City Council - Regular Meeting

Good evening, everybody. We are now live.

I want to thank you to the City of Gallaudet. City Council meeting, regular meeting on Tuesday, May 26th in the City Council Chambers. Hal, if you could follow up.

Councilor Garcia? Here. Councilor Yazzie? Here. Councilor Gallaudet? Here. Councilor Molina?

Here. Mayor DePaul? Here. And if you could all join us in the Pledge of Allegiance.

I pledge allegiance to the Father,

Our first item is comments by the public on non agenda items. Last time we kind of had to limit the number of comments, but if we can keep it just to two minutes and state your name and what your comments are about and we can go ahead and get started. Who wants to be first? Anderson.

Yeah, my name is Richard Anderson. I'm a taxpayer. I'm a citizen of Gallup. I pay property taxes. I pay utility taxes, and I pay utilities. I'm here as a citizen. I'm here as a grandpa for my granddaughter tonight about the AI centers. We all know New Mexico Department of Justice kicked Facebook's butt to the tune of $375 million for child safety. putting our kids in danger. Now Zuckerberg's friends, all his buddies and bed buddies are coming for the water. They're coming for the landmine to make their AI centers. Don't let them, don't let them. In Georgia, 10 weeks ago, an AI center used 10 billion gallons of water. Didn't even pay for it. They didn't pay the city for it. So I'm just here to say that. I know people with money, people that make that kind of money, usually you don't give a crap about opinions of a biker like me because we're poor and we do jobs that nobody wants to do. And we're the ones that the city won't hire. But thank you for your time.

Absolutely.

Good evening, Mayor and Council. My name is Larry Wynn. I want to speak briefly on two items. One is to urge that the most important thing often about assuring that democracy works is to have transparency about the issues that are before the people And I believe that in the interest of doing that concerning data centers, that it's advisable to follow the trend that is massively increasing all over the United States, which is to enact a moratorium on any action that is taken quickly and hurriedly as being by definition not in the interests of the people. It may be that data centers are a good thing. It may be that the data center here might be a good thing, but it is not clear that that is true. And therefore, I think we need to get much more information and preparatory to having adequate information that we should have a moratorium on any action to approve such a thing prematurely. The other thing I'd like to mention is, and I'll be brief, This summer, the United States of America is going to enact probably temporary guidelines on how to allocate Colorado River water. It is probable that Arizona, for instance, will lose 25 percent of their entire water supply. And when that happens, there will be a bidding war for water rights it is not at all obvious even though some might say that we should not worry but it's not at all obvious that gallup will have water in its future And so therefore, I believe that it would be advisable for mayor and council to take that with the seriousness that it deserves and start looking transparently into the actual complexity of this matter, preparatory to taking action that would assure that Gallup will have water. It's not going to affect me and my wife probably because we're old and we'll be gone. But it will affect everybody else in this room. And I know, Mr. Mayor, that you are very well aware of all these things. And I urge you to trust the people and be open and in-depth and clear. And shall I say it? reconstitute a water board to help these things be understood by the people so that participatory knowledgeable action can be taken by an informed electorate. Thank you.

Good evening, Mayor and Council. My name is Daniel Berg, and I'm here to comment on the data center and the affluent water agreement. And so I would urge you to go against or to not agree with the affluent water agreement until there's more research done as to what it can do for what, how it will impact our environment. Although it is wastewater that's being agreed upon is that we still have the Rio Parco ecosystem downstream that it would affect. But furthermore, what we're seeing in communities across the country is that the wastewater that comes out of the data center is actually very toxic. And so they're seeing concentrated levels of PFAS or forever chemicals. They call them PFAS. They're seeing that come out, and the way the process works when they cool these CPUs and these GPUs, these processing units, which has hundreds of thousands in a given data center, is that the water flows through and around them, cooling down the systems, the heated water goes back to a cooling system, and then back and forth. Uh, as much as possible to the water is unusable. And then the water is evaporated about 80% of it into the air. The 20% has now these constant high concentrations of what they're seeing nitrates. Uh, D scaling agents, but on top of that PFAS, which the EPA has also, um, admitted, they don't have a way to. Filter out PFAS for water supply systems and so. Again, although it started out as wastewater, it's coming out what. Does come out will be more toxic to the environment and therefore our community and also what evaporates into the air. Um, I just don't think there's been research done on, but maybe there has been, but that's something that really needs to be looked into. I think before this agreement is made, and I want to commend you for. your decision to table that issue with the four to one vote. And please hold these companies reliable and have them do some some private research done. And please keep our interests in mind over these jobs that are promising or these businesses that are promising jobs and money, which could actually have more negative effects than the positive effects were being promised. Thank you.

Dr. Dr. Liu here, I actually just wanted to very make a very brief comment, which is I wanted to actually just sort of maybe enumerate the support for a moratorium in this room. So with the folks who are here, who would support a moratorium against data centers and who would be in support of reconstituting some sort of an advisory board to discuss this issue, please raise your hand. So we will continue to show up here at City Council to work with you on this issue. Thank you.

Hello, my name is Denise Massey. I'm a Gallup resident. And the first thing I want to do is to commend the board for working so diligently to try and find industry to come to our city and to help all of us do better. One thing, when data centers first came about, many people saw them as a boom to their community and they jumped on the bandwagon. And many data centers have been built all around the country. We have a luxury right now of learning from their experiences and we need to look out for what has been happening in various cities around the United States. This is just a support for a moratorium. Let us give time to think about what we're doing, learn from others and do a good job for Gallup. Thank you.

Thank you. Any more? Anybody else?

That's it. That's all.

Anybody on the phone?

Hello, my name is Mike Butler. My dad was Andrew Butler who did the paintings downtown, not Butler store, but we are Irish descended. Been in Gallup since the 90s on the east side, support Sierra Yazzie. Congratulations on your win. Very proud of you and the work you're doing for us on the east side. Also just want to say that very concerned about these AI data centers. I think other people have said Uh, more things than I will, but just want you to know that yes, we support the reconstitution of the water board. We also support a moratorium on these data centers. So thank you very much.

Okay, any one more we go, I can move on from meeting.

Hi, I'm Liam McCarthy. I grew up here in Gallup, born and raised. I have the best interest in this place. Voted for about half a few people on this panel, and I trust that you guys are doing the best job you can to try and determine what the best course of action is for our city. That being said, I understand that some of the motivations for building this data center would be the jobs it could potentially bring. As somebody who works in construction and teaches general industry, the drain that a power center would have on our electrical grid would spike our energy bills, which would not be good for your constituents. Further, we simply don't have enough water to cool these data centers. So I know part of the idea is that we could potentially leverage the pipeline from Farmington, which is a great idea. However, the problem with that is farmington themselves is also going to be developing a data center so that option is kind of going to be off the table and we do live in a desert it's just even if you think data centers are a good idea aside from the potential for shall we say government overreach to keep it polite here um aside from that potential glaring problem that could come from it gallup is not a locality that can sustain that amount of electrical and uh water draw with our with our uh Aqua 1st, so thank you. 1 more and that's it.

Good afternoon. I'm Andrew. I. I'm a teacher here and, um. Teaching history, looking at the way that the United States has built great infrastructure. We build railroads and roads that last for years and years and years. And these data centers have to be replaced very often. And I've heard that the plan by 2030 is to be putting most of these data centers up in the outer space where it cools, right? And so these things are probably going to become obsolete a lot faster than our highways or railroads, things like that. Not to mention the water, not to mention the drain on the power grid. It would probably drain as much power as the whole city uses in a lot of cases. So those are just things to keep in mind as we consider these things for our community. Thank you.

Okay, we're gonna move on to the next subject, and that's the presentation information items. And our first presentation is the FOCUS Alternative Learning Center. And our speaker is Mrs. Armenta.

Greetings, Council, Mayor.

I'm new to you, Susan, so. I found out my grandmother was a little baby girl here.

So just want to share that personal note. Yes, thank you for your time in advance. I'd like to introduce myself. My name is Joanne Armenta. I'm Miss Armenta or Dr. Armenta, but I'm not Mrs., just for the record. I have a background working for the Southern California Association of Governments, and that is the largest metropolitan planning organization in the country. During my tenure there, I worked for the Department of Energy, advancing energy efficiency, renewable energy in the transportation sector, working closely with the State of California Energy Office, as well as the South Coast Air Quality Management District under the umbrella of SCAGS, Southern California Association of Governments. With that background and in my educational career, which I have a degree in business is in my master's, and then organizational leadership and development, and then my doctorate in education leadership and change. So wanting to apply my career knowledge with my academic experience, I retired and I wondered what to do once I retired because my grandparents often said I had a life of privilege and it was important for me to give back. So having been brought up in the Southwest, coming back and forth with my family, having my father's side of the family in Arizona, my mother's side of the family in New Mexico, when I came here, I realized this was where our organization could best serve, which we started this organization before I retired in 2008 in Arizona. So we're registered 501c3 nonprofit organization, registered in Arizona in 2008. So we've been around almost 20 years. In that capacity, we also registered with the state of New Mexico and with the Navajo Nation business regulatory kind of things to make sure that all our bases are covered as we venture into this community. So having had the experience working with the feds, if you will, what we learned there in the transportation sector is that there was a big gap in the workforce development side of things. Workforce development wasn't ready to manage the new technologies for the alternative fuels and, for example, the electric vehicles. So around the country, there's coalition coordinators for the Department of Energy. It's called the Clean Cities Program. And with that program, many of our, we started with the Clinton, with the Clean Energy Act back, And so over the years we have different administrations that fund our programs and other years we have lean years like right now. So in order to continue our work, because we believed in our work, we started nonprofits across the country and we've partnered with educational institutions in order to develop the workforce and meet that demand. Having said that, yes, I lived in the Navajo Nation for 15 years. I moved here in 2010, 11. And I learned among the people what they were dealing with. I had no idea, but it broke my heart. And I knew my organization had a mission in addressing the many, many families living without electricity. I just couldn't conceive of the thought of it. But I got busy to understand the dynamics. And with that said, I also realized having my background I saw an opportunity in the emerging clean energy economy, and especially in solar. That has been around, but as I said, the ebbs and flows of funding is limiting our capacities to be able to expand our program. So what I did is started the nonprofit, and I sought out federal funds through the Environmental Protection Act, environmental justice, and they awarded us seed money to start the Solar Warrior program. which we call the Solar Warrior Program. And we were fortunate enough to have two years teaching this program. It's a training and certification, so it's not just a few classes in general terms. It's a certification. So Purpose Focus is certified through Solar Energy International for the curriculum, as well as North American Board of Certified Energy Practitioners to be able to certify our students that go through the program. So we had students go through the program through the Dinette College School of Transformation, but that program folded. And then we started teaching at UNM for the last two years, and now we're done with that program. In that last year and a half, we've invested over a quarter of a million dollars to renovate a building on Metamore so that we can be autonomous and have our own program. Beyond just the solar training program, we also consider this facility as a community resilience hub. where we also as an organization, 501, also sponsor many other organizations to be able to do their work in food security, water security, energy security, financial security. So all of these things as a holistic model move together to support community-based capacities. and build workforce to meet these demands in these communities with these organizations that are doing the work on the front lines. So that's kind of our bread and butter, if you will. We've been doing that for several, several years. But with this new building, as I just said, it's a community-based hub where leaders, community members, organizers, stakeholders can come together and discuss issues that are related to the well-being and the welfare of not just communities now, but future generations. So I'm kind of pretty much done. I think one of the things I would really like to emphasize here is that our facility is ready. We haven't started marketing it yet. I'm just introducing it all to you here now. And I think our first article is going to come out in the journey on the 1st of June. So it'll kind of open it up. But what we're really aiming to do and get the support of the council here is something to say, hey, welcome, we support you and we wish you well and for workforce. And, you know, I was meeting with another leadership department earlier a couple of weeks ago about energy audits and different other types of certification courses. So it's not just high academic, you know, you know, accredited types of classes and education. We need certification. We need workforce. We need trades to really get people out there to do the work. Thank you very much for your time.

Joanne, thank you so much for coming. And, you know, one of the things too, which we really appreciate is, you know, we talking about water and wastewater, we do not have any certified operators. We're low on operators on just on a lot of certifications. Would you guys, in addition to the solar and the electrical and those, do you also offer those operator type programs or could you?

Well, that was what was asked of us a couple of weeks ago. And that is to look at what is the need of the city in terms of there was a mention of a fire at a solar farm and the fire department. and their respondents didn't really know how to handle that. So that is a specific training. And so we have specific training, advanced trainings being just the certification, but in terms of providing opportunities to offer more certification courses, that's what we're about. That's what we're here for. So we invite you to support us support you. And thank you.

Does anybody have any more questions? Yeah.

Thank you. Thank you so much for being here. Thank you. I'm sorry if I missed this earlier, but how many of these learning centers do you have across the country?

Interesting question that you bring that up. So we modeled our program after Red Cloud Renewable in South Dakota. They were the only training center that offered not just theoretical training, but hands-on application and upskilling their knowledge so that theory and application come together. So that being said, there was nothing in the Southwest that So we're the first of its kind. And so with that, I think we could really leverage this because this certification in these classes are going to be in high demand for that workforce. And if we could be that southwest center, if you will, to bring in all the other technicians in different fields like carpentry or HVAC or electrical, they...

need that extra training to up their skills and capacities in order to um you know uh you know assign attention to whatever it is that they need to address thank you um i have a few other questions i'll just ask them all at once and you can answer them when will you be starting to enroll students will you be hiring local staff to help with these training needs or how big is the staff or the center um and then how You know, it sounds like you're doing a lot of renewable energy stuff. So is this a priority on helping people like, no, your purpose is to get them certified or you, cause a lot of it is like on renewable energy. So then will the purpose be to also teach. people about how to have like solar panels at their house so they don't have to pay for electricity as much. Or I'm just curious about how the solar part of it is being implemented as well.

