►
From YouTube: Public Works and Utilities for June 7, 2021
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
B
B
B
D
F
B
B
Okay,
thank
you.
So
that
brings
us
to
the
items
that
were
pulled
off
of
the
consent
agenda.
The
first
is
item
a
which
is
a
request
for
the
approval
of
amendment
number
13
to
service
contract,
18-0-5-5-2,
increasing
compensation
for
the
upcoming
fiscal
year
by
1
million
570
498.68
to
a
new
total
of
4
million
four
hundred
sixty
thousand
four
hundred
sixty
six
dollars
and
seventy
four
cents,
including
nmgrt
for
security
services
throughout
city
facilities,
universal
protection
services,
lp,
dba,
allied
universal
security,
councilwoman
v
hill
coupler.
D
G
G
Over
mr
chair
counselor
v
ho
koppler,
yes,
so
uh
that
those
particular
amendments
uh
uh
have
become
uh
they
they're
uh
they're
repeating
every
fiscal
year.
So
um
I
I
oh
so,
they're
still
in
the
contract,
they're
still
in
the
contract,
yeah
those
contract
amendments
essentially
uh
for
the
most
part,
I
think,
there's
been
a
few
that
have
reduced
services,
but
many
of
the
contracts
are
or
many
of
the
amendments
actually
expand
the
services
of
the
contract
and
until
we
remove
them
via
another
amendment,
they
remain
uh
an
ongoing
repeating
service.
G
D
G
G
uh
Mr
chair
counselor
v
hill
koppler
um
again
that
was
uh
before
I
assumed
responsibility
for
the
contract.
I
am
not
entirely
sure
why
those
two
uh
locations
were
removed.
I
do
know
that
uh
I
currently
have,
since
I've
uh
assumed
responsibility
have
uh
added
a
patrol
at
the
plaza
and
that
plaza
also
provides
checks
on
the
convention
center
parking
garage
at
night,
so
we've
kind
of
doubled
up
services
there,
but
as
to
why
city
hall
and
the
convention
center
were
removed.
I
can't
speak
to
that.
D
D
D
H
G
Gym
um
mr
chair
uh
counselor,
v
hill
copler,
um
I'm
gonna
make
that
a
quick
distinction,
the
uh
in
amendment,
one
that
was
uh
security
specific
to
the
rail
yard
visitor
center,
which
is
uh
occupied
and
managed
by
tourism,
and
so
uh
seeing
that
uh
these
security
services
were
removed
from
both
the
uh
visitor
center,
their
visitor
center
at
the
rail
yard
and
the
convention
center.
um
I
I
again,
I
can't
speak
to
why
that
happened,
but
it
looks
like
the
same
entity
removed.
G
You
know
the
same
service
from
multiple
locations
and
then
amendment
number
nine
that
was
mine.
That
was
one
of
my
amendments.
After
assuming
control
of
the
contract,
um
we
had
had
uh
several
issues
in
the
rail
yard
park
and
which
you
know
south
of
paseo
and
several
in
the
business
district
north
of
paseo,
and
I
had
funding
available.
G
So
I
had
security
services
added
to
the
whole
rail
yard
to
try
and
mitigate
those
issues
that
we
really
feel
like
are
pretty
directly
related
to
kind
of
uh
um
you
know,
kind
of
issues,
kind
of
born
out
of
covid
and
we're
hoping
we'll
kind
of
wind
down.
As
things
begin
to
open
back
up-
and
I
may
not
have
answered
all
of
your
questions,
if
you'd
like
me
to
elaborate-
please
let
me
know.
G
G
Yeah
or
it's
actually
page
four,
it's
right
after
the
memo
is
the
summary
of
services
for
the
21
22
season
and
it
lists
all
of
the
locations
we're
providing
service
to
um
and
the
hours
and
days,
and
all
of
that
it
as
a
kind
of
a
to
help.
You
kind
of
understand
where
we
are
keeping
services,
basically
at
the
moment,
we're
not
removing
services
from
any
location.
D
G
G
D
G
D
D
G
um
Mr
chair
councilor
v
hill
koppler,
another
change,
so
uh
amendment
number
12
um
I
created
specifically
to
give
me
more
flexibility
to
kind
of
move
guards
around
town
as
necessary
without
having
to
process
a
contract
amendment
as
long
as
all
the
parties
were
amenable
to
it
um
amendment.
uh
Let
me
see
amendment
number
11
added
24,
24-hour
security.
Seven
days
a
week
on
the
plaza-
and
uh
you
know
a
few
months
into
that
process.
