[Music]
around this
all right i'd like to false awards
legacy council committee meeting for
monday february 7th 2022
the first uh committee of public safety
so i'd like to call the public safety
committee to order we have one agenda
item that is the 2022 new york state
stock dwi plan grant and i'll be
presented by
ac
good evening everybody
here before for acceptance of our new
york state uwi uh enforcement grant it's
an annual grant we get based upon a
formula the state uses please don't ask
me a question about the foremost i
really don't know they they notify us
each year also do special enforcement so
it's obviously very serious these are
bad portions that go out there as well
as they have a um
this right here
high visibility controls which are
important because those are ones that we
do around
super bowl sunday so far holidays
certain holidays just to try to minimize
any people that might be you know
drinking and trying it so
hook up two different categories sixteen
thousand thirty eye controls and the
rest for high visibility so
any questions potentially
any questions from our council members
is there any other business to fall
before the public safety committee
if not i'm getting a motion to adjourn
so
second how's your favorite
sorry about that working together i'd
like to call to order city development
and planning we have 12 items on the
agenda the first item is uh release of
easement mayor mccarthy
thank you madam president uh first item
deals with uh
commonly referred to as the wedgeway
building it's been a point of
controversy for a number of uh
years
and uh
the team at metroplex has been working
on a number of scenarios
and there is a easement that really has
been uh so
for all practical purposes no longer
needed
their city has now turn over to ray
gillin
to go into some of the details would you
like to come up here sure
see you on camera
that's good i have a face for radio
though
thank you
we're trying to position the wedgeway
building for development we've had a
great step forward with the city
historic commission
enthusiastically and unanimously move
forward to the state historic office a
recommendation that'd be listed on the
state historic register
the mayor was advocating for that and
it's going to be on considerable
placement on the historic register by
the state on march 10th
so that was an important step to ready
the building for development
tonight we're asking your support for
another important step is there there's
an easement on the building that dates
back to 1928
on the little parking area next to the
building
and um we've worked with colvin chris
wallin the mayor
it's no longer needed by the city
literally dates 1928.
uh we need to clean it up because anyone
who wants to come in and redevelop this
building
the bank will say oh what about this
easement if they'll cause this problem
so the city no longer needs it there are
no city utilities in the easement when
every boulevard got built all utilities
underneath the road are new so there's
no need for this easement
and getting rid of it
it's another step small step but very
important step to redeveloping
the wedgeway building at the cornerstone
year
any questions
it's not nothing to say a motion
second all those in favor aye aye
thank you all right thank you
next item on the agenda is to authorize
the mayor to enter supplemental
agreement number one in the new york
state department of conversation for the
pedestrian safety action plan mr wallace
so this is a supplemental agreement we
actually uh passed this as a
committee
about two cycles ago however there was
an error with it and we thought it would
be easier just to redo it again the
error was is that the
city share the local share was not
included on the draft that i had
so if you were to turn to
um i don't know how to say page three
of the handout there is a local pair
um it looks like this yep the back right
here
um where it says 100 nps that's 6 16 8
49 that is a local share that we're
going to be uh
splitting with metroplex as we move
forward
as this project the psat is also
involved with
the city turning j street two-way
by the post office and doing some other
things that were outside the scope but
we thought it would be better to do the
project than one
so we're going to be doing
the federal project as one project
trying to accomplish some goals and now
that's reflected on
so
this wasn't on the report so we've
already identified where this ship will
be in the budget we've already budgeted
yes yep this is we're using for this
money so every year we either use chips
money which is a state allocation or we
use road improvement money which was in
the budget so we use a combination of
that to do these type of infrastructure
projects so there is no new budgeted
items needed to go this was already
incorporated into a bunch of things do
you know what um what percentage the
metroplex would pay yeah i believe there
are around 200 000 of this i have to
check up there for the for the j-street
portion of it i've been working with
jamie on that
okay okay other questions council
members
all right it's not possible to entertain
a motion
second almost in
favor okay the next time is to authorize
the issuance of a revocable permit
number 664 to j3 properties llc
so this is
a revocable permit 132 gay streak which
you will see a picture of here
open
the door
it is for a
awning
on the awning type in there before
they'd like to
[Music]
are there any questions
second
the next item on the agenda is uh to
declare the city council as lead agency
for a seeker state and golf course at
rio p jackson
dia
and mr epstein
good evening everyone um the department
of development received a request from
spinel properties to change the zoning
of two parcels
from our free multi-family residential
to the c5 business history
um this has this this site includes
approximately 54.6 acres that live
within the city and it has another 62
acres that are in the town of rotterdam
so it splits between the two
municipalities
the proposed
zoning change from the current zoning in
the cities portion is from r3 to the c5
and this allows for various uses um 64
different uses that are defined in the
code i think we gave you some
information about what those potential
uses could be
and the the directly adjacent um to the
parcels here is the r3 multi-family the
r1 single family
and r101 family residential within the
town of rotterdam
there hasn't been a specific use
identified for the property
and access to the site is made via
jackson avenue which is a residential
street um that begins on the corner of
lawton albany street
so this is really it's on here for
discussion
we
understand that this could open up a
potential for a variety of retail and
office uses has the potential to
increase the tax revenue and local
employment in the city and it could be a
catalyst for the revitalization in the
woodlawn neighborhood
but we also need to be you know
able to effectively evaluate the
proposal
based on
the the intended use
so our recommendation is to just we
wanted to bring this forward
and
start the discussion but we also
understand that more information might
be needed before an action is taken
president
internal discussions we thought that