So I think you have two questions there. So I'd like to just the first, and that would be, we have a program called train the trainer. So what we do is not only bring in the instructor, we usually have somebody that's graduated with their certificate to shadow the trainer, the instructor this way. We're building workforce within our industry and within our. So that being said, hiring, we only do independent contractors. We don't hire employees. I don't need that headache. So it's everyone's independent contractors. That's just safety. And in terms of the second part of the question, application into the communities, we started out that way. But what we realized as we deployed many systems across the reservation and also part in Zuni, we find that some of the technicians don't follow up. They don't go back and troubleshoot or maintain them. And it's really incumbent, what we strive to do is have these trained technicians take responsibility for the gift that they were given, the opportunity, and give back to the community to identify a family. All that is living without electricity, and then we would deploy and install. However, what we're finding is that that's a liability for us. It's a risk to us because then we might be called to be responsible for maintaining that system when we're just trainers. So we want to move away from that. and really empower our technicians to take on that role and responsibility. And we support them in doing so by helping them build a small business. So we, you know, with business background and all that, we facilitate in supporting them and encourage them to start a small business within their cohorts.

So how does one get trained? How does one sign up for this?

So I'm now just putting flyers out here and information like a trifold. And the packet that you have here is, like I said, is for your information. But all this information will now become publicized in June, and then we'll start taking in applicants.

Yes?

Thank you.

Thank you as well.

Any other questions?

Okay, I appreciate your time. Thank you so much.

Our next item on the agenda is This is going to be a recommendations from the Gallup West I-40 interchange study. This is exit 16 and the East I-40 interchange study exit 26. And And I'm David Wilson here.

Hey, thank you so much, Mayor. Thank you, Councilors, for this opportunity to tell you about the recommendations for the I-40, New Mexico 118 I-40 East-West Interchanges projects. With me tonight in the audience is Mr. Billy Moore. He's the project manager from the Northwest New Mexico COG. My name is David Wilson, project manager with Bohannon Houston. And then also online is my lead planner, C.R. Lithgow, along with our planning principal, Denise Atkins, also. Oh, there's a presentation that goes with it. I don't know if you all see that. I'll just say this was a unique project. From the standpoint, normally, when you have an interstate project and interchange project, it's going to be led by the New Mexico Department of Transportation. This project was a difference led by the local government. So. In 2022, the legislature authorized some money related to the trade ports for local governments to study access to I-40 and I-10. And the city of Gallup applied for that money and received a grant, which ultimately contracted with the COG to administer the scope of work, who then contracted with Bohannon Houston. So it's kind of the history on it there. Because of that unique arrangement, and if we want to go to kind of the next slide, I'll show you real quick. We duplicated some of the process to kind of make it fit. So we created what we call our primary stakeholders, our study team group, to help lead and guide the study. And I want to thank a few people who really helped, who were on that committee and did that. Matt Robinson, along with Robert Hamlin during his tenure here. And then also Rodney Skirskit from the county. We're very instrumental in that along with some of the DOT folks. And then also in the stakeholder meetings, Mr. Chepetti also who helped with his input was very instrumental. I wanna thank those individuals for it. If you wanna turn to the next slide, I'll show you a little more about the project specifically. So under this contract, we looked at two interchanges under one project. Each one is having its own independent study and preliminary plans put together. The one on the left is exit 16 or the west interchange. And then the one on the right 10 miles to the east is exit 26 at the east interchange. Um, this slide here shows some of the other, um, kind of major studies and projects going on, um, in the area. And so those were all taken in account with the project, you know, name some of the big ones, obviously the I 40 corridor study, which was recently completed. He's part of that. I think the other thing the slide shows is some of the linear. features through the city, besides I-40 and just 118, but also the Ripper Echo of the West, along with the BNSF tracks. And we'll dig into those a little more. I'll show you how those impact the interchanges. But just a few other things, obviously we know where the airport is, the new Coal Basin Road and the Energy Logistics Park play into it. So if we wanna look at the next slide, just show you kind of the basis or the starting point for these projects, just a gathering of some of the many projects, economic activity, economic plans, along with transportation plans and safety plans that are going on in the area. Given this activity was it was the basis for submitting the grant application and having these interchange looked at so that when this activity starts to take place, the transportation infrastructure is ready to receive it. So, if we want to take a look at the next slide. I just want to point out it was very important to us. through this project that we followed the federal process and the DOT's basically location procedures, they call it, thereby keeping the project eligible for the federal funds as it moves forward. So, and they, I don't know how many people are familiar with the process, but they kind of break it into letters or numbers and letters. So it's a process Just basically outlining it, but where you look at the interchange here's what's working. Well, here's what's not working. Well, identify those and then brainstorm ideas to to address those deficiencies while you're gathering public input agency comment. come up with as many alternatives as you can, initial alternatives. Again, get input on those from the public and agencies and do an iterative process. Hopefully get to a point where you have one or two alternatives rise to the top and you start looking at those really in depth. This is also going on while you're looking at environmental factors as well. And we develop some screening matrices as we go through it. So I'll just show you that ultimately. So that's what we're doing for this project is developing the 1A and 1B study. If we look at the next slide, there is an environmental phase, phase 1C. We have tried to set some of that work up. Because construction funding is not identified for these projects, we can actually complete that. Part of the project, but we can help start to get it set up a 1 D preliminary plans. We have prepared those. For the 2 interchanges, and that's the extent of the funding at this point. So, if we want to just look, I'll just show you a little more about the interchanges and the recommendations if we want to go to the next step. This one just shows the timeline, kind of how the activities that I talked about took place, the kickoffs in the later part of 2024, some of the public meetings in early 2025. One of our first presentations to the Council here, I believe that was in March of last year. Going through the detailed analysis along with a number of, um. Stakeholder in public meetings, so just have flows. Um, let's go ahead and look at the next slide. We did do independent safety analysis for both of these interchanges. But I thought in summary form, this slide really wrapped it up. This actually comes from the I 40 corridor study. But this particular exhibit shows the incidences of crashes along I-40 by milepost, basically from the state line to the edge of Albuquerque. And when you look there in red, you can see both how the west and east interchange, with the east being the highest of all the mileposts along the whole corridor, by far the highest instance of crashes. And the west interchange, not far below it. So it doesn't top out when you look at severity and fatality, but just by incident of crashes, it sure does. Let's take a look at the next slide. I guess as part of the study, what we do come up with is a purpose in need, right? We look at those safety and deficiencies and then basically develop a purpose in need, which becomes kind of the plot line of the project. What it is we're hoping to achieve. And here is the example purpose in need from. from the Exit 16 project and the Exit 26 is very similar. So dig into that. Let's just take a look at the graphics and I can show you some more. Okay, so this is the West interchange at exit 16. Lots of lots of, I would say it's particularly defined by the truck stops and the heavy vehicles that are using it. Those have before been to the West of the interchange. Now, there's the new 1, 9 truck stop to the East. So there's a lot of heavy vehicle traffic at this interchange. Maybe. saving grace, I don't know. But the interchange, unlike when we look at the East interchange, this interchange was reconstructed in the mid 90s and was brought up to standards at that time. So some of the acceleration lengths are longer than what we see at the East. But particularly as far as deficiencies here, there's certainly a lack of pedestrian facilities and multimodal facilities through the interchange on 118. Operationally, both the ramp intersections are unsignalized at this point. The intersection to the west meets current signal warrants, and the one just to the east is right on the verge of meeting signal warrants under existing conditions. And again, we have the railroad runs very close there. There's some ridge lines, particularly up along Twin Buttes. There's a cemetery that backs up on I-40. And then as we look to the west, there's a fairly large floodplain there too that impacts. And then I think it's worth mentioning too, Mentmore Road or County Road 1 that runs to the north, connects up to Carleton Coal Road. So while that's not the main connection, It is certainly worth realizing that that it does connect. So, if you want to look at the next slide. I'll show you some more slices we did the initial alternatives. I think we talked about this last time we presented there was. 15 initial alternatives that were developed these were presented to the public. This is back there in the earlier part of of last year. From that input, and then through that study team that I mentioned, these alternatives, all 15, were weighed in a matrix. And then the three that you see highlighted here were advanced to detailed study. Alternative, actually D2 was a single point urban interchange and we started looking at that some more and it just didn't work. So it was eliminated from further study pretty quick. But let me show you the two that advanced. If we can go to the next slide. Alternative B is a widened loop interchange. And it's really what this is looking at. One of the main things that we see And we have drone video that shows it, and it was also mentioned in the public greatly. Is even though the Excel, the loop ramp that goes up and accelerates on the I 40 meets highway standards. What we see is with that heavy truck traffic. Climbing up that that steep loop around in the tight geometry, the trucks tend to go slow. What happens is you get more agile vehicles behind them. And as soon as the queue gets up next to I-40, you have traffic jumping into I-40 that's not up to speed. And you see a hotspot of sideswipes and rear-end crashes associated with that. So what this alternative is doing is adding a second lane to that loop ramp and trying to keep trucks In the outside lane, and let the other vehicles move into the inside lane, and that allows everybody accelerate and get up, get up to speed so that they're not having to cut over. It does require the bridge over 118 and the railroad to be widened does recommend the signals to be added at both those ramp interchanges. As well as it takes care of a few other geometric issues on on the other apps, it is worth noting that the railroad bridge is grandfathered it has some some both vertical and horizontal clearances that no longer meet railroad standard. And it creates some some challenges in in in raising that bridge and widening it that ultimately leads to a retaining wall in between the two directions of travel eastbound and westbound and I 40 so. This, it does require the loop ramp to be widened a little bit, which doesn't mean digging into the embankment that's next to the loop ramp and kind of pushing Glen Buttes Road over a little bit. That alternative was weighed against if we want to look at the next one. is D3, which is a diverging diamond alternative. A really interesting concept. We talked about these a lot last time. There's a few hundred of these built across the country now. There's one of them in New Mexico. They operate and exchange traffic very efficiently because the signals operate very efficiently. They kind of work like a reverse roundabout, but they eliminate left-hand traffic. And I guess you might refer to them as a contraflow or where you kind of drive on the wrong side of the road. But when done right, they can be very, very natural. But some of the things we found with this interchange layout is access became very challenging, both for the, namely for the Shell Station on the, or what was the Shell Station to the east at Twin Buttes Road, and then particularly too at the little road between the Navajo and the Loves Truck Stop. Access there became very, very challenging. Also, I mentioned that railroad bridge as we moved forward with with the study. And trying to make that bridge fit to current standards, the profile grade going up to the interstate got very steep. Almost to the point of being fatally flawed actually. So. So, if we go ahead and look at the next next slide. The recommendation on this is to advance with alternative B to the environmental stage. That is the widened loop ramp. We were also concerned on that diverging diamond that although it's designed with wide lanes and shoulders, just again, just given the high volume of heavy truck traffic driving next to each other, that there was a higher chance of sites wide crashes between those vehicles.

Yeah. Yeah.

Right now it gets a little difficult. So, yeah, the alternative B is the is the recommended alternative. Yeah, it does work with the future three language recommended in the I 40 corner study cost estimate is about 113Million dollars for that alternative. There's some geotechnical work that needs to be done, I think, if that advances. I think it's important to point out on this one, though, that I think it does lend itself to an interim solution, being signalization and improved signing to help keep trucks and use the full length of the acceleration. We heard that a lot in our public meetings that, hey, if you just signalize these intersections, you take care of 85% of our problems. So that is a recommendation to and just look at signalizing is get a good bang for your buck. And then I'll show you real quick too. There is some. Access point consolidation that's worth talking about. Let's take a look at the next slide. Some of the other deficiencies. Oh, let's get here. This is. Yeah, there's some good visualizations. I like these, I just caution to be a little careful with them. They look so, they can look so real, sometimes they can be a little misleading the way we see it. And we can look at the next one too, just to give an idea of what some of these look like. And you can see the extra lane added there. So as we look at the picture there, let me go back to the other one right there. We see Twin Buttes come around in front of the hotel there. That spacing to the interchange ramp is deficient. It's not long enough per access standards. At some point, that is probably going to require access control. There's really not another good alternative for folks using twin buttes. And we talked about this a lot with the county and in our public public meetings. And if we look at the next slide, there was a couple alternatives to that proposed. The 1st, 1 was was Raleigh road. That's the 1 to the South that you see there. That would connect twin Buttes over to Rico, which is signalized it at 118. The, the residents of the county. We're not particularly thrilled with this option. The city does own that right away. That is city right away right now. But it's about 2 thirds of a mile long. So to follow the whole loop, it's about. But over a mile out of direction, which was not very popular. So, from that, that Mario street extension was considered. And that that did receive a better better feedback. And operationally, it does, we did some additional accounts there. It does work with the travel center, though, all the way around. I do want to caution in the long range transportation plan. There's another corridor extension. Out near high range road, that's to the bottom mile or more to the south of all of this. And that brings a lot of traffic from 602 towards the interchange that all wants to make a left onto 118. Preferably, that would take place at Rico Street, but Rico may have challenges being extended because I believe there's allotment land in the way. So ultimately, if those left turns get to either Mario or to Twin Buttes sometime in the far out future, there will be operational failure with that is what the models show. So with that, you know, there's certainly desire to get that traffic to Rico Street. So happy to answer questions on that or go right to the east.

A couple to jump in on. Do you know offhand, like, how much, how many people were at this public input? How much public input?

Yeah, I want to say around 40, that vary between, there was two public meetings and, you know, And while I'm here, I'll ask Sierra and online to look that up real quick.

I'm going to hang on.

Okay. We'll get that number. Yeah. Plus or minus the second one. Maybe it wasn't quite as well as a 10 and attended for my collection at this same interchange or the second one was exit. So, no, so we did two, two public meetings, both, both interchange projects were presented. During both meetings.

Okay. Yeah. And then it looks like you are including in this preliminary design phase pedestrian safety.

I didn't need to mention that. That's right. Pedestrian is a big. Big part of of the purpose and need so, um. There is another study going on on a 118. That's making recommendations for 20 some miles of 118 that goes through both of these.

