. 1. >> Coun. Borrego: THANK YOU. FLOOR AMENDMENT NO. 1 IS ON PAGE 5, LINE 3, INSERT A NEW SECTION AS FOLLOWS. SECTION 11, WITHIN 30 DAYS OF THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO'S ADOPTION OF REVISED CODE CITY PLANNING AND COUNCIL PLANNING STAFF WILL REVIEW THE CITY'S ANYTHING CONSERVATION CODE FOR ALIGNMENT WITH THE STATE'S ADOPTED CODE TO CONSIDER POSSIBLE AMENDMENTS NECESSARY TO CREATE CONSISTENCY BETWEEN THE STATE AND CITY ENERGY CONSERVATION CODES. NO. 2, RENUMBER SUBSEQUENT SECTIONS AS APPROPRIATE. NO. 3, PAGE 5, LINE 23, STRIKE THE TERM THIS AND REPLACE WITH THE FOLLOWING SECTION, 1 THROUGH 9 OF THIS. AMENDMENT WOULD REQUIRE CITY PLANING AND COUNCIL PLANNING TO REVIEW CITY'S ADOPTED CODE WITHIN 30 DAYS AND MAKE ANY MINOR CHANGES OR MAJOR CHANGES DEPENDING ON THE SITUATION. IN SPEAKING WITH CHIEF BUILDING OFFICIAL THIS MORNING, I FOUND THAT THE AREAS THAT WE MAY WANT TO CONSIDER LOOKING AT AND I AM NOT SUGGESTING THAT THESE ARE THE ONLY AREAS, BUT LENGTH OF DUCT, AIR CHANGE FOR RESIDENTIAL, AIR CHANGES FOR RESIDENTIAL AREAS, AND AS WE KNOW, THE CITY CODE CANNOT BE LESS RESTRICTIVE THAN THE STATE CODE SO I THINK IT IS REALLY PRUDENT FOR THE CITY COUNCIL TO ADOPT THIS RESOLUTION BASED ON THAT. THANK YOU. AND THAT IS A MOTION. >> Coun. Davis: THANK YOU FOR THE MOTION TO APPROVE FLOOR AMENDMENT NO. 1. IS THERE A SECOND? I'LL DO IT FOR THE RECORD. I APPRECIATE ALL COUNCILORS WORKING ON THIS AND WE ARE WORKING HARD TO GET THIS IN PLACE. WE KNOW THE STATE IS CONSIDERING THEIRS. BUT IT IS NOT CERTAIN THEY'LL ADOPT A SIMILAR CODE. AND IF THE STATE ADOPTS A SIMILAR CODE WITH OTHER AMENDMENTS, I THINK THIS IS A GREAT PROCESS TO ENSURE THAT THE CITY TAKES A LOOK AT HOW OUR CODE AND THE STATE CODE MIGHT INTERSECT AT THAT POINT AND WHAT CHANGES NEED TO BE MADE. THERE IS NO REASON THE CITY SHOULD WAIT ON SOMETHING THAT IS NOT CERTAIN AT THE STATE LEVEL. I WOULD SUPPORT THAT. THAT SAID, I WANT TO GO BACK NOW AND MAYBE ASK FOR THE ADMINISTRATION BEFORE I GO TO THE COUNCILORS THAT I HAVE IN ORDER. MR. RAEL I ASSUME THIS IS YOU. >> RAEL: MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL, I THINK THE AMENDMENT THAT IS SPONSORED BY COUNCILOR BORREGO ACTUALLY TAKES CARE OF THE CONCERNS THAT ANY ONE IN THE ADMINISTRATION MIGHT HAVE AS IT RELATES TO WHAT THE STATE WILL DO MOVING FORWARD. WE ALL KNOW THAT ULTIMATELY THEY CAN ADOPT THIS CODE AND WE HAVE TO BE COMPLIANT WITH THEIR DECISIONS BUT I THINK THE CONVERSATION EARLIER IS CORRECT. WE ARE OPERATING UNDER A CODE THAT IS A DECADE OLD AND THIS BRINGS US UP INTO I THINK A PLACE WHERE WE CAN DO SOME REALLY IMPORTANT CHANGES TO HOW WE BUILD OUR ENVIRONMENT IN ALBUQUERQUE. SO, WE ARE OKAY WITH WHAT HAS BEEN PROPOSED. >> Coun. Davis: THANK YOU. >> BACK TO COUNCILORS NOW. >> Coun. Benton: JUST REALLY QUICKLY TO CLARIFY. I THINK THE STATE LAW ALLOWS AND ANTICIPATES THAT LOCAL JURISDICTIONS CAN ADOPT LOCAL CODES AS LONG AS THEY ARE NOT LESS RESTRICTIVE THAN THE STATE CODES. SO, WE CAN HAVE A STRONGER STATE THAN THE STATE CODE IF WE CHOOSE. WE MAY HAVE THE SAME ONE BUT WE MAY NOT HAVE ONE THAT IS LESS RESTRICTIVE THAN STATE CODE. THAT APPLIES TO ANY OF THE CODES ACROSS, PLUMBING, ELECTRICAL, ANYTHING LIKE THAT. SO, THIS COMMON IN OTHER STATES, WE DO RECOGNIZE DIFFERENT LOCALITIES HAVE DIFFERENT STANDARD. SO, IN OUR CASE AT STATE PREEMPTION, THAT IS OUR STANDARD. WHATEVER THEY PASS, LET'S SAY IF WE WERE TO, SOME OF WHAT I WOULD CALL WEAKENING AMENDMENTS, PROBABLY NOT THE BEST TERM BUT AMENDMENTS THAT REMOVE SOME OF THE STANDARDS FROM OUR OWN VERSION OF THE CODE, IF WE WERE TO PASS A BUNCH OF THOSE RIGHT NOW AND THEY WERE NOT IN LINE WITH THE STATE CODE, THEN WE WOULD HAVE TO AMEND IT ANYWAY. SO, YEAH, IT WILL BE INTERESTING TO SEE WHAT THE STATE HAS DONE. IN THE PAST, ALBUQUERQUE HAS LEAD ON ENERGY EFFICIENCY CODES. WE HAD OUR OWN CODE UNDER MAYOR CHAVEZ. THAT WAS SUBSEQUENTLY CHALLENGED IN COURT, SUBSEQUENTLY REPEALED BUT THAT WAS A VERY STRONG LOCAL CODE, CERTAINLY STRONGER THAN THE STATE. THIS ADOPTION OF IT WITHOUT ANY AMENDMENTS IS REALLY THE CLEANEST THING FOR US TO DO RIGHT NOW. I SUPPORT THE AMENDMENT. I THINK IT MAKES SENSE THAT CERTAINLY ONCE THE STATE GETS AROUND TO ADOPTING SOMETHING THAT WE THEN EVALUATE WHAT THOSE ARE AND SEE WHICH, IF ANY, WE WANT TO ADJUST. BUT THIS GIVES US A CLEAN INTERNATIONAL ENERGY CONSERVATION CODE ACCORDING TO THE STANDARD OF THE INTERNATIONAL CODE COUNCIL AND JUST GOING BACK TO MAYOR CHAVEZ' CODE, WE WERE CRITICIZED FOR STEPPING OUT AND WRITING OUR OWN CODE AND IT WAS NOT PART OF THE INTERNATIONAL CODE COUNCIL FAMILY OF DOCUMENTS. SO, IN THIS CASE, WE ARE TOTALLY IN LINE WITH THAT. ALL REPORTS ABOUT THE 2018 CODE IS THAT IT WILL SAVE A TREMENDOUS, CERTAINLY OVER THE 29 CODE THAT WE ARE PRESENTLY UNDER, 2009 CODE THAT WE ARE UNDER WILL SAVE TREMENDOUS ANSWER OF ENERGY. LOOKING AT ESTIMATES ARE BETWEEN ZERO AND SIX YEARS MAXIMUM FOR THE ENERGY SAVED WITH THE MODERN CODE. THE '15 CODE ALSO UNDER CONSIDERATION BY THE BUILDING SAFETY DEPARTMENT, THIS IS NOT MUCH MORE STRICT THAN THAT, BUT IT HAS TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT FEEDBACK AFTER THE AMENDMENT AND FEEDBACK FROM USERS OF THAT CODE. FROM ENERGY CONSERVATION IT IS VERY SIMILAR TO THE '15 CODE BUT PICKED UP ON A LOT OF JUST ADMINISTRATIVE FIXES AND SMALL TWEAKING OF THAT '15 CODE THAT MAKES IT MORE USER FRIENDLY. I DO SUPPORT THE AMENDMENT. I THINK THIS IS REALLY IMPORTANT THAT WE LEAD. WE HAVE LED BEFORE AND LET'S LEAD AGAIN AND SEE WHAT THE STATE DOES. >> Coun. Davis: COUNCILOR JONES. >> Coun. Jones: THANK YOU. I THINK WE ARE GOING DOWN A SLIPPERY SLOPE HERE. DO I APPRECIATE COUNCILOR BORREGO'S AMENDMENT. I THINK THAT WILL HELP IMMENSELY. I THINK WE ARE IN A SITUATION WHERE WE COULD BE, THE CITY CHANGES THEIR CODE, WE START TRYING TO GET, THERE WILL ALWAYS BE GLITCHES, WE TRY TO GET THEM OUT. WE TRY TO GET DEVELOPMENT STARTED AGAIN IN THE CITY. THE BUSINESS PEOPLE START DESIGNING, START TRYING TO BUILD, START DOING BY OUR CODE, THE STATE CHANGES THEIR CODE, DO WE CHANGER OURS TO CONFORM TO THEIRS? HOW MANY TIMES IN A NINE-MONTH PERIOD CAN CAN WE CHANGE THE CITY CODE AND STILL BE COMPETITIVE. I AM NOT SURE WHAT THE STATE WILL DO OF COURSE, IF THE STATE WERE TO PUT IN A FAR LESS RESTRICTIVE CODE, OR THE SAME LANGUAGE, IT WOULD BE A LITTLE LESS EXPENSIVE TO BUILD A COMPARABLE BUILDING AND THE SAME BUILDING OUTSIDE OF THE CITY LIMITS OVER IN THE COUNTY, THE COUNTY AS I UNDERSTAND IT IS NORMALLY ADOPTS THE STATE CODE. WHAT ARE WE FIGHTING HERE AND HOW MANY TIMES WOULD WE HAVE TO CHANGE WHAT A BUILDING, BUILDER CONTRACTOR ARCHITECT DOES IN A BUILDING IF WE PUT FORTH A CODE, THE CODE CHANGES. WE ARE WORKING ON A CODE NOW AND IT WILL TAKE A WHILE FOR THIS TO TAKE EFFECT AND THEN WE HAVE ANOTHER CODE AND CHANGE IT AGAIN WITHIN A MATTER OF MONTHS. WHAT DOES THAT DO TO THE PREDICTABILITY (INAUDIBLE). I AM CONCERNED ABOUT THE CONFUSION THAT WE ARE PUTTING IN PLACE HERE. SO, WE CAN ONLY DO WHAT WE CAN DO AND KEEP THE CITY WORKING AND KEEP BUSINESSES GOING. THANK YOU. >> Councilor Bassan: THANK YOU. MS. SCHULTZ DO WE HAVE SOME ESTIMATE AS TO HOW LONG IT COULD TAKE THIS APPOINTED EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE TO DECIDE FROM THEIR MEETING ON SEPTEMBER 15 OR IS IT NEVER ENDING POTENTIALLY OR ONE AND DONE? >> SCHULTZ: IT IS REALLY AT PURVIEW OF THAT STATE COMMITTEE ON SEPTEMBER 15. WHETHER OR NOT THEY ARE INTERESTED IN MOVING FORWARD WITH A CODE AT THAT TIME, IF THEY FEEL LIKE THEY HAVE ADDRESSED ALL THE PUBLIC COMMENTS THAT CAME IN DURING THE LAST SEVERAL MONTHS AND IF THEY HAVE A CODE THAT IS READY TO GO. I PERSONALLY DO NOT HAVE INDICATION FROM THAT COMMITTEE AS TO WHAT THEY INTEND THEIR ACTION TO BE ON SEPTEMBER 15 BUT THEIR OPTIONS ARE TO ADOPT A CODE OR TO DEFER THE MATTER FOR MORE CONSIDERATION. UNFORTUNATELY WE DON'T HAVE CONTROL OVER THOSE TIME LINES AT THE STATE. >> Councilor Bassan: A COUPLE MORE THINGS, PLEASE. IS THERE A SENSE THAT THE STATE IS FEELING A SENSE OF URGENCY AFTER 10 YEARS OR AFTER HOWEVER LONGSOR LONG THEY HAVE BEEN TAKING. DO WE THINK THE STATE WILL FINALLY HANDLE THEIR BUSINESS WITH THIS. >> MR. PRESIDENT, IT HAS BEEN A PRIORITY OF THE GOVERNOR TO UPDATE THESE BUILDING CODES IN RELATION TO ENERGY CONSERVATION AND BECAUSE THIS COMMITTEE ISN'T POINTED BY THE GOVERNOR I SUSPECT THERE COULD BE URGENCY TO BRING THE CODES TO THE CURRENT. SO, I WISH I HAD A BETTER ANSWER FOR YOU THAN POLITICAL SPECULATION BUT THAT IS WHAT I CAN OFFER AT THIS TIME. >> Councilor Bassan: I APPRECIATE JUST HAVING SOME CONCEPT OF IT. SO, THE AMENDMENT IN THEORY SOUNDS GOOD. I WISH I WOULD HAVE TIME TO REVIEW IT. I AM NOT COMFORTABLE VOTING FOR SOMETHING WHEN I HAVEN'T SEEN IT. I DON'T KNOW IF I MISSED SOMETHING OR IT WASN'T SENT OUT. I AM STILL THINKING ABOUT THAT A LITTLE BIT BECAUSE I HAVEN'T SEEN THAT. SO, I THINK IT SOUNDS GOOD IN THEORY BUT THE FACT THAT WE ARE JUST A FEW MONTHS AWAY FROM THE STATE MAKING A DECISION ON SOMETHING SOME IMPORTANT, AND IT HAS TAKEN OVER TWO YEARS. I GUESS THAT WHOLE CATCH 22 WHERE IT HAS TAKEN SO LONG LET'S FINALLY GET IT DONE AND IT HAS TAKEN SO LONG, WHAT IS A FEW MORE MONTHS. AT THE SAME TIME I THINK THE DECIDING FACTOR FOR ME IS FACT THAT THIS IS SUCH A MASSIVE ISSUE AND WE ARE BASING IT OFF EMAILS WITH PUBLIC COMMENT MAKES ME MORE CONCERNED THAT WE DON'T HAVE GOOD INPUT FROM PEOPLE ALWAYS IT IS MORE OF THE ACTIVE PEOPLE THE WHO SOMETIMES WE HEAR, YOU KNOW, FROM THE SAME PEOPLE A LOT AND SOMETIMES WE HEAR FROM NEW PEOPLE. I BELIEVE THAT THERE ARE MANY CONSTITUENTS DON'T REALIZE THERE IS ISSUE TO BE HEARD AND THEY DON'T ALWAYS KEEP UP WITH WHAT WE DISCUSS, BUT, PERHAPS, IF THEY WERE ABLE TO BE AT A MEETING IN PERSON THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT I THINK COULD REALLY MAKE A DIFFERENCE, SO, I AM STRUGGLING WITH RUSHING THROUGH AND PUTTING THE CART BEFORE THE HORSE YET AGAIN. I FEEL THIS IS SOMETHING IT MIGHT BEHOOVE US TO WAIT A COUPLE OF MONTHS. I AM A STRONG ADVOCATE OF TRYING TO LEAD THE WAY OR TRYING TO IMPROVE THINGS. I THINK WE DEFINITELY NEED TO PRIORITIZE CLIMATE AND ENVIRONMENT BUT I DON'T KNOW IF THIS IS GOING TO BE SOMETHING THAT THE RISKS DON'T OUT WHAT WEIGH THE BENEFITS. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION ON THIS ITEM? >> THE MOTION BEFORE IS TO APPROVE FLOOR AMENDMENT NO. 1 OFFERED BY COUNCILOR BORREGO. IF THERE IS NO OTHER DISCUSSION, I'LL ASK MS. ORTEGA TO TAKE THE ROLE ON APPROVAL OF FLOOR AMENDMENT MEANT NO. 1. >> Councilor Bassan: YES. THE. >> Coun. Benton: YES. >> Comm. Barela: THE YES. >> Coun. Gibson: YES. >> Coun. Jones: YES. >> Coun. Pena: YES. >> Coun. Sena: YES. >> Coun. Davis: YES. >> 8-0 WITH COUNCILOR HARRIS EXCUSED. >> Coun. Davis: YES, FOR THE RECORD, COUNCILOR HARRIS HAS BEEN EXCUSED FOR THE REST OF THE MEETING FOR ANOTHER MATTER. WE ARE BACK ON THE BILL AS AMENDED. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION BEFORE WE RETURN TO THE SPONSOR? >> Coun. Pena: THANK YOU. NOW THAT WE ARE BACK ON THE BILL ITSELF I JUST LIKE TO ASK SON ON, BY APPROVING THIS TODAY, DOES THAT, AND WITH COUNCILOR'S AMENDMENT, DOES THAT KIND OF APPROVE IT BUT WE WAIT UNTIL THE STATE APPROVES IT? IS THAT WHAT I AM UNDERSTANDING? >> FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND OF COUNCILOR BORREGO'S AMENDMENT THIS WOULD APPROVE THE 2018 CODE AS IT EXISTS AND DRAFTED BY INTERNATIONAL CODE COUNCIL. THAT CODE WOULD GO INTO EFFECT, SO, FUTURE BUILDING PERMITS WOULD HAVE TO COMPLY WITH THAT 2018 CODE AND THEN ONCE THE STATE MAKES THEIR DETERMINATION WHETHER IT BE SEPTEMBER 15 OR OCTOBER 15, WHENEVER THEY DECIDE TO DO THAT, THE AMENDMENT CALLS FOR THE STOIT REVIEW THAT CODE AND PROPOSE ANY AMENDMENTS TO THE CITY'S VERSION BASED ON THE FINAL OUTCOME OF THE STATE'S VERSION. THAT DOESN'T NECESSARILY MEAN THAT THE CITY WILL FOR SURE UPDATE THAT CODE BUT IT ASKSES WE TAKE A LOOK TO SEE WHERE OUR CODE IS NOT IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE STATE. >> Coun. Pena: BASICALLY THE CODE WOULD GO INTO EFFECT IMMEDIATELY IF THIS PASSED? >> YES. I BELIEVE IT WOULD. I CAN CHECK THE RESOLUTION QUICKLY TO SEE IF THERE IS EFFECTIVE PERIOD. SOMETIMES RESOLUTIONS ARE EFFECTIVE FOR A COUPLE OF DAYS BUT YES THIS ONE GOES INTO EFFECT IMMEDIATELY ONCE PASSED BY THE VETO PROCESS AND TAKING NORMAL STEP THAT LEGISLATION MUST TAKE BEFORE IT IS FORMALLY IN EFFECT. >> Coun. Pena: IS THERE ANY KIND OF ANALYSIS, MR. PRESIDENT, THAT ACTUALLY SAYS HOW MUCH MORE THIS COULD POTENTIALLY ADD TO THE BUILDING OF A HOME, OF A RESIDENCE? >> MR. PRESIDENT, COUNCILLOR PENA, I DO NOT HAVE THAT DATA. THOSE WERE QUESTIONS THAT THE COMMITTEE IN 2018 CONTEMPLATED. BUT, THOSE FIGURES WERE NOT PROVIDED AT THAT TIME. IF COUNCILLOR BENTON HAS SOME DATA WHICH SOUNDS LIKE HE MIGHT, I WOULD ASK HIM TO CHIME IN ON THAT QUESTION. >> Coun. Davis: DO YOU WANT TO RESPOND TO THAT? >> Coun. Benton: YES, PLEASE. SO, OUR VERSION OR STATE'S VERSION WILL ADD SOME INITIAL FIRST COSTS TO CONSTRUCTION. WHETHER RESIDENTIAL OR COMMERCIAL. THE IMPORTANT POINT IS HOW QUICKLY DO THE ENERGYIZATION PAY FOR THAT ADDITIONAL COST. THE ESTIMATES YOUR FOR RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION, FULL PAY BACK IN 4.4 YEARS. THAT WOULD BE FOR THE OWNER, MANY OF THE FOLKS THAT YOU ARE GOING TO BE (INAUDIBLE). ON THE COMMERCIAL BUILDING, DEPENDING ON THE TYPE OF BUILDING, ESTIMATES ARE BETWEEN ZERO AND SIX YEARS OF FULL PAY BACK ON THE INITIAL CONSTRUCTION COST. IN CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY, YOU KNOW, ESPECIALLY WHEN, YOU KNOW, ECONOMIES ARE BAD, OR LOCALIZED ECONOMY IS BAD OR NATIONAL ECONOMY IS NOT DOING WELL, THERE IS A TENDENCY JUST ON TO MAKE IF YOU'RE TRYING TO BUILD SOMETHING, JUST DUMB IT DOWN, MAKE IT AS INEXPENSIVE AS YOU POSSIBLY CAN. WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE LIFE CYCLE OF THAT BUILDING,LIFE CYCLE, COST OF OPERATING THE BUILDING, CALLED LIFE CYCLE COST, THAT IS WHAT WE ARE REALLY THAT YOU CANNING ABOUT WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT PAY BACK. WITHOUT QUESTION, WHATEVER THE STATE DOES AND WHATEVER WE DO, AND EVERY TIME A CODE IS UPDATED WHETHER MECHANICAL, ELECTRICAL, THEY TEND TO INCREASE SOME COSTS BUT THEY ARE BEING PROPOSED NOT WILLY NILLY BUT BY A COUNCIL . IT IS IMPORTANT TO RECOGNIZE THAT IS NOT LIKE A BUNCH OF ENVIRONMENTALIST WANTING TO MAKE A STRONGER ENERGY CODE. THIS IS THE INTERNATIONAL STANDARD. IN TERMS OF US, YOU KNOW, REVISITING IT ONCE THE STATE DOES SOMETHING, I AGAIN I SUPPORTED THAT. I HAVE GOT NO ISSUE WITH THAT BUT I THINK WE NEED TO STEP FORWARD AND START PREPARINGS LOCAL INDUSTRY FOR THIS. IN A SHORT PERIOD OF WHATEVER THE PERIOD IS BETWEEN THE STATE DECIDING TO ACT AND OUR ACTING WILL GIVE US A STRONGER CODE THAN THE STATE WHICH WE ARE ALLOWED TO DO. >> Coun. Pena: SO, THAT BEING THE CASE, YOU KNOW, JUST LOOKING AT, YOU KNOW, THE CITY OF ALBUQUERQUE AS IT IS, YOU KNOW WE ARE IN A DIFFICULT STATE TRYING TO DO AFFORDABLE HOUSING. WE ARE TRYING TO MEET THAT THRESHOLD IS DIFFICULT FOR SOME PEOPLE. I UNDERSTAND AND TOTALLY SUPPORTIVE OF THE, YOU KNOW, THE CODE FOR, YOU KNOW, THE CODE THAT WE ARE PASSING NOW. I CAN'T THINK OF THE TERM. BUT, ANYWAY, I THINK, YOU KNOW, I THINK WE REALLY SHOULD HAVE ANALYSIS OF WHAT IMPACT IT HAS TO HOUSING FOR THE CITY. ALTHOUGH WE COULD PASS SOMETHING THAT IS STRONGER THAN THAN WHAT THE STATE PASSES, I WORRY THAT IT REALLY PUTS HOMEOWNERSHIP OUT OF THE REACH OF MANY PEOPLE IN OUR COMMUNITY WITHOUT EITHER HAVING AN ANALYSIS OR SOMETHING IN THE BILL THAT HELPS LOWER INCOME PEOPLE WHEN THEY ARE TRYING TO PURCHASE A HOME. I THINK RIGHT NOW, THE AVERAGE HOME SALE IN ALBUQUERQUE, I DON'T WANT TO QUOTE AND BE INCORRECT, BUT IT IS STEEP TO BEGIN WITH AND AS YOU KNOW, WE'RE ONE OF THE POOREST STATES IN THE NATION AND I DO WANT TO BE AN EXAMPLE FOR THE ENERGY CODE BEING VERY ON THE EDGE BUT, I MEAN, IF IT REALLY PLACES PEOPLE OUT OF BEING ABLE TO PURCHASE A HOME, WE LAND UP WITH A LARGER HOMELESS POPULATION OR PEOPLE, YOU KNOW RENTING. SO, 4 ME, I WOULD JUST, MAYBE MAKE A REQUEST WE AT LEAST SO I CAN GET MORE OF THAT INFORMATION THAT WE COULD AT LEAST DEFER IT FOR 30 DAYS. I WOULD MAKE THAT MOTION. >> Coun. Davis: COUNCILORS, THE MOTION TO DEFER SUPERCEDES MOTION ON THE FLOOR. SO, IS THERE A SECOND? I'LL ASK YOU TO RAISE YOUR HAND VIRTUALLY. I SEE COUNCILOR BASSAN. SO, COUNCILLOR PENA DOES THAT CONCLUDE YOUR REMARKS. >> Coun. Pena: LET ME JUST KIND OF JUMP BACK A LITTLE BIT BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, I READ THE BILL PRIOR TOYOU KNOW NOW AND I THINK IT IS IMPORTANT. I THOUGHT MAYBE WE WOULD DEFER IT SO I KIND OF LOOKED AT IT FROM THAT LENS BECAUSE I REALIZED THAT THE STATE HASN'T PASSED THEIRS YET. I KNOW THAT THE GOVERNOR IS MAKING THIS A PRIORITY WHICH IS AWESOME. SHE SHOULD AND WE SHOULD. I JUST REALLY WOULD LIKE MORE INFORMATION IN TERMS OF HOW IT IS GOING TO AFFECT OUR LOWER INCOME COMMUNITY. >> Coun. Davis: THANK YOU. THE MOTION ON THE FLOOR FOR THE MOMENT IS DEFERRAL OF 30 DAYS UNTIL SEPTEMBER 9 MEETING. WE'LL ASK YOU TO KEEP YOUR COMMENTS ON POINT BUT WANT TO INCLUDE EVERYBODY. COUNCILOR BENTON. >> Coun. Benton: I'LL OPPOSE THE MOTION. EVERY 30 DAYS THAT WE DELAY IS MORE SUBSTANDARD HOUSING WILL BE BUILT. I AM GOING TO CALL THEM THAT BECAUSE THEY ARE BEING BUILT UNDER A 2009 ENERGY CODE. AGAIN, THESE ARE INDUSTRY STANDARDS NATIONWIDE AND THEY ARE INTERNATIONAL STANDARDED ABOUT WHAT WE SHOULD BE DOING AND WORKING PEOPLE IN GENERAL WE HAVE TO ACCEPT THE FACT THAT HOMEOWNERSHIP FOR WORK DRIVING IS VERY HARD DRIVING IS VERY HARD TO COME BY. >> THE RELATIVE COST OF THESE IMPROVEMENTS BY THE WAY MOST WILL BE ADOPTED BY THE STATE BECAUSE THE STATE IS NOT LOOKING VERY GOOD FOR NOT HAVING UPDATED ITS CODE. THOSE WILL BE BORNE BY WORK ING PEOPLE. THEY ARE PAYING UTILITY BILLS AND WHEN I WAS MAKING POINT ABOUT PAY BACK, THAT IS THE PAY BACK, RIGHT? IN THE SHORT TERM, THERE IS A GREAT PAY BACK IN TERMS OF THE COST OF THE ENERGY. IT IS ALSO JUST CONSIDER THE CONTINUED DEVELOPMENT OF BUILDING STOCK UNDER THE OLD CODE IS NO ONE'S BENEFIT. IT DOESN'T BENEFIT OUR CITY IN TERMS OF ITS RESILIENCE, IN TERMS OF CLIMATE CHANGE. WE KNOW OUR CLIMATE IS GETTING HOTTER AND HOTTER. EVERYDAY THAT GOES BY MORE SUBSTANDARD LOWING IS HOUSING G BUILT. SO, IT IS A FALSE EQUIVALENCE TO BE TALKING ABOUT AFFORDABILITY OF HOUSING TO ANYONE AND NOT BE CONSIDERING THE COST OF OWNING AND OR RENTING AND PAYING UTILITY BILLS FOR THAT HOUSING. >> Coun. Pena: CAN I JUST RESPOND TO THAT? >> Coun. Davis: VERY BRIEFLY. >> Coun. Pena: THAT WAS DIRECTED AT ME. I JUST WANT TO SAY THAT COUNCILLOR BENTON I DON'T DISAGREE WITH THE ENERGY CODE. I DON'T. I THINK IT IS IMPORTANT AND WHEN WE ARE TALKING ABOUT SUBSTANDARD HOUSING AND REALLY BUILDING HOUSES UNDER OUR OLD ENERGY CODE WHICH IS THE 2009, I AGREE IT NEEDS TO BE UPDATED. MY WILL THING JUST COMES FROM EQUITY IN OUR COMMUNITY AND, YOU KNOW, THIS IS SOMETHING THAT HAPPENED TO US A LONG TIME AGO WHEN TALKING ABOUT IMPACT FEES IN OUR COMMUNITY. OBVIOUSLY DIFFERENT FROM ENERGY CODE, YOU KNOW, ALL OF A SUDDEN THE CITY OF ALBUQUERQUE, SOUTHWEST AREA, PREDATES MUCH OF THE CITY OF ALBUQUERQUE, YOU KNOW, AND WAS BUILT OFF THE BACKS OF THE LABOR FROM THE SOUTH ESPN FOR . THE MONDAY DID I DIDN'T GET DISTRIBUTED CORRECTLY AND WENT TO OTHER AREAS OF THE CITY TO BUILD. WHEN IT CAME TIME WE WERE ASKING FOR OTHER FAIR SHARE OF THOSE IMPROVEMENTS AND SERVICES TO OUR AREA, IMPACT FEES TURNED AROUND AND DID A CODE FOR THE IMPACT FEES IN TERMS OF SAYING, SINCE THE SOUTHWEST AREA DOESN'T HAVE IT, THEY HAVE TO PAY MORE AND THEY ACTUALLY QUADRUPLED AMOUNT OF MONEY IT WOULD COST FOR US TO BUILD IN OUR AREA OF THE CITY IN TERMS OF THE IMPACT FEES. I DON'T HAVE TO EXPLAIN THAT TO YOU. I KNOW YOU KNOW HOW THAT WORKS. I ALWAYS HAVE TO BE CAUTIOUS WITH OUR AREA IN TERMS OF REALLY PUTTING THE CONSTITUENTS IN MY DISTRICT AT A DISADVANTAGE. I AM MERELY ASKING FOR JUST SOMETIME TO FIND OUT HOW IT IS GOING TO IMPACT COMMUNITIES OF COLOR REALLY. >> Coun. Davis: THANK YOU. NEXT UP. >> Councilor Bassan: THANK YOU MR. PRESIDENT. MS. SCHULTZ DOES THIS APPLY TO REMODELS FOR THE UPDATE ENERGY CODE. ANYBODY WANTING TO REMODEL THEIR HOME OR, YOU KNOW, ANY KIND OF IMPROVEMENTS, WOULD THEY HAVE TO THEN REWE ARE IT OR REDO AND BRING ALL OF IT UP TO CODE IN. >> SCHULTZ: I WOULD ASK SOMEONE FROM THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT HOW LARGE A REMODEL WOULD HAVE TO TAKE PLACE FOR COMPLIANCE. ALL NEW CODES, MECHANICAL, PLUMBING, FIRE OUR ENERGY FOR THOSE TO BE REQUIRED TO BE COMPLIANT. I SEE DIRECTOR WILLIAMS AND OUR CHIEF BUILDING OFFICIAL MR. CLARK IN THAT ROOM READY TO GO. >> MR. PRESIDENT, GOOD EVENING, WILLIAMS WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT HERE WITH CHIEF BUILDING OFFICIAL CLARK WHO WILL ADDRESS COUNCILOR'S QUESTION. >> CLARK. ALL NEW WORK ON CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS WOULD BE REQUIRED TO ADHERE TO THE NEW CODES EXISTING ELEMENTS AND RENOVATIONS WOULD NOT APPLY. UNLESS DO YOU A LEVEL THREE ALTERATION WHICH IS MORE THAN HALF OF THE BUILDING. THEN THE ENTIRE STRUCTURE WOULD HAVE TO BE BROUGHT UP TO THE CURRENT ENERGY CODE. >> Councilor Bassan: I AGREE WITH EVERYTHING COUNCILLOR PENA IS SAYING. I AM FOR MAKING THIS HAPPEN AND I AM FOR SUPPORTING ALL OF THAT BUT I DO NOT BELIEVE THAT THIS IS A FALSE EQUIVALENCE. I THINK WE NEED TO TAKE THIS INTO CONSIDERATION AS ALBUQUERQUE HAS QUITE A BIT OF POVERTY AND I DON'T KNOW IF PEOPLE HAVE FOUR YEARS TO WAIT IN ORDER TO MAKE UP ENERGY COSTS IF THEY WANT TO BUY THE FIRST HOME. IT IS GOOD TO HAVE EXTRA TIME, WAIT FOR THE STATE, FIND OUT ANSWERS AND LET'S DO IT RIGHT WAY SO WE CAN GET STARTED MAKING IT WORK MORE IDEALLY AND MORE STREAMLINED FROM THE GET GO. >> Coun. Davis: THANK YOU. NEXT UP COUNCILOR JONES. >> Coun. Jones: THANK YOU. THERE ARE SO MANY QUESTIONS IN LEGISLATION LIKE THIS. FIRST OF ALL WHY DIDN'T WE GET IT FROM ADMINISTRATION EARLIER. SECOND OF ALL WHY WASN'T IT DISCUSSED WITH US BEFORE WE GOT IT AND THIRD, WHY OR HAVE WE TAKEN THIS TO PEOPLE WHO WILL BE IMPACTED BY THIS? HAVE WE TAKEN TO ORGANIZATIONS WHO PROVIDE HOUSING, TAKEN IT TO, I KNOW THIS IS NAYSY THING TO SAY, TO THE INDUSTRY THAT BUILDS THESE THINGS TO SAY WHAT IS THE MARKET? WHAT DOES THIS DO AND MANY OF THEM ARE VERY MUCH COMMITTED TO ENERGY SAVINGS AND EVERYTHING BUT WHAT DOES IT DO? WE DON'T KNOW. THIS IS JUST SOMETHING THAT CAME DOWN TO US. WE HAVEN'T HAD A CHANCE TO TALK TO PEOPLE ABOUT IT. IT IS JUST RUN IT THROUGH, RUN IT THROUGH, WHEN IN FACT WE ARE STILL OBVIOUSLY STILL SURVIVING ON THE ONE WE HAVE AND NOT BUILDING THAT MUCH NEW. I THINK THAT TO RUSH SOMETHING LIKE THIS THROUGH WITHOUT GETTING THE CORRECT INPUT FROM PEOPLE THAT IS A MAJOR THING WE DO. THIS CAME DOWN AND I DON'T THINK ANY OF US HAD ANYTHING TO DO WITH WHAT WENT INTO IT AND DIDN'T SEE IT UNTIL IT WAS PUT ON THE AGENDA. I THINK WE DO THIS WITH EVERYTHING. HOW CAN YOU PASS SOMETHING LIKE THIS WITHOUT, I MEAN WE TALK ABOUT OPEN SPACE, HOW CAN WE NOT TALK ABOUT THE BUILDINGS THAT OUR PEOPLE ARE GOING TO RESIDE IN AND NOT KNOW WHERE WE ARE GOING WITH THIS. IT CAME DOWN QUICKLY WITHOUT ANY INPUT. I DIDN'T SEE IT. I DON'T KNOW ABOUT ANYBODY ELSE. THIS IS ONE OF THOSE THINGS WHERE WE SHOULD TAKE A LOOK AT THIS AND SEE WHAT IT REALLY IS AND WHAT IT WILL DO. SO, COUNCILLOR BENTON I UNDERSTAND YOUR APPROACH, ABSOLUTELY 100%. I JUST THINK THAT THIS IS GOING TO AFFECT THE ENTIRE CITY FOR COULD BE ANOTHER 20 YEARS IF IT LIKE THE LAST ONE. >> Coun. Gibson: THANK YOU. SO, I AM HEARING A LOT OF FOLKS WHO ARE REALLY CONCERNED ABOUT PASSING THESE COSTS ON. THAT IS A VALID CONCERN BUT, YOU KNOW, WE ARE KIND OF COMPARING INITIAL COSTS TO OPERATING COSTS. COSTS THAT HIT YOU EVERY MONTH. YOU KNOW, ELECTRIC AND GAS AND WATER AND THOSE THINGS. OPERATING COSTS ARE MORE IMPORTANT THAN THE SMALL INCREASES IN UP FRONT COSTS. THIS HAS BEEN BEFORE ON SEVERAL ORGANIZATIONS I AM SURE. THE TWO THAT I KNOW ABOUT AND THIS COMES FROM SOME PUBLIC COMMENTS THAT WE RECEIVED EARLIER TODAY. PACIFIC NORTHWEST NATIONAL LABORATORIES DID A STUDY ON THIS AND THEY FOUND THAT IT WAS QUITE COST EFFECTIVE. THAT THIS CODE IMPLEMENTED OVER PREVIOUS CODES IS COST EFFECTIVE, WHICH MEANS SIMPLY THAT YOU SAVE MORE ON ENERGY USE OVERTIME THAN YOU WOULD SPEND IN THE UP FRONT COSTS PAYING FOR IT. THE OTHER SOURCE THAT I CAN NAME IS ONE THAT IS VENEER AND DEAR TO OUR HEARTS, I BELIEVE HERE IN ALBUQUERQUE, AND THAT IS PROSPERITY WORKS. THEY ARE ADVOCATES FOR KEEP DRIVING OUT OF POVERTY AND HELP DRIVING IN POVERTY GET OUT. AND THEY SUPPORT THIS UPDATE BECAUSE PEOPLE NEED TO BE ABLE TO PAY THEIR UTILITIES. SO, THERE IS THAT TO CONSIDER. THIS AS COUNCILLOR BENTON MENTIONED, THIS HAS BEEN WORKED ON FOR WELL OVER TWO YEARS. I ATTENDED, I BELIEVE, TWO MEETINGS, IF MEMORY SERVES ME CORRECTLY, AND SO THERE HAS BEEN A LOT OF WORK DONE ON THIS OVER THE TIMEOUT. THIS T I M E IN WASN'T A FLASH IN THE BAN THAT CAME UP AND WAS PUT TO COUNCIL FROM THE MAYOR'S OFFICE. MAKING THIS A BETTER ENVIRONMENT FOR OUR KIDS, ALL OF OUR KIDS, GRANDKIDS, GOING FORWARD, CREATING THE TYPE OF ENVIRONMENT THAT I THINK THAT WE ALL WOULD LIKE TO SEE IS GOING TO BE UNCOMFORTABLE SOMETIMES. IT IS GOING TO TAKE LIKE REACHING OUT A LITTLE BIT FARER THAN WHAT WE CAN SEE BUT THIS IS A GOOD PLACE TO START BY UPDATING THESE CODES BECAUSE WE HAVE A LOT OF DATA TO SHOW THAT THIS IS WORTHWHILE. THE SO, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THIS GET PASSED TONIGHT ACTUALLY. AS AMENDED. I HOPE THAT WE HAVE ENOUGH AGREEMENT ON COUNCIL TO DO SO. THANK YOU. >> Coun. Sena: THANK YOU. I DO WANT TO SPEAK ON THIS AFTER HEARING PUBLIC INPUT WHEN IT WAS IN COMMITTEE AND HEARING FROM OUR ADVOCACY GROUPS AND HEARING AND READING PUBLIC COMMENT THAT WAS SUBMITTED ON THIS TOPIC, I KNOW THAT MANY GROUPS WERE VERY INTERESTED IN HAVING A SAFER ENVIRONMENT AS IT RELATES TO CLIMATE CHANGE AND THESE UPDATES AND JUST KNOWING AS COUNCILLOR BENTON HAD MENTIONED, THAT THE COST SAVINGS WILL GO ONTO ESPECIALLY OUR RENTERS AND I KNOW A LARGE PROPORTION OF ALBUQUERQUE ARE ALSO NOT HOMEOWNERS BUT RENTERS. AND A LOT OF THOSE COMMUNITIES ARE COMMUNITIES OF COLOR AS WELL. I DO HOPE THAT BECAUSE OF THE COST SAVINGS IT WOULD BE PASSED ONTO THE TENENTS AS WELL. TO ME, I BELIEVE THAT THIS A LONG-TERM INVESTMENT INTO OUR LIVES BECAUSE PRIMARILY COMMUNITIES OF COLORS ARE THE ONES THAT ARE IMPACT THE THE MOST FROM CLIMATE CHANGE. I WILL SUPPORT THIS UPDATE BECAUSE I THINK THAT IT IS LONG-TERM INVESTMENT INTO OUR COMMUNITIES AND I KNOW THAT IS NOT PARTICULARLY THE ISSUE THAT COUNCILLOR PENA HAD BROUGHT UP, BUT I JUST WANT TO NOTE THAT THESE UPDATES ARE IMPORTANT AND A LONG-TERM INVESTMENT IS NEEDED AND HOPEFULLY IN EVALUATING SOME OF THE ANALYSIS DONE IN BILL ITSELF ELIMINATING THIRD PARTIES SO THAT CONTRACTORS CAN DO THIS THEMSELVES, CUTTING OUT SOME OF THOSE ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS, THOSE COSTS SAVINGS WOULD BE CUT DOWN AS WELL TO THE HOMEOWNER. SO, I THINK THAT IT IS IMPORTANT AND I HOPE THAT THESE UPDATES WILL BE HE HAVE HE (INAUDIBLE). >> Coun. Davis: I WANTED TO RESPOND TO A COUPLE OF THINGS I HEARD. I THINK THE CONVERSATION IS RIGHT AND WE SHOULD ALWAYS LOOKING AS COUNCILOR ROHREROR SENA POINTED WHAT IS IMPACT ON PEOPLE WE SERVE. COUNCILLOR GIBSON BEAT ME TO THE PUNCH IN LOOKING AT REAL DATE AVAILABLE. STUDY SHE MENTIONED WHICH ANYONE CAN FIND ENERGY C ODES.GOV WHICH IS FEDERAL GOVERNMENT'S ANALYSIS OF THE INTERNATIONAL ENERGY CODE IT FOUND IN CLIMATE ZONE 4 WHICH IS ALBUQUERQUE AND WE ARE LISTED AS ONE OF THE EXAMPLE CITIES THAT IMPLEMENTING 2018 CODE WOULD COST A GRAND TOTAL OF $42.75 PER AVERAGE HOME IN THE CITY. ONLY DUE TO INCREASES IN WHATEVER A U FACTOR IS FOR WINDOW CONVERSATION. I ASSUME THAT IS ULTRAVIOLET BUT THAT $42 INCREASE FOR AVERAGE FAMILY HOME IN THE CITY WOULD BE REPAID BACK THROUGH ENERGY SAVINGS OF ALMOST $30 A YEAR PAID BACK IN LESS THAN A YEAR-AND-A-HALF. WHEN I LOOK THE AT DATE 8 