►
From YouTube: Public Works & Utilities Meeting 1/24/22
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
B
D
E
E
B
F
B
A
G
B
C
B
A
A
G
B
G
B
B
E
F
F
F
Director
wheeler,
um
yes,
I'm
super
excited
to
finally
be
permanently
in
new
mexico.
Regarding
the
flyovers
for
the
project,
we
are
in
the
process
of
capturing
after
footage
for
segment
three
and
then
the
video
for
segment,
three,
which
is
um
sort
of
the
southeast
part
of
town,
will
be
available
on
the
website
within
the
next
couple
of
weeks,
in
a
similar
fashion
to
the
segment
one
video
um
we're
still
working
in
segment
four
right
now
and
we
also
are
still
working
in
segment
two
um
due
to
a
couple
of
material
delays.
F
But
as
soon
as
those
areas
are
complete,
we'll
have
our
drone
pilot
go
back
out
to
capture
that
footage,
and
then
um
all
four
segments
will
be
available
on
the
website,
hopefully
uh
sometime
in
march,
but
um
segment
three
is
going
to
be
coming
in
the
next
couple
of
weeks
and
then,
depending
on
the
material
that
we're
waiting
on
for
segment.
Two
segment
four
may
be
available
first,
because
we
anticipate
finishing
that
within
the
next
couple
of
weeks
as
well.
B
E
Oh
thank
you,
mr
chair.
Oh
members
of
the
committee,
um
so
we
do
meet
as
a
project
team
twice
a
week.
Actually
I
meet
once
a
week
with
dakia
and
once
a
week
with
pnm
a
massive
group
there
pnm
is
uh
working
hard
to
get
approval
to
install
the
equipment
that
was
designated
in
the
city
of
santa
fe
community,
guided
lighting
design.
We
did
select
some
fixtures
that
are
not
already
on
their
approved
list
of
alter
of
um
approved
alternatives.
E
um
It's
making
good
progress
they've,
so
they
believe
they
understand
that
they
will
be
happy
to
use
the
type
of
equipment
now
they're
validating
which
vendors
they
will
use.
um
They've
they're
checking
their
network
security
issues
um
and
but
they're
working
their
way
through
that
process.
I
think
within
the
next.
F
E
We
should
have
internal
approval
from
pnm,
at
which
time
they'll
give
us
um
the
go
ahead
to
start
working
on
an
amendment
to
their
conversion
contract
to
incorporate
that
equipment
that
we
selected
into
their
contract,
and
then
they
could
start
work
on
that.
So
we're
still
probably
a
couple
few
months
away
from
them,
starting
but
working
through
the
process.
Well,.
B
E
That
that's
correct
uh
chairman,
um
the
you
know,
pnm
is
a
publicly
regulated
utility
everything
they
do
is
approved
by
the
prc
and
that
equipment
that
we
selected
was
not
on
the
prc,
approved
list
of
equipment.
So,
but
um
thank
you
so
much
the
governing
body
for
your
uh
really
vision
here
in
night,
dark
sky
protection
and
comfort
of
led
lighting,
because
what
we
are
working
through
here
will
serve
many
communities
in
new
mexico
to
convert
their
uh
energy,
inefficient
lights
to
dark
sky,
protective
energy,
efficient
leds.
A
Thank
you,
mr
tara.
I
just
have
a
question
where,
where
can
somebody
go
to
see
the
progress
of
this
um
I
mean?
Is
there
a
website?
Can
we
go
to
the
city?
Do
we
go
to
pnm,
I
mean
when
constitutions
are
asking,
am
I
going
to
be
involved
in
this
in
my
area?
Where
can
people
go
to
see
where,
where
these
are,
these
changes
are
taking
place
and
what
the
progress
is
on
the
on
the
total
project?
A
E
Thank
you
chairman
and
counselor
lee
garcia.
Yes,
it's
santa
fe
led.com
is
the
project
website.
It's
also
where
people
can
enter
requests
for
shielding
um
we're,
also
we're
accepting
any
of
their
feedback
at
all.
There's
a
feedback
form
there
um
and
we're,
including
all
of
the
feedback
and
requests
that
we
get
in
these
reports
that
you're
getting
at
every
meeting.
G
Thank
you,
mr
chair,
just
a
quick
question.