It
was
clear
that
you
know
we
were
spending
too
much
time
and
money
on
that
one
location.
G
So
I
divided
it
into
three
separate
eight-hour
blocks.
Eight
of
those
hours
remained
on
the
plaza.
Eight
of
those
hours
went
to
supplement
security
at
the
rail
yard
and
the
other
eight
hours
went
to
patrolling
um
pete's
place
in
the
salvation
army.
Since
then,
the
salvation
army
has
closed
down
their
operations
so
that
other
third
eight-hour
block
just
services
pete's
place
at
the
moment.
D
Okay,
um
so
I
really
have
a
problem
with
concentrating
all
of
this
money
and
security,
mostly
on
downtown
areas.
When
we
have
parks-
and
I
know
you
may
not
be
privy
to
this-
but
we
get
so
many
constituents
calling
us
about
issues
in
the
parks,
needles,
drugs,
death
and
they're
all
on
the
midtown
to
south
side-
and
I
don't
see
any
of
that-
I
don't
see
enough
attention
in
this
contract
paid.
To
that
I
mean
I
I
I
don't
know.
I
I
mean
certainly
and
then
pete's
place
yes
and
harrison.
Road
is
a
big
problem.
D
So
I'm
not
I'm
not
sure,
I'm
liking
this,
and
I
I
don't
it's
it's
just
that
you
know
we
have
so
many
needs
on
the
south
side,
midtown
to
the
south
side
that
I
don't
see
addressed
here
and
it's
not
because
I'm
us
versus
them.
It's
because
I'm
familiar
with
all
of
the
issues
that
that
are
happening
in
our
city
in
these
parks.
H
H
G
D
Well,
it's
worth
a
lot!
So
when
I
look
at
this
uh
bottom
line,
action
requested
it's
1.5
million,
almost
1.6
million
dollars.
Most
of
this
protection
is
downtown,
and
now
I
hear
we
only
have
ninety
thousand
dollars
dedicated
to
all
of
the
south
side.
Well,
not
just
the
south
side,
but
uh
I
think
that's
where
well.
I
can't
say
that
that
that
travis
security,
roams
and
and
services
all
well.
You
said
how
many
parks
did
you
say:
melissa,
12,.
H
H
D
G
D
G
G
D
G
Locations,
uh
mr
chair
counselor,
v,
hill
koppler.
uh
It
sounds
like
it's
being
cropped,
but
all
the
way
on
the
left-hand
side
of
the
document.
It
lists
all
the
various
you
know:
uh
sites
or
sections
of
the
contract.
It
begins
with
the
santa
fe
account
manager
and
then
goes
on
to
geneviva
chavez
center
and
uh
onwards
from
there.
D
I
really
would
like
to
see
more
money
directed
towards
uh
parks
security.
We
really
really
need
it.
This
is
a
great
deal
of
money
and
I
I
I
can't
support
this.
The
way
it's
drawn
up
right
now,
I'm
sorry,
that's
I
you
know
our
I
mean
we've
got
dugouts
that
are
messed
up.
We
got
melissa
knows
all
this.
Everybody
knows
all
this.
D
D
Now
I
know
you
said
some
of
it
is
because
you
know
we
have
to
use
for
the
airport,
which
is
also
good,
but
I
don't
know.
I
really
would
like
to
see
some
of
this
reconfigured
and,
and
I'm
glad
we
at
least
have
ninety
thousand,
but
that
money
doesn't
go
very
far
and
I
know
melissa.
You
probably
can't
express
an
opinion
so
I'll
do
it
for
you,
but
you
know
all
the
complaints
we
get.
You
know
the
issues,
it's
bad,
and
so
um
that's
that's
all
mr
chair.
F
F
G
Resources,
um
mr
chair
counselor,
garcia,
I'm
I'm
brainstorming
um
to
the
best
of
my
knowledge,
uh
not
not
that
I'm
aware
of
that's
a
there's,
a
nuance
to
that's
a
nuance
to
how
contracts
are
drafted
and
instituted
that
I
uh
I
can't
speak
to.
I
my
unders,
what
I
would
like
to
say
and
I'm
kind
of
thinking
on
the
fly.
What
I
would
like
to
say
is
that,
once
you
approve
this
contract,
the
entire
contract
is
uh
is
a
is
a
legally
binding
agreement.
G
I
could
I
could
you
know
kind
of
on
my
honor
see
services
and
not,
uh
you
know,
not
execute
my
portion
of
the
contract
and
we
could
ask
all
of
the
other
site
managers
to
do
the
same
um
and
then
in
that
time
kind
of
work
on
a
revised
contract.