DON'T FIND THAT A $42 INCREASE IN COST OF BUILDING A HOME IN ORDER TO MAKE IT MORE ENERGY EFFICIENT AND LOWER ENERGY COSTS LONG-TERM FOR A FAMILY, I BELIEVE THAT ON BALANCE MAKES SENSE. SO, I THINK THAT IS IMPORTANT. I DID HEAR IT. I UNDERSTAND COUNCILOR JONES' CONCERN THAT PERHAPS WE HAVEN'T HAD A CHANCE TO REVIEW THIS. I KNOW THIS IS COUNCILOR JONES' BILL AND NOT DISPARAGING THE COUNCILOR BUT SHE WAS CHAIR OF THIS COMMITTEE THAT HEARD THIS BILL. IT IS HER BILL AND THIS COUNCIL HAS BEEN CONSIDERING THIS FOR MORE THAN TWO YEARS NOW. IN FACT WE HAD PAST LEGISLATION TELLING ADMINISTRATION TO MOVE FORWARD FASTER. BECAUSE THE COUNCIL HAD BEEN DURING THIS FOR SO LONG AND SO, I FEEL LIKE THIS IS IMPORTANT AND PART OF OUR VALUES TO MOVE OUR CITY FORWARD TO BE A LEADER AND WE HAVE BEEN BEHIND AND THE STATE WILL FOLLOW OUR LEAD AFTER THIS. SO, I THINK IT IS CONSISTENT WITH OUR VALUES. I'LL SUPPORT THE MOTION TO APPROVE THIS LEGISLATION AS AMENDED. >> FOR THAT REASON, I WOULD SUPPORT IT. THE LAST COUNCILOR I HAVE IN THE LIST IS COUNCILOR BENTON. SEEING NO OTHERS, I AM GOING TO ASK COUNCILLOR BENTON TO USE THIS AS A CLOSE AS WELL. UNLESS ANYONE HAS ANYTHING FURTHER. WE WILL BE BACK ON THE MOTION. >> Coun. Benton: SO, ARE WE STILL ON THE MOTION FOR DEFERRAL? >> Coun. Davis: YOU ARE RIGHT. ITS MOTION TO DEFER. >> Coun. Benton: AS A MATTER OF PROCEDURE, THIS IS COUNCILOR JONES' BILL SO SHE SHOULD DO THE CLOSE BUT I'LL MAKE THIS MY FINAL COMMENT. I DO OPPOSE DEFERRAL. DOESN'T SEEM LIKE MUCH BUT EVERY 30 DAYS THAT GOES BY IS ANOTHER 30 DAYS OF NEW BUILDING PERMITS THAT COME IN UNDER THE 2009 ENERGY CODE. I MAINTAIN THAT IS A SUBSTANDARD PRODUCT THAT IS BEING BUILT. WHETHER IT IS RESIDENTIAL OUR COMMERCIAL. I REALLY DO MAYBE FALSE QUESTION WE CIVILIAN LANCEY EQUIVALENCEY IS THE WRONG TERM BUT I AM A STRONG ADVOCATE FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING. THE DAYS WHEN THE LANDLORD PAID THE ELECTRIC BILL ARE LONG GONE AND GAS BILL. THERE MAY BE SOME STILL AROUND THAT WEREN'T METERED SO IT IS ALL ROLLED IN SOMEHOW BUT REGARDLESS WHETHER IT IS ROLLED IN OR THE BILL IS PAID BY THE TENENT WHICH IS MORE COMMON, IT IS COSTING WORKING PEOPLE MORE FOR THEIR HOUSING. IDEA THAT WE ARE GOING TO BUILD MORE SO-CALLED AFFORDABLE HOUSING, THAT IS SUBSTANDARD IN TERMS OF ITS ENERGY USE, AND THOSE BUILDINGS ARE GOING TO STAND FOR ANOTHER 40 YEARS AFTER THEY ARE BUILT AND MAYBE LONGER SOMETIMES, I HAVE TO SAY THAT THAT DOESN'T CALCULATE. WE COULD DO SOME SORT OF ANALYSIS OF THIS AND I THINK THE NATIONAL DATA IS THERE AS DESCRIBED BY PREVIOUS SPEAKERS. WITH REGARD TO THE SOMEHOW BEING SPRUNG ON US AT LAST MINUTE, THE FIRST BILL THAT WE DID CREATED ADVISORY BOARD THAT INCLUDED NAOP, INCLUDED HOME BUILDERS. THERE WAS ROBUST DISCUSSION. FOR WHATEVER REASON NO PROPOSAL WAS PUT FORTH FROM THAT COMMITTEE. TO THE COUNCIL. THAT WAS THE TIME AT WHICH PRESIDENT DAVIS AND I SPONSOR ADD BILL SAYING LET'S MOVE FORWARD ON THE '18 BECAUSE THAT IS WHERE EVERYBODY IS GOING AND THE THERE IS NOTHING NEW HERE. THE SAME PEOPLE WHO WERE SAYING, LET'S HOLD BACK, AND WE ARE NOT GOING TO BE COMPETITIVE, WERE THE SAME PEOPLE THAT REPEALED THE LAST VERY FINE ENERGY CODE THAT WE HAD UNDER MAYOR CHAVEZ. SO, YEAH, I REALLY HAVE TO PUSH BACK ON THAT IDEA THAT THIS HASN'T BEEN DISCUSSED. THIS HAS BEEN OUT THERE FOR WELL OVER, LET'S SEE, PROBABLY ABOUT 27 MONTHS, I THINK, SINCE WE FIRST HEARD THAT. I URGE THAT WE MOVE FORWARD WITHOUT DEFERRAL AND WE GET THIS PASSED TONIGHT. AND WE PASS COUNCILOR BORREGO'S AMENDMENT. IF IS WHERE EVERYBODY IS GOING TO THE 2018 CODE. >> Coun. Davis: MY APOLOGIES. I APPRECIATE COUNCILLOR PENA I, IT IS YOUR MOTION FOR DEFERRAL. >> Coun. Pena: AGAIN I JUST REALLY WANT TO REITERATE I THINK THAT THIS IS GOING TO HAVE NEGATIVE IMPACT ON COMMUNITIES OF COLOR. I UNDERSTAND AND I JUST WANT TO SAY THAT I SUPPORT ENERGY CODE BEING REVISED BUT UNTIL I LEARN MORE ABOUT HOW IT IMPACTS COMMUNITIES IN NEEDY REALLY WOULD JUST, YOU KNOW, ASK FOR ANOTHER 30 DAYS TO JUST GET SOME OF THAT INFORMATION BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, IF YOU LOOK AT HOUSING STOCK AND SOME OF THE RENTALS WE HAVE IN OUR COMMUNITY, THOSE AREN'T GOING TO BE UPDATED ANY TIME SOON AND WITH INCREASED COSTS I DON'T SEE DEVELOPERS LOOKING AT THEIR TENENTS AS GOING IN THERE AND DOING ALL NEW ENERGY CODES OR REALLY HAVING MOTIVATION TO REPAIR SOME OF THESE OLDER RENTALS THAT WE HAVE OUT THERE. YOU KNOW. SO, I JUST WOULD LIKE MORE INFORMATION ON THAT, YOU KNOW, I HAVE A LOT OF CONCERN AND WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT AFFORDABLE HOUSING, YOU KNOW, WITH ALL DUE RESPECT TO COUNCILLOR BENTON, I THINK IT IS AN IMPORTANT PART AND HE HAS ALWAYS BEEN SUPPORTIVE OF THAT, BUT, WITH THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING, THERE IS A PERCENT ACKNOWLEDGE PERCENTAGE FOR LOWER INCOME. I AM AFRAID WE DON'T HAVE THE AMOUNT OF QUALITY AFFORDABLE HOUSING TO REALLY REACH THE MASSES IN TERMS OF THE PEOPLE THAT WE ARE TRYING TO AFFECT. SO, I JUST, KNOW, LOVE ENERGY CODES, THINK IT SHOULD BE, YOU KNOW, ENHANCED AND ADOPTED BUT I THINK THAT WE SHOULD AT LEAST HAVE 30 DAYS TO GET MORE INFORMATION ON HOW IT IMPACTS COMMUNITIES OF COLOR. URGE YOUR SUPPORT. INFORM. >> Coun. Davis: I ASK HIM ASK YOU TO TAKE THE ROLL CALL ON MOTION 4 DEFERRAL. >> Councilor Bassan: YES. >> Coun. Benton: NO. >> Coun. Borrego: NO. >> Coun. Gibson: NO. >> Coun. Jones: YES. >> Coun. Pena: YES. >> Coun. Sena: NO. >> Coun. Davis: NO. THAT MOTION FAILS. >> Coun. Davis: THANK YOU. WE ARE BACK ON THE BILL. O-12 AS AMENDED WITH COUNCIL BORREGO'S FLOOR AMENDMENT NO. 1 WITH UPDATES OR THE REVIEW IF THE STATE PASSES AADDITIONAL CODE. WE ARE BACK ON YOUR BILL, LAST CHANCE FOR COUNCILORS TO ASK QUESTIONS. I REALIZE COUNCILOR JONES MAY NOT BE IN SUPPORT OF HER OWN BILL AT THIS POINT BUT WE DO HAVE COUNCILOR BORREGO WITH A QUESTION. >> Coun. Borrego: CAN YOU HEAR ME NOW? OKAY. THANK YOU. SO, I DO APPRECIATE THE DISCUSSION THAT WE JUST HAD AND I TRULY APPRECIATE THE CONCERNS THAT COUNCILLOR PENA DISCUSSED AND I THINK AS I THINK ABOUT CODES, WHICH, YOU KNOW, I PROBABLY WORKED WITH FOR 35 YEARS, MAYBE. CODES DON'T GO THROUGH REVISIONS THAT OFTEN. AND WHEN THEY DO, WE NEED TO GET IT RIGHT. I THINK ABOUT THE BUILDING WHICH I ACTUALLY HELPED BUILD WHEN I WAS A CHAIR INNER OF THE STATE RETIREMENT BOARD IN SANTA FE IS THE PERA BUILDING WHICH WAS BUILT VERY ENERGY EFFICIENT AND WE PUT THE MONEY INTO IT UP FRONT. IT HAS BEEN A REAL POSITIVE MODEL FOR FUTURE BUILDINGS, ESPECIALLY COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS IN SANTA FE. I THINK ABOUT NEW MEXICO AND I THINK ABOUT OUR AIR AND WIND AND SOLAR AND ALL THE THINGS WE HAVE AND LESS AND LESS WATER THAT WE HAVE. SOMETIMES, YOU KNOW, I THINK THAT WE HAVE TO DO THINGS THAT ARE REALLY DIFFICULT TO ENSURE THAT, SOMETIMES WE HAVE TO BITE THE BULLET UP FRONT BECAUSE THE BENEFIT THAT WE HAVE IN THE END REALLY WILL OUT WEIGH THE COST AND COUNCILOR DAVIS POINTED OUT THE COST WHICH SEEMS, YOU KNOW, FAIRLY MINIMUM. AND I THINK THAT WHEN WE START THINKING ABOUT THE CONSUMER AT SOME POINT IN TIME BECAUSE OF, YOU KNOW, MORE EFFICIENT BUILDINGS, THEY ARE ACTUALLY GOING TO BE PAYING LESS IN TERMS OF UTILITIES AND OTHER TYPES OF COSTS THAT THE CONSUMER PAYS. SO, I THINK IT IS REALLY IMPORTANT THAT NEW MEXICO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE NATURAL RESOURCES THAT WE HAVE AND I THINK THIS IS ONE OF THE WAYS THAT WE CAN DO THAT AND AS I MENTIONED EARLIER, WE MAY HAVE TO PAY A LITTLE BIT MORE UP FRONT BUT IN EFFECT THE BENEFIT WILL OUT WEIGH THAT COST EVENTUALLY. THOSE ARE MY COMMENTS. THANK YOU. >> Coun. Davis: YOU CAPTURED MY POINTS EXACTLY. SEEING NO OTHER WILL DISCUSSION, WE'LL GO BACK TO COUNCILOR JONES WHO HAS THE RIGHT FOR FINAL WORD EVEN THOUGH CARRYING IT BY REQUEST. >> Coun. Jones: THANK YOU FOR MAKING IT CLEAR. I WAS GOING TO POINT THIS IS NOT MY LEGISLATION. CARRIED BY REQUEST. NO ONE ELSE WOULD DO IT. I HAVE TO WONDER WHERE ALL OF YOU WERE. I DO NOT SUPPORT THIS LEGISLATION. ALTHOUGH COUNCILOR BORREGO'S AMENDMENT HELPS IMMENSELY. I THINK IT IS RUSHED. I THINK WHAT THE STATE IS DOING, WE SHOULD COME INTO PLAY WITH THAT ALSO BUT I CANNOT URGE YOUR SUPPORT. BUT I WILL OPEN THE FLOOR FOR A VOTE. THANK YOU. >> Coun. Davis: THE MOTION ON THE FLOOR IS TO APPROVE THIS AS AMENDED. >> Councilor Bassan: NO. >> Coun. Benton: YES. >> Coun. Borrego: YES. >> Coun. Gibson: YES. >> Coun. Jones: NO. >> Coun. Pena: YES. >> Coun. Sena: YES. >> Coun. Davis: YES. >> MOTION PASSES 6-2. >> Coun. Davis: THAT WAS A LOT OF DEBATE AND GOOD TO HAVE THAT CONVERSATION. ADD MA'AM VICE PRESIDENT COULD I ASK YOU TO MANAGE THE NEXT ITEM R-216, COUNCILOR BENTON'S BILL WHILE I TAKE A QUICK BREAK. >> Coun. Gibson: SURE. I THOUGHT WE WERE DONE. IF YOU YOU'LL TAKE THIS ONE I'LL TAKE THE NEXT. ITEM F, COUNCILLOR BENTON, WOULD YOU LIKE TO ENTER THAT? >> Coun. Benton: R-216 IS NUISANCE SUBSTANDARD DWELLING IN NEED OF ABATEMENT AT 615ARNO I MOVE DO PASS. >> Coun. Gibson: I'LL SECOND. THERE IS A MOTION AND A SECOND. DO WE HAVE, DO YOU HAVE SOMETHING FOR THIS OR DO YOU WANT TO TURN IT OVER TO PLANNING. >> Coun. Benton: I GUESS WE SHOULD HEARING FROM THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT OR ADMINISTRATION ON THIS. THANK YOU. >> Coun. Gibson: DIRECTOR BRENNAN. >> BRENNAN: THANK YOU. YES, MA'AM, THIS IS A PROPERTY AT 615ARNO SOUTHEAST THAT HAS BEEN WORKED BY OUR CODE ENFORCEMENT DIVISION BECAUSE THE PROPERTY HAS BEEN UNINHABITABLE FOR ALMOST FIVE YEARS. FOUR YEARS AND 11 MONTHS. SINCE THAT TIME, CODE ENFORCEMENT HAS FREQUENTLY RESPONDED TO MISSING DOORS AND WINDOWS ON THE PROPERTY. IT HAS LACKED UTILITIES FOR THE DURATION OF THAT PERIOD, OPEN TO TRESPASS AND THE YARDS HAVE BEEN MAINTAINED OR REQUIRED MAINTENANCE FOR REMOVAL OF LITTER AND DEBRIS OR WEEDS FROM THE YARDS. CURRENTLY THERE IS OUT STAND BEING TOTAL LIEN AMOUNT OF 19,700 AND SOME CHANGE. THERE ARE STILL CONTINUE TO BE EMERGENCY CALLS FOR SERVICE TO THE PROPERTY. IN THE LAST 12 MONTHS POLICE DEPARTMENT HAS BEEN OUT AT LEAST TWICE AND CODE ENFORCEMENT CONTINUES TO RECEIVE COMPLAINTS FROM NEIGHBORS ABOUT STATUS OF THE SITE RECEIVING TWO COMPLAINTS THIS YEAR ALONE ABOUT THE CONDITION OF THE PROPERTY. VARIOUS ATTEMPTS HAVE BEEN MADE TO WORK WITH AND CONTACT PROPERTY OWNER. WHILE WE HAVE REACHED OUT OF STATE PROPERTY OWNER, THAT HAS BEEN MANY MONTHS SINCE WE RECEIVED CORRESPONDENCE OR COMMUNICATION WITH THEM. THERE HAS NOT BEEN ANY PLANS, BASED ON OUR DISCUSSIONS WITH OWNER WHEN WE WERE ABLE TO SPEAK WITH THEM FOR THEM TO EITHER ADDRESS THE HON GOING UNABATED VIOLATIONS OR COME UP WITH A PLAN TO REMODEL AND REPAIR THE EXISTING HOME AND PUT IT BACK INTO PRODUCTIVE USE. IN SHORT THE VIOLATIONS OUTSTANDING. I STAND FOR QUESTIONS. >> Coun. Gibson: ANY QUESTIONS? ALL RIGHT. COUNCILLOR BENTON? >> Coun. Benton: THANK YOU. DIRECTOR SUMMARIZED THIS WELL. I HAVE BEEN FOLLOWING THIS MYSELF SOMEWHAT. THIS IS A FAIRLY LARGE STRUCTURE. IF YOU SEE PHOTOS THAT ARE PART OF THE PACKET IT IS A LARGE STRUCTURE AND VERY CLOSE TO ADJACENT STRUCTURES. IT IS SURPRISING IN A WAY. IT WOULD BE A DIFFICULT SITUATION FROM A FIRE FIGHTINGS STANDPOINT I WOULD IMAGINE. IT IS A SUBSTANTIAL STRUCTURE IN TERRIBLY POOR CONDITION AND FOLKS IN THESE BLOCKS AROUND IN IMMEDIATE AREA ARE REALLY WORKING ON THEIR HOUSES AND TRYING TO GET THEM FIXED UP AND THIS POSES INJURY TO THE PEOPLE ON THE BLOCK. I URGE YOUR SUPPORT. >> Coun. Gibson: ALL RIGHT. ANY OTHER COMMENTS? QUESTIONS? MS. ORTEGA, CALL THE ROLE PLEASE. >> Councilor Bassan: YES. >> Coun. Benton: YES. >> Coun. Borrego: YES. >> Coun. Gibson: YES. >> Coun. Jones: YES. >> Coun. Pena: NO. >> Coun. Sena: YES. >> Coun. Davis: YES. >> THAT PASSES ON 7-1 VOTE WITH COUNCILOR HARRIS EXCUSED. >> Coun. Davis: THANK YOU MADAM VICE PRESIDENT FOR CARRYING THAT MATTER. SO, NEXT WE ARE UP ON R-217. I MAKE A MOTION TO PASS R-217 NUISANCE SUBSTANDARD IN NEED OF ABATEMENT AT 3 1/8 MESILLA. I SEE SEVERAL. I'LL TAKE COUNCILOR BASSAN. WILL YOU WAKE US THROUGH THIS. WE HAVE SEEN THIS AT COMMITTEE AND COUNCIL FOR A NUMBER OF YEARS. WE SPENT A LOT OF MONEY CLEANING UP THIS PROPERTY FOR MORE THAN TWO DECADES DEALING WITH OWNER UNCOOPERATIVE AND HAS SOME CO-EXISTING ISSUES BUT I THINK WE ARE FINALLY AT END OF THIS AND I THINK SOMETHING THAT THE LA MESA NEIGHBORHOOD WILL BE HAPPY TO KNOW IS FINALLY COMING TO RESOLUTION. COULD YOU GIVE US A QUICK UPDATE. >> THANK YOU. AS YOU MENTIONED THIS PROBLEM PROPERTY HAS BEEN DEEMED UNINHABITABLE FOR OVER TWO YEARS. PRIOR TO THAT VARIOUS AGENCIES HAVE WORKED TO KEEP THE PROPERTY CLEAN AND YARDS OF THE PROPERTY CLEAN, ENSURE THAT THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY WAS OFFERED ASSISTANCE IN SOME WAY SHAPE OR FORM THROUGHOUT THE YEARS. ALL OF THAT WORK BASICALLY HAS LED US TO WHERE WE ARE TODAY BECAUSE OF NONCOMPLIANCE AND UNCOOPERATIVE PROPERTY OWNER TO RESOLVE THE ISSUE. SINCE WORKING ON THE PROPERTY CODE ENFORCEMENT HAS BEEN OUT MULTIPLE TIMES, MOST RECENTLY TALKED TO THE PROPERTY OWNER IN JUNE OF THIS YEAR TO TRY AND ONCE AGAIN DETERMINE A PATH FORWARD. IF THERE WAS A WAY TO EITHER PROVIDE THAT OWNER WITH ASSISTANCE AND OR GET THEM INTO SOME SORT OF PROGRAM ASSISTANCE TO HELP THEM WITH THE MASSIVE AMOUNT OF OUTDOOR STORAGE OF LITTER AND DEBRIS ON THE PROPERTY. ASK THE COUNCILORS TO LOOK AT PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE PROPERTY THAT ARE IN THE PACKET. THOSE ARE ACCURATE REPRESENTATION OF THE CONTINUED CONDITION OF THE SITE. CURRENTLY THERE ARE MORE THAN 13,000 IN LIENS AGAINST THE PROPERTY. AGAIN THE HOUSE IS UNINHABITABLE, THERE HAS BEEN MULTIPLE CALL US FOR CERTIFICATES ADVICE OVER THE PAST 12 MONTHS BY THE FIRE DEPARTMENT AS WELL AS THE POLICE DEPARTMENT. MOST RECENTLY THE FIRE DEPARTMENT WAS AT THE PROPERTY IN APRIL BECAUSE OF A FIRE THAT BROKE OUT IN THE BACK YARD. BECAUSE OF ALL THE STEPS THAT HAVE BEEN TAKEN AND WE ARE JUST NOT ACHIEVING ANY COMPLIANCE WHATSOEVER, NOT MOVING FORWARD WE COME WITH REQUEST FOR