Okay.

Um, and that has that has access control in it. It has. uh bike and pedestrian improvements recommended in it and we have matched into those uh specific to this interchange and we can go back and look at it but we are we are recommending to take bikes and pads through the interchange to the north um so that they're not in conflict with that loop ramp movement and the heavy trucks with the loops

Okay, see on the north side.

Right. So we would move everybody over to the north. And that would take place through signalized signalized crosswalks around.

Awesome. That's a project but are you guys also contracted to work on that.

No, we're not. But we surely take it into consideration. Right. We try to look at all identify all the different studies that are going on or have been done and make sure we're in line with the recommendations out of those documents.

Okay.

Thank you. Did you find our attendees numbers?

Yes, I did. So there were 24 people at the first meeting, which presented all of the alternatives. And then there were 14 people at the second meeting, which presented the detailed alternatives, which we showed today. I also would mention that we had additional stakeholder meetings and also met individually and in groups with some property owners as well who responded to our outreach efforts.

David, what's your best guess when you're going to get this thing funded?

So I can't speak for the DOT, but it would be my belief that the East Interchange, not the one I just talked about, I think what their last comment to me was that they wanted to review the study, review their priorities. The East Interchange, and we'll talk about that in a second, again, I can't speak for them, but I believe that is becoming a priority project for them, that they are interested in advancing. And this has been a great step to getting it started. And again, going back to that whole part of following that federal process so that it can hopefully launch right into it. Thank you, Stan.

Hey, David, one question, you know, at the phase, it could the signalization be done since it's the intersection warranted that that would, like you say, say, solve a factor of the problems right off the bat.

Yes, may I? Yes. Yes. The the inner, the west, the west ramp intercept the westbound ramp intersection on the west. That one meets warrants today. At the time, the one on the east, I could say is like right on the verge. And I believe the 118 study, it may have actually met warrants in that. So I think it's just a matter of finding one of those studies and it's it.

It'd be nice to fund two signals at about $5 million each versus trying to go find $113 million.

Yeah, exactly. Mark, I'd like to speak to that. If you don't mind, this is Frank. If you look at how close the east, the off-ramp for going west and the on-ramp for west along with the east, how tight that is, signalization, I'm very worried, just turns us into another Munoz overpass where you just have very tight light after light after light, and then they back up. And that would create a huge safety issue. You look at now with just the stop sign, they're already backing up. At times onto the freeway, and that would be a disaster when you then have them backing up on 66, or sorry, New Mexico 118. So just a concern there, and that was discussed. I know some of the property owners thought, hey, that would be great, but you look at how many are already backing up. Now, I would be worried with tight signals that, sorry to say, New Mexico hasn't proven they can synchronize a light yet. Their idea of synchronization is this one's green, so the next one has to be red. So just a concern.

I just say we really appreciate that comment. We've looked at that and realized that concern. The analysis does show that the Q-links fit. But certainly, um, synchronization when they're when they're that close is a little more difficult.

Any questions. Okay, go ahead and go on 10 miles away present the other 1. yeah.

Okay. So this will go a little faster because we got all the front end out of the way. So, yeah, exit exit 26. there to the east, the east interchange. And even a little more defining, you can really see it in this graphic as far as constraints with the River Brooker to the west. I mean, it's all just right there. The River Brooker to the west is right there. Then the railroad tracks right there. And then 118 is right there. So it really, really creates a constraint to how the ramps can come in and you start to see what the original designers were up against. Again, as far as land use around it, it is travel related. I think there's a couple of fueling stations and then, you know, some hotel accommodations. As well as a few restaurants, obviously, the Hoboth Christian School is near there. And again, some of the defining features, I know that there's discussion of a possible health facility expansion to the south and maybe some things at the refinery and as well as Red Rock and the White Rock community too. So just kind of what's happening there. The interchange was built in 1980, plus or minus, and unlike the one we just looked at, has not been reconstructed. So some of the particular defining features of it, For the eastbound on-ramp there on the bottom of the picture, it comes in on the curve of I-40. Particularly at night, it's difficult for folks as the trucks are coming down off the bridge and on the curve and trying to gauge where your gap is to get into traffic. So that's been brought up as a deficiency. The off ramp on the other side, the westbound off ramp has a slight curve deficiency in it where it's a little too tight. But then I think the big story starts to come in on the other two ramps. So the westbound loop ramp, again, is kind of steep and tight, which in and of itself isn't necessarily a problem. The problem is when it gets up onto I-40. The merge is very, very short. There's nowhere near current standards. So you have slow traffic coming up at best that has to start moving over right away. And just to make it a little worse, it's very tight on the bridge, very narrow shoulders. So it's very constrained and there's not a lot of gift to it, you might say. And then for the eastbound off ramp, it's very similar. There's a very short diverge until it goes into the tight ramp, going back down to 118. And that basically has vehicles decelerating early in I-40, or they're hitting that curve above its design speed. And we do see a hotspot again of crashes associated with those merge and diverges, as well as a little bit with the S-curves as well. Again, their pedestrian facilities are sporadic to non-existent. The interchange ramp on the east side is signalized, the one to the west is not. The one to the west does currently meet signal warrants as it is right now. And just to kind of follow up on Mr. Spade's comment on Ward 2, Toltec is currently signalized. And that would remain, right? That would remain, yeah, under these recommendations. They do. So let's see. Let's go ahead and look at the next slide if we could. For this interchange, there was basically eight initial alternatives that were identified and weighed and analyzed in the early part study. Two of those advanced, Alternative A and Alternative D. Alternative A is an improvement to existing conditions, and Alternative D is a trumpet interchange alternative. Um, let's take, uh, let's go ahead and take a look at those if we could on the next slide. So, what, um. What alternative a is doing is similar to that? Well, I should back up from there 1, those, those, uh. The eastbound on ramp, it does push that out. So it's no longer on the curve and lengthens it. Um, it does look at tying that in before the robot box culvert that goes underneath. And then that curb deficiency on the westbound off ramp is corrected also. As far as the loop ramps, Yeah, there's not a lot of geometric type improvement to them, but the improvement does come up on I-40 to where there's adequate acceleration and adequate merge length and adequate shoulders to accommodate that. So as it's shown here, what you see when one of those loop ramps either merge to or diverge from are actually separate structures offset from the existing bridges, but the way the study Then environmental or a planning document, I'm sorry is written is that it allows. Based on how money can be allocated in time for them to be built as separate structures or as. Completely rebuilt with a mainline bridge too. So, so it was just, it was done that way to, like I said, allow different funding scenarios to take place. Again, it does recommend signalization of the ramp to the west. Again, the analysis does show that the queuing fits and that there is an acceptable level of operation with that. And that's, yeah, that's basically that improvement. And it does, as I said, it ties to, again, to the 118 study for the pedestrian bike improvements and recommends those under the bridge. Those improvements would all be on the south, as I understand it, and talking with some of the different bike and city people earlier that, you know, that we don't want to encourage that type of activity next to the tracks. So it's all on the south. So that's alternative A. Let's take a look at alternative D. He says alternative D was a Tremont interchange. This went through a few different iterations You can see there what it does is it consolidates all the movements to the east and does that through another loop there. Again, the kind of the separate bridges or bridges at I-40 that go over the West and the tracks and 118. It's kind of that same scenario there. But what this alternative would do, and like I said, it went through a couple iterations. The final one that you see here doesn't require the relocation at Church Rock Street, but you can imagine there'd be a pretty substantial retaining wall between the loop and going down to the street and then the neighborhood that's right there. It also requires a curved bridge, which was over I-40, which can be done. It's just a little... More difficult and more expensive to build. Um. But, um, but, um, and but but, uh, overall, if we go ahead and look at the next next slide. Basically, basically looking at that, um. There's certainly some geotechnical concerns with the high fills and there's some drainage concerns there with that loop. And just looking at the overall impacts, alternative A, that improvement to existing conditions is the recommended improvement to advance into an environmental phase. Again, it is conducive. It works with the future 3, 3 lane widening that's recommended in the I 40 study. The cost on that 1, as you can see, there's a little north of 151Million. It does require some right of way. Some impact to some land certainly requires some further geotechnical investigations and some floodplain analysis is required. And we need to, we need to review. We need to get a little better right of way grade right of way analysis that advances to so. And certainly some coordination other railroads difficult on all these projects. To coordinate with at this stage of the project. So so that needs to happen. I think the important part to mention on this, and we can see, let's look in 1 of the next slides and we can see it. That shows how that new on-ramp moves towards Rehoboth, so it's not on curve anymore. But if we consider that and look at the next slide, one of my concerns was as we now look at the westbound on-ramp, and moving it around with the funding that was available and how far we were able to go on this project. We needed to tie that in at the Superman Canyon, before the Superman Canyon Road Bridge. And we look at that and darn, we go, darn, we just took the merge, you know, we just fixed having a merge on the curve on the other side, just turn around and put it on this side. So that's something we've talked to the DOT about. And one of the recommendations is as this moves into the environmental stage, that it be expanded and that the Superman Canyon bridges be looked at so that potentially the merge can be moved beyond the curve and we can get all the merges off the curves.

So it's just this end of access. 126 is 151.6 million.

Just this one interchange.

And then that was the other interchange 11.

Oh, 113. Yeah. So, you know, it might be worth mentioning on this one, you know, the bridge, it's a 10 span bridge, about 900 some feet long that goes over 118, the report of the West on the railroad tracks, again, built in 80. Believe it or not, it ranks not high on the, it ranks in fairly good condition because of all the money and effort the DOT has put in to maintain. The construction of the bridge itself, the deck by today's standard is thin. The girder spacing is pretty wide by today's standard. And I think you can kind of just look under it and see that the slenderness of the columns, you know, is kind of slender by today's standards too. So there's quite a bit of the DOT to replace these bridges. along with the operational issues of it. Because there have been instances, I'm sure you're aware of, of pieces of the deck becoming unsound, the concrete becoming unsound, falling out of the deck, which is not good for anybody.

But just to make sure I understand, that 151 man includes the bridge. Yeah.

Oh, I'm sorry. Not just the geometry, it includes the bridge. If we just did the geometry, it'd be a lot cheaper. Right. Right.

I have another question concerns both 16 and 26. With with the extension of the. Excel and decel lanes. What is the potential of widening both of the boxes that go under it? The one there it meant more. That's a single lane going underneath I-40. And then Rehoboth is not much wider. What are the odds of encompassing both of those in this project to widen those vehicle boxes that go underneath I-40?

I'm trying to think of the one.

Sweetwater Road, I think is what he's talking about. Right, Frank, the one off Industry Lane?

Correct.

Yeah, that runs over to the plant. Yeah, that one's narrow.

Yeah, that one definitely needs to be widened. And if that could be part of this project, because they're going to be putting diesel lanes there, looks like pretty close to it. And same with the Rehoboth box.

We could certainly take that as a comment to be added. and to be looked for consideration.

Thank you. I think that would be a help to both of those neighborhoods and I'd appreciate it.

A quick comment on 26. As somebody who uses this ramp on and off several times a week, I've often thought that this exact design that you're showing would solve a lot of issues. So I really appreciate that. I think it's very common sense. I think in the meantime, I don't know if this is like y'all can suggest this, or I can, or the city can, to the Department of Transportation, but even just some signage on the eastbound off-ramp that's such a tight loop, there's no signage warning you that such a tight loop is coming up, and that, you know, the off-ramps in Albuquerque are so well marked, you know, that shows you the little picture, and 25 miles per hour ramp, you know, and then some slow down space or having some signage back before the bridge. In the meantime, until anything more permanent, sounds like this could be a pretty long-term project. I think that would just prevent so many of these accidents too, and like semi-rollovers coming off of that ramp.

Yeah. Yeah, no, we can certainly add that as comments to the report as it finalizes.

And we can make that request to the maintenance group here in Gallup.

Dave, I got another question, I guess. This whole ramp on 26, the whole project evolves being so close to the bridge, right? And that's a big safety concern. Had you guys looked into moving that ramp, further down the road closer to the casino or something like that where you can get full longer ramps you know to the in and off the interstate so so there were some alternatives i looked at a couple things kind of splitting like splitting the ramp like like

Like, like the ramp would actually come off and instead of going. Around the development that's there now. Like, possibly come in closer to the, to the state police as far as the casino in that in that area. Well, there's not there's not a lot of room back in there between. between the the highway and 118 and you know you can kind of see you can kind of see what the original highway designers did that's why you had those sharp s curves you know they they they flared it out so that they could create that room to pull the to pull the ramps in and then that's what gave you those kind of sharp s curves through there um so i mean within within the general area we looked at that Um, and it ran in, it ran into a couple problems. Either either the grades were too sharp. You know, because we're thinking about all weather conditions, right? Like what's this look like in January 5th when it's snowy and icy, right? And you've got trucks sliding down some steep interstate bridges dead to 118. Or just the queuing length between them two. And it just, we couldn't get something to work. You know, and then, you know, you think, well, what if, what if we go the other way and go, some of the options looked at going under. And then the problem there is, it's, is drainage. There's no way to get, there's no easy way to get the water out because it's so flat and you're right next to the, to the little river there and it's below flow lines. So, so I guess in short, it was looked at, but it was, it was, it was difficult to find something that worked and And then, and then there were some that looked looked at, but again they didn't work very well, and then they didn't meet if hwa policy or interchanges became what's called a partial interchange and so that was that was difficult.

They like the other one, could we put the for the nurse at the signalization be put in without the rest of the like as a phase one i'm talking about exit 26.

Um, I made signal warrants now, so we get so it can be signalized. Yeah, I know. Um, and again, just just so we're thinking about that and all on all of these. I'm not, I'm not sure that it could be put in. To where you could say, hey, I could just leave it right where it is when we do the larger project. Um, but, uh, but certainly it could, it could be put in. You had to maybe master arms and things like that could be salvaged. but it certainly meets signal warrants as we sit here today.

Any more questions?