But
I
don't
think
there's
any
way
for
us
to
to
approve
just
a
portion
of
a
contract.
F
G
A
G
Just
to
kind
of
further
um
kind
of
build
on
the
concept
you
asked
about
a
moment
ago.
I
I
would
like
to
point
out
that
each
of
these
sites
on
the
contract
provides
funding
for
security
out
of
their
own
budget,
so
midtown
libraries
airport,
one
you
know
worth
considering,
would
be
rather
than
having
each
of
those
entities
you
know
put.
F
You
know
I
did
have
the
same
question
of.
Why
don't
we
have
full-time
security
at
city
hall?
I
know
there
used
to
be
once
upon
a
time
and
now
it's
gone
away
and
I'm
assuming
it
will
be
opening
again
soon
and
why
wouldn't
we
have
security
there,
especially
in
the
instance,
there
are
going
to
be
major
protocols
in
place
and
I
don't
want
to
be
putting
staff
in
the
position
to
be
playing
security
guard.
F
um
You
know
to
tell
folks
uh
you
have
to
abide
by
the
the
covet
safe
protocols
that
will
be
in
place
and
to
put
staff
in
those
positions.
I
think
it's
going
to
be
unfortunate
because
they're,
I
think
we
can
all
foresee
instances
where
folks
will
say.
Well,
sorry,
I
don't
want
to
wear
my
mask,
I'm
vaccinated
and
I
I
would
just
rather
have
that
intermediary-
be
the
security
guard
than
a
staff
person
and
put
them
in
that
position.
F
Is
it
possible
for
us
to
hold
off
the
governing
body
approval
until
the
meeting
at
the
end
of
the
month,
which
will
still
be
approved
before
the
uh
june
1st
deadline?
It'll
allow
for
maybe
some
some
more
dialogue
to
happen,
um
and
who
knows,
I
don't
know
if
anything
will
change,
but
I
think
it'll
allow
for
us
to
internally,
maybe
see
and
and
as
well
work
with
the
the
contractor
the
person
we're
getting
into
this
agreement
with
what
what
agreements
could
be
made.
I
think
I
don't
know
I'm
just
trying
to
like.
G
The
clerk
then
begins
the
process
of
gathering
the
remaining
signatures,
which
I
believe
is
the
finance
director
and
then
the
the
mayor.
Once
that's
done,
the
city
clerk
signs
and
records
the
contract
once
the
contract
is
recorded,
a
recorded
version
is
turned
over
to
me
and
I
have
to
generate
a
munis
contract
once
that's
approved.
I
then
use
that
to
generate
a
purchase
order
and
that
process
can
take
anywhere
from
on
on
a
really
in
a
really
good
week,
maybe
two
or
three
days
to
kind
of
standard
business.
G
F
Understandable,
mr
net,
I
think
it
one
thing
we're
learning
from
this
process
is
that
um
maybe
it's
a
good
time
to
start
planning
since
now
in
regards
to
where
our
resources
can
best
be
utilized
in
regards
to
providing
security
services,
um
and
I
think
that's
a
governing
body
discussion
and-
and
I
think
everybody
will
have
uh
valid
concerns
and
where
appropriate
resources
should
be
deployed
um
with
that.
No
other
chairs,
I
mean
sorry,
no
other
questions,
mr
chair,
okay,
uh
councilwoman,
v,
hill,
coupler.
D
Thank
you,
mr
chair.
I
I
just
want
to
comment
on
um
some
of
the
commentary
you
had
mr
burnett
a
little
bit
earlier
on
and
and
I
I
take
the
position
that
you
know
uh
the
city,
attorney's
signature
and
so
on,
finance
signature.
They
don't
run
the
show.
The
council
runs
the
show.
So
you
know
I'm
not
in
favor
of
an
argument
that,
oh
you
know
all
these
signatures
have
already
been
gotten.
So
there's
nothing.
We
can
do
it's.
Actually.
D
You
know
that
I
don't
mean
to
go
into
a
civics
lesson,
but
that
the
governing
body
is
the
last
is
the
is
the
rule
maker,
and
so
I
think,
with
all
this
money
and
knowing
that
parks
has
very
little
money
for
security,
and
I
don't
hear
too
much
about
some
of
these
other
places
where
there's
issues,
maybe
it's
because
they
have
security.
But
I
do
hear
about
parks
and
I
hear
a
great
deal
about
parks
and
I,
I
think,
there's
a
way
to
carve
out.
I
think,
there's
enough
time
to
carve
out
the
airport.
D
You
can
take
that
little
section
of
the
chart
have
it
be
a
standalone.