I
guess
for
clarification,
uh
because
I
recall,
during
the
whole
approval
process,
we
had
a
different
equipment
that
was
requested
from
the
community
and
the
big
hang
up
was
that
we
couldn't
approve
what
they
were
requesting
because
it
wasn't
on.
It
wasn't
approved
by
pnm,
and
that
was
the
big.
G
We
can't
move
forward
with
that,
because
pnm
hasn't
approved
it
and
going
through
the
approval
process
through
pnm
could
take
months,
if
not
years,
and
uh
to
hear
that
we
selected
equipment
that
a
pnm
didn't
approve
and
it's
not
taking
the
exaggerated
time
frame
that
was
told
to
the
community
back
last
year.
While
we're
going
through
this
process
is
a
bit
frustrating,
I
think
so
so
were.
G
How
is
it
that
the
governing
body
was
told
the
equipment
was
approved
by
pnm,
but
now
we're
finding
out
it
wasn't
and
that's
what's
delaying
pnm's
installation?
Can
you
help
clarify
that
for
me
and
for
the
public?
Just
because
I
have
had
some
concern
written
to
me
from
the
constituents
saying
hey,
look
told
us
this,
but
that's
not
what's
happening
in
practice.
E
Certainly,
yes,
thank
you
so
much
for
the
question.
um
Councilor,
michael
garcia,
chairman
rivera.
um
Actually,
what
we
had
said
was
that
2200
kelvin
lights
were
not
and
would
not
be
approved
through
the
process
that
would
be
impossible
to
achieve.
Pnm
wouldn't
even
have
begun
the
process
of
getting
them
approved.
They
felt
that
they
did
not
meet
uh
safety,
highway
safety
standards
for
lighting
street
light
streets,
and
so
2200
kelvin
was
out
of
the
question,
but.
G
Director
wheeler,
because
that's
not
what
pnm
told
us
pnm
told
us,
it
was
uh
representative
ronda,
said
they're
not
on
our
approved
list
and
we
have
to
go
through
the
prop.
They
didn't
speak
against,
2200
kelvin
lighting.
They
didn't
happen
there
was
there
wasn't
down
there
approved,
listen,
it
they'd
have
to
go
through
the
extenuating
process
of
getting
it
approved.
B
E
Yes,
thank
you
so
much
chairman,
I'm
sorry.
If
there
was
confusion-
and
I
can
see
how
there
is
you
know-
there
was
a
lot
of
details
that
we
talked
about
because
there's
the
fact
that
nmdot
will
not
accept
the
3000
kelvin
lights
on
the
main
road,
so
we've
deferred
those
um
pnm
could
not
accept
2200
kelvin
lights.
So
we
couldn't
work
with
that,
but
they
were
willing
to
work
with
2700
kelvin,
another
group
inside
pnm.
That
has
to
be
that
vets.
E
These
designs
is
their
risk
management
group
and
their
risk
management
group
decided
that
really
2700
kelvin
was
as
low
as
they
could
go.
They
would
not
approve
anything
lower,
and
so
there
was.
There
is
sort
of
this
like
box
that
had
a
lot
of
angles
on
it
to
try
to
find
the
sweet
spot
in
the
middle
and
really
the
the
design
that
the
governing
body
selected
really.
Is
this
really
sweet
spot
where
we
could
get
low,
kelvin,
low,
lumens
uh
comfort,
lenses,
extra
shielding
um
and
still
meet
um
pnm's
criteria
for
a
preferred,
acceptable,
alternative.
G
G
G
The
information
from
pnm
was
that
they
didn't
have
the
equipment
they
didn't
speak
or
against
the
2200,
and
I
think
that's
that's
the.
What
I
I
think
the
frustration
that's
been
expressed
to
me
from
the
community
is
that
they
were
told
one
thing
they're,
just
if
we're
there's
justification,
but
that
is
not
what
we
ultimately
followed
through
here.
G
We
again,
I
think
we're
we're
being
told
one
thing
and
actions
are
being
different
and
I
think
the
community
is
is
is
frustrated
with
this
process
uh
and-
and
I
think
that's
this
is
where
ultimately,
I
think
we
can
do
better
in
this.
The
product
is
is
great
for
the
community.
The
benefits
are
going
to
be
great,
but
but
when
they're
told
one
thing
and
our
actions
are
different,
I
can
definitely
understand
where
their
frustrations
come
into
play
um
and-
and
I
know
that
there's
facts
grounded
in
their
frustration
with
that.