CONDEMNATION. >> Coun. Pena: THANK YOU. I WOULD WEIGH IN BECAUSE I TYPICALLY DON'T VOTE FOR THEM. I THINK I VOTED FOR THEM IN THE PAST BUT I TYPICALLY DON'T VOTE FOR THEM FOR THE REASONS THAT I JUST REALLY DON'T LIKE THE IDEA OF CONDEMNATION ON PEOPLE. IT SEEMS, YOU KNOW, NOT THIS PERSON IN PARTICULAR BUT OVER AND OVER AGAIN HEARING ABOUT HOUSES THAT ARE TAKEN AWAY, WE ARE TALKS JUST IN THE PREVIOUS BILL ABOUT OUR HOMELESS POPULATION, YOU KNOW, IN THIS INSTANCE. I REALLY PROBABLY NEED TO AT SOME POINT, I HAVE TALKED ABOUT IT IN THE PAST. I THANK BRENNAN, I KNOW THEY DO ALL DUE DILIGENCE. AT COMMITTEE I HAD ASKED THEM TO TRY TO WORK WITH THIS GENTLEMAN TO FIND A WAY TO PROVIDE ASSISTANCE, YOU KNOW. I THINK WE HAVE TO HAVE A LARGER CONVERSATION AND I'LL WORK WITH OUR DIRECTOR AND CHRIS MELENDEZ TO TRY TO IDENTIFY WAYS TO PROVIDE A GRANT THAT IS REPAYABLE TO THE CITY AND THEN TRY TO LOOK AT IT FROM THAT PERSPECTIVE OF WORKING WITH OUR BEHAVIORAL HEALTH AT COUNTY TO FIND ON IT WHAT WE CAN DO. I FLOW WAS A PROPERTY THAT WE HAD IN WESTGATE WHO THERE WAS A MAN AND I THINK BRENNAN I DON'T KNOW IF YOU WERE AROUND AT THE TIME OR WHETHER IT WAS LAST ADMINISTRATION WHO WAS REALLY HAVING SOME MENTAL HEALTHISH IDEASES AND SIMILAR SITUATION. WE WERE ABLE TO WILL CRISIS TEAM GO OUT AND TRY TO HELP THAT PERSON AND REALLY GOT A LOT OF SUPPORT AND GOT SOME OF THE DEBRIS MOVED. BUT I REALLY HAVE A LOT OF HEARTBURN DOING CONDEMNATION ON PEOPLE BECAUSE WE DON'T KNOW THE REASONS BEHIND THEIR INABILITY TO FIX THEIR PROPERTY AND OR THEIR SITUATION SO ANYWAY DIDN'T MEAN TO BE LONGER ON THAT EXPLAINING BUT I AM GOING TO BE TALKING TO STAFF TO SEE IF WE COULD REALLY CREATE SOMETHING. WE NEED TO. >> THANK YOU. >> Coun. Gibson: THANK YOU. SO, I JUST WANT TO ANSWER THAT A LITTLE BIT. WE ARE ACTUALLY DOING QUITE A BIT. WE HAVE TWO GROUPS, A WORKING GROUP CALLED VACANT ABANDONED SUBSTANDARD PROPERTIES AS WELL AS ADAPT. WHICH WORKS WITH BOTH RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES AND BUSINESS PROPERTIES. TO HELP PEOPLE AND PROPRIETORS OF, YOU KNOW, REMAIN AND BE SUCCESSFUL IN THEIR HOMES OR BUSINESSES. BUT, SOMETIMES, IT DOES HAPPEN THAT THE HOUSES ARE JUST SO FAR GONE OR APARTMENTS OR WILL COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS ARE JUST SO FAR GONE AS WE HAVE ALL SEEN, ON PHOTOGRAPHS, THAT THEY HAVE TO COME DOWN. AND, I NOT THAT IN MY OWN DISTRICTS FOR A LONG TIME. WE HAVE ONLY, I THINK, YEAH, TWO PROPERTIES, A COMMERCIAL BUILDING AND A RESIDENTIAL BUILDING IN THE SIX AND A HALF YEARS I HAVE BEEN ON COUNCIL AND IT IS BECAUSE THEY HAD REACHED SUCH A POINT THAT THEY WERE NOT -- THEY WERE BEYOND REDEMPTION. ITS NOT JUST THAT THEY ARE BEYOND REDEMPTION BUT THE PEOPLE WHO HAVE LEGAL TITLE TO BOTH OF THESE PROPERTIES AND THE ONES THAT I VOTE IN FAVOR OF TAKING DOWN, EITHER ARE DECEASED OR NOT AVAILABLE OR HAVE EXPRESSED NO INTEREST IN THE PROPERTY FOR A VERY LONG TIME. SO, WHEN I VOTE YES ON THIS, I DON'T, I HOPE PEOPLE DON'T TAKE THAT AS, YOU KNOW, I AM JUST DOING THIS ON THE FLY. WHAT I AM DOING IS TRYING TO HELP THE NEIGHBORHOOD IN THOSE AREAS. THE PROPERTY OWNERS AND THE RENTERS THERE WHO ARE LIVING THERE AND TRYING TO, YOU KNOW VA , YOU KNOW HAVE A NICE LIFE. I FELT THE NEED TO SAY THAT BUT THERE IS ALWAYS SOMETHING MORE WE CAN DO, YOU KNOW, SO BOTH OF THESE THINGS COULD USE MORE PEOPLE WORKING ON THEM, PROBABLY A LITTLE MORE FUNDING. SO, ANYWAY, THAT IS IT. THAT IS ALL I WANT TO SAY ABOUT THAT. THANK YOU. >> COUNCILOR BENTON. >> Coun. Benton: I AM SYMPATHETIC TO COUNCILLOR PENA'S STATEMENT ABOUT THIS AND I HAVE BEEN THROUGH QUITE A FEW OF THESE NOW. THEY RUN THE GAM IT, RIGHT? THEY RUN THE GAMUT FROM ONES WHERE I REALLY PUSHED, I GUESS, AT THIS TIME WAS STILL THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT, WHOEVER WAS MANAGING THE PROGRAM, FOR THESE CONDEMNATIONS OR WHATEVER WE ARE CALLING THEM, TO HOLD OFF UNTIL A PROPERTY OWNER ACTUALLY WAS ABLE IN BARELAS TO BRING A HOUSE BACK. EVERY TIME I RIDE BY THERE AND SEE THAT HOUSE I THINK, DAMN, WE SAVED THAT ONE BUT THEN ANOTHER HOUSE ON BARELAS ROAD, I AM NOT PICKING ON BARELAS OR ANYTHING BUT WAS INCREDIBLY INTERESTING HISTORIC HOUSE AND IN THAT CASE, YOU KNOW, IT WAS A FAMILY WITH MULTIPLE HEIRS, THEY COULDN'T AGREE AND SOME OF THEM WANTED TO KEEP IT AND RENOVATE IT. OTHER DIDN'T. IT WAS HEART BREAKING AND ENDING UP GETTING DEMOLISHED. ANOTHER ONE RIGHT DOWN THE STREET FROM OUR HOUSE IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. THE NEIGHBORHOOD IS REALLY SUPPORTED TRYING TO, YOU KNOW, A COUPLE OF DIFFERENT PROPOSALS WERE PUT FORTH TO THE PRESENT OWNER WHO WASN'T DOING ANYTHING. OWNER WAS OUT OF STATE. IT HAS COME TO WILL NOTHING AND NOW, YOU KNOW, THAT BUILDING IS AT THE POINT WHERE, AGAIN, IT IS LIKE THE ONE WE ARE TALKING ABOUT BEFORE, IT IS A HAZARD TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD. IT COULD EASILY BURN DOWN TWO ADJACENT HOUSES. I REALLY APPRECIATE ALSO WHAT COUNCILLOR GIBSON HAS BEEN DOING WITH THIS ABANDONED TASK FORCE. I FULLY SUPPORT THAT. I ALSO REALLY AGREE WITH WHAT COUNCILLOR PENA IS SAYING, IS THAT SOME OF THESE COULD BE BROUGHT BACK. MAYBE YOU KNOW, MAYBE THE COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS ON THEM MAY BE MARGINAL BUT THERE ARE SOMETIMES HISTORIC HOUSES THAT CONTRIBUTE TO THE FABRIC OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND IF THEY COULD BE BROUGHT BACK AND PUT TO GOOD USE FOR' FORWARDABLE HOUSING OR SOMETHING ALONG THOSE LINES, I WOULD REALLY LIKE TO PITCH IN WITH THAT COUNCILLOR GIBSON. I AM SORRY I HAVEN'T HELPED MUCH WITH THAT. WITH YOUR EFFORTS ON THAT. MAYBE COUNCILLOR PENA AND YOU AND I COULD SIT DOWN AND TALK ABOUT, YOU KNOW, WHAT ARE THE OPPORTUNITIES? WHAT ARE WE MISSING HERE. I OFTEN THINK THAT WHEN THESE COME ALONG. SOMETIMES I LOOK AT THEM AND GO, WOW, LIKE AT THAT CUTE HISTORIC HOUSE AND ALL THE NEIGHBORS HATE IT AND WANT IT TO GO AWAY. WE DON'T HAVE A PROGRAM:OR A STRONG PROGRAM OR FUNDING IDENTIFIED TO GET IN AND SUBSIDIZE SAVING THOSE PROPERTIES. IT IS A TOUGH ONE. >> I TEND TO GO WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD WHATEVER THEY SAY. >> Coun. Davis: THANK YOU. I SEE COUNCILLOR PENA AGAIN AND IF WE HAVE NO OTHERS, WE'LL MOVE TO CLOSE. >> Coun. Pena: NOT ONLY CODE ENFORCEMENT WITH GET SOME OF THE BENEFITS FROM THIS, BECAUSE THEY ALWAYS NEED HELP. BUT, ALSO WE HAD SOME OF THAT, WE PROVIDED, MADE A PROVISION IN THE ORDINANCE TO FUND -- I DON'T REMEMBER WHAT IT IS CALLED BUT FOR PEOPLE WHO DO NEED MONEY, YOU KNOW, TO HELP DO A PROJECT. HELP THEM KEEP, STAY IN THE HOUSE A LITTLE BIT LONGER. AND SO THOSE TWO THINGSES. YOU KNOW. GETTING FUNDING, A FUNDING STREAM GOING, I THINK, IS REALLY IMPORTANT SO THAT IS AVAILABLE FOR EXACTLY THE THINGS THAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT. >> Coun. Davis: THANK YOU. I THINK THAT IS A GREAT WAY TO CLOSE. SO I'LL JUST SAY ON BEHALF OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD WHO HAS BEEN WAITING ON THIS A LONG TIME. WE URGE YOUR SUPPORT. >> Councilor Bassan: YES. >> Coun. Benton: YES. >> Coun. Borrego: YES. >> Coun. Gibson: YES. >> Coun. Jones: YES. >> Coun. Pena: NO. >> Coun. Sena: YES. >> Coun. Davis: YES. >> PASSES ON 7-1 VOTE. THANK YOU. >> Coun. Davis: THANK YOU FOR YOUR SUPPORT. R-28. BICYCLES. >> Coun. Benton: THANK YOU, R-28 ADOPTING THE SILVER AVENUE BIKE BOULEVARD REVIEW. >> Coun. Davis: I SECOND THAT. >> Coun. Benton: QUICKLY IF I COULD, JUST A LITTLE BIT OF BACKGROUND. MS. MORRIS IS HERE AND CAN TALK AS WELL. BUT THOSE OF YOU FAMILIAR WITH THE SILVER BIKE BOULEVARD IT HAS BEEN IN PLACE FOR A LONG TIME. IN THE RECENT PAST, COUNCIL GARDUNO FOLLOWED BY PRESIDENT DAVIS DID A PRETTY GOOD MODERN UPDATE TO THE BIKE BOULEVARD EAST OF YALE. SO, THIS PLAN I THINK WAS REALLY WELL THOUGHT THROUGH BY THE CONSULTANT. HE CAME UP WITH CONSIDERING HOW COMPLEX THOSE TWO BARRIERS ARE CAME UP WITH COMMON SENSE WAYS OF HELP DRIVING WHO ARE NOT EXPERTS BICYCLISTS. IT IS ABOUT FAMILY FRIENDLY CYCLING, MORE LEISURELY WHERE YOU HAVE KIDS WITH YOU. NOT FOR THE HARD BOILED COMMUTER THAT RIDES. SO, WE TOOK A GOOD LOOK AT THE CONDITIONS AND I THINK THEY CAME UP WITH A GOOD PLAN. MS. OTHER IS MORRIS CAN FILL UD TAKE ANY QUESTIONS. >> MORRIS: THIS STUDY REVIEWS SECTION FROM YALE WEST TO THE RIVER. THE PLAN CONTAINS A LIST OF RECOMMENDATIONS THAT RANGE IN SCOPE FROM PAINTING AND STRIPING IMPROVEMENTS AND SIGNAGE IMPROVEMENTS TO THE IMPROVEMENTS THAT COUNCILLOR BENTON MENTIONED CROSSING UNDER THE FREEWAY AND OVER THE RAILROAD TRACKS. IT INCLUDES RECOMMENDATIONS FOR KEY INTERSECTIONS THROUGHOUT TO IMPROVE ACCESSIBILITY FOR CYCLISTS AND PEDESTRIANS. THEY WOULD IMPROVE THE AREA FOR ANYONE USING THE SPACE AS WELL AS DRIVERS, IMPROVE VISIBILITY AND SIGNAGE. LET'S PEOPLE KNOW WHAT IS GOING ON AND HELPS EVERYONE. THE PLAN HAS A PRICING LIST OF EACH OF THE ITEMS WITH THE PRICING ASSOCIATED WITH EACH. THE WAY THAT THE PLAN RECOMMENDATIONS ARE SET OUT IF MONEY IS AVAILABLE TO DO EVERYTHING YOU DO EVERYTHING. BUT YOU CAN ALSO PICK THINGS OUT AND DO THEM AS FUNDING IS AVAILABLE AND IN WHATEVER ORDER IS APPROPRIATE. I AM AVAILABLE FOR QUESTIONS. >> Coun. Davis: THANK YOU FOR THE INTRODUCTION. OPPORTUNITY TO ASK QUESTIONS. GOING ONCE. GOING TWICE. SEEING NONE. COUNCILLOR BENTON TO CLOSE. >> Coun. Benton: THANKS. THANKS FOR PUTTING THAT OUT. I AM NOT SURE THAT -- THESE FACILITIES HAVE BEEN VERY POPULAR. THEY TEND TO CHOOSE STREETS THAT ARE CALMER TO BEGIN WITH. BUT, OF COURSE WHEN YOU CUT ACROSS A MAJOR INSTATE AND RAILROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY, THINGS GET COMPLICATED. SO, NONE OF THIS IS PAID FOR YET. IT IS NOTHING BUT A PLAN WITH ESTIMATES AND WE'LL SEE HOW IT CAN BE FUNDED. THE GOOD NEWS IS ALSO THAT AS MS. MORRIS SAID, WE CAN TACKLE SOME OF THE REAL SIMPLE STUFF, SIGNAGE AND BASIC SMALL MOVES. URGE YOUR SUPPORT. >> THE. >> Councilor Bassan: YES. >> Coun. Benton: YES. >> Coun. Borrego: YES. >> Coun. Gibson: YES. >> Coun. Jones: YES. >> Coun. Pena: YES. >> Coun. Sena: YES. >> Coun. Davis: YES. Q. PASSES UNANIMOUSLY WITH COUNCILOR HARRIS EXCUSED. >> Coun. Davis: CONGRATULATION S. IT HAS BEEN ANOTHER TWO HOURS, NORMALLY WE HAVE BEEN TRYING TO TAKE A BREAK. HERE IS WHAT I THINK WE DO. WE HAVE FOUR ITEMS ONE OF WHICH I THINK WILL GENERATE SIGNIFICANT DEBATE. UNLESS THERE IS ANY OBJECTION, I THINK WE WILL MOVE FORWARD. IF YOU NEED TO STEP AWAY BY ALL MEANS, CLOSE YOUR VIDEO OUT AND WE WON'T DO ANY VOTES WITHOUT EVERYBODY'S PARTICIPATION. UNLESS THERE IS OBJECTION, I THINK WE'LL TRY TO MOVE FORWARD AND SEE WHAT WE CAN GET DONE. IF ANYBODY FEELS LIKE YOU NEED A BREAK JUST RAISER HAND. NEXT UP COUNCILOR SENA. >> AMENDING APPROPRIATIONS FOR THE CORONAVIRUS SUPPORT AND RECOVERY PROGRAM. >> Coun. Gibson: SECOND. >> Coun. Sena: AOR AMENDING ,000,000 ONDOLLARS WE HAVE ALREADY SUPPORTED. ORGANIZATION REJECTED SOME OF THE FUNDING PUT FORWARD SO WE HAVE PROCESS OF GOING THROUGH APPLICATIONS AND REGAINING FUNNELEDS THAT WERE REJECTED. I JUST WANT TO SAY I REALLY WANT TO THANK THE FAMILY COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT. AGAIN, THIS ISN'T EASY TO AWARD THE GRANTS BECAUSE SO MANY ARE STEPPING UP TO HELP OUR COMMUNITIES SO WE WERE ABLE TO GO THROUGH PROCESS ONCE AGAIN AND MAKE THOSE CHANGES THAT YOU'LL SEE IN YOUR PACKET. SO, I URGE YOUR SUPPORT A AND JUST WANT TO THANK THOSE THAT PARTICIPATED FOR REALLY STEPPING UP AND HELPING US GET THROUGH THIS. >> Coun. Davis: I SEE COUNCILLOR GIBSON IS ON DATE. I WANT TO ECHO FOR GOVERNMENT WORK GETTING THIS MUCH MONEY OUT THE DOOR AND REPURPOSING WHAT WASN'T USED THE FIRST TIME IN A COUPLE OF WEEKS IS AN AMAZING FEAT, GIVEN THE CRISIS. WE CREATED A SYSTEM THAT INCLUDED EVERYBODY'S VOICE AND FOCUSED EVERYBODY'S ATTENTION TO HELP COMMUNITIES THAT NEEDED ASSISTANCE. I APPRECIATE 80 YOU AND COUNCILLOR GIBSON ALONG WITH THE STAFF. I SEE DIRECTOR PIERCE IS RAISING HER HAND. I WANT TO GO TO CO-SPONSOR. >> Coun. Gibson: I THINK YOU HIT IT ON THE HEAD. I DON'T THINK I HAVE EVER SEEN US MATH THIS QUICKLY BUT THE REASON IS BECAUSE EVERYBODY WAS WRITING TO DROP EVERYTHING ELSE, EVERYBODY WAS WILLING TO FOCUS ON THIS. THIS TAKES CARE OF THE LAST LITTLE BIT THAT WAS NOT ACCEPTED FOR VARIOUS REASONS AND THINGS DON'T ALWAYS GO THE WAY YOU THINK THEY WILL SO THIS TAKES CARE OF THAT. I AM JUST GLAD WE ARE GETTING THE LAST OF THIS MONEY OUT THE DOOR. >> Coun. Davis: YOUR TEAM DID A GREAT JOB AND HAD TO ADMINISTER THE PAPERWORK AND GET THIS MONEY OUT. GO AHEAD. >> I JUST WANT TO SAY, THANK YOU COUNCIL PRESIDENT DAVIS AND ALL THE COUNCILORS. I JUST ECHO COMMISSIONER ZNA AND GIBSON'S COMMENTS. REALLY A BIG TEAM EFFORT. PROUD TO GET THIS MONEY OUT IN THE COMMUNITY. WHEN I GAVE AN UPDATE WE HAD LIKE THREE THAT WERE STRAGGLING, AND THEY ARE ALL OUT THE DOOR AND THESE SUPPLEMENTARY CONTRACTS WE REVED UP ENGINES READY TO GO WITH APPROVAL TONIGHT. I AM EXCITED ABOUT ONE OF THE FELLOW SISTER DEPARTMENTS EQUITY AND INCLUSION, THEY ARE WORKING ON A RESOURCE DIRECTORY AVAILABLE SOON THAT WILL BE AVAILABLE TO THE COMMUNITY TO GET THE WORD OUT WHEN SOMEBODY IS LOOKING FOR EVICTION PREVENTION OR FOOD OR ONE OF THE MANY THINGS THAT THAT MONEY WENT FOR. THEY CAN USE THAT AS DIRECTORY. I THINK THAT IS IMPORTANT AND AVAILABLE THIS WEEK. THAT IS FINE WORK OF EQUITY AND INCLUSION. THANK YOU. >> Coun. Davis: THAT IS A GREAT MODEL. WE TALKED ABOUT CREATING THAT DIRECTORY FOR ALL KIND OF THINGS INCLUDING COMMUNITY SERVICE DEPARTMENT THAT WILL HELP LIMIT THE NEED TO SEND FIRST RESPONDERS WHERE THOSE OTHER SERVICES CAN BE AVAILABLE AND 768 HELP LINE. THANKS FOR ALL THAT. OTHER COUNCILORS, OTHER DISCUSSION? IF NOT, LAST CALL FROM THE SPONSORS FOR CLOSE. THEN WE'LL GO TO MS. ORTEGA. >> Coun. Gibson: URGE YOUR SUPPORT. >> Councilor Bassan: YES. >> Coun. Benton: YES. >> Coun. Borrego: YES. >> Coun. Gibson: YES. >> Coun. Jones: YES. >> Coun. Pena: YES. >> Coun. Sena: YES. >> Coun. Davis: YES. >> Coun. Davis: YES. PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. >> Coun. Davis: CONGRATULATION S. NEXT UP R-78. >> Coun. Borrego: WOULD YOU LIKE FOR ME TO DISCUSS THIS. >> Coun. Gibson: GO AHEAD. >> Coun. Borrego: I WOULD LIKE TO MOVE R-78. AND R-78 IS APPROVING FISCAL YEAR 2021 APPROPRIATIONS TO PROVIDE FOR OUTDOOR DINING AND OUTDOOR RETAIL GRANTS TO LOCAL BUSINESSES. AND, BASICALLY WHAT THIS BILL DOES IS IT PROVIDES 300,000 IN ADDITION TO THE MAYOR'S 200,000, WHICH WAS APPROPRIATED VERY RECENTLY FOR ACTIVITIES THAT INCLUDE BOTH OUTDOOR DINING AND OUTDOOR RETAIL GRANTS. AND THIS WOULD BE USED FOR ADDITIONAL TENTS. WE HAVE HAD OVER 100 BUSINESSES, RESTAURANTS COME IN FOR THE OUTDOOR TENTS AND MANY OF YOU ALL WHO HAVE HAD SOME DINING IN THE RECENT WEEKS, HAVE SEEN THOSE TENTS INCREASE AND THAT HAS BEEN A VERY SUCCESSFUL BILL THAT COUNCILOR GIBSON AND I SPONSORED A COUPLE OF MONTHS AGO. AND, SO, THIS BASICALLY PROVIDES ADDITIONAL FUNDING TO ASSIST THOSE SMALL BUSINESSES. IT EXPANDS IT TO OUTDOOR RETAIL SO, SMALL BUSINESSES AS WE HAD A DISCUSSION SOME TIME AGO AND COUNCILOR BASSAN REMEMBERING WHEN WE TALK ABOUT A SMALL BUSINESS, THAT THIS WOULD PROVIDE FUNDING FOR BARRICADES, FOR EXAMPLE, OR WHATEVER WOULD HELP TO ASSIST IN THAT BUSINESS EXPANDING OUTDOORS. SO, THAT WOULD BE DETERMINED AS THEY MAKE THEIR APPLICATIONS WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT. AND SO I URGE YOUR SUPPORT ON THAT AND I THINK WE NEED A SECOND? THE. >> Coun. Davis: I SUSPECTS YOUR CO-SPONSOR IS THAT. I SEE HER RAISE HER HAND. WE'LL TAKE COUNCILLOR GIBSON AS SECOND. COUNCILOR GIBSON FOR OPENING COMMENTS AND SPONSOR SOURS HAVE S HAVE AN AMENDMENT. >> Coun. Gibson: WE DO HAVE A FLOOR AMENDMENT. IT IS IN YOUR I PADS. MINE IS HERE SOMEWHERE. >> Coun. Borrego: I CAN LEAD TO IF YOU WOULD LIKE ME TO. I'LL READ IT INTO THE RECORD. PAGE 2, LINE 7 AFTER THE TERM RETAIL INSERT THE FOLLOWING LANGUAGE, IN PARKING LOTS, NO. 2, PAGE 2, AFTER LINE 8, INSERT THE FOLLOWING WHEREAS COUNCIL RESOLUTION R-20-87 IS CURRENTLY BEING PROPOSED AND WOULD DIRECT ADMINISTRATION TO EXPAND ACTIVE STREETS INITIATIVE ESTABLISHED BY R-20-59 IN ORDER TO ALSO FACILITATE SAFE, SOCIALLY DISTANCED OUTDOOR COMMERCIAL FOOD AND BEVERAGE SERVICE OPPORTUNITIES ON CERTAIN TREATS FOR THE DURATION OF THE CURRENT PUBLIC HEALTH EMERGENCY ORDERS. THIS BASICALLY ADDRESSES A BILL THAT IS COMING UP THAT COUNCILLOR BENTON IS SPONSORING SO, IT IS ACTUALLY WOULD MAKE AN AMENDMENT TO HIS BILL AS WELL. SUPPORT OF RESCUE INCLUDE HIS BILL IN THIS AMENDMENT, RATHER. >> SECOND. >> Coun. Davis: COUNCILOR WILL SECOND. CAN YOU CLARIFY THE SECOND PART HOW IT RELATES TO RESOLUTION 20-59? I WANT TO BE SURE HOW THESE TWO PIECES GO TOGETHER AND HOW MUCH WE ARE APPROPRIATING. >> YES, THANK YOU. SO, THE SECOND PART OF THIS AMENDMENT IS ACTUALLY ADDING A WHEREAS STATEMENT TO THE CURRENT BILL THAT IS UP FOR DISCUSSION. THIS KIND OF ACTUALLY IS SETTING MORE TONE TO SAY A BILL WILL BE PROPOSED THAT WOULD ALLOW RETAIL, I AM SORRY, COMMERCIAL AND OUTDOOR DINING SPACE INTO STREETS AS WELL AS INTO THEIR PARKING AREAS. SO, I BELIEVE THE UPON SUPPORT OF RESCUE JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THESE ARE COMPLIMENTARY INITIATIVES. THE 500,000 BEING APPROPRIATED IN THIS BILL COULD COVER THE 200,000 FOR THE MAYOR'S GRANTS THAT AND BUILT.ING THAT UP ANOTHER 300,000. , BUMPING IT UP ANOTHER 300,000, TO SET UP TENTS. THAT IS IN CONTRASTING TO COUNCILLOR BENTON'S BILL WHICH WOULD ALLOW STREETS TO BE BLOCKED OFF TO PROVIDE FOR RETAIL AND DINING SPACE. THERE IS ANOTHER 500,000 DOLLARS BEING PROPOSED FOR THAT PURPOSE. SO, THAT IS THE DIFFERENCE THERE. >> JUST TO CLARIFY, THEY ARE NOT CONTRASTING, THEY COULD BE COMPLIMENTARY. YES THEY WORK TOGETHER. >> Coun. Davis: A COUPLE OF FOLKS UP FOR QUESTION OR CONVERSATION. I HAVE COUNCILORS GIBSON, BORREGO. >> Coun. Borrego: I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY SOMETHING WITH REGARD TO THE BILL, 200,000 HAS ALREADY BEEN APPROPRIATED BY THE MAYOR AND SO WE ARE ADDING IN OUR BILL AN ADDITIONAL 300,000 AND IT IS ALSO IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT IS COMING FROM THE CARES ACT FUNDING. >> Coun. Davis: THANK YOU. >> Coun. Gibson: THE DOG WON'T LET ME USE MY MOUSE. SO, I JUST WANTED TO TALK A LITTLE BIT. THERE IS OBVIOUSLY A NEED FOR THIS. THERE IS A DEMAND FOR HELP FOR NOT ONLY RESTAURANTS BUT MERCHANTS, RETAILERS WHO, YOU KNOW, CERTAINLY TOOK ADVANTAGE AND CONTINUE TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE IDEA OF EXPANDING INTO MAKERRING LOTS OR COMMON AREAS. SIDEWALKS, BUT, YOU KNOW, IT COSTS MONEY TO DO THAT. AN THEY YOUR ALREADY STRETCHED TRYING TO MAKE PAYROLL TO KEEP THE LIGHTS ON. SO, NOT ONLY WOULD THIS PROVIDE SHADE COVER, YOU KNOW, BUT IT ALSO COULD POTENTIALLY BE USED FOR TEMPERATURE CONTROL, IT HAS BEEN VERY HOT. I HAVEN'T BEEN OUT YET ONTO A PATIO BUT I UNDERSTAND THAT UNLESS YOU GO AND CAN BE THERE LATER, QUITE A BIT LATER, IT CAN BE PRETTY TOASTY, SO THERE ARE PORTABLE COOLERS, CHILLERS THAT ARE AVAILABILITY. ALSO THERE IS NOT TON PRODUCE AN AESTHETICALLY PLEASING ENVIRONMENT AS MUCH AS CAN YOU OUT OF A PARKING LOT, BUT THERE IS A LARGE SAFETY ELEMENT HERE, YOU KNOW. BARRIERS, AT TIMES, ARE NEEDED, DEPENDING WHERE YOU ARE. SO ALL OF THOSE CAN GET QUITE COSTLY. I THINK THIS IS EXCELLENT USE OF CARES ACTS MONEY TO KEEP PEOPLE EMPLOYED AND BUSINESSES IN BUSINESS, AND OBVIOUSLY WE'LL FIND OUT FROM THE 200,000 THAT MAYOR KELLER MADE AVAILABLE THAT THERE IS A LOT OF INTEREST AND NEED FOR THAT. THAT WILL AUGMENT THAT. THANK YOU. >> Councilor Bassan: THANK YOU MR. PRESIDENT. I DO HAVE SEVERAL QUESTIONS. WHETHER IT BE FOR THE SPONSORS OR MAYBE ADMINISTRATION, WITH REGARDS TO THIS. THIS IMPLEMENTATION OF COURSE, ABSOLUTELY ADVOCATE FOR HELPING OUT BUSINESSES AND MAKING SURE THAT PEOPLE CAN USE THESE FACILITIES SAFELY AND WE CAN DO WHAT WE CAN ESPECIALLY WITH THE CARES MONEY BUT I HAVE A FEW QUESTIONS AS TO HOW DO PEOPLE APPLY AND I KNOW THIS IS THROUGH THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT BUT HOW DO THEY APPLY AND HOW MUCH DOES EACH RECIPIENT RECEIVE OR WHAT ARE THE METRICS AGAIN, INVOLVED IN THIS PROCESS. >> Coun. Davis: GOES TO ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND IN THAT SCREEN I SEE A FIE FIGHTER AND TWO OTHERS TO HELP US ANSWER THAT QUESTION. >> RAEL: METROPOLITAN REDEVELOPMENT WILL BE GIVING YOU SOME STRUCTURE OF HOW WE HAVE PROCEEDED SO FAR WITH THE OUTDOOR, AS YOU WILL, RESTAURANT EXPANSION, A VERY LONG MATRIX, IF YOU WILL, ABOUT AMOUNT OF MONEY AWARDED PER BUSINESS, DEPENDING ON THE EXPANSION REQUEST, ET CETERA. SO, IT IS A PRETTY GOOD MATRIX AS IT RELATES TO THE SIZE OF THE BIRKS WHAT THE EXPANSION IS GOING TO BE AND THEN MOVING FORWARD WITH MAKING SURE THAT IF THEY ARE IN THE CITY'S RIGHT-OF-WAY OR IN A PRIVATE AREA, SPACE, ET CETERA, AND THEN WHAT KIND OF FACILITY THEY MIGHT NEED WHETHER IT IS A STRUCTURE THAT IS BUILT OR WHETHER IT IS ON A CANOPY OF SORTS THAT MAYBE CAN BE RENTED OR LEASED OUT. I AM THINKING THAT SHE IS AVAILABLE NOW TO GIVE YOU INFORMATION SO I AGOING TO TURN IT OVER TO HER. >> Coun. Davis: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT. WE JUST CAN'T HEAR YOU. THERE WE GO. >> THANK YOU. SO, THE GRANTS, THE APPLICATION FOR A GRANT IS AVAILABLE AT C ABQ.OUTDOOR-DINING. >> CABQ.GOV FORWARD SLASH OUTDOOR SLASH DINING. THAT IS WEBSITE TO GET APPLICATION. IT IS MULTI WEB FORM, SINAL MANY FOR PEOPLE TO FILL OUT AND UP LOAD THEIR INFORMATION. THE AWARDS RANGE FROM 25 RUN TO 2500 TO 5,000. DEPENDING WHAT WE ARE SEEKING FTHEY ARE SEEKING SIDEWALK DINING EXPANSION IT IS LOW END. IF THEY ARE PROPOSING TO EXPAND INTO A STREET IS AT HIGHER END OF THAT SCALE. SO FAR WE HAVE HAD 100 FOLKS APPLY. WE HAVE LAST WEEK WE RAN THE FIRST LOTTERY OF PEOPLE. WE ARE SELECTING PEOPLE VIA A LOTTERY. WE HAVE MORE APPLICANTS THAN FUNDING AND THEY GO INTO A LOTTERY. THERE IS A PREFERENCE FOR BUSINESSES THAT ARE LOCATED EITHER IN METROPOLITAN REDEVELOPMENT DISTRICTED OR MAIN STREET OR PREFERENCE FOR BUSINESSES OWNED BY WOMEN OWNED OR SMALL MINORITY BUSINESS OWNERS. WE HAVE CHOSEN THE FIRST GROUP, BATCH, OF APPLICANTS AND AT THAT TIME WE WERE ABLE, BECAUSE WE HAD 30 LOTTERY SLOTS AND 29 APPLICANTS, EVERYBODY WAS ABLE TO BE BE AWARDED. WE HOPE TO RUN IT EVERY WEEK TO 10 DAYS WITH NEW APPLICATIONS. >> MR. PRESIDENT I HAVE A FEW MORE QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS. IF I CAN. >> THANK YOU. SO, THAT HELPS. IS THIS PROPOSED 300,000 ADDING ONTO THE 200,000 AND THE SAME EXACT PROCESS FOR THE, OUR USING SAME EVALUATION FOR APPLICANTS? >> I CAN ANSWER THAT QUESTION. YES, COUNCILOR IT WOULD BE FOR THE SAME EXACT PROCESS. >> Councilor Bassan: WE ARE INCREASING THAT TO A TOTALING OF 500,000. CAN PEOPLE APPLY DUPLICATIVELY. CAN THEY APPLY ONCE AND DO IT AGAIN. IF THEY HAVE GONE THROUGH OR JUST ONE COMPANY AND BUSINESS ALLOWED? >> I BELIEVE WE WILL HAVE MORE DEMAND THAN WE HAVE FUNDING. WE CHOOSE TO MAKE IT AVAILABLE TO ONE GRANT PER COMPANY. THAT IS THE WAY WE ARE ADMINISTERING IT RIGHT NOW. IF WE GOT TO A POSITION WHERE DEMAND RUNS OUT WE COULD LOOK AT GOING BACK TO THE LIST AND HAVING A HIGHER GRANT BUT THAT DOESN'T SEEM TO BE THE TRAJECTORY WE ARE ON. >> Councilor Bassan: MY FINAL QUESTION IS DO PEOPLE APPLY RETAIL FACILITY RETAIL FACILITY APPLY RETROACTIVELY. CAN THEY GET REIMBURSED FOR SOMETHING THEY PAID OUT. >> YES. THE GRANT FUNDS ARE AVAILABLE TO REIMBURSE COSTS BACK TO WHEN OUTDOOR DINING WAS FIRST MADE AVAILABLE IN MAY. >> Councilor Bassan: THANK YOU. >> RAEL: IF I MIGHT MAKE 1 POINT. KEEP IF MIND ALL THESE AWARDEES MUST GET PERMITS THROUGH THE PROPER CHANNELS FOR EXPANSION, FIRE MARSHAL REVIEW, ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH, ET CETERA. I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT IS A REQUIREMENT THAT IS IMPORTANT TO US. WE APPRECIATE AS WE MOVE THROUGH THIS SO EVERYBODY IS IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE CITY'S RULES. >> Councilor Bassan: CAN I FOLLOW-UP. SO, MR. RAEL SO PEOPLE CAN USE AS WRITTEN IN THIS THEY CAN USE IT TO ACTUALLY PAY TO EXPAND THE SPACE AND ANY MEANS NECESSARY FOR THAT, RIGHT? >> IVERSON: COUNCILOR BASSAN I DIDN'T UNDERSTAND THE QUESTION. >> Councilor Bassan: IF BUSINESSES A PLY AND FOLLOW PERMITTING PROCESS, THIS IS JUST FOR ANY MEANS FOR EXPANSION OR IS THIS FOR MORE OF THE ESTHETICS OF DINING TO MAKE IT MORE ENTICING? JUST SO WE CAN TELL CONSTITUENTS HOW BEST THEY GO ABOUT RECEIVING THESE AND APPLYING FOR THEM? >> IVERSON: THE FUND ARE AVAILABLE, THEY ARE REALLY GEARED TO EXPANSION OF SPACE. BUT, THERE ARE A LOT OF COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH EVEN GETTING AN EXISTING PATIO HAVING THE RIGHT PPE, HAVING ADDITIONAL STAFF, HAVING SECURITY THAT YOU KNOW, IT IS SLIGHTLY FLEXIBLE IN THAT SENSE BUT THE MAIN THRUST OF IS FOR PEOPLE TO EXPAND CAPACITY WITH EXPANDED OUTDOOR DINING AREAS. >> Coun. Borrego: THE WAY THE BILL IS WRITTEN IT IS TO FACILITATE SAFE, SOCIALLY DISTANCED OUTDOOR COMMERCIAL FOOD AND BEVERAGE SERVICE OPPORTUNITIES AND SO THAT IS THE COUNCILOR BENTON'S BILL. THIS PARTICULAR BILL IS KIND OF MIRRORING THAT BUT ALSO INCLUDES RETAIL. EXPANSION. SO, ANY OPPORTUNITY THAT WOULD ALLOW FOR THAT TO OCCUR, AND WITHIN REASON, I MEAN, YOU KNOW, I THINK THAT WOULD BE UP TO THE CODE ENFORCEMENT FOLKS WHEN THEY ARE GIVING OUT THE PERMIT AND THE FIRE DEPARTMENT. I SEE OUR DEPUTY CHIEF SITTING THERE. >> Councilor Bassan: IT IS A QUESTION ABOUT PERMANENT EXPANSION. IF A RESTAURANT HAS PERMANENT PATIO SPACE CAN IT BE EXPANDED FURTHER OR JUST ON RETAIL PLACES THAT DON'T CURRENTLY HAVE OUTDOOR SPACE. >> Coun. Borrego: I GUESS THAT IT IS BASED ON THE SITE PLAN THEY PRESENT. BECAUSE EACH SITE PLAN AND IT IS A DRAWING THAT WOULD BE CODE ENFORCEMENT. I DON'T KNOW IF BRENNAN IS AVAILABLE BUT EACH ONE IS LOOKED AT INDIVIDUALLY. WE ARE BACK TO COUNCILOR SENA. THEN WE'LL GO BACK TO THE SPONSORS TO CLOSE. >> Coun. Sena: WHAT HAS BEEN THE OUTREACH THAT HAS BEEN DONE SPECIFICALLY TO, YOU KNOW, YOU TOUCHED ON THIS BRIEFLY ABOUT PREFERENCE TO, YOU KNOW, BUSINESSES THAT YOUR OWNED BY COMMUNITIES OF COLOR. WHAT SPECIFIC OUTREACH HAS BEEN DONE? >> YES, APPLICATION IS CURRENTLY AVAILABLE IN SPANISH ENGLISH. APPLICANTS CAN USE THE CITY'S TRANSLATION SERVICES AND WE HAVE MADE OUTREACH THROUGH ALL THOSE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE ASSOCIATIONS INCLUDING HISPANIC CHAMBER AND BLACK CHAMBER. >> Coun. Sena: A LOT OF OUR ASIAN AMERICAN PACIFIC ISLANDER OWNS BUSINESSES HAVE BEEN HIT HARD WELL BEFORE FEELING IMPACTS OF PANDEMIC BECAUSE OF ANTI-ASIAN SENTIMENT AND RACISM DUE TO THE VIRUS. SO, MY QUESTION REALLY IS EMPHASIZE OUTREACH TO THESE BUSINESSES ARE CRITICAL BECAUSE THEY ARE FACING A LOT OF THE IMPACTS WELL BEFORE WE AS A CITY EVEN FELT IMPACTS. HOPE THAT THE OUTREACH IS BEING DONE BEYOND THE CHAMBERS OF COMMERCIAL, BEYOND SOME OF THESE ORGANIZATIONS BECAUSE WE DON'T CURRENTLY HAVE AN ASIAN AMERICAN CHAMBER WITHIN THE CITY BUT I KNOW THAT WE CERTAINLY DO NEED HAVE THAT OUTREACH. I HAVE MANY CONSTITUENTS REACHING OUT HAVING CONCERNS THAT THEY HAVE A LANGUAGE BARRIER ACCESS AND THEY JUST DIDN'T KNOW, BY THE TIME THEY DID KNOW, THE GRANT PROCESS HAD ALREADY ENDED. SO, I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT IT IS EMPHASIZED AND STRESSED AND WE HAVE A LARGE ASIAN AMERICAN POPULATION AND I WANT TO STRESS THAT. MY QUESTION IS ALSO I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW THE COMPOSITION SUCH AS DEMOGRAPHICS OF SOME OF THE AWARDEES GRANTED TO MAKE SURE ITS IS EQUITABLE PROCESS. IS IT POSSIBLE TO GET A LIST OF THOSE? >> YES. THAT IS ABSOLUTELY DOABLE. WE WOULD BE MORE THAN HAPPY TO PROVIDE A LIST AND DEMOGRAPHICS OF THE FOLKS THAT HAVE APPLIED. I ALSO WOULD LIKE TO DEFER TO DIRECTOR JARAMILLO WHO HAS SOMETHING TO ADD TO THE OUTREACH POSSIBILITY. >> HAR A >> JARAMILLO: I WANT YOU TO KNOW WE ARE MOVING FORWARD WITH WORKING WITH NEWLY FORMED ASIAN BUSINESS COLLABORATIVE WORKING A YOUNG WOMAN NAMED KRISTELLE SIARZA. WE WILL WORK WITH THAT ORGANIZATION NEWLY FORMED AND WE SILENT SECOND AGAIN BE