Thank you. Thank you.

Thank you for coming to Gallup and giving this presentation.

Really appreciate it.

Thank you so much. Same thing, Billy. Thank you. And also, Commissioner Walt, he's in the audience too. I forgot to recognize him.

And they want to exit 16. You're on 16, yeah. You're on 16, yeah.

Thank you so much. Thank you. Thank you very much.

Our next item is a presentation by Erica, acting city attorney for the, it's the report on the resolution number R2026-5 and this line of the property at 3402 Blue Hill Avenue.

Thank you, Mayor and Council. So you all may recall this subject property was one of a few brought before Council in January 2026 for condemnation proceedings. This particular property had a special provision put into it before HAB-Masyn Moyer- pursuing demolition, which was 120 days to try to obtain and or past title 120 but day Marcus tomorrow may 27 so I wanted to give this report to you guys all today. HAB-Masyn Moyer- Unfortunately, we have not we've been unsuccessful in those efforts we tried to again contact the owner, we hunted down our office hunted down. PB, Lisa Smith. : Additional information in terms of who the lender, maybe who may be paying the taxes, but didn't find any additional information that would be. PB, Lisa Smith. : That would lead us to any successful transfer of title, so you know our original lean is less than $2,000 which really makes foreclosure a challenging endeavor so. PB, Lisa Smith. : Our recommendation and consulting with planning is to proceed with a partial demolition because, again, the call from Council. in the proceeding itself was to try to retain the external part of the structure. So that's what we're going to proceed. It's consistent with the resolution, but just wanted to update you all that we were unsuccessful in that charge.

Let me just ask a question. I guess CB2, we've never done partial, have we? Is this going to be the first time? If we go out with a partial demolition?

We generally don't do a partial. We do the full demolition because generally when we bring a structure to condemnation, that means it's beyond repair. In this case, there's significant roof damage where the roof's leaking into the house and the ceiling's caving in, so the roof would have to be repaired as well. if we do a parcel and meaning by parcel is just gut the inside, leave the framing. That way somebody could come in and rehab it easier. Um, there are still personal belongings in there that belong to the homeowner. So, uh, it's like they just walked out one day and left everything there. Uh, So that would be a challenge as well.

And would it have to have a general contractor? Because you'd have to leave the bearing walls up, right?

The general contractor would have to do it. But the challenge there is that we can't hire them as the homeowner because we don't own the property. So that's another thing that we have to find a workaround for, which I don't know that would be possible. Okay.

It's a lot easier to knock them down completely, isn't it? This would be one of the first ones.

Full demolition and a demolition lien is certainly easier for us to then foreclose on and get title if we need to.

Yeah, I'm not real excited about that. We had a fire on the corner house, 3400. And for 20, 30 years, it's been an empty lot. You know, weeds growing, you know, the whole nine yards. Don't even know what was it. You guys might, but I... It's a vacant lot.

It's a vacant lot. I'm assuming owned by the same homeowner that had it when the house was there. Again, I'm not sure. I could give you an update on the ones that we have demoed so far that were part of that package. Two of them have been demolished. The one on Jefferson on the north side has been torn down and also this commercial structure has Thereby Boardman has been torn down. We are working on getting asbestos testing for the two houses in Chihuahua right now. So we could proceed with going to bid on those. So we're making progress.

Well, good. Any more questions?

So there's not a chance. So if you partially demolish it, then you're still going to try to sell the property to somebody or I don't understand how that works. Because I thought the last time we talked about this, we talked about seeing if it was stable enough to sell as is and someone could come in. If we obtained the property as a city and then we sold it.

We had contemplated trying to sell the cities in lean interest, which is currently the clean and lean, the PB, Lisa Smith. : Less than $2,000 but because the taxes are being paid because they're still a property owner because it's still subject to a mortgage we you know as long as someone has title it's hard for us to do anything so for the city to obtain title. PB, Lisa Smith. : absent the current owner to do it would be through a demolition and then foreclosure on that lane. PB, Lupita D Montoya, So we did, but it would.

I mean, that's still three conventional method. Yeah, this is this is new territory. You know, we've never done this. Right.

PB, Lupita D Montoya, It was asked in January. So I just wanted to provide an update and PB, Harmon Zuckerman, Appreciate it.

And the mortgages also current as well.

PB, Lupita D Montoya, That as far as we can tell, you know, it's sort of the the mortgage has been passed through a handful of it. I have yet to be able to talk to an actual human so

we could demolish the house and then foreclose on the property and then someone could come in and buy the land and just rebuild?

What we've done in the past when we had condemnations is we'd demo the property, we'd foreclose after the time period has elapsed, and then at the time Habitat for Humanity was still in operation and we would donate the land to them and they would build new houses. They're not an organized organization, if that makes sense anymore. So there's nobody to do that now. So that was one way we were able to rehab those properties. Now we would just demo them and they'd be a lot available for construction.

Isn't Richard Koontz with the Housing Authority interested in homes like that to rehab?

Mr. Mayor, Councillor Garcia, yes, Mr. Koontz has expressed interest in buying properties for that purpose. There are vacant lots around town. I don't know if he's researched them or not, but he has voiced, you know, wanting to do something like that.

To answer Linda's question, I don't think he's interested in rehabbing as he's building new, a lot of vacant lots.

Sounds good.

PB, Lupita D Montoya, So we're going to do partial you say.

PB, Lupita D Montoya, Well, that was the sort of the direction was to try and see if we could somehow sell our interest in the the current lean unsuccessful again with contacting the property owner. PB, Lupita D Montoya, If a partial demolition is is available me because it was the request of counsel and in the resolution to keep the structure as intact as possible.

So it's abandoned right now, basically.

Yeah.

So my concern if we do partial is again, it'd be the transients and drug activity.

We have a couple options. We could just, I mean, it's condemned. We don't have to tear it down. We could just leave it set there, which kind of defeats the purpose of condemnation, but we're not obligated to tear it down. It's property owner's responsibility to do it. If they don't, then the city can proceed. And if we choose to do it, which is what we're doing in the Chuita area. If we just leave it sit, yes, it can become an attractive nuisance, which means transients could get in there. They could start a fire. They could have parties. They could do unlawful things. You might have to go out there because they do become attractive nuisance. They'll get in there and they'll strip all the copper and they'll, you know, destroy it. They've already started getting in there a little bit and graffiti and stuff like that. So they don't last long. I mean, Unless the neighbors are real diligent and calling the police and having them go out there. We don't have to demo it. We can just let it sit there.

Are you going to come back to us then with a question on how to proceed?

Those are the options now. We either proceed with partial demo, which would be kind of a tough thing to do being that we don't own the property because as I pointed out there are roof, there's roof damage, which has that water come in, which once water gets in the rafters and starts going through the place and ceiling starts falling in, you know, it's kind of just goes from there. It's not easy to fix, but that would have to be fixed first. I don't know how we do that being that it's private property still. We can't hire a contractor to go fix it because we don't own the property. So that's a challenge right there. So if we leave it as is, it'll just continue to deteriorate. The water is going to continue to get in. Monsoons are going to come and it's just going to start falling apart little by little. So our options are leave it or we go out to bid and do regular normal procedure and then turn it down.

So our biggest problem here is communicating with the homeowner, correct? There's been no communication with him.

Yeah.

None whatsoever.

None whatsoever.

There's been attempted communication where there's been no response from them. Yes. That's right.

I just hate to tear it down because everybody in this room knows we don't have contractors that want to build in Gallup. It's a lot easier to refurbish a house than to find a contractor to build one. And such is the case, the house right next door to it. There was a fire there back in the 90s, late 90s, early 2000s sometime, and still a vacant lot. And the city goes over there. I have seen somebody going over there and cutting weeds and cleaning it up a couple of times a year. But it's hard to get a contractor to build a house here in Gallup. It's too difficult. Having said that, it's just a lot easier to rehab the house.

Mayor, this was just a report. It was not advertised as any action to be taken tonight. So if we need to take action, it will have to be at the next meeting for what to do.

And no additional action needs to be taken. The resolution of finance is this was just the one outstanding component with 120 days.

And we appreciate it. I mean, this issue is all over Gallup. You know, there's a lot of properties out there that get mixed up and renovated. And we've talked about insurance companies and mortgage companies.

And how do you go about this? You know, it's going to be creative.

Well, thank you, CB. I appreciate it. The next item is consent agenda. These items are placed on the consent agenda so the City Council can designate by unanimous consent those routine items that wish to be approved or acknowledged by one motion. If any one item does not meet the approval of all council members or if a citizen so requests, it will be heard as a separate item. With that, do we have a motion or request? Oh, I was going to read it.

Consent agenda item number one, approval of minutes of the regular meeting of April 14, 2026. Consent agenda item number two, budget adjustment from senior fund cash balance into 2019 for the amount of $15,000 to cover food costs for the remainder of the fiscal year. Consent agenda item number three, Request for street and parking lot closures for the 76th annual Gallup Lions Club Rodeo Parade, Barbecue, and Battle of the Bands to be held on Saturday, June 13, 2026. Consent agenda item number four. final review and approval of vacation of existing public utility and drainage easements as part of replant number one of lot number two of ortega subdivision and love subdivision and two unplatted tracks of land consent agenda number five budget adjustment from non-capital to capital for vehicle purchase

Now we're going to make the motion to approve the consent agenda as is.

Second. Councilor Malini?

Yes.

Councilor Piano? Yes. Councilor Garcia? Yes. Councilor Yazzie? Yes. Mayor DeFalle?

Yes. Okay, with that, thank you, Ron. Saw you on the phone there in Vince, but your item was approved, so we're good to go. And you're good to go on that one.

Thank you, Mayor. We appreciate it. And we will get busy to get it working. Thank you.

The next item is a discussion action topics. And the first item is the Arts and Cultural District Pilot Grant, a grant agreement and budget adjustment. And our presenter today is Matt Robertson.

Good evening mayor and council. Yes, before you, you have a grant agreement. So requesting consideration to approve this agreement and also approve budget actions. So we can place expenditure and revenue accounts in place. In a nutshell, this program is an exhibition project that we're doing in partnership with Southwest Indian foundation. Essentially, we're going to be, it's kind of multifold. It's to support artists with some technical assistance, business training, marketing training, helping with their accounting, giving them some of that financial technical support that sometimes artists don't necessarily concentrate on as much as their creative pursuit, which is understandable. So with that, we're going to be doing daily exhibitions at the Multicultural Center. And the aim is to give the artists a place to work and support to grow as an artist and contribute to economic development and in turn hopefully increase tourism and get people to come out and see the artists as they're working. That's the exhibition part of it. So if you've been in other cities, you've probably seen kind of similar projects where you can go and talk to the artists while they're working, see the process in action and kind of be a little bit more familiar with what's being created. So that's really quickly what we have here today. I'm asking for your approval and stand for any questions you might have.

Any questions?

Chair, I have a few questions. My first question, well, first of all, I think it's great that we got awarded the funding, which is awesome. We previously had a lease with SWIFT, and so I'm wondering, that hasn't come back to us, so do we have a remaining lease with them, or is that something that's coming before council in the future?

Mayor, council, I've been privy to the discussions on the lease, so I couldn't answer that question for you.

I can answer. I consulted my magic ball and thought they might ask about the SWIFT lease. So currently, yes, SWIFT is leasing space from the city's cultural center. The term of that lease just at a high level was July 1, 2019 to June 30, 2021. There are, however, automatic renewal provisions for up to four additional two-year terms if it's not terminated. So that gets us to 2029. If all those four terms. But just if you want to do two years, it would be 2023, 2025.

And I can speak more to that. We are in process of... Working on the least specifics since we're talking an exhibition space and we're also talking a small convention center space in the downstairs on the East side. So we're still working with Swift to bring that to you. So it should be coming. This is May already. Late June, early July.

Great, thank you. And then I was just curious about some of the, I can't answer Matt, just let me know, but some of the stipulations around what we're spending the money on. So I saw in the contract it states a few specific artists. Are we opening this up to any artists out there that could potentially be, you know, showing their art, their craft? And then how are we, it seems like this is a quick turnaround. So how are we going, how are we getting those artists in? I guess that my question is.

Sure. Mayor, Council, those were some of the master artists that are at the Multicultural Center currently. I know some of them are already not able to participate in the program, so we'll do a public call out and see who's interested and go through a vetting process of some kind to, you know, fill those slots.

Okay, yeah, because I noticed that there's like a few that are already mentioned in the contract. I just want to make sure we're not just going with people that have already been used or we already, I mean, not that they shouldn't be able to do it, but that this is open to lots of different artists that maybe have never had the chance of displaying their craftsmanship. So, okay. And then maybe we can't answer this either, but how part of this contract is that we're paying the artists, right? We're paying people to do this. So do we know how much we're paying artists or weavers or Ask makers to to. Do this, I don't know if it's like a daily rate or it is mayor counsel that it is essentially daily rate.

Um, I don't know if you have access to the document in front of you, but it's in here our budget. So you'll see in there. Kind of the breakdown of daily rate, so basically it averages between 150 to 220 dollars or so a day, depending on it's pretty much the month and then split into how many days we have throughout the month.

But what if someone can only come for like three hours versus someone comes for eight hours?

They're going to have to commit. Mayor, council, they're going to have to commit to the program or they're not going to be able to participate or they won't be paid if they don't come and render the services that are being asked of them.

So that's for like all, they have to be there all day.

We'll have a set schedule, yes, that they'll have to be there.

Just a quick note, Matt. The exhibits were not included in the packet and the upload. So I think the stipends are on exhibit B.

Okay.

Yeah, Mayor counsel, I can't explain that. I should have had the whole document there and believe I uploaded the whole thing.

So we have the grant agreement only. It doesn't. It doesn't outline those details. Um, were you done? I have some questions, so I'll let you in.

Yeah, absolutely. Um, yeah, go for it.

Okay. Yeah, that was similar to the lease question. I was wondering how it came about that we decided to partner with Southwest Indian Foundation on this, especially given that the lease contract had come into question. And so how was that decided that we would work with them?

