[{"_1":2,"_111":-5,"_112":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,87,99],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6335265,"mediaKeyId","2290168-2624e851957b935c78a2e9cdf95a1107","parentId",2290168,"title","Public commenter raises concerns about public‑records responses and Historic Preservation Board voting rules","audioSeconds",517,"startMs",6962000,"endMs",7479000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2290168-2624e851957b935c78a2e9cdf95a1107&start=6962&end=7479","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2290168-2624e851957b935c78a2e9cdf95a1107/thumbnail_6962000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6335265/Santa-Fe/Santa-Fe-County/New-Mexico/Public-commenter-raises-concerns-about-publicrecords-responses-and-Historic-Preservation-Board-voting-rules","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6335265-031e3ca5c1bd6e2cd6a139cec61129e8/orig.mp4?Expires=1773614575&Signature=k1H-~nz19qSW~gKEvc8wO77pXdCDQpczsz-YhxIxP2tdvQ59n5eO7QHBo5zdB3PXdWjV0JBXSBO9YS3RTejMYAy7iRCBV~iYWheVa2XB7IU1aZL8GncD6XgHolpumgZ7Hl3QQrt85N1oee4EyWOYmAcXo6oS0sA5sEu3Xja4NeD4WUmzF0iMg7NyIqPorKQsjmiky8pJywAtIbEX-2ug~CnLkEkD~nnM-uI~U1IGih4KHAsg9jG84A9yf2ZUFYpphQKY5Wv3GRLgtu2VLqaTHkd90Q4L-zSpn2Th8Bgd2CgKbH4Fv6uda5Z-eCv0MX-kgEDqboxDE4GvNClybbha7w__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","City Council of Santa Fe, NM","date","2025-02-13T00:05:11Z","article","A member of the public, Stephanie Benonato, used the petitions portion of the Feb. 12 meeting to report problems she said she encountered when requesting city records and to raise a concern about how the Historic Preservation Board applied voting and quorum rules.

Benonato told the governing body she had requested staff reports and other documents related to Recreation Department matters and maintenance of fitness equipment; she said the records produced did not match the requests and in at least one case she regarded the response as \"fraudulent.\" She asked the city to correct its records handling and public‑records responses.

Benonato also raised a procedural concern about the Historic Preservation Board's handling of an appeal she referenced. She quoted language from a 2019 resolution that she said requires a majority of members present to decide a question when a quorum exists. She told the council that when only two board members voted on a matter despite a quorum being present, that result was inconsistent with the resolution's written voting instruction. Benonato said the correct reading of the resolution requires the majority of members present to decide an item and described the apparent practice as a problem that frustrates the public.

The council did not take action in response to the public comment during the meeting. Staff did say they were continuing work to correct public‑records and constituent‑service processes at the clerk's office and other departments and that procedural questions about boards and commissions can be taken up with the city attorney and staff for clarification.

Ending: The city had no immediate response on the record to Benonato's specific allegations; the comment is expected to prompt follow‑up from the clerk's office and the city attorney's office on public‑records responses and board‑voting procedures.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Governing Body Meeting 2-12-25","oneSentenceSummary","A resident told the governing body that she received incorrect material in response to public‑records requests and questioned the Historic Preservation Board's vote interpretation; the comments asked the city to follow the written language of a resolution for quorum and voting.","taxTitle","Santa Fe, Santa Fe County, New Mexico","taxId",2727,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6335270,"Council approves $933,000 in road impact fees to complete Agua Fria/South Meadows intersection project",602,5642000,6244000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2290168-2624e851957b935c78a2e9cdf95a1107&start=5642&end=6244","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2290168-2624e851957b935c78a2e9cdf95a1107/thumbnail_5642000.jpg","/articles/6335270/Santa-Fe/Santa-Fe-County/New-Mexico/Council-approves-933000-in-road-impact-fees-to-complete-Agua-FriaSouth-Meadows-intersection-project","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6335270-6b080fd6942da9f9da6c8d84d3ce5095/orig.mp4?Expires=1773614575&Signature=KSHkfxRETpQBA~M6NzGS1o5mFwJgAb~3w9M0kGNfBD1ZF20vSIizyTRsAEhN0CzQnXyA6wO--1OJC0zBnisFX9ic7r8TfB~PEMQCWnCy4ryVIi~rNJ1igdUU2Uw0J-3GFydIyWD33NRrBjZZYPazL4DqsyZXpGrri9tj53KaBzD2pbNnoLyrR-Lr3j0bMrg0A2o9WxvyPzgmEwThx6UORIto60hx2aaNW8WfGVwe8kgCfntN9zw-r14ONefopRRjbrKgYUeldsxyTv6-wN-QZz6UCsgyCBQoHJRwhxhEiaB7vyanNuC4Qutyjd00sstnJm~HwsaDfDvHcGQkz-0wyA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The City Council approved a budget amendment resolution to allocate $933,000 in road impact fees to complete the Agua Fria/South Meadows intersection improvements project, officials said during the Feb. 12 meeting.