INTENTIONAL AT REACHING OUT TO ASIAN AMERICAN BUSINESS OWNERS, PACIFIC ISLANDER BUSINESS OWNERS AND ACTUALLY LOOKING TO DEPLOY A PARTNERSHIP WITH KRISTELLE AND THE NEW ORGANIZATION. I WANTED TO LET YOU KNOW WE ARE MOVING FORWARD WITH THAT OPPORTUNITY. >> Coun. Sena: THANK YOU. I JUST WANT TO FOLLOW-UP. I APPRECIATE THAT AS M S. SIARZA DID APPROACH ME AS WELL. I AM GLAD THAT YOUR IN CONVERSATION AS THEY KIND LOOKED TO ME FOR THAT AS WELL. MY LAST QUESTION IS REALLY TO ASK, FOR THOSE THAT HAVE HAD, YOU KNOW, VIOLATION OF THE PUBLIC HEALTH ORDER, IS THAT CONSIDERATION THAT THEY DIDN'T KNOW OR, IS THAT A CONSIDERATION IN THE BUSINESS APPLICATIONS FOR THE GRANT FUNDING? >> WE HAVE NOT REALLY HAD ANY TYPES OF VIOLATIONS FROM BUSINESSES RESTAURANTS ANYTHING LIKE THAT TO REALLY THE COMPARE OR CROSS REFERENCE THOSE THAT APPLY AND THOSE CITED FOR ANY TYPE OF PUBLIC HEALTH ORDER VIOLATION. RIGHT NOW WE HAVE NOT LOOKED THAT AT ALL. HAVEN'T HAD TO. >> Coun. Sena: THANK YOU. >> Coun. Davis: THANK YOU. AS A REMINDER WE ARE ON FLOOR AMENDMENT NO. 1 AND MOTION TO APPROVE FLOOR AMENDMENT NO. 1 OFFERED. SO WE'LL LET THOSE SPONSORS MAKE ANY FINAL REQUEST FOR APPROVAL. OTHERWISE TO MS. ORTEGA FOR THE VOTE. >> Coun. Borrego: URGE YOUR SUPPORT. >> Councilor Bassan: YES. >> Coun. Benton: YES. >> Coun. Borrego: YES. >> Coun. Gibson: YES. >> Coun. Jones: YES. >> Coun. Pena: YES. >> Coun. Sena: YES. >> Coun. Davis: YES. THAT AMENDMENT PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. >> Coun. Davis: THANK YOU. WE ARE BACK ON THE BILL AS AMENDED. BACK TO THE SPONSORS. >> Coun. Borrego: URGE YOUR SUPPORT. >> Councilor Bassan: YES. >> Coun. Benton: YES. >> Coun. Borrego: YES. >> Coun. Gibson: YES. >> Coun. Jones: YES. >> Coun. Pena: YES. >> Coun. Sena: YES. >> Coun. Davis: YES. >> THAT PASSES UNANIMOUSLY AS AMENDED. >> Coun. Davis: THANK YOU. I DISAPPEARED. COUNCILORS JUST TO KEEP THIS CONVERSATION ROLLING WE ARE GOING TO TAKE LAST TWO ITEMS OUT OF ORDER. COUNCILLOR BENTON PRESENT R-87 NEXT SINCE IT RELATES TO DINING ISSUE. THEN WE'LL END WITH R-80 WHICH RESOLUTION COUNCILLOR PENA ADDED FOR IMMEDIATE ACTION. >> Coun. Benton: THANK YOU. R-87 DIRECTING ADMINISTRATION TO EXPAND THE ACTIVE STREETS INITIATIVE ESTABLISHED BY R-20-59 IN ORDER TO ALSO FACILITATE SAFE, SOCIALLY DISTANCED OUTDOOR COMMERCIAL FOOD AND BEVERAGE SERVICE OPPORTUNITIES ON CERTAIN STREETS DURING THE PRESENT PUBLIC HEALTH EMERGENCY. I MOVE A DO PASS. >> Coun. Gibson: SECOND. >> Coun. Benton: CAN YOU HEAR ME OKAY? ALL RIGHT. SO, WE DO HAVE A FLOOR AMENDMENT IN THE I PADS. I THINK THIS IS FROM COUNCIL BORREGO. IF I AM NOT MISTAKEN. BUT I DID WANT TO ADDRESS AND PROBABLY ASK COUNCIL BORREGO ABOUT IT. BUT BASICALLY, THIS IS EXPANDING ON A BILL WE PASSED AT LAST MEETING. AFTER THE VERY QUICK ACTION AND I APPRECIATE THAT ACTION BY THE DMD AND BY ADMINISTRATION TO IDENTIFY STREETS FOR CLOSURE WITH THE ACTUAL STREETS PROPOSAL. I HAD SOME REQUESTS AND THESE ARE FROM BUSINESSES THAT REALLY DON'T HAVE A PARKING LOT THAT IS APPROPRIATE FOR CONVERSION, SO THEY DON'T HAVE MUCH OF A SIDEWALK. THEY DON'T HAVE MUCH OF A PARKING LOT THAT COULD BE USED, THESE TEND TO BE IN OLDER PARTS OF TOWN WHERE THERE IS HISTORICALLY HAS NOT BEEN A PARKING REQUIREMENT BUT OPERATING OVER THE YEARS SO THE IDEA WAS TO EXPAND THIS SOMEWHAT AND WE DID IDENTIFY FUNDING 4 IT. WITHIN THE CARES ACT, BECAUSE THE BIG COST OF A STREET CLOSURE IS BARRICADE, I MEAN, THE COST OF THE TEMPORARY STREET CLOSURE IS BARRICADING. INTENTIONALLY WHEN MR. MELENDRES AND I WERE DRAFTING THIS, WE DID CONSIDER THE RETAIL COMPONENT OR POSSIBILITY FOR RETAILER OUT IN THE STREET AS WELL. MY CONCLUSION WAS THIS MONEY WAS NOT GOING VERY FAR BECAUSE IT IS A HIGHLY EXPENSIVE BARRICADING AND THAT UNLIKE RETAIL, WHICH CAN STILL BE OPEN MOST OF IT, UNDER THE CURRENT EMERGENCY, FOOD SERVICE AND BEVERAGE SERVICE IS NOT ALLOWED INDOORS AT ALL. SO, WE MADE THAT DISTINCTION AND BATTED IT BACK AND FORTH. THE AMENDMENT WOULD ADD RETAIL. I AM NOT NECESSARILY OPPOSED TO IT BUT I KNOW THAT SOME OF THESE ENTITIES AND AGAIN THEY ARE TYPICALLY IN OLD TOWN, DOWNTOWN, NOB HILL PLACES WHERE THEY HAVE A HISTORIC STORE FRONT TYPE DEVELOPMENT PATTERN WITHOUT NECESSARILY ANY PARKING LOT OR ANY SIGNIFICANT SIDEWALK TO EXPAND ONTO. THAT IS WHAT THE BILL IS ABOUT AND MR. MELENDRES COULD ANSWER QUESTIONS BUT WE DESIGNED IT THAT WAY. I VERY MUCH APPRECIATE THE REFERENCES FROM COUNCILOR BORREGO AND GIBSON. >> Coun. Davis: WE HAVE MOVED THE BILL. WE HAVEN'T MOVED AMENDMENT YET. I ASSUME HAVE YOU THAT MOTION FOR FLOOR AMENDMENT NO. 1. I WANT TO BE SURE WE KEEP OURSELVES TOGETHER. >> Coun. Borrego: I DO. WOULD YOU LIKE ME TO READ THAT INTO THE RECORD? >> Coun. Davis: AMENDMENT HAS BEEN AVAILABLE AND IT IS FAIRLY LENGTHY, SO, IF YOU WANT TO READ EXPLANATION BUT IT HAS BEEN AVAILABLE FOR REVIEW. >> Coun. Borrego: IT IS JUST ADDING RETAIL ESTABLISHMENTS. I THINK THAT COUNCILLOR BENTON'S BILL IS GREAT AND I THINK IT REALLY DOES HANDLE AREAS THAT ARE MORE INNER CITY NEIGHBORHOODS THAT HAVE A DIFFERENT DEVELOPMENT PATTERN AS YOU MENTIONED. SO I THINK I WOULD URGE, I WOULD MOVE THIS BILL AND I HOPE TO HAVE A SECOND. >> Coun. Davis: MOTION ON THE FLOOR IS FOR FLOOR AMENDMENT NO. 1. DO WE HAVE A SECOND? I SEE COUNCILLOR GIBSON SAYING YES. WE'LL TAKE HER. WILL DISCUSSION ON FLOOR AMENDMENT NO. 1. >> Councilor Bassan: THANK YOU. I AM WONDERING IF WE CAN GET A LITTLE BIT OF FOLLOW-UP FROM MAYBE PLANNING AND DIRECTOR WILLIAMS REGARDING COUNCILLOR BENTON'S COMMENT ABOUT HOW IT WAS CONSIDERED WITH RETAIL SPACES BUT, I MEAN, I AM LEANING AND AGREEING WITH COUNCILLOR BENTON. I AM NOT OPPOSED TO IT. HAPPY TO HELP LOCAL BUSINESSES BUT HOWEVER PEOPLE CAN GO INSIDE AND SHOP AT RETAIL STORES. I AM WONDERING WHAT PLANNING SAYS ABOUT REALITY AND KIND OF REALISTIC PURPOSES AND IF IT IS GOING TO MAKE IT HARDER TO HELP MORE PEOPLE OR WON'T MATTER. KIND OF WHERE WE ARE AT WITH THAT. >> Coun. Davis: START WITH YOU ON THAT ONE. ANY THOUGHTS ON SORT OF HOW THIS MIGHT GO? >> RAEL MR. PRESIDENT AND COUNCILOR BASSAN, A COUPLE OF THINGSES WE HAVE TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION, AND MR. BRENNAN DID LEAVE EARLY, BUT, AN ISSUE ABOUT THIS IS THAT IT WORKING WELL IN STREETS WHERE YOU DON'T HAVE COMPETING BUSINESSES WHERE YOU HAVE MAYBE A RESTAURANT THAT MIGHT WANT TO USE A PART OF THE STREET BUT ACROSS THE STREET THERE IS RETAIL SHOPS THAT RELIES ON TRAFFIC REALLY TO FLOW IN FRONT OF THEIR RESTAURANTS OR WHERE YOU HAVE DIFFERENT TYPES OF RESTAURANTS THAT MAYBE YOU HAVE A GRAB AND GO RESTAURANT NEXT TO A MORE TRADITIONAL DINING RESTAURANT. WE HAVE TO KEEP THE STREETS OPEN. SO, THAT IS THE CONVERSATION THAT WE HAVE TO TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION AS WE LOOK AT THIS EXPANSION BECAUSE THIS ACTUALLY DOES, IN SOME CASES, REQUIRE US TO CLOSE A PORTION OF THE STREET OR PUT IN THE APPROPRIATE BARRICADES. SO, IT IS FAIRLY UNIQUE IN THAT THERE ARE NOT VERY MANY AIR WHYS WHERE YOU CAN DO THIS COMPLETELY. I DON'T KNOW IF, I'LL DEFER TO COUNCILLOR BENTON WHETHER OR NOT IF YOU WERE APPLYING THIS TO RETAIL. THAT IS THE CHALLENGE WE HAVE IS JUST MANAGING ACTUAL ACCESS ON THE STREETS FOR DIFFERENT TYPES OF BUSINESSES. THERE IS GOING TO BE SOME STREETS WHERE THIS IS GOING TO WORK REALLY WELL, BECAUSE YOU'LL HAVE BUSINESSES ACROSS THE STREET FROM EACH OTHER THAT ARE COMPATIBLE AND SOME AREAS WE MAY NOT BE ABLE TO DO IT BECAUSE OF THE DIFFERENT NEEDS OF THE BUSINESSES ON THAT STREET. >> Councilor Bassan: IF I CAN RESPOND AND ASK ONE MORE QUESTION. IF YOU WANT TO PITCH IN, I WOULD BE GRATEFUL. I GUESS I AM WONDERING WHERE THAT BOUNDARY BETWEEN IT BEING BENEFICIAL AND BEING TOO CUMBERSOME COMES IN. I WOULD HATE TO PASS THIS AND SAY, OKAY, WELL, SOME RETAIL AND SOME RESTAURANTS CAN DO IT NOW, VERSUS ALL OF THEM ORIGINALLY IN THE PLAN. I NEED GUIDANCE ON RECOMMENDATIONS IF ANYONE IS WILLING TO OFFER THEM UP. >> Coun. Benton: JUST QUICKLY. THE BILL ANTICIPATES THAT THERE ARE FAIRLY LIMITED NUMBER OF PLACES WHERE THIS WOULD BE APPLICABLE. AND THAT THE KIND OF SCENARIO THAT MR. RAEL WAS TALKING ABOUT SHOULD BE CONSIDERED BY ADMINISTRATION WHEN THEY ARE LOOKING AT THIS. BUT, AGAIN, I AM NOT OPPOSED TO INCLUDING RETAIL IN IT. BUT I THINK THERE PROBABLY SHOULD BE A TIER OF KIND GIVEN THAT AS WE DISCUSSED, YOU CAN ENTER THAT RETAIL ESTABLISHMENT WHERE INDOOR DINING IS PROHIBITED WITH THE CURRENT SITUATION. RECOGNIZING THAT, CERTAINLY RECOGNIZING THE SCENARIO THAT MR. RAEL WAS TALKING ABOUT, IF THERE IS SOME KIND OF COMPETING INTERESTS, THEN ADMINISTRATION NEEDS TO BE ARBITER OF THAT WITHOUT QUESTION. WE DIDN'T CREATE SOME LARGE VOLUME OF RULES ABOUT THIS. WE BASICALLY (INAUDIBLE). IN THE SAME WAY THEY DEALT WITH ACTIVE STREETS. THEY KIND OF PUT IT OUT THERE AND PEOPLE MADE SUGGESTIONS ABOUT IT AND THEY HAVE NOW DOWN ON TO THE ONES THAT ARE FEASIBLE. THE SAME WAY THIS COULD HAPPEN WITH OR WITHOUT THE RETAIL AND I WOULD TRUST OUR FRIENDS IN THE ADMINISTRATION TO MAKE THE RIGHT CALL. BUT, I THINK WE'LL -- IT WILL BECOME EVIDENCE THAT SOME PLACES COULD REALLY USE THE HELP AND THEY ARE AGAIN ON LOW VOLUME STREETS. NOT INTENDED FOR SOME CLOSURE OF A LANE ON CENTRAL AVENUE NEW FOR INSTANCE. JUST LOCAL STREETS WITH FAIRLY LOW VOLUME. IT COULD MAKE OR BREAK SOME OF THESE RESTAURANTS AND MAYBE RETAIL AS WELL. >> Councilor Bassan: ONE MORE RESPONSE. COUNCILOR BORREGO WOULD YOU CONSIDER A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT TO ADD TO IT THAT IN CASES WHERE THERE ARE CONFLICTING SPACES BETWEEN RETAIL AND RESTAURANTS THE RESTAURANT OPTION MIGHT PREVAIL OR WILL PREVAIL. >> Coun. Borrego: I WAS GOING TO JUST FOR COMFORT LEVEL COUNCILOR BASSAN, IF YOU REMEMBER A COUPLE MEETINGS AGO WHEN WE ORIGINALLY PROPOSED THESE CONCEPTS IN SEVERAL OF OUR BILLS, COUNCILLOR GIBSON AND I, WE DID INCLUDE RETAIL SO IN ORDER TO BE CONSISTENT, THIS REALLY IS JUST FOLLOWING THAT LEAD. AND, YES, ABSOLUTELY, I THINK YOUR AMENDMENT IS GREAT AND WE COULD ADD THAT AS NO. 7 TO FLOOR AMEND. NO. 1. >> Councilor Bassan: THANK YOU FOR THE CONVERSATION ALL OF YOU AND WILLING TO DO THAT. >> Coun. Davis: WE'LL ADOPT FRIENDLY AMENDMENT AND THEY CAPTURED THAT AND WE'LL GET THAT CORRECT IN THE FINAL VERSION. SO, COUNCILOR BORREGO. I WANT TO NOTE WE HEARD A GREAT,. >> Coun. Borrego: YOU HEARD MY COMMENTS NAP WAS MY COMMENT.. >> Coun. Davis: WE HEARD HOW ADMINISTRATION SET UP SCREENING PARAMETERS TO LOOK AT ISSUES AROUND NEIGHBORHOOD NEEDS, EQUITY, OPPORTUNITY AND OTHERWISE. I JOIN COUNCILLOR BENTON IN SAYING I TRUST ADMINISTRATION TO GET IT RIGHT AND LOOK AT THOSE ISSUES AND APPRECIATE THAT. COUNCILLOR BENTON WE ARE STILL ON FLOOR AMENDMENT NO. 1. LAST COMMENT AND WE'LL CLOSE. >> Coun. Benton: UNLESS COUNCILOR I WILL ACCEPT HER AMENDMENT WITH THE COUNCILOR'S FRIENDLY AMENDMENT. >> Coun. Davis: YES WE ARE GOING TO ADOPT COUNCILOR'S NO. 7 TO COUNCILOR BORREGO'S AMEND BUT WE HAVE TO VOTE ON AMENDMENT NO. 1. THAT IS WHERE WE ARE. SO, WE'LL CALL THAT QUESTION, FLOOR AMENDMENT NO. 1. TAKE THE ROLE. >> Councilor Bassan: YES. >> Coun. Benton: YES. >> Coun. Borrego: YES. >> Coun. Gibson: YES. >> Coun. Jones: YES. >> Coun. Pena: YES. >> Coun. Sena: YES. >> Coun. Davis: YES. THAT PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. >> DAY OF BACK ON YOUR BILL AS AMENDED BY FLOOR AMENDMENT NO. 1. I DON'T BELIEVE THE OTHER DISCUSSION AND WE HAVE HAD BROAD DISCUSSION. IF YOU'LL MAKE YOUR CLOSE WE'LL GIVE EVERYBODY A CHANCE TO JUMP IN IF THEY HAVE SOMETHING. >> Coun. Benton: I DO APPRECIATE THE WHOLE COUNCIL REALLY COLLECTIVELY HAS STEPPED UP ON SOME OF THESE BILLS AND ADMINISTRATION HAS BEEN GRACIOUS ABOUT SOME OF OUR CRAZY DEADLINES THAT WE HAVE SET FOR THEM. SO, I THINK THIS DOVETAILS WELL ALL EFFORTS AND WE ARE TRYING TO DO ALL WE CAN FOR LOCAL BUSINESS AND ESPECIALLY I DO WANT TO SINGLE OUT RESTAURANTS BECAUSE OF THEIR RECENT CHANGES WHERE THEY WERE OPEN AND NOW THEY ARE CLOSED AGAIN. URGE YOUR SUPPORT. >> Coun. Davis: THANK YOU. SEEING NO OTHER DISCUSSION, MS. ORTEGA. >> Councilor Bassan: YES. >> Coun. Benton: YES. >> Coun. Borrego: YES. >> Coun. Gibson: YES. >> Coun. Jones: YES. >> Coun. Pena: YES. >> Coun. Sena: YES. >> Coun. Davis: YES. >> PASSES UNANIMOUSLY AS AMENDED WITH COUNCILOR HARRIS EXCUSED. >> Coun. Davis: WE ARE BACK ON LAST BILL OF THE EVENING. COUNCILLOR PENA YOU MOVED TO PUT R-80 ON AGENDA FOR IMMEDIATE ACTION. WILL YOU PRESENT YOUR LEGISLATOR. >> Coun. Pena: ESTABLISHING A COMMUNITY BASED PROCESS TO FIND SOLUTIONS. I DO MOVE DO PASS. >> SECOND? PRESENT A BACKGROUND. >> Coun. Pena: CAN I READ AFTER SUMMARY. THIS DIRECTS ADMINISTRATION TO COMPLETE A COMMUNITY IMPLEMENT PROVIDE RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING THE DISPLAY OF LA JORNADA ART WORK WHICH INCLUDES ONATE. I THINK THE WRITE-UP TALKS ABOUT, WHEN THEY INSTALLEDDED THIS THEY MADE SURE NOT TO NAME ANY OF THE STATUES SO I THINK THIS MIGHT BE NOT CORRECT IN OUR WRITE-UP. ANYWAY, WHICH IS CONSIDERED TO BE ONE OF THEM IS CONSIDERED TO BE ONATE. THE PIECE IS PART OF THE ALBUQUERQUE MUSEUM PUBLIC ARTS COLLECTION AND SITS OUTSIDE MUSEUM. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR INSTALLATION WILL BE PRESENTED TO ARTS BOARD FOR REVIEW AND SUBMITTED TO CITY COUNCIL FOR CONSIDERATION. SO, WE JUST WANTED TO SAY THAT I MEAN THIS HAS BEEN BEING A HISPANIC WOMAN FROM ALBUQUERQUE AND LONG HISTORY GOING BACK GENERATIONS HERE, YOU KNOW, I THINK THIS IS IMPORTANT CONVERSATION. I KNOW WHEN IT HAPPENED I WAS VERY CONCERNED ABOUT THE WAY AND PROCESS THAT IT OCCURRED TO GET TO WHERE WE GOT TO WITH THE REWILL MOVE OF THE STATUE. I THINK IT IS IMPORTANT NOW YOU KNOW, WITH THE SUPPORT OF THE ARTIST, THE STATUE WAS REMOVED. AND PLACED IN A SAFE PLACE UNTIL A DECISION IS MADE. I KNOW TALKING WITH ADMINISTRATION ABOUT PUTTING THIS FORWARD, THE EASY THING FOR ME TO DO OR ANYONE TO DO IS LET ADMINISTRATION, MAYOR, MAKE THE DECISION ON THIS. BUT, FOR ME PERSONALLY, I THINK IT IS IMPORTANT AS A BODY TO MAKE A DECISION AND ESPECIALLY CONSIDERING THIS BODY IS MADE UP OF, IT IS PRETTY DIVERSE IN ITS MAKE UP AND I THINK IT IS IMPORTANT TO HAVE THAT INPUT. IT IS NOT GOING TO BE US ULTIMATELY MAKING THE DECISION. THIS IS PART OF A COMMUNITY CONVERSATION. I KNOW THE MAYOR HAVING TALKED TO HIM EARLY ON HE KNOWS HOW UPSET I WAS. I SHARED A FEW WORDS WITH HIM BUT WE TALKED ABOUT THIS RACE HISTORY AND HEALING PROJECT WHICH I WAS CONCERNED THAT ANGLO MAYOR WOULD BE KIND OF LEADING THIS INITIALLY, YOU KNOW. SO I TALKED TO HIM AND CONGRESSWOMAN HAALAND ABOUT US COMING TOGETHER AND MAKING A COLLECTIVE DECISION AND REACHING OUT TO THE COMMUNITY TO SEE HOW WE ADDRESS OUR COMPLEX HISTORY IN THE CITY OF ALBUQUERQUE. I HAVE SAID THIS TIME AND TIME AGAIN BUT, YOU KNOW, I AM OF I THINK OF THE HISPANIC DISSENT AND YET I HAVE LIKE 25% INDIGENOUS, SO IT IS ONE OF THOSE THINGS THAT IS JUST DEPENDS YOU KNOW, IT IS WE ARE THE CONQUERED AND CONQUERORS, RIGHT? IT DEPENDS WHAT DAY OF THE WEEK WE DECIDE TO HATE OURSELVES AS A COMMUNITY. THE SAME HOLDS TRUE FOR NATIVE AMERICAN BROTHERS AND SISTERS WHO HAVE HISPANIC IN THEM AS WELL. I THINK THIS IS IMPORTANT PROCESS. THEY ARE DOING A REALLY GOOD JOB. I HAVE TO COMMEND THE FOLKS AT CULTURAL SERVICES 4 REALLY BEING OF SIR ADVICE TO COMMUNITY LEADERS WHO HAVE ALREADY GOTTEN TOGETHER AND MET AND CREATING TEAM LEAD TORRES HAVE THESE DISCUSSIONS. THEY ARE MADE UP OF LOTS OF VARIETY OF PEOPLE, YOU KNOW, ONE OF THE THINGS I MADE SURE OF IS TO TALK TO THE STAFF TO SAY THEY REALLY NEEDED TO REACH OUT, BRANCH OUT, OUTSIDE OF THE TYPICAL PEOPLE THAT WE ARE GOING TO, TO MAKE UP THESE TEAM LIEDERS. I THINK WE HAVE PEOPLE FROM CULTURAL SERVICES HERE MAYBE TO TALK ABOUT IT. BUT I REALLY WANT TO GIVE A SHOUT OUT TO WILL ELICIA, SHE HAS BEEN A CALMING VOICE IN ALL OF THIS. SO, DO WE HAVE A DIRECTOR HERE? >> DR. SANCHEZ IS HERE, YES. >> Coun. Pena: I DON'T KNOW IF YOU WANT TO ADD ANYTHING, DIRECTOR? >> SANCHEZ: THANK YOU. YEAH WE REALLY APPRECIATE ALL THE CONVERSATION. I KNOW THAT COUNCILLOR PENA HAD A LOT OF STRONG AND ALSO POWERFUL GUIDANCE FOR US AT THE BEGINNING OF THIS WHEN WE STARTED PUTTING IT TOGETHER. I FEEL GOOD ABOUT THE TEAM THAT WE PUT TOGETHER TO SUPPORT THE PROCESS AND SOME REALLY WONDERFUL FACILITATORS WE BROUGHT IN FROM THE COMMUNITY TO LEAD THE DIALOGUE, WE DO HAVE ABOUT 30 VERY DIFFERENT COMMUNITY MEMBERS WHO HAVE VOLUNTEERED TO HOST WILL SESSIONS. SO THAT WE MAKE SURE WE ARE BRINGING A LOT OF DIFFERENT PEOPLE IN. IN ADDITION WE HAVE SOME OPEN COMMUNITY SESSIONS SO THAT ANYBODY CAN SIGN UP AND PARTICIPATE. YOU KNOW WE HAVE ABOUT 300 PEOPLE ON THE MAILING LIST FOR THIS PROJECT, JUST TO GIVE THEM UPDATES. HOPING TO BUILD THAT EVERYDAY. STARTED OUR SESSIONS LAST WEEK AND THEY ARE GOING WELL. THEY ARE VERY POWERFUL AND VERY RESPECTFUL BUT HONEST. I THINK THAT IS WHAT IS GOING TO LEAD US TO GOOD RECOMMENDATIONS THAT WE WILL BE ABLE TO SHARE WITH THE ARTS BOARD AND ULTIMATELY SHARE WITH CITY COUNCIL FOR YOUR REVIEW. >> Coun. Pena: I THINK WE CAN'T HEAR YOU. >> Coun. Pena: GOT IT. THANK YOU. APPRECIATE THAT. YES, YOU KNOW, I'LL TALK ABOUT, I DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU'RE CALLING THEM. ONE OF THEM WENT OUT AND SOLICITED PEOPLE TO BE PART OF HIS TEAM. HE HAS REALLY GOT A REALLY GOOD DIVERSE TEAM THAT I APRIL ACTUALLY VERY EXCITED TO HEAR ABOUT THE CONVERSATIONS THEY HAVE. I KNOW THAT JEANNETTE BACA, GONZALES WHO WAS KIND OF FOR THE REMOVAL, SO, I REALLY APPRECIATE THE FACT THAT HE HAS COME TO THE TABLE TO HAVE THESE DISCUSSIONS IN A REAL GOOD POSITIVE WAY. I APPRECIATE THAT. I APPRECIATE EVERYBODY THAT IS ON HIS TEAM AND OTHERS. I URGE YOUR SUPPORT. I DON'T KNOW IF ANYONE HAS ANY QUESTIONS. >> Coun. Davis: WE HAVE A NUMBER OF COUNCILORS WHO WANT TO WEIGH IN. FIRST ONE I SAW WAS COUNCILOR BORREGO. >> Coun. Borrego: THANK YOU. I HAVE LIMITED CHARGE LEFT. APPRECIATE WHAT COUNCILLOR PENA IS DOING BUT I DID RECEIVE PHONE CALLS DID ABOUT NOON TODAY, FROM SOME VERY PROMINENT HISPANIC LEADERS, WHO SAID THAT THEY HAVE NOT HEARD ABOUT THIS. AND THEY WERE CONCERNED THAT THEY HAD NOT HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO WEIGH IN ON THE BILL. >> I AM CONCERNED THAT WE HAVEN'T HEARD FROM THE SORT OF INPUT ON THIS PARTICULAR BILL. SO I WOULD ASK COUNCILLOR PENA IF SHE WOULD CONSIDER POSSIBLY DEFERRING THIS FOR 30 DAYS SO WE CAN HEAR FROM LEADERS. I DON'T THINK IT WOULD CHANGER ANYTHING THAT WE ARE TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH IN THIS BILL. YOU IT WOULD GIVE PEOPLE AN OPPORTUNITY TO WEIGH IN ON IT AND GOING FOR IMMEDIATE ACTION TONIGHT IS REALLY PRETTY QUICK. AND WHILE I UNDERSTAND THE PROCESS THAT THE MAYOR'S OFFICE IS GOING THROUGH AND THE CULTURAL SERVICES DIVISION, I STILL THINK THAT IT IS A REALLY GOOD OPPORTUNITY IF WE ARE SERIOUS ABOUT COMMUNITY INPUT, THEN WE SHOULD HAVE PEOPLE HAVE THAT OPPORTUNITY. I THOUGHT ABOUT POSSIBLY SENDING IT TO ONE OF THE COMMITTEES BUT I THINK, YOU KNOW, IN 30 DAYS WE COULD, I MEAN WE DON'T HAVE TO GO TO COMMITTEE. I THINK WE COULD JUST BRING IT BACK TO THE FULL COUNCIL AND CONSIDER IT AT THAT POINT. I MAKE A MOTION WE DEFER FOR 30 DAYS. >> Coun. Davis: MOTION ON THE FLOOR FOR DEFERRAL UNTIL SEPTEMBER 9 MEETING. SINCE WE HAVE OTHER COUNCILORS IN CUE. COUNCILOR SENA IS A SECOND. IS THERE A SECOND? >> Coun. Davis: I'LL SECOND THAT MOTION FOR DEFERRAL UNTIL SEPTEMBER 9. MOTION ON THE FLOOR FOR THE MOMENT. SO, WE'LL GO THROUGH THE LIST OF COUNCILORS AND ASK YOU TO INCLUDE YOUR CONVERSATION BOTH ABOUT THE DEFERRAL AND UNDERLYING BILL JUST IN HOPES THAT WE CAN KEEP OUR CONVERSATION AND OUR DEBATE ON TRACK. START WITH COUNCILOR SENA. >> Coun. Sena: THANK YOU FOR THAT. >> IT ASKS COMMUNITIES AND ASKS THEM TO STEP FORWARD AND FORMAL ICES THE ON PROCESS. I WANT TO MENTION BEING PART OF THE RACE HISTORY AND HEALING PROJECT I WAS ASKED TO BE ON THERE AND FOR ME I HAVE TOLD THE PROJECT AND MEMBERS THAT FOR ME IT IS REALLY TO LISTEN TO THEIR GUIDANCE AND CONVERSATIONS THAT WERE BROUGHT FORWARD AND THAT I WOULD DEFER TO COMMUNITY INPUT WHEN IT CAME TO THE DECISIONS OF THE INSTALLATION. THAT IS WHAT WAS REALLY IMPORTANT. I JUST THOUGHT HAVING CONVERSATIONS. I WAS ACTUALLY IN A BOOK CLUB THAT THE OFFICE OF EQUITY AND INCLUSION WAS HAVING ON CERTAIN TAP TOPICS AND THIS HAD A LOT OF CONVERSATION ABOUT WHAT IT MEANT FOR A CHICANO MAN WHO WAS A CITY EMPLOYEE AND HE VOICED HIS OPINION AND EVEN OUR INDIGENOUS COMMUNITY MEMBERS AS WELL. BEING ABLE TO BE INCLUDED IN THE CONVERSATION, I BELIEVE THAT RESOLUTION DOES EXACTLY THAT. IT IS FORMALIZING THAT PROCESS AND HAVING THE MAYOR'S OFFICE I DO APPRECIATE WHAT THEY HAVE DONE THROUGH RACE HISTORY AND HEALING PROJECT AND THE FACILITATIONS THEY HAVE DONE SO FAR IN INCLUDING SO MANY COMMUNITY MEMBERS, SO I DO AGREE WITH COUNCILOR PENA IN THE END IT WILL BE BROUGHT BEFORE COUNCIL AFTER THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS ARE MADE. AND, I AM JUST GLAD THAT THIS MAKES THAT PROCESS OPEN TO OUR COMMUNITY AND RESOLUTION IS SAYING EXACTLY THAT, THAT WE WILL MAKE A DILIGENT PROCESS TO ALLOW COMMUNITY MEMBERS TO CHIME IN AND THAT HOPEFULLY WE INCLUDES A. INCLUDES A MANY PEOPLE AS WE CAN. EVEN IN THE NATIVE AMERICAN COMMUNITY THERE ARE OTHER ART PIECES WHERE IT TALKS ABOUT COLONIZATION OR OPPRESSION, I APPRECIATE THAT WE OPEN THIS DIALOGUE FOR SO MANY COMMUNITY MEMBERS TO HAVE COMMUNICATIONS AND CONVERSATIONS BECAUSE IT IS SO IMPORTANT. SO, I SUPPORT COUNCILLOR PENA'S RESOLUTION. I THINK IT IS VERY IMPORTANT BECAUSE WE DO NEED TO MOVE TOWARDS HEALING ON THIS PARTICULAR INSTALLATION AND INCIDENT THAT OCCURRED WHILE ALSO MAKING SURE MORE COMMUNITY MEMBERS ARE ENGAGED IN IT. I WON'T BE SUPPORTING. >> Coun. Davis: SAW YOU WANTED TO WEIGH IN. BUT WE HAVE FIVE OTHERS. I WANT TO GIVE A CHANCE TO OTHERS. >> Coun. Pena: THANK YOU COUNCILOR SENA. I WANT TO SAY THERE IS REALLY, YOU KNOW, THIS IS ABOUT GETTING COMMUNITY INVOLVED SO THERE IS NOT A SET AMOUNT OF PEOPLE. THIS IS ACTUALLY ENCOURAGING THE COMMUNITY TO GET INVOLVED. THERE IS ALREADY, AND I THINK DIRECTOR SANCHEZ CAN TALK ABOUT IT. I MEAN THERE IS LOTS OF PEOPLE GETTING INVOLVED. THERE IS LIKE SEVEN OR 10 TEAMS ALREADY MADE UP OF, ENCOURAGING MORE PEOPLE TO GET INVOLVED. I WANTED TO SAY WE HAVE ALSO RECEIVED IF OUR EMAIL TODAY A LETTER FROM THE NATIONAL ULAC SUPPORTING THIS RESOLUTION SO,, THAT IS IT. >> Councilor Bassan: THANK YOU. I JUST POINT OF CLARIFICATION WITH THIS RESOLUTION. SO, THE RACE HISTORY AND HEALING PROJECT IS THAT FOR ALL PUBLIC ART OR IS THIS RESOLUTION BASICALLY MAKING IT OFFICIAL THAT WE STARTED SOMETHING ALREADY AND WE ARE EVALUATING WHAT TO DO OR THERE WILL GOING TO BE -- ADMINISTRATION WILL BE DIRECTED TO COMPLETE A COMMUNITY PROJECT, DOES THAT MEAN THERE IS A NEW PROCESS ON TOP OF THAT OR JUST SAYING WE ARE COOL WITH THE RACE HISTORY AND HEALING PROJECT IN ORDER TO GET INPUT FOR THESE RECOMMENDATIONS? >> DOES THAT NOT MAKE SENSE. COUNCILLOR GIBSON, IS THIS MAKING IT OFFICIAL WHAT THE ADMINISTRATION IS ALREADY DOING WITH COMMUNITY INPUT REGARDING THE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR WHAT TO DO WITH THIS STATUE? >> Coun. Davis: DIRECTOR SANCHEZ. >> Coun. Pena: I CAN TRY TO ANSWER. I AM NOT REAL CLEAR ON WHAT YOU'RE SAYING BUT REALLY INTENT OF THIS IS REALLY TO LOOK AT THE STATUE AT HAND RIGHT NOW, RIGHT, AND INSTALLATION. I THINK IT IS A BIG CONVERSATION THAT NEEDS TO BE HAD BUT, ABSOLUTELY, I THINK AS WE CONTINUE WE NEED TO LOOK AT OTHER PUBLIC ART AS WE MOVE FORWARD. I DON'T KNOW IF ANY OF THE COUNCILORS HAVE EVER SEEN A PIECE OF ART THAT REALLY, THE PUBLIC SHOULD LOOK AT IT. THERE IS A PIECE OF ART THATS WHO NOTHING TO DO WITH CONQUISTADOR OR ANYTHING BUT IT IS IN FRONT OF STARBUCKS AT HYATT, THERE IS ART INSTALLATION THAT SHOWS SOME OPPRESSION THERE, SO, I'LL JUST SAY THAT AND, YOU KNOW, IF ANYBODY WANTS TO TAKE A WALK BY THERE, I WELCOME THEM TO. >> Councilor Bassan: IF WE PASS THIS IS HAVING ADMINISTRATION COMPLETE A PROCESS FOR COMMUNITY INPUT TO RECOMMEND WHAT TO DO WITH THIS; IS THAT GOING TO BE A NEW COMMITTEE OR IS THE RACE HISTORY AND HEALING PROJECT ALREADY THAT GROUP OF PEOPLE? WE ARE JUST MAKING IT OFFICIAL? >> Coun. Pena: NOW I GOT YOU. WE KIND OF STARTED THIS PROCESS, WE ARE JUST ACTUALLY TRYING THE FIGURE OUT HOW DO WE GET TO THE ANSWER FOR THIS PROCESS. COMMITTEE IS KIND OF STARTED WHEN MYSELF AND CONGRESSWOMAN HAALAND AND THE MAYOR MET AND HE SET THIS UP PROCESS. IT WAS BEGINNING AND 16 TENTH IS TO GET COMMUNITY MEMBERS TO BE INVOLVED WITH THIS BUT THEN AT THE END OF THE DAY ONCE THIS PROCESS IS BEING DEVELOPED IT WAS LIKE WHERE DOES IT GO? DOES MAYOR MAKE DECISION ON THIS ULTIMATELY? TAKE THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS, NOT DECISION BUT TAKE THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS AND MAKE DECISION OR SHOULD WE SUBMIT IT TO THE COUNCIL TO MAKE THE DECISION. FOR ME I THINK BECAUSE THE COUNCIL IS PRETTY DIVERSE, AND I THINK IT REALLY SHOULD FALL -- IT IS THE BODY THAT HAS SOME COLOR. >> Councilor Bassan: I AM SORRY TO DRAG IT OUT. I DON'T FEEL LIKE I STILL GOT AN ANSWER REGARDING THIS. IS THE RACE HISTORY AND HEALING PROJECT THE PROCESS THE COMMUNITY INPUT WILL MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS TO BASED WHEN IT SAYS BEE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL, THE ADMINISTRATION IS DIRECTED TO COMPLETE A PROCESS FOR COMMUNITY INPUT FOR RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE THE INSTALLATION. IS THE PROCESS THAT WE WILL BE BE DIRECTING ADMINISTRATION TO DO THE PROCESS IS THE RACE HISTORY AND HEALING PROJECT OR IT IS SOMETHING NEW? >> Coun. Pena: IT IS THE RACE HEALING PROJECT. >> Councilor Bassan: THANK YOU. >> Coun. Davis: THANK YOU. NEXT UP COUNCILLOR GIBSON AND BENTON AND THEN MYSELF. BACK TO OTHER COUNCILORS WHO HAVE SPOKEN BEFORE. >> Coun. Gibson: THANK YOU. SO, I FINALLY GOT, FINALLY UNDERSTOOD COUNCILOR BASSAN'S STATEMENT AND QUESTIONS. I UNDERSTAND ALSO COUNCILOR PENA'S RESPONSE. HERE IS MY QUESTION, WHY DO WE NEED THIS RESOLUTION FOR THIS PIECE OF ART? I DO NOT MEAN TO MINIMIZE THIS PIECE OF ART BECAUSE I LOVE THIS PIECE OF ART. I AM SORRY TRULY SORRY THAT IT MIGHT DEPICT SOMETHING REALLY PAINFUL TO PEOPLE. BUT, I THINK THAT I AM LIKE YOU, COUNCILLOR PENA, I WOULD NOT WANT TO SEE ANY DECISIONS MADE ON THIS WITHOUT CAREFUL THOUGHT AND REFLECTION. SO, WHY THIS RESOLUTION -- WHY DO WE NEED A RESOLUTION JUST 4LA P JORNADA? CAN YOU HELP ME UNDERSTAND THAT. >> Coun. Pena: I CAN TRY TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION. AGAIN WE CAN LEAVE IT TO, RIGHT NOW THERE IS NOT A PROCESS FOR END RESULT. SO, WE STARTED THIS HEALING PROJECT AND THESE COMMUNITY CONVERSATIONS AND GETTING PEOPLE TO BE PART OF THE PROCESS TO BE INVOLVED IN THE DECISION MAKING TO MAKE THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS. WE DIDN'T HAVE FORMAL PROCESS OF ONCE THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS WERE MADE, WHERE DOES IT GO. DOES IT GO TO MAYOR TO MAKE THE DECISION? OR DOES, LET ME REPHRASE. DOES IT GO TO THE MAYOR TO TAKE THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS UNDER CONSIDERATION OUR DOES IT COME TO THE COUNCIL TO TAKE THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS AND BASICALLY SO THIS KIND OF FORMALIZES THAT. IT SAYS THAT IT SHOULD COME TO THE CITY COUNCIL AND OBVIOUSLY THE MAYOR WILL STILL BE INVOLVED BAWLINGS INVOLVED. I JUST, YOU KNOW, BEING A HISPANIC WOMAN AND THERE BEING ANOTHER ON THE COUNCIL AND OBVIOUSLY COUNCILOR SENA IS ANOTHER PERSON OF COLOR, I THINK IT IS IMPORTANT TO REALLY HAVE MORE THE THAN ONE VOICE WEIGHING IN ON THIS IMPORTANT ISSUE. LIKE YOU SAID COUNCILLOR GIBSON, I REALLY APPRECIATE YOUR COMMENTS, BECAUSE, EXACTLY THE POINT IS THAT YOU LIKE THIS PIECE OF ART. >> Coun. Gibson: THANK YOU FOR THAT. AS ONE OF THE WHITE WOMEN ON THIS COUNCIL, I JUST WANT TO SEE, I WANT US TO LOOK FORWARD, YOU KNOW. LOOK AT ALL OF THE DIFFERENT ART WORK THAT IS OUT THERE. PLAQUES OUT THERE, HISTORICAL THINGS THAT WE STILL HAVE THAT WE PROBABLY REALLY NEED TO TAKE AN INVENTORY ON