Mayor, council, staff were discussing basically we think the Multicultural Center could be more. You know, they do a great job as it is, but we saw this opportunity to enhance some of the programming, so we went after it. And they have the space, they have master artists, and they don't have a program like this already in place. So we felt they were natural partners to work with.

Okay, because it was specifically focused on the building, the kitchen of the cultural

And the discussions on this were before the Bruja, I guess, with the contract on the building. These discussions started well before that.

And Mayor and Councilor, this isn't just simply a matter of location in the building. SWIFT is a very robust organization. Teri Frazier is an amazing person to work with. She brought a lot of expertise and relationships to the table and we're leveraging that and continuing our partnership together.

Okay. And then is this, my other question was, is this the only grant that we're doing under the Main Street and Arts and Cultural District program this year.

Mayor, Council, this is the only grant I've applied for and received so far this year under the auspices of the Main Street program.

Okay, so in that regard, I just wanted to make a couple comments, sorry, comments about my perspective on this, because I do want to see us use that building well, and I do want to see us have some robust arts development in the community. However, I think that in regard to a creative industries grant, I would like to see it move away, see actually us as a whole community shift away a little bit more from the perspective that arts are an exhibition of especially Native American traditional crafts and commodification of that, and to move toward appreciation for art as storytelling, art as community building, find ways to inspire the next generation of artists. and to preserve. So it's both preserving cultural knowledge, you know, inspiring people to get into art, but also inspiring people to get into art just for the expression of their own philosophies, their own perspectives of the world. Like, I'd love to see us bringing youth into this. So like, Bringing good creative, the whole creative industries thing is really big, right? And I feel like in Gallup, we tend to focus on it as just a little slice of like, well, how do we do tourism better? And that's a part of it, it is. And I appreciate what we wanna do to boost the value of what people get when they stop through Gallup. But I come from an art family myself, and I just really see that value of engaging in various forms of art, And I would hope that in the future, we as a city would consider arts and cultural district programming beyond just tourism focused activities. So that's kind of why I'm having trouble supporting this grant. I do think there could be some great things that come out of it. I'm glad to hear that it'll be open to anybody who wants to participate in the business development side. I know there are people who are going to want to do that. So I think that could go over well. I just wanted to bring out that other side of it as well.

Thank you. I think this is a great start. It's a great beginning. And I like your suggestions. And I think going at the cultural center, they do a lot of that right now, Terry Frazier. They expound on the artist Native American. So I think they're already, it's advantageous for them to be part of this group. And I know it's a great beginning for you, so I really support this.

Thank you. I know we're taking the award in this comment now, but just a comment also that I believe as we took over Main Street recently as a city, That we will be having a main street board and I don't think we've regrouped on that, and so my hope is that soon, we can also see members different. sectors of the art community beyond that board, then they can also help guide this initiative, as well as other. kind of our initiatives moving forward, and I think we just sound like we have that right now, so my suggestion and my comment would just be that I know we are working on that, but i'd like to see that sooner than later that we have. a Main Street board come together with all the different parts of the community so that they can give their voice to how these projects move forward in the future.

And Matt, if you'd mentioned, we have the state Main Street meeting set up. And as soon as that happens, I see us moving forward with the board and the full process rolling. But I apologize. I've been out. I skimmed the email and couldn't say the date or nothing. Sorry to put you on the spot.

Mayor, Council, I believe it's I can tell you just a second. That's the 12th, I believe, June. Excuse me. Yes. So June 12th meeting at 10 a.m. here at City Hall. The state Main Street folks are going to be coming down to help us get set up, you know, get in the right direction. Part of their visit is they also want to stakeholders, elected officials, folks like that. So keep you on the loop as you know, these matters develop.

10 a.m.

Yes.

And Matt, just to be clear, this is the City of Gallup Main Street. Is it Calma Arts and Cultural District, or is that going to be the single name of the Main Street now?

Mayor and Council, that's the single name of the Main Street. The Arts and Cultural District is under the umbrella of the Main Street program, which is now under the umbrella of the City.

Okay, thank you.

I'd like to make a motion.

Oh, I just wanted, while you guys are getting situated, because Main Street is historic preservation, Arts and Cultural District is explicitly a creature of state statute, but they sort of intertwine. One of the things that this council made me know of is the Gallup Arts and Cultural District plan was adopted by resolution number 2015-35. That may also provide some historical context as you guys are looking into this, but just some references because of how it's all structured.

I'd like to make a motion to approve arts and cultural district pilot grant budget adjustment.

Councilor Molina?

Yes.

Councilor Garcia? Yes. Councilor Piano? Yes. Councilor Gale? Yes.

Yes. Thank you. Next item is approval of FY27 preventing alcohol-related deaths, notice of award and budget adjustment and authorization for the city manager to execute the contracts. And our speaker today is Deborah Martinez.

Mayor, Council, Deborah Martinez, City of Gallup Behavioral Health. We were finally awarded our annual IHS grant for $2 million. This part of the program funds mostly NCI, high risk, PSO at GPD, three of the salaries in Behavioral Health Department. And I stand for any questions.

It came sooner than later. I think it was just last meeting, right, that we were funding over.

Our regular grant ended April 30th. So that's why you'll see I have two items on because I didn't get it to Friday. So I wasn't sure if we were going to have to ask for more money out of the opioid settlement to keep us floating. So I pardon my caution.

Oh, so does this negate the next item? Yes. We'll not have to do that. Okay. No questions. I just want to say I don't know if it was since our last meeting, but I got to go over and tour NCI and that was really enlightening. And I just wanted to say, I think there's a lot of really good things happening with the staff over there, what they're doing and how they're using all the space and that just to publicly state as well, you know, to, to, The misperception is that you can only shelter there if you're intoxicated. And that's not true. So just trying to back out there to defeat that myth that there is shelter being provided to people overnight who want to voluntarily stay.

Yes. And just for context, 11,403 intakes were for the protective custody last year and 9,303 intakes are for the shelter. So there is a lot of people utilizing the shelter.

Thank you, Deb. Any more questions? We'll move on to a motion.

Karen Hollweg, Make a motion to approve the budget or sorry approve the fyi 27 preventing alcohol related deaths notice of award and budget adjustment and authorization for the city manager to execute contracts.

Yes, yes, yes, yes. Yes. Okay, so the next item.

I'll let Deborah explain, and Sarah already said it, is not needed, but go ahead.

Mayor Council, as a precautionary item, I didn't get the hard grant award until Friday, so I put both in the instance that we hadn't received the award, that we would need to put opioid funds to continue operations at Detox Center. That is no longer needed, so I ask.

Okay.

don't think there's anything required of the counselors there why not no not at all okay all right with that um thank you very much deborah and we're going to take a everybody at 10 minute break come back in 10 minutes yes please

Thank you.

Thank you.

All right guys, let's get started. Zoom the meeting. The next item.

It's going to be a proclamation declaring extreme or severe drought conditions within the city of Gallup. Good evening, Mayor and Council. I have a short presentation for you.

Basically, this is the nightly weather. All right, so we did an update for you about a month or so ago, and I kind of do that just to prepare you, just in case we have to do a proclamation. So we can go to the next page. So the reason why we do this is in New Mexico, there's the New Mexico Fireworks Licensing and Safety Act, which is Chapter 60, Article 2C, and it's a 10-page document that talks everything about fireworks. And it says that... Local jurisdictions, cities can actually restrict fireworks based on a couple of different things. First is an ordinance or a proclamation that we're declaring to severe or extreme drought conditions. So we do not have a city ordinance when it comes to fireworks. So we usually do this every year based on the drought. And this has to be based off the National Weather Service, United States Forest Service. And the reason why we're kind of doing this proclamation now is it has to be issued no less than 20 days before the start of the holiday selling season. And for the 4th of July, they can sell fireworks from June 20th to July 6th, except for year round retailers, which we do have one here in Gallup. They're allowed to sell fireworks year round. Next page. So what I came to you back in March, these were our drought conditions as of March 12th. So you can see that Gallup or Gallup and McKinley County is in a moderate drought during that timeframe. If you go to the next page, this is our current drought conditions. So you can see that McKinley County, the drought has actually gotten worse. So pretty much all of McKinley County is either in severe or we do actually have some parts that are in extreme drought. So go to the next slide. So according to the National Integrated Drought Information System, 100% of McKinley County is in drought, so it's affecting all the population. This is the 65th driest April on record for the past 132 years. We're about a quarter inch below normal, and this is the 22nd driest year to date over the last 132 years from January to April. So we're about one and a half inches from normal where we should be from our normal drought conditions that we usually are. Okay, the next page. is from the Drought Center, basically just saying this is gonna be from about May 1st to July 31st, what the drought's gonna do in New Mexico. So based on the weather conditions and the upcoming weather, the drought's gonna persist in our area. We go to the next page. Basically, this is from the National Interagency Fire Center. This is where they talk about fire weather. So in May, we're looking at above, Basically potential for significant fire behavior. The next slide, we go into June. Our area is also looking at above normal fire behavior. And then if we go to July, our area is kind of right on the cusp of it. And just because that's when we start getting to the monsoon season, kind of like July and August. All right. So what I'm coming to you tonight is for the proclamation to declare severe or extreme drought. And one of the things I wanna, since we have a new mayor and counselor, And to tell the public, so if we do this, it does not allow us to ban all fireworks. So in New Mexico, we are not allowed to ban all fireworks. There are permissible fireworks. Now, there's fireworks that are illegal at all times, which they don't even sell them in New Mexico. But there's permissible fireworks. And those permissible fireworks, there's lots of different types. There's ground devices. A lot of times those are called safe and sane. Those are the ones you can get like at Walmart, Albertsons, you know. safe and sane ones. And then there's also permissible fireworks that are aerial fireworks. So with this restriction, it only allows us to restrict very specific fireworks. For example, like bottle rockets will be restricted, firecrackers will be restricted, helicopters, those are the ones that you light and they spin and they go up in the air. Those will be restricted. But aerial shells will not be restricted. So a lot of the public asks, well, why are some of these restricted and some of them are not? Because it's the state law that we have to follow the state law. We're only allowed to restrict certain types unless we do an ordinance. If we were to do an ordinance, then we could ban all aerial fireworks and they would just be the safe and sane ones that stay on the ground. But we don't have an ordinance for that. So we still get lots of calls every year for illegal fireworks. We do our best to try to get to them. A lot of the fireworks that people see that say are illegal, they're actually legal. And as long as they're doing it safe, we allow them to keep doing it. But also usually on the 4th of July, we're so busy going call to call to call. I think last year we had like 15 or 20 fires in the city over the 4th of July that evening. It's very hard for us to get to check their legal status on their fireworks. So with that, I'll stand for any questions. And then you guys have the proclamation in front of you.

Any questions for the chief? No, sir. We've all lived in Gallup long enough. We understand.

And before you get to the proclamation, just to let you know, if you guys approve this proclamation, it goes into effect. Tomorrow we'll go to our year-round retailer that we have in Gallup. We've worked with them for many years. They already know what fireworks they'll have to pull. They work with us. We have no issues with them. But also a lot of the vendors that come up and set up tents during the 4th of July, we've worked with them so well that we do inspections. We do at least two inspections required by state law, and then we do surprise inspections. So if this proclamation goes in effect and fireworks restricted, I want to let the public know if they buy fireworks inside the city of Gallup, they are legal to use because we inspect those tents so much they will not sell any restricted fireworks.

Cool. Do you go with three miles in our buffer? Just inside the city limits.

So state law says that all firework retailers have to be inspected twice a year. In the city of Gallup, the state fire marshal's office does one. We do the second. In the county, the state fire marshal's office will do both of them. But they're only looking at very specific things. We really look at the fireworks. And then we do surprise inspections throughout the selling period just to make sure that they're still following the requirements.

I'd like to make a motion. Motion to approve the proclamation declaring extreme or severe drought conditions within the city of Gallup.

Councilor Molina?

Yes.

Councilor Peano? Yes. Councilor Garcia? Yes. Councilor Yazzie? Yes. Mayor DePauley?

Yes. Thank you, Mayor and Council. Thank you, Chief Barrett. Our next item is the public safety building reallocation. And our speaker is Keegan McKenzie-Chavis.

Good evening, Mayor and Councillors and city staff. Okay, so first item I have here. This item requests City Council approval to authorize the reallocation of funds from the existing operational account in project number LA-2503 to support the scope of the grant agreement. So the total fund to be transferred is 394,608. Reallocation as follows, so it was in the building and structures and it needs to be moved into equipment and machinery and then also non capital furniture so 1100 11,308 and then 383,300. So staff recommends that the city council approve and authorize the reallocation of the $394,608 for the existing operational account 4810 into the appropriate operational accounts 4820 and 4620 in project number LA 2503. So the fiscal impact is just to ensure that the project and grant is properly managed. Recommend that the city approve and stand for any questions.

Same money we got from the grant originally that we already approved. It was in the wrong line item. Exactly. So we're just moving this up to a different line item.

To two different line items to accommodate the fact that it's furniture and it's related to the building. So that's, you're exactly right.

Yeah, I was really confused when I first read this. Like, didn't we get this approval this month?

We did and it's just in the building and structure and it needs to be in the furniture and equipment okay that's all that one is.

Any more questions.

Second. Yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes.

Okay, our next item is request for use of 134,809 dollars from the general fund to cover the project shortfall for project number CP 2, 2, 0, 5, and that's 2nd street and CP 2, 2, 0, 7, which is 3rd street pedestrian pedestrian safety projects. And with that, can you go ahead and explain what those monies will be used for.