You
can
create
a
mini
mini
agreement
to
get
the
airport
money
through
um
and
um
and
then
we
reconsider
some
of
the
other
funds,
for
you
know
carving
out
not
changing
them.
All
the
rest
of
the
language
would
be
pretty
much
the
same.
You
just
have
to
change
the
dollar
amounts
and
stick
the
one
that
was
above
that
you
said,
was
coveted
money.
D
B
Councilwoman
vl
koppler.
Maybe
what
we
should
do,
because
I
agree
with
both
you
and
counselor
garcia.
Is
we
make
that
our
motion
and
our
recommendation,
because,
unfortunately,
our
committees
don't
have
the
power
to
stop
this
from
going
forward
as
long
as
it's
not
put
on
a
consent
agenda
next
week,
so
we're
probably
better
off
making
a
recommendation
with
this
as
part
of
the
recommendation-
and
I
would
just
add
that
maybe
this
money
is
appropriate
for
these
things
and
if
that's
the
case,
then
we
need
to
find
more
money
somewhere
else
for
our
parks.
B
uh
But
we'd
like
to
have
that
discussion
also
and
and
kind
of
see
the
the
the
big
picture,
because
I
agree
with
councilwoman
b
ho
copler
and
councillor.
We.
We
need
to
spend
more
in
security
on
our
parks
um
and
but,
like
I
said,
councilwoman
vl
koppler.
They
could
put
it
on
the
they
could
hear
it
wednesday,
with
or
without
regardless
of
what
we
do
this
evening.
And
so
maybe
we
need
to
we.
D
D
G
G
My
recommendation
to
to
the
counselors
tonight
would
be
to
work
to
identify
a
specific
source
of
funding
that
could
be
allocated
directly
to
parks.
I
think
the
administrative
hurdles
of
trying
to
shuffle
money
around
you
know
shave,
money
off
of
the
budgets
of
several
divisions
and
departments
inside
of
the
city.
Is
a
is
a
large,
is
a
I'm,
not
sure
how
that
works.
To
be
honest
and
it's
in
no
way
trying
to
be
argumentative,
I'm
trying
to
provide
you
know
real
the
best
advice
I
can
in
a
situation
like
this,
um
for
what.
D
Okay,
thank
you.
uh
Well,
I
understand
that,
uh
but
it
goes
to
my
point
earlier.
We
you
know
as
a
council,
we
need
to
set
policy
uh
and
you
know
you're
talking
the
bureaucracy,
which
is
fine.
I
mean
we're
very
bureaucratic
and
we
have
methods
in
place
to
accomplish
everything
you
just
said,
and
what
that
is
is
setting
priorities,
and
you
know
I
don't
buy
the
idea,
which
I
understand
completely
where
you're
coming
from.
D
But
um
you
know
somebody
wasn't
thinking
about
the
parks
and
there
should
have
been
a
voice
and
if,
if
miss
wheeler
was
here,
I
don't
know
where
she
is.
But
if
she
was
here,
you
know
she
would
understand
and
maybe
learn
from
this.
I
know
miss
mcdonald
is
here,
but
but
there
are
issues
in
the
parks
with
security
that
we
could.
I
could
sit
here
and
talk
to
you
all
night
about
what
goes
on
there
and
and
we
need
security
in
our
parks.
D
We
need
a
presence,
and
sometimes
when
you
just
have
a
presence,
it
cuts
down
on
some
of
the
activity
and
it
works
that
way.
With
the
homeless,
too,
we've
been
working
with
the
police
department.
When
there's
a
presence,
you
know
it
moves
somewhere
else,
maybe,
but
it
does
go
away
from
the
offending
uh
from
the
the
the
place.
That
is
offended.
D
So
I
don't
know
I
I
don't
see
this
as
insurmountable,
because
parks
are
important
to
all
those
places.
Some
of
the
places
you
mentioned
here
are
parks.
You
know,
but
not
specifically,
you
know
they.
They
might
have
parks
nearby
that
when
those
people
you
know
have
time
they
come
over
to
the
rail
yard,
for
example.
So
it
just
is
all
one
big
swoop,
but
but
I
stand
by
my
motion
and
uh
that's
what
I'd
like
to
do.
B
B
B
Yes,
okay,
so
that
item
passes
with
the
specific
recommendations
from
the
committee.
That
brings
us
to
item
c,
which
is
a
request
for
approval
of
a
state
capital
outlay
grant
agreement
for
a
supportive
housing
facility
project
20-e-2745
in
the
amount
of
844
470
to
plan
design,
construct
and
renovate
a
facility
for
homeless
and
below
market
renters,
including
housing
and
services
in
santa
fe,
councillor,
garcia.
F
Thank
you,
mr
chair,
and
I
guess
I
don't
know
if
mr
chapman
or
I
don't
know
if
miss
lad
is
on
if
she's
part
of
the
project,
but
just
to
get
a
brief
overview
because
to
to
have
you
know,
design
construct,
build
what
ultimately
is
going
to
happen
with
a
hundred
thousand
dollars,
because
that
that's
a
lot
of
money
and
are
we
building
a
brand
new
structure
at
santa
fe
suites?
Are
we
renovating?
I
mean
what
what
are
we
doing
what's
being
proposed
right
now,.
I
J
J
J
J
F
J
Mr
chair
counselor
garcia,
we
are
awarded
them
and
I
will
defer
to
david
because
I
don't
usually
work
with
capital
alley
funds,
so
I'm
not
entirely
clear
on
the
exact
process,
but
they
were
awarded
through
the
legislature
um
to
a
project,
a
supportive
housing
project
to
cover
any
of
the
any
of
those
costs.
So
it
could
have.
um
I
believe
that
the
description
says,
construct,
design
uh
or
renovate
um
the
request
was
put
in
before
the
pandemic,
um
but
we
had
already
started
working
with
the
community
partners
on
the
specific
santa
fe
suites
site.
I
I
Individual
taxes,
it's
taxed,
I'm
giving
you
a
little
bit
more
of
a
preview
than
you
probably
want,
but
it's
essentially
when
the
when
the
state
tax
takes
anything
from
the
earth,
petroleum,
natural
gas.
That
kind
of
thing
uh
that's
what
the
funding
is
from
and
essentially
it
allows
the
city
to
accept
the
grant.
I
F
Okay,
thank
you,
mr
chapman,
and
you
you
did
briefly
touched
on,
or
I
think
miss
lan
touched
on
a
question
I
did
have
in
regards
to.
I
did
see
this
was
requested
prior
to
the
pandemic
and
prior
to
our
agreement
to
purchase
or
provide
resources
to
purchase
santa
face
weeks
and
how
that
played
into
it.
So
for
so
thanks
for
that
clarification-
and
I
guess
my
question
then,
is
uh
with
the
with
the
resources
that
we've
been
awarded.
F
I
uh
My
interpretation
of
excuse
me,
uh
chairman
counselors,
my
interpretation
of
the
verbiage
from
the
appropriation
it
says
uh
for
a
facility
for
homeless,
so
uh
it
doesn't
mean
for
numerous
facilities,
um
but
uh
I
could
vet
that
question
now
to
the
department
of
finance
and
administration
to
see.
If
that's,
my
interpretation
is
correct,
but
from
my
experience
doing
this,
my
answer
would
be
no.
J
Chair
chair,
beta,
counselor,
garcia,
I
can
answer
that
the
original
intention
was
to
support
the
purchase
and
the
operation
of
santa
fe
suites.
So
this
project
was
in
the
works
for
probably
close
to
12
months
before
the
request
the
capital
outlay
request
was
put
in
at
the
legislature,
so
the
coalition
had
homelessness
and
the
nonprofit
partner
at
the
time,
which
is
no
longer
the
nonprofit
partner,
but
the
housing
trust
at
the
time
lobbied
for
that
funding.
J
So
it
was
always
um
considered
to
be
for
the
santa
fe
suites,
and
I
think
the
one
roadblock
for
using
it
um
at
interfaith
would
be
that
it
is
for
a
permanent,
supportive
housing
project.
An
interfaith
is
a
shelter
so
there
that
is
a
very
specific
that
is
very
specific
language
in
there.
So
it
does
greatly
narrow
where
it
could
be
used,
even
if
we
were
able
to
parse
it
out
through
other
projects.
J
F
The
the
the
friends
just
expressing
themselves,
um
no
just
just
wondering
community
solutions-
is
the
co-partner
correct
with
this
project.
So,
but
I
guess
my
question
is:
um
what
are
their
thoughts?
I
mean
obviously
they're
they're
supportive
above
you
know
them
receiving
nearly
a
a
million
dollars
to
improve
the
site,
um
but
but
are
they?
F
J
F
Okay,
thank
you
so
much.
I
appreciate
that
and
I
know
that
they're
deeply
invested.
I
just
was
wondering
where
they
are
in
regards
to
any
other.