bringing to the council
again for review and the council at some
point would have to deal with a zoning
change one way or the other but the
normal pro
process would the council refer to the
planning commission the planning
commission
reviews it sends back a recommendation
to
the council and then the council can act
but is in no means bound by what the
planning commission has recommended this
was the uh his outline that there's
still a lot of questions about
this proposal
and
i think probably at this point the best
way would you work with mr coldin
and if you're so inclined and the rest
of the council selling client would be
to draft a letter or some correspondence
with the proposed developer
outlining uh some of the areas where
we'd like more information
work with them to put that information
together and then to be able to come
back with a
firmer proposal and again the
first step would be
doing
a lead agency for seeker but that also
trips an eis
review
which
there's a lot of questions on that
traffic
uh water and sewer
uh other environmental issues that would
come up that are still
very vague in this in under the c5
proposal i personally feel that it opens
up too many options
that
would have negative
connotations
for
some of the adjacent property owners in
that area of the city as a whole an
absent that being able to be narrowed
down into something that i think would
be more acceptable
uh i think we should just move in a
slower manner and a little bit more
cautiously approach it
i have to i tend to agree with that i
didn't look through all the information
that was sent and there is no specific
use at this point and we actually talked
about this in the pmc a couple of weeks
ago and in order to actually move it to
the planning committee they need to know
what's being planned and that is not has
not been outlined in here so i would
have to agree that we would um to send a
letter to you know
to ask for additional information
um i think that would be uh we want to
go cautiously
rather than move forward in direction
that we then can't um you know retract
uh something and at this point in time
the neighborhood also i've heard from
the neighborhood that they have concerns
about what's going to be there so we
need to be able to be in a position to
be very specific and answering to our
residents to say what's going to happen
in that particular neighborhood and we
don't have that at this point in time so
i think we definitely should um do that
but i i welcome certainly uh input from
other council members and their views on
this
mr um
no no i i have to agree with you
i both uh
party and doing this let's hold it let's
get all information together before we
do anything
because i want to mention the
neighborhood and the resident needs to
know
what is the intended use
and what is going to be placed there
we just can't disapprove something we
have to have a blanket uh
you know and then all of a sudden uh
things are being built there and we have
no say and control what is going there
so i agree with that
anyone else
so what we'll do with this agenda item
and we don't have to move anything and
actually the other two that come after
it
we wouldn't have to do anything we just
um put together the letter to send to
the developer asking outlining the
questions that we have regarding this i
don't know if other council members had
an opportunity to look through because
there was a lot of information that was
provided but take the opportunity to
look through any questions that you want
to have answered we can make sure we um
put forth in that letter so a
question just so are we going to are we
going to i'm as put but you put that
letter together are we going to talk
with the residents of the area to see if
they have any questions that they wanted
to get answered specifically from my my
understanding is that there is a meeting
with they've called the neighborhood
meeting on march 2nd
and they want questions answered which
we don't have answers to right now so
between now and then maybe we will have
answers but i still think we should you
know we would they would go home with
their meeting and appear invited
we would be there um and that's a good
actually a good point to say any
questions that they have maybe and we
can format in the letter um so now this
is the public document um they should be
able to review it as well
and president mr cohen thank you um
one of the things that we had an
opportunity to speak obviously with mrs
mrofstein and other folks in development
as well as marion mccarthy
we really need to take a look at what
the most intensive use of
the proper with the most intensive use
under the proposed zoning change would be
um and see how that corresponds with you
know not just a comprehensive plan uh
that the city has but also uh as missy
mentioned um and mayor mccarthy
mentioned the um the environmental
impact um there are certain things that
were submitted in the application that
you know it's obviously a really good
step forward in terms of what was
submitted but there's some follow-up
that's needed as you indicated um so mr
and i we're going to
kind of
chat tomorrow about recommendations for
the city council because the city
council at some point would act as lead
agency
for
follow-up with the developer
and we did provide some of those notes
all right well so then we'll just be
working with corporation capital and the
department of developers formulate that
left
thank you thank you very much and so
that means the other two items on the
agenda which are also related to this we
will not be taking any action on those
either
all right
okay i think i think you do have another
one thank you
so um so we're skipping right to
item number eight um
just a reminder for the public hearing
on the south at barrett uh
which will be february 14th january 14th
yeah absolutely
okay and the next item is jerry barrell
harp funding allocation in here
um so we've got a rebuilding plan
underway for a splash pad area
basketball court including improvements
in jerry brooke park
outreach for the development of the plan
indicated that lighting was a priority
for area residents to increase the
visibility and safety
but the lighting is currently outside of
the budget that we have for the park so
we did um we did propose an application
as part of the arc of funding and it was
for 120 000
members to install student internal
lighting to complement the current
redevelopment of the park
um
so we are asking just because of the
timeline of the project
um we're kind of in the design phase now
and we're hoping to move to construction
you know by the summer um so we are we were requesting that we could
utilize
um
the funding from the american rescue
plan to
supplement the current grant we have to
uh to move the
project
all forward
could you tell us a little bit more
about the practical world and others so
there's going to be about four hundred
thousand advantages that would be
additional 120. correct so could you
just kind of give a quick overview of
what the
yeah so um so the park improvements it
was initiated by a grant that was
proposed to the office of parks and
historic preservation so it's a state
grant that we have for 205 000
we also have supplemental funding which