Okay, and before I read the little synopsis, I just want to say that this was a project that was started by City Manager Ustick, and this was an application that was done that was necessary to do this project in order to be able to apply for a quiet zone. So just a little background information. So on July 26, 2022, City Council awarded Wilson and Company their contract for for professional services to design pedestrian safety improvements at the 2nd and 3rd Street grade crossings. Projects were set up for the cooperative project agreement CN6101480, project number CP2205, and for CN6101480, 01470 project number CP 2207 with a termination date of September 30 2025 Wilson and company had not completed the design work to. delays with nm do T and also. the NSF agreeing on the drainage solutions. In addition, the project manager from the NMDOT rail division retired and correspondents ceased in the city of Gallup, with the city of Gallup, thus hindering any possibility of an extension. Therefore, the city will need to cover the remaining balance of Wilson and Company's professional service. So the fiscal impact is 134,000. $134,809 from the general fund to cover the remaining design costs and invoices for Wilson and company split between $68,858 for project CP 2205 and then $65,951 for project CP 2207. Staff recommends approval of the funds from the general fund to cover the remaining balance and This project is about 60% of completion.

So can I bring up a question here?

Sure.

Okay. So we just applied today for the safe streets for all. And this is what we applied for is to finish design and actually get the construction done. It was applied for last year and it was rejected because we just asked for the design money. This year, we're asking for the design and construction. When we did our debrief with the Fed, they really liked what the COG had put together and was requesting, but it was automatically rejected because we just asked for design and a component of the grant stated that must have construction. So it was automatically rejected. So I would ask, can we hold off on this request until we see if we get the safe streets for all? Because if we do get the safe streets for all, it'll be no money out of our pocket. It'll be all fed with state matching funds versus us having to go to the general fund.

Frank, I don't know the answer to that. I think that the reason that this was put up is because they're requesting payment for this amount of money. So I have to ask Alicia about the idea of waiting a little bit longer to find out where we stand on this new grant. And I'm not sure the timeline for the approval of the new Safe Streets for All.

So this isn't to get us from the 60% to the 100% on design. This is for work that was already done.

Both, right? I think it's both, yeah.

Well, if we could hold off on the future until we get the safe streets, but of course we definitely need to pay them on what we've done, on what they've done. I mean, they should be billing us for what they've done, not for what they're going to be doing.

I agree with the design.

Right.

And why are we paying them?

So I got a partial payment. Yeah. You know, it depends on their on their payment.

Well, they're a company trying to try to make ends meet as well. So I really think if they've done some work, you need to pay them for what they've done so far.

Well, and I can say that I was at the last meeting, and there is conflicting opinion how to go forward with the drainage issue. It was kind of at a standstill. And so that's also my understanding of the 60% is that there was not an agreement on how to deal with the drainage issue within 2nd and 3rd Street. And so there was to be another meeting. We haven't had that yet.

The other question too is that if we do proceed with 134, we know that's going to pay some back bills and then it's going to complete the 200%. With the grant agreement, what we might do is just check and see if we can get reimbursed for that with the grant agreement.

The one that Frank is talking to, the safety for all?

Patty's shaking her head no.

No, any work done before the grant agreement is approved is denied automatic. So it's only work after the grant agreement is done moving forward. And, you know, Brandon and Evan done a great job at the COG for us on this grant and worked with our staff to get that submitted. And I did get the confirmation that it was submitted today.

Frank, when do we find out if we get the Safe Streets grant and when do we owe Wilson and Company $135,000? Because it seems like that's the issue, right? Like, Yeah, the timing of what we owe them and the timing of when we get this.

This has been in limbo. I can't give you the exact time. I'd have to have Alicia tell you that. But I know that there was a huge delay. You can see that the date for the grant agreement, the termination was September 30th. 2025 and it went to because of the retiring of the NMN DOT person. And so it kind of fell off, I guess, everybody's radar or the work was just halted for a little bit. So I need clarification on how much of this is past due. And if it is to compete, I was thinking that it's all past due, but I could be I could be wrong on that.

So council, if I can ask you to table this to the next meeting when we can research what is owed. And again, if this grant closed September of last year, we should not be authorizing any work past that without a PO in place for new funding. So let me do some research and bring this to the next council would be my ask. Okay.

Yeah, it makes sense. I mean, we, there's, there's a lot of unknowns and especially since it was, it was the, it wasn't, it was like termination expired on the 30th, I imagine.

And then work wasn't complete. And then there was a retirement. I think it was just a snowballing.

The key is this project is in our safe streets process right now. And we, we can, we might have this thing fully funded and constructed next couple of years.

And it is moving. I mean, now everybody we did have a meeting a couple of months ago. Like I said, the issue was agreement on how to deal with the drainage and that was. They were going to go back and do some different design.

Explain what it is. It's the narrowing down of 2nd, 3rd streets and providing pedestrian walkways. Lost arms every got 2nd and 3rd street done yet.

No, this is the design for that, but that's what I don't understand either what counselor was saying. Like, is this. Well, anyway, we're going to postpone it. But just to see if it's past due or is this for the money for the design part they didn't finish? Because according to this, they never finished it because of all these delays.

That's where you're finding out.

Yeah. So I don't want to pay them all this money for something we didn't even, they didn't do yet.

And I need to get clarity on that. If it's my understanding that it was all past due, but it maybe is to complete the project.

Okay.

Okay. We'll proceed without a motion.

motion to postpone approval of request for the use of 134 809 from general fund to cover project shortfall for project cp2205 and cp2207 pedestrian safety projects in order to do more research on what is past due and what is future due i shake it so confusing no one wants to yeah i'm not sure if you're done and readdress

Councilor Piano? Yes. Councilor Molina? Yes. Councilor Yazzie? Yes. Councilor Garcia? Yes. Mayor DePauley?

Yes. The next item, number seven, is resolution number 2026-17. It's the amendment to the Transportation Project Fund agreement with the New Mexico Department of Transportation for phase four of the Nijoni Boulevard reconstruction project by request at time extension to June 30th, 2027. And Keegan, you saw the mast arms going up today, so...

yeah so i should um so both this item number seven and um number eight are both um related to the same project nizhoni and second street they're two different different grants um funding the nizhoni project and so i should um tell you this is precaution but we had a nizhoni update meeting today and the issue with the the signal arms And the mast arms not going up, we're a little bit ahead of schedule in that project, was some hardware. And at the update meeting, thankfully, it came in. So the brackets and the bolts to put everything together are there. And so they... we're starting um today and the hope is next week but we did this as a precaution um because the grants um funds terminate at the end of the month so we asked for an extension just from the experience that sometime the hardware takes a really long time, that we might be right on that line of June 30th. So this was precaution in case the hardware didn't come in. I think we should still go ahead with it in case there's any pickups or anything. But so item number seven is basically, let's see, Nijana Boulevard phase four is now fully designed and we have requested due to delays with the traffic light hardware, to complete light installation to avoid losing the remaining grant balance. A TPF amendment is required amending the grant version date. To the 30th of June 27 we just push it out a whole nother year to just make sure everything was.

And the lights happy programmed and wired and there's a lot of work left on those mast arms and the lights right and there's good yeah and these jobs just everybody knows, this is tpf funding. And number eight is map funding, which is municipal material program so there's two different graphs funding this project.

And they're both through the DOT.

Local government.

Yeah. So, yes. So they're both related to deal with the same issue, funding for that project. But just out of precaution to make sure we utilize the funds, we push them out for another year. Okay.

We have a motion.

Motion to approve resolution number R2026-17, amendment to the Transportation Project Fund Agree with the New Mexico Department of Transportation for Phase 4 of the New Jones Boulevard Construction Project by requesting a time extension to June 30, 2027. Second.

Mr. Piano? Yes. Councilor Garcia? Yes. Councilor Ghazi? Yes. Councilor Molina? Yes. Mayor DeFault?

Yes. And we'll just continue with number eight, since we already had the explanation.

Yeah. And it's just the that this is the map funding for the New Mexico Department of Transportation. So the same thing to just push it out one more year to make sure that we have access to the funds and we can complete the project. But it looks like everything is good. It's the same job.

It's a different fund. It's the same job.

It's different funding.

And I'd really like to thank Keegan for being very proactive on this and looking to the future and the what ifs. Very good on that. I appreciate it, Keegan.

Thank you, Frank. You know what? We were supposed to be two weeks early on this project. And so... We really kind of went back and forth and just had big discussions and just said, let's just, there's no harm in covering and making sure that we have the extension. If we're early, we're early.

And it doesn't cost us anything. Exactly. We get the money.

Just some paperwork.

Okay, we have a motion.

Motion to approve resolution number R2026-18, amendment to the Municipal Arterial Program Agreement with the New Mexico Department of Transportation for phase four of the Nijone Boulevard Reconstruction Project by requesting a time extension to June 30th, 2027. Second.

Councilor Piano? Yes. Councilor Garcia? Yes. Councilor Yazzie? Yes. Councilor Molina? Yes. Mayor DeFaule?

Yes. Okay, our next item, number nine.

Okay.

It is approval of resolution number 2026-19 to allow for an application to the NMDOT Transportation Project Fund for the Mentmore Road Improvement Project. And with that, Keegan, I'll give the description of the project and where we're going with it.

And I'm going to lump these together just as these are two new projects coming up. And so... i'll tell you about the first one, these are both through nm do T, and these are transportation project fun so two different projects, but i'm utilizing the same funds, so this first one we're requesting approval resolution 2026 19 authorizing. The submittal of an application to the New Mexico Department of Transportation. Transportation project for a grant request in the amount of $750,000 for the Netmore Road improvements for planning and design. The project is from Sonosti Drive to the end of the city limits, which is right around the church past the bridge, as I understand it. Is it? It's not past the bridge?

It's about 500 feet from the bridge.

Okay, before the bridge. Okay. If approved, the local match will be equal to 5% of the grant amount of $37,500. Once awarded, City Council will have to approve the matching fund with the acceptance of the grant agreement. This application is due May 30th. And there's already been consultation with district six in Mexico do T, just to kind of get feedback and so the next step is to actually send in the application so let's see matching funds will come up if we're granted this award. Staff recommends approval without Sam for any questions.

I i've got a comment i'd like to see us go ahead and do it all the way to the bridge that last piece of road is the counties. And. I guess that's why I keep thinking the county does a lot for us, you know and and. Most importantly, with this road project, the drainage part will come to play. And that's an important item on that road.

I'm not sure if we can change the scope at this point. I don't know if you can either, but I'd sure like to.

You know, I don't know. The way it's put together, it's $750,000 from Metmore Road, and it just says starting at Sinosti. It doesn't really say where it's ending.

It says the end of the city limits.

Oh, it says right there. You'd have to change the scope and the ordinance to do that.

We can approve this then. Maybe the county can simultaneously do something at the same time. It would have just been nice for it to have been one project.

Well, we're just approving an application at this point. Correct. We're just approving that we're allowing staff to apply and that if we do get afforded, we'll pay the 5%.

Correct. And also just the understanding that this is a planning grant. It's not for construction. This is just for planning and design.

So let's change the scope of work for the construction part. I mean, that's great, but that might be more possible.

I'd like to make a motion. Approval of the resolution to number R2026-19. to offer an application to the New Mexico DOT Transportation Project Fund for the Mintmore Road Improvements Project.

Second. Councilor Molina? Yes. Councilor Garcia? Yes. Councilor Pena? Yes. Councilor Yazzie? Yes. Mayor DeValle?

Yes. The next item is I had number 10 it's approval of resolution number are cheese or two six dash 22 allow for the an application to then mdo T transportation project fun for the Mary Anna have a new improvements project and again our speakers keegan.

Again same and mdo T transportation project fun again, this is an application. So requesting approval for resolution in 2026 19 authorizing the submittal of an application to the new Mexico department of transportation. Transportation project or grant request in the amount of 1,860,000 dollars for the mariana avenue improvements for construction construction management and testing. PB, Lupita D Montoya, The project is from the journey boulevard to Anton street but it proves the local if approved the local match will be equal to 5% of the grant amount at $93,000 once the word City Council will have to approve the matching. Will be asked to approve the matching fun with the know I guess they have to approve the matching fun, but the exception of the grant agreement this application is do you make 30th. So this is only the application, this is project has already been designed, so this is for the actual construction and construction management and then any testing that might need to be done. And just asking for approval of this project.

Was there any reason why we're not applying to do the whole, do Mariana Avenue all the way to the end?

These are whole block projects, and so they make a distinction. The Public Works have made a distinction about the section that gets completed. Counselor, I couldn't give you the logic behind that. I know they're part of, this is one of five whole block projects that we've been trying to get different funding for. I'm not sure what his criteria is for making the start and end points, but I should find that out and know that.

So it would be another whole block project to do and then straight to the end.

This section right here is referred to as a whole block project.

Okay.

So whoever, whoever's the person, right where the block ends, this person. Tough out of luck, sorry.

So I, yeah, and those are really good questions that I should... Ask. could have asked Robert but. This is true department what's the criterion for the start and endpoints.

it's probably a link street.

i'm thinking that fits in the parameters of the whole block just too bad yeah and the most intense need within that street i'm thinking.

Any more questions? This is my district. They'll be happy if we get this. Approval of resolution number R2026-20 to allow for an application to the NMDOT Transportation Project Fund for the Mariana Avenue Improvements Project.

Second. Councilor Piano? Yes. Councilor Garcia? Yes. Councilor Yazi? Yes. Councilor Molina? Yes. Mayor Capaldi?

Yes.

Thank you, Mayor and Councilor. I'll stay the rest of the time.

Next item is resolution number R2026-21 and resolution number 2026-22, joint resolution from McKinley County directing the allocation and distribution of fiscal year 2026 and 2027 of liquor excise tax revenue projected or received. And our speaker is Erica Pratt.