Romella Gross Moss, Complete Streets capital projects manager, told the council construction is about 40% complete and described improvements as ADA‑compliant sidewalks, safer driveway access, bike lanes on both sides, lighting and traffic signal upgrades. She said delays were caused by right‑of‑way negotiations and public‑utility easements.

\"We had to negotiate with 11 property owners to secure right of way and four property owners to secure public utility easements,\" Gross Moss said, noting work on the final easement was expected in March or early April. She said project schedules also were affected because four poles tied to the project were privately owned and could not be moved by the utility without completed easements.

Staff said the project already has state funding of approximately $3.8 million; prior city match included roughly $189,000 of road impact fees. The additional $933,000 requested is eligible under the city's Impact Fee Capital Improvement Plan (IFCIP), and staff said the project is eligible for up to $3 million in road impact fees.

Councilors expressed frustration at the delay and thanked staff for navigating complex property and utility issues. The clerk called a roll; the vote on the budget amendment was unanimous with the following recorded votes: Councilor Lee Garcia — yes; Councilor Michael Garcia — yes; Councilor Lindell — yes; Councilor Romero Worth — yes; Councilor Jamie Cassatt — yes; Councilor Alma Castro — yes; Councilor Amanda Chavez — yes; Mayor Weber — yes. (Councilor Faulkner was excused earlier in the meeting.)

Ending: With the additional road impact‑fee allocation approved, staff expects to complete required easements and proceed with remaining electrical relocations and construction to finish the intersection improvements project.","The City Council voted unanimously Feb. 12 to allocate $933,000 in road impact fees to finish construction of the Agua Fria South Meadows intersection improvements, citing right‑of‑way and utility easement delays that stalled work.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6335275,"City seeks nominees to reconstitute impact‑fee advisory committee as IFCIP update begins",424,4498000,4922000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2290168-2624e851957b935c78a2e9cdf95a1107&start=4498&end=4922","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2290168-2624e851957b935c78a2e9cdf95a1107/thumbnail_4498000.jpg","/articles/6335275/Santa-Fe/Santa-Fe-County/New-Mexico/City-seeks-nominees-to-reconstitute-impactfee-advisory-committee-as-IFCIP-update-begins","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6335275-70c7f27af7da4aa7b45579b0c3881ae4/orig.mp4?Expires=1773614575&Signature=ih~tPlmH~G62aHBoivlfbMLQxonxd0Hsj4yFhTBNlbMu0hweklrPp6xJhD0Rem7g1V-67Dn1-SCbV9NKUagcJOrK-edV6eGw26CRFeqdnlxad9xNj1DQe3cVE8CVOXycZxRAYgRxIAK8DQfqYUW1LpljhwZmZcz9A4GJYtEnHUbeq7fkH2G~ndxi6H0J~f82aZ9ANub2p51e6y~iZ3NGp-K~JH6hVk800r5rSWw~kETAwXS9FxXRrsKzlFXZ18YXF90RBZP9f7OD8h05izpw62QtefypjFpSwJ6UO8YvNdx4h7NujWX-MgkZOG-AJ-5v73ruxyRclbqG8paK4qDvbA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","City Public Works Director Regina Wheeler told the Governing Body on Feb. 12 that the city must reconstitute its Capital Improvements Advisory Committee (CIAC) as staff begins an update of the Impact Fee Capital Improvement Plan adopted in December 2020.

Impact fees are charged under state law and city code to offset the infrastructure impacts of development. \"There are four types of impact fees that the City of Santa Fe collects: roads, parks, fire, and police,\" Regina Wheeler, public works director, said.

The CIAC is a nine‑member advisory body; city code requires that at least four seats represent the real estate, development or building industries. Wheeler asked each councilor to submit candidate recommendations; staff requested the governing body provide names within two weeks so the clerk can place nominees on an upcoming agenda for formal appointment.

Wheeler said the IFCIP update will reassess land‑use assumptions, update project lists eligible to be funded with impact fees and ensure projects on the city’s capital improvement plan (ICIP) remain aligned with growth‑related needs. She noted that impact fees are commonly used as match or gap funding for larger capital projects: city staff said the city often supplies roughly 25% of project costs while state or grant funds supply the remainder on many projects.

Wheeler provided a short history: the last IFCIP was adopted in December 2020; Public Works took management of the program thereafter to better align fee collections with capital delivery. She said 15 projects have used impact fees to date, with several complete and other projects actively using fee revenue. Examples discussed included a listed allotment of $1.1 million toward Fire Station 5 equipment and training facilities and additional impact‑fee support requested for the Agua Fria South Meadows project (an item later before the council).

Wheeler said CIAC members will be expected to meet quarterly and serve two‑year terms that may be renewed. She said applicants do not need to live within a particular council district and in some cases need not live in the city. The department offered to accept resumes and provide staff feedback to councilors on proposed nominees before formal appointments.

Ending: Council members responded with support and asked staff to circulate the nomination process and a short timeline. The city will proceed with candidate submissions and return to the governing body for appointment.","Public Works asked the governing body to nominate members to a nine‑member Capital Improvements Advisory Committee to help update the Impact Fee Capital Improvement Plan (IFCIP). Impact fees collected by the city fund roads, parks, fire and police infrastructure and are often used as grant match or gap funding.",{"_33":100,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":101,"_41":102,"_43":103,"_45":104,"_47":105,"_49":106,"_51":107,"_53":108,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":109,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":110,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6335279,"Santa Fe posts clean FY24 audit; eight findings remain including two material weaknesses",1298,314000,1612000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2290168-2624e851957b935c78a2e9cdf95a1107&start=314&end=1612","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2290168-2624e851957b935c78a2e9cdf95a1107/thumbnail_314000.jpg","/articles/6335279/Santa-Fe/Santa-Fe-County/New-Mexico/Santa-Fe-posts-clean-FY24-audit-eight-findings-remain-including-two-material-weaknesses","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6335279-74c49952e380e401db3ee3132326f54f/orig.mp4?Expires=1773614575&Signature=PHqsYvyf1dHWXFhj81h4IhCiO0go1vvpf-haei1tmtnZXP-gE6~hHK7J7nG5iZoVDS8EBZN00SnrJkod7KapkIxTfXJD0JfqMX1arx9syvuE6HOLKq~gT17CmGCy7lGWgSvomzvg9GLyRB~fWkEGVNU5zf8wufLp5~U4DMzlml44PWOKvBrvlht~611CIRQ-SRDy72-bXy1hwef5azZX4i5UJWq-XcztSzqA~Xo9bd2mtHuv98cvM0qY~0IOLZwvM4VYjhzoAgsksBfNXatM2Pxyymjg78aK4AFWmM9E7hOvshmvNO~E~iaO6yYLWiK2ow1bTep3Tx~I2ea2RBq-JQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The City of Santa Fe received an unmodified (\"clean\") opinion on its fiscal year 2024 financial statements and on federal compliance testing, City Finance Director Emily Oster told the governing body at its Feb. 12 meeting.

\"This was an unmodified opinion for the financial statements and the federal compliance audit,\" Emily Oster, finance director, said, adding that the audit showed fewer findings than the prior year. Auditor A.J. Bowers of Carr, Riggs & Ingram explained details of program testing and control findings during the presentation.

The nut of the audit presentation was that external auditors were able to substantiate balances and transactions to the level required by generally accepted accounting principles, while also reporting eight findings in the FY24 report. Officials said the number of findings dropped from 13 the prior year; the city reported resolving nine FY23 findings during the FY24 audit process and a total of 37 prior findings across audits for FY21–FY24.

Bowers described the audit scope and timeline: planning began mid‑2024, fieldwork occurred in the October–December window, the independent auditor's report is dated Dec. 16, 2024, and the New Mexico state auditor released its review Jan. 27. The auditors tested three major federal programs as required by the Uniform Guidance: the Airport Improvement Program, the Federal Transit Cluster, and the Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Fund, and issued unmodified opinions on those programs.

The FY24 report lists eight findings: two material weaknesses, four significant deficiencies, and two matters reportable under the New Mexico State Audit Rule. Auditors flagged a material weakness in controls over construction in progress and another material weakness related to equipment and real property management for federally funded airport awards. Federal award findings included reimbursement request documentation, allowable‑cost/payroll matters and subrecipient monitoring concerns. Auditor Bowers said some federal program findings were repeats from prior audits but reduced in severity in some cases.

City staff described steps and deadlines to address findings. Finance officers said the city has hired a capital asset accounting manager and plans to implement a capital‑asset module in the Munis enterprise resource system to improve tracking of construction‑in‑progress and fixed assets. Staff and auditors told the council that six of the eight current findings have planned corrective actions targeted during fiscal year 2025, while some items tied to system implementation or external collateral requirements have longer timetables.

Finance Director Emily Oster emphasized the work across departments: staff from IT, legal, municipal court, parking, utilities, human resources, transit, youth and family services, economic development, airport operations and contract partners supported the compressed audit timeline. Accounting officer Matt Bonhoeffer was singled out by Oster for leading much of the corrective work since joining about a year earlier.

Council members pressed for clarity on repeated findings, timelines and measures to prevent recurrence. Auditors and staff described how several repeat findings were \"modified\" because the underlying facts or affected accounts changed from the prior year; they also described procedural changes (shifting grant draws and centralizing grant review) that reduced the size and frequency of some errors reported in prior years.

City and audit staff provided several quantitative items during the discussion: FY24 had eight findings (2 material weaknesses, 4 significant deficiencies, 2 state‑audit items); the city resolved nine FY23 findings during the FY24 audit process (69% of FY23 issues); auditors reported a total of 37 prior findings resolved across the last four audits (FY21–FY24). The audit opinion is dated Dec. 16, 2024; the state auditor released the report Jan. 27, 2025.

The presentation concluded with council questions and staff requests for continued support for staffing, systems work and follow‑up reporting. No formal votes were taken on the audit itself at the meeting.

Staff noted they will return with progress updates on corrective actions and implementation milestones for the Munis capital‑asset module and other system fixes.

Ending: The FY24 audit gives Santa Fe a clean opinion while leaving a small set of control and compliance issues to be corrected. City staff and outside auditors told the council they expect to correct most findings during the coming fiscal year and will report back on milestones.","City officials and external auditors reported an unmodified (\"clean\") opinion on the City of Santa Fe's fiscal year 2024 financial statements and federal compliance testing, while identifying eight findings—including two material weaknesses—and timelines to correct most by mid‑2025.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Public commenter raises concerns about public‑records responses and Historic Preservation Board voting rules

Council approves $933,000 in road impact fees to complete Agua Fria/South Meadows intersection project

City seeks nominees to reconstitute impact‑fee advisory committee as IFCIP update begins

Santa Fe posts clean FY24 audit; eight findings remain including two material weaknesses