AND I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY LA JORNADA ITSELF. WHY DOESN'T ITS JUST INCLUDE ALL PIECES OF ART. WHAT AM I NOT GETTING? >> Coun. Pena: I GUESS IT COULD INCLUDE ALL PIECES OF ART. I THINK MAYBE AS WE EXPAND AND SEE WHAT HAPPENS, I THINK THE TOPIC AT HAND RIGHT NOW IS LA JORNADA SPANNED WE HAVE TO ADDRESS BECAUSE ACTUALLY THE STATUE IS IN STORAGE RIGHT NOW AND WE REALLY HAVE TO ONLY OUT WITH COME UP WITH A DECISION WHAT TO DO WITH IT. WE HAVE TO DECIDE WHAT WE ARE GOING TO DO WITH IT. AS YOU SAY, THERE CAN BE AMENDMENT TO THIS TO SAY THAT AFTER THIS DECISION IS MADE, MAYBE WE SHOULD LOOK AT OTHER PIECES OF PUBLIC ART AND SEE WHAT WE DO WITH THEM. I AM NOT NECESSARILY SUPPORTIVE LIKE I EXPLAINED THAT THERE IS OTHER PIECES OF ART OUT THERE THAT TO ME ARE VERY OFFENSIVE. I DON'T KNOW, I GUESS I CAN SAY I DON'T KNOW WHERE I WOULD BE WITH KIND OF THOSE STATUES OF KEEPING THEM OR REMOVING THEM. WE PUT UP PUBLIC ART AND ART IS SOMETHING THAT IS THERE FOR DISCUSSION AND TO INSPIRE CONVERSATIONS AND I THINK, YOU KNOW, LA JORNADA INSPIRED A CONVERSATION ABOUT OUR HISTORY AND PEOPLES. I REALLY THINK IT IS IMPORTANT THAT IF THE DECISION IS MADE TO REMOVE THIS STATUE, THAT IT IS REPLACED WITH SOMETHING OF HISTORICAL VALUE ABOUT OUR HISPANIC HISTORY BECAUSE WE HAD SO MANY, WE MADE SO MANY CONTRIBUTIONS DO THIS STATE AS WELL. I DO NOT WANT TO ERASE OUR HISTORY. >> Coun. Gibson: I DON'T WANT TO SEE THAT EITHER. I DON'T THINK THAT THIS IS THE FORUM OR TIME TO SPECULATE ABOUT WHAT MIGHT HAPPEN AND ALL OF THAT. I THINK THAT IS WHAT THE INPUT IS FOR. WHAT IS WHAT CREATING A FORUM AND SPACE AND GETTING THE PEOPLE IN THE ROOM TO FIGURE THAT OUT AND, DAY OF LET ME PUT YOU ON MUTE. SORRY, GO AHEAD. >> GIB GIB I AM NOT COMFORTABLE WITH THIS. I WON'T SUPPORT IT BUT I MEAN I WOULD HOPE THAT THIS GROUP THAT IS GETTING TOGETHER AND LISTENING AND TALKING WITH ONE ANOTHER AND GETTING SOME PERSPECTIVE, I HOPE THAT THE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT THEY CAN COME UP WITH CAN INCLUDE ART WITH HISTORICAL SIGNIFICANCE AND ARTISTIC SIGNIFICANCE AND WE CAN FIND AN APPROPRIATE PLACE 4 THIS. >> Coun. Davis: I SEE MR. RAEL WANTING TO WEIGH IN. WE HAVE COUNCILLOR BENTON AND MYSELF AND ADMINISTRATION AND THEN BACK TO COUNCILORS WHO HAVE SPOKEN BEFORE. LET ME GO BRIEFLY THE MAYOR'S CONFERENCE ROOM. >> THANK YOU. COUNCIL PRESIDENT DAVIS AND I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY A COUPLE OF THINGS. I FEEL LIKE A COUPLE OF IMPORTANT QUESTIONS HAVE COME UP. ONE OF THE PRIMARY REASONS WE ARE SUPPORTIVE OF THIS RESOLUTION IS THAT WE THINK IT IS VERY LIKELY THAT THERE WILL BE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT WILL ACTUALLY REQUIRE COUNCIL APPROVAL JUST BECAUSE THE EXTENT OF CHANGING OR MOVING OR ALL KINDS OF THINGS EVEN ADDRESSING CERTAIN KINDS OF CHANGES TO THIS WILL END UP SOMETHING THAT WOULD COST MONEY THAT WOULD COME IN FRONT OF COUNCIL. WE WANT TO BE HONEST WITH THE COMMUNITY THROUGH THIS PROCESS IN TERMS OF WHERE FINAL DECISIONS ARE GOING TO BE MADE. THIS IS ONE THING WHEN WE DEAL WITH COMMUNITY INPUT COMMUNITY WANTS TO KNOW WHAT IS THE PROCESS ONCE THEY MADE RECOMMENDATIONS. WE WANTED TO MAKE IT CLEAR FROM THE BEGINNING WHERE THE PROCESS WAS GOING TO BE, WHICH BOARD WOULD LOOK AT IT AND WHERE THOSE DECISIONS WOULD BE MADE. I THINK THAT IS REALLY HELPFUL AT THE BEGINNING FOR COMMUNITY TO REALLY TRUST PROCESS, BECAUSE THEY KNOW WHERE IT IS GOING. COUNCILOR ASKED QUESTIONS ABOUT WHAT ABOUT THESE OTHER THINGSES THAT WE SHOULD BE TALKING ABOUT. THAT IS WHY RACE HISTORY AND HEALING PROJECT IS NOT CALLED THE ONATE PROJECT BECAUSE WE KNOW THAT ADDITIONAL CONCERNS AND AREAS ARE GOING TO COME UP AS WE GO THROUGH THESE CONVERSATIONS AND IF THIS PROCESS WORKS WELL, IF THIS PROCESS OF COMMUNITY DIALOGUE AND FACILITATED SMALL GROUP DISCUSSION WORKS WELL, THEN WE ABSOLUTELY WANT TO USE IT IN OTHER SPACES AND FOR OTHER ISSUES. BUT FOR RIGHT NOW WE ARE FOCUSED ON THIS PARTICULAR ISSUE WE ALL KNOW IS CRITICAL AND REQUIRES A LOT OF THOUGHTFUL AND URGENT ATTENTION. SO, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> Coun. Benton: I STRONGLY SUPPORT THIS BILL AND APPRECIATE THE FACT THAT THE ADMINISTRATION IS ON BOARD WITH IT AS WELL. I THINK IT IS INCUMBENT ON US TO BE PART OF THE DECISION MAKING PROCESS. I TOO AM HEARTENED TO HEAR THAT PEOPLE ARE ADDING INDIVIDUAL GROUP DISCUSSIONS WHEN THE WELL ONATE STATUE. AT THIS TIME IS A PUBLIC ART WORK THAT DEPICTS AS THEY SAY THE JOURNEY THAT WAS TAKEN. AND ONATE WAS DEPICTED AS PART OF THAT AND CERTAINLY WAS PART OF IT. WE SAW MY FRIEND ALLEN COOPER AT BEGINNING OF THE MEETING AND ALLEN WOULD HAVE BEEN ALL FOR TAKING IT DOWN AND TAKING ONATE DOWN. I HAVE OTHER FRIENDS AND PEOPLE WHO I RESPECT TO ARE CONCERNED ABOUT THIS FROM ALL SORTS OF DIFFERENT ANGLES. AS A PUBLIC ART WORK WHICH WAS COMMISSIONED BY THE CITY BEFORE OUR TIME, AND IT IS A PUBLIC ART WORK. IT IS NOT A STATUE, THE KIND OF STATUE WE CONSIDER WE WHEN LOOK AT CON FEDERAL STATUES ON PUBLIC SQUARES. SPEAKING OF THAT I AM HOPEFUL ABOUT THIS RACE EQUITY AND INCLUSION PROJECT BECAUSE I SEE IT AS, YOU KNOW, KIND OF LIKE, IT IS SORT OF LIKE A RECONCILIATION EFFORT. IN A WAY I HOPE IT WILL WORK SOMEWHAT ALONG THE LINES OF WHAT WAS DONE IN SANTA FE WITH REGARD TO THE, I AM DRAWING A BLANKS. THE REENTRY PARADE AND SO FORTH. THAT WERE OFFENSIVE TO NATIVE AMERICANS. I WORKED SEVERAL YEARS AGO WITH ALDER JEFFERSON AND OTHERS FROM THE AFRICAN AMERICAN COMMUNITY TO REMOVE SOME TOTALLY INACCURATE PLACKS DISPLAYED IN OLD TOWN PLAZA HAVING TO DO WITH THE VERY BRIEF CONFEDERATE OCCUPATION OF ALBUQUERQUE AND SEEMED TO FLOOR FEW THAT PERIOD WHEN THE CONFEDERATE TEXAS TROOPS CAME THROUGH ALBUQUERQUE AND TOOK OVER OLD TOWN. THAT IS NOT AN ART WORK. THOSE ARE PLACKS AND REPLICA CANNONS AND HISTORICAL INTERPRETATION OF OUR HISTORY WHICH I THINK THERE ARE PROBLEMS WITH, THAT WE NEED TO BE TACKLING THINGS LIKE THAT AS WELL. THIS IS THE ONE THAT IS RIGHT AT HAND. IT WAS IRONIC BECAUSE I HAD BEEN SPEAKING TO JEFFERSON AND WAS TAKING ANOTHER RUN AT ONE SPECIFIC PLACK. YOU CAN GO TO OLD TOWN PLAZA AND SEE WHAT YOU THINK. I HOPE THIS CAN BE EXTENDED BEYOND JUST A PARTICULAR PIECE OF PUBLIC ART WHICH IS IMPORTANT CONVERSATION AND DISTINCTIVE CONVERSATION. I APPRECIATE DIRECTOR SANCHEZ' EFFORTS ON GETTING THIS ON TRACK. I STRONGLY SUPPORT THE RESOLUTION. >> Coun. Davis: THANK YOU. RECOGNIZE MYSELF AS LAST ONE TO SPEAK ON THIS CYCLE AND THEN WE'LL REMIND EVERYBODY WE ARE ON THE MOTION TO DEFER UNTIL SEPTEMBER 9 MEETING. HERE IS WAY I SEE THIS. THIS LEGISLATION I APPRECIATE IT WAS INTRODUCED LATE ON FRIDAY. IT HAS A THIN ANALYSIS BUT THERE IS MORE TO BE DONE. I AGREE I SUPPORT THE HEALING INITIATIVE AND THE CONVERSATIONS. CONVERSATIONS WE HAVE HAD WITH ADMINISTRATION THEY ARE WORKING WELL AS WE HEARD TODAY. THEY ARE INCLUDING RIGHT FOLKS HAVE DIFFERENT FACILITATORS WHATEVER THE TECHNICAL TERM IS WORKING WITH DIFFERENT COMMUNITIES AND BRINGING THOSE FOLKS TOGETHER. BUT I MY CONCERN IS THAT THE AS SOMEONE POINTED OUT AS DIRECTOR SANCHEZ POINTED OUT THERE IS A PROCESS TO ENGAGE THE COUNCIL. I AM NOT SURE IT IS COUNCIL'S FINAL DECISION TO MAKE HOWEVER EXCEPT THROUGH THE FINANCE AND APPROPRIATIONS AND HERE IS REASON WHY. THE CITY OSSETERS BOARD ORDINANCE 10-5-4 SAYS ARTS BOARD IS APPOINTED WITH RECOMMENDATIONS FROM CITY COUNCILORS AND NOMINATIONS, EMPOWERED TO MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE POWER FOR THE ACQUISITION AND CARE OF PUBLIC ART. COUNCIL HAS NO ROLE IN THAT AND TRADITIONALLY NOT HAD A PLACE IN INDIVIDUALLY LOOKING AT INDIVIDUAL PIECES. BUT THE COUNCIL DOES APPROPRIATE MONEY TO THE PROGRAM. I AM NOT OPPOSED TO COUNCIL BEING INVOLVED IN THIS PROCESS BUT I AM NOT SURE THAT WE COULD SAY IN THE SAME VOICE THAT WE TRUST ADMINISTRATION HAS SET UP PROCESS FOR EQUITABLE INPUT AND THEN ALSO SAY THAT BECAUSE THE MAYOR IS ANGLO MAYOR HE CAN'T MAKE DECISIONS ABOUT PEOPLE OF COLORADO OUR. WE HAVE A PROCESS TO TAKE PUBLIC INPUT THROUGH BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS THAT INCLUDES REPRESENTATIVES OF THE CITY APPOINTED BY CITY COUNCILORS, BASED BY LAW ON THEIR EXPERIENCE IN ARTS AND CULTURE AND THESE EXPERIENCES TO MAKES A RECOMMENDATION TO THE MAYOR. THEN THAT PROCESS WOULD BE THAT THE MAYOR WOULD BRING THAT TO THE COUNCIL FOR APPROVAL THROUGH THE NORMAL LEGISLATIVE PROCESS WHICH WOULD BE APPROPRIATIONS 4 MOVING, CHANGING IT, SECURING IT IF WE KEEP IT IN PLACE. I THINK THIS MAY BE GETTING' HEAD OF THAT A LITTLE BIT IN THAT WE HAVE TO LET THE PROCESS WORKS ITS WAY OUT. THAT SAID, I DO THINK THERE MAY BE A ROLE HERE AND I THINK WE NEED MORE TIME TO UNDERSTAND THE CONFLUENCE OF ORDINANCES ALREADY IN PLACE, PROCESS DESIGNED AND WHAT EACH BRANCH OF GOVERNMENT'S ROLE IS. I PROBABLY WOULD ULTIMATELY SHORT THIS BUT I DO THINK THE PROCESS MATTERS AND WE SHOULD GET IT RIGHT. I HEAR COUNCILOR BORREGO, THIS PROCESS WAS SELFED DIE ADMINISTRATION WITH A FEW KEY LEADERS BUT NOT ALL CITY COUNCILORS BUT WE SHOULD ALL SUPPORT THAT AND PUSH DRIVING TO SUPPORT THAT PROCESS AND THEN DECIDE THAT BUT I DON'T THINK WE HAVE TO RUSH TONIGHT THROUGH LATE INTRODUCTION AND IMMEDIATE ACTION TO DECIDE WHAT THAT PROCESS WILL LOOK LIKE WHEN IT WON'T ARRIVE 4 FOUR OR FIVE MONTHS. THIS GIVES US ALL TIME TO THINK ABOUT THE PROCESS A LITTLE, WORK OUT QUESTIONS ABOUT LEGAL ISSUES, FINANCE QUESTIONS AND PROCESS AND SOURCE SO THAT WE CAN GIVE THE COMMUNITY THE CONFIDENCE THEY NEED, WHOMEVER IT THAT IS MAKES FINAL DECISION, WHETHER ADMINISTRATION OR COUNCIL BY FUNDING IT, THAT WE CAN DO IT WELL AND THAT WE WON'T BE CHALLENGED. IF WE ARE CHALLENGED BY COURT ACTION OR OTHERWISE, WHICH IS ALWAYS THE RIGHT OF SOMEBODY TO DO, WE HAVE CHECKED ALL THE RIGHT BOXES TO BE SURE WE RECOGNIZE THAT. REMEMBER THIS ADMINISTRATION CAME IN SAYING THEY WERE GOING TO PUT 100 NEW PEOPLE ON BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS TO REPRESENT OUR CITY WITH EXPERTISE IN THESE AREAS. WE SHOULD GIVE THEM OPPORTUNITY TO DO THAT BEFORE THE COUNCIL INSERTS ITSELF IF THAT PROCESS. FOR THAT REASON I SUPPORT COUNCILOR BORREGO. IT IS IMPORTANT WE SET UP A PROCESS BUT I DON'T THINK IT IS POUR WE DO IT WITH LATE INTRO, A QUICK ANALYSIS AND IMMEDIATE ACTION TONIGHT. SO I WOULD SUPPORT THE DEFERRAL. WITH REMINDER WE ARE ON THE MOTION FOR DEFERRAL. I WANT TO GO BACK TO COUNCILLOR PENA. WOULD WAITED RESPOND TO COUNCILORS AND COUNCILOR BORREGO TO CLOSE ON MOTION FOR DEFERRAL AND THEN BACK ON THE LEGISLATION, IF NOT DEFERRED. >> Coun. Pena: I JUST WANTED TO PROVIDE CLARITY YOU KNOW, WHEN YOU SAID THAT I DIDN'T TRUST AN ANGLO MAYOR TO MAKE THIS DECISION, THAT IS NOT WHAT I SAID. I SAID I THOUGHT COLLECTIVELY AS A BOARD WITH A DIVERSE GROUP OF PEOPLE WOULD BE BETTER IN MAKING THAT DECISION. ABSOLUTELY NOT THAT HE COULDN'T. I AM SURE HE COULD. BUT, FOR ME, MY PREFERENCE IS TO HAVE IT GO THROUGH A BOARD THAT HAS THAT DIVERSITY IN IT. ULTIMATELY SAID HE WOULD MAKE THE DECISION BY SIGNING OFF ON THE LEGISLATION OR NOT. >> Coun. Davis: THANK YOU FOR CLARIFYING. >> COUNCILOR BORREGO TO CLOSE ON THE MOTION TO DEFER. >> Coun. Borrego: THANK YOU. I DO SUPPORT THE RACE EQUITY AND INCLUSION PROCESS. I THINK IT IS A VERY, VERY IMPORTANT PROCESS. THE HEALING THAT COMES FROM THAT IS GOING TO BE VITALLY IMPORTANT FOR HOW OUR CITY IS GOING TO MOVE FORWARD AND THAT PARTICULAR PROCESS WILL BREAK DOWN A LOT OF BARRIERS THROUGHOUT THE CITY AND THROUGHOUT OUR RACES AND THROUGHOUT RELIGION. A LOT OF DIFFERENT PIECES FOR THAT. I THINK THAT IS SOMETHING THAT WE DEFINITELY NEED AND WE SAW THAT AS A RESULT OF THE WHOLE ISSUE WITH, YOU KNOW, THE ONATE STATUE AND PEOPLE THAT WANTED TO TAKE IT DOWN AND BROUGHT UP A LOT OF ISSUES, A LOT OF HURT FROM A LOT OF DIFFERENT PLACES THAT HAVE BEEN OPPRESSED AND SUPPRESSED FOR MANY YEARS. SO WITH THAT SAID, THERE IS ALSO A PROCESS FOR COMMUNITY ARTS AND I HAVE BEEN THROUGH THAT PROCESS MEANT TIMES I WILL TELL YOU, I WAS INVOLVED IN CHEVY ON A STICK WHICH GOES MANY YEARS BACK. I WAS INVOLVED WITH THE BEAUTIFUL PIECE OF ART THAT IS ON MONTANO AND FOURTH. I WAS INVOLVED WITH THE PARK IN BARELAS. I COULD GO ON AND TELL YOU MANY, MANY PIECES THAT WE WENT THROUGH THE ARTS BOARD ON. TO PLACE PUBLIC ART. THERE IS A PROCESS AND THAT PROCESS IS IF WE ARE GOING TO CHANGE IT, THEN THAT IS A POLICY DECISION FOR THE COUNCIL. AND I THINK THAT BRINGS BACK A BIGGER ISSUE. ARE WE GOING TO PUT EVERY PIECE OF ART THROUGH THIS NEW PROCESS THAT SEEMS TO BE SORT OF PART OF THIS DISCUSSION FOR THIS LEGISLATION. ARE WE CREATING A NEW PROCESS. IF WE ARE THAT IS OKAY. THAT IS OKAY. BUT WE NEED TO BE CLEAR ABOUT WHAT IT IS THAT WE ARE DOING BECAUSE LA JORNADA IS NOTHING MORE THAN A PIECE OF ART THAT CREATED CONTROVERSY. THERE IS ALREADY A PUBLIC PROCESS INVOLVED IN THAT ADVISORY BOARD, THEY HAVE TO ADVERTISE, THEY HAVE TO GO THROUGH THAT PUBLIC PROCESS AND THEN THERE IS RECOMMENDATION. THAT IS TRUE FOR EVERY PIECE OF ART THAT WE DEAL WITH IN ALBUQUERQUE. NOT JUST LA JORN WILL ADA. WE ALREADY HAVE A PROCESS IN PLACE. AND MY CONCERN AND, YES, IT IS GREAT TO BE ABLE TO HAVE AS MANY PEOPLE INCLUDED IN THE PROCESS BUT I AM HEARING FROM PEOPLE TODAY, THIS AFTERNOON, THAT SAID, WE DIDN'T EVEN KNOW THIS WAS ON THE AGENDA. HOW DO WE GET OUR COMMENTS IN TO THE COUNCIL? THEY DIDN'T HAVE THAT OPPORTUNITY SO, IF WE ARE TRULY TALKING ABOUT INCLUSION, THERE ARE PEOPLE THAT ARE MISSING AT THE TABLE. SO, WITH THAT I WOULD RECOMMEND 30 DAY DEFERRAL. >> Coun. Davis: THANK YOU. WOULD YOU CALL THE ROLE MOTION TO DEFER UNTIL SEPTEMBER 9. >> Councilor Bassan: YES. >> Coun. Benton: NO. >> Coun. Borrego: YES. >> Coun. Gibson: YES. >> Coun. Jones: YES. >> Coun. Pena: NO. >> Coun. Sena: NO. >> Coun. Davis: YES. THAT PASSES ON 5-3 VOTE. THAT MATTER IS DEFERRED TO SEPTEMBER 9. >> Coun. Davis: THANK YOU IT WAS NOT A FLOOR AMENDMENT. THAT MATTER IS DEFERRED UNTIL SEPTEMBER 9 AND THERE BE BEING NO OTHER BUSINESS BEFORE THIS COUNCIL, THIS MEETING IS ADJOURNED. (MEETING ADJOURNED AT 8:25:00 P.M.)