Thank you, Mayor and Council. Deb is handing out some supplemental materials and we'll make sure that I don't miss anything. The Joint Excise Tax Allocation Committee met on Monday, May 18th to discuss the allocation of the local option liquor exercise task for FY26 and FY27. That's why there's two resolutions before you. The biggest change, as you will see in that box that's highlighted with average revenue, is it's expected that revenues are going to significantly decrease from the higher revenues that were seen during the pandemic years. What is changing over what that means is that the general allocation of the primary allocation of the city of 835,000 is the same primary allocation to the county of 800,000 is the same. The city is, however, not getting that additional 250,000 for the PSOs. Part of that is because It adds up and if the fund rolls over, the plan is to always have a contingency for one year should the voters not approve the ordinance on the three-year schedule. So that allows people to plan for one year. So this is just probably a more fiscally conservative recommendation from the LET committee in terms of FY26 and FY27, but given that the actual revenues for FY25 and the anticipated ones have significantly decreased. Do I miss anything?

No. So on the agenda item at Mayor-Council Debra Martinez, City of Guelph, it says to approve the $1 million when in actuality all we got was the $835.

And it's correct in the resolutions. There's just, I think, some confusion with my apologies on that.

So we'll just put a budget increase of $835 instead of the $1,085. I thought we well I thought this was also I thought it was more because we were getting the money from last year that was our reimbursement plus this coming fiscal year reimbursement right which is better for us so we're not waiting a whole year to get reimbursed we'll get reimbursed quarterly well until the joint resolution is made we can't bill Oh, so this is only the last fiscal year.

FY26 and FY27. So this year and next year. So next year we won't have that issue where we haven't got reimbursed and I already sent my reimbursement to the county. Okay.

Got it. It'll be similar to the $835 next year?

Yeah, it's just a drawdown from that.

I got confused when Eric was talking about why we didn't get the extra 200,000 from the PSOs.

Because if you look at the pink highlighted box with the average revenue, that's decreasing significantly. And this is to plan overall, and this is to plan for both the city and county allocations at 835, 800 respectively, to get through the current date of the ordinance and to plan for an additional fiscal year should the voters not approve the liquor excise tax again in three years. Okay.

So let me ask you a clarifying question. This year, we do get that 200,000. Next year, we don't.

No, it's FY26 and FY27, but do not include the 200,000.

Well, this is where we get. And Walt, if you're still sitting there in the audience listening, this is where we take it, where we enter into something and we do services for a full year. And then at the end of the year, we finally have a meeting. We've expended the money, folks. And Patty might be able to speak a little bit more to that, but we've expended the money. We have the PSO officers. We've expended the money. And now it's like, oh, by the way, we finally are going to have a meeting in May to get paid for this last year. And it's $200,000 short. I didn't walk out of that meeting with that impression.

So yeah, I'm looking at this, this agenda item. I'm a little bit confused as well. But we are at the very tail end of the year, we've already had to dig into general fund, which impacted next year's budget. And so having to do great grief. And we were just talking there is nothing budget for next year until we get this all settled. we'll have to wait till after the DFA submissions and then we'll be back to figure out for next year. But we're gonna have to do that in May and then send it to DFA first quarter of next year because we can't change it between now. So it's causing us lots of problems. But we even originally increased our obligations for funding.

and we've been trying to recruit those and get that maxed out and i can see the one million so the budget would for next year be 1 million 85 000 but the actual money we're bringing in is only 835 000 a difference of 250 000 so i see frank's point um how does that work am i missing something

Well, the way the JPA is constituted is it's only requiring a meeting every May. I mean, maybe being more proactive, the city's committee would be helpful because this ordinance was approved in November of 2024. So you can sort of prospect out FY25, 26, 27 coming from that three-year. We had, I don't know why it took to the end, but to get through FY26 and FY27, but-

Dave Kuntz, Then just basically what why we just do in the fiscal impact just increase the budget by the amount we know we're going to get they turn 35 and then go to have bake sales for the rest, you know, however, we do it, you know. Dave Kuntz, When I mean, so I mean that might be that at least least we know going to be next.

yeah. that way we won't budget the money we don't have this is the benefit to this agreement this year is that we know that we're getting the 835 next year yeah and that's what we did yeah and that's we weren't sure until last week what we were getting like because of the liquor excise tax committee so did we when we approved this resolution last fiscal year we didn't know how much money was going to come in overall because like frank's saying that we obviously felt good for one million

because we put that in our budget and then we spent it. And now it's the end of our fiscal budget and we're saying we're 200,000 short. So we just didn't know, but we spent it anyway. I thought our contract stated we were getting a million. I didn't know. So...

Sorry that's yeah when we did the budget for fiscal year and we budgeted this money to come out of general fund we have funded it out of general fund all year. we've been pushing the county and everybody involved let's get together let's work this out just now, but last week, she was able to attend the meeting they got everybody together and came up with the agreement that they will fund this the 835. So if I'm understanding this correctly, tonight's ask should be only a budget increase of 835, which will be the revenue we will give. And so we'll come back again to get a budget adjustment for next fiscal year. But until the county has this meeting and we reach the agreement, because of all sets of governing officials for approval, we can't budget that money. So we did budget it, but we budget it to be paid out of general funds.

Oh, so we just never knew. We just like guessed. We just guessed that it was going to be over a million and it was only 835 like for last fiscal year. Because I mean, I just may not have done it in contract somewhere with them.

No. And what we presented during all the budget process wasn't the county was going to pay it. We've made it clear that we didn't have an agreement yet. And so we didn't have an approved budget. But what we had in prior years and what we still set up as far as the contracts, as far as staffing, was that we thought we would get funds for the two PSOs that it was to pay for, and that we thought we would give the full 835 for the detox. We went forward with contracts. We paid it because it was deemed that it's necessary, and it was something we wanted to happen, and we did have the funds to do it. But we paid that with the general fund money, which is allowable, and that's how we presented the cash, and that's what we've done for the year. This is just going to allow us to reimburse the funds. and get drawn down from the county while we can. I'm not sure we'll be able to draw down the full 835, but Anthony drives us both. And so we really have to wait until he works with us and comes to the table and we come to terms on it.

For the meantime, let's reduce our budget to what we know we'll have an idea we might get, 835. Let's don't use the million, 850, 8,500.

And to your question, Councilor Peano, the JPA itself, which is the agreement to then allocate, only establishes the allocation committee. It doesn't commit to any set allocation of those revenues. And so again, the city is beholden to, first, the liquor access tax being selected and approved by the voters of McKinley County. then to the county working with the city through this committee to decide how those revenues are going to be dispersed.

We can request another meeting and ask to use the reserves, but that would leave us if we don't get funded another year, we would just have to cut programming.

Well, in the future, we could just update the JPA so that we don't keep running. Sounds like a lot of it that's not happening on stage. Yeah.

we're not going to run into this issue again because we insisted on doing it for next year now. So we know what's budgeted this year. You know, we're like, you know, we need to, we need to have the meeting so we can get reimbursed. And the confusion was, well, we, we, you know, we met May of last year and filled it out. And it's like, well, County, that was for last year. You were a year behind and, And they're like, no. And then when they looked at the resolution, they're like, yeah, we were. So again, this year, we've gone July 1 till middle of May and having a meeting. And that's why I was under the impression this year we were being fully funded. Next year we were going to start being cut back because of the lessening revenues and such being collected. So I would recommend asking for that additional $2,000 for this year because it has been spent.

$200,000.

Yes. And, and, and, and, you know, if it dips into the reserves, it dips in the reserve. So I, I, I will call another meeting. You know, I would like to have this one approved so we can start collecting now. So we have it before the end of the year. But at the same time, call a meeting to ask about, you know, because again, we left the meeting may have last year operating on the belief of this and And the confusion was they thought the agreement was set up last year for this year. And if that's true, that 200,000 was included.

So you guys didn't come back to council if we kept the other 200,000?

Correct.

Oh, the motion.

Yeah, I think it'd be a motion.

motion to approve resolution number r2026-21 and resolution r202 622 joint resolutions with mckinley county directing the allocation and distribution for fiscal year 2026 and 2027 of liquor excise tax revenue projected and or received in the amount of 835 000. second um do we need to specify that the budget impact will only be an increase of 835 000

Or does that matter?

You said that? Councillor Piano?

Yes. Councillor Mulligan?

Yes. Councillor Yazzie? Yes. Councillor Garcin? Yes. Mayor DePauw?

Yes.

I think so.

Okay, next item is another item with Erica, and it's going to be a disciplinary complaint against Bernadine Martin, who is a former district attorney here in District 11.

Thank you, Mayor and Council. So the agenda item itself is pretty detailed in terms of the timeline. Specifically this year, the case was set for trial before the New Mexico Supreme Court in March. On February 27th, the case was dismissed after the parties entered a settlement agreement. Part of that settlement agreement was that the New Mexico Department of Justice, which did conduct the investigation at the governor's direction upon the city's request, was not going to file a disciplinary complaint. There have been complaints that I know of that have been filed by other peers and attorneys, but this is something for the city council to consider in terms of the effects that her tenure had on the city's constituents. In terms of why this is coming before Council at this time. It's been about a year since the city staff and personnel went to the governor met with the governor general counsel staff to ask for assistance to take some sort of action at investigation and potential removal of the district attorney for lack of action. In April of 2026, the governor appointed John Burnett to continue serving that term for district attorney, that's to 2028. By all accounts, there's been some stability brought to that office. However, of course, with important offices like that, there's been some other effects and we expect, I think our former city attorney has said, we will probably see effects for many years. Unfortunately, for some of those families, they may never see full resolution of their cases. so one of the things before council in addition to the petition it doesn't include the exhibits but i do have those i didn't ever request it's just a lot of pages but i'm happy to provide counsel that upon request miss martin's answer and supplemental brief and the settlement agreement themselves as well as the blank complaint form is attached i have invited our chief of police Chief Pablo to provide a brief summary of her deposition and testimony that was very important in terms of the investigation and underlies some of the concerns that the city and the city's legal community had in terms of the lack of prosecution of cases.

Mayor, Council, thank you.

so this is just a brief of my deposition that went through but i just want to make some key notes i know a lot of people have been reading newspapers during that time hearing people coming to you with their concerns and also what the news has been covering but um number one is the systematic communication failures with the district attorney's office in this one key impacts officers frequently lack timely updates on case status declinations, and filing decisions. DA Martin's office sharply reduced email communication from 2021 to 2024. Officers were often bypassed and excluded in crucial information. Attempts by Gallup Police Department to formalize communication, CC lists, follow-ups, meetings were largely unsuccessful. Number two, case declinations, dismissals, and missed deadlines. The pattern emerged in which cases were declined shortly before statutorial deadlines, often in minimal explanation. Operational consequences, late subpoenas, rapid court scheduling, contributing to officers' failure to appear events. In custody cases were set quickly, leaving little time for preparation on these cases. Dismissal and delays allowed repeat offenders to reenter the community. Some cases appear to be dismissed to reduce caseload pressure. Number three, court scheduling and subpoena problems. GPD provided detailed officer schedules, yet subpoenas were routinely issued with less than seven days notice. Magistrate court set hearings rapidly, especially for in custody cases. Conflict of interest sometimes resulted in dismissal without notifying Gallup Police Department. Lack of coordination among courts and DA and Gallup Police Department created an avoidable case failures. Number four, internally instability within the DA's office. High turnover among prosecutors. Incidents of attorneys being fired in court. Reports of chaos or unprofessional courtroom conduct. Limited presence of the DA at community meetings, inter-agency meetings, and court. This instability directed affect case review, filing consistently, and prosecutal follow-through. Number five, impact on victims, families, and community trust. Families of homicide and DWI victims expressed frustration with delays and lack of communication. Some meetings became tense due to the lack of prosecution and clarity. Officers believe offenders perceive Gallup as a place of where cases fell through the cracks, undetermining deterrence. Number six, GPD's efforts to improve case outcomes. Despite limited prosecution support, GPD has implemented checklists and software tools to strengthen case packets, shipped second and third DWIs to municipal court to reduce dismissal, maintain a blue team database to track failure to appears in officer performance, participation in multi-agency partner justice meetings, DA rarely attended, conducted internal review of six plus violent crime cases to prepare for filing, In that, the disposition shows that the Gallup's justice challenge stem primarily from prosecutorial communication failures, late case handling, and inconsistent coordination, not from police operations. This systematic issue have led to case dismissal, missed deadlines, reduction in accountability of offenders, erosion of public trust. Addressing these problems will require reform, consistent prosecution engagements, and improve interagent communication. That's just a summary of what my testimony was going to be going into this. But I think one of the biggest that I wanted to stress was number five, the impact on victim and families and community trusts. We still are going to be rebuilding that years to come. But we're up for that challenge. But I think that as the city, we made our concerns there. And it went through the process there. But I think that we just don't let it be. We finish through with that process. But that's all that I have.

I stand for any questions. And if I can add on to that, in addition to considering a disciplinary complaint, which is strictly under the rules of professional conduct, it goes to a lawyer's professional conduct, speaking to what Chief just went through. One thing that this council may also want to consider in terms of victim impact is a form of a truth commission. I'm not sure if you guys have, if you all have seen the interviews that the San Juan County DA's office that came in to try and move some cases, as well as DA Bernice, that there are some cases that they will not be able to prosecute due to deterioration of evidence, missing witnesses. People may not actually see justice in the courtroom and via the court system. So something to consider that would probably require the council working with our state delegation to get some form of commission, but that could also be something to be able to address potential, some sort of resolution for victims and families because she was the elected DA from 2020. November 3rd, 2020, until she resigned in 2026. So that's six years of cases.

Well, thank you, Erica. And Chief Powell, you know that the morale, which was not stated on our police officers, how it just shot down the morale to know that they would make arrests and do work and just get released. That was one of the big items that really upset me.

So would this disciplinary complaint be filed by you as acting city attorney?

I could file it on behalf of the city council should the city council want to do it. I've filed my own complaint.

Okay, so it would say that state that is coming from the city council.

Yeah. Yeah.

Oh, go ahead.

You know, it's been about 15 months and three of us here sitting here tonight. We're there along with the commission, county commission and several others. And we started something. We talked to the governor. We started something. And things worked out just as has prevailed, as they say. My hat's off to everybody that helped in this situation, chief, our sheriff, our chief, everybody that had something to do with it. And I'd really like to thank Mr. Burnett for taking on such a big job. walking into a chaotic place and getting it fixed up and going. Thank you to all who helped.