You
know
improvements
to
the
site
so
and
part
of
the
original
agreement
when
we
purchased
senate
or
gave
the
resources
to
purchase
santa
fe
suites
there
was
that
clause
where,
if
there
was
any
default-
or
I
can't
remember
the
exact
verbiage
where
they
would
have
to
repay
the
resources,
is
that
still
applicable
for
for
these
resources
as
well.
J
F
D
J
Lad,
ah
sorry,
my
mute
button
got
stuck
um
chair,
beta
counselor
vehicle
coupler.
The
10-year
period
of
performance
is
connected
specifically
to
the
two
million
dollars
of
cares
act
funding.
So
it
works
like
a
pr
like
a
project
participation
agreement
on
the
economic
development
side,
which
is
as
long
as
during
that
period
of
compliance.
J
The
grantee
of
those
funds
complies
with
what
they
said.
They're
going
to
do,
then
the
debt
is
forgiven,
but
what's
also
included
in
that
project
performance
agreement
is
a
land
use
restriction.
So
what
that
land
use
restriction
says
is
that
the
property
has
to
be
used
for
affordable
housing,
and
I
don't
off
the
top
of
my
head.
Remember
the
term,
but
I
believe
we
tied
it
to
other
subsidy
sources,
which
was
40
years.
D
J
That
is
correct.
So
after
10
years,
if
they
have
been
compliant,
they
do
not
pay
back
any
debt,
so
we
net.
We
do
not
have
any
of
that.
We
don't
have
that
recourse
of
um
foreclosing
on
the
cares
act
funds
after
10
years,
but
there
is
a
land
use
restriction
that
does
not
go
away,
so
they
they
might
decide
to
sell
it
to
another
owner,
um
but
it
still
has
to
be
used
for
affordable
housing
that
land
use
restriction
goes
with
the
title
stays
on
the
title.
D
Okay,
so
what
I'm
asking
is,
is
you
know
if
the
10
years
expires
and
and
we're
out
of
it?
We
we
have
spent
844
400
on
it,
and
then
it's
not
really
ours
anymore,
although
I
know
what
you're
saying
we're
guaranteeing
that
it's
used
for
affordable
housing.
I
was
just
mentioning
that
because,
maybe
it
you
know
this
844
000
renovation
is
going
to
make
the
building
more.
D
J
D
J
And
because
of
the
land
use
restriction,
the
value
the
market
value
of
this
property
is
always
going
to
be
restricted,
so
this
840
thousand
dollars
is
going
to
make
it
work
and
function
better
for
the
current
use,
but
by
the
time
10
years
has
gone
by
some
of
those
systems
that
have
been
replaced.
Some
of
those
repairs
that
have
been
made
are
going
to
have
to
be
made
again
because
that's
just
the
reality
of
property
management.
So
it's
not.
You
know
it's
not
a
it's
not
equity
into
the
project
like
the
cares
act.
Funding
was.
D
Okay
and
then
the
last
question
I
have
is
um
you
did
say
this
was
before
santa
fe.
Suites
was,
you
know
an
agreement,
but
you
had
that
in
mind
uh
when
you
request
capital
out
when
an
organization
requests
capital
outlay
money
to
from
the
legislature,
they
have
to
have.
um
You
know
some
kind
of
justification,
a
write-up
if
you
will
how
that
money
will
be
spent
more
so
than
just
this
overall,
you
know
general
language,
we
see
here.
So
you
know
it's
a
very
specific
number
844.470.
D
Surely
there's
more
documentation
somewhere
about
this?
Now
I
do
realize
that
sometimes
during
the
legislature,
they
just
say:
oh
here's,
a
pot
of
money-
let's
just
put
it
over
there,
but
but
usually
there's
a
little
more
scrutiny
than
that
about
what
is
this
money
going
to
be
used
for
so
that
they
can
come
back
and
check
that
we
did
use
it?
So
you
are.
J
Mr
chair
counselor
v
hill
copler.
I
do
not
know
how
that
number
is
determined
uh
with
these
funds
because
again
I'm
this
is
not.
I
don't
usually
work
with
capital
alley
funds
um
there
would
have
been
and
I'm
trying
to
remember.
I
don't
even
know
um
yes,
I
don't.
I
don't
remember.
The
estimate
was
based
on
that
property
having
that
property
in
mind
um
and
using
some
sort
of,
but
I
don't
I
don't
know
if
the
total
cost
was.
J
D
Okay,
so
what
I
suggest
is
someone
should
go
to
that
legislation
before
we
start
spending
this
money
and
putting
it
in
these
places
to
spend
that
that
we
know
that
we
are
following
the
intent
of
how
this
money
was
granted,
because
sooner
or
later,
and
I've
seen
this
somebody
will
follow
up
on
it
and
then
we
won't.
We
may
have
done
the
wrong
thing
and
they
will
not
be
happy.
So
when
you
get
this
kind
of
money,
it's
always
good
to
know
the
fine
print
and
that's
what
I'm
suggesting
we
go.
D
I
have
seen
some
organizations
uh
really
be
taken
to
task
because
they
thought
they
were
spending
the
money,
the
way
that
they
that
they
thought
it
should
be
spent
and
the
legislation
legislation
said
different,
and
so
some
of
those
organizations
had
to
cough
up
the
money
and
give
it
back.
I've
seen
that.
So,
if
I
could.
I
I
I
J
I
Yes,
this
is
the
exact
legend.
This
is
what
they
approve.
This
is
what
the
mayor
the
governor
signed-
and
this
is
the
the
appropriation
there's
this
is.
The
money
must
be
spent
exactly
to
the
verbiage
of
the
contract
and
that's
what's
on
the
contract
and
there's
a
copy
of
that
contract
in
in
your
file.
I
It's
not
mentioned
specifically
now,
but
the
once
it
goes
to
this
vetting
process.
This
is
going
to
have
to
go.
You
know
on
the
procurement
side
of
it,
which
will
require
us
to
put
rfp
out
um
an
rfp
out.
You
know
for
this,
except
I
guess,
to
make
a
long
choice.
um
Long
story
short
uh
century
suites
by
you
approving
this
doesn't
guarantee
that
santa
fe
squeaks
gets
this
money.
I
It's
going
to
go
out
to
a
betting
process
and
if
there's
another
organization
in
santa
fe
or
another
organization
that
can
provide
the
services
that
we
list
on
the
rfp,
then
it
wouldn't.
Then
you
know
we're
going
to
have
a
little
bit
of
backtracking,
but
you
know
that's
the
way
the
legislature
works.
D
J
J
It
doesn't
guarantee
that
it
goes
there
because
of
what
david
is
saying,
which
is
that
it
has
to
go
out
in
a
competitive
process,
but
I
can
assure
you
right
now:
we
do
not
have
any
other
permanent,
supportive
housing
projects
serving
homeless
people
and
below
market
renters
in
santa
fe.
That
is
eligible
to
use
these
funds.
D
And
and
you
you
were
probably
right,
but
I
thought
the
rfp
process
was
a
competitive
process
and
I
don't
feel
comfortable
saying
even
right
now.
Oh
this
is
going
to
santa
fe
suites.
I
I
mean
it
has
to
be
decided
on
by
whatever
people
within
our
organization
make
these
decisions,
and
so
I'm
not
saying
it
shouldn't
go
there,
but
it
I'll
go
back
to
pre-selection.
I
think
it's
very
uh
disingenuous
to
say
where
this
money's
going
when
it
has
to
go
to
rfp.
D
J
J
Well,
you
could
decide
that
you
could
decide
that
on
the
basis
that
you're
not
comfortable,
that
an
eligible
project
exists
to
use
the
funds
at
this
point
in
time
and
because
of
the
time
constraint
on
the
funds,
it's
um
probably
not
viable
to
just
hold
on
to
them
until
and
there
may
be
another
project
coming
forward,
which
would
be
very
exciting,
but
you
know,
I
think
there
is
an
opportunity
here.
um
I
don't.
J
D
F
uh
Thank
you,
mr
chair.
um
I
would
highly
recommend
that
we
revise
the
memo
for
this,
because
uh
in
the
memo
it's
clearly
states,
this
funding
will
be
used
to
renovate
santa
fe
suites
by
making
security
improvements
and
renovating
in
communal
areas
to
facilitate
on-site
services,
and
given
that
this
is
going
to
be
an
rfp
process
that
should
that
should
not
be
part
of
this
memo,
because
it
does
predetermine
who
this
is
going
to
to
say.
There's
not
another
entity
that
can
utilize
these
resources.
I'd
beg
to
differ.
F
This
is
a
great
deal
of
money.
I
I
we
can,
and
we
are
going
to
make
some
great
impact
with
this,
but
we
want
to
make
sure
that
we're
going
through
a
fair
process
as
well,
because
whether
it
is
santa
fe,
suites
or
any
other
entity
that
is
awarded
these
resources,
the
impact
it's
going
to
have
on
this
community
is
great
and
we
want
to
ensure
that
we
are
as
we're
moving
forward
with
these.
The
allocation
of
these
state
resources
that
we're
doing
it
in
a
fair
and
transparent
manner.
