Council - Regular Meeting

You're live.

good afternoon welcome to the city council meeting today is monday august 17th 2026. it's approximately 1 p.m mountain standard time i am mayor pro tem john munoz before we start i want to mention that we have the american sign language interpreters available for every regular council meeting who are at the front for anyone who requires interpretation we will start with the moment of silence for the brave men and women of the United States Armed Forces as they protect our interests around the globe, as well as the courageous men and women of the Las Cruces Police Department and Las Cruces Fire Department as they keep our city safe 24-7, 365 days. Please join me for a moment of silence. Council Harris, would you please lead the Pledge of Allegiance?

Thank you now we will begin with the presentation of certificate of appreciation

Okay, I'll start with the Certificate of Appreciation on behalf of the City of Las Cruces, and if we have other proclamations, Councillor Harris will present those. No other proclamations. Okay. On the retirement of President and CEO of the Greater Las Cruces Chamber of Commerce, Debbie Moore, I'd like to read a few, only a few of many, many accomplishments that Debbie has attained over her years of service. Debbie Moore has been a resident of Las Cruces and has served as president and CEO of the Greater Las Cruces Chamber of Commerce since May 2016. She's called New Mexico home since 1984. As a native of Claremore, Oklahoma, Debbie is a widow to her dear husband, Bill, who passed away in 2018. She is blessed with a blended family of six children, 15 grandchildren, 13 great-grandchildren, and 10 great-great-grandchildren. Debbie's professional background reflects a broad range of experience, including work in nuclear power plant construction, the electricity industry, education, commercial real estate, nonprofit, and chamber leadership. Her chamber experience spans more than 35 years and includes leadership with the following organizations. Greater Las Cruces Chamber of Commerce, Rio Rancho Regional Chamber of Commerce, Greater Albuquerque Chamber of Commerce, Hobbs Chamber of Commerce, and Waxahachie, Texas Chamber of Commerce. There are so many awards to name, but let me cover a few. Honorary degree from Doña Ana County Community College, recipient of the Governor's Distinguished Public Servant Award, recipient of the Small Business Administration New Mexico Legacy Award. Debbie has been in many councils and many boards. Let me name a few. Appointed by Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham as the member of the New Mexico Cannabis Regulatory Advisory Committee, where she currently serves as chair. Appointed by the governor as a commissioner on the New Mexico Military Base Commission. Appointed by the governor as a member of the New Mexico State Workforce Board. served and was very, very instrumental in the last year's economic recovery council during COVID and its after effects and sits in the governor's women's health house memorial task force. Debbie has an extraordinary ability to unite and motivate very busy community and business leaders, volunteers, and partners. She has helped small business grow, strengthening both the local and state economy. Among the many accomplishments Debbie is proud of, one of the most meaningful is her steadfast support of White Sands Missile Range and military services. Debbie has also driven a strong and meaningful movement at the local, state, and national levels, expanding the Chamber's contributions and advocacy in talent and enterprise development. Her impact includes 14 missions or trips to Washington DC and the Pentagon. She has worked with six governors, numerous elected officials, and many boards throughout her career. Debbie's leadership has helped shape more than 800 Leadership Las Cruces participants. She has supported more than 500 junior leadership participants and graduates, young people who represent the future of our community. In addition, she has worked with and supported more than 1,500 chamber ambassadors. Debbie, please come on up. And I would like to ask the counselors if they would like to join me for a picture and presentation. Debbie, we cannot say enough to show you our appreciation and gratitude for what you've done for our community, for New Mexico, and the impact you've had on our lives. You've always shown an optimism for New Mexico, and her people. As you retire, enjoy this wonderful milestone. I'd also like to bring up some chamber officers and visitors, Stacey, Chad, others.

Thank you, congratulations.

Not one to shy away from saying a few words. I didn't think I was going to cry. Retiring is a trip. It's bittersweet. But I'm very grateful for this council, the councils before this city, because they played such a pivotal role in my life. And I am moving to Oklahoma to be with two of my children. And I will miss all of you. But I was watching Zootopia over the weekend, if you've watched Zootopia. And at the end, the bunny, I don't even know what her name was, was talking about moving forward and talking. And one thing I really value about our councils, about our staff here at the city, is we may not always agree, but we have the conversations. And I just encourage you to keep up the conversations because that's important to moving our city, my new home, forward. I will miss you all dearly. I just want to shout out to a couple people, three people that I've worked with real close. See Mandy Leatherwood up there, Elizabeth Teeters, and Christine, who I think's behind me. Three wonderful young ladies that, I'm sorry, girls, that have grown. I've watched them mature. And it was a pleasure working with the three of you guys, especially. And, of course, Chief Story is not here. And, you know, many of our support for them. But my heart is in Las Cruces. I just happen to be going back to Oklahoma. But thank you for this honor. Thank you for your support of the chamber, our community, and me personally. God bless you.

Thank you. And again, congratulations, Debbie. Let's go ahead and start with item 1.3, departmental highlights.

Good afternoon, Mayor, city council and staff. I'm Adolfo Cardenas and I'm the city treasurer. On July 20th, I stood here to present to council the ordinance to authorize the execution of the loan agreement with the New Mexico Finance Authority for the financing of the flood control projects. On that day, I presented estimated information, and before you today, I provide you with actual loan details. The city is going to issue $3,065,000 of MGRT bonds, series 2026. $3 million will be used for the project, and $65,000 will be used to cover the cost of the insurance. The bond will mature through June 2038, and since the city will pay this bond relatively quickly, the average life of this bond will be about three years. The true interest rate will be 2.55%, and what that means in amount is that it's gonna be a total interest of 254,545. If we add the 65,000 of the cost, into this formula that all true interest costs will be about 3.27%. And if we add all of the principal payments and interest payments at the end of this bond, the total debt service will be 3,319,545. Are there any questions?

Thank you. With no other presentations, let's move on to, oh, we have one more. A little quick on the draw there, John. Utilities Department.

Good afternoon, Mayor Pro Temp, City Councillors, Steve Perez, Deputy Director, Regulatory Compliance for Las Cruces Utilities. So I'm here to inform you of several regulatory topics today. The first topic I will be covering is related to water sampling and reporting for lead as required by the lead and copper rule. I will provide an example of how lead sampling results are included in a calculation to determine compliance. As a brief background, our water systems are required to complete sampling of a certain number of drinking water taps. Pardon. of a certain number of water taps every three years. Our water laboratory technicians coordinate the sampling, they pass out the sampling kits and required information, and the customers collect their own samples from inside their homes. The next day, our staff pick up the samples, complete the required paperwork, and send to a third-party laboratory. When we receive the sample results, we then have to calculate the 90th percentile value. Why is it 90%? Why is 90% used? Because if more than 10% of taps exceed, then it signals an issue with the system and not just a single or a few pipes. So moving on to the example, as you can see on the slide, Just to reiterate, the action level is exceeded if the 90th percentile of sample results are greater than 0.015 milligrams per liter. So starting with step one, as I mentioned, customers collect their own water sample. Step two, we obtain the results and we place the third party lab results in ascending order. Step three, we're gonna multiply the total number of samples by 0.9. So 20 samples by 0.9 gives you 18, which is your 18th sample, which is representative of the 90th percentile. So you can see here in the image to the right and the table to the right there, next to the 18th sample, our sample value when putting them in ascending order was 0.009 milligrams per liter. Therefore, That number is below the action level. So we, as reporting would show, are not in exceedance of the action level, as I've mentioned. So step four, you compare that 90th percentile level to the action level. If your 90th percentile value is higher than the 0.015 milligrams per liter, you have the exceedance. In this case, as I mentioned, 90th percentile, 0.009 milligrams per liter, so there is not an exceedance. So the rule stipulates that if more than 10% or more than the two samples in this example are over 0.015 milligrams per liter, then that would be an exceedance. So you'd have to have the 18th value, the 19th value, and the 20th value all exceeding. So now, what about those two numbers that were outliers? the .018 and the .024, those numbers are subject to sending, which we actually send notices to all the customers, but those customers that had exceeding values, which were outliers, they would receive a notice which would inform them what they can do to lower their exposure to lead from their internal plumbing, amongst other information that's included in the notice. So moving on to the next topic today. I would like to inform you of a public notice that customers received at the beginning of August. This notice was required for a drinking water violation that we had back in November. The violation was due to lab paperwork errors for routine water sampling, which made it appear that required samples and tests were not completed. This was not an emergency. and we fixed it by retesting and submitting the correct information on the lab paperwork. The public notice was scheduled to go out with a CCR, but went out separately due to a formatting issue. So if we went into a little bit more detail here, according to the slides, one monthly routine sample at a customer's residence tested positive for total coliform. In accordance with the regulations, what do you do when you have that happen? An additional sample was collected from that residence to confirm and came back negative. And then one sample was collected up the street, an additional sample down the street, all coming back negative. All the supply wells that were in use on that date of the original sample, all the supply wells were sampled and tested negative. And as I mentioned, the test of concern was for total coliform. And just to go back there, incorrect well IDs in the lab paperwork made it appear that required well samples were not collected. So there was no immediate danger to human health. It was a monitoring and reporting violation. They call those third tier violations. We resampled the wells and the site that had a negative hit on the street and two additional locations, all negative. So one thing, as I previously may have mentioned there, was that typically we're allowed a year to send these out with consumer confidence reports. And moving forward, we'll make sure to do that ASAP rather than waiting until later as the rules would allow. Say in a year, we'll just go ahead and get those notices out immediately. So moving on to the next topic here. For the next topic's gonna be regarding water consumer confidence reports. So consumer confidence reports went out to customers back in June. And what is a consumer confidence report? It's an annual water quality report required by the EPA that local drinking water utilities must give to their customers. And these reports will tell you where your water comes from, what contaminants are in it, and whether it meets safety rules. Recently NMED has required us to resend revised reporting for the University of States water system. Because University of States uses water from the Las Cruces utilities municipal water system to meet demand, NMED initially suggested and approved the original report to include combined water quality data from both University of States and Las Cruces municipal water systems. NMED has since determined that we needed to present separate water data tables for each supply source. We've since updated, got approval for the revised tables, and we'll be sending those out soon. So customers from the University of the State's water system can expect to be receiving that letter with separate water quality data tables in the near future. And with that, I'll stand for any questions.

No questions? All right, thank you, Steven, and thank you, Adolph, for your presentation earlier.

All righty, thank you all.

Thank you.

All right, let's go ahead and move on to Pets of the Week. Jasmine would end up. Jasmine.

Good afternoon, Mayor, members of Council, and city leadership. My name is Jasmine Urena, and I'm the Digital Content Specialist Intern of the Animal Services Center of the Mesilla Valley. For the month of August, we are having Clear the Shelters, where all the adoptions are free. We've been having a lot of great adoptions during Clear the Shelters, and we're so happy to see our animals finding their homes. We welcome everyone to stop by, take a look at our adoptable animals, and hopefully find your new best friend. I would like to highlight a few that are looking for their forever homes. Artemis and Draco have been recently adopted, but Bella and Eddie are still available. And then we have here Onyx and Aurora that recently also got adopted, which we're happy for them. And we also have Dingle and Kaba looking for the forever homes. And here we are focusing on our long-term residents. We have Ebony that has been with us for 361 days. And we have Blaya that has been with us for 360 days. Then we have Mika. She's been with us for 303 days. And Angel was with us for 279 days, but she recently got adopted as well. And these are our community events for the month of August. On August 19th, we'll be at the Farmer's Market. August 22nd, we'll be at PetSmart. August 26th, we'll also be at Farmer's Market. And then August 29th, we'll be at Tractor Supply. For anyone interested in adopting, fostering, volunteering, or learning more, our website is ASCMV.org. And I listed our social media platforms on there. Thank you.

Thank you, Jasmine. Now I'd like to move to item number two, conflict of interest. Are there any members of city council, city manager, any member of city staff who have a known conflict or interest on an item on the agenda?

None.

No.

None.

No.

Thank you. And the mayor is out on a funeral, so our thoughts are with him. Now let's move on to item number three, public participation. Please speak directly and loudly and state your name for the record and stay within your time.

Good afternoon, Mayor Pro Tem, City Council. I'm Jennifer Cry. And so I like the way you started public participation. Because I'm here today to talk about respect. R-E-S-P-E-C-T. Find out what it means to me. We have rules such as three minutes. We have rules that should be applied equally. We have a shared public forum here which requires adherence to the rules for us to have civil discourse. so we can be uh... empathetic to others i'm going through the letters here in case you didn't pick up on that and uh... we can have concern or consideration for others but it's for everybody so i just want to mention if it happened to be relevant i think it can be kind of uh... awkward maybe uh... difficult for some people to interrupt others when they're speaking but i've seen it down here and it's been done effectively i did go to county commission meeting how long have i been doing this it was when commissioner ross and was chair that had to be twenty seventeen uh... And somebody got up and spoke and spoke and spoke and would not stop. And either he or one of the other people in the county turned off the mic. And that immediately killed it because the gentleman knew he was no longer being heard. So that's an option perhaps. But R-E-S-P-E-C-T T is for time, and I have brought the Bible, and I do have verses that I can read from. Excuse me. So Mayor Pro Tem, may I have more time?

Ms. Gray, I appreciate you, but no, just stay within your time, please.

Exactly, I agree. Thank you.

Thank you.

Mayor Pro Tem, folks here today, those watching online, I'm Lynn Maurer. At the October 6, 2025 meeting, the City Council approved a grant agreement with the New Mexico Finance Authority for $15 million. Its principal purpose is for replacement of lead and galvanized water service lines. What is the $15 million actually being spent on? Documentation shows that no piping has been replaced and pipe inspections have virtually stopped. From the 1st of April through the end of July, only 13 inspections have occurred. Since the grant approval, there have been 16 weeks in which the utilities department has conducted no inspections. Has management directed the funds to other uses because of the great budget snafu? If so, did the city council authorize it or been briefed on this diversion of funds? Who decided that money obtained for one purpose can be used surreptitiously for another purpose? It smells like fraud. This appears to be another way the utilities department avoids spending money on low value properties in the city and the lower income folks who live in them. This is a city department that doesn't include all the city's mobile home communities on the inventory map, much less inspect them. These are the properties most likely to be truly disadvantaged. We've asked for an explanation numerous times as to why half the city has been left off the map. It appears that management is hoping to save millions in inspection and pipe replacement costs by acting like the oldest and poorest sections of the city don't exist. If there's a different explanation, we'd like to hear it from the utilities director. Another way utilities personnel have been falsely denying the existence of lead pipes are its characterizations that most lead piping has already been replaced. This is belied by the service line installation dates in the master spreadsheets that show dates of 1870, 1890, and 1919, for example. These installations all precede, by decades, the 1986 federal lead ban. This means these lines are, because of their age, all likely to be lead. The city is also both stingy and non-compliant because it refuses to sample tap water for lead when property owners request it, even though the federal lead and copper rule requires it. Albuquerque tests the water of its people, as do other cities, but Las Cruces Utilities doesn't. Again, where is the $15 million being spent? Who decided that Las Cruces water drinkers don't deserve to have their water sampled for lead, or have their pipes inspected for lead or galvanized piping, or have their lead or galvanized piping replaced when it's found? The city's documentation from before inspections were virtually halted shows at least 84 properties that have galvanized piping that must be replaced. But the city hasn't lifted a finger. even though it has $15 million to do these replacements. Why? Thank you for this opportunity to speak.

Mayor Pro Temp, City Council, I'm Liz Rodriguez-Johnson. The utilities director needs to tell us precisely what's actually going on regarding the implementation of the federal lead and copper rule. Sending a staffer is not sufficient. The staffers highlights at the last meeting were highly misleading. In fact, the department's own documents show that while 83 properties were discovered to have galvanized pipes before December 31, 2025, eight of these were not notified. This was brought to your and the director's attention in April, supported by the department's own documentation. Yet the director sent a staffer to your last meeting to falsely claim that every property owner with galvanized pipes was notified by last December. How would you feel if utilities inspectors found your water pipes were galvanized and did not notify you? These pipes, through which water you drink flows, would likely be rusting away as galvanized pipes do and become more and more prone to collapse. If you knew about the galvanized pipes, you might be able to take immediate steps to find the money to replace the piping. At a minimum, you could buy a water filter to try to protect all the water drinkers at your property until the pipes could be replaced. It is utterly heartless to keep from a property owner the knowledge that their pipes are galvanized. There is no justification whatsoever for this hard-hearted and unlawful behavior by the utilities director. As we have reported previously, the purported re-inspection of the galvanized pipes at Farragher's Elementary School is not credible, according to a licensed plumber. Furthermore, what about the other 35 properties that also mysteriously came up with new inspection reports which said there was no galvanized pipes found when previously there were? The widespread revision of inspection reports does not ring true. No explanation has been provided despite our repeated requests for why 36 inspection reports which originally showed galvanized pipes are now suddenly not galvanized. The director needs to provide a truthful explanation for each of these 36 inspection reports. Utilities patterns of refusal to be forthcoming is also evident in its repeated failure to provide public documents under the New Mexico Inspection of Public Records Act. Documents requested are inspection reports for water lines. In response to lawful IPR requests, the Utilities Department has regularly responded with incomplete and chaotic batches of document. Whether because of intention or incompetence, this is inexcusable and disgraceful, and it serves as yet another technique to try to dodge accountability and withhold information from the public. Thank you.

uh... mary counselors thank you for your time my name is michelle johnson and i'm a homeowner in las cruces i'm here today because more than four hundred homeowners and their families in sonoma ranch north are being affected by long-standing drainage in infrastructure problem involving a privately owned arroyo that runs behind multiple homes I respectfully request that my comments and materials that I have submitted be included in the official record. This issue is fundamentally a dispute between the private owner of the Arroyo, the developer, and the city of Las Cruces. Homeowners did not create these conditions, authorize the work that led to them, or have any control over the property involved. Yet homeowners are being told that we are responsible for infrastructure improvements and erosion control associated with a drainage system that was not properly constructed in the first place. In fact, the city itself has acknowledged that the scope of the repairs required far exceed anything that can be described as maintenance. Despite these unresolved issues, The developer is now seeking to annex phase six, potentially adding new obligations and financial burdens to current residents. I have submitted documentation regarding these concerns to the director of Las Cruces Community Development because I believe these matters deserve careful review. Therefore, I respectfully ask the City Council to investigate this situation, clarify responsibilities, and postpone any construction and annexation of Sonoma Ranch North Phase 6 until these issues have been fully addressed. This issue affects a community of more than 400 homeowners and their families, and I am asking the city for transparency and accountability. Thank you for your service and for your consideration.

Good afternoon, my name is Laura Sidoran and I come today because I have some concerns about Amador Crossing. Quite frankly, I come seeking information and I would just like as someone who lives a block from Pioneer Women's Park.

Go ahead, let's restart the clock. State your name for the record and just a little bit closer to the mic so we can. My name is- Well, hold on, Laura. Yeah, actually, just a point of clarification. That is on the agenda, so there'll be time for public comment as well?

I had sought approval. I have a 15 month old at home that's presently sleeping, and so that's really the concern is I have a limited amount of time.

Gotcha. Okay, well, that's fine. Yeah, let's restart the clock. Sorry, thanks, Laura. And congratulations on your baby.

Thank you. My name is Larissa Duran. I live one block away from Pioneer Women's Park. And quite frankly, after the Desert Crossing Apartments, I have some concerns about the rollout of Amador Crossing. I did contact the city initially to try to get some more information. I wanted to be informed and that's precisely why I wanted information such as what type of prior felony convictions are going to be disqualifying for individuals seeking housing. Another concern that I have is what is going to transpire if we find individuals who are engaging and dealing drugs out of this property or location? Will they be removed? Because if we have a vulnerable population, that are trying to get clean, we have one drug dealer in there pushing drugs out to them. And quite frankly, I think that the results could be catastrophic. Again, I have a 15-month-old, another one on the way. I want to be able to go to the park. And my child's a late walker. But I want to be able to feel comfortable that when he's walking in the park, he's not going to step on a needle. So that's why I just, again, I would love more information. community involvement in terms of developing criteria, just so we can have a seamless integration of Amador Crossing into our neighborhood. And quite frankly, just the open exchange of information, it's not going to be perfect. You know, there's going to be people with issues, but I think as a community, or at least personally, I'd like to be apprised of people who are experiencing mental health crisis. I'm involved in the court system. We see individuals who pick up multiple cases. I was just in Judge Graff's courtroom today. There was a single individual with a breaking and entering case, a battery against a household member, and unlawful use of a firearm. And again, 999 was his address and showed no respect for the court. The judge held him because he said he just disregarded the court's orders repeatedly. So again, I would like just more information. How can I get involved? When I call the city, I don't necessarily equate drug dealing to a private individual having a glass of wine in their home. So just any insight as to how. I can assist or be part of this.

Good afternoon. My name is Michael Mesquitha. I return today to continue my explanation on the misinterpretation of the meaning of the wall of separation between church and state. I pointed out last time that this phrase is not in our U.S. Constitution and that its origin came from Thomas Jefferson's personal letter in 1802 to the Danbury Baptists of Connecticut who complained of state taxes going to support the established Church of Connecticut, the Congregationalism. Another individual spoke after me saying there was a reverend named Roger Williams who had basically preached on the same subject and that this phrase was common during colonial times. Although it can be argued that Roger Williams preached earlier on this subject in 1636, it seems this phrase was not commonly used during colonial times. I did an AI search on the phrase and it gave me this. No, the phrase of the separation of church and state was not commonly used in American colonial dialogue. It became more prominent in the 18th century, particularly after Thomas Jefferson's letter in 1802. But think about it. The primary intent of James Madison and the others involved when creating the Bill of Rights was to protect individual rights from government intrusion. It's only logical that the same intent would apply to the First Amendment regarding religion. The Founding Fathers did not want to be subject to an established religion, which was the case with the Church of England and why many colonists came to America. Again, it was and still is about freedom of religion, not freedom from religion. What about the process used? Glad you asked. Twenty iterations of the language of the First Amendment ensued the congressional debate before the final version that we now know as the First Amendment was sent to the House on September 24, 1789. Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. It's worthy to note that not once in any of those 20 attempts to write the language of the First Amendment did the phrase separation of church and state appear. The word conscience, although it does not appear in the final form, occurs in 12 of these proposed iterations. Thus, it is evident that the motivating concern of the drafters of the First Amendment was to protect conscience from government, not to protect government from the religion. And if the intent of the First Amendment's phrase regarding religion was to keep religion out of government, then why would the following practices have been allowed? First, in 1789, through today, both Houses of Representatives and the US Senate elect chaplains to open each and every session with prayer. William Lynn was the first chaplain to serve in the House. Second, George Washington appointed chaplains to the U.S. military on July 29, 1775, shortly after the creation of the Continental Army. That was the beginning of the Army Chaplain Corps. Third, since 1789 through today, the U.S. Supreme Court has opened each of its sessions with the cry, God save the United States, in this honorable court. There's many other examples I could use. Thank you.

Thank you.

Good morning, or good afternoon, excuse me, Mayor Pro Tem. Golly, we're talking about separation of church and state, wonderful.

Jim, state your name.

Excuse me?

Please state your name.

I'm sorry, James Hurst, Jim Hurst. Here's what the New Mexico Constitution says about religion. Every man shall be free to worship God according to the dictates of his own conscience and no person shall be molested or denied any civil or political right or privilege on account of his religious opinion or modes of religious worship. No person shall be required to attend any place of worship or support any religious sect or denomination, nor shall any preference be given by law to any religious denomination or mode of worship. Let's talk about the colonial world, 1776. Most of our founders hung out in taverns. They didn't hang out in the tavern to drink, they came out in the tavern to talk about politics. The person who influenced that discussion more than any other was a man named Voltaire, Frenchman. Here's what Voltaire said about religion. Christianity is the most ridiculous, the most absurd and bloody religion that has ever infected the world. Our founders liked Voltaire. They liked John Locke, who also argued about separation of church and state. There was a man named, gosh, I'm getting old and I'm forgetting names. John Leland John Leland was about this John Leland the Baptist took up the tradition of Roger Williams and yes, they preach separation of church and state and many of them still do today. That was part of their preaching our founders. including James Madison, who wrote the Bill of Rights and the Constitution, said, religious bondage shackles and debilitates the mind and unfits it for every noble enterprise. During most of the 15 centuries, has the legal establishment of Christianity been on trial? What we have, what have been its fruits, more or less, in all places, pride and indolence in the clergy, ignorance and servility in laity, in both superstition, bigotry, and persecution. Now that's the... of the Bill of Rights attitude towards religion. What's clear is they meant for a government uninterfered with by religion and not interfering in religion. Thank you very much.

Mayor, Council, Juan Garcia, I adjusted my public comments to instead read about the road incident that happened yesterday. And I'm quoting, today around 5 p.m. I was stopped at the Missouri and Solano intersection waiting for a green light when a lunatic that was involved in an earlier dispute with his girlfriend nearby attacked us from his vehicle. He pulled up next to us, lowered his window, pulled out his gun, and shot at my truck more than 10 times, not caring about my child or me. This was a deliberate attack, no road rage, just me casually waiting at a stoplight. I was hit once on the ribs, and thanks to God's grace, my child did not get hit, only minor scratches from the shattered glass. God sent his most precious angel to watch over my son and I. My second life starts today. I am also grateful that no other people around us got hit and really grateful to those wonderful people that stayed by my son's side and stayed by our side in the rain. You guys are the heroes along with all the first responders that arrived on the scene. To my family, I love you all for being there and checking up on my son and me and being there for us at the hospital. God bless you all. Las Cruces is no longer a safe place. It hasn't been for some time now. I strongly believe it. Being attacked with no motive and a streetlight. That person being angry at his miserable life. This post is not to garner any attention. It is meant for education and for me to warn people who live in this town to always be careful. And in the post, there are some pictures of some of the wounds that happened yesterday. So I think we've come to a conclusion that this city is not safe. sitting at the light, minding your own business, and you get shot, you and your son. My comments for today. We need a designated camping area for those who want to live outside, somewhere with a port-a-johns, water and dumpsters, an extension of Camp Hope or similar. We also need boundaries. If someone camps outside the area, they get two warnings. On the third, they get a one-way ticket to wherever they want to go. That's not punishment. It's a shot at a fresh start. Mayor, council, please stop putting this off. This isn't about punishing people. It's about doing the right thing for everyone in our city. Thank you.

Tim Jenkins here. I'm here this afternoon because we need to have an honest conversation about the homelessness in our city. And we need to stop pretending that asking for accountability, public safety, and reasonable actions means that we hate the homeless people. It doesn't. I've heard members on this council suggest that those of us who are demanding change are trying to criminalize poverty. With all due respect, that could not be farther from the truth. There is a tremendous difference between criminalizing poverty and enforcing laws that exist to protect everyone in our community. We can have compassion for someone who is struggling while still saying that open drug use, theft, vandalism, trespassing, illegal camping, public disorder, and dangerous behavior can no longer be accepted in our community. Compassion without accountability is not compassion. It is enabling. And when our parks, sidewalks, businesses, neighborhoods, and public spaces become unsafe and unusable, it is not just the homeless population that is affected. It is our families, our children, our seniors, our business owners, and our taxpayers. We have spent astronomical amounts of money and resources pretending to address the homelessness, but yet the problem only seems to get worse and worse. We need to recognize that homelessness is not one single problem with one solution. There are people who genuinely need real true assistance, not just housing. There is a mental health crisis in our community that needs to be addressed along with people who need treatment, structure, accountability, and a pathway back to society. These people deserve real, true help, not just a roof over their heads. But helping someone does not mean abandoning the rest of our community. I want to sincerely thank the men and women of our Las Cruces Police Department for all their efforts to combat this crisis. Our officers deal with this situation day in and day out. They are called into encampments. They deal with the theft, the drugs, the violence, the mental crisis, and with often the same people time and time again. Our officers are asked to deal with problems that go far beyond what policing alone can solve. But yet they continue to show up, they continue to protect this community, and they continue to answer the call 24-7. So we thank them for their dedication and willingness to go beyond the call of duty day in and day out. Council, it is high time that we remove the roadblocks that are hindering our city from being safe for all. Thank you.

My name is Thomas Stevens. Thank you, Las Cruces Police Department, for your attention to autism awareness. Mr. President of the United States, Mr. Mayor Pro Temp, And council members and staff, faith moves despite fear. Revelation 12, 11, And they overcame him, Satan, by the blood of the Lamb, and by the word of their testimony. And they loved not their lives until the death. This is the word of my testimony. In 1979, the door-knocking preacher showed up on the doorstep with the one true gospel of Jesus Christ. Three weeks later, on February 11th, about noon, I heard the gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ preached one more time. I saw myself as a sinner on my way to a devil's hell in need of my Savior. I believed Jesus Christ died on the cross for my sins and rose again from the dead and was offering me the gift of God eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord. I heard the invitation, come, take of the waters of life freely. I walked the aisle, told the preacher, I need to be saved. In less time than it takes to tell it, I bowed my knees and called upon the name of the Lord Jesus Christ to save my never dying soul. He saved my soul that day and now keeps me. One week later, I was baptized in deep water, not for salvation, but for a public alliance with the Lord Jesus Christ, who I trusted. All I got is the blood of Jesus and the power of his resurrection. Come to find out, that's all I need. Philip the evangelist said, if thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God. And he commanded the chariot to stand still. And they went down both into the water, both Philip and the eunuch, and he baptized him. The bread I got from heaven is worth sharing. It's not... It is my great honor to share it with you today the invitation still come get on board the ark of God's salvation Jesus Christ come put the blood of the lamb over the door of your heart and death the angel cannot touch you identify publicly with the Redeemer in deep water baptism not putting away the filth of the flesh but a good conscience they answer a good conscience towards God by the resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ who we trusted and Behold, I stand at the door and knock. If any man hear my voice and open the door, I will come into him and will sup with him and he with me. Sayeth the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the beginning of the creation of God. Seek him that maketh the seven stars of Orion and turneth the shadow of death into morning and maketh the day dark with night, that calleth for the waters of the sea and poureth them out upon the face of the earth. The Lord is his name. The center cross of Lord Las Cruces, New Mexico. For the scripture saith, whosoever believeth shall not be ashamed. Is this not a brand plucked out of the fire? Thank you.

Is there more public comment? Any more public comment? OK. There being none, let's go ahead and move on through the agenda. So I would like to now ask for a motion to approve the acceptance of the agenda with the removal of 7.5, as we will discuss that in the future in a work session. So approval of or acceptance of agenda. Motion.

As yeah move to approve with the removal of seven point but so we're not going to talk about seven point five today, okay I Moved to approve move to move to prove Sarah second second second Christine I

This is on the motion to accept the agenda as presented with removal of item 7.5 in its entirety. Councilor McClure? Yes. Councilor Matisse? Yes. Councilor Harris? Yes. Councilor Boncomo? Yes. Councilor Caran? Yes. Mayor Pro Tem?

Yes.

And the mayor is absent.

Okay, thank you, Christine. Motion carries. Now let's move on to section seven, resolutions, ordinances for discussion. First one, 7.1, public hearing required. This is on resolution 27-030. It is approximately. 1 59 p.m and are we opening this for a public discussion okay public discussion hearing okay Is there anyone here for or against the issuance of this particular item and this issuance of liquor license? Please approach. Please state your name for the record.

Good afternoon, Mayor Pro Tem, city councilors. My name is Brian Locke. I'm the CEO and owner of Santa Fe Brewing Company. A little bit about Santa Fe Brewing. We're New Mexico's original craft brewery, opening our doors in 1988. We produce ales, lagers, ciders, and a non-alcoholic premium pilsner. and operate five tap rooms, two in Albuquerque, three in Santa Fe, and employ roughly 90 people. Our brand is distributed statewide in New Mexico, El Paso, Arizona, and Colorado, and our goal is to support the Las Cruces community through gross receipts and by providing one or two full-time jobs, along with eight to 10 part-time positions. We are always looking for ways to partner with other local breweries. Recently, we brewed a collaboration beer with Little Toad Creek, and we'll look at more opportunities with local brewers in the community. Our intention is to build a core community oriented space and partner with New Mexico State University in some capacity. I'm very grateful for the opportunity and look forward to joining the small brewing business community here in Las Cruces. And I'm asking for the approval of a small wine grower license at 901 East University Boulevard. Thank you for your time and consideration. And if there are any questions, I'm happy to answer them.

Thank you. Other public comment?

Okay, Commissioner.

Mayor Pro Ten. Over here.

Yes, Councillor Matisse.

I just wanted to ask if you brought any samples.

I'm going to call you out of order. Okay.

I was asked to ask you if you were going to have food at the new location. It's for public education purposes.

The answer is yes, I do plan to offer food. We partner with a organization called Fusion Taco. They have 15 plus locations in the northern part of the state, so this will give them an opportunity to open a space down here, so they'll be operating the kitchen for us.

Thank you.

Thank you, Council. Adam? Okay, it is approximately 2.03. We're gonna go ahead and close public hearing at this time. Public comments, thanks. So I need a motion and a second.

Move to approve.

Second. Move to approve, second. Christine.

Adam Wanchoa of Community Development, for the record. Before you have the proposed liquor license for the new Santa Fe Brewing Company, which will be located at 901 East University Avenue, which would be in building 945, suite 3A. So pursuant to state statute, the applicant has submitted for approval of what is called a winegrower second location liquor license. That is liquor license number BLA000020671. This is with on-premise consumption, package sales, and patio service as well. The ABC from the state did go ahead and send preliminary approval to the city in June 29th of this year. This did go out to review by our reviewing parties who provide liquor licenses for your review. Planning staff did note that there is a distance waiver that would be required with this application due to its proximity to an educational institution. Continue on that the question is concerning the required 300 foot separation of a liquor establishment from a school campus As we all know where this is that this is approximately about 90 feet from New Mexico State University property that being said though it is over 300 feet from the closest actual building itself, but it's still property. So according to the New Mexico state law, local government body may grant a waiver to allow such business within 300 feet of a school. Council may determine whether or not the location of liquor license request is appropriate, and we just have some kind of general guidelines when it comes to taking this into consideration is things like health, safety, or welfare issues. So essentially when you vote yes, you'll be voting yes not only for the liquor license, but approve the associated waiver with it as well. So to better show you where this is at, this is the subject property itself. The actual location of the new Santa Fe Brewing Company will be right around here. NMSU right down to the south, as you can see, there's just a parking lot right across the street, closest building being about half a block away or so. So with that, your option is one, to vote yes and approve the proposed liquor license and associated waiver request. Two, to vote no, deny the proposed liquor license and waiver request. After this, the vote, the ABC will be notified of the vote, and the application process will continue through their process. That is the conclusion of my presentation. I stand for questions.

Councilor Curran?

Thank you, Adam. Thank you for being here. I have three comments that are semi-questions. Sorry, Adam, as per usual. One, I'm very excited about this happening, and I will stake that I am the most enthusiastic drinker. But if Councilor Matisse wants to, if you want to have a contest, we can. On council, sorry. So I'm very excited about this. My two questions. One is, so there was a prior brewery at this location, and this seems like kind of an absurd bureaucratic process that we would redo the exact same thing for a different place. Isn't there some way, and this is probably state laws, but that we can say like, We agree that people can drink in this location. It seems like a bureaucratic overdue to revisit this every time if it's a different proprietor. What's the deal?

Mayor Pro Temp, Councilor Corrine. Correct, this was the former location of the Bosque Brewery. Unfortunately, though, these licenses are handed out a person at a time. It doesn't run with the property, if you will. So whenever a new business comes in, just like a new cannabis location would have to come in, if there's something that they need, like a special use permit, they would have to go through the process all over again. Not only that, but it also allows a municipality, this has happened in other smaller municipalities where they had a liquor license in a certain establishment, There were a lot of issues with that liquor license, a lot of police calls, a lot of violence, a lot of bad things that were happening there. That place closed down. Don't want to put any of my other municipalities on point here, but then somebody else moved in there and the state got this extensive police report and basically the community said, no, we don't want this here because it's a problem in this location and that liquor license was actually denied.

Okay, thank you, that really helps with my understanding of it, even though I do think it does feel like a lot of bureaucracy in this situation for something that is Makes a lot of sense, and then my third question is, in the application, it alluded to another waiver related to churches, and I am shocked that there's crossover between public comment and this application, but here we are. Is that an issue, or is that a state law thing, or is that old timey?

Mayor Pro Tem, Councilor Caran, there is a requirement from a religious institution. Staff went out there and actually measured the closest church is about 500 feet away-ish, if you will. We did not see that distance requirement from a religious institution. But those are the three criteria that we're looking at when you submit an application for a liquor license. You have to be 300 feet away from a religious institution, from a educational institution, and then a military institution. military base, I guess, or installation, or military installation, those are the big three that the state is looking at.

Okay, I kind of object to that a little bit, but that's a state-related issue, but I've been moved by public comment, clearly, to think about this. Anyway, thank you, and thanks for measuring and making sure that that's not actually a thing.

Council Harris.

Thank you. I had kind of a related question, which is more for my own information since I'm new. And we've done a few liquor licenses. But I was curious if you could just go through the process. So if somebody wants to open a new bar in town, roughly what is the process to get that license? Obviously, in this case, we're not transferring a license. but like does the city have its own process does the state have its own process which the city is subordinate to those things overlap uh... you can walk us through it may pretend counselor harris

For all those questions, basically yes. It's a dual process, if you will. Basically what they'll do, they'll start the process with us, find a location, what's the zoning on it, can I have a liquor establishment on this property, doesn't matter what kind, if you will, bar, restaurant with beer and wine liquor license, because the state went from, essentially when I first started doing liquor license reviews, there were like a few liquor licenses that they had, now it's, They've gone exponentially as to the different types of liquor licenses that they offer. That being said, staff will then create a statement of zoning, then they start the actual application process with the state of New Mexico's ABC section. They'll start their process, they'll get their initial review, they will then issue a preliminary approval. That preliminary approval will then be sent to us City Clerk Christine will get that preliminary approval and we'll start essentially our process because the application requires us to recommend, make a recommendation for that liquor license within 45 days of receiving that preliminary approval. Sometimes we need to get extensions as we've seen. These two do not need extensions but in the past we've had to request for extensions. Then we'll basically bring it before you all. You all will do your vote on everything after that gets voted upon the clerk will then respond to the state with the documentation and then they'll continue their process issue finally issuing that liquor license after the state then issues a liquor license then to come back to us provide that copy of that state list uh issued liquor license and we as a city will issue a city liquor license and they're ready to go so it's a little back and forth hopping back and forth but it is a liquor license and the state does have the power to oversee all that okay so we have

You have a state liquor license, and then the city has our own, and there's like overlap and application fees and stuff between them, or?

Mayor Pro Temp, Councilor Harris, the state has their fees, and we have our established fees. For instance, there's a fee for the actual application process, like bringing it before you all, and then there's just a yearly fee for a city liquor license that's part of your business registration as well. Just like you get a yearly business registration license, you get a yearly liquor license registration as well.

Okay, that's good to know, and obviously it is what it is right now, but I think I'm also questioning the extra bureaucracy, and maybe there's something to streamline there. I understand that there's reasons why we have these rules, but maybe something for us to look at in the future. Otherwise, I have no further questions.

Thank you, Councillor Harris. Other discussion, questions, comments? Thank you, appreciate it. Those are good comments. Anytime we can reduce bureaucracy and fees, I think that's a plus. Are there additional public comments, I believe?

I believe we closed public comments, did we not?

Did we close? Okay. Okay, we'll allow it. Okay, please come up.

Hey, everybody. I've never spoken before, so I didn't have a, oh, it's, my name is Regina Shervanek. I'm an owner of a property several blocks away, but I received the notice in the mail that, like, as usual. So my questions are, and perhaps they have already been answered, but my real issue is parking. You know, it's really crowded at that location anyway. I mean, I see people, like, you know, going around two or three times just to get into the Starbucks that was there. So is that something that's already been addressed with Santa Fe Brewing or not? Because that sounds like a big thing, especially if they're going to have patio. There's going to be a lot more people there, and that's a lot more traffic. noise, et cetera, et cetera. Who asks those questions to who?

Adam, if you would answer that, please.

Of course.

No, no, you're fine. So essentially, whenever the development actually came in, they were required to provide the number of parking cells that they have now. So the number of parking cells provided for that shopping center, because it's considered a shopping slash business center, meets code when it comes to the number of parking cells being provided. That being said, we do, that area is relatively a busy area, but we do have on-street parking allowances in the residential area around there as well, and that is something that is encouraged in the University District overlay, which is what this property is located at. So having to park a couple blocks away to get to the bar, that's basically what the University District envisioned, more of a pedestrian-friendly type of area.

Can I cover that? i mean i understand the off street the street parking but there's not if you show that picture there's really you'd have to interrupt a lot of other i mean where's where's the off street there you know i mean as it is here's a good example my property is very close to the game and one thing that we probably do as you have questions or concerns we probably share them with adam or various departments and we'll cover that um... will that work uh... sure unless the decision is being made right now yes to approve or not approve so how do we get over that are they getting it approved right this second or not i'm not sure i understand that process

Yeah, it will still be under consideration as we work through the approval process.

Okay. It would be really nice if it was sort of information on here to let us know that we should talk to somebody ahead of time. You know, that would be helpful for the future. Gotcha. Because I get a lot of these.

Thank you. No, appreciate that. Thank you. Thank you. Will there be no further? Adam, did you have anything else? We're good? Okay. All right. Okay, without any further comments or questions, let me go ahead and call the motion. Christine?

This is on the motion to approve resolution 27-030. Councillor McClure? Yes. Councillor Matisse?

Yes.

Councillor Harris? Yes. Councillor Bencomo? Yes. Councillor Curran? Yes. Mayor Pro Tem?

Yes.

And Mayor is absent.

All right, thank you. Let's go ahead and move on to 7.2, resolution 27-031. We'll start with Adam's presentation and then we can call a motion. And then public hearing, okay. We'll start with public hearing, how about that?

Good afternoon, Mayor Pro Tem, Council. I was trying, you know, the downside of this hearing is it sort of lets the cat out of the bag of a restaurant, but as you are likely aware, La Nueva Casita has changed the pride of Israel Chavez. Yes, Israel Chavez. And so we have about 18 employees, almost all full-time. They work about 39 hours. That's the restaurant business model in the United States. They're all very happy to be there. Many of them have worked more than 5 to 10 years at the restaurant. We've maintained something that has been there for a very long time. It's the oldest continually operated restaurant in the same place. In order to be able to... continue to operate the restaurant. We've made the decision to apply for the beer and wine license, which is already working its way through the process. And this is the, I think, final step. So we just request approval of the application. Thank you.

Go ahead, Adam. We'll start with a motion. We'll start with a motion from the council.

Do you need to close the public hearing or is that?

Good idea. Yes, thank you. Thank you, team. Appreciate the team effort here. We'll close the hearing at 2.19 downtime. Now I'll entertain a motion.

Move to approve.

Second. Okay, move to approve. Second. Okay, Adam, please go ahead.

yet again here we go folks another liquor license this is for la nueva casita cafe which is located at 195 north mesquite street uh so again pursuant to new mexico state statute an application has been submitted for approval of what is called a restaurant a beer and wine liquor license uh liquor license number bla zero zero zero zero zero one six six eight six with on-premises consumption and patio services. The alcoholic beverage control division of the state did provide preliminary approval to the city on July 6th of this year. This did also go out to all reviewing parties who provided liquor licenses and there are actually no issues identified by staff with this application. The La Nueva Casita, as we all know, is right here on the southeast corner of Oregon Avenue and Mesquite Street, right across the street from Klein Park in the historic South Mesquite neighborhood. So your options, one, to vote yes and approve the proposed liquor license, or two, to vote no and deny the proposed liquor license. The ABC will be notified of the vote and the application process will continue through their process. That is the conclusion of my presentation. I stand for questions.

Questions or comments? All right. OK. And thank you. It's great to see that there is development and growth in our city's most historic area. So appreciate the efforts of Mr. Chavez and hope that he continues to Progress and continues the Estrella Tacos, which are my favorite, by the way. All right, Christine.

This is on the motion to approve resolution 27-031. Councilor McClure? Yes. Councilor Matisse? Yes. Councilor Harris? Yes. Councilor Bencomo? Yes. Councilor Curran? Yes. Mayor Pro Tem? Yes. And the mayor is absent.

Thank you. Item 7.3, resolution 27-032. Resolution approving the June 30, 2026 quarterly financial report to submit to the New Mexico Department of Finance and Administration.

Move to approve.

Second.

Good afternoon, Mayor Pro Tem and City Council. My name is Josh Saffel. I'm the accounting supervisor for the finance department. Before you today is a resolution to approve the fourth quarter report that is submitted to the New Mexico Department of Finance and Administration. i'd like to start off just with a little bit of background uh the requirement for this reporting uh this is through uh section 6-6-2 of the nmsa 1978 this requires that periodic financial reports are prepared and presented by local public entities that of course would be a municipality such as the city of las cruces and that this is done at least quarterly which we do do we do submit quarterly reports Those are to be filed with the Department of Finance and Administration, their local government division. So we do submit those to DFA on a quarterly basis. However, a little further on that, the DFA does require that when we submit the fourth quarter financial report that we send with it a resolution from the city council approving that report. So for the period ending June 30th, 2026, we did submit a fourth quarter report to the New Mexico Department of Finance and Administration on July 31st, 2026, but it is pending approval waiting on this resolution to be submitted to them. Also our final FY27 budget approval, that's the current budget, that is also contingent upon submission of this resolution approving the fourth quarter financial report. Now primarily the main purpose of the quarterly reporting DFA is very concerned with the budgeting and with how we're doing in terms of our budget. And so their primary concern is that our actuals meet our budget. And so that fourth quarter report is in compliance, meaning that it is within the budgetary standards that we submitted to DFA. Just a few very preliminary results and highlights. I do want to stress very much so that these numbers are bound to change. These are preliminary numbers. The numbers were pulled from our ERP system as of July 24th, 2026. With ongoing end of year closure activities, with the audit that we're working through as well, these numbers will change. But DFA recognizes that as well. That is usually updated once we get our annual comprehensive financial report for FY26, which will be probably maybe six or more months from now. So again, just to stress that these are preliminary numbers taken as of July 24th, 2026. In the general fund, we showed revenue of $182 million, excuse me, $182,219,915, expenditures of $143,201,206, and transfers out of $24,665,674. Now then, in all other funds, the revenue was $217,653,676, and our expenditures were $198,930,325. And of course, there was a transfer into the other funds of $24,665,674. And with that, here are the council options to vote yes, to no, amend, or to table. And with that, I will stand for any questions.

Councilor Horan? Any questions? No? Sorry, sorry. That's okay. All right, Christine.

This is on the motion to approve resolution 27-032. Councilor McClure? Yes. Councilor Matisse? Yes. Councilor Harris? Yes. Councilor Bencomo? Yes. Councilor Coran? Yes. Mayor Pro Tem? Yes. And the mayor is absent.

Thank you. Okay, our next item is 7.4, resolution number 27-033, resolution authorizing property management agreement for the Amador Crossing Multifamily Residential Development.

Move to approve.

Second. Good afternoon, Mayor Pro Tem, Councillors, and city staff. My name is Donny Procise, Purchasing Supervisor for the Financial Services Department, and before you is a resolution to authorize a property management contract for Amador Crossing. Little bit of background, Amador Crossing is a 50 unit affordable housing project adjacent to the Mesilla Valley Community of Hope on a 4.8 acre site at 1101 West Amador Avenue in Las Cruces. This is a two story secured building that will provide housing to small households and individuals that are at risk or currently experiencing homelessness with a primary focus on those with less than 80% area median income, or AMI. The project will provide affordable housing to approximately 70 individuals who will live in studios and one bedroom units. The city will require a property management firm to work closely with Mesilla Valley Community of Hope and other service providers to implement a coordinated, supportive housing approach that prioritizes housing stability, resident success, and access to supportive services. The property management firm will be expected to develop policies, procedures, tenant selection plans, and other operational documents that will reflect industry best practices for permanent supportive housing, promote successful tenancy, encourage resident engagement, and support the long term success of this housing development. On May 1st, 2025, the city's purchasing program advertised request for proposals number 24-25-074 for property management services. The solicitation resulted in the receipt of one proposal that was evaluated by the Selection Advisory Committee, or SAC, on June 4th, 2025. The SAC is recommending award to High Desert Housing of Albuquerque, New Mexico. Housing and Neighborhood Services is requesting authorization to contract with High Desert Housing for a term from September 1st, 2026 through June 30th, 2031 in an amount not to exceed $50,000 annually plus reimbursement of owner approved operating expenses funded by rental revenue plus applicable taxes subject to approved budget appropriations. The property manager will be paid a fee in the calculated amount of 7% of gross rent collections for each calendar month. In addition to the calculated percentage being paid for management services, the city will reimburse the property manager for approved items including, but not limited to, operating expenses, capital expenditures, insurance premiums, utility charges, heating, ventilation, and cooling maintenance charges, repair and maintenance expenses for items of a non-capital nature, janitorial and other regularly conducted maintenances, cleaning and repair, costs of improvements to common areas and tenant spaces, general administrative costs, etc. And those operating budgets will be approved annually. With that, these are your options and I stand for questions.

Councillor Harris.

Thanks. A few questions. I guess first, on the previous slide, more technical things, I guess could you expand on what is an operating expense? And then also, budgets will be approved annually. Who approves those? Will that be city council, somebody else?

Mayor Pro Tem, Councillor Harris, I'll defer to Natalie on the operating budgets, but I believe, yes, the annual budget approval process would be part of our annual budget process and approved by. Okay.

Good afternoon, Mr. Mayor, Natalie Green, for the record. So the annual operating budget is made up of a number of things. It includes accounting and auditing, advertising, legal services, the property management fee, salaries for staff, office supplies, telephone, of course, water, electric. Sewer, trash and refuge, it'll include things like extermination, ground repair, landscaping. There is some maintenance and turnover of units. And then it also includes things like the property insurance and then there's a set aside for replacement reserves and then enrichment services to fund supportive services.

Okay, so that not to exceed $50,000, that's just the property management fee? Correct. Okay, just wanted to clarify that.

Yes, the property itself will take in rental revenue, and the rental revenue will cover the operations. Very similar to like an enterprise fund, but it's not part of the management fee.

Yeah, yeah, understood. And I think I also read in the packet that we're not obligating ourselves to anything beyond the rental revenue. So if it doesn't, rental revenue doesn't cover something and everyone's HVAC needs to be replaced, they'll be on the hook for that.

Maybe not on the hook the city would be but part of the the model includes capital replacement and our operating deficit reserve fund so as part of the Performa you'll see sorry. It's a little bit small, but you'll see that we allocate at least $50,000 a year to reserve so Presumably in a new building you will not have capital expenses but as we progress and to year 10 or year 15, you will have some major replacement, and we've anticipated those costs.

Okay, cool. And then the other questions are... Half question, half comment. But I think it's fair to say that we've learned a lot of lessons from Desert Hope. And that those lessons are being incorporated here. And so I wanted to maybe see if you could expand on what some of those are. Obviously, somebody is going to be on site all the time. And we're getting a property management firm that has experience with this specific kind of property. If you want to expand on that a little.

Correct, Mr. Mayor Pro Tem, Councillor Harris, one of the biggest lessons learned is property management before day one, presuming that this agreement gets approved today. That was one of our largest issues with Desert Hope is that property management was not hired or onsite the first year. The other thing that we've layered into this is we do have, one, there's a lot of design changes. So there's closed access, there's a vegetable, there's security. And so there's, yes, staff has learned lots of lessons from past projects and incorporated them into this one.

Yeah, cool. And I guess my other comment is that I'm glad to see these being brought online. When we did the tour, we went a little more in depth on what all of those design changes are, and I think It's very good from my perspective. I think the right lessons have been learned. This seems like it's going to be a pretty safe and secure facility, and hopefully giving people more stable housing will improve the neighborhood in general. That's the neighborhood where I work a lot, and so looking forward to it. That's all I have, Mayor Pro Tem.

Councilor McClure.

Thank you. I just had a couple of questions. I did want to confirm that one unit is going to be for an onsite residence for the manager. Is that correct?

I went too far. That is correct. So there are 50 units. 24 of them are single room occupancy units. and then there's 26 one bedrooms. 10 of those have been set aside for project-based vouchers, and then we do have one manager's unit, which is not considered income-producing, so that does change our operating revenue a little bit, but yes, we have set aside a unit for an onsite manager.

Second question, so the 100,000 for the, it sounds like wraparound services is kind of factored into the management of this. What is that, can you kind of elaborate a little bit more on that? The support of services, yeah.

The enrichment services, we've set about 100,000 to 110, depending on the performa you're looking at at a given time. And that is primarily for two case managers that will be on site full time supporting the residents in that community.

Thank you. This is the largest property that they're going to be managing, right? From what I can tell from their website?

Mayor Pro Tem, Councilor McClure, I believe they have one that's of similar size, but it may still be under development. I know we didn't, well, I think you covered it, but High Desert Housing has 30 years in affordable housing, and most of that is permanent supportive housing, and they do manage a facility in the city of Las Cruces already, and it's a project that we already monitor and supervise annually, which is called Casa de Corazones.

Can you remind us what the square footage of the studio slash one bedrooms are?

I did not bring the floor plan with me. Oh, hold on. I have it in my rental revenue. I tried to bring everything I thought you might ask me. So the zero bedrooms are at 330 square feet. And then the ADU ones are, I'm sorry, that's the ADU ones and then the non-ADU ones are 310 square feet for the actual unit.

And for the one bedroom, is that the?

The one bedrooms are at 485 square feet and 524 for the ADA units.

Okay, thank you.

Councilor Matisse.

Hello, Natalie. Is this a unique project or different from Padrina and the others, correct? I mean, this is owned by the city and managed by the city, whereas the others, you've made them quite ROI type of return. On paying the rent, where is the majority of the money coming from in their rent payments? What are they paying with since they're like 80% already below?

Mayor Pro Tem, Councillor Matisse, this is significantly different than a federal low-income housing tax credit. Similar, but different. The first thing is it has no federal funds. It is completely funded by state and local dollars, so it does change some of the requirements a little bit. It does allow us the flexibility to set the rents at 80% or at the FMR instead of the 60% based on the LIHTC. The other significant difference is it is a supportive housing model, so it emphasizes screening people in, particularly those experiencing homelessness, providing them with wraparound services to work through some of the contributing issues that led to their homelessness and It comes from both harm reduction and trauma-informed lens, right, that every individual is different, and so we want to make sure we're meeting people where they are and assessing each person on a case-by-case basis. In terms of the rent, the city will set the rents at the FMR and then residents can pay their rent in multiple ways. Some of them will be self-pay, so they will have the income to be able to rent a unit. Others may be using vouchers, whether that's from the public housing authority or other voucher Distributors in the area which could be Mesilla Valley community hope or La Casa who have a variety of vouchers funded by different programs Hopefully that answers Thank you.

I I'm just going to if you go to page 8 slide 8 I'm just going to read something that I, in reading in the budget book, budget highlights. You have an innovative development that combines affordable housing with essential onsite supportive services for families experiencing or close to experience homelessness. Individuals with severe mental illness and low income families. So there has been some change. When I brought this up to you about severe mental illness with families, I think you answered me that one out of three is mentally ill. You gave me that statistic, so I didn't know how to take that, but I didn't take it personally. Has there been a change on the families for this particular?

Mayor Pro Tem Councilor Matisse, HUD defines family as even a person of one. So yes, families can be one person, two persons, four people. So HUD has a very loose definition of families.

So, okay, so family could just be one person?

Yes, they would be considered a family or a household.

Okay, thank you.

Other discussion, questions, comments? There's also a public comment as well.