I just want to make a comment. I'm fine with passing this complaint. I wouldn't normally do this, but I've not heard one person in this community that was happy with the DA, unfortunately, and there's a lot of families let down and a lot of things that happened during this time. it's nothing personal, but if Ms. Berna is allowed to keep her law degree, she can run for office again. And it's unfathomable that that would happen and that people would vote for her, but we live in a weird society where that could happen. And I personally just don't want to see that happen. I rarely meet people who everybody agrees on something where Some people say, oh, yeah, I like that person. I don't like that person, whatever. But there was not one person I ever interacted with that had something positive to say about their experience with the DA's office. And that's so very unfortunate. So I think that it sends a message that we not only that we don't accept this, but we don't accept this in the future. And we don't accept this kind of behavior in our judges and our DA's office. It just sets something up for a precedent moving forward. So I'm in favor of it.

I also want to comment that I also am in favor of this because even if just one victim was affected by this for the city of Gallup, there'd be a difference in the decision. Well, if we could have a motion.

Now there's nothing to vote on really, is there? Yeah, we're going to send a letter, right? We're going to send this?

Yeah, I would say just motion to file a disciplinary complaint. What I can do is summarize the agenda item, include the minutes, and submit it on behalf of the city.

Motion to approve acting deputy attorney to send a letter on behalf of the city council as a disciplinary complaint against Bernie Martin, former district attorney.

No second.

Councilor Piano? Yes. Councilor Molina? Yes. Councilor Yazzie? Yes. Councilor Garcia? Yes. Mayor DePauley?

Yes. Okay. With that, that concludes all of our items except for the last one, which is a public hearing. on the proposed transfer of ownership of dispensary liquor license number DIS-000388 to Burnt Corn Holdings LLC, DBA, Paramount Liquor and Lounge. With that, the Burnt Corn Holdings... Hang on. Excuse me. Um, burnt coal corn holdings seeks to transfer a dispensary liquor license number. D. I. S. zero zero zero three, eight, eight located at three zero nine West historic highway. Sixty six Galvin, New Mexico, the city council decide whether to approve or disapprove the transfer of the license. The Director of Alcohol Beverage Control has granted preliminary approval. Legal notice of the public hearing is published in the Gallup Sun on April 24, 2026 and May 22, 2026 and posted on the City's website. The application, the Director's preliminary approval, and the zoning certification letter and legal notice are all attached in the packets. New Mexico law provides a local government governing body shall hold a public hearing on the question of whether an alcohol beverage control division should approve the transfer of the license. The city of Gallup may disapprove the transfer if the proposed location is within an area where the sale of alcohol beverages is prohibited by the laws of New Mexico. Number 2, the issuance would be in violation of the zoning or other ordinance of the governing body or number 3, the issuance would be detrimental to public health safety and morals of the residents of the city. The location is not in a prohibited area and the issue and the issuance would not be. not be in violation of zoning or other city ordinances. To disapprove the transfer on public health, safety, and moral grounds, a city council must find the issuance of the license be detrimental to public health, safety, and or morals of the city residents by substantial evidence presented during the public hearing testimony. Concerning the negative effects of alcohol alone is not sufficient to justify such a finding. within 30 days after the public hearing, the city must notify the Alcohol Beverage Control Division of the council's decision to approve or disapprove the transfer of the license. If the city council fails to approve or disapprove the transfer within 30 days after the public hearing, the director of the Alcohol Beverage Control Division may give final approval to the transfer of the license. If the City Council approves the transfer, the Director shall approve the transfer. If the City Council disapproves the transfer, the Director shall disapprove the transfer. The Mexico Court of Appeals has initial jurisdiction of appeals from division decisions. Legal notice reference reset and we have, there's really no fiscal impact gross receipts tax revenue from the sales of the alcohol be gained by the city of Gallup and this is a quasi judicial hearing. And with that, we will. Start there are speakers named here, but we can go ahead and start with the, um. With the hearing, if that's okay, it's pretty good.

Should I read that again?

Okay.

This is a hearing on the proposed transfer of ownership of dispensary liquor license number DIS-000388 to Burnt Corn Holdings LLC doing business as Paramount Liquor and Lounge located at 3090 West 66th Avenue, Gallup, New Mexico. Because this is an important hearing, anyone wishing to address the council in this manner must be sworn in. Is the applicant burnt court holdings or their representative present? Thank you. Is there anyone else wishing to testify in this matter? Okay, with that, we'll have a single representative testimony. So... I guess that... All right, Al, if you can go ahead. We have one representative. If you could stand. Good. And give your name.

My name is Porter. Good. Please raise your right hand, please. You swear at the testimony you're about to give, the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, under penalty of perjury. Thank you very much for being here.

All right, I'm going to read a few more paragraphs.

You get to enjoy my reading and then we can go from there.

Because this is a quasi judicial hearing, council members should not participate in this manner if their impartiality might reasonably be questioned. This generally would be where the member has a personal bias or prejudice, has made a public comment that appears to show the member intends to vote a particular way in this manner, would personally benefit from the matter, decided or is closely related to the party or has a connection to a party that would tend to influence the member's decision on this matter. Are there any councilor members that wish to recuse themselves in this manner? It doesn't look like there is, no. Does the applicant wish to ask that any council members not participate in this matter due to a concern about impartiality of a council member? No.

Okay.

We'll now hear the evidence. Would the applicant's representative please come to the podium and present the applicant's testimony and any other evidence the applicant wishes to consider, the council to consider?

Good evening, Mayor, Councilors. Like I said, my name is Loren Cook. We are We're working on obtaining the liquor license from Paramount. We did all our due diligence as far as the state and the city getting all the zonings and all the documentation necessary to the state. We did all of our due diligence as far as background checks and everything that the state requires us to do to obtain a city license. The Paramount Liquors is already established. It's been established and it is still in operation as of today. And we're just here just to see if you guys can support us in obtaining the license.

Thank you, Mr. Cook. It doesn't look like we have any other witnesses. And we don't have any other testimony or anybody sworn in. What's that? Yeah, I'm still going. Okay. Now, is there, and so we don't have any, no one sweared in to be in the opposition, so we won't have any opposition. Now that we've heard all the evidence, the council's free to ask questions and ask any questions they might have of the representative.

I have a question. I thought it was permanently closed, the location. Is it not?

It's open.

Okay. When you Google it, it says permanently closed. So just, I don't know if you need that.

Yeah, I'm not sure. I'm not sure it was open. It's been open.

Okay. Google could be wrong. So, all right. Great.

I have a question. Is the thought to keep the license there at that? Yes, it's going to remain. Very good. No more questions for me.

Actually, I have a question. Is this packaged liquor, or it says lounge? I've never been there.

It holds both licenses, but the lounge side is permanently shut right now. Oh, the lounge side. Yeah, the lounge side. The packaged side is open. And I'm keeping it the same.

Sorry. So the liquor license for this that you're applying for would be?

specific to package liquor would be for the lounge and both licenses, but we're going to use the liquor likes the package of liquor for its current location.

Okay. But it would be, are you guys saying that we'll be opening the lounge? No, it would just be for the patch liquor.

Okay.

Got it. Thank you.

Any other questions? There's now time for council to deliberate and come to a decision in this manner. Council may deliberate in either an open or closed session. What is the pleasure of the council as to how to deliberate? Open?

Okay, everybody. I'm good. I'm good with where we're at.

Okay. Would any councillors like to make a statement before we vote on this matter?

I don't know as much about packaged liquor, but just my only question is, I assume we've done our due diligence on the city side, but this isn't close within proximity to a school, a church, because I know that's a lot of the questions around that I get from community members about taxes, but that would be my own question.

That's already been established for the state.

And our planning director is taking care of all this information.

Okay, do I hear a motion regarding the transfer of ownership of the dispensary liquor license? I make a motion to approve the public hearing the proposal of this liquor license.

Number DIS-00388 to Burd Court Holdings, LLC, doing business as Paramount Liquor and Lounge. Is that good? Yes, sir. Okay.

Do you guys have a joint motion?

We have a joint motion. I just amended it. It's getting late. I note the motion. Anybody second? Second.

Yes. Yes.

Yes.

Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes.

Our next item is comments by the mayor and city council. I'll go first. I know there's a lot of, today there were some questions about developing a water board and different things. And of course, those things are always taken into account. You know, the city of Gallup was done in a bad way, August 14th, 2019, when the Navajo Gallup project was delayed. We were anticipating water here, and I'm probably being repetitive though, in December 31st, 2024, we should be getting surface water right now, and we're not. So, you know, any boards or commissions or anything put together, of course, you know, we know what the plan is right now that we're looking to get water in 2030. And when we get that water, you know, it should be surface water. But if the surface water is delayed even further, we will still be relying on groundwater wells, which we do have a lot of groundwater rights to continue with. So just rest assured, everybody, we do have water. The Gallup has surface water. It will eventually be here and a lot of groundwater to take the city through the next probably 100 years. Anyway, that's all I wanted to say. If you want to go next. Whoever wants to go next.

I'm just going to make one comment. This is already kind of late. We've had a lot of people come and talk about Bay Eye Center every meeting. I think it would be helpful if maybe the council just put out some sort of press release of like, which is information, because I think there's a lot of opinions, which is fine, but there's also, I think some information that I've heard people state tonight that wasn't correct. Just not like certain things that they thought the center would do with the city would do. And I think it might be helpful for us just to have some sort of documentation that we put out there for people on like where the process is at right now, what's legal versus what's not, because I mean, I've heard comments about, you know, using too much electricity and that'll raise our rates. I understand all of that, but also currently the understanding is that they would put in a solar plant that would help with electricity. I also, my understanding, and I don't want to get into the big old conversation, but it's just that the walk, we delayed the, we delayed that the last meeting, but the company already transferred those water rights to that company. And so actually they can move forward within that timeline. All we did as a council was delay the timeline, but they could still do it and they can still buy private land and build on it without the city's permission because we don't own that land. I'm not saying whether I'm for that or not. I'm just clarifying some things because I think there's been a lot of talk about like, don't let them do this. And it's like, there's some things that within their legal right, they can do without even getting the city's permission. Now, moving forward, we can limit the water, the electricity and all that. That is true. But they can move forward before that without us, without coming to us. So I just, you can hate me later, but I'm just stating the fact on like what's acceptable. So I think it might be helpful for us to put out some documentation on what's legal, what's not, what's true, what's false, just so that people can have all the ducks in a row and some facts. So I think that would be helpful for council as well. So I just want to make that general statement. Thank you.

Yeah, I agree. I think we need to do a little bit better with public information. but especially on this because people do want to know and I've been meeting with a lot of constituents who have the patients and I have a meeting tomorrow with Greg Thompson who came to the council to present just to get a lot of those questions answered, to ask everything and to find out more about, you know, a lot of those what ifs and future planning kind of plans and what would be required. So I would encourage everybody here to do that as well and just to stay in conversation. But I do agree that a document would be super helpful. And then also, at some point, if we get there, a public informational session would be warranted. So I think that we could do that as well.

I appreciate it, Sarah. You know, and I think the best one to put that together would be Greg, because he can answer the questions. I have 21 questions that I need to have answered, and we'll be glad to give it to him. And if he could answer those questions, we would have that. Because, you know, I don't know anything about data centers. I know about water. you know but yeah absolutely so what we think will they come yeah yeah just tell them we need we need some information to get out to people okay appreciate it thank you that's a wonderful idea a couple other quick things um i wanted to mention on june 6 there is going to be an event this is saturday um

Unfortunately, I'll be out of town, but there is an event for families of missing and murdered Indigenous relatives at Scooter's Barbecue. A whole event going on between 9 and 3. And so anyone who is a family member of a missing and murdered relative is welcome to participate in that event. And public is also welcome. The press is certainly welcome. Just because, you know, this is the family of Peter Redhair hosting this and I've mentioned these things before, and I think that it's just important to keep talking about it and keep putting it back on people's radar that it's important to remember a lot of these unsolved cases are still out there to support the families going through that. And then I lastly wanted to just mention, you know, since we have decided to go ahead and advertise for the city attorney position. I'd like to request that we do move forward with that get that going this week post this job this week so that we can keep the process moving forward and toward appointing someone to that position.

I'm not sure. I wasn't aware that it was.

Is anybody here that can speak to that? If the position has been posted publicly?

I know they're planning on getting it by the end of the month.

Okay. That would be by Friday. I was given some information.

I was supposed to say that that could be. We should look into that.

Well, yeah. I just want us to keep moving forward with the process.

Thank you.

Thank you.

I'd just like to thank all the hardworking employees of the city of Gallup and just the hardworking ones. Thank you.

All right.

I do just want to add that I do not take a complaint against potential misconduct of a lawyer as a peer regulated profession lightly. It just initiates the investigation. But I do think that lawyers in positions of public trust owe a higher duty of responsibility to the constituents they serve and those they advise. That includes district attorneys, city attorneys, county attorneys, and others. including those at the highest level of the Federal Department of Justice. And I would encourage others who are interested in initiating complaints to file complaints as well, should they feel that there was a potential violation of misconduct.

Thank you, Erica.

Frank, you have anything?

Just thanks to Matt.

A big, even bigger special thanks to Ben Welch, who is still working away, even though he's retired. You know, the run for the wall came through. Highly, highly praised. Wonderfully attended. really, really put Gallup in a very positive light. And then our veterans day, I mean, our Memorial day, um, ceremony this weekend. Um, you know, I apologize for missing Monday on that, um, with family matters, but, um, very, very, I heard some good things already about it. Um, people texting me and sending me different things, um, even with the poor weather, um, very, very positive and great pictures. Um, Very, very thank you to all of our veterans and those families who lost their significant others and sons and daughters serving our country. So just a special thanks to them.

Thank you, Frank. Yeah, it was quite the rainstorm we had. No one complained, though. No. Okay.

Second. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes.