[Music]
You're live.
Well, good afternoon everyone. Welcome
to our work session. Today is Monday,
April 28th, 2025. It's approximately 100
p.m. I'm Eric Enrique as mayor. And um
if you all join me in a moment of
silence for our public uh safety, our
men and women of the
military who continue to protect our
country.
If you join me in the pledge.
To the flag of the United States of
America and to the republic for which it
stands. One nation under God,
indivisible, with liberty and justice
for
all. We'll go ahead and start with the
jobs of the week. Sarah Rainey.
Good afternoon. Thank
you. My name is Sarah Rainey. I am the
onestop coordinator for the America Job
Center New Mexico for the Southwest
region. For jobs of the week, we have
for the city of Los Cusus the shift
supervisor at the MVRDA. That one starts
at 27.84 an hour and closes on the 5th
of May. We also have street maintenance
supervisor starting at $51,000 a year
and that one also closes on the 5th. For
Donana County, we have supervisor for
vector control. That one starts at
$44,000 a year and the close the posting
closes on the 7th of
May. We have a direct support
professional and licensed practical
nurse for the hearts of hope. That one
starts at $13 an hour and the posting
closes at um on the 17th, excuse me. We
have a firefighter EMT position at NMSU
for 1928 an hour. The posting closes on
the 17th of May. And then we have three
dishwasher positions at the Rio Grand
Vineyards and Winery starting at $14 an
hour and the posting closes on the 21st
of May.
Um, as always, you can reach us at 226
South Alamita Boulevard, Alamita
Boulevard, and then any of our social
media outlooks is e, sorry, it's
employeem at all of our callings. Thank
you. Thank you, sir. Next is pets of the
week. Uh,
Carol, good afternoon. I'm Carol Nelson,
digital content specialist for the
Animal Services Center of the Messia
Valley. As a reminder, when our dog and
cat of the week are promoted for the
week, they are available at no cost. Um,
and really good news, our dog of the
week, uh, we actually had a rescue reach
out to us, um, action program for
animals, um, because they enrolled
Brooke into their prison program. And
so, she'll be working with, um, those at
the prison to get trained so that she
can go to a home. So, we're super happy
for her. Uh, and then our cat of the
week also was adopted, so we had really
good success this week so far. Um, but
we still do have long-term residents to
highlight and plenty of other op options
to for adoption. Um, and right now we're
running a special where all animals who
are spayed and neuter um, their adoption
fee is waved right now. Um, because on
the 30th it's National Adopt a Shelter
Pet Day. So, we would love to see people
come in and find their forever
companions. So, Dora has now been at our
center for 474 days. She is spayed um
and so she is one of the ones that her
uh fee is waved. Alice 328 days. Tony um
is neutered and so free uh has been at
our center for 312 days and Whisper 271
days. So those are just some of our
long-term pets, but we have lots of pets
to choose from. And this week we will be
at PetSmart on Friday from 10 to 1 and
then we are going to be at Petco on
Saturday. So definitely come out and
visit us and feel free to check out more
information on our website or follow us
on social media. Thank you.
All right. Thank you,
Carol. Next, we'll start with our uh
agenda items 3.1, fiscal year 2025,
budget review and public hearing.
Good afternoon. My name is Jacqueline
Andrew Balcava, budget and grant
administrator, and I'm here to present
today the proposed budget for
FY2526. This year's budget, our theme is
is highlighting ways that the Las
Cruis's community celebrates Cadinho
through local events. So, this is going
to be showcasing the city's spirit and
engagement through the year. Um for this
year's cover photo shown above is
celebrating the return of the Messia
Valley Balloon
Rally. Here you'll see the all fund
expenditures. These are in millions and
these are for all the city funds. Um at
the top we'll start with the general
fund. On this table we show the FY25
revised which for the general fund is
approximately 168.3 million. FY26
proposed amount is 174 million. That is
an increase of approximately 5.7 million
or
3.4%. For all other operating funds,
same information for the FY25 revised
3.3 million FY26 proposed 2.5 a decrease
of.8 I8
million or 24.2%.
For special revenue
funds, you have the FY25 revised of 79.4
million. FY26 proposed of 66.8
million. If we look down to the bottom,
the citywide total for this year is for
FY25 revised. Currently um the revised
budget is
694.7 million and the FY26 proposed is
609.6. This is a decrease of
expenditures in all funds of
approximately 85.1 million or
12.25%. I didn't go through all of the
fund types, but we do have them broken
down. And this is how you'll find them
in the all fund summary broken down at
this level.
This is a visual of the FY26 proposed
city budget. Again, totaling the
609.6 million
expenditures. The largest percentage we
see here is enterprise funds at
approximately 31% followed by the
general fund at 29%.
Specifically, just for the general fund
expenditures for the FY25 revised, it's
currently sitting at about approximately
168.3 million. And for the proposed 426,
we're looking at 174 million, which is a
3.4% increase.
And in here is a summary of just the
general fund again in millions and shows
similar information. We have the FY25
adopted budget on the first column, 2025
revised, 2026 proposed and then the
increases. So for this year for the
beginning balance for the general fund,
the 2025 adopted was 64.6 million.
The revised is currently at 71.9 million
and our proposed is 76.5 million. This
is approximately a $4.6 million
increase from the revised to the
proposed. The revenues for the general
fund were adopted at
162.4 for
FY25. The they are currently at 166.8 8
and for 2026 the proposed amount is
166.5. So we see a decrease of
about2%. For our expenditures adopted
was 165.6 and our revised is currently
at
168.3. For 2026 we're proposing an
increase of about 5.7 million to get us
to 174 million.
The ending balance for the general fund,
there is a required 212th reserve. So
you'll see that subtracted out to give
us an unreserved balance. At adoption
for FY25, we were sitting at 3.8
million. For the 2025 revised, we're at
9.8 million and for 2026 proposed 5.7
million. That is a decrease of
approximately 4.1 million or
41.8%.
Here's a breakdown of the general fund
increases. Again, taking us from this is
taking us from the revised budget of
168.3 to the proposed of 174 million,
which is approximately a difference of
5.7 million. Breaking that down, that
comes down to personnel increased
approximately
10.4, operating decreased 1.8 8 million
and capital decreased 2.9 million to
give us that total change from FY25 of
5.7
million. Here are some considerations
that were used to budget for
FY26. Starting off with the salary and
benefit pro projections. There is a 5%
general wage increase already included
into the benefit projections represented
in bargain contracts were already
incorporated. Longevity has been
incorporated and for vacant positions
this year they are being budgeted at
first quartile for 50% of the year or
budgeted at
50%. And the health insurance is um
budgeted at employee and spouse rate.
There is a para increase of
about.5% included and we're budgeting
insurance premium increases at 12%.
showing where your money comes from.
This is just for the general fund. It's
a breakdown of the revenue sources for
the general fund largely made up of the
gross receipts tax at approximately
79% or 130.7
million followed by fees and charges
um I'm sorry, property tax at 15.7, fees
and charges at 15.2, two, franchise fees
at approximately 4 million and cannabis
excise tax at
750,000. And this gives us a total for
the general fund of revenue at 166.5
million. Where your money goes, this is
again just for the general fund. Our
expenditures for the general fund are
largely made up of personnel at 69% or
120.2 million followed by operating at
31% or 53.4 million and then capital is
a small amount at
342,000 giving us the total budgeted
expenditures at 174 million for the
general fund for FY26.
We wanted to highlight the transfers
that are currently budgeted for the
general fund. These are transfers that
are coming out of the general fund and
they're broken down um to show the
transfer description and the amount. For
example, we see here um the vehicle
acquisition budgeted at $1 million.
And here is a continuation of the same
information continuing with general fund
transfers. The total net transfers
coming from the general fund including
debt is approximately 34.3 million for
FY26.
We have a breakdown here of the
FY26 recommended new positions. This is
just for the general fund. On this
slide, the asterisk shows which are
budgeted at 50%. And the little one next
to it shows any positions that are
related to a council request. So for
parks and wreck, we have a recreation
services supervisor, senior landscape
architect, irrigation worker, and a
youth program specialist. I'm sorry, six
youth program
specialists. For police, a codes
enforcement officer, and an animal
control officer, finance buyer
one. Here's a continuation of the new
positions for the general fund, city
manager's office, a Messia Valley
Community of Hope facilities maintenance
worker, quality of life, a library, two
collection development, and for the fire
department, six firefighters, three
drivers, and three
lieutenants. Here on this slide, we do
have another asterisk where two uh shown
with two um and these are for items that
are budgeted at 25%.
This gives us a total new position count
of 26 for the general
fund. Here we have non-general fund
positions for visit las cruis's office
assistant senior and an intern for
public works a utility locator one and
two light equipment operators for
quality of life a food service worker
utilities an MIS administrative
assistant and a GIS technician
one on this side we're continuing the
non-general fund positions with
utilities, SCADA network specialist, one
billing and receivables representative,
water quality lab, senior office
assistant, and a solid waste service
worker, giving us a total count of 12
new positions for non-general
fund. We did want to highlight the items
that have been budgeted for fire and
policemies for FY26. So for fire, there
is an anticipated start date of February
2026 for an academy with an expected
graduation date of June
2026. This academy will support the
staffing needs of the new fire station 9
and will also help filling positions
across the fire department. Also already
included in the budget is budget for a
police academy. There is currently one
starting this fiscal year in April. This
is a 55th academy which with an expected
graduation date of September 2025. So
will cross fiscal years. And there is
also the 56th police academy that is
budgeted and this one is to be held from
January through July
2026. And so this will support
recruitment and maintain staffing levels
in line with operational
needs. We have some council highlights.
These are first for the general fund.
These are items that were identified
from the budget retreat as council
requests. This may not be an exhaustive
list. This did um we did depend on the
departments to provide some information
for council request. So these are just
highlights for police department. The
NBEN lease. The NBEN lease will improve
our ability to solve firearm related
crimes through rapid ballistic evidence
comparisons, boosting efficiency and
supporting national forensic efforts to
enhance community safety. This is
currently budgeted at 40,000. For parks
and wreck, we have PAL boxing. PAL
Boxing is a program that teaches boxing
and provides support for at risk and
low-income youth, though it is open to
all kids and young adults. and this is
currently budgeted at 100,000. For
public works, we have the neighborhood
traffic calming program which aims to
reduce vehicle speeds and improve safety
on residential streets through measures
like speed hubs, traffic circles, and
signage. This is budgeted at 140,000.
for communications, a closed captioning
Spanish translation budgeted at
4,320. And this uses AI to automatically
translate English into Spanish for
closed captioning during live government
events. For ED, an MRA projects
jumpstart budgeted at 100,000. This
offers financial incentives to
businesses and property owners within
the metropolitan redevelopment area.
City Manager's Office, SNAP, or the Spay
and Neuter Action Program budgeted at
$80,000. HOPS prevent pet overpopulation
and improve animal health in Diana
County by offering lowcost or free slash
free space/neuter
surgeries for
fire. This is just specific to fire at
this time. This is overtime for licensed
master social workers. This would allow
funding for overtime um as needed for
out of out of office um hours
specifically to cover the light
program. And then this is budgeted at
38,922. And then lastly under city
manager's office, a public health
coordinator. This is a grant that will
be applied for. And so this is the plan
is for this to be a grant-f funded
position and this will plan and oversee
public health programs working to
promote health, prevent disease and
ensure access to health services within
a
community. We have a council highlights
for all other
funds for community
development. These first three are for
TID. So the first one, the downtown
security cameras is part of a
partnership aimed at enhancing public
safety in the area, particularly during
events like the farmers market and other
local gatherings budgeted at 175,000.
Rio Grand Theater Interior painting
budgeted at
52,000. It aligns with the city's
mission to beautify downtown and
maintain the area's historic
charm. And last, we have the downtown
planters safety improvements at
$80,000. And this is a partnership aimed
at enhancing urban
safety. For public works, a sidewalk
condition assessment at
$440,000 involves inspecting sidewalks
for issues like cracks, uneven surfaces,
and hazards to ensure pedestrian
safety. And city manager's office,
specifically housing and neighborhood
services storefront repair initiative.
This is a carryover from FY25. The
carryover amount is approximately
271,866. And this is this provides
funding to local businesses impacted by
graffiti or van vandalism. And this
funding amount has increased from 200
25,500 to 5,000 per occurrence, enabling
businesses to make more significant
repairs and improvements.
I am going to hand it over to Mercedes
Tomo from Fleet so she can go over the
VAF vehicle
list. Good, excuse me. Good afternoon,
Mayor, City Council, Mercedes Tomo for
Fleet Services. After reviewing um
department vehicle requests, these are
the 17 um units that are approved for
purchase by the vehicle acquisition
fund. Fire is approved for two vehicles,
an F-150 and a Maverick. Both are for
operational support. Parks and
Recreation is approved for three F-150s.
Two units will be for sports fields and
one unit is for park maintenance. The
police department has been approved for
eight Ford interceptors for patrol and
an F-150 for animal control. Public
works has been approved for an F-150 for
construction management and quality of
life has been approved for two F-150s
for senior
nutrition. Um, I'll hand this back to
Jacqueline. Thank you, Jacqueline
Dubalgava. For the record, for a fiscal
agent contributions, we have three
agencies listed, animal services, MVDA,
and Metro. We've listed here the FY25
city of Las Cruz's
contribution. These listed here are only
the city of Los Cru's Las Cruz's
portions. for FY25, City of Las Cruz's
contribution for animal services was
2,220,136 and the FY26 proposed
contribution is
2,335,136 or an increase of
5.18%. For MVDA, the FY25 contribution
was two approximately 2.8 8 million and
for
FY26 the proposed contribution is
3,31,131 which is an increase of
approximately 7%. For Metro the FY25
city of Lasus contribution and the FY26
proposed contribution are both
325,543 with no increase.
This totals the contribution for the
proposed FY26 for a fiscal agent
contribution to $5.6
million which is an increase of
approximately 5.86% from last
year. We wanted to provide an update
from Talshore funding. And so this these
are amounts that were budgeted in FY25.
We've listed them and then we've
included the estimate estimated
carryover amount. This carryover amount
was provided from by the departments and
so this is subject to change. It is
currently just an estimate. Um but for
the FY25 budget, so if it shows on here,
for example, facility maintenance, the
first one on our list, the FY25 budget
was $1 million. They're estimating it'll
be fully spent and so there will be
nothing carried
over. On the next slide, we will
continue with the Talshore fund updates.
Again, it's the same
information and the amount projected to
be carried over into the following
fiscal
year. This amount that's carried over is
already included in the budget for FY26.
And then here is a continuation. There
are some FY24 carryovers on this list
and so they have been identified as
well. Here are the FY26 Talshore request
highlights. These are items that are
currently being budgeted for FY26 out of
the Talshore fund. They are for city
manager's office housing and
neighborhood services Mano Mano at
676,000 safety opportunity support at at
199,913 health public services at
600,000 homeless outreach program at
164,000 giving us a total of
1,639,913 coming out of the Talshore
fund for FY26.
and I stand for questions.
Okay. Thank you, Jack. Any questions?
Uh, councelor Flores. Uh, thank you,
Mayor, and thank you so much for the
presentation.
Um, when I was in law school, I took um
accounting for lawyers. I dropped the
class because it's like to me it's like
a totally different language altogether.
It's a different world. Um so please
forgive my indulge me please. Um so
um on page most recently in page 25
there's a homeless outreach
allocation.
Um
and what exactly is for what purpose is
that allocated?
I
mean,
does I mean, it isn't handed out to the
homeless, is it? I mean, it's something
Natalie is coming up to answer that
question.
Mr. Mayor, Councelor Flores, Natalie
Green, for the record. Our homeless
outreach program uh staffs two uh teams
of two employees that do street outreach
to people experiencing homelessness in
our community. So when we get calls out
for
um our neighbors who are in different
parts of the city, right? So we get a
call, someone is living in this area,
please send outreach. And so our
outreach team goes out there, engages
with those individuals, make sure that
they have updated
um uh case case notes, right? they've
done their uh housing intakes and they
work with them to uh bring them closer
to the Messia Valley Community Hope
campuses to receive services and then
hopefully transition into Camp Hope or
housing programs um to uh address their
unhoused status. So is it um the uh
personnel at
uh uh city uh community of hope that
does the actual outreach? Uh Mr. Mayor,
councelor Flores, that's correct. We
contract out uh with the Messia Valley
Community Hope. They hire the the team.
So there's two teams of two employees
each, so four employees total. And um
they manage that program on behalf of
the city. Oh, that's great. I you know,
I think it'd be a good um well, it's not
about the budget, but uh to be informed
about that because I know I think all of
us on the city council are very much
concerned uh with the uh unhoused and um
it would just, you know,
get some stats on that. Thank you so
much, Miss Natalie. Thank you. And I
have more questions.
Um so, um the allocation made for the
real grand painting of 53
$52,000. Was it 52? Yeah,
52. Um is that coming out of the
TID? And then do you really think it's
going to what's going to be painted? One
wall.
I mean, seriously, uh, painting is an
art and and that that theater is
probably going to require some gold, you
know, some paint. No.
I'm going to defer to um Chris Favor for
this.
Good afternoon, Mayor, counselor. Chris
Faver with Community Development. Yeah.
So, there was money already budgeted to
do some painting work on the interior
and exterior of the RGT. This is just
extra money to make sure they have
enough to do all that. And it's just
touching up the paint on the inside of
the building. Oh, okay. Okay. Well,
that's a good explanation because I
thought, you know, it's not going to get
done or it's not going to be finished,
but great. Thank you for the
explanation. Thank you, Chris. And I
have more questions.
Um, oh, on uh page
20, the allocation of monies for our
fire department, I mean for our
different departments. Are these um new
are these new automo bills slated to
replace or to add the existing amount of
cars and vehicles? These are for
replacement. They're so for replacement.
Mercedes.
The um only the only vehicle that will
be new and added to the fleet is for the
animal control officer for that new
position. Everything else is a
replacement to the fleet. Oh, okay. So,
there's going to be an additional uh
vehicle for the animal control p uh
personnel. Yes, correct. Wonderful. So,
yeah. So, there'll be one added animal
control officer vehicle. Um all the
other 16 vehicles are replacement
vehicles. Great. Thank you, Mercedes,
could you state your name just for the
minutes? Uh, Mercedes Tomo for the
record. Thank you. Thank you, Mercedes.
And I have more questions.
Um, there's a on page 23 you have gap
funding and
um what is that? You prefaced it by
saying it was GA gap funding. What
exactly is gap funding? I mean, for
example, we have homeless outreach
75,000 carryover zero. What's where's
the gap or what what what is it? So,
when we when we put gap funding, we
refer to funding needed to complete the
project. So, this $2 million has been
set aside in order to meet all of the
construction needs for Fire Station 9.
Oh, okay.
And on on page eight,
um there's reference
to
longevity. There was a was it page
eight? Yes. Yeah. So, what exactly does
that mean? So, HR does a calculation
based off of the different positions.
And so for any represented bargain
contracts or any employees who qualify
for longevity that has been incorporated
into the budget and that is a
calculation completed through the the
salary and benefit projections that HR
provides and then we incorporate those
into the budget. Okay. So it's a
projection. Yes. Yes. Okay. Thank you.
And then
um on page 11 there's a balance on the
general
fund. And what does that uh cover?
I'm sorry. I there was a page 11 and
there was a general fund. Maybe I've got
the wrong page. Anyway, there was
uh
LA I'm sorry that's is it slide six? Is
it the unreserved balance?
Um well um you can explain that also. A
lot of this is like
really I'm really dense in that regard
in many regards but this is one of them.
Of course, no problem. So for the
general fund summary, this is a
breakdown of the year. So the beginning
balance is what we have here. We'll for
the FY26 proposed at a I'm
[Music]
sorry, we have a beginning balance of
approximately
76.5 million. That includes any
projections or any carryovers that we're
bringing in from the prior fiscal year.
Um and then we subtract out or add in
the revenues and expenditures and
transfers which gives us an ending
balance. And then because the general
fund is required to have a 212th
reserve, then we take out the 212th
reserve which in this case for FY26 is
approximately
$28.9 million to give us an unreserved
balance of $5.7 million. So this just
shows us the trajectory of the year and
this is the information that is
budgeted. So, um, this isn't based off
of actuals. It is just based off of
budgeted information at the beginning of
the year for the proposed and these
numbers can change. Yes. So, we normally
at this time we are relying strongly on
projections and so that's the
departments are projecting how much
they're going to spend to the end of the
fiscal year. During FY26, the audit will
be completed for FY25. Once the audit
numbers are out, we come to council and
update any beginning balances to reflect
actuals at that time. Then we'll update
the beginning balances to reflect what
was actually spent. And so there that
will be updated throughout the year. And
that's where we see that difference
between the 2025 adopted and the 2026
revised. Okay. And when will that be
presented to council? So for FY26,
approximately around February of next
year. Yes. Okay. All right. I think that
um Oh, um page 17, fire department for
the um allocation for light the light
project. What
[Music]
um where are
we? Page 17. Page 17 is Oh, okay. Yeah.
the um
it's what?
Oh yeah. You know what? I have the wrong
number. I'm telling you. I'm horrible
with numbers. No worries. It's right
here on 18. No. Okay. I was just
wondering if
um Oh, I know.
Fire overtime licensed master social
workers. So that
38,922 is that going to be enough to
add Oh. Oh. Oh. for the overtime. Um
that is the estimated because how many
how many uh LM uh LMWs do we have? SWS.
I'll have to defer that question to fire
on the specific amount currently
employed by fire.
Go ahead, Chief
Daniel. Mayor, Council Flores, Mike
Daniels. For the record, we currently
have three social workers. Part of this
overtime plan is to uh increase their
availability. Currently, they're exempt.
So, we're reclassifying them as part of
this to a non-exempt status so that they
can be used to for back fill to keep the
light team in service more often versus
hiring uh new
FTEEs when when one's out or on leave.
This allows us to bring them in off duty
so that we can keep the light team in
service more days out of the year. Yeah.
And my question is really based on um my
humble opinion that you probably need
more uh
FTEES in the UI license
MSWs. I mean that's my humble opinion.
So based on the current downtime, it it
doesn't appear that we would need them
unless we want more light teams in
service, but to maintain the current
single light team in service, we we
believe we can accomplish a a decent
amount of of coverage or quite a bit
more coverage just by being able to uh
utilize offduty and bringing them in.
Yeah. Well, I you know
I I it would be great if we could have a
presentation on that. I don't want to
overstep city manager or mayor, but I
think it'd be great if we could have
because I know that uh Mayor Prom, our
former mayor prom um Cassandra Gand
worked really hard on this and um and I
remember just, you know, being uh
watching and listening. So, I'm just uh
following up on all of that. Thank you
so much to you and thank you. Thank you
very much for your indulging me. Thank
you, Councelor Kin. Thank you. Um, thank
you for the presentation and the
booklet, which I'm going from page 50,
which I think is approximately where um
this a lot of this stuff is. So, that's
I really appreciate having the document.
This is really skinny, though. So, I'm
I'm looking forward to the giant thick
one that I that I collect in my in my
office and actually read. Um, thank you
for the concise version for today. I had
a couple of quick um, questions and
follow-ups. I really appreciate you all
including um, staff wage increases. I
think 5%
um, I I just feel like we're behind.
everyone is behind because of the rate
of inflation and I really appreciate um
and always want to advocate for us
making an investment and giving paying
our folks the best ways that we possibly
can. always all staff throughout the
institution and and I think we have the
best employees and I I really appreciate
that that um initiative which is more
than um the state gave recognizing you
know a lot of state employees are at 3
or 4% so that that's outstripping them
and I I again am proud that we're a
great employer and I want us to keep
that up so I wanted
to express my gratitude for that the
inclusion of five a 5% increase which
again, I don't think is enough um given
the inflationary rates, but I understand
that we're also in a really um difficult
budgetary moment uh with a lot of
ambiguity in the future. So, I think our
humans are the best thing that we have.
Yeah. So, I I think I appreciate us our
investments in that.
Um, the other part that I wanted to
really point out, I think the
neighborhood traffic calming program, we
had a really brief conversation about
this last week. Um,
$140,000. I I feel like this there are
probably three things that I've
mentioned that my residents are really
worried about. And I recently got um the
summary from the neighborhood watches
which reiterates this idea that one of
the big things that folks really want is
for traffic to be slowed down on their
streets. And I I I I know that this is a
representation toward what we asked for,
but it's not it doesn't come close to
what we really need to do to invest in
in neighborhood traffic calming. So I
actually would love to have a specific
work session related to neighborhood
traffic calming sometime and what kind
of things we might need to fund in the
future if we really want to invest in
this. So, I'm not this isn't really a
question. It's more of a comment as
you're ever accustomed to from us. Um,
but I just want to say this investment.
I appreciate it as a as a gesture toward
this, but that's like one 20th of a
traffic circle and my neighborhoods want
like 15 new traffic circles last last
month. So, um, except for the people
that hate traffic circles.
Um, so thank you for that. And then the
last thing that I just wanted to go to
was on slide 25. This is another thing
that folks in my area and across the
city have really said they appreciate is
Mano Mano. Um I think that this had a
higher budget allocation in the past and
one of the things that folks really
reported is that they feel like this um
service that we offer is really powerful
and I think they're visible in in my
neighborhood and and so I've heard from
residents that Mono Eimmano is is making
an impact. So, I'm just curious what why
the reduction because I don't get the
sense that there's less of a need. Um,
and I think they're really delivering on
what they they need to be. So, I think
that's one of the places that I was
curious what what's going on
there. So, this 676
$676,000 for Mano Mano is based off of
the amended service agreement. So, the
service agreement was for
$676,000 and so that's what is being
budgeted here. there is a carryover from
that amount. Last year I think it was
93,000 that was budgeted including
vehicles. So those vehicles have been
ordered and there is also a carryover um
of that
amount
and yeah I'm I just don't want that
service to be reduced. That's one of the
things that I'm really hoping we can
maintain in our so whatever that looks
like. Mr. Mayor, Council Karin, I will
add that uh while the service agreement
is for
$676,000, that's what we subcontract out
to Mono Mano, the city still has
expenses um that we have to provide as
part of our contract that are not in
that number. So, it is underfunded. Um
the city is required to provide all the
supplies, all the vehicles, and the
long-term maintenance. Um in addition,
one of our vehicles is it died. So the
and the other one has 600,000 miles and
so part of that funding was a
replacement of the Mano Mano vehicle. So
um we are hoping to see that um restored
to what was requested and budgeted. Um
so last year council raised that to the
814 and added that additional um truck.
So if it's stays at the 676, we will be
reducing our level of service to parks
in particular because it's the van
that's impacted.
Thank you. I I would like to see us
maintain the level of service that we
have for Monoim Mano because it is
something that my residents I know
really speak um very highly of and feel
it's a visible impact in their
communities for what they're
experiencing. Um traffic
calming is is the second thing that I
just really want us to think about ways
that we can invest and have forward that
conversation. And so um I appreciate
seeing both of those things in here as
well as many other things that we've
talked about, but those are two things
that I continue to hear from my
residents. So, thank you again for the
work on this. I know that you all really
um faced a daunting task this year of
doing it a little bit differently and I
really appreciate the way that all of
the departments have put in to think
about this um in a different way and
really look constructively at the ways
that we make an impact in our community.
So, um thank you again for for your
presentation and listening to my
comments, not questions, of course. And
I just did want to add sorry Jaclyn
Balava for the record that the
neighborhood traffic calming program the
amount budgeted is for a pilot program.
C uh council.
Thanks mayor. I had a question for page
18.
um the public health coordinator. I
think that that was came up during our
presentations and I'm just curious about
the thought process of having it grant
funded especially with grants around the
country as they are and sort of just the
idea of that's kind of unstable and
where's the priority of that and in
terms of finding that grant for it. So
there has already um sorry mayor
councelor mccclair um there is already a
grant that has been identified and is in
the process of being applied for and so
that with that grant a portion of that
will go to fund the public health
coordinator. Do we know when that might
come through? Is there kind of a
tentative award date if we did get it?
Um not at this time. I don't believe I
don't have the answer here. I can we can
look into that.
I'd be curious to see whether or not we
can actually maybe even just a part-time
position to before it actually the grant
does come through to see whether or not
we do that. But I see someone else
coming to this. Sorry, Mr. Mayor,
counselor Karan. Uh we did receive
notice from the governor's office that
that has been awarded. It's 350,000. The
bulk of that will be for staff and it's
a two-year grant. Um we're just
finalizing that scope of work and then
we'll bring it into the budget. Awesome.
Thank you. And I also wanted to uh
second the idea of having a traffic
calming um work session. I think that
would be valuable. I also get a lot of
those and um yeah, Mono Mano also is a
super valuable program that I would like
to see make sure that we sustain that
level of service as well. So, thank you,
Mayor Pro. Thank you, Mayor. And thank
you so much, Jacqueline, and the rest of
the budget team for getting us here.
This is our last hearing, right, before
our official vote? Yes, that's correct.
Okay. Um I'm just going to go um kind of
down the list um on page numbers and
since since you're here, this is
perfect. I'll start here. This isn't
really a question. I honestly just
wanted to
um say that this is my fifth budget
cycle and it has felt the most different
in a good way. Um, I will say that I
feel like uh you having sort of the
highlights here, the council priorities
and then the little ones next to some of
those requests. Um, I you know, I've
said this before, I feel like in the
past it just has felt like a little
autopilot, the budget cycle, and this
time felt really generative. And um you
know, most of us come come very well
prepared to budget sessions because
we've been in the community. We've been
talking to people and we know exactly
what we're going to be asking for and
ensuring that um gets uplifted and
funded. And so I just wanted to
appreciate that. Um first and foremost,
um a question on number
19, you have the storefront uh repair
initiative carryover. I'm sort of just
very curious around the process here,
right? Like I knew that at the end of
last year we were nervous regarding ARPA
dollars. Are this additional allocations
we've given to the storefront program or
these still ARPA dollars that have been
sort of, you know, secured and not going
to get pulled back. Mayor, mayor promp
this is that continuation of the ARPA
funding. So this carryover amount is
from ARPA. Okay. And but they're safe.
No one's trying to claw these back. We
have not heard that anything will be
clawed back for Marba. I'll claw back
myself. Just kidding. Um, it's a good
program, so I'm glad it's still going.
Um, number uh page
20 on vehicles. I don't I apologize. I
don't remember if last year when we uh
initially um sort of allocated for park
rangers if we also allocated for
vehicles. Did we do that last year? Is
that already in the budget?
I'd have to look into that. I believe
they have been, but I'm not sure the
amount of vehicles. Okay. Go ahead,
Chief. Uh, Mayor Mayor Prom. Yes. And we
have all three of those vehicles sitting
at the police department right now.
Okay. Thank you. Waiting for the rangers
to fill them. Thank you. I could not
remember. So, thanks for that. Um, and
then honestly, I had the similar
question as councelor Corin around page
uh 25 in Mano Mano.
I I think probably every single one of
us up here h makes requests to Natalie
to send the Manu Mano program if not on
a weekly basis on a pretty regular
basis. I think that those vehicles take
a significant beating. Like they're
doing very hard work. I think that
they're doing really important work. Not
only is it the vans, which you know,
I've heard that there's a van that's
been totally broken. They're literally
using one on loan. Um, I think they have
equipment that needs to be used, right?
Like the little trash pickup things,
vests, um, bags, like all of this kind
of equipment. I think Community of Hope
covers the insurance for the vans,
right? So, I know that not even the
entirety of Manu Mano isn't even being
fully funded by the city, right? Like I
think Community of Hope as a whole puts
in additional funds as well, like
insurance for the vans. The food for the
employ for the employees gets provided
by El Calito and uh Casad Perigrinos. Of
course, they have to maintain wages um
like the rest of the city. And so I also
want to make sure that we are funding
programs that work like these programs
in our community work because we not
only we I see them out there all of the
time, but like I hear back from
community members that um how grateful
they are that something like this
exists. And so I would really hate for
us to roll back something that exists
given um something that works given um
you know the conversation we continue to
have around our own house neighbors. So
I did just want to uh give that last
plug um because I also want to make sure
that we provide them the funding um they
need to be a to be continue doing the
level of service that they have been so
far. Thank you.
Council
ment my my question is um if you go to
page 22 and
then okay and you you see these
initiatives and the question is really
for uh the city manager
u all of this is from the Telshore fund
correct page 22 23 24 and of course
that's not a recurring fund I mean, we
have another 14 million that we could
take out of it and we might last
through
27, 28, maybe 29. But all these great
initiatives, how how are they going to
be funded in say fiscal year
2029? Mr. County
Coun council Batis, you're you're asking
for a project that has not been
identified in in other words. Well, I
assume you're going to continue these
initiatives, correct? Mono emano. I
mean, it's a great program, but right
now it's being funded from the shore
fun. Yeah. Council Matis, great
question. Um, Mono Immano is is approved
by this budget that you see in front of
you is approved by by US Council as you
know. Um, to answer your 2029 question,
hypothetical. Um, I I know it's
hypothetical. It's just that once that
money is used, is is it got it? It's
gone. Right. Understood. But now, but
you want these programs and these great
initiatives, the housing initiatives,
all of them to continue. I mean, not
just for two years, three years. You
want
them perpetual. Correct. Yes. Um,
councelor Matise, what what I'll share
with you to answer your question at at
it at its most simp simplest form is um
this is Telshore fund. Once it's used,
um the the funds are the the funds are
reduced. We receive interest on these
funds um currently right now. So if we
do nothing with them, um we continue to
receive revenues based on its interest.
Um but Natalie can answer some of the um
some of the questions as well. Uh Mr.
Mayor, councelor Matise, this year uh
the state of New Mexico put out some
significant resources both for
affordable housing and uh homeless
encampment response. So, our goal is to
to utilize those fundings and reimburse
the telshore funds for much of these
projects. In terms of the affordable
housing projects, those are one-time
projects and they are loans. So, all the
revenue will come back to the city. Of
course, that's over a 20-year period,
but our intent is to make the Telshore
fund whole for any of the funds that
it's allocated to us for loans. Um, in
terms of the gap funding for Amodore
Crossing, again, we've been very
successful at um acquiring, I haven't
announced it yet. I was going to do it
in my next presentation, but we just got
another $2 million to help recoup some
of the expenses that the city's paying.
Um, so our goal is to to fund these
programs with other revenues as much as
possible and so we'll be working on that
over the next year.
Mr. Mayor, I'd like to sort of tackle a
little bit of that question as well. I
think that the longer and the more
intentional we are about investing in
long-term solutions like housing, the
more we invest in housing people who are
currently experiencing homelessness and
the more we invest in building our
housing stock through things like
realize and those kinds of uh long-term
solutions, the less there'll be a need
for things like mano emano. So, um,
ultimately the goal is, while Mano Mano
is incredible and I want to see it, uh,
fully funded, the goal is for us to not
need it eventually. And I'm not saying
2029 is that timeline, but the more we
invest in the long-term uh, in the
long-term solutions, the less we will
need for um, the shorter term solutions
that are currently working right now.
Thank you.
Thank you, Mayor Pro. I I guess had we
done this 15, 20 years
ago and had good investments and and
good revenue, we would have probably
never needed the Telshore fund. So, so
it's a good it's a good project and a
good uh good way to go.
Okay, thank you. A couple of questions.
Uh just getting back to the page 20 with
the
vehicles. Just want to make sure like we
on on the staffing, we've got one new
code officer coming and one new animal
control. I think you said there's one
vehicle for animal control. Are we going
to make sure that we get the vehicle for
the new code officer as well?
Thank you, mayor. So, yes, the animal
control officer is the one budgeted and
I'm going to defer to police on that
question.
Chief Mayor, um there's not a vehicle
that's dedicated for it, but we have
some other solutions. So, we're working
with fire to repurpose a vehicle that
was potentially going to be sent to
auction and we have a couple other
backup plans. So, I I think we have it
covered with a it's actually a decent
vehicle for the codes officer.
Okay. Thanks. just want to make sure
that if you get a new position that we
get all the resources that they need to
to be able to fulfill their duties. Um,
one of the other things that has been
brought to my attention and I I think
it'd be page
22 with uh I think it would fall under
maybe uh the CM office for
uh health
uh public services. If if if not under
the telshaw fund, maybe quality of life,
maybe there's another another funding
source for the Los Cusus public schools
has reached out for some of their uh
case managers or or social workers that
they have afterchool programs uh that
that only fulfills two days out of the
week and they're requesting 150,000 that
would do five days out of the
And I think that's a great intervention
program, a great
uh public service healthwise for our
community that if we could partner up
and help out Los Cusus's public schools
with their their social workers and
making sure that uh for the youth in our
community, we're giving them five days
out of the week instead of just two.
I guess I'll look to the city manager to
see where exactly that would that would
fall under under the budget, but that is
a request also working with our
community
schools and uh the public
schools. And the other one I know I I
agree to with traffic calming. Those are
always concerns that come out from the
residents. Uh, but the other thing is
um training and safety. And I know I'm
just springing this on now because I
just saw it last week. There's a a
company here in town
uh Mansco company that is doing a school
instruction for heavy uh equipment
operators. And they had some simulators
there that they can do up to 36
vehicles. included there are police
units, fire apparatus, uh heavy
equipment that our public works and
street use all the time. Uh there's
simulators that that cost about 70,000.
And uh I'm just throwing it out there
because I promised Lucio I would and say
that uh it'd be great for training, for
testing, uh preventing accidents, uh and
and just helping our staff to get better
trained in in traffic. Uh so that's
another another item that I present and
throw out there.
Council Matis, mayor, I'd just like to
support you on your request for the
social workers for Los Cru's public
schools. Thank you. Okay. Thank you.
Um, with that, at this point, um, being
that this is a public hearing for our
budget, is there any members of the
public that would wish to speak at this
time? Yes. Come on up.
three minutes. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Um,
yeah, we'll give you up to three
minutes. Thank you. Uh, I'm Linda
Sinclair. I'm the president of the
Friends of Thomas Branding Memorial
Library, and I want to start just by
thanking you for the support you've
already shown for the design process for
the renovation. um that I I'm sure was
helpful for us when we went to the state
legislature and were able to get some
funding from them and we will continue
harassing them for more capital
campaigns. But you have in this budget a
librarian to collection development
position and I do want to encourage you
that is an incredibly important position
for the library. It is our library staff
has so incredible. They wear so many
hats and do mo so many things outside of
their regular responsibilities because
we don't have someone in that position
and haven't for quite some time as I
understand it. So I just would like to
encourage you to support that library
collection position. The operation of
the library um is so vital to so many
people. the friends. Actually, I have
more friends here in the audience, but
they're out at running the book sale
that we have going on right now to try
and bring in some more money to help
with some of the other operating
expenses that come up that they don't
have the money for in the budget that
the the staff does such a great job of
putting on. So, I want to thank you for
your support in the past and encourage
you to keep supporting the library.
Thank you. Thank you.
Yeah. Coming up,
Mr. Mayor, members of the council, my
name is Nicole Martinez. I also just
wanted to express uh my my gratitude um
for including Community of Hope uh in
the budget um and supporting some of our
our programs. I know that our homeless
outreach program, the Mono Mano program
are certainly coveted programs in
several other communities. I think it's
a really strong partnership that we have
with the city of Los Cusus and shows
that we care about our our unhoused
neighbors. Um I also am really grateful
to see that it's been budgeted to have
uh on-site maintenance for community of
hope. Not sure if you know how it works
right now, but currently if Hardin's
toilet breaks, the work order comes to
me, I send it to the city. Um cost per
lights go out, comes to me, goes to the
city, and then sometimes I don't know if
things are getting updated or what might
be happening. So, this really will
streamline um and prevent a lot of the
things I think that we see happen at
Community of Hope. Um so, I'm really
excited to have that there and hopefully
will save the city some money uh in the
future. And while I'm here, I also just
wanted to um comment on a couple of
other programs I know that are city
funded. Uh they're not necessarily in
this budget. One of them is is the grow
funding that we've gotten from
legislature and that's to help people
with some one-time assistance. um people
that are exiting homelessness, you
transitioning into their own apartments,
might be security deposits, but a lot of
the funding that we have used has been
to prevent homelessness. So, I know that
sometimes um it gets lost that we're
doing a lot of those things, too. So, we
have a lot of different types of housing
programs, but we're really flexible and
that we think that housing is the way to
go with that. So, people that, you know,
I know that there was a woman that had
come uh information about her um losing
her housing had come forward. Um those
are the types of the people of people
that we are helping constantly. Um since
July we've served 163 clients with that
funding. Um so prevented um at least 103
of those people from becoming homeless
by assisting with that funding. Um 19
was security deposits, several with
utilities um and quite a few that were
also utilizing that for their first
month's rent. Uh we also have been
operating ARPA funding the landlord risk
mitigation program that can also be used
would have would have worked for that
that same woman as well. Um and we have
worked with 33 unique landlords in the
city of Los Cusus with the landlord
mitigation. It's for damages but it's
also for recruiting landlords. Um it's
also for helping bring units into
compliance with inspections so they're
safe when we're moving people into those
units. And then we also have other
funding sources that come from the state
um that will assist people with homeless
prevention funding in more than just one
month of rent. So more ongoing uh
assistance for people who might be
facing eviction. So just wanted to let
you know that those are things that the
city's also been supporting. I don't
think that landlord risk uh made it into
this particular budget, but it remains a
really useful uh program in keeping
people uh either in their own home or
quickly moving them to another unit so
they don't join the ranks of our
unhoused population. So again, just
wanted to say thank you so much.
Thank you. Yes, come on up.
Just a uh Tim Tim Jenkins for the
records. um a question. I mean, I don't
know how many times in the last year
I've actually called on Monoemano and
they have done excellent work, but I
remember prior to CO that we had a
program with the inmates picking up
trash, which I know the governor shut
down during CO, but would that maybe be
an option of something we could maybe
implement or bring back to help cut
costs? Just an idea. Just thought I'd
bring it up.
Okay, thank
you. Is there anyone
else? No. All right. Thank you.
Where's Leslie?
And just real quick again, thank you to
Leslie and her staff and Jacqueline,
everybody for the the budget and the
review. Thank you. And next we'll go to
item 3.2, to capital improvement program
FY26 review and public hearing
Cynthia.
Okay. Good afternoon, city council
mayor. My name is Cynthia Lamo, CIP
manager with planning and implementation
and we're here to present the proposed
FY26
CIP. So I first want to start by making
a note as to what is capital. Capital
assets which are assets that have a
useful life or more than that one year.
So for the city that means a vehicle, a
building, infrastructure, road, uh
utility systems. So with that you can
imagine that our CIP program is has a
lot of projects. So when we say capital
improvement projects that could range
from the procurement of a vehicle, the
expansion of a building or a street
reconstruction. So with that as you can
see our process is is significant but
most of all the CIP process and the
document of it it's required by city
charger. The document prioritizes
capital needs and identify potential
sources associated with those projects.
It informs the selection of the
legislative pri priorities. As we know,
the state has a process every year where
we submit uh projects to be considered
for capital outlay or funding uh for uh
legislative from the legislative
session. It also informs the public of
the city's infrastructure investment and
informs the public of our future needs
in terms of capital
projects. The CIP produces a document
that spans for six years. One year is
funded and the remaining five years are
unfunded year unfunded needs. So this is
how we communicate to the public what
projects are needed and how much funding
the city needs to complete those
projects. The projects are guided by the
city's uh comprehensive plan and any
other city council adopted plans. It
uses several funding sources from
grants, capital outlay, bonds and loans.
and it is approved by city council and
all of the amendments following the
adoption are also approved by city
council for the FY26
process. CIP staff and departments
started preparing for it since May of
2024. During this time there are
prescoping meetings with departments.
There's evaluation of upcoming uh
infrastructure needs. In August of 2024,
we start with a CIP kickoff. That's
where we set all of the uh changes to
the process and we ask departments to
please start thinking about the projects
that they would like to be submitted for
uh for the
CIP. that uh closure that uh period of
submitts in September and in November
the CAP uh evaluation process starts. At
this evaluation process we evaluate all
of the data that was submitted by
department. projects go through a
internal review of four key departments,
public works, sustainability,
facilities, and utilities as those are
key projects, key programs that have a
say in capital projects. After that,
there's more evaluation and back and
forth with the department. In March of
this year, we had the CIP retreat. We
had um the work session and publication
of the preliminary of our proposed CIP
document. We are now in our second work
session and public hearing and we will
hope to follow in May with the CIP CIP
adoption. I want to point out that the
numbers I will be presenting today are
adjusted from what they were what from
what was published as the publication
was in March. The current fiscal year
continues. We're continually
re-evaluating and revising the account.
So, we're constantly working on getting
ready the document for adoption in
May. This is an overview of the proposed
uh or preliminary
CIP. Last year, the funded projects
amounted to 133 million. Currently, we
have 191. We have a p 14% increase
change and this one of the factors that
are leading to this increase is that
last year we had several uh projects
that were funded and those were large
multi-year projects for example the uh
park maintenance with the legacy and
several um the inductive charging and
fire station 9. So we have many projects
where the funding is being carried over
for this coming year. So that number
goes up. Our funding needs are have also
increased by a 29%.
One element that is we can attribute to
this is as we place more structure to
the CIP process, departments are
constantly working on finding and
identifying those capital projects that
are needed and going through the CIP
process so we can identify really what's
upcoming and the uh funding that are
needed to complete those projects.
The cap aside from its financial is also
spatial as we want to uh recognize
importance of the location of the
capital projects. This is a quick
snapshot of the where the projects are.
The dots represent projects and the
lines are streets or trail projects but
as you can see majority are uh downtown.
We have a good number of projects at the
airport, a few street projects at the uh
industrial park and a few up here um
towards the up uh north part of the
city. The FY26 preliminary CAP is
identified by four types of projects.
The first one is carryover which we have
120 projects which are projects that
have started or have already been added
to the cap and we're moving them on to
the next year. 44 annual projects. These
are projects that receive funding on an
annual basis as they have projects are
recurring. For example, uh roof
replacements that we know that there
constantly have uh projects and we have
130 future projects. Those are projects
that have been identified as a need but
there's no funding associated to it. So
we consider them future and one newly
funded from the communications
department. And next to it you will see
the funding associated to the projects
by the same category of project type
carryover and annual that will be our
funded. So we have 175 million carryover
project 16 in annual projects and the
newly funded project of 181 for the
communications department.
The CIP has multiple funding sources. We
use loans, bones, grants, and this is
the uh distribution of of all of the
funding uses in the CIP. As you can see,
the largest option is the grants, which
includes the capital outlay. Those are
funding that funding that we receive
from the state. We have then uh
loans 2.8 aid with bonds and the 26 from
taxes. The smaller um amounts that you
see on the right side are for waste and
wastewater impact fees and park impact
fees. There's a small lever of of other
which includes a capital improvement gas
capital gifts and memorial public works
capital improvements
uh wastewater capital improvements and
water and water. So this is a
distribution of uh funding sources.
This next slide provides a distribution
by
department and as you can see the uh the
highest departments will be those with
uh projects oper that uh are in capital
for example utilities we have public
works with t 58 million the smaller
departments it's understandable that
they have uh less capital uh capital
projects for example visit less cruises
75 which is one project for furniture
for the convention
center. This next slide is the same
information but a different visual just
to see uh the funding uh by department.
So again we have the three departments
with the highest capital funding which
is parks and wreck, utilities and public
works.
The this next slide shows uh the
projects um in terms of
numbers. So uh street improvements we
have 69 projects. Towards the middle you
see city operational facilities with 12
projects and I want to point out that uh
the categories in the CIP are meant to
facilitate keeping track of the nature
of the projects and the monitoring. So,
city operational facilities will be like
improvements to the city hall versus
um public facilities where we have 69
projects that will be our library, our
senior centers, all of those public
facilities
um where there's more usage rather than
operational.
This this next slide is again summary by
categories but this is the funding
that's associated with each of the
categories. So we have utilities with
5.2 street improvements with 40 million
and the third highest public facilities
with 22 million. There's a smaller
percentage for the other which we emerge
two categories which is equipment and
IT and city operational
facilities. So this summary represents
um the funded and the outer five years
which are unfunded by um by category.
This slice shows active transportation,
airport, attainable and affordable
housing and city operational
facilities. Second slide, uh we have
public facilities, public safety, public
transit, resiliency, streets, new street
improvements and utilities.
And again the FY27 to31 are all
unfunded. Those are the uh uh the needs
for each of the categories.
So in the past in 2023 um three programs
were developed uh active transportation,
complete streets and resiliency and all
of them to provide a more
um a focus to all projects related to uh
active transportation complete street
and resiliency. So active transportation
are those that we want to
prioritize as it is active
transportation complete streets. We want
to emphasize welldesigned multimodal
roadways and resiliency. We want to
prioritize green infrastructure
um elements. Anything from storm water
drainage, trees, anything that will
improve the uh or will enhance green
infrastructure.
So again this programs were meant to
focus fundings on these priorities. So
with that there was also the process
called the 90% design approval which
meant that projects go through a design
uh process. We want to make sure and
enhance that there and enhance or higher
standard of elements from this three
buckets added to those projects. So,
it's a more complete
project. Under the first program, active
transportation, we have four projects
that will be receiving funding. All of
them are uh street reconstructions. We
have Madrid Avenue, Melendres, and South
Main ETHL. It's still pending the sign
approval. under complete street. We also
have uh the reconstruction projects with
East Mesa roads and drainage. This will
be along Cortez road, Melendres and
South
Maine. And lastly, resiliency Castle
Linda is Messa roads which is a Cortez
uh project, Melendres, and Ethel with
which again pending design approval.
So with that, our next steps is to
continue reviewing our accounts, our
projects, our numbers, and be ready for
the CIP adoption that is planned for May
19 of this year. So with that, we I'm
I'm here for any questions that you
might have.
Thank you,
Cynthia. Do we have any questions? Mayor
Proip. Mayor, I don't have any
questions. I just wanted to tell Cynthia
thank you for a great presentation.
Anyone else? We're good. Thank you,
Cynthia. Great job. Let me just open it
up to the public if there's any members
of the public that would like to speak
at this time.
Okay, seeing none. Thank you. Good job.
Next on the agenda is item 3.3, the city
of Los Cusus's parks and recreation
impact fee study. That be
uh Katherine Harris Rogers
and Julie Erland's
Good afternoon, Mr. Mayor, members of
city council. Katherine Harrison Rogers
for the record. Uh, today we're here to
talk about the draft impact fee study
for parks. Um this particular study um
provides a synopsis of the maximum fee
that can be allotted uh towards uh park
impact fees uh which essentially are are
those fees that are needed to basically
maintain our current levels of service
uh moving forward.
So, chapter 33 of the municipal code
requires a review of the impact fees of
the land use assumptions, i.e. our
growth rates, the number of people
living here, um, how we're growing as a
city, and our capital improvements plan
at least every five years. Um, or it
requires that the council determines
that there are no updates needed to any
of those things. Impact fees again are a
funding mechanism that offset growth
impacts. Um and these periodic changes
are needed uh to account for
accelerating or diminishing growth
rates, changing household sizes,
fluctuations in the level of service,
meaning the um the amount of parkland or
amenities that we have per thousand
people uh in the city, cost escalations,
as well as shifting policy and
priorities with city council or the
public. A little bit of a history uh
regarding park impact fees. These are
collected at the time of building permit
either for single family or multifamily
homes. Um and they've fluctuated over
the years. They were established in 1995
uh with chapter 33 in our municipal
code. And at the time there was a fee of
$249 for single family and 175 for
multifamily. That lasted well into 2007.
That's not to mean that they weren't
reviewed um subsequently, but that that
fee in particular lasted that long. And
in 2007, there was a resolution that
incre increased that fee over a period
of two years. Um started at 550 for
single family residents and 400 for
multif family and then was increased
over a period of two years to 800 uh for
single family residences and then $400
for multifamily residences if uh
amenities were provided on site. So, for
example, if a um if a an apartment
complex provided a pool and a gym and
outside areas for recreation and play,
those fees could be reduced to $400. If
not, it was $800, similar to the single
family residential. Then in 2013, uh
there was a resolution that established
the current fees. Uh those are currently
$2,600 per unit, both single family and
multifamily. Um and uh there have been
subsequent uh draft
um reports related to park impact fees
over the years that have requested a
slightly higher than what was adopted by
council. Um the draft study uh was
prepared by Tishler Bice. Um and here we
have a representative Julie Herlins with
Tisheller Bice. Um again this study is
the maximum allowable fee uh based on
the analysis that was done um by the
consultant um and the information
available. Of course much of that comes
from us. Uh something to note council
can lower that fee. However uh they
cannot exceed that fee. Um, it should be
noted that if the maximum allowable
isn't adopted, there generally still is
a gap in terms the amount of funding it
takes to maintain what we call our level
of service um for park land and
amenities. Uh, this particular study
includes the land use assumptions again
um that is the area in question that
would be the city of Los Cru's as well
as the growth rates, people per
household, things like that. the capital
improvement plan, not to be confused
with what was just shown to you by
Cynthia, that's actually the facility
types that can be included as part of
this study in including their level of
service. Uh, for example, that would be
how many pools are available per
thousand people, for example. Um, cost
analysis, uh, basically how much does it
take to build one of those facilities or
how much does it cost to build an acre
of parkland? And then of course the
maximum impact fees. It's basically
adding up all those different facility
types, the number of people and
maintaining that level of service and
coming up with this maximum fee. Um
we've recommended in this particular
report. Um two different methodologies
uh that of course city council will have
to choose from. One is by housing type
which we've done historically
multifamily and single family. Usually
different fees are the same fee for
those. um or by unit size which is
similar to the way it's uh the public
safety impact fee um is currently uh
been adopted and is being applied. And
in this particular case it's it's broken
down into three housing types. And then
of course the study also includes
revenues and shortfalls. Basically how
much is really needed over time to make
sure that we are maintaining our current
level of service. there's always a
shortfall even if we adopt the fully the
full maximum park impact fees which is
interesting to note and Julie can
provide a little bit more information
about that. So I'm going to go go ahead
and turn it over to her because she is
the expert and has a lot of information
to present today and I'm going to go
ahead and get that opened for you. Bear
with me one
second. All right, go ahead Julie.
Okay, this is a little bit different
format. Okay, great. Um, let me see if I
can get it a little bit zoomed in
here. Okay, this is in a PDF format, so
a little bit a little bit different. Uh,
good afternoon, uh, mayor, members of
council. My name is Julie Hurland. I'm
vice president with Tishler Bice. Um,
it's good to be here with you, uh,
today. Uh, and as Katherine gave a very
good overview of where we're at, um, I'm
going to get into a little bit more of
the detail um, of the calculations, some
of the information that's included in
the report, highlight that uh, that
material and, uh, we'll go from there.
Um, so there are a number of components
uh, within the impact fee study and the
impact fee uh, itself. uh these are and
we talk about components and these are
the types of sort of the sub uh types of
parks underneath the the park
calculation. So we have neighborhood
parks, community parks uh with two
different types. One is sort of a
community park general, community park
athletic, uh special use parks, trails,
recreation centers, indoor aquatic
facilities and outdoor aquatic
facilities. And you'll see throughout uh
we have uh options presented for
neighbor for the impact fee with
neighborhood parks and without and this
is uh directly uh related to the recent
adoption of of envision envision las
cusus uh where there's some changes in
subdivision regulations and we can talk
a little bit more about that. Um but we
are presenting uh the fees with both
neighborhood parks and without um if uh
with the adoption of envision uh um Los
Cusus uh the uh the requirement for
neighborhood park uh landed improvements
to be provided at uh development
approval sort of negates the the uh the
the the need for it to be in the impact
fees. So it is is a choice here. Really
quick, it's realize I'm sorry. Realize
I'm sorry. I apologize. Realize. Thank
you. I think you probably were trying to
give me
that was a much older and different
place in a different study from
somewhere else. So realize um okay so um
what I'll be showing you is a series of
uh of slides um that call out some of
the detail in the study that you have in
your packet with a an inven a a listing
and inventory of the current the current
levels of service where the city is at
today. Uh again by these each of these
subcomponents. Um so first we'll talk
about neighborhood parks. Um, and this
is an inventory again of what's in place
currently. Um, and what we're doing here
is totaling the number of acres,
100.56 acres, so almost 101 acres of
neighborhood parks currently in the
ground. Um, and then deriving a level of
service, and again level of service in
this case is the infrastructure level of
service. So the amount of acreage of
this type of park per thousand persons
currently in in the city. Um, and so
you'll see here our level of service is
087. Um, and uh, we apply a a land
acquisition cost here for this type of
park at 70,000 acres, 70,000 per acre.
Um, and this is uh, we have some more
detail on that as well if we want to go
if we want to drill down, but um,
information in the report on that
calculation.
um to get to a land cost per person for
neighborhood parks of
$60.90. So almost $61. So this is kind
of a a a a format that we use throughout
the study for each of these
subcomponents. And so the next one then
is community parks, both again uh
general and community parks athletic uh
facilities. Um what is interesting here
is that when we round we end up at the
same level of service purely
coincidental. Um I as I joked with staff
I checked this many times because when
you come out with the same a very
similar or a same number you want to
make sure uh there's not uh something
else going on there. Uh so uh
approximately 149 acres of each of these
types of facilities. Um, and these are
defined throughout uh through the with
staff and in your in the master plans
and and ongoing uh work to identify the
types of facilities or the types of
amenities within these facilities um and
how those are classified. So each of
these Yep. Sure can. Nope, that's not
what I wanted to do. Let me do
this.
Yes. Okay, better. Okay, thank you,
Katherine. Okay. So, uh level level of
service for each of these types of park
about 1.3 acres per thousand. Um in this
case, there's a a a different land
acquisition cost for these types of
parks uh separate from the neighborhood
parks at $65,000 an acre. So, a cost per
person applying that level of service
multiplied uh by the land cost
$83885 for uh special use parks. Again,
a different subcategory under the
umbrella of parks and recreation. A
current inventory of acres of about 39
acres, a level of service of.33 per
thousand, uh a land cost per acre that
is similar to the that is akin to the
neighborhood park. So, uh a land cost
per person of
$2310. And then for these types of
outdoor facilities, we then have those
are all the land uh the cost per person
on the land acquisition side. So then we
get to well the stuff that's in the
park. So the improvement costs within
the parks. Uh and so for this this is a
standard 2acre park at a cost per acre
of
$438,000 per acre for improvements. And
this is a prototypical type of park with
uh these types of amenities uh within
the park. Uh and then we show here again
providing some options with either with
neighborhood parks and without uh or
both of those options, we have a cost
per person that's assigned to that level
of service. So with neighborhood parks,
we're at a higher amount of about uh
$1600 per person,
$1655. and without neighborhood parks
applying that level of service of about
1,274. Then we move on to
trails. Uh and the trails level of
service is expressed as linear miles. So
this is again the current inventory in
place today of about 83 linear miles of
trails. The current level of service
about.24 24. And applying the uh
improvement cost per per mile of trail
of
$260,000, we get a trail cost per person
of
$62.40. Moving on to some indoor
facilities. First, we start with
recreation centers. Uh this again is a
um a uh the current level of service of
uh in square footage. So 56,000 and
change of uh square feet for current
facilities and uh the level of service
then about 0.5 per person. Um this is a
a we get into these types of facilities
where and and for all of these that if
the if they're included in the impact
fee uh the the uh the direction in the
future is for the city to continue to
provide these same these same facilities
and these same levels of service. So in
this case, we have a current level of
service of 0.5 square feet per person
and a and a a construction cost to
provide uh f a future recreational
facilities of
$725 per square foot. Uh so the cost per
person is
$355. Uh so again, if this were going to
be included, just like all of these
other compon components, the city is um
agreeing to continue to provide that
same level of service in the future,
provide that facility for uh indoor
aquatic facilities. This one's a little
bit different. Uh this reflects
facilities that have already been built.
Uh and so this is what we call a cost
recovery methodology. And so these are
uh this is allocated or this is
essentially spread out over future
populations. So you'll see here the
population number is different. Uh it's
a 20 years into the future and that uh
we're taking that square footage and
allocating it into the future. Um and
then reflecting the city's uh share of
the cost. So there was some external
funding that was used for these
facilities. And so we're reflecting what
the city contributed uh to get to the
cost per person. Uh and you'll see here
that $180 is the current is the uh cost
per person um included in uh the
component in the impact fee
calculation. And then finally, the
outdoor aquatic facilities piece is
essentially the splash pad component. Um
this this is the current uh the um uh a
current level of service uh for what's
in the ground today. uh cost of about
$26 per
person. Again, the assumption that the
city continues to build outdoor uh
splash p uh splash pads and splash
parks. So, alto together each of those
components then we we use as a building
block to get to the uh to the impact fee
uh the maximum supportable calculated
impact fee. Um and so this is just a a
sort of a snapshot summary of where
those costs uh how those costs can are
relative relative to the total. We also
do include a credit uh in the
calculation that accounts for potential
double payment by uh folks paying uh
paying prop paying taxes that are then
used to retire debt on this these same
facilities. Uh so we have a credit
that's integrated into the fee um and
then a uh calculated fee for single
family and multif family. And as
Katherine mentioned, we have two options
here uh for the fees. But first, I'll
show you how this how the level of
service uh translates into future growth
related needs. So what you're seeing at
the top of this slide is a summary of
all of those levels of service and the
cost factors that go along with those.
And then the middle part of this slide
then shows our uh the projected
population which comes from that land
use assumptions which is part of the
part of the uh
documentation. So a projected population
of about 14 uh 14,000 almost 15,000 uh
residents over the next 10 years. Now
these are projections. They're not meant
to be a prediction necessarily. If the
city then grows uh slower and grows
slower than what we've I what we've uh
projected uh there would be less of a
need for infrastructure. If the city
grows faster then there would be more of
a need for infrastructure. So what
you're seeing here then is for this
14,629 increase. How many acres and
square feet and linear miles of this
infrastructure would be needed to
accommodate that growth? So it is tied
back to the growth back to the land use
and the growth related needs as opposed
to uh existing deficiencies as opposed
to increasing uh levels of service etc.
This is at the current levels of service
what are those infrastructure needs and
that's in this gray shaded uh area and
the green highlighted cost associated
with those improvements. Again the city
were to grow slower there would be less
of a need. If the city were were to grow
uh faster there would be more of a need.
again at that same level of service and
there are choices along the way of of
funding those things or not.
Um so given that with those needs those
levels of service those co cost
components the the impact fees can be uh
calculated and were were calculated and
this is what you have in the report and
the packet. Uh so again with
neighborhood parks so this is like the
fully loaded maximum supportable uh top
uh top level of potential impact fees
with all of the components at that
highest rate. Again we're showing in
these two different methodologies or two
different approaches sing a a two fee
approach where it's single family or
multif family versus a uh a impact fee
schedule by size which would be all of
the units together. So, it's one or the
other. Uh, you wouldn't adopt both of
those schedules. So, you'll see here
that by the square the the uh the fee
schedule by square footage, you have a
uh a low end uh a small unit, the
smallest unit with a household size
that's scaled to that unit. Uh that is
currently would be at the maximum
maximum level with neighborhood parks
lower than the current fee is in place
today of that 2600.
When we then turn to um well one more
kind of rounding that out with that
maximum fee uh what does that mean in
terms of a potential revenue collection
given the projection the same
projections that we've based those uh
the needs on uh we have uh a a shortfall
what looks like a sizable shortfall but
what's really uh showing is of this $28
million a a a a big portion of that is
from the already built uh pool indoor
pool. So the growth related share is
much is much is much lower and I'll show
you that sort of a better example
without neighborhood parks. So let me
just turn to the without the
neighborhood parks piece. So this is uh
the fully the maximum calculated uh fees
without that neighborhood park
component. So no land no improvements on
the neighborhood park level of parks.
Um, and so then again, we're looking at
on the by size category a uh a low end,
the lowest level of the fee that's less
than the current fee at 2600. So that's
about a 22% reduction on that low end.
Again, this is without neighborhood
parks. And then um the kind of parallel
and again uh kind of having I think this
is an easier an easier um uh thing to uh
to see here and and the highlight here
is that basically with that credit
that's included in the calculation the
shortfall from growth even at this
maximum level uh is about 4.1 million.
Again, this 27 million includes, and I'm
kind of using my my uh cursor here,
includes this kind of large amount
that's already been built and sort of
sunk that the cost those costs have
already been sunk, so to speak, for
pools. Um so, and with that, I'm happy
to Oh, nope. And Katherine's going to
wrap up with um a closing. So, thank you
for your
time. So, I do have some additional
information to provide you before we get
to questions.
um specifically regarding um the capital
improvements advisory board and let me
open this into a better
view. So uh they're an advisory body to
the city council uh related to uh park
impact fees, levels of service, the
CIP and they met several times to
discuss this particular report. um 1st
January um 2023 there was a
recommendation for approval of the land
use assumptions. They had actually
reviewed that in the fall and then
brought it back for further discussion.
And then in February of 20 of February
27th of 2025, there was a recommendation
of the draft study. That being said, um
they did recommend an alternate fee
structure than what was provided uh in
the report. um they did an independent
analysis of neighborhood park costs and
came up with an entirely different fee
than the report came up with. Now, I do
want uh to let you know, take it with a
grain of salt. Although the information
they had uh was information that worked
well for them, it didn't account for a
lot of our component parts that were
included um in the analysis um because
we used essentially what would be a
sample park. And those fees were based
on on real fees that came from either
projects that we did, projects that
independent developers did that we then
reimburseed them of. Um so uh let me
show you what the recommendation from
CIA was so that you can see the
difference. Um there was uh much lower
um in terms of the proposed fee. still
an increase in some of the higher levels
but certainly um a an even greater
decrease uh than had been proposed um by
the draft report. The draft report was a
22% decrease for this this lesser level.
Um and then of course everything
increased um as well. Uh something to
note the methodology that they did
select in terms of their recommendation
to this council um was the square
footage um methodology rather than by uh
multif family single family which is the
unit type. Um just to break it down
further uh this was the analysis that
was done um by CIA in terms of their
cost per acre for improvements. Um just
and again if you recall in the report it
was
$438,000 per acre for improvements based
on our analysis. Their analysis
determined
$36,000 per
acre. Um some considerations for council
as we move forward with this and
actually uh go to a public hearing on a
regular council agenda is again the
methodology um the by unit type option
or unit size option. Again, unit size is
more in keeping with the way um the
public impact safety fees are. Um
something that uh both CIA and and staff
um uh prefer, but ultimately it's up to
this council to make that decision. Um
the facility types to include or exclude
neighborhood parks. Um again, realize
Los Cru's is incorporating that into
requirements for developers as they
build out subdivisions. uh which is why
uh the recommendation was to remove it
here. Um and then of course the fee, the
maximum fee as recommended by the report
um the CIA recommendation, another fee
as determined appropriate by this
council or that there are no updates or
changes needed at all. Um that is that
is um under your purview. And so with
that um we would be happy to take uh
questions. Um I know that there's a lot
of information here. Um you were able of
course to um hopefully review the report
um and uh we have additional information
if need be um if there are specific
questions that perhaps come up.
All right. Thank you Katherine and thank
you Julie. Um questions. Councelor
Krant. Thank you. Thank you for
including all of this data and I realize
that now I want to have your job. This
is super interesting to me. Um so I love
it. Um, it's totally my jam. Um, thank
you for orienting us on this and and I
briefly saw Phil walk in, but then he
ran away. I don't know. This is
something that from my perspective is
we've been considering as a city for a
really long time. It's really um
overdue. Like I think we've been
neglecting our duties to to address um
park impact fees for a long time. And I
think we we now kind of have the
experience of of having to catch up
which is not a great situation to be in.
But um I was hoping that you could bring
up so you had the CIA recommendations
but the one prior to that is the or or
on this I think it's just one page up.
Okay. Um, I guess for me the most
important variables that I think about,
and again, I think that my district
probably has the fastest growth of of
anyone. So, these impact fees will
probably be paid primarily by people
moving into district 5. Um, and I can I
that's part of what I consider in this,
but I also see that lots of parks are
actually exist in our district. And so I
and people are always calling me to ask
that the city come out and maintain
their tiny 1 acre neighborhood park. And
so all of those variables for me um
really make me think sorry like maybe
one more up
uh this one I think. So, I just wanted
to say from me, I think this is I I I
think we should include neighborhood
parks, although I understand that the
variable um that realize is somewhat
complicating of that. Um so, for me, in
part because of that very reason that
many people in my district benefit from
neighborhood parks and um but I don't
know how that will be moving forward in
terms of development and reimbursement
and all of those things. So, I sort of
defer on that, but I know that um all of
these get passed on to residents. That
is how buying a home goes. Um and I one
of the biggest things that people always
say is don't put up barriers to housing.
And I what I very much appreciate about
this model is that it takes into account
entry level housing for people who have
small families versus you know sort of
middle of the road and and thinks about
housing units, how many people there are
using the services by based on that. So
I would like to say that I support the
way that this is approached in terms of
square footage making it parallel to the
to the public safety impact fees. And I
also want to um really encourage us in
in my district. I think in the last year
housing prices have increased
um enormously and people continue to buy
houses. So So I say this homes stay on
the market for 3 days, 4 days, 5 days.
Um they cost probably 35% more than when
I moved into the district at least or
perhaps up to 50% more than when I moved
into my district. And so I just want to
put the caveat in here um that while
housing prices this is a factor in
housing prices, they're going to go up
whether I I anticipate whether we do a
lot of things or not, this isn't one of
the biggest variables driving housing
prices um from my observations and
experience in the district. So I would
also urge us to use to do the maximum
allowable fee per unit because folks are
enjoying these services. They're
expecting a level of service from us. um
we owe it to people to give them green
space in the out in the outside. And I I
would similarly argue that this accounts
for steep impacts on the housing sort of
supply by by changing to a residential
per square foot model instead of um
something else. And so it accounts for
that in the calculation. So I just want
to say thank you for presenting this um
of those options that were given. I I
don't know if this is I don't remember
if this is actually the one. I think I'm
thinking of the one with neighborhood
parks.
Um Oh, yeah. That's a that that one's
really a lot. Um so I I I am here for
this. This is the one that I would say I
am I am in for the maximum allowable for
each. um in part because thinking about
what benefits folks experience uh it's
disproportional from this and also um I
think for a while people were paying
like $3,000 to be members of a golf club
in my district and so I say that for
context like that's not
um that's one one golf course and again
I'm not saying that that's not a
legitimate expense it's great but this
is all of the facilities that the city
provides and so many neighborhood parks
so for me this what I would ask for
moving forward. Um I I realize I'm a
singular sort of voice in that
conversation. But um I do I have been
watching this issue since I got on
council and I'm really happy to have the
opportunity and I urge us to do it um as
soon as we possibly can so that we can
start um addressing the revenue shortage
and building more new park facilities
too.
Thank you mayor promp. Thank you, mayor.
Um, and thank you so much for this
presentation and for finally getting us
here. Um, like councelor Kin said, we've
been talking about this for a really
long time. I remember early days of the
uh, Ephilly administration. I uh, spoke
to him often about uh, about the
honestly the need for us to improve our
parks impact fee system as a whole. I
think uh we have incredible staff that
has gotten us to this point not only
with this conversation but with the
improvements in realize that of course
while that's still sort of out there I'm
I am very confident that we will have uh
realize as a citywide policy. So I I
just really do first of all want to
thank all of you for this work. Um this
is tremendously exciting. I don't think
I would take this job. It's way too many
numbers uh for for me. But I do um love
this conversation as a whole. And then
just for because there were so many
numbers and because so many of us um
have different filter than that, I just
want to say a couple things to summarize
so that I make sure I understand and so
make sure the public understands. Not
that you all aren't numbers people, but
I imagine there's a lot of non-numbers
people. Okay. Um, early on you spoke
about uh sort of the like the cost per
person and all of that and you said that
if we stay on track like if we change
nothing um that the need for our park
system would be around $37 million. Is
that am I interpreting that
correctly? Yes and no. Oh, okay. But
yes, more yes and no. Uh, let me go to
with neighborhood parks. Okay. And I'm
kind of in between reading and of
distance glasses, so this is kind of
tough. So, um, well, actually, let me go
back to Yep. If you do nothing today.
Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yep. Exactly. Um,
sorry. The, um, so the the, um, No,
actually, so growth related. Sure, you
are exactly right. I apologize. Uh,
exactly right. This is Yep. $37 million.
You're exactly right. um of growth
related needs based on the projections
that we have you know that are uh from
multiple sources um trends we look back
we look forward there's uh other um
external um uh projection sources that
we will look at but uh given a
projection over 10 years of about 14,000
and change of people um at that level of
service yes there's $37 million worth of
growth related needs of which a a a the
the the majority of that is in the park
improvements and so I was mistaken in
the um the indoor aquatic because what
we show here is really is is just that
the growth related share in this in this
uh chart so yeah the 2.6 6 million.
Okay. I was just so happy when you said
that I was right. Thank you. Okay. So
then my second question to this is and
just brace everybody. Brace yourselves.
I'm going to say a really scary word. I
want to talk about the equity in the
park system. And so um so even earlier I
think in one of your slides earlier,
right, you had them the neighborhood
parks um all of them listed. I would
have loved if you added a column on
which district they were because I think
it would have shown the serious inequity
that we have in the city of Los Cusus in
terms of the person in the park, right?
And who has access to neighborhood parks
and who doesn't because of frankly in my
opinion the years of disinvestment in
the park system um through the park
impact fee system and all of that. And
so I think I I maybe perhaps for the
next for our voting session, I would
love to see something like that because
I think from someone like I'm in
district 4 and from someone like me
where there is very little growth
happening. There's some growth but very
little growth. Um and the growth that
has happened, right? Like I always point
to Legends West neighborhood. I don't if
you know I don't know if you know or
not. Um, but this growing sort of
neighborhood, right, had this tiny
little pocket park and they said, "Yeah,
we'll build some some trails and it's
just not adequate for that
neighborhood." Um, and so when I think
about this conversation, I always think
about Legends West and that that
neighborhood as a whole and District 4
as a whole and three and one just
deserved better in terms of um
neighborhood parks. So, that's how I'm
sort of approaching this. I'm also
wondering if you
have like national best practices for
what this like dollar per person should
be, the land cost per person. Do you
have that top of your head? And I'm
curious if if sort of how that matters
in this conversation. Right. Right. It's
a great question. Um the So I always uh
we have lots of discussions both here
and elsewhere. So we are my firm does
work nationally. We do impact fees.
We've done I over a thousand impact
fees. I don't know what our number is
these days, but uh across the across the
country, 40 years. Um I've been there
for half of that time. Speaking of
numbers, uh but um the um so we're
really hesitant to talk about
comparisons in comparable communities
because every community's level of
service is different. everyone has a
different range of things and types of
parks and types of services, you know,
types of facilities that they provide
underneath, you know, the umbrella of
parks and wrecks. So, we're we're very
hesitant to do that. Um, we do we have
had questions and we can follow up on
some of what we've learned sort of
regionally and in the state, but it is
kind of a real checkerboard in terms of
who does impact fees, who doesn't,
where, what other sources of funding
there are. So we work in Colorado,
Arizona, Colorado, there's um kind of
this uh sort of a history um and a
tradition of dedicated uh dedicated
taxes to purchase open space. So sort of
they take their open space piece out and
kind of do that separately, you know. So
there's really a checkerboard of of who
does what and when and where and the
history. Uh Florida's very different
than Arizona, Colorado. California is
its own, you know, thing. Um, and New
Mexico is is is kind of a mix of all of
those things. There's really not a a
kind of a standard. Um, and so, uh, so
we're we're, you know, long way to say
hesitant to provide those kinds the the
specifics in terms of dollars. We can
say, you know, what other folks have
done, you know, regionally and kind of
within the state. No, I really respect
that. Thank you. I I um thanks for that.
Think one of the things that I
appreciate most about this study is that
you have it is like deeply localized.
Like it is all local data, all local
numbers. And so I think that that's
actually uh um really credible, right? I
think um I think some of the sort of
tension that exists around the last
number, the 2600, is that it's a little
bit of an arbitrary number and I want to
move away from that completely. And what
you have done here is said, "Oh, I have
receipts." Like there is we got to this
we got to this number through a very
specific localized formula. And so I I
really respect that. Thank you. Um I
think um just generally I think what I
would like to say about some of this and
what I'm already expecting will be the
push back around will this will make
home prices increase. And I do want to
note that in 2013 the last time there
was an increase which was a very long
time ago and if anything I've learned
from utilities is that we should not
rate shock people right like that rate
shock is bad that's we should try to
avoid putting this huge increase on
people and so instead you do a more
gradual um smaller increases in order to
upkeep and maintain your entire system
and deliver good service. Um, I feel
like that's a good perspective for this
as well. And in 2013, the sort of
honestly the narrative was the same.
Like you're if you raise it, you're
going to make it impossible for someone
to buy a home. I would argue that right
now first-time home buyer, it's already
impossible for them to buy a home. And
it's not because of park impact fees.
It's because of stagnant wages. It's
because of student loan debt. It's
because of medical. It's because of a
lot of other things that have nothing to
do with park impact fees. And yet here
we are trying to figure out how to
provide the best service to our
community. Um parks I deeply believe are
just as vital as a utility. And so um
I'm very happy that we're having this
conversation. For me I think the what I
would like to see us move forward with
is the
uh I don't know I think it's page 16. um
the piece without neighborhood parks
given the piece that exists in realize I
think if we sort of said um you have to
dedicate certain parkland and there will
not be reimbursements anymore and you
have to pay an additional fee. I I fear
that that would um get us in legal
trouble potentially. So um given the the
the stuff surrounding realize right now
though um in my mind if realize is the
new zoning code I think for me this I
would like to move forward with this and
in the residential by square foot. The
only um caveat maybe asterisk that I
would put here is that uh one of the
biggest motivators behind realize one of
the biggest motivators of the city as a
whole is to increase our housing stock.
like we have a serious housing crisis uh
for not just affordable units but fair
market rent units uh the missing middle
type of units right like it we are in a
housing crisis and we are trying to do
many things in order to incentivize what
that looks like um I and again I don't
we can't predict the future right so I
don't know if this number on the 1300 or
less would would yield build us the what
we desired to see and and especially in
the infill and I don't know and so I
guess if we move forward with something
like this I would like us to sort of in
a year and just in conversations with
staff right like in a year we revisit
and say did this yield us the kind of
housing the multif family housing that
we were hoping to especially in the
infill and if it didn't perhaps it's
time to revisit what the cost uh for
1300 or less specifically the less
could actually look like. Do you think
so that we wouldn't have to do an
arbitrary number at that point, is there
a way that you and your firm and staff
can come up with a number to help us
address a situation like that? Right.
Yeah. E, excellent, excellent question
too on the on that sort of threshold.
Um, you certainly so there's some
flexibility in those ranges for sure. Um
and this was um uh this was to be
consistent with the public safety fee.
This is exactly in line with the public
safety fee. Um thinking there would be
some level of consistency and um or that
would would provide a level of
consistency and uh certainty uh from the
development side. So you're sort of, you
know, you're kind of fitting in the same
buckets as you're as you're getting your
building permit in terms on the on the
other side of the table. Um but but that
can be an area uh that uh we uh uh from
our side can look at a little bit
closer. The the potential issue there is
the the low end of the household size.
Um and we have um you can go lower than
one considering some vacancy, you know.
So this is a h this is a a a person's
per housing unit. So at any given time
there there's going to be some vacancy
there. So you can be lower than one. Um
but it still needs to be reasonable and
it needs to sort of uh mathematically
make sense. Right. There's no half a
person per unit. Right. Right. So um so
the so the so it's sort of a yes or no
yes and no no question where you can
certainly drill down and look a little
bit deeper at the data to see how much
if you can go smaller than that 1300 uh
you know floor.
Um but again there is some some
flexibility there and you can you can
change the the middle parts to you know
the middle part too in terms of uh uh
scaling it you know sort of different uh
buckets. So so we we've worked in
communities with a fee schedule with you
know 10 categories or you know sort of
there can be have a range there. So, so
there's some flexibility there and I and
I just want to say that I think for now
I'm very comfortable moving forward with
this particular scale and again in a
year right once realiz is in place and
this and like all of that sort of pieces
are in place that we can look and
actually say
like what is happening right is it
working is it not working and then and
then sort of address it that way but I
at this point I just feel like we're so
far behind
as a whole that I'm not, you know,
willing to wait any longer and I think
um this is just vitally important and uh
I, you know, we need to improve our park
system as a whole. So, thank you so
much. Thank you,
Council Cor. I just wanted to This is
actually for Katherine, so sorry you're
off the hook, but thank you again. Um
and and I can settle on this if if
that's what you want, but I'm going for
the max. I'm just
saying highest highest end. I just want
to clarify one other point to this
question. For the first time, I think
this year, we waved impact fees for
affordable housing. And I just want to
clarify that changes to this would not
change our ability to do that in within
ordinance, right? That's correct. So
section 13131
uh is where those provisions related to
waiverss for affordable housing projects
exist. And uh historically you have sort
of two options with that. Historically
what we've done is we've but you uh as
council have identified a budget given
that to affordable housing so that that
we could reimburse those fees as we have
affordable housing projects come
through. We had a really large housing
project come through this year and the
code actually allows for a full waiver.
Um that's built into the code as well.
Um just historically it hasn't been done
but it was done the first time this year
for Peach Tree um apartments uh in the
metro Verde area um and there was a full
waiver of that for the affordable
housing and it's a fully affordable HUD
you know identified project. So with a
ton of amenities with a ton of
amenities. That's correct. Pickle ball.
Yes.
Council Grant. Uh yeah, I'm not going to
add anything really new to the
conversation, but just want to chime in
that I also support moving ahead with
the maximum allowable fee.
Um sticker shock is not fun, but it's
the inevitable consequence of not
addressing these things in a timely
fashion over years and years. And I
understand, I'm not dunking on previous
councils. Um, I understand why it's easy
or sometimes easier to just say, "Okay,
never mind. We're not going to change
anything because you're being badgered.
People are angry. You're being
threatened with not being reelected."
Um, which is not my problem. So, I'm
happy to,
um, you know, both recognize, understand
how we got here, but say it is time to
move ahead. So, I just wanted
to add on to that. Thanks.
Thank you. Uh, council,
I'll add on to that as well. I think
that it is time to kind of recognize
what benefits um, mental
health-wise parks do for our city and
everybody enjoys the amenities to the
ways that they can allow for themselves.
So, I would also like to ask I think we
in our one-on-one meeting, I had
suggested cutting a little bit into
the,300 or less. I like the the idea
that it might incentivize a different
type of housing as well. Um, so I'll add
to that as also and yeah, the square
footage is probably the better portion
of that. Thank you.
All right. Thanks. Um, what I would like
to add is it is difficult to balance. It
is it is something we are playing
catchup as you can see the dates of when
we started with the impact fees and then
when they were increased I don't know it
was 9 or 11 years but there was a big
gap and and we've seen that and we've
seen that with our own parks in our
previous presentation on the budget we
showed where we put money from the
telshar fund into our legacy parks and I
think that starts with us to to set the
standard and say these are the parks we
want for our city and we've done that.
So, I think it's also up to the
developers and the builders and everyone
else to annie up and make the nice parks
that we expect, but we have to have that
balance with with building as well. If
we do nothing, we're just going to get
further behind. I think we all agree
with that. So, to say with consistency,
I'm in favor of the square footage to be
consistent with public safety. But then
also I'm looking at the page 16 uh with
is that the one without
uh the neighborhood is that 16? Yep. 16.
Yeah. Looking at that. So we kind of
have that happy medium because what we
also have available is what we've
already done the telshore fund and then
I know up next we're having another
presentation with the geo bonds and
that's where we get to that equity and
that's where we can we can look and say
these are the park improvements we need
in certain areas and the city continues
to grow and develop and we don't get
further behind but at the same time if
we need to catch up we have other
options. We have the public safety
critical infrastructure GRT coming up
that'll start in July. Those will be
some other opportunities that we can
catch up with the things that have been
neglected. But we move forward and
everybody does their piece and we try to
balance as best we can to have a bright
sustainable financial future and not
always trying to catch up. So that would
be my recommendation. the square footage
and the page 16 uh would would be what I
would be looking at. All right. Good.
Okay. Thank
you. Okay. So, next we have item
3.4 the geo bond quarterly
update. Mr. David Cidio.
Well, good afternoon, Mayor and Council.
David Sevilla, public works director for
the record. Accompanying me and also
providing the update for the 2022 GOB
bond updates is Miss Natalie Green, our
housing neighborhood revitalization
administrator.
As you all may
recall, our community approved four
projects and four questions. Just as a
reminder on that bond question or that
election question, sorry, for a new fire
station number nine, the continuation of
the East Mesa Public Wreck
complex, affordable housing and park
improvements.
As part of our last update in January,
the new fire station was approximately
10%. We're working on finishing
up the roughens and also the exterior
footings. At this point in time right
now, the contractor is nearly complete
with the stem wall. What that is is the
CMU or the concrete mortar units that
are going to make up the wall on the
exterior and the interior portion of the
building. And with that, they will be
prepping portions of the building to
install the concrete pad. That'll
involve some vapor barrier, which goes
between the soil and up onto the CMU.
They will also be erecting the internal
structural components or the columns for
the building. That way, they can
continue with a concrete pad as we move
forward. At this point in time, with
that, construction is at 15%. And you'll
see some photos here in a little bit,
but at this point in time, you're going
to start to see a little bit more
vertical improvements as time goes on.
Photo there on the left is completion of
some of those cleanouts or
utility stubouts for the building along
there through a footing. In the middle
picture, you're starting to see those
CMU blocks go up. Also there on the
right as you start to see photos of the
image of the building
itself. And with that, here's the
construction schedule. As I mentioned,
we're 15% through the through the
project based on our estimated schedule
that we had developed prior to the
project. Schedule shows that we should
be estimated about
15%. As installations continue, we look
to catch up to that schedule moving
forward.
for the park improvements. At our last
meeting, we had let you know that we are
still working to finalize that lease
agreement with IBWC. That has been
completed. We are going to be moving
forward with construction here in midmay
in a few
weeks. With that, we will start those
improvements on the south half of the
park. As you all know, Laorona has both
a north and a south portion that's
bisected by US70 or Picachu Avenue.
However, there is a trail that goes
underneath and connects them. Uh, at our
last meeting, we also updated that we
were getting quotes for park equipment
replacement at Tillbrook as that was the
item number two identified under the
park master plan for need.
through discussions with parks and
wreck. Uh we are going to be moving
forward with a new scope at Laorona. Now
this will involve improvements to the
north half of of Laorona. You can see
right over here to the right where my
mouse is moving. You do have US70 or
Picacho Avenue. There is some playground
equipment down over here and some other
areas that the scope of work is going to
be used to identify with those funds
that were left over from the original
bid. Those include replacing the
playground equipment there at the park
on the north side and also the safety
surfacing. If any of you recall, the
safety safety surfacing around parks is
that kind of smooshy rubberized texture
uh that allows for for less impact.
There'll also be some wayinding and also
looking at mitigating some of the storm
water that comes here through the
playground. Now, depending on how we
mitigate that and whether we propose to
discharge that storm water into the
river, may have to amend the lease with
IBWC.
However, we're looking at options to see
what we can do to help mitigate some of
that at this point in time right
now. And as a reminder, up at the top,
you'll see some of those pictures that
we were doing with the original work
addressing sidewalks, some of the
benches, shade structures, not only
that, but fountains and then also
upgrading the restrooms. Down over here
towards the bottom, you'll see that
picture there. This shows encompasses
both those improvements on the south and
also on the
north. For this project here, we haven't
started that construction based on the
lease agreement that was going back and
forth. However, at this point in time,
if you remember, those schedules again
were an estimate. So, starting
construction, we are looking to meet the
deadline that we do have there through
quarter
4. our next project here for the East
Mesa Public Works Complex and the
continuation of it. I'll get into that
here shortly, but I want to also touch
base on those items remaining from the
punch list and the work that was added
to phase one. So, the shade structures
at this point in time, we are nearing
completion of those. We understood that
there was a delay as we received them.
It looks like we will be finishing up
those that were installed within the
pickle ball courts here within the next
week or so. And then the other shade
structure within the park itself should
be completed within three
weeks. For the playground equipment that
was added to this phase, that
construction will begin also miday. We
are estimating 12 weeks for installation
on that park equipment. And again, I'll
show you on the map where where that's
going to be installed.
And then finally for the continuation
with that 2.7 under the question that
was approved here in
2022 those improvements that procurement
is in progress. We did mention that we
were going out and getting costs. The
cost that we received for everything
that we had wanted to install came well
above what we currently have. We had to
scale back some of those and I'll go
over what those improvements will be.
That process is in procurement right
now. Once we have that, we will be
moving forward and we're estimating to
be in construction starting in
June. So, here are those items that will
be installed as part of this work
through here. We have two basketball
courts, the restroom at the 10 acre
park, some street furniture with
benches, shade structures, musco
lighting. This will include that
lighting for the basketball courts and
the skate park adjacent too. skate park
is under a separate contract and not
part of these go bond funds. However,
through those other funds that skate
park is skate park is being built
adjacent here within the
complex. And then lastly, we do have a
10x10 public art space that'll be going
in as you come into into the complex
itself
here. Here's the schedule that we do
have for that. Based on the estimated
schedule through here, we are aligning
with that and should be continuing to
have those improvements done through
quarter
4. And at this time, I'll go ahead and
turn it over to
Natalie. Good afternoon, Natalie Green
for the record. Mr. Mayor, members of
council, uh, this is an update on the
affordable housing project. So, Three
Sisters is 88% complete. They've
received temporary cos for buildings A
and B and they have leased those up.
They're looking to get uh TCOs for C and
D this week and then E H and the rest of
the letters um next
week, whatever those letters are. And
then again, they're they're leasing up.
Uh there's already residents residing in
buildings A and B. And then please save
the date for our ribbon cutting on May
13th.
uh Padrina Senior Apartments and I will
talk while this video plays. They are at
74% completion. Um the exterior is
almost completely done. There's um some
minor cleanup that needs to occur. Uh
they are working on finishing what's the
western wing. Um and then once uh the
elevators come in, they want to phase
occupancy. So, they want to um lease up
the entire west wing and then they'll
finish out the east wing. And so,
they've just finished uh their dog park.
All the stuckco's done. Um and they're
working to finalize
that. I'll let it play a little bit more
before I change the screen.
Um, and then they're also working on
some of the landscaping is starting to
go
in, but for the sake of time, I'm going
to skip ahead and I can send you these
videos if you want to see them. Um, we
have uh drone footage on all the
projects uh from our public works team.
So, shout out to Chuck for um his work
on
this. Uh, the Peach Tree Canyon
Apartments, it is under construction.
They're at 26% completion. So, they're
starting framing on a lot of the
buildings. They do think the first
residential buildings will be complete
in September of 2026. And so, they want
to start leasing in August and then also
do TCO, so they'll be able to phase the
occupancy. Uh, Arcadia first uh phase 4,
that's the single family subdivision
that we are acquiring with general
obligation bonds to work on some single
family. We've finished the purchase
negotiations. So, uh, that contract is
out with the with the seller of the
property and then we'll bringing that
forward for council
approval. Um, Amodore Crossing is not
funded with GoFunds, but I do like to
give updates. Um, again, we've secured
over $14.25 million. The most recent
award was $2 million from Housing New
Mexico. Um, we're just waiting uh final
legal approval hint, Brad, and then
they're ready to wire me the $2 million
next week.
Um we do have a remaining gap of 1.3
million. We're looking for the state to
fill that. Um if for some reason they
don't uh fill that, there's some
additional um grant savings that we may
have. And then I just wanted to give an
update on some of our pipeline projects
um from December. I do want to let you
know that the residences which was the
project near the fire station 9 is not
moving forward. they um were not able to
submit an application and the the
finances just don't pencil out. So that
project um will not be moving forward in
that location. They are potentially
evaluating other locations in the city.
Um Posses was awarded both capital
outlay and a 9% low-income housing tax
credit. So final approval for that
project um will go to the board uh MFA
board um May 21st. And once that um
moves forward, we'll work on
transferring the property formally.
We'll be finishing design and anticipate
that we'll start construction um in
about 6 to 8 months. And then Royal
Crossing, we're in pre-development, so
we're still evaluating that project.
That's a potential 147 unit 55 plus
community at the corner of Main Street
and Solano in the Royal Crossing um
master plant. and uh they would be
looking for some sort of commitment from
the city uh just before the 2026
application cycle. And then we have two
other projects that are
um single family subdivisions that we're
working on with Tiara del Soul. So the
Sierra del Soul and the Skyllark
subdivisions are permit ready. So we're
just waiting for some of those uh funds
to come from the state and we'll start
construction on those. And with that uh
David and I will stand for
questions. All right. Thank you,
Natalie. Thank you, David. Uh, Councelor
Grant,
thank you, Mayor. No, I was I was a
little bit ahead of you. Um, quick
question. Uh, Natalie, um, regarding
three sisters, first of all, thanks.
This is all amazing. Oh, and I just want
to I just want to give you some snaps
for, you know, goating Brad from the
podium. like I've watched so much NFL
draft lately and that was that was a
baller move like that. I really
appreciated that.
Um so uh great to hear um that we're
already getting folks moving into Three
Sisters. I know with Pedrina the uh
getting them leased out was you know
actually it was demand over supply that
you were getting constant. How has
leasing gone with Three Sisters? Has
there been a good response from the
community? Um, there is. There are some
few vacancies. Uh, so one of the things
we're doing is the ribbon cutting will
be open to the public. So, we're hoping
to right after the ribbon cutting, we'll
be able to fill the rest of the units,
but um Oh, that's fant. So, it can also
be kind of a recruitment neighborhood
building event. Fantastic. I will add
that um Peach Tree uh we we're at
probably once a week getting an inquiry
to be added to the weight list. So, um,
there have been some folks already
anticipating those to be ready to go.
Oh, that's amazing. And do you have a
sense of how how are people finding out
about this? Is it word of mouth? Is it
city social media? It's a little bit of
all of it. Um, Mr. Mayor, uh, Councelor
Graham, some of it is, uh, updates from
this. They end up in in, uh, social
media or the newspaper and we get calls.
Um, in the case of Padrina, sometimes
it's district meetings or
um, again, people are just monitoring
what's happening at council and they saw
something in the paper and are calling
us. And then a lot of times it's just
inquiries and calls, right? So,
someone's having a landlord tenant issue
and they're looking for a new place to
live and then we're able to provide a
list of um, different subsidized
properties across the city um, including
the flyers that we get from the property
manager. And then of course all the
properties have um very large signs. So
as people see construction move up, it
does have um typically contact
information for either the developer or
the property manager. Okay, great. Thank
you so much. Um and then just a a
comment toward Dave and not so much a
question. I'm happy to see the Laorona
Park improvements um getting put on
there. That's a place that I ride
bicycle through several times a week,
especially the wayfinding because I feel
like currently I am the wayfinding asset
for the city because anyone who looks
lost, I'm like I I know I know this
trail system. Let me let me help you
out. So, um great great to know that and
that the you know hopefully some storm
water
um fixes because it can get a it can be
a whole other pool facility over there
sometimes. So great to hear. Thank you.
You can go ahead now, Councelor Corin.
Just kidding. Yes, please. I I would
like to add to my budget request a small
sandwich board for Graham to wear while
she's cycling that she can maybe
whiteboard that she can write directions
on. Ask me um where where you can go. Um
I was just curious, I don't know if I
remember, but could you talk about those
two developments, Skylark and I I don't
know where those are or anything about
them. Could you just talk about them a
little bit? Sierra Delul and Skylark. Um
I don't remember them and they sound
cool. Councelor Karan. Um Sierra Sierra
del Soul is a subdivision that is next
to Sierra Middle School. It is a piece
of property that the city acquired in
exchange uh for paving Bruins Lane. And
so as part of that, we put out an RFP
and did a development agreement. Um they
ti del designed both subdivisions. Um
but they've been holding out for funds
to be able to build the infrastructure.
Um and we anticipate those funds coming
sometime in in the new fiscal year um
through some grant funding. And so our
hope is to do that. Um and that's Sierra
and Lewis or Lewis Street and Spruce,
but the parking lot's there. So it's
behind the parking lot. Um and then the
other property, Skylark, is off
Skyllark Drive and Central um on the
East Mesa. Um we had initially looked at
that to be a subdivision and twoacre
park. Um and that was a directive from
former counselor um Sorg when he wanted
a twoacre park on the East Mesa. So we
initially uh designed it for the park.
um when the cost came back uh to be able
to build the subdivision out was
unfeasible with the park. So they've
redesigned it to make it all housing. Um
and there is a substantial waiting list
for both of those projects. So there's
almost 200 people waiting for first-time
home ownership and so uh we do want to
use a portion of the go bonds to do
first-time home buyers um in Sierra del
Soul Skylark and then the Arcadia which
is in uh the Metro Verde
PUD. So a little bit of infill little
bit of new. Thank
you Mayor Pro Tim. Thanks Mayor. Thank
you Natalie. If you go back to this one,
I I don't have a question really. I just
wanted to let you all know that last
week when uh we met with Secretary of
Workforce Development, Serita Ner, we
talked to her about all of these
projects and like just how ready they
are and the gaps in funding and and
really still advocating for that $10
million to come because we know that it
it will be used immediately, right? Like
it it's not money that's going to be
sitting around sort of waiting for
something to happen. like it can be used
right now as you can see obviously even
like with Amador that we still have a
little bit of a gap but it's already
going and Peach Tree is moving fast and
um so you know just a huge thank you to
Jan who was there um and then just
really hoping Natalie that obviously
you're keeping in connection with with
the secretary and making sure that um we
do as much as we can to
um advocate is the kind word but really
fight for these dollars to come to our
community. I'm going to have a Tom Cruz
moment of show me the money. I love that
actually. I will join you. Um I think
Los Cruus is ready and like I said, we'd
use it pretty immediately. So, um just
thank you for, you know, all of your
staff being so well prepared for that.
And then David, I just have one small
question for you on Laorona Park.
Please, I apologize if I forgot if
you've you've probably talked about this
in previous presentations, but the IBWC
um was it said approval that had didn't
have a check mark yet. And can you just
talk to us about what that meant?
Mayor Mayor Prom.
Yeah, right there. One. So under the
construction phase, the lease approved
by all parties. That's the update for
this one here.
So yes, the lease has been approved.
It may have to be amended based on how
we mitigate the storm water. That's was
part of the discussion. Got it. Thank
you so much if I totally missed that.
Appreciate it, Mayor Council Graham. Uh
thank you for for the recognition.
However, that was that was Parks who who
had the decision to move the funds over
here. Just wanted to share that with
you. Thank you. Thank you so much.
Okay.
Oh, that's good. Thanks. I did have one
other question. the the one on
um El Paso that's
uh yeah Pedrina senior apartments and
it's not really with the housing it's a
little bit more for uh Steve uh
with I just know throughout the
community there's a lot of talk about uh
more pickle ball courts more pickle ball
courts and I know that there's a Frraier
park there and there there's other
parks. Is there any any update? Is that
something that can be converted uh from
tennis courts to pickle ball courts or
in other areas of town?
Yes, we um have looked into and um
talked with the community groups about
um using Fringer as a pickle ball
facility.
Um the feedback um was that um from the
pickle ball group was more that they'd
like to see a tournament site um a place
that can grow out to 24 32 courts
eventually. Um they feel like right now
they've um been getting by. That was our
discussions about 3 months ago, four
months ago. But I have seen an uptick in
the last 3 months. Um, East Mesa pickle
ball complex has been um full.
Previously I usually maxed out at five
courts out of the eight and so Apadaka
had been down you know short one usually
open. Um and so we can go and um convert
Fringer to pickle ball courts. Um, and I
do have a cost on doing
that. We've also looked at making it
multi-use and making it so that it can
be a footall
slashbasket and still add a couple
pickle ball courts there. And so we've
been looking at each of those options.
All right. Thank you, Steve. I I was
more concerned like or asking for the
residents that are living there now in
in in that community. you know, it's
just a walk right there to the park and
that to have some of those amenities and
I don't know if through the developer uh
Natalie if there ever been talks about,
you know, having some recreation
activities for their for their tenants
as well. That's that's why I was
wondering if that was something that
could be done, but you already said
you're looking at the cost and that's
something that maybe we could talk with
the I was hoping you the residents you
could see it from here, but I don't
think you can. M. Yeah. When you when
you played the video, that's what caught
my eye was the park. All the green space
behind there. They are um they did add a
cross Well, they need to paint the
crosswalk, but they did add an ADA ramp
with direct access from the apartment
complex to correspond with the
um Fringer and Gomez what's what's it
called? Master Plan. And so, um, my
goal, not this year, next year, is to
advocate for some grant funding, um, for
parks, similar to how housing advocated
for, uh, Valley View Park. So, it's on
my list of, um, wheeling and dealing to
do to hopefully get them some some grant
funds to make some improvements to, um,
add additional connectivity with uh,
Pedrina.
Sounds good. Thank you.
Thanks.
Okay. That was our last item. Thank you,
David. Uh motion to adjurnn.
So move, Graham. Second.
This is on the motion to adjurnn the
work session. Councelor Mccclur. Yes.
Councelor Matise. Yes. Councelor Graham.
Yes. Councelor Karan.
Yes. Councelor Fletus. Yes. Councelor
Bencoml. Yes. Mayor, yes.