Please don't start the timer yet. I want to explain. I'm not coming to speak for myself. I was contacted this weekend by Carol Baker, a resident here in Las Cruces. People call me a lot. And she, because of her work schedule, is not able to speak. So she emailed this to me and asked me to speak for her. To the City of Las Cruces Mayor, Manager, and City Councilors, I am writing to address my concerns regarding the selection process for management of the Amador Crossing affordable housing development. The published agenda for today's council meeting indicated a vote is scheduled to award the five-year management contract to High Desert Housing of Albuquerque. the sole bidder for this effort. My research on bid net indicates the request for proposal or RFP for this bid opened April 11th, 2025 and closed on May 1st, a period of 21 days. Perhaps that is standard, but for a management project of this scale and contract duration, 21 days seems quite short, especially considering that groundbreaking for project construction itself had taken place just three months prior on January 8th, 2025. A second and related concern about this council vote comes from a quote in a July 11th, 2026 story about the project in the Oregon Mountain News. The city of Las Cruces owns Amador Crossing. Martinez said High Desert Housing will serve as property manager while Mesilla Valley Community of Hope will provide case management and subsidies. Is it normal for municipal practice to announce such wards in the media before the council has actually voted to award a contract to a particular bidder? The final concern I address here, and I have many more, regards the proposed management contract itself. One small paragraph in contract section 14 staffing states, if budget allows, managers shall provide on-site security, or if budget does not allow, coordinate at least weekly with security staff that may be provided by owner. This rather breezy admission that there might possibly be a need for security at this complex completely disregards the numerous call-outs Las Cruces police already have had in this area on Amador Avenue on a regular basis, including for the tragic murder of Officer Jonah Hernandez in February 2024. Full-time security will be needed and will require a healthy budget, whether provided by the management contractor or the city. As area businesses and residents, including those future residents of Amateur Crossing can attest, this is a non-negotiable. I know reworking this bid contract will threaten your plan December opening date, but since the selection committee approved this single bid over a year ago, you've had plenty of time to correct this. Therefore, I respectfully request that council vote no on this contract award until you can rework this bidding process such that more than one bid is received and the contract itself in a way that addresses public safety issues more specifically. Thank you for your consideration. Carol Baker, Las Cruces, New Mexico.

Other comments, questions? Councilor Matisse?

I just had a question for our city manager, Connie. vision in the building of this happened many, many years ago and it's finally coming about and it's being built. But have you anticipated the budget cost in your budget for the next, perpetually I guess, I guess it's gonna be half a million. Yeah. Have you, did you figure that in your budget?

Thank you, Mayor Pro Temp, Councilor Matisse, City Manager. Right now, what has been passed, US Council has passed FY27. We've considered just the utility costs at this moment. We have pro formas that are that Natalie has shared with you. Those are things that, as mentioned earlier today, that operating budget will be presented in front of council accordingly, but I'll let Natalie share more details to that.

Mr. Mayor Pro Tem, Councilor Matisse, yes, we have considered that. As you can see from a snippet of the pro forma in front of you, the resident income is well over $566,000. Considering our vacancy rate, and our vacancy rate, we went conservative at 7%. The average vacancy rate in Las Cruces is less than three. And for these projects, it's typically less than one. Again, we want it to be conservative in our assumptions. And then as part of that, we do have our gross income. There is no debt service, so because we state funded this through grants, there is no debt. so 100% of the rental revenue goes into the operations. Our preliminary expenses, including the supportive services and the healthy reserve is 447. And as you can see, we have net operating income at 79,000 for year one. And then that continues on through year 10. So those operating incomes will just be reinvested into the the reserve fund or the operating deficit fund. So as of right now, Amador Crossing is 100% self-sustaining, with the exception of the annual security costs that we already fund for the entire Mesilla Valley Community Hope Campus and our other city facilities.

No, thank you Natalie. I think originally, I don't know how much you required from the Tel Shore fund for this particular project, do you remember?

Mr. Mayor, Councilor Matisse, the Telsor Fund has budgeted $4 million for the construction of Amador Crossing. I don't think that we've spent it with the exception of a few thousand dollars, but don't hold me to that. I can get you our actual expenditures out of the Telsor Fund, but I've committed to spending all of our other funding sources first and then trying to preserve as much of the Telsor Fund as possible.

No, I ask this question, and particularly with the city manager involved in it, is because the public out there knows that we have a $15 to $20 million deficit. So when you explain how it's so self-sustaining, I think they're probably very happy with that. So thank you for the answer.

Other questions, comments? Okay. And now just one quick question based on the letter. What's the normal time period for RFP process? Is it 21 days? Does it happen periodically? Is that the normal or is that the standard?

Mayor Pro Tem it depends on the scope of work but generally the RFP process if we're going through the selection advisory committee is going to take between three and four months from start to finish just factoring in the development of the scope of work getting the committee together to do the initial review of the RFP the advertisement portion which I I can also mention our procurement code does require that when we do a competitive public procurement we advertise it for at least one week. The purchasing program's standard practice is to advertise for at least two weeks just to ensure visibility, but we can do a longer publication as in this case at the request of the using department. I believe this one, the timeframe from the solicitation of the RFP to the actual presentation of the contract for award was due to the time involved with the contract negotiation process, but I believe Natalie can speak to that more specifically.

I will add, Mayor Pro Tem, that property management for affordable housing projects is a really niche group. Off the top of my head, I only know of two that are operating statewide, and they do not have an emphasis on supportive housing. So even if we went back out, I know out of the three operating statewide, we would end up with a very similar outcome. And we do know that this was sent to those other property managers, but again, they declined or sent an email declining to bid, thanked us for considering them, but also was not interested in submitting a bid because it's outside of their typical skill set, I should say.

Gotcha. Okay, thank you, Natalie. So there's things like sole source, I get that, and then there's a smaller, I guess, population or cohort of niche players in the market. Okay, thank you. Any other questions? Yes, Councilor McCombe.

Thanks. I just really want to say thank you to all of you for getting us here. I think there's been many conversations before this and Just grateful this is finally happening. I'm not surprised. But I am disappointed that there continues to be this kind of hostility towards this kind of project from some members of the public and certainly from some members of the council. I think we get criticized. The thing is that we do nothing. That's criticism. And then when we do something, that's also criticism. And I want to encourage people to appear especially to make their decisions based off um the housing experts that have supported this project and perhaps you're like well they're biased or from here um from inside the city or or service providers okay then look outside of here um there are folks across the state who have um really highlighted the the innovative and unique model that is Amador Crossing and the kind of services that we will providing for our most vulnerable neighbors because they are still our neighbors. People who are unhoused are still residents of the city. They're still our neighbors and they still absolutely deserve to enjoy Housing especially the kind of housing that is supportive to them. So I just I Initially wasn't gonna say anything because I'm ready to vote for this, you know, we've been ready to vote for this We've had many conversations and I think people want to continue to Sort of weave this narrative around Amador crossing and I and I don't want to get give it any more fuel because I think it's I don't think it's in good faith and it's again it's discouraging and beyond that I'm going to push through that because I actually think this is a very empowering project I think this is a very bold project that we can continue to get supportive support from. our state partners. So I just, I wanna say thank you and I'm looking forward to hopefully this passing and meeting these folks very soon, Natalie, so that perhaps we can have conversations with them about what this means. And I'm frankly very proud to have this in District 4. So thank you.

Councilor Matisse.

Natalie, I'm not weaving any negativity on public housing or affordable housing. I just am very glad that it's sustainable financially, and that's my concern for the entire budget for all the departments. But since you're so creative and innovative, can I ask you, have you looked at the possibility of the tiny homes concept? And have you contacted Wounded Warriors? you know i see where they're taking hotels and maybe you're familiar with that natalie because you you get into everything and and then that's good that we're providing uh homes for those that uh that they need it and i'd like to see that expanded in in maybe other concepts i i just was concerned basically at the cost per unit That's all. And it looks like you've done a good job with that. And we have all these experts from HUD and everywhere else. But it's still our taxpayers' money. So I'm trying to get more people in more housing for less money. And that's what I'm weaving. I'm not weaving anything else. Thank you.

Mayor Pro Tem, Councilor Matisse, as with any housing project before we evaluate feasibility, the best practice is to know who we're serving and design a model around the problem we're trying to solve. So I've expressed the desire to figure out who Tiny Homes works best for. We do have a potential pilot project for a partner, with a partner, but we're trying to get a few of these bigger projects off of our plates before we can evaluate some of the smaller projects. The only thing I'll say that I wanted to address around Amador Crossing is it's not housing only, right? Amador Crossing is about the first step in someone's journey, so they come into Amador Crossing, can receive housing and stabilize and then they can work on all of the other things with our supportive services so i do want to address that amador crossing is not housing only it's housing plus all the other things they need to be successful and then happy to look at other types of models we definitely have evaluated some of the feasibility of different housing types. Low income housing tax credits is the most sort of bang for the city's buck. We can help leverage other funding sources and our investment in those is typically anywhere from 10 to 30,000 per unit. And we've successfully been able to leverage those projects and leverage the funding that council and the voters entrusted with us with the Go Bond. And I'll go back to bragging on my team, right? We got $11 million in city funding and we've been able to leverage almost $170 million in outside federal investment, state investment, and equity investors funding to build housing. So working on those different types.

Thank you Mayor Patem, I see Miss Martinez is here. And I like the cooperation with the Habitat for Humanity, the cooperation you've had with Rose Garcia. And those folks go into a home and they actually build some equity. So I think there's a lot of good in all these organizations that are creating homes for people. And thank you both. Thank you, Miss Martinez.

Thank you. Other comments, questions? Thank you, Donnie, and thank you, Natalie. Christine?

This is on the motion to approve resolution 27-033. Councilor McClure? Yes. Councilor Matisse? Yes. Councilor Harris? Yes. Councilor Bencomo? Yes. Councilor Caran? Yes. Mayor Perlton?

Yes.

The mayor is absent.

Thank you, everyone. Now we'll move to Section 8, Board Appointments. So I'll read these into the record now. Mayor Ricas as voting delegate to the NML Annual Conference and Councilor McClure as the alternate. Councilor Curran appoints Sabine Krishar to the Health and Human Services Committee. On the following, I would need a motion and a second and a vote for appointments. Diana Peru, new appointment to the largest tax advisory board. Move to appoint Diana Peru.

Second. This is on the motion to appoint Diana Peru to the Logger's Tax Advisory Board. Councilor McClure? Yes. Councilor Matisse? Yes. Councilor Harris? Yes. Councilor Bencomo? Yes. Councilor Caran? Yes. Mayor Pro Tem? Yes. And Mayor's absent.

Okay, we need a motion and second for new appointment to the Veterans Advisory Board, Jeffrey Eekman. Move to approve. Is there a second?

Second.

This is on the motion to appoint Jeffrey Ekman to the Veterans Advisory Board. Councilor McClure? Yes. Councilor Matisse?

Yes.

Councilor Harris? Yes. Councilor Vancomole? Yes. Councilor Caran? Yes. Mayor Pro Tem?

Yes.

And the mayor is absent.

Okay, now section nine, notice of proposed ordinances. 1.1, council bill number 27-006, ordinance number 3122, an ordinance approving a ten year lease agreement between the city of Las Cruces and Explorer Academy for the 0.79 acre municipality owned tract of land.

Move to approve. Bring it forward, sorry. Bring it forward.

Thank you. Item 9.2, Council Bill number 27007, ordinance number 3123, an ordinance amending section 19-131 of the Las Cruces Municipal Code 1997 as amended regarding construction, repair, and demolition work hours.

Allow me to redeem myself, please bring it forward.

Thank you. All right, let's move on to council member reports and comments. Councilman Clerk?

Nothing today, thank you.

Council Matisse? No. Council Paris? Thank you. I have three things. I'll try to keep it brief. The first is I want to say thank you to LCPD and Lieutenant Bradley for entertaining us on Thursday and answering a bunch of questions about flock and stuff in detail. I am, of course, being myself and I'm not super thrilled with creeping surveillance. But I was pleased to see kind of a lot of the thoughtfulness and consideration that LCPD has put into their policies. We do go above and beyond the state policies. And there were even some things that Lieutenant Bradley had considered that I had not. And so I appreciate that. At the same time, I still am interested in a city level policy on surveillance technology in general. LCPD certainly has their own, and that's great, but departmental policies are subject to change. And I think that there is room for that. And certainly we have other departments who have similar technologies. There's cameras all over this room, for instance. And it's worth a discussion on how we treat those things. Um, so moving on, um, to kind of announcements of events, uh, September 8th will be the district three community meeting. So come out and join us. I think it'll be at Conley. Um, and, uh, more information will be going out about that soon. And then on the 17th, um, There's going to be a presentation from Greg Colburn on the book Homelessness is a Housing Problem, which he's an author. And it's an excellent book. I've read it before. So if you're interested in that, make sure to sign up and come see us. That's all I got. Thanks.

Thank you. You can just give me one of these if you want. Thank you. I wanted to thank staff for placing the IRB policy in a work session. I'm very much looking forward to that conversation. I want to thank economic development staff for putting so much thoughtfulness behind it already. I do feel like in the last, I don't know, eight months or so, we've learned a lot about IRB and what to do, what not to do, and so I'm very excited to engage in that conversation and make this policy as strong as it can be. You know, to be very frank, I'm pretty tired of feeling like we get taken advantage of as a community outside corporations and while we want to encourage economic development, we want to encourage it in a way that uplifts our dignity and our values and our resources and I think this policy has absolutely that potential and so I'm excited to talk about it a little bit more at a work session. I did also want to just mention last week from the work session last week. We had these presentations from Evita and from Film Las Cruces. And part of my questions were around how much of our funding makes up their budgets. And for both of the organizations, it's a very big chunk of their budgets are made up of our lost crisis tax dollars. And I think even just the conversation we had, I think that it's very interesting to me that we tend to be a lot less, provide a lot less scrutiny for those kind of contracts than, for example, the organizations at Mesilla Valley Community of Hope whose budgets are significantly less reliant on city public dollars, significantly less. And so I, for one, would not be supportive of increasing the budgets of those organizations. In fact, I think we need to start having a more long-term plan for those organizations to start thinking about what smaller portion, one, diversifying their budgets, diversifying their funding sources, and start thinking about a long-term plan to start reducing the amounts of those budgets. Not because I don't think they're valuable, but if we really are serious about our own internal budget and balancing it, I think it's only fair to do that with these organizations that we are providing significant funding to. So I wanted to ask for that conversation. And then lastly, I also wanted to talk about FLOC. You know, Councillor Harris and I had a really great conversation with Lieutenant Bradley. Lieutenant Bradley gave us two hours of his time. It felt very bad, but it was also a very good conversation. At the end of the day, you know, I just, I will just not ever be someone who is supportive or excited about mass surveillance, especially from a company like Flock, and especially in additional context in relation to a very hostile federal administration. And so I think for those reasons, I will not be an ally, but I also think that we have a responsibility as a city to be good stewards of this data, and there are transparency portals that Lieutenant Bradley is working on. They are provided by FLOC, which sometimes can add an asterisk, but I do think it's a very important step forward to launch this transparency portal as soon as possible. Like I said, Lieutenant Bradley is working on it. I'm just gonna provide a list of things that I think should be part of the transparency portal, and I do think it should be as much as possible. The number of cameras, the number of scans performed, data retention time, the number of vehicles detected in let's say 30 days, the number of searches total, the hot list hits. Hot list are things like human trafficking hot list or stolen vehicle or what are the silver alerts and those kinds of hot lists. To be explicit about what agencies LCPD is sharing data with, what agencies did LCPD receive data from, what is detected, what is not detected, and then list the prohibited uses. and then provide a link to the police department's internal policy on the use of these kinds of cameras. So I think there's a lot we can do and I also agree with Councilor Harris that I think in the future we should start thinking about what it looks like to have an internally owned transparency portal that isn't provided by FLOC but that has additional mechanisms and audits but I do think in talking to Lieutenant Bradley, I have trust in him and the team that we can move forward into this place of being very transparent and honest and responsible with the kind of data that we are collecting from our residents and that we take the time to hear constituent concerns about what this could mean for their lives. So thank you.

Thank you, Councillor McMillan. Councillor Curran.

Thank you. I appreciate you both following up on the flock conversation as well, so thank you for that. I don't have anything except to welcome the, well, I do want to put out a stand for the Safe Streets for All Transportation Safety Action Plan. There's a virtual meeting this week, and then there are ongoing pop-ups throughout the month. And I hope folks who have come to this council before in a number of contexts and asked us for more pedestrian and cyclist safety will participate in those conversations. But my main thing is welcoming back all of the NMSU students or welcoming new NMSU students to Las Cruces. I really appreciate that we have amped up our collaboration with NMSU and I do think that we are partners and I appreciate that our city is such a welcoming place to all of those students arriving to town. And so if you see them around, just know Today I walked around DACC and weirdly Nathan Small was sitting by himself at a table completely alone, and I was like, buddy, what are you doing? And he was just like a new student. He said, oh, I'm here to meet with Dr. Torres. And I was like, she's not coming here, buddy. This isn't where her office is. And I felt like I was guiding a new student. It was really sweet. Anyway, he found Dr. Torres and where he was supposed to be. But new students are wandering around looking nervous and scared, so please, I hope that we can all welcome them and guide them where they're going. I don't think Nathan Small is taking classes at the ACC this semester, but he certainly had the look of a new student who were on campus this week.

Thank you. Council Caron. I spent some time up north this weekend with some friends of ours in public service. And one of the things that was encouraging were the compliments about Las Cruces. We have challenges, we don't agree, we won't always agree. Even if we agree on a solution, we may disagree on the path to get there. But it was positive to hear good feedback from folks who are very direct and very savvy as to what they're doing. So compliments to the city staff, to council, and everyone who supports us. So I want to say thank you. Plus, I know in the work session I did say that Trader Joe's was overrated and perhaps it is but I did out myself and send some pictures Saying you know, I did visit Trader Joe's this weekend as well It was just there. Oh So in case those get out just wanted it to say that And I appreciate the the session last week on on downtown and some of our partners and I think again as a city we have a lot of potential we have a lot of potential downtown and on that I think we can all agree so thank you city manager

Thank you Mayor Pro Tem, City Councilor, City Manager, just a few announcements. Next week, Wednesday the 25th through Friday the 28th, we will have the New Mexico Municipal League annual conference. Typically this happens all over the state. Last time we had it here was around 2016-ish. And so we welcome back the conference here. We appreciate all the staff helping. Visit Las Cruces Tourism Department and all the staff putting this together. So next week we will have elected officials and executive staff from every city in New Mexico. So it should be fun. So we will roll out the red carpet and show New Mexico what we're all about and we appreciate, again, kudos to staff for getting that ready and making sure that we're ready to receive all the delegates as they come in so just a heads up on that second to last strategic plan public input and listening sessions thank you to staff putting that together and to counselors for attending we appreciate all the staff making that possible we've collectively had six listening sessions three focus groups sessions and we were able to make it out to the farmers market as well additional session and to connect with the people so a lot of work happening with that it's every five years so we appreciate the work from staff making that happen last but not least parks and rec we do have music in the park is back this Sunday evening, August 23rd, with a great lineup featuring Windy City, Chicago Tribute, and Celebration Cooling the Gang Tribute. Should be fun, so come out, free admission, open to the public. We'll see you there. Thank you, Mayor Patel. That's it.

Thank you, City Manager. With that, I will entertain a motion to adjourn. Move to adjourn. Is there a second?

Second.

Third.

This is on the motion to adjourn the meeting. Councillor McClure? Yes. Councillor Matisse? Yes. Councillor Harris? Yes. Councillor Bancomo? Yes. Councillor Curran? Yes. Mayor Pro Tem?

Yes.

And the mayor is absent.

We are adjourned.