we're going to put forward to accept
from the county for 200 000
um and then the lighting um is kind of
in addition to that
um so it was something that we we hoped
we could move forward through arpa um
but i know that that process is still
being determined um but we're just
bringing it forward um with the
understanding that it's a project that's
underway and it's something that we're
trying to get done this year
um and so that was really where the
request came from
so um
my first concern was um my first thought
was looking at this is that we you know
we said we're developing a plan we put
out applications et cetera but now we're
starting to spend down when at the last
meeting uh mr ferrari said we were 12
million at that time so i do have
concerns that you know that we're
spending down and when we get through
our process where we're actually
um going to be
looking at applications and funding
applications we're spending down
spending out and it's less money it
seems like most of the money is gone um
to city projects the other question i
have for you actually is that um
so this is street lighting that we're
talking about and it's also internal to
the park so around the court and
along some of the pathways that are
internal to the park so my question
would be why wouldn't this um qualify
for smart cities since its lighting and
part of the smart city lighting is
putting leds around why this isn't
something that we could be we could out
um from that
it's we could look at that again most of
the one has been on actual streets
uh in the fixtures going
uh on the conversion of the coker
headlights then most of the money we've
spent more recently
is
in lane fiber so that we have the
network to connect these devices and
sensors
so i mean there's we set aside a few
million so is there a 120 dollars that
we i know that we did part uh lights in
hill horse park so to me it makes sense
if we're if we're doing
smart uh city lighting all over the city
that this is just something that just
makes sense that we would and this is
lighting that we would be able to um use
those funds as opposed to um using our
phones
so
you know that's that's my thought that
we would try to use some of that fun and
these lights that were not my
understanding is that they would just be
standard fixtures and not have any of
the
acoustic or
optical sensors
on them
so
are you saying that in that case that
funding can't be spent
i'd saying it can't be spent but it's
not under the area where we're going to
get the most impact out of those dollars
but if it's possible because you know
again i know there's led lights that
have been already you know put in part
of the city without the analyticals as
part of it and it just to me um makes
sense that we would you know use smart
city
funding for this and not continue to
spend down on the argos so
all the leds that we put in
are part of the mesh network
for the national grid
that
part of the package this type of
lighting would not
[Music]
be part of that but
i'd like to know the cost differential
between having the standard kind of
lighting that we would be putting into
parks
versus the lighting that we
are the led sensor lighting lights that
we're putting in
i don't know if we can price these for
any of those fixtures
uh
you know and sometimes it has to do with
just i think the electrical connection
like to where the lighting is going
that's what a lot of the cost tends to
be
you know i would say for jerry grill
since they're internal to the park you
have to get the power there
and that's going to be some of your
costs and then of course the fixtures as
well
but right now it's not we haven't moved
forward we don't have the design yet
because you know we're waiting to see
where we can um
get the funding from but um
but yeah i understand that there's a
lot of decisions that are you know
in front of everyone and
we're just trying to do our best to
you know pair things
um most effectively so
i guess i'm just trying to do you think
that it would be more than 120 000
to move from the standard lighting
to the smart cities lighting
i don't know i i'm not sure
um the estimate came from you know the
design team as like a
just a general estimate we didn't
anticipate we would exceed that amount
yeah um
but but again it's not fully designed
because
yeah so but we could that's something we
could we could look into and
you know
see what that difference is
mr toro good evening thank you
um my concern is um you know by the time
we get our committee in in place um it's
gonna be maybe past summer i don't know
but it's well it's it's gonna be a
process and here you know the kids are
going to be out residents are going to
be out in the park with no lighting and
it's something that needs to move
forward and move ahead so that that's my
only concern
no i i share that i just i'm just
talking about where the funding can come
from right i mean to come now right
yes mrs williams uh so mr can you just
confirm was there a formal
request fund for this project submitted
prior to the end of the deadline yes
there was a break so i would have to
agree with
council president porterfield that we've
made promises to the community that we
would stand up this committee and allow
them the opportunity to voice their
opinions regarding the expenditure of
this arkham money so i don't think it's
necessarily the council saying no but
it's just that if the city would choose
to move forward with this project doing
that collaboratively so i think we do
owe a responsibility to ensure that
outside of the lost revenue monies that
we put forth to the city and outside of
expedient purchases to support some of
our
ems services uh that we should maintain
the bulk of that funding for them to be
able to make the decisions that they
see best for the city
so
yeah i have a question so am i
understanding correctly that we did use
this uh
money for lighting in another park
before
there was some smart the mayor could
probably speak to that more about the
lighting that went into hillhurst
sorry sure i was talking i was inquiring
about the money that was spent um in
hillhurst park to do the lighting and we
tapped into this uh to smart cities
money to do that
some of the
features on that are smart city lighting
the other ones are put in by national
grid
under the rev demonstration project
the replacement of the
cobra light fixtures that were there
mr palmini yeah i think it's time to
move forward with this we've heard from
years from residents that live in the
area that the lighting is a concern
delaying it doesn't help anything
um
it'll be delayed at least a month if not
two
more likely closer to two
and residents
that live in that area
are
by far
very well
in favor of the lights so i think it's
time to move forward get the lights done
that way we're not encroaching too far
in the summer
and then the safety issue
hopefully
gets taken care of and it also becomes a
better environment for the kids that are
using it
we talk about investing in our neighborhoods and our parks all
the time investing our youth
this is an opportunity we're talking 120
000
we've heard about this issue for years
let's move forward
oh sure so so what are we saying due to
because we're still in the process of
kind of putting together um
the committees around our money
would it be
it you know it doesn't seem like that
using the smart city money uh would
allow us to
you know expedite the process and get it
done faster
is that what we're saying well the smart
city money is there already there so no
if we do we have to redesign the
lighting yeah we'd have to have
different lights like the reason why i
brought the request i'm sorry i totally
respect and understand the process
that's underway you know for the the
reason i brought the request forward was
just because
um i know this is a you know it's a
project that has a lot of support and
we're just trying to fill in the gaps
that we have in the funding we don't
want to have to value engineer you know
things out and that was really what was
behind it but like i said i do
understand that you have a process that
you're trying to
you know and trying to look at the
different funding sources um it's just
this particular project is kind of
underway right now um so that's why we
brought it forward
around getting this done so my question
is more like okay if there's a pot of
money that is existing that we could
type in to do it and get it done and it
won't um compromise the integrity of the
our process is is that kind of a win-win
so i'm trying to get feet up and down
please
is all that
money allocated
for
[Music]
i'm not
sure just what
is left in terms of what we've
committed for laying the fiber and other
components
we can
review that and give you a number
tomorrow
well um so for me i wouldn't want to
move the sport until we knew that i just
i feel very strongly that we should try
to use it um so if it needs more of a
breakdown and we talk about the design
and all that all that information is
important to me
and it's equally important too that as
you said something was done in hillhurst
and why we can't do something similar in
jerry burrell or around jerry burrell i
need a lot of clarity around why we
can't use smart city funding for
lighting when that's what it's for so
um and you know i appreciate what you're
trying to do moving forward and all of
that the lights and jerry burrell
were cobrahead fixtures
that we paid a fixture charge for
part of the rep demonstration project
was all those cobrahead lights in the
city have been replaced with led
fixtures so those were ones in
jerry burrell park and they were
replaced just the same way we placed the
ones out on the streets
and when were they replaced
i think you were at the press conference
when they
don't remember the day but that was
the crew went up and took the fixture
down and
replaced it
that was still first
yeah i was there for that for hillary
clinton
these are the ones on the street
right are replaced these are ones that
will be in the park
and they're going to be more of a
decorative feature
than
the overhead cobra lights well this says
street lighting and internal lighting
actually so
the um i don't i don't know what the
final design or the scope is where
though yeah i think
we're going to take the opportunity to
look at what's existing
look at what's needed internal to the
park and if there is any additional you
know street lighting that
is needed in the design that we would we
would include those but again it was it
was a preliminary thing i think um the
design console
said a estimate of nine new fixtures you
know
but but again we'd have to really look
at what's there and that would be part
of the you know the review so it really
was an estimate um
based on
a projected need but still have to do
some more to figure out what exactly is
needed
anybody so i i would like to actually
see the design i know that we're doing
other things there and i've been part of
those meetings and i respect the fact
that you know the community that i
happen to live in that community so all
that's fine i just want to make sure
that we do two things that we make sure
that how much what exactly that we need
first and foremost and then secondly if
we could find funding even if it's not
all from these smart cities that we can
see if there's other ways to fund it so
that we're trying to keep as much money
in the arpa funds as possible
so yes ms patrick well i do have a
concern that if we wait first of all you
brought it to us tonight there must have
been a reason that you thought that we
needed an insurgency in terms of the
rest of the splat i mean having looked
at the park extensively last summer
clearly the splash park had i mean this
stuff needs to be fixed for these kids
it's it's it's you know i was over there
when there was a camping session and it
was kind of like what are we doing like
we shouldn't even be
letting the kids
you know we're giving them like not a
good situation here so let's upgrade the
park so
are you saying you're coming here
tonight
instead of waiting
does that affect the rest of the project
which i thought was almost close to
trying to um you know get the splash pad
get the other stuff done it's just that
originally the lighting it wasn't part
of the scope of work because we didn't
have the funding to do it that was the
reason why we put in the request for our
because we said hey maybe we can you
know get some of this funding to add
this
amenity you know which is we know is
needed um and and so that that's really
you know um the reason for bringing it
forward tonight is just because the
design is underway and if you know i
know with orchard park when we ordered
the lights it was like a three-month run
time exactly so that was really just
where it was coming from um
not trying to undermine the the article
process but just trying to say we
feel that this is a community-supported
project
right exactly it definitely is a
community supporting project and we've
heard that loud and clear and i think if
we wait
we could run into a situation where
um
if it goes you know we want to make sure
that the park is safe especially come
summer when children will be
i shouldn't just say children i mean
obviously the basketball courts etc i
mean that's not just kids but we need we
need that safety factor of the lights
don't forget that if we if we hold it
what happens if it doesn't get approved
during the opera process
which is also a risk well
i like that we know that the community
wants the lights in the park i mean i
think
we're doing involved with all of us
so
but let me just let me just say that um
the project is not as close as you're
indicating it's not and we started with
a splash pad a couple of years ago
things happen and actually some of the funding that was for that splash pad
then got moved someplace else so there
was so that happened as well so that's
part of the reason we have a deficit
right now because the the project just
to move forward as quickly as it um
wanted to and so my understanding is
that design
as miss diaz just said the design is not
even done for the legs it wasn't
originally a part of it so it's not as
close as that and we're all concerned
about safety i understand that but i
just wanted to to refocus this to say
yes we want the lights is there other
ways we can help fund this as well so we
can maintain as much arpa funding as
possible that's really
not denying about the safety or any of
that but can we talk about some other
ways to try to get some funding look at
the design what does it mean how much if
any of it at all can be used um from
smart city money anyway
and maybe it wouldn't be as much so
um and for i'm sorry mr mr farley had
your hand up yeah and i'm just i'm just
wondering if i'm asking the same
question a different way here
so so um so are we saying that um the
possibility of using smart city money
will delay the process or why would that
make it longer wouldn't that make it
faster no no
i think miss patrick is saying that we
need to do this right now otherwise that
will delay the project and that means
using the ark of funding
but we could potentially use another
source of funding well mr mayor mr
ferrari have said that we we have to
look and see what's left so
we just need to find out if what what
we're proposing um falls in the
parameters of smart city and if so then we can move and how much we can
that's what i that's what i see how long
i mean where are we with the design
phase
well they're moving into like
construction documents and i've said
like
even though i was very clear we're not
we can't confirm the money for the
lighting but we are going to have it
designed
either way because eventually we want to
get the lighting funded and we just
you know
with lead times and everything just we
hope to do it with everything else but
right and it makes sense to do it with
everything else um so where are we with
the design so would we know in two weeks
would you be able to tell us where we
are
not you as a designer would that be
ready if we came back into which he said
okay here's the design this is exactly
what we need for smart this is exactly
how much lighting i'm not okay i'm not
i'd have to confirm with the consultant
on it might not i could probably get
more information than what i have now
around a clear
scope of what the lighting would be but
in two weeks
yeah
that's that'll i would like to move
forward on this
um for us to get that information but um
we have two other committee members so
your input part of me because i have a
little power
i said my design my goal is just to to
hold on to this to get the information
come back in two weeks before we move
forward
to see if we can get some funding from
smart cities to uh you know to help with
this particular thing and not use as
much art for funding
yeah i'm going to agree i have to agree
with that
[Music]
so could you come back to us in two
weeks with that and you know in the
meantime you and i can tell um you know
if there's any questions or
other things
that we may have that the council may
have
and and council members i you know um
welcome you if you have questions just
send an email you can send the email to
myself to mistia
um to the mayor and mayor i would ask
that if we could just look at if there's
any funding at all that we could use
towards smart cities to supplement this and meet somewhere in
the middle on that
all right thank you we'll see you two
weeks i think
all right
okay the rest of the items on the agenda
are for um
executive inspection so i need a motion
to reset
so second all those in favor all right
we're
finance committee the first item is
accept 200 000 in funding from the
disconnected from schenectady country
for jerry carrell arc improvement
mr um this is kind of what i i mentioned
the connectivity county legislature has
authorized two hundred thousand funding
to be allocated through the improvements
to jerry brown park um this complements
the funding that we have through the
states of 205-417
so this is just a resolution from the
city council authorizing the acceptance
of the funds and the amount not to
exceed 200 000
um in authorization of the mayor and
order doesn't need to enter an agreement
any questions concerns
may have a motion
one second
all in favor
the next item is 2022 hot emergency
solution grant
[Music]
and it's a request from bethesda house
to
um
to
remove rapid re-housing program funds of
19 216 to the homeless prevention
program
um so we're requesting this contract
amendment and authorizing the mayor or
as doesn't need to effectuate this with
bethesda
the next item is calling for public
hearing to amend the 20 21 22 annual
action plan is yes
so um here we have we're requesting the
reallocation of some unexpended cdbg
funds that we had in the 21
2021 to 2022 annual action plans in the
public works category
so we're looking to reallocate 250 000
which will require a substantial
amendment to the annual action plan and
a 30-day comment public comment period
and public hearings
so we're looking to use these funds for
city park improvements
and this would include
um but we don't want to build it to
the current plans being developed for
jerry bell park
and also
the fitness
facility that's proposed for orchard
park that's through
a grant with mvp healthcare
so we would like to
hold a public hearing
on the february 28th to amend the action
plan and
also
basically just reallocate this 250 000
of unexpended funds to city park
improvements
any questions let's support a field i
have a question so um i noticed that you
did say jerry berlin in another part so
and over 250 thousand dollars do you
have any idea how much you would want to
allocate to your car i just don't
understand at all so um
i believe in
americans i think
we know that there's a lot of work
that's needed you know in the parks and
essentially we had some unexpended funds
through delayed projects and the snap
program which there weren't foreclosures
i understand that i just want to know
between the 250 do you know how much you
have you have you had talked about how
much would go to this part how much
would build another right that was my
question so i believe the fitness court
is 115. the correct mvp is 50 000.
this court and the local match is
approximately 115.
50 000 from the nbp is the grant and the
local match
is approximately 115. does that include
pouring the slab
i don't that does include pouring inside
and that's for mvp okay all right so i
have the answer
thank you
for um that is in and that's for the
fitness for the fitness okay go ahead
all right thank you
and we still have it just so you know we
still have a deficit in the in the
jerry's world budget
that is aside from the lighting that we
would intend to um use the cdbg funding
for
um so it's it's
if um
you know because i'll just say
originally i thought maybe we could just
use the cdbg from the lighting but then
the project would still
fall short in some other areas
and the other aspect of that is
just construction costs have been
incrementing up so some of the
assumptions and these numbers were made
a couple of years ago
in the reality when they go up
for actual bids now they're coming in
higher than what we hoped
all
the next item is 2021 budget
reallocation retro payment first you
enter agreement between the city of
schenectady and firefighter local 28 mr
ferrari
banner president city council mayor
uh as you remember back in october of
2021 uh resolution 2021-15 the city of
schenectady and uh
labor had a labor agreement with the
city's connectivity firefighters local
28.
uh within that contract uh uh it
contained a retroactive payments back to
2019 2020 and 2021.
uh the city we did not uh
we did not appropriate this settlement
in that 2021 budget because we didn't
know uh
when it was going to be completed so
in accordance with the government uh
county governmental accounting standards
that we need to charge this uh
and disclose it in the 2021 fiscal year
um these retro payments uh uh were
recently disbursed and uh
and we're asking the the recommendation
of the attached accounts to be
appropriated uh the total amount of that
is one million two hundred sixty three
thousand eight hundred ninety one
dollars and thirty cents
uh we remember we're recommending using
uh uh our our funding loss and general
reserve
revenue springs
any questions
i have a motion
second
all in favor
the next item is a 2022 budget
reallocation payment personal agreement
between the city of connecticuty and
firefighter local 28th mr ferrari so at
the same resolution and the same uh
labor agreement uh when we did these
retro payments these were all paid in
2022. so uh when we did make those
payments in 2022 uh there was uh a
cost of fica and medicare and pension
payments so we're looking uh for the
total cost uh if you see through with
the
detachment uh the total comes to 568
thousand one hundred nineteen dollars
and uh uh because uh we're using pension
uh money so we're going to ask to be uh
reappropriated using the general fund
reserves
[Music]
any questions
a little bit second all in favor aye
thank you
any other businesses for finance
all in favor
health and recreation um we have just
one item on the agenda and that is a
ceremony ceremonial resolution um and so
i'll turn the floor over to missport
so february is american heart month and
so
um you know we often do ceremony
resolutions to bring attention to
certain diseases or someone special did
something so i think it's important that
we do this and you know heart health is
something that um
many americans like as one out of four
um don't even know they haven't one of
four deaths in the american united
states because so i think it's an
opportunity to bring this forward and
also to um also women
suffer from heart disease more so than
men
so i think it's important that we just
bring it forward and talk about
examining our health habits and so i
just would like to have a ceremony
resolution presented to that
any questions
thank you okay i'd like to call the
government operations committee to order
we have two items two agenda items
uh the first of which is around our
procurement policy and i will turn it
over to an advertising reporter
thank you um so we have we discussed
this about four weeks ago and at the
time that we discussed it
and actually let me just be clear mr
mutavero's name could be next in my name
here not on the previous one
um
so at that time we talked about the fact
that we um didn't have any real
reference to our mbwbe in there and our
procurement policy only referred to it
in the um footnotes
and so we want we talked about the fact
that we need to have mr gardner here to
give us some information and also to
talk about inserting language actually
in the procurement policy
so all of you um mr garner would you
like to come forward so did every
council member get a copy of what you
send out
yeah it's in the back it's all right
here okay
so
go ahead
okay so again thank you for that
coming for you um again we'll be asking
for this is a review of the
original confined uh
security policy that was passed back in
2020
and with the understanding that we will
review that from time to time and
modified
not created as necessary this request
here we're asking to
raise the uh mwe uh
compliance on contracting uh
opportunities over a hundred thousand
from
eleven point five percent uh mvp and
eleven point five percent wb up to
fifteen percent east a total of thirty
percent which is in line with the system
that was the state
which was consistent with the
modification of keeping that alignment
will be going from
seven percent but nbe which is the work
for 12 percent but nbe and
women was bringing the workforce goals
and getting to
[Music]
elaborate on section three public works
uh construction contract exceeding three
hundred thousand that's what we're
proposing
okay so again back in 2020 we talked
about the cap on
justin's project having uh kept a
minimum of
250 thousand dollars today on the uh any
public works project within the city
and we're asking to raise that to 300
[Music]
so what is the benefits the city will
receive by doing that you would expand
the crew so you have more smaller firms
opportunity to bid
on public work projects
um so this is different from what we
approved in
2020 i thought that when we talked about
it a couple of weeks ago we were pretty
much just trying to make sure that the
policy
that we were seeing
reflected what we had agreed on
in 2020 but
now we're changing this is actually to
change the 2020 policy
that's okay i guess i thought we were
doing something different
no at the end of that conversation
awesome
and then that actually we said and you
were in agreement that we should look at
how the mwbe was a part of it because it
wasn't there before
we did have that conversation when we
discussed this four weeks ago when we
weren't ready to come back in two weeks
we didn't have the information okay i
guess i thought that we discussed making
sure that what we were doing was in line
with what we had done all that work on
in 2020 yes you're correct
we review the documents and we bring it
up to date and today's uh whatever is
out there
10 000. i'm moving the mwbe
um
11.5 so 50 50
on the work force gold
to 20 those are the only changes to this
mwb document that we have looked at two
years ago and those were changes going
into the
this year
that we're
do you have any proposing with the um oh
something like me
ms patrick did you have concerns about
them no it's just not what i thought we
were discussing tonight i thought we
were
i i thought we were discussing something
different so
i trust mr garden
recommendation
as he knows
in 2020 when it was adopted the last
time by resolution um there were two
separate resolutions right there was one
for the purchasing policy and then uh
essentially like a lack of better word a
sister resolution approving
the mwb policy
you know it's obviously up to the
council i see them as being two separate
policies because it gives more
flexibility because the mwb policy may
be one that you
um
you go back to in 2023 presumably maybe
to to reevaluate
the purchasing policy is one that is
good for two years
so if the council is going to entertain
a resolution or entertain a legislative
request to pass a resolution i would
do it
two separate alleged requests and two
separate resolutions
we had we had two set of documents the
last time was the section three policy
at the end of the year was that combines
one sister resolution i didn't
i don't well as far as i know there's
only one in terms of the energy and mwb
and workforce goals here
um is there a separate
document
outside of that here yeah there was a
section no no but in terms of what's
being presented today
right so yes
that's what i'd say right so you know my
recommendation would be um if you're
going to do it pass one for a
legislative request item for
the purchasing policy and the separate
one for the 2022 mwb work and workforce
goals okay
so to follow up on them
that so when we talked to the last time
was we you can mention the fact that
there's a footnote about mwbe and we'll
talk about actually putting the whatever
that footnote refers to at least some
specific language that says do this as
opposed to uh counting on someone to
look at the footnote and then do it
do you not use it
well at the end right no and i
understand that um obviously the mwb
workforce goals are just that their
goals
right whereas the change to um
increasing the uh public works contracts
to 300 000 is you know that's that's
firm
so i see it you know one is something we
aspire to do and the other is
a hard number that is going to be in the
purchasing policy and sure we do refer
to the
mwb uh and work and workforce uh
goals
um in the but again that's up to the
council
you know i'm just making my
recommendation because these are for 20 20 excuse me for 2022 whereas the
purchasing policy is a two-year policy
you brought the discussion on i do have
another question so
um
the other um part of it so anything that
um is under
what is the level of contracts that you
save so it's 35 000 under this are those
goals apply to that
so all right so um the other thing that
uh
that i think is important that so that
we're trying to meet our goals if we
include those contracts as well i think
would be beneficial are you part of
those discussions now if it's under that
amount or is it a hundred thousand over
right
so that might be helpful in us returning
our goals if we look at the contracts
that are under um
35 000 because maybe we're meeting them
and we just it's just because it's not
calculated in that we would um be able
to meet those goals so i would like to
be able to see those contacts as well
that's something that mr gardner would
have
input in to make sure he helps to
identify mwbes
so that they could you know avail
themselves to those opportunities as
well
i have a question so how did we is that
like kind of like this
how do we reach that threshold for a
hundred thousand four
how do we get to that threshold to decide you know what
comes before you and what does
that thing come out on the
worst contract yes so episodes we're
talking about um you know you're saying
that there's some unconscious that
because they don't rise to a certain
level they don't they don't come before
you correct
and and that that threshold was what they'll be like purchasing uh
you know contact somebody doing um
you know snokeline for example or
repairing the windows you know things
like that okay and
you're suggesting um
that all those all contracts um go
through ron's office for to see if we
could help meet our wp eagles
and
the other
thing i'd like to see is this also only
talks about this
in the um procurement process it always
talks about goods
um it's whatever is
so i would like to see services as well
um be a part of that yes
yeah services are there services at
first or part of our computer policy
yeah
i'm gonna have to read through that
again i didn't see that so i wanted to
make sure that services with goods and
services and that just says
okay
so just just follow up make sure that
you're safe here so mid sports are you
asking that instead of having a footnote
let us insert
that section into the policy so
whatever that footnote refers to and i'm
not talking about have it extensive but
so that people are as they're reading
through they're not overlooking it and
just passing on that you know just make
it clear that mwp mwde participation is
something
you know that that they need to consider
when we're talking about um preparing
for the city
[Music]
i i i um
i don't want to draft something that is
not the council's intention obviously if
you were to pass
you know the legislative request um i
don't know if this language that um
you know
in preparing a resolution i'd like to
you know ideally to be language that
reflects accurately what the city
council or the committee passes tonight
if it doesn't in fact pass anything
um so i i don't want to misrepresent
what is actually passed if something
does pass
any other questions around this
that's cool you had a request
is not in and i just want to
just so you know the um i at the last
meeting i asked what i asked for again
today just so we could see
the um contracts that had been um
had been left in the past i think it was
18 months just so we can see if we were
even hitting the goals even
unintentionally and there was things
under 35 000 but um there i wasn't you
know i haven't gotten those at this
point in time
because ultimately if we can do it by
using it over all the contracts that we
did that would just be
in my mind better for the city to see
that we're reaching those goals
any further questions or discussions
around them
so are you looking at us moving power in
terms but
or do you want to hold off and catch her
well i'd like to be able to see that
documentation first um just to see where
we are with that
um
and i don't know if we can do that
between now and then and i mean i guess
my bigger question is is that something
we're willing to consider that mr um mr
gardner be
you know involved in that process as
well
i mean
i i you know to
can't speak to mr carter's no capacity
right now to do that but i think if we
do have the capacity i think that that sounds like a
good practice um
anybody else thinks about that and if so
we're saying that maybe we um
hold off on this and kind of revisit
after we get some more information seems
like that's where we're going
well i don't i would like to see us be able
to look at that so but other counselling
yeah i don't have a problem with that
but then we can also work at inserting
the two sections that you wanted to see
in this policy where the work for force
have you have in the
requirement section so a two section
needs to be added into the policy well
mr coleman is saying that he doesn't
think it
i'm not saying that at all i'm not
saying that i'll it's you know it's
obviously within the constant
prerogative to
put it into the purchasing policy and
what it deems you know fit
i just don't want to create language
that doesn't accurately reflect what the
council would like obviously
it seems like we'll be as we're having
more information obviously when we work
on the corporation council in order to
make sure that we're putting forth
accurately describes what we're trying
to do here
right
okay so there's a definitely what
two weeks we're saying
okay
next on the agenda is
the discussion on ole miss broadcasting
um
thank you uh so as we all know the
problem with the broadcasting of the
meeting still remains an issue
particularly the audio
the last
time we talked about this was about a
month ago
checked in with the zeb from osm
in the mayor's office
unfortunately the two haven't been able
to
really
get together and put something before
but just wanted to make sure that we
keep this on on the agenda to make sure
that we actually do address this
and at some point get it fixed so people
can't
actually hear what we have to say
i don't know did you want to add
anything um i don't really have anything
to add just i know that um
tell everybody
that it would make a lot of people happy
that watch it at home to be able to hear
it clearly
and and see it a lot better
we do the best we can with what we have
but
frankly some love is deteriorating it's
older um this would put us in a really
good place
visually and audio
to really bring the council meetings
home and archive
forever
um
[Music]
[Applause]
behind there how loud it is to adjust
that so that would give the sam or
somebody
audio controls to uh to turn it down or
up if something's not awful
in the chambers separate from the
recording so there's little things like
that that would uh certainly help the
production quality of the meetings
but i'm happy to answer your questions
all right so
we used to have
speak for that foreign those cordless
mics uh just started dropping off two of
them don't work at all now um and then
the eos
gentleman tom told me that they are
running on frequencies that we're not
even allowed to run out
um there's a digital equivalent now of
those that were a lot better
and
yeah so that's why we're not using those
anymore
they're just they're just
dated
would this be an opportunity to kind of
partner with someone like um our uh
our
community partners like around
who are doing board meetings right now
who don't seem to have the same issues
like if they're willing to do that like
maybe our school district or accounting
even to try to see if we can partner
with them around
accessing the same type of technology
that they're using
um
it's just different and quite frankly
um
they do a great job um
but our needs are a little different we
have a
different room i mean this is an older
building and there's just little things
like that
fighting against like little audio
noises that with the the hum and the
lights and that just eats the mic and
this would um
take care of all those issues
but it's good
so
um
i actually i did mention this too mr
fellow brothers followed so at this
point in time um
how
i mean
how long would it take or what is the
process i think maybe maybe that being a
question for the mayor but um because i
thought at least if we could have chores
of somebody but
um the feedback is that we shouldn't
entertain expense that we you know
that we're just spending money because
we have to upgrade but at this point
time we're using one mic and i've still
even with the one like that my one of
the feedback that i'm getting is that
it's still not good quality so much for
the um
for the public so
what are your thoughts on
what we are where we are right now
um
i mean this with the proposal i mean
it's a top it's a top to bottom kind of
thing it would take care of all those
problems i mean honestly i
um i looked at every
you know item and i asked tom a bunch of
questions on each other so i understand
what intersects with one
and it all
kind of just sounds great i mean
it really is a
top-down approach
to it
you know
i mean i could get different proposals
from different uh but it would you know
take
some more weeks and right now
the equipment is just frank i mean we
have no cordless mics
and there's other issues as well with
these links on table and and little
things like that that just need to be
upgraded
in my opinion
well i think if we're not
people can't hear you know then it's
really kind of defeating the purpose of
what we're trying to do so i appreciate
your thoughts on that mr murderer
yeah thank you
i think all of us in this room here can
attest that we have received our fair
share of complaints
from the public in terms of argue in
terms of the likely i think this is
something that we should
do
we should we should proceed
with this and move out to
get the mayor authority to um go ahead
and get this contract and get this
equipments in
and uh you know rehab the whole place
and get the
it working properly so that the resident
can
look and hear
think that's something that we should do
um there's no hole but there shouldn't
be no hold back on this server at this
point in time let's select the
defender and we'll power
and get this equipment installed
uh so i also think it's worth noting and
before i state that i want to say thank
you for all the work that you're doing i
know you definitely mentioned there are
some system issues that you're trying to
navigate and i'll definitely see you in
here uh
trying to get it functional um so
you know i noticed that
but in regards to us offering this
service or an option for people to view
these meetings from home i think we're
going to offer this we need to make sure
it's at a certain level and standard
that allows them to be able to view our
meetings or we need to adjust how we
offer this if at all so definitely
i appreciate this discussion item being
on the agenda again tonight but i think
we need to place a greater
emphasis on this because again i think
our residents or visitors who are
viewing these meetings
they owe us a certain quality and if
we're not able to meet those
expectations we should just uh
remove it
sooner
[Music]
so
largely agree but i think there's
information
that
we if we want to continue down this road
we need to discuss an executive session
regarding some other options
and
look and hear all that information
before
we proceed with any sort of action
because
i think it's information that
is needed to be heard
and it's important information to have
yes we want to have quality
transmission of our meetings
but we also need to make sure we're
using our money
efficiently and effectively and also
have the information so i think if we do
want to
continue down that road it should be a
discussion
and executive session
i knew the thoughts were on that
and so can i just show some clarity
around that so it would be regarding
contracts then yes your contract oh
but to mr palomini's point the
relationship between the city and open
stage media evolved with the last
negotiations with the franchise
agreement with
what was then time warner it's now
charter and
simultaneously with verizon so they are
the designated
peg
operator of
pegtv is
public access education and government
and so those contracts the franchise
agreements have expired
and we have not entered into
negotiations to renew those there's been
some changes at the federal level
there's discussions at the state level
and it's a uh what i call a dynamic
process
[Music]
and that's
some of the things that were
in the city's advantage a little over 10
years ago
are not there today
all right
so please
have we budgeted
50 something thousand dollars no no so
we would have to find the money
there's no request in the clerk's budget
this year for
any upgrade of
the support system share that equipment
with us
no
i'm trying to get some maybe some
dollars
you'll try it
okay you need further discussion on the
matter
is there any more business what's more
here so we're moving this into executive
session continue discussion if you want
to uh yes we should please let's do that
all right sometimes it's executive
session
everything else is everything else is
executive session
so you just need to um you can just go
in
we could go in right
uh
recess
second
all in favor
okay
now do i open close your eyes
okay i'd like to uh open the claims um
and with that i will entertain a motion
they need to go into executive session
and if i get a second
okay um all in favor
okay
oh