F
uh
So
with
that,
I
I'd
recommend
that
the
memo
be
revised
to
strike
that
last
sentence,
given
that
it
is
uh
going
to
be
allocated
as
an
rfp.
uh
No
other
questions
with
that
I'll
I'll
go
ahead
and
make
a
motion
to
approve
pending
the
uh
elimination
of
that
sentence
from
the
memo.
Okay,
we
have
a
motion.
Is
there
a.
B
D
F
B
Yes,
okay,
so
that
item
passes.
That
brings
us
to
item
f,
which
is
a
request
for
approval
of
sole
source
procurement
for
project
management,
application,
support
and
technical
support
for
four-year
mountain
river
consulting
inc
and
the
total
amount
of
1
million
422
thousand
dollars.
uh
Councilor
garcia.
F
L
F
L
F
Okay,
thank
you
so
much,
and
so
I
guess
after
these
four
years
are
up,
then
we're
on
our
own.
We
don't
anticipate
needing
these
additional
support
services
right
where
the
new
system
should
be
in
place.
Our
team
should
be
fully
trained
and
we
should
have
a
system
that
we
won't
need
these
uh
advising
contract
services
anymore.
Is
that
correct.
L
That's
correct
for
the
billing
system:
the
mountain
river
does
do
additional
um
work
for
public
utilities
just
in
general,
and
that's
why
I
I
use
the
majority
of
the
money
the
first
year
reduces
down
in
the
second
and
the
third
and
the
fourth
year.
um
I
can
only
potentially
project
the
next
two
or
three
years.
um
You
know
we'll
just
have
to
see
what
happens
in
year,
three
and
four.
If
there's
additional
um
resources
needed
from
them-
or
you
know,
can
we
end
it
in
year?
Two,
it's
it's
kind
of
a
a
moving
scale.
F
L
B
D
B
B
B
C
B
Thank
you,
okay.
So
that
brings
us
to
the
last
item
item
k,
which
is
request
for
the
approval
of
amendment
number
three
to
the
psa
with
vladimir
jones
and
the
total
amount
of
one
million
four
hundred
and
fifty
thousand
dollars
for
advertising
agency
services
for
tourism,
santa
fe
for
fy22
uh
councilwoman,
v,
ho
coppler.
D
Thank
you,
mr
chair
um
is
mr
randall
here
I
guess
not
um
well,
the
questions
are
pretty
much
for
him.
I
want,
when
you
add
all
this
up.
Overall,
it's
four
million
for
advertising
and
quarterly
reports,
and
I
my
question
is:
uh
are
the
quarterly
reports
on
time
and
number
two?
What
are
we
getting
for?
What
kind
of
advertising
is
being
done
for
all
this
money,
but
I
can
save
this
for
council.
B
Okay,
is
there
anybody
from
I,
I
don't
see
mr
randall
here
either
it
has
to
go
to
finance
committee
on
the
21st,
then
yeah
governing
body
on
the
30th.
I
guess
without
a
recommendation
from
public
works,
unless
we
want
to
come
back
to
public
works
on
our
meeting
of
the
do
we
have
a
meeting
um
before
council
meets
again.
I
think
we
do
on
the
28th
28th.
D
F
B
E
A
Sure,
mr
rosado,
good
afternoon,
mr
chair
uh
councillors,
I
just
want
to
notify
the
the
traffic
calming
program,
uh
we're
going
to
be
restarting
that
I
discussed
our
traffic
conditions
with
our
traffic
engineering
consultant
and
we
go.
We
decided
that
the
traffic
conditions
are
getting
back
close
back
to
normal,
so
we're
going
to
be
restarting
those
traffic
impact
analysis
for
the
traffic
carbon
program
in
areas
where
we
don't
have
a
special
condition,
for
example,
schools
uh
that
are
still
out
during
the
summer.
A
D
A
Okay,
the
the
the
first
step
is
the
uh
the
constituent
has
to
request
uh
a
meeting
for
orientation
of
the
on
the
program
to
our
division.
uh
Then
I
will
schedule
that
meeting
and
give
the
the
constituent
the
orientation.
The
first
step
is
to
define
the
area
that
needs
that
will
be
impacted
by
the
request
and
doing
so.
You
will
define
also
how
many
signatures
you
will
require
to
start
the
process.
A
A
A
A
After
that,
there
will
be
a
public
engagement
uh
process
where
a
community,
a
committee
for
the
project
will
be
established
uh
with
community
members
and
those
community
members
and
the
traffic
engineer
consultant
will
will
share.
Ideas
of
what
can
be
done
is
because
traffic
calming
is
not
only
